My Lords, I am very nervous about these amendments, probing as they are. Flood Re has one aim: to provide flood insurance for those people who cannot buy it at the moment. The first year or two will be very difficult until it has built up its reserves, provided that there are not too many claims in those early years. However, I am very nervous about the suggestion that Flood Re ought to spend money on flood-resilient activities. What happens in 10 years’ time if we have another horrendous year of rain—floods all over the place—and these households go to Flood Re and say, “I’ve now got a claim, will you pay it?”. What happens if Flood Re replies, “I’m so sorry, I have paid it all out on building a dam here and there”? I do not think it is the right answer to get Flood Re to pay money out other than for genuine flood claims.
Water Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Cathcart
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 11 February 2014.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Water Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
752 c548 Session
2013-14Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2014-02-13 14:59:05 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-02-11/14021176000104
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-02-11/14021176000104
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-02-11/14021176000104