As The Guardian notes this morning:
Millions more homes in England, Scotland and Wales face devastating floods, and some towns may have to be abandoned as climate breakdown makes many areas uninsurable, a Guardian investigation has found.
New analysis from the insurance industry, seen by the Guardian, reveals the extent of concern in the sector, with bosses warning that large swathes of housing and commercial property in densely populated areas will be at greater risk.
Separately, experts have said that some towns may need to be abandoned as homes and businesses struggle to get insurance in areas repeatedly battered by storms and rising sea levels.
I also noted this:
Densely populated areas including London, Manchester and parts of north-east England, are likely to be worst hit. Experts also say London's flood defences need to be updated urgently to protect the capital from devastating floods.
And this:
Bermondsey and Old Southwark in London and Boston and Skegness in Lincolnshire are projected to have about 90% of homes at risk from river and coastal flooding by 2050 – the highest proportions in the country.
Richard Tice continues to deny that climate change is a risk, though, despite his constituency being on the frontline of risk.
My own position on this could not be clearer. To prepare this post, I searched for my own videos on this subject on Google and got this summary of my arguments back from it, which I thought it was worth sharing:
UK tax campaigner and political economist Richard Murphy has consistently highlighted the severe risks posed by flooding and rising sea levels, both for individual households and the wider financial system. A central argument of his is that climate change, and specifically flooding, is creating a financial crisis that is largely being ignored by politicians and financial markets.
Flooding and the housing and banking sectors
Murphy has repeatedly warned that extensive areas of UK property are becoming uninsurable due to the increased risk of flooding, with profound consequences for the banking sector.
- Uninsurable housing: He argues that as climate change worsens, properties in flood-prone areas will become uninsurable, which in turn makes them unsellable. This can leave homeowners trapped and cause a "time bomb" for the housing market.
- Bank risk: With an estimated 85% of UK bank lending secured on property, Murphy warns that banks are at risk of large-scale defaults as these properties decline in value or become worthless. He points out that this systemic risk is largely being ignored by financial institutions.
Criticism of government inaction
Murphy has been highly critical of the government's approach to flood risk, accusing politicians of denying the "existential threat".
- Ignoring the science: In a July 2025 blog post, Murphy criticised politicians for not taking the threat seriously, despite data showing UK sea levels are rising faster than the global average.
- Regional disparities: He has commented on the suggestion that some areas, particularly in Eastern England, might be "sacrificed" because the cost of flood defences is too high.
- Inadequate funding: Murphy has argued that flood defences should be paid for by government deficit spending or "People's Quantitative Easing," rather than being limited by standard budget constraints. He has previously advocated for a "Green New Deal" that includes investment in flood prevention systems.
Broader economic context
Murphy frames the flood risk issue within a larger critique of current economic policy, which he argues is failing to address climate change and other systemic threats.
- Climate insolvency: He has argued that many large companies are "climate or carbon insolvent," meaning their balance sheets do not account for the costs of transitioning to net zero. He contends that existing accounting rules conceal this, creating hidden risks for financial markets and pension funds.
- Financial market failure: Murphy believes that until honest accounting practices and proper regulation acknowledge these risks, both economic and ecological collapse are likely. He sees the failure to address climate change as a major financial crisis waiting to happen.
This is one of my videos on the issue:
The question is, when are politicians going to act, or will they wait until it is too late?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Much as most of old Dunwich has disappeared, the Viking settlement of Skegness was lost to the sea in the 1520s. Sorry to everyone who lives there but it could easily happen again. Skegness may be bracing, but it has long depended heavily on tourism, and people won’t want to visit a town under water.
East and central London is a very big issue. Billions of value, under real and increasing threat.
And Ely could become an island again, with the Fens under brackish water.
Agreed
Including re Ely
But if that happens this country will also have very little food
The case for damming the Wash is overwhelming
I cannot think of a single reason why Tice needs to worry about this. He won’t have any interest in Skegness by the time it is flooded. He has almost no interest in it now.
The way politics works at present, he has no need to bother about it. Climate change denial is working fine for him.
He and his corporate Reform UK Ltd cronies are interested in short term wealth extraction, and destroying permanently as much of the nation state as possible, and democracy with it. By the time Skegness sinks they will be in Dubai with the solar-powered air conditioning on full, laughing their heads off, knowing their final years will be comfortable, as the rest of us suffer. Starmer and Badenoch and Jendrick will be their neighbours. That’s the plan.
But we can stop them.
Well, Dubai is tenth on the “cities vulnerable to flooding” list here: https://earth.org/sea-level-rise-projections/
And from where will Dubai and its many foreign residents source their food?
Government and the finance “industry” are like ostriches in the sand, seeing no evil of the fast approaching climatic disasters. True London and East Coast towns are under threat but also in the West such as the Somerset Levels, Hinckley C nuclear power station and towns on the river Severn such as Tewkesbury and Worcester.
.
Tewkesbury and Worcester are worst of all
More than 10 years ago George Monbiot wrote this Interesting article
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/13/flooding-public-spending-britain-europe-policies-homes.
Thanks
It is not for nothing that there is a form of mass migration away from the South East coasts to the Midlands and elsewhere, pushing up house prices as it goes. At first I thought that this was the cost of living effect, but maybe this is a source of it too?
It is as if we are being abandoned. But really, this is neglect on a potentially huge scale. And then when you add in rampant equality, I would call it ‘homicidal’.
‘Rampant inequality’ – sorry folks!
Rampant equality – that would be nice!
This is yet another reason why the wider distribution of your commentary is so necessary, on this and many other topics.
There is little satisfaction to be had from saying “I told you so!” when the costs of ignoring your well researched warnings are ignored.
You can look at the flood map available from Climate Central at
https://coastal.climatecentral.org/map/7/-0.5245/52.4263/?theme=sea_level_rise&map_type=year&basemap=roadmap&contiguous=true&elevation_model=best_available&forecast_year=2050&pathway=ssp3rcp70&percentile=p50&refresh=true&return_level=return_level_1&rl_model=coast_rp&slr_model=ipcc_2021_med
The link takes you to southern England, you can move the map around over the whole world and zoom-in too.
You need to learn to use and interpret the results; it takes time to fully appreciate the threat and which areas are likely to suffer.
I suspect the first flood to really damage the City will be needed to concentrate the body-politic’s mind.
Thanks
Worth looking at
Thanks. It looks like the Isle of Thanet might become an island again after 500 years. More worryingly, we may have to say goodbye to the atmospheric Dungeness Foreland which would be worrying as it currently has a nuclear power station built on it!
There will be numerous nuclear stations in that situation. Sizewell is another.
That disaster already happened in 2011.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_accident
But it was a long way away, so who cares? Certainly not our mainstream politicians.
We build these things on the coast for the cooling water, then we cross our fingers, and hope the disaster will be after we’ve died.
Growth!
the Aviva report mentioned in the Guardian this morning is published on its website. I have had time so far just to skim it, but it warns of the risks we face, not just from increased flooding but also from increased heat and subsidence. It is forthright, detailed and alarming. It requires an urgent government response. When will one be forthcoming, I wonder. Surely when a major insurer puts out a report like this the government response cannot be a shrug of the shoulders? And as for Tice and Jenkyns who sit there in East Anglia like King Canute ordering the seas to recede it surely ought to have electoral consequences for them. They cannot seriously maintain their denial of climate change in the face of a report such as this, can they?
PS. to those who are good at assessing risk. The risk for the “very low” category is defined as one in a thousand. Phew. We are in that group. But is that actually as safe as it sounds?
Thanks
https://www.aviva.com/newsroom/news-releases/2025/10/uks-iconic-landmarks-at-risk-from-climate-change-by-2050-according-to-new-report/
Given the lengthy lead in time for the Thames Barrier, the AVIVA report makes for chilling reading. It beggars belief that today’s current crop of imbeciles that pose as political “leaders” are not only ignoring these issues but going so far as to roll back on net zero policies and loosening the already frail environmental laws. In my opinion, it is an act of gross political criminal negligence.
We’re spending untold millions repairing the buildings of Parliament even though it’s clear they’ll be catastrophically flooded if no steps are taken to stop it. It would be much more prudent to build new facilities somewhere in the north of the country.
Agreed
Poor old King Canute. He did what he did to show his sycophantic courtiers that not even the king could stop the tide coming in. Yet he still gets misrepresented.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5901/cmselect/cmenvaud/550/report.html
As it happens the environmental audit committee also published its report on flood resilience in England yesterday. Well worth a read.
Thank you
They get the risk and nothing will happen because Rachel’s spreadsheet matters more
Farage has, I believe, two properties in Lydd or thereabouts
So with apologies to Bob Dylan
Lapping on Farages Door
Would it be possible to dam the Wash, Richard? There is high land to the east at Hunstanton, but nothing flood-free on the west. The best land for agriculture will be gone, as will most of the Netherlands. There will be an acute shortage of vegetables and massive eastward migration to cope with. Quite glad I won’t be alive to see it.
The dam would have to reach to the Wolds in Lincolnshire – several miles inland. But it is poossible and would generate vast amounts of electricity as well.
Our local town is Tenbury Wells which is highlighted in the article. It has a fine 1930s Art Deco cinema which is a flourishing local theatre. It also has a striking grade ll listed building – the unique nineteenth century Pump Rooms. Surrounded by orchards it is the venue for an annual Applefest and the orchards also contribute to being regarded as the mistletoe capital of England, celebrated in the annual mistletoe fair. It is also home to a wonderful traditional hardware shop. This lovely market town is in danger of becoming a victim of climate change as bureaucracy, funding rounds and insurers who will no longer insure leave it the opposite of high and dry. It makes me sad that we seem to believe we can’t afford, and don’t seem to be capable of organising, protection of such gems and the legacy built by past and present townsfolk.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c334jnmx6lzo
We could of course protect life in your town
The choice is not to do so, and that is very different
Its a pity the Guardian didn’t do due diligence on the article along with the other msm.
They keep asking for money to support them but they are just as bad as the rest imo.
https://talkingupscotlandtwo.com/2025/10/14/not-one-scottish-town-named-as-likely-to-be-abandoned-due-to-floods-though-one-of-my-six-home-towns-might-be-the-only-candidate/