SIR MICHAEL Spicer is to urge the Government to take account of the true cost of flooding when allocating funds for flood prevention and alleviation schemes.

After a meeting with Kempsey flood victims and officers of the Environment Agency, the West Worcestershire MP said it was time for a change in the funding formula.

"We need a bigger pot of money and a more accurate way of assessing cost-benefits," he said.

"At the moment, assessments are made on the basis of notional costs, with the aim of dispersing the money on a fair basis throughout the country.

"But the notional costs are well below the real costs and don't take account of social, environmental and health issues."

According to a feasibility study carried out by the Environment Agency, none of the flood alleviation schemes considered for Kempsey reached a cost-benefit ratio of 1:1 when calculated, according to Government guidelines.

The highest rating was 0.391, for building defence walls to protect houses on the northern bank of Hatfield Brook.

"I am well aware that flooding has caused deep distress for a number of people in the village, which should be taken into account in assessing cost-benefits," said Sir Michael.

Utter chaos

"I went to one house in Kempsey where they were still in utter chaos two years after the flood, because there was so much debate with the insurance companies."

Church Street resident Rex Oram, whose home has flooded six times in the last five years, said the official way of calculating damage to properties was totally unrealistic and did not allow for the cumulative cost of frequent flooding.

For example, he had lost a freezer, fridge, cooker and washing machine in the last major flood, but official figures allowed just £400 for replacing domestic appliances in a pre-1918 detached property.

"Frequency of flooding doesn't appear to be given sufficient importance and the effect on the community isn't taken into account," he said.

"People in St Mary's Close suffered from sewage problems, although their houses were not flooded, and others some distance away from the flood had damp patches rising up their walls."

Sir Michael said Kempsey people had been rational, perceptive and knowledgeable in their dialogue with the Environment Agency.

"It's my job to make sure their views get heard in Whitehall," he said.

An Environment Agency spokesman said the meeting had gone well.

"We had already met with the people most badly affected to clarify some details of cost-benefit analysis and this was about moving forward," he said.