People living in areas prone to flooding - these days that's around five million homes - will find little comfort in a highly critical report published by MPs on Tuesday.
Exactly who is ultimately responsible for dealing with flooding in the UK is unclear, because neither of the two government bodies tasked with handling the growing problem believes it's them.
This is despite the government's own analysis concluding that flooding will be one of the biggest risks to the UK in the years to come.
The Commons Public Accounts Committee is the latest group of MPs to subtly criticise the coalition's practice of transferring powers from central to local government, whilst simultaneously cutting council's budgets.
But chief among their concerns is the lack of an obvious system in place between the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), the Environment Agency and local councils to tackle flooding when it becomes a threat to communities. The MPs are particularly worried about a deal between the government and the insurance industry that ensures that flood-risk homes can be affordably covered. That deal ends next year, and MPs accuse DEFRA of: "leaving it late to reach a new agreement, and this will lead to uncertainty and worry for affected households and communities."
DEFRA hands almost its entire budget for flood-risk management to the Environment Agency, but in the evidence given to them from both the department and the quango, MPs were clearly unhappy with the notion of 'joint responsibility'. The MPs believed there was a "buckpassing agreement" going on.
After a session last November when civil servants from the two bodies were grilled at length, MPs concluded that the framework for deciding who was responsible for different aspects of flood-prevention was "unsatisfactory", while the decision to hand much of the job to local authorities created real risks because the budgets were being cut in real terms.
In the report MPs say: "We are sceptical about how much [DEFRA] can rely on funding from local sources when local authorities are balancing more pressing needs. The Department told us that it did not expect all local authorities to raise additional funds, but it did not have a clear plan setting out the extent to which additional local funds would replace funding previously provided nationally."
Their comments echo criticisms elsewhere in government - particularly over social care - where the responsibilities of government have been transferred to councils. Local government budget cuts are among the most severe of all departments under the coalition.
Responding to the report the Environment Agency said: “We are already addressing the points raised in this report, and will seek to further improve the way we manage the risks of flooding across the country, an ever present threat that is likely to increase in the future with climate change."
DEFRA also commented, saying: “We’ve reformed the funding system to allow the number of flood defence schemes to be increased and give local people greater choice and control over protecting their community from flooding.
"Under the new Partnership Funding system, the most at-risk and deprived areas can receive more money for flood defence schemes, backed by funding from the private sector whenever possible.”
Labour accused the government of ignoring its responsibilities: “The Government is passing the buck to local councils, asking them to choose between repairing roads and protecting homes from flooding. The irony is that this approach may cost more in the long run as the Environment Agency is unable to predict what schemes will proceed, which means procurement costs rise.”
The most flood-prone places to live in Britain, according to the Association of British Insurers: