A Norfolk MP has denounced a minister’s response to parliamentary questions on controversial Broads surrender proposals as resembling “a dodgy insurance policy”.

Keith Simpson said he was considering organising a select committee-style meeting of the county’s MPs after the “unimpressive and contradictory” letter from environment minister Phil Woolas.

The minister was questioned last month at an adjournment debate in Westminster Hall, initiated by Mr Simpson and attended by most of the county’s MPs, on draft proposals by government conservation advisers Natural England to deal with the consequences of climate change in the northern Broads.

Among four options being considered was one to let the sea breach defences between Eccles and Winterton, flooding 25 square miles of countryside, including at least six villages, as far inland as Stalham and Potter Heigham.

Mr Simpson, Conservative MP for Mid Norfolk, asked Mr Woolas to respond in writing to unanswered questions from the debate. Mr Woolas replied: “Firstly, I must reiterate that there is no question of the leaked report being a ‘plan to abandon the Broads’. Natural England does not have the power or the intention to take decisions on the future of flood management.”

He said the Environment Agency remained committed to its current hold-the-line policy but admitted: “While there are absolutely no proposals to abandon the area (and the people who live there) to the sea, we must, regretfully, accept that our coastline is changing.

“Inevitably, this means that some places can no longer be sustainably defended in the long term, and even those that can be defended are unlikely to remain unchanged.”

He said Natural England’s research would be invaluable in helping to inform decisions about future flood management in the area, adding: “I therefore reject the calls for Natural England to withdraw their report.”

Mr Woolas, who is scheduled to visit Norfolk next month, said it was highly regrettable that the report had been leaked to the press. He added: “I firmly reject the accusation made during the debate that Natural England wanted the report to be leaked.”

He suggested that local people and landowners might be able to take responsibility for defences if the agency decided to stop maintaining them. The minister cited the example of Bawdsey in Suffolk, where a trust had been set up to finance coastal works.

But Mr Simpson said: “It’s an unimpressive response and is shot through with contradictions. There’s an element of complacency about it. The letter reads like a dodgy insurance policy telling you that you are covered, but then you check the footnotes on page 19 and see all the exemptions.

“Defra is living up to its reputation for not having its eye on the ball. This reinforces both local people’s and MPs’ deep scepticism about Defra and other government departments coming up with a coherent strategy to deal with this issue.”

Story by Jon Welch on the EDP website