Floods!

What does Corbyn say about it? What's he promising the Labour Party would do if in power? Is he still on holiday?

"Coalition ministers made it more difficult for flood defence schemes to get funding by introducing tougher targets demanding 60% more "benefits" for every pound spent on protection, it has emerged.

Under the new rules brought in three years ago, the Department for Environment Food And Rural Affairs (Defra) wanted to see an average of £8 of damage avoided for every £1 they would spend on schemes.

Previously, projects were simply expected to deliver more than £1 of damage avoided for every £1 spent, with an average across all schemes of £5 of damage avoided for every £1 spent.

The more stringent targets were introduced after the coalition started to slash the Environment Agency's funding for flood defences, with central government expenditure cut from around £670m when the government came to power in 2010 to about £576m for the next three years.

Maria Eagle, Labour's shadow environment secretary, said it was "appalling that ministers apparently made it harder for vital schemes to secure approval" while the flood protection budget was cut by nearly £100m a year."

This is from an article a year ago.

What article? Please disclose your sources.

I expect we all noticed that there was no coverage of Cameron chatting to deferent flooded-out families or business owners on the news tonight. Steered him towards the army and other professional groups.
Unfortunately more rainfall on its way on Wednesday - another 24 hours worth starting tomorrow night (here in N Wales).
The weather is exceptional. It was 15deg here this evening. The gulf stream is too far south and the procession of storms that usually passes to the north of the UK is process-ing over us. This phenomenon is thought to be linked to the warming of the Arctic. Same weather pattern we had in the early months of 2013.

ana I know that you question a lot of what dj says, but are you saying that she is wrong or incorrect in what she has said above? I mean if you are sure she is wrong it would be good and informative for other grans to know where the post is incorrect.

I live in th north west where many areas are flooded. When we heard Cameron was visiting 'the north' today, we predicted he'd go to York rather than Rochdale, Radcliffe or Hebden Bridge because he'd be more likely to face hostility there. That's my left v right contribution.

whitewave, I was not questioning whether dj is right or wrong - those were not her words/opinions but a passage quoted from 'an article'.

As most of dj's links are from left-wing publications I felt it might be biased and would like to know where it came from.

The gulf stream is too far south
Or is it the jet stream that is too far south?

theconversation.com/why-do-flood-defences-fail-52017

ana You can be assured that the article is absolutely factually correct, there is no bias.

We cannot think of the changing weather pattern in political terms. We have to face up to the challenge and understand that whilst most of the time the weather is benign we will be getting more and more of these episodes. This together with the fact that the sea levels are rising creates serious and life destroying issues for those involved.

The trouble is that those not directly affected tend to have short term memory and accept without question when cuts are made to our flood maintenance budget and capital budget in order to balance the books.

No one however who has experienced the utter devistation would ever forget and will live in fear every time torrential rain is forecast and at times of high spring tides.

Devastation!!!!

whitewave, there was no indication of where the quote came from

Thank you for the link to the actual article, dj.

Yes, whitewave, having lived in York in the 2000 floods, and up until 2010, I know how scary it can be. This is much more widespread.

After we sold the guest house, we were thinking of buying a flat in one of the blocks affected just off the Huntington Road/ Layerthorpe interchange. We realised it was a bit daft because the flood maps showed a 1 in 20 risk of flooding in the garages.
The Archbishop said the most sensible thing in those interviews. Why is the electricity on the Foss Barrier at a level where it can be damaged by flooding?

Oh, just realised the link dj gave was not related to her post of 22.14. Never mind, I'm sure the quote is absolutely factually correct...

Another couple of relevant paragraphs from the same article. This is what the Environment Agency says.

"Flood defences on average prevent £8 in future flood damages per £1 spent," it said. "This is because funding is limited and typically only the best-value-for-money projects are taken forward. The Environment Agency published last February a list of 387 projects that will not proceed at least for the next four years due to a lack of funding, or where more money needs to be found to fund their development.

"Ideally, every flood defence project that achieves benefits greater than its costs would be funded (by someone, not necessarily government)," it said.

It is definitely a right wing government doing this. No apologies for saying this.

rosequartz you are right. Woke up and thought .... wrong word!
I agree politics should be taken out of this issue. Unfortunately we have a government that does not want to do anything to control carbon emissions or regulate the behaviour of landowners.
Here's Monbiot explaining how removing regulations from landowners (traditional Tory supporters of course) is counterproductive.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/17/farmers-uk-flood-maize-soil-protection

The shadow chancellor was very sensible on this subject this morning. A cross party agreement with no changes when changes of government

There must be some sort of consensus throughout the England and Wales that this needs to be taken out of party political hands. The Pitt report in 2008 strongly indicated the way forward and for a time extra resources were given to those areas at real risk. We need to revisit this and continue where we left off and of course updating it as necessary - it is a moving picture and we are definitely on the back foot at the moment.

Any Grans living near Oxford will be aware if the "new" bit of the Thames being built to mitigate flooding - perhaps something like this could be done in Leeds?

Oxford also got a new railway into London, after the northern ones were shelved. No North/South divide?

"This country can afford flood defences, and as many of them as we want within our physical capacity to build them. We can pay for them in three ways.

First, we could issue new gilts. That is, of course, government debt. But given that markets are buying any amount the government creates without flinching or demanding higher interest rates this is entirely possible.

Second, we could create a National Investment Bank and have it issue bonds to cover the cost with a yield either covered by the government, or insurers, or, if the money was spent wisely on developing new technology by marketising it and creating a new world leading industry in this area.

Third, we could of course do People’s Quantitative Easing using either of these bond issues, although I do not think that would be necessary at present.

So, we can pay for this without raising taxes any time soon and maybe ever and, if done wisely, this problem could be turned into an opportunity.

In fact, if we thought long term enough we would realise that we really do have to invest big time in this issue. For example, if the whole of the area from the Wash to Bedford is not to be flooded regularly in the future it really is time we dammed the Wash. Then we would also have a tidal energy source and would preserve and create new wildlife habitats when soon many will be lost.

But that may be going too far when at present the government can’t seem to think beyond finding the cash for sandbags."

Richard Murphy.

York Magistrates courts have been flooded.
The last time that happened was in 2000 and they were closed for six months. Cases were then held in Selby. However, Selby courts have been closed because of cuts.

Chickens beginning to coming home to roost?

"The government was warned by its own advisory body that a funding gap could leave swaths of the north vulnerable to flooding just weeks before the deluge this Christmas, official documents show.

Prof Colin Mellors, head of the Yorkshire regional flood and coastal committee (RFCC), said funding cuts could mean discontinuing some flood defences, according to minutes on the government’s website.

The disclosure came as opposition MPs representing northern constituencies affected by the floods rounded on David Cameron for neglecting defences outside the south of England, creating a north-south divide in preparedness."

From an article in the Guardian this morning.

The minutes on the government website referred to are in a 140 page document, just in case anyone wants to read it.

Anniebach, I agree with the idea of no changes when a change of government, but we can't start from where we are now.
Like Richard Murphy says, we can afford to pay for flood defences. It just needs government will.

Is Oxfordshire being affected by cuts?

Agree Jen, they have to take action now