Cable Forum - UK Flooding

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - UK Flooding (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33702045)

I have taken everything on board concerning my opionon.

I will say again. Thie government has made severe cuts to everything, and yet feeds MPs with an 11% pay increases. Multi Millionaires with the MPs little group, are getting richer.

And yet, when it comes down to Joe Bloggs etc. We have to settle for 1%. They have made cuts to everything, including the Environment Agency which covers flooding.

What the government should do is LISTEN to local communities that are besides Rivers, build defences.

As soon as disasters happen in other countries, we are quick to jump on the goodwill bandwagon and send BILLIONS to these countries.

When it comes down to the UK, and those poor people who have lost everything in the floods. What Cameron has to do is to fund those people NOW, not six months or year. Such as Wraysbury.

Trouble is that you only every see an MPs is when they want your vote.

I feel for those poor people, and now the flooding it hitting parts of Scotland.
This is not down to Climate change, the thing that this government should do is Think, Learn and Listen to the people.

If local people that there area could be a flood problem, then MPs should seek there councils advice. And then act. Not wait till the damage has been done

I was shown a picture of a part of Devon today that is being hit by flooding

Again its not all down to this government, but also the previous 2 or 3 governments that made cuts in budgets diverting money elsewhere. It takes year of cutting funding, it doesn't just happen overnight. Also as I posted earlier after the flooding last year there was an announced increase in spending on flood defences of which some where built but the flood waters still rose above them and destroyed them.

It is down to climate change. The flooding hasn't happened just because money has been cut. Flooding is getting more frequent due to the change in climate.

You saw a photo? I saw first hand today flooding in and all around Glasgow and Scotland. Overton Park a 5 min walk from my house was flooded. The streets near Hampden were all flooded too.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v...74&pnref=story

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

Stephen, How do you know its Climate Change - are you a scientist. If you believe in all this climate change rubbish. Your'll believe that a pink elephant will land at Glasgow Airport.

Or will you believe that the Ice Bergs melting will increase the water levels.
You tell the people that are being flooded by burst banks.

In fact, l know an area of Chiswick and Twickenham, that gets flooded regular. As you are in Glasgow, there it an area in Chiswick by the Fullers Brewery that gets flooded at High Tide.
The residents there have put in FLOOD DEFENCES, which work. I have seen first hand of this.

Near where l live, by Twickenham Lock. and the Park gets flooded at High Tide. What do they do. Lower the flood gates and this prevents flooding.

It does not take a magician to work things out.

IF you build these defences, they work. It is not causes by climate change.

I was brought up by the River Thames, but defences are in place to prevent flooding.

Not everything is simple, but you have to invest money into projects. Sadly this government wont invest in these projects

If you think if drains are not cleared on a regular basis. this will cause flooding. Like last year, my road was flooded, and several days later the council came along when it was too late.

Arthur, how do you know medicine works - are you a doctor?

How do you know electricity works - are you a physicist?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35814908)

Among other things a record low in solar activity.

The strong El Nino is mainly caused by much warmer than normal waters in the Pacific, and the hottest year we've had on this planet since records began. The climate is warming faster than the the most pessimistic forecasts, and that is worrying.

Doing the 'blame game' is missing the much bigger picture of the climate change crisis facing the planet and what we ALL need to do NOW. Its not up to somebody else to solve, we all need to solve it.

The 3rd World will suffer most initially, but doubtless we aren't too concerned about that. At least we have the resources to respond to these emergencies, many countries don't. The only crisis we'll be worried about is the resultant immigration one.

By the time the whole world does wake up to it and takes unified action it'll be too late, if it isn't already.

Think my Xmas spirit has gone already :(

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35814954)

Stephen, How do you know its Climate Change - are you a scientist. If you believe in all this climate change rubbish. Your'll believe that a pink elephant will land at Glasgow Airport.

Such ignorance is truly breathtaking.

climate change is very real, it's what the Earth does.

Previously we were covered in ice, or you could walk from Dover to Calais as he sea levels were lower.

The climate changes continuously, now whether you believe that human activity is adding to the speed of change, is another argument.

But climate does change. Irreversible fact. Ooh look, an elephant!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35814954)

I am not but as others have said climate change is real, I have studied geography among other things and understand climate and the weather.

---------- Post added at 09:07 ---------- Previous post was at 09:06 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35814958)

Arthur, how do you know medicine works - are you a doctor?

How do you know electricity works - are you a physicist?

Well put Hugh.

Something that crept in under the radar is that in 2000 the then (Labour) government signed up to an EU environmental directive that precludes dredging of any river except main navigations upon pain of massive fines from Brussels. You know, preservation of bird habitats, mussel beds, fishing etc etc. This is why so many water courses have become silted up, of course it is convenient for El Gov as it saves money but maybe peoples ire should be partly directed at our masters in Brussels.

Sorry I can't give the link but I'm on a narrow band connection that means searches take forever but the story was in today's Sun and the editorial amongst other places.

Quote:

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35815050)

There are many European directives, many are not from the EU but from OSPAR. Habitats Regulations, Marine Strategy Framework Directive, MPA's SAC's etc.

I think you are trying to refer to the water framework directive.

As with all these directives nothing is banned. If the river needs to be dredged or cleared it can be, but the proper assessment has to be done before hand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35815086)

Well done for not allowing people to perpetuate the myth that the EU is responsible for all our regulations and for telling us what to do. People also forget that EU regulations, and the regulations and judgements issued by unrelated bodies like the ECHR, are often initiated by us and that we have up to 10% representation on these bodies.

On the subject of dredging there has been a lot of misinformation put about. e.g. The authorities were criticised for not allowing dredging on the Somerset Levels because water voles were being put before people. In fact, voles live on quite back waters on smaller water courses up stream. Also dredging upstream would be a very bad idea because that allows rainwater to get down to the flood plains much quicker. Water needs trapping and slowing in the hills, not speeding up.

---------- Post added at 11:28 ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35814947)

There is no conflict between foreign aid and flood prevention and relief at home. There is enough cash to go around. Blaming Johnny Foreigner is a smoke screen set up by those who would divert our attentions away from those who withhold profit taxes or grab the larger part of the cake before the crumbs even get as far as the public purse.

Well-targeted foreign aid, apart from being the right moral thing to do, is also an investment in our future business partners and is an investment in our security. Those who want us out of the EU would do well to remember that we will be depending on friendly relations with these needy countries more than ever when we come to renegotiate all our trade deals.

Also money spent on mitigating the effects of global warming is money well spent if it means that less people will be migrating towards Europe from threatened coastal plains and river deltas or from sub-Saharan Africa.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35814848)

And what's caused the particularly strong El Nino?

It can happen :shrug:

Revealed: how Tory cuts are wrecking UK flood defences

Quote:

Many of Britain’s flood defences are being abandoned or maintained to minimal levels because of government cuts that could leave almost twice as many households at “significant risk” within 20 years, according to a leaked document submitted to ministers.

Oh dear ...

Good article

Quote:

While lecturing us on the threat of greater rainfall and rising sea levels, the government has reduced spending on flood defence. Every time we have floods, the Chancellor announces a few extra million, only to quietly slash funding once we have had a few dry months and the issue has disappeared from the political radar. This year, spending on river and sea defences — including capital expenditure and maintenance — will come to £695 million, a 4 per cent reduction in real terms over the past four years.

To put that into context, this year the government and consumers between them will spend £4.3 billion subsidising green energy. We keep being told that we cannot afford more money for flood walls and diversion channels, yet we are being forced to spend a far greater sum in an attempt to control the climate. Pursuing a policy of prevention rather than cure might be a sensible strategy with smoking-related diseases, but it is foolish when the preventative measure involves a grandiose and futile attempt to stop it raining so heavily and the curative one would consist of sound, practical measures to manage the flow of rivers.

Don't take this as gospel but it's interesting.

Perhaps if the taxpayer were to stop funding deforestation, removal of heather to improve grouse shooting for Hooray Henrys, subsidy of farming on land that's unviable for farming but great to hold water, and indeed removal of a whole bunch of 'flood defence' that nature provides to then pay for entirely artificial defences and clean up that'd be a good start.

We need to co-operate with nature, not spend money buggering it up in one place to then spend more money trying to fix it elsewhere. The current policies are simply moronic on each and every level and the government has shown little interest in fixing it which is unsurprising when it's as infested with an old boys' network and vested interests as this one is.

Incidentally that's not a partisan jibe. I'm sure that we've had other governments as equally beholden to vested interests and it's just not been as easy to track those interests due to no Internet.

---------- Post added at 19:07 ---------- Previous post was at 19:04 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 35815398)

Good article

Quote:

Diversion channels have been dug; areas of agricultural land are being used to create temporary reservoirs where floodwaters can be held back to prevent flooding of towns downstream; roads and houses are being raised or rebuilt off the floodplain.

Hah. In the UK the taxpayer subsidises water management programmes that keep agricultural land, grouse farms, etc, dry at the expense of flooding of towns downstream.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6794286.html

Quote:

Pickering, North Yorkshire, pulled off protection by embracing the very opposite of what passes for conventional wisdom. On it’s citizens’ own initiative, it ended repeated inundation by working with nature, not against it.

Quote:

They built 167 leaky dams of logs and branches – which let normal flows through but restrict and slow down high ones – in the becks above the town; added 187 lesser obstructions, made of bales of heather and fulfilling the same purpose, in smaller drains and gullies; and planted 29 hectares of woodland. And, after much bureaucratic tangling, they built a bund, to store up to 120,000 cubic metres of floodwater, releasing it slowly through a culvert.

And the cost? £2 million..