Hundreds of UK flood defences not built due to budget cuts

[Zaune]

The Guardian

Nearly 300 flood defence schemes across England have been left unbuilt due to government budget cuts, according to documents obtained by the Guardian.

Thousands of homes have flooded in recent weeks, causing hundreds of millions of pounds of damage. But in some of places overwhelmed by the deluge, flood defences that might have protected against rising waters and were in line for funding in 2010 were never begun, including at Croston in Lancashire and Kendal in Cumbria.

"The government is wringing its hands while the waters rise," said Charles Tucker, chairman of the National Flood Forum, which represents 150 community flood action groups. "The fact is that spending has decreased while flooding has increased. Spending on flooding is clearly not enough."

The exceptionally wet weather has caused chaos across the country from the banks of the River Yealm in the south-west to Sheepy Magna in Leicestershire and Hebden Bridge in Yorkshire. Travel to the Silverstone grand prix was severely disrupted last week after the car parks flooded and the Great Yorkshire show was cancelled because of the weather for the first time in its 154-year history.

The Guardian's analysis of Environment Agency documents shows 294 flood defence projects that had indicative funding in 2010 to begin work in the following two years have received no funding at all.

Major river schemes affected include those due to cost £58m in Leeds, £6m in Thirsk, Yorkshire and £1.3m in Croston, Lancashire. Other stranded projects include a £12m tidal barrier to protect Ipswich and a £6m coastal defence project at Fleetwood, near Blackpool.



"Labour left us with a massive debt problem, spending £120m every day just paying the interest on the debt," said a spokeswoman for Caroline Spelman, the environment secretary. "We couldn't put off dealing with the mess. This means, like every government department, very difficult decisions have had to be made regarding where to cut spending."

"The government is playing Russian roulette with peoples' homes and businesses," said Mary Creagh, Labour's shadow environment secretary. "We know flooding is the biggest threat the country faces but the government is wilfully disregarding the scientific advice. In the end it will cost the country more. Every £1 spent saves £8, not to mention the human trauma avoided."

Tim Farron, president of the Liberal Democrats and local MP for Kendal, where a £325,000 scheme for the River Kent failed to materialise, said: "The problem is the demand for flood defences is rising when the pressure on public funds is also rising. But you should spend what you have to spend to avoid flooding. The cost to taxpayers is probably less than the cost of dealing with the damage afterwards."

The number of homes at risk of flooding is set to quadruple in the next 20 years, the government's official advisers, the Committee on Climate Change, warned this week. In December, the environment select committee of MPs warned cutting flood protection was a "classic false economy", while the government's own report on climate change risk in January said flooding was the UK's greatest threat, with annual damages set to rise to billions of pounds a year.

"It does not take a genius to work out this is an area where money needs to be spent now," said Richard Lewis, executive member for development and economy at Leeds city council, where planned funding for major flood protection project did not survive the cuts. "Leeds is the economic powerhouse for Yorkshire, but the cuts are the economics of the madhouse."

"In the last three years, the Environment Agency has completed 364 new flood risk management schemes resulting in better protection for an additional 188,200 households in England and Wales," said Paul Leinster, chief executive of the Environment Agency, which delivers flood defences for the government. "There will always be more schemes proposed than funds available and no one can prevent flooding entirely."

Government spending on flood defence rose rapidly after the massive flooding in 2007 but the pre-election annual spend was slashed by 27% by the coalition – a figure cited by Lord Smith, the Environment Agency chairman.

While 294 schemes in line for funding in 2010 have been left stranded, analysis of Environment Agency funding documents for 2012-13 shows a total of 846 schemes have been identified but require "reduced costs, improved outcomes or additional contributions" to go ahead.

Didn't think that one all the way through, did they.

[PeZook]

Why, what could POSSIBLY go wrong?

It's like that everywhere, though. Poland has floods EVERY YEAR,the anti-flood measures have been underfunded for decades now, yet the budget for maintaing and constructing them does not increase.

Predictably, every year there's drama about flooding. Fortunately, serious floods are not that common, so it's mostly fine.

Except when it's not.

Yay?

[weemadando]

This just in, government responds to stupid criticisms about spending by not spending on critical, life and infrastructure saving projects, saving a relatively inconsequential amount of money now, in exchange for horrific spending on relief and recovery projects later.

I wish this wasn't old news everywhere in the world.