Winner of the New Statesman SPERI Prize in Political Economy 2016


Monday 7 December 2015

UK flooding, austerity and the media

UK flooding again tops the news, and I’m reminded of a series of posts I wrote after Christmas 2013. The first showed how austerity led to a sharp cut back on flood prevention. The second pointed out that the consensus was that spending on flood prevention should be rising because of climate change, but the environment minister was a climate skeptic. The third noted how the government had managed to deflect any significant criticism until now, but I thought surely that cannot last. At the time it became one of my most widely read posts, but when the government thereafter continued to avoid serious criticism except for a handful of articles I realised how weak our media had become in holding the government to account.

I have no idea if any of the most recent floods can be directly connected to the post 2010 cuts, but that is not how these things work. We cannot prove that each of these severe weather episodes are linked to climate change, but we work with probabilities. Unfortunately the media find it hard doing the same.

Here is the time series for spending that I found in the House of Commons library.


The impact of austerity is clear, but by including spending already committed in 2010/11 and choosing the right dates ministers managed to get away with saying that spending had not fallen on their watch. Anyone with these figures could have blown that cover, but I hardly saw this chart anywhere else in the media. Equally almost no one picked up on the fact that spending should have been on a rising trend because of climate change, and linked that to the views of the then environment minister.

Until then I had thought that the government had got away with austerity partly because the impact of the cuts had not been very visible. Flooding was highly visible, yet the links with austerity were completely absent from the media beyond the Guardian and FT. So, in that rather negative sense, this episode became an education for me. An education the public was denied.    

8 comments:

  1. A tale of austerity- Liquidity excess but investment dearth

    ReplyDelete
  2. On Today, one resident complained that if it was a Tory region they would have been looked after. Was he right? Should the residents of Cumbria start voting Tory to prevent flooding?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Penrith and Carlisle in the north-east of Cumbria are Tory-held (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Parliamentary_constituencies_in_Cumbria), and have been affected by the floods (see map at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/07/chaos-cumbria-floods-lake-district-turn-lives-upside-down). Admittedly much of the affected area in the western Lakes and down into Lancaster is Labour held (+ Tim Farron's Lib Dem constituency), but it's far from obvious that this is politically targeted incompetence rather than the more general kind.

      Delete
    2. I'm from Whitehaven in the Copeland district of Cumbria, and it seems more like there's a correlation between level of flooding and level of Tory-ness than the other way around, but this could be a example of ideological bias on my part.

      The badly flooded areas include: Carlisle on the northern border with Scotland which is Tory-held in terms of its mayor and its MP; Penrith on the Eastern border is held by Conservative Rory Stewart; Keswick and Cockermouth are in Labour-held Copeland, but to be honest, they consider themselves to be much posher than jam-eaters like us and so are more Tory in temperament; and finally Kendal is held by Lib-Dem leader Tim Farron, who might seem either tory-ish or the opposite depending on your political outlook (Kendal definitely has a more 'monied' feel than Copeland if you don't include Keswick and Cockermouth in that consideration).

      Whitehaven and its nearby neighbour Workington were largely unaffected by the floods, and both are Labour held for Jamie Reed and Sue Hayman respectively.

      Obviously, though, the reason we didn't get flooded is more because of geography rather than a lack of investment in flood prevention, but it seems likely that a lack of investment as per Simon Wren-Lewis's arguments could also have a strong influence for the flood-hit areas too. Copeland is doing very badly with regard to its NHS provisions at the moment, and there's a great deal of worry that we're about to lose what little pre-natal facilities that we currently have (with the upshot that Copeland women with emergency birthing difficulties might have to travel 60 minutes to Carlisle to get life saving treatments - hopefully without Carlisle being flooded at the time).

      Delete
    3. Apologies, but I made a mistake on Cockermouth's district as it's in Allerdale not Copeland (and both are boroughs rather than districts too). It's still a bit posh and tory-ish though.

      Delete
    4. Thanks for the clarification.
      It seems that the complainer on Today was confused about who his MP is!
      Anyway, it seems that Cumbria did receive 'investment' in flood defences after the last one (2009) but it does not seem to have stopped it flooding this time. Money well spent?

      Delete
  3. ok so you would like action to be taken...but the construction industry seems to be constrained. All economists seem to want infrastructure projects. We have Crossrail, we have the masses of construction projects happening in London from Marylebone to the Elephant and Docklands. Construction capacity is constrained. What would you do to build capacity? At the moment there is no room for a multiplier effect.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Please continue to highlight media deficiency - excellent and important work. I find the uncritical, tame, uninformed, simplistic media bias to be truly disconcerting given how much it frames the national debate and ultimately election outcomes.
    Thanks, JL

    ReplyDelete

Unfortunately because of spam with embedded links (which then flag up warnings about the whole site on some browsers), I have to personally moderate all comments. As a result, your comment may not appear for some time. In addition, I cannot publish comments with links to websites because it takes too much time to check whether these sites are legitimate.