2007 saw very bad flooding in the UK. A report was commissioned from
Michael Pitt (no longer available on a government website, but
available here (pdf), HT @FiDaisyG)
which stated:
ES.12 The scale of the problem is, as we know, likely to get worse. We are not sure whether last summer’s events were a direct result of climate change, but we do know that events of this kind are expected to become more frequent. The scientific analysis we have commissioned as part of this Review (published alongside this Report) shows that climate change has the potential to cause even more extreme scenarios than were previously considered possible. The country must adapt to increasing flood risk.
The Labour government responded to this review by substantially
increasing central government spending on flood prevention. It
reached a peak in 2010/11, the last year of the relevant spending
review. Subsequently the coalition government, as part of its
austerity policy, cut back on spending, going directly against the
spirit of the Pitt review.
It was obvious following 2007 that substantially more money needed to
be spent on flood prevention as a result of climate change, and the
Labour government acted on that knowledge. The Coalition government
ignored it. Suppose that instead of cutting, the coalition government
had allowed spending to increase each year by 2% from that 2010/11
level: a very modest rise given the nature of the risk. That would
have meant that by 2015/16 around £500 million more in 15/16 prices
would have been spent in total, which is about three quarters of the
total amount spent this year. As 2014/15 is acknowledged as a one-off
positive blip, by 2020/21 under Conservative plans we will probably
be looking at missing expenditure near £1 billion. And that is
despite all the flooding that has occurred since 2011, some of the damage from which
must be the result of this missing spending. That is a huge spending
gap created by the Conservatives.
I still find it remarkable that no one has held the government to
account for this huge failure. Flooding is currently costing at least
£1 billion a year. Even if filling that spending gap had prevented only a
small proportion of these current and future costs, it would have
produced a handsome return, as well as avoiding a great deal of
individual heartbreak. Yet the government continues to get away with
talking about unprecedented rainfall, as if no one had thought this
might happen. John Deben, Chairman of the Statutory Committee on
Climate Change, tweets
"Surprising no broadcaster seems to have sought to discuss advice on flooding and adaptation to climate change given to Government"
The Labour Party too appears to have made no attempt to coordinate a media attack on the government, in an area where their own record was exemplary. DEFRA secretary of state at the time that Labour increased flood defences was Hilary Benn, who is MP for Leeds (one of the areas affected by flooding) and Ed Miliband was the minister in charge of energy and climate change. The current DEFRA shadow minister is Kerry McCarthy, and all I could find from her on flooding was this and this.
Speaking about the
latest flooding, David Cameron said “We will do everything we can
to help people in this, their hour of need.” It is a shame that no
one seems capable of asking him why he added to these needs, by
ignoring the growing evidence (including the Pitt review) that more
money needed to be spent on flood defences.
