Flooding - A National Emergency.

[Theland]

Time for the government to step up and if necessary increase taxes to help the poor victims of flooding.
I would happily pay more, would you?

[woofgang]

ermm no. by the time the increased tax was at the government, let alone at the people it would be the middle of the next decade. If you want to put money into the problem (and I have) then go to one of the many collection websites and donate directly.

[cassa333]

How many times can you happily pay more for all the different pay more areas in life?

Where I do think flood defences should be better it is impossible to protect everyone. That’s a simple fact of life.

We forget we are not omnipotent. We are just people and we cannot make the tide stop as King Canute tried to do.

For the most part we forget that we are at the mercy of the eliments. We put on a coat when it gets a bit chilly, up goes the umbrella when it rains, the fire switches on when its cold. But the eliments are a cruel master that we thought we were master of.

The extinction rebellion lot will say this is all about climate change, and it might be, but we have had bouts of treacherous and excessive weather before and we’ll have it again.

I haven’t an answer other than look at the flood planes and live accordingly.

[Cloverjo]

I’d happily pay more tax to help homeless people, and anyone else who’s down on their luck and need a boost. But as I said in a previous thread about flooding, pack up and move upstairs.

[Boto]

Definitely not.

[Apc2604]

I agree with Woofy. If you want to help, donate directly. Whilst it's really awful for those affected, awful things are also happening to others all over this country.

[david small]

No I would not pay yet more tax. My family and I have paid ridiculous amounts of tax. The country is run by incompetent I’m all right jacks. Death and taxes, we are taxed to death and beyond. I’m bitter about the amount we’ve been fleeced by successive so called governments.
So a big NO.

[douglas9401]

Dredge waterways and estuaries, stop spivs building on flood-prone land, bin vanity projects that drain the lifeblood from the country, put 'save the vole' type stuff on the back burner and so on and so on until equilibrium is restored.

I'm sure all this is actually in hand under the banner 'working inCREDibly hard' though so we can look forward to a brighter future with dry feet and a rosy future.

[douglas9401]

Maybe one 'future' too many there.

[Togo]

Douglas has just taken either a rosy or brighter future away from us, the parsimonious, flinty eyed, scrooge. Apart from that I agree with everything he said, that I said earlier on another thread.

[Deskdiary]

Definitely not - I already pay far too much tax.

Still, there’s nothing to stop you donating the equivalent of the extra tax you’d be happy to pay to those affected.

[Mamyalynne]

There are many appeals set up to which we can donate if wished, some are local but a search such find them.

Here's just one.

https://www.rotarygbi.org/flood-appeal-remains-open-storm-ciara-storm-dennis/

[douglas9401]

Oh dear, I apologise for

a. Not following you closely enough, Togo, and

b. Stealing your thunder(although I was just rearranging the furniture).

[jourdain2]

Individual donations -fine. No, I wouldn't increase taxes. Better management is needed. I lived in the Calder valley for a short while (Mytholmroyd, but up the hill above) and there are lots of contributing factors. Far too many for ne to go into here, but can I start with telling you that all the old pack-horse trails and the places they had as centres (e.g. Heptonstall - up the hill above Hebden Bridge) were on the tops of the hills? The valleys were even then classed as too dangerous). The old, Victorian, clay land-drains on the hills have been let go … that's just the start.... sweeling (burning controlled heather-breaks) needs to continue to stimulate the heather ground-cover with its roots (weirdos said it should be stopped) etc., etc.. Mismanagement most of the way and that's down to councils.

How do I know? My first husband was a drainage engineer in Calderdale for many years. He left me in no
doubt about the ineptitude and parsimony of the council at the time. It may be different now, of course.

[Mozz71]

Why should we foot the bill? How about MPs forego their next pay rise and that money go to help those affected by the floods instead?

[naomi24]

I agree with Woofgang and APC. Give money directly to help victims rebuild their lives - and to pay their next insurance premium - if they can get insurance in future.

//How about MPs forego their next pay rise//

650 MPs. That'll sort it!! :o/

[brainiac]

Absolutely no need to increase taxes to sort this out. We somehow manage to give away an astonishing 14 BILLION pounds in foreign aid every year, come what may, much of it to crackpot, corrupt regimes. I would half that and spend it on our own infrastucture: flood defences, fixing potholes, improving provincial train services, particularly in the north, maybe even a non-PFI hospital or two.... And so on.

There's no reason we should be obliged to give away 0.7% of GDP, just because someone somewhere came up with that figure, and someone somewhere said we should sign up to it.

[Gromit]

We should not use taxpayers money to compensate people whose houses get flooded.
But we should a fund to sue builders and developers.
They often build on flood plains (or flat areas with a history of flooding). Previous instances of the plot being flooded (old photographs or contemporaneous old stories) are ignored and planning permission getting granted, on sites that have a history of flooding.
A fund to sue those responsible would deter developers from building on cheap (but dangerous land).

[jno]

it appears many homeowners thought they were covered by government-backed insurance, ony to find they aren't

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/21/new-homes-in-flood-risk-areas-not-covered-by-insurance-scheme

[birdie1971]

As a Civil Engineer specialising in drainage, I think I'm qualified to answer this question:

“Time for the government to step up and if necessary increase taxes to help the poor victims of flooding. I would happily pay more, would you?”


No. That would be my short answer.

My longer answer would be - “Yes. If that money were better targetted at the actual source of the problem(s) rather than squandered on short-term, headline grabbing, boondoggles.

What do I mean by that?

I mean, properly managing the upstream hydrological feed-ins. Slowing / attenuating the initial flows so that downstream conduits can cope with the volume of water. I mean, taking a long-term view on these issues by creating attenuation ponds/lakes to achieve the aforementioned. I mean, dredging watercourses to remove accumulated silt and other obstructions...

The EA have been incubating this problem for years and their misguided, ideologically driven actions, based on unproven and unscientific nonsense are the root cause of much of the flooding. They refuse and/or have been prohibited from dredging rivers due to EU directives on maintaining the habitats for various species of wading birds. I have personally had arguments with EA bods about the efficacy of river dredging whereby they claim that removing the accumulated silt may (hypothetically) adversely affect those downstream when the flooding caused by said accumulated silt is literally affecting people upstream of the alleged hypothetical flooding.

The double-think and ideological muppetry of some of the people in the drainage sector is breathtaking.

In short. More taxes won't necessarily help. Better understanding of the problems will. We can solve these problems if we are given the means to do so.

[Deskdiary]

Even for those that cannot (rather than will not) buy insurance, there's plenty of affordable domestic flood protection products available.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=FloodKit%EF%BF%BD&i=diy&search-type=ss&ref=bl_dp_s_web_0