Updated 18/10/2008
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Environment Agency strategy exposed - How to avoid accountability!
(Ewan Larcombe)
Have you been affected by flooding? Are you unhappy with the Environment Agency?
Nationwide floods are extremely rare, so the vast majority of events may be labelled 'local' although the scale and impact of any event will vary.
Furthermore 'nature' and the elements has no respect for town and county boundaries, or catchment areas.
Some areas may be dryer than others, but where quantities and timings of precipitation are a matter of luck, the probability of flooding may be varied by the actions of man.
When it comes to flooding, the EA use the word 'risk' rather than probability, where risk is actually a combination of probability and consequences.
The EA claim to be reducing the risk of flooding, but although the consequences may be reducing, the probability of the event itself occurring is in fact increasing.
I prefer to use the word probability, on the basis that prevention is cheaper than cure.
That said, when a flood event occurs (as they have done and will continue to do) the EA has a clearly defined and well practiced procedure to follow, in order to handle the many angry flood victims who are looking for someone to blame.
Although they are responsible for flooding and flood defence, this is how the Environment Agency behaves in order to avoid accountability..........
The following section added 17/10/2008
Since the EA took over from the National Rivers Authority, they appear to have abandoned watercourse maintenance, and prefer instead to compile and issue maps and flood warnings from the safety of a warm dry office.
When things go wrong, the first thing they do is send representatives out into the flood zone in Wellington boots. This ensures that they can claim to be concerned, and enables them to discreetly collect flood data at the same time.
Flood victims tend to get increasingly angry after a flood event, particularly when it is suspected that the actions (or inactions) of the Environment Agency exacerbated the consequences of the event.
People are especially upset when the EA divert flood water into villages in order to save towns, and also when they fail to issue any flood warnings.
The standard EA procedure to deal with unruly hoards of angry flood victims is to dispatch a 'road-show' to a number of venues. Whilst ensuring that the locations such gatherings avoid areas where specific shortcomings have been identified (e.g. blocked and/or mis-operated watercourses), ................
The following section added 18/10/2008
The list of excuses that the Environment Agency uses to avoid watercourse maintenance and dredging gets ever longer and includes:
Unsustainable solution, protected colony of Depressed River Mussels, protected Crayfish, water voles, natural self-scouring watercourse, dredging will undermine bridge foundations, nowhere to dispose of dredged material, too expensive to dispose of dredged material, dredged material is hazardous waste, unable to place dredged material on adjacent land, dredging equipment and operators disposed of when EA took over from NRA in 1996, no budget available for dredging - only for grass cutting, ................
If you know of other EA excuses, please let me know
UNDER CONSTRUCTION - MORE TO FOLLOW.
