Jump to content

£100M for south coast flood damage


is the north being disadvantaged for the south?  

46 members have voted

  1. 1. is the north being disadvantaged for the south?

    • yes, they deserve it.
    • no, they deserve it.
    • yes, purseholders are looking after their neighbours.
    • no, of course not.
    • the south should be given up to the sea.
    • cant vote now, i'm drowning!


Recommended Posts

Watching the news it does look awfull down south,in the summer when they have their barbies nextto the river it looks good then they have to take the rough with the smooth,they should be insured for this kind of stuff and if they can't afford it shouldn't live there.

 

It looks terrible.

 

Been looking more into the new insurance deal the government has done on behalf of people in flood zones. The deal excludes council tax band H properties and anything built since 2009. Any properties that become impacted by new changes due to climate change are also excluded. It excludes businesses too.

 

This is going to mean that from 2015 a lot of properties are faced with uninsurable risk of flooding and therefore potentially unlimited losses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite simply UKIP and some right wing Tories have had a beef with foreign aid spending for a long time.

 

Get out on the streets and see how normal/working class people and pensioners feel about overseas aid.

 

---------- Post added 12-02-2014 at 09:48 ----------

 

We are the a wealthy country.

Lets find the extra cash for the repairs out of the 99.3%of our national budget, not the 0.7% that gets used for overseas development

 

I've all ready asked you to give us a figure or did you just make it up in your head?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£100M for south coast flood damage pledged.

STOP PRESS! NOW £130M

 

If i remember rightly, the east coast got bugger all, not even any offer to stop coastal erosion claiming countless homes.

 

are those with the purse discriminating against us northerners.

 

another reason to vote UKIP perhaps?

 

Paul Hudson was interviewed by Radio 4 last night and he made a good comment. There may well be less people affected by these floods compared to the us up north in 2007 but that only lasted a few days. These current floods have been for months now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get out on the streets and see how normal/working class people and pensioners feel about overseas aid.

 

---------- Post added 12-02-2014 at 09:48 ----------

 

 

I've all ready asked you to give us a figure or did you just make it up in your head?

 

I know some might be opposed to overseas aid but that's got nothing to do with the flooding at present.

 

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holland is a different situation though - and yes, they've spent astronomical amounts of money on flood prevention, but they've also allocated previously inhabited areas as new flood plain, and declared that other areas will not be protected in the event of flooding with people being allowed to decide whether to continue to live there.

 

All the Dutch authorities have done really is protect those areas which lie below sea level. That and annoy their neighbouring countries - by restricting the flow of water out to the sea, they've caused numerous floods inland further up the rivers - pretty much like the Somerset levels.

 

And even then, they admit there's nothing they can do to stop certain areas being eventually reclaimed by the sea.

 

Correct.

 

This article is worth reading, it explains what the Dutch strategy actually is. And it isn't "let's build more and bigger barriers". Because doing that has consequences too.

 

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18229027

 

and

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_for_the_River_(Netherlands)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know some might be opposed to overseas aid but that's got nothing to do with the flooding at present.

 

Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

Still waiting on actual figures on the 0.7%

 

Still fudging the issue I see. Go and tell the people whose homes are flooded that an Indian space ship is the best way to spend their taxes.

 

Or more to the point would you dare meet these flood victims face to face and tell them that India and Pakistan's Nuclear arsenals are more important than their own well being?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the tories got in we gave 0.56 % GDP, (2010), the aim is to grt to 0.7%.This was a target set 20plus years ago.Quite a number of the other eu countrys already meet and exceed this.

 

Another one who can talk in meaningless percentages without disclosing figures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still waiting on actual figures on the 0.7%

 

Still fudging the issue I see. Go and tell the people whose homes are flooded that an Indian space ship is the best way to spend their taxes.

 

Or more to the point would you dare meet these flood victims face to face and tell them that India and Pakistan's Nuclear arsenals are more important than their own well being?

 

There is no issue to fudge. It's very clear. You're responding to dog whistle politics that does nothing to help anybody right now. It's idiotic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.