8 1 min 15 yrs

For once I am linking to the Guardian. That headline is not made up. Communities in Yorkshire are still underwater after more than three days and this can happen again if we get another spell of bad weather. I dont give a crap whether this is caused by Global Warming or just freak weather such as we have experienced before – but if this Government, flush with cash and able to provide the underclass with all the booze they can drink, all the Playstations they can zone in front of and all the social workers they can stomach, cant find money for this, what the hell are we bothering to pay a penny of our extortionate taxes for?

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

8 thoughts on “No New Money For Flood Defences Until 2011

  1. DSD

    You’re generally against people getting state handouts. Please explain why handouts should be given to protect people stupid enough to live right by the sea or in a river flood plain. Why should my taxes have to pay for such folly?

  2. Death toll rises to 4. Four. What a fucking emergency! Four dead. Four. Car crashes have bigger death tolls. What a non-issue. Next…

  3. Peter,

    Dont be so utterly crass just to try and score a point on behalf of your beloved Labour Party. Flood Defences are ‘state handouts’? Not even an arch-libertarian would come out with something like that.

    The majority of these people either dont live on flood plains or went where the housing was, on the obviously naive assumption that the Government might have some form of adequate provision in place against them being inundated with several feet of water. A friend of mine spent 24 hours in Sheffield City Centre with no food water, toilets or electricity when he was trapped at work – do we now say that every single person in Sheffield ‘deserves it’ because they got a job or a house in one of Britain’s largest cities?

  4. DSD

    I’m not against relieving suffering with public funds. But I am against wasting millions on flood defences in areas that were never inhabitaed in the past precisely because they were prone to frequent flooding.

  5. The officials within local authorities which gave planning permission for these houses to be built on flood plains should be made personally responsible for the damages suffered by inhabitants. These officials KNEW that the houses were to be built on flood plains but proceded to authorise their construction: wouldn’t have been any back-handers involved, by chance?

  6. Its not backhanders Allan – its desperation on the part of Government to create enough housing outside the southeast for the literally millions of people escaping the effects of mass immigration. I remember Farage mocking a proposed floodplain development about two years ago – standing on the very spot they intended to build on in three foot of water wearing giant green fisherman’s waders…insanity.

  7. The link which I’d been reading was to the Yorkshire Post which had described how planning permission had been given to housing estates on flood plain land. Now, I’m sure that in Yorkshire there are many areas suited for housing which are above flood levels BUT flatter areas are easier for building operations – faster return on money etc. So how did planning permission in these localities be granted?

  8. Its like this Allan. It is the *Regional Assemblies* that make these decisions on the grand scale. The Regional Assemblies are controlled from Brussels and obey their masters desperate urging to find more housing as quickly as possibe to accomodate the mass flow of immigrants that they wish to facilitate into Britain. As you say, its quicker and more profitable than building somewhere vaguely sane, but its also quicker and that is the desired end in and of itself.

Comments are closed.