Pickles puts the boot into Quangocrat Smith

[Dedworth]

I won't be printing 'Save Chris Smith' T-shirts, says Pickles as he calls for flood boss to apologise

• Communities Secretary wants Environment Agency chairman to apologise
• Said the agency had become 'riddled with political correct' eco-fanatics
• Accused Smith of playing 'divide and rule' setting 'town against country’

He used brutal sarcasm to pile on the pressure, adding: ‘I don’t see myself becoming the advocate of the “Save Chris Smith” campaign or printing “Save The Environment Agency One” T-shirts.’
He accused Lord Smith of playing ‘divide and rule’ by ‘trying to set town against country’, letting the EA become ‘riddled with politically correct’ eco-fanatics opposed to dredging, presiding as the organisation ‘lost its way’ and spending 20 times more money on its bloated bureaucracy than on keeping rivers clear.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2sraQohuV

Well said Eric a common sense Yorkshireman

[Jamesey]

It's a shame that the politicians are already trying to "score points" in the wake of the flooding problems.

The solutions need to be based on science, engineering and statistical climate analysis, along with a realisation that urban areas need to take priority over rural ones when it comes to flood defence.

Flooding has always been an issue on the Somerset levels, but it hasn't been this bad in living memory. I have friends and family who have been directly affected, so this issue is "close to home" for me.

[Dedworth]

Flooding has always been an issue on the Somerset levels, but it hasn't been this bad in living memory. I have friends and family who have been directly affected, so this issue is "close to home" for me.

‘The EA hiked up the council tax by around 20 per cent in the West Country last year with little to show for it.

He added: ‘It must not be invisible any more. They need a clear leadership and to understand that people matter. People are entitled to feel safe in their homes.

The EA gets £1.2 billion a year but paid out £395 million on staff last year and just £20 million on improving maintenance of culverts and channels to ensure the free flow of water.’ It was the most expensive agency of its type in Europe, costing nearly as much as in the USA.

Mr Pickles had no truck with green activists who say people on the Somerset Levels chose to live below sea level and should move.

‘That’s bad news for most of the Netherlands isn’t it?’ he quipped, with trademark deadpan humour.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2ss4UoDQj

[Jamesey]

The Environment Agency proposed dredging last year, but it was ruled out by the Government since it didn't offer "value for money". This was the correct decision. If you had a million pounds to spend on flood defence, why spend it protecting a couple of hundred rural properties when you could protect thousands in a town?

Politicians know very little about the complex matter of flood defence, but are quick to jump in and grandstand. As one EA staff member stated, Pickles would be more use as a sandbag!

[Dedworth]

The Environment Agency proposed dredging last year, but it was ruled out by the Government since it didn't offer "value for money". This was the correct decision. If you had a million pounds to spend on flood defence, why spend it protecting a couple of hundred rural properties when you could protect thousands in a town?

Politicians know very little about the complex matter of flood defence, but are quick to jump in and grandstand. As one EA staff member stated, Pickles would be more use as a sandbag!

Where did that come from ? My understanding is that the EA declined to spend £1.7 million dredging but happily blew £2.4 million of our money on PR.

They ceased regular dredging of the Thames years ago and now only do it "for safe passage of rivercraft, also taking into account conservation and available resources" - note no mention whatsoever of flood prevention

Smith is a career trough feeder and should be fired from all his quango and public sector non jobs

[Jamesey]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26078592

The relevant section is buried at the bottom:
"Mr Winkworth said Lord Smith told him the reason the area was not dredged, as was promised a year ago, was because the £400,000 set aside was not enough and they were waiting for other agencies to contribute."

The EA is just one of five or six agencies responsible for flood management on the Somerset Levels. Due to Treasury rules, the maximum they could put forward for dredging was £400K. The other agencies declined to put in anything, so the dredging didn't happen.

But all this talk of dredging is just part of the political blame game. The people with the real answers to this problem are the scientists, engineers and hydrologists. We should get are advice from these people, not politicians!

[Dedworth]

Some interesting stuff :-


Inside the Environment Agency - Experiences from EA Insiders

http://insidetheenvironmentagency.co.uk/


In recent news stories, Lord Smith is accusing ministers of playing politics with the floods, but as I pointed out last year in one of my most earliest posts, politics has been a key game played by management at the Environment Agency. There have been numerous occasions where management have discussed strategic drawback from critical projects with the objective of appearing to need more funding and to cause upset among constituents of MPs they don't like. Management have allowed personal feelings to influence how they handle incidents, and have favoured certain MPs and councillors over others. This is nothing new and is a regular part of doing business inside the Environment Agency.

As for having their hands tied by the Treasury, I presume that the abuse of working, flexitime and annual leave processes is the fault of the Treasury also? Or maybe the £31 million spent on a bird habitat instead of flood maintenance? Or how about the £395 million spent on staff (£592 million including pensions) vs £219 million on capital projects, and just £20 million on maintaining rivers.

Seems the Environment Agency is quick to play foul when the shoe is on the other foot.

Perhaps Lord Smith should air out his own cupboards and expose how management within the Environment Agency have used past incidents to gain favourable political positioning, how they spend significant amounts on political training for management/senior staff, PR staffing and programmes, and how management have used their positions to influence favoured MPs/councillors over others.

Environment Agency bosses spent £2.4million on PR... but refused £1.7million dredging of key Somerset rivers that could have stopped flooding - does that include PR staff salaries and pensions? Does it include the political training given to management and senior staff? Does it include other communications programmes with the aim of influencing public and politicians that the EA have classified under another heading (other than PR)?

UPDATED: Environment Agency boosted spending by £41m last year - so, EA spending actually went UP in 2012/13:

"In 2012-13 the EA spent £1207.4m compared to £1166.6m the year before. It ended the year with £95.8m cash in the bank. We are told the “cuts” stopped it doing a good job on flooding. How big an increase in spending would it take to qualify as no cut?"

A recent comment has brought home the failure at the EA - it is the EA Ops people who you see out on the ground doing the grunt work, yet they are some of the lowest paid in the organisation - Ops says: "We have 8 Environment Officers in this office who spend most of their time reading meters. Times that by 17+ area offices = 136 EOs tasked with mundane tasks getting paid £25,000+ each = £340,000 + pension, phones and lease cars = £400,00+ that could be used to pay our ops guys on the ground who actually are working their socks off. Too much waste in other departments."

Seems EA staff are being warned against public exposure and openness - Josh has posted: "My team leader has told everyone during a team meeting that anyone posting negative comments on public forums or to media will face disciplinary action for bringing the EA into disrepute. You've been warned."

[Dedworth]

Self serving Smith and his sycophants should be sacked over this :-

Why did floods agency spend hundreds on 'equali-tea' gay awareness mugs... and £30,000 on gay pride marches? As Britain counts cost of shoddy defences, we reveal bizarre spending by quango bosses

• Investigation shows the Environment Agency, headed by Lord Chris Smith - Britain's first openly gay Cabinet Minister - spent £639 on gay rights mugs
• EA also spent £30,000 sponsoring Birmingham's Gay Pride festival in 2009
• Comes as EA faces growing criticism of its handling of the flooding crisis

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2tVVigojT

[mickcant]

They all make me wonder
Mick.

[Dedworth]

[Arthur Little]

It seems to me, there's plenty of "dredging" going on amongst ALL parties concerned with this issue ... in the sense that, each of them is "scraping the bottom of the barrel" - looking for excuses to apportion blame to the other(s) - when, truth be told, the excessive flooding has most likely arisen from the consequences of extreme climatic changes affecting the lowest lying, predominantly flat areas - a "natural phenomenon", previously unheard of (in these parts) in living memory.

[Jamesey]

It seems to me, there's plenty of "dredging" going on amongst ALL parties concerned with this issue ... in the sense that, each of them is "scraping the bottom of the barrel" - looking for excuses to apportion blame to the other(s) - when, truth be told, the excessive flooding has most likely arisen from the consequences of extreme climatic changes affecting the lowest lying, predominantly flat areas - a "natural phenomenon", previously unheard of (in these parts) in living memory.

Good post and very true.

The political blame game is very tedious and diverts attention away from the real issues. Chris Smith is a gay former Labour cabinet minister, so it's no surprise that the Tories are trying to blame everything on him.

The dredging issue is something easy to campaign for, but would have made little difference to this flooding event. With all the criticism of the EA, they have successfully prevented flooding in places like Taunton and Bridgwater. Unfortunately, some rural communities have paid the price for this.

There are some difficult decisions to be made, and despite David Cameron's rhetoric, money will be an issue. But the flood experts are the people we should be listening to, not the politicians.

[Dedworth]

Dredging has started in Somerset - the great crested newts must've made a quick getaway. I wonder how long Smith will be in his job ?

Dredging of the Somerset Levels gets under way at long last as diggers move in to scoop 20 years of silt build-up from the River Parrett

• Diggers began removing silt from a 200-metre stretch of River Parrett
• Engineers will clear five miles of the river and neighbouring River Tone
• Scheme, which will last several months, to cost £5.8million
• Follows severe flooding in Somerset Levels earlier this year
• Locals blame lack of dredging by Environment Agency for January floods
• EA insists removing silt would not have prevented the flood crisis
• Is part of 20-year, £100million plan to ensure floods never hit area again

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2xZSY5gY4