I entirely agree. And of course, the further we are from: 'it woz god wot did it', then blame will be levied in other directions.

On your further point, while I understand the sentiment, I do think that, if government scientists are consistently making a certain point, one would hope that politicians of whatever party would, in government, look at long-term planning.

That, of course, raises the issue of the connection – or lack thereof – with the public. It would be so welcome to see the end of spin (from whichever party) and serious honesty with the electorate.

It does make you wonder if the Dutch had gone about flood prevention and water management in the same cack-handed, penny-pinching way we had, Amsterdam would probably be the new Atlantis

They had no choice, because places were becoming like Atlantis. They weren't being flooded because of abnormally heavy rain but because the sodding sea was launching an attack. I'm pretty sure our "emergency avalanche fund" (if we have one) doesn't compare with Austria/Switzerland etc.

This country is odd - Whenever we suffer any significant period of wet weather, we flood... Similarly, whenever we suffer a significant period of dry, warm weather, we go into drought/hosepipe ban mode.

Would it be too simple to suggest some sort of drainage/reservoir system is planned and built, where we are able to cope with, and store, any winter rain and then use the excess water in the summer to water our plants and wash our cars, until our hearts are content??....

The major difference is a political will to do something. We just flog everything off to private enterprise and cut funding to what little remains

What? So we should build flood defences up in the Pennines to match those they have in the Netherlands because that'd show 'em that our politicians mean business.

Do you need some foil for your crack?

Well. TBH the flood / storm news is doing my head in!

Somerset levels (some of it lower than sea level) under water, the Thames Valley (I think the clue’s in the name) under water.

Dave giving assurances that “money’s no object”, Miliband questioning his statement , blah, blah.

People squealing about the environment agency, endless sandbags, a rickety railway line right next to the sea, (I’m sure I’ve seen that image all week) & dredging (I mustn’t forget the answer to all the ills)

Endless videos of human misery, hour after hour.

Well, hears the breaking news, the climates on the change. It’s happened before, & sure as hell it’s happening again.

I just wish it was all going on “Up North”, I might just see a bit more alternative news.

If I do you're clearly the person to come and see.

An example of how poorly the EA is funded is their current number of Fisheries Officers (Bailiffs). I was reading on an angling forum (don't know how true it is) that only 6 officers are employed to care for the entire NW region from the Mersey to the Scottish border.

I do know that they have currently teamed up with the Angling Trust to train volunteer bailiffs such is the lack of manpower.

Anyone with a fishing licence is encouraged to act as quasi-bailiffs, that's always been the case

"Money no object" says Camoron.

Perhaps he should have a word with Christchurch Council who are rlcharging residents £7.50 per sandbagrl

Had to laugh when I saw that this morning, particularly as Cameron had said publicly yesterday that councils should spend whatever it takes as central government will reimburse them.

Its also noted on there that the local MP who won't reply to his constituents, is the same MP who refered to the dining room staff at Westminster as "servants" last year.

As non sequiturs go, that's spectacular.

A slight point: a vast amount of this winter's flooding and damage has been caused by the sea, not just record levels of rain.

And, as we've already discussed, there have been ongoing cuts to the agencies that are tasked with dealing with such problems (and others) and a lack of any long-term planning for years.

Yes, electoral considerations may intervene, but the example of the Netherlands is entirely legitimate as one of showing that, irrespective of the political differences of different governments (there have been prime ministers from three different Dutch parties since 1980 as an example), if the political will is there, long-term planning and long-term action can occur.

Successive governments have apparently had scientists warning of what was going to happen, but have chosen to fiddle while the floods become more frequent.

We need some sort of consensus, across all parties, on what needs to be done, because there's no indication that these are simply "freak events", as Owen Paterson likes to characterise them. One would think that that would be common sense.