Environment Agency

[Troll]

Fit for purpose or a complete bolloxs waste of £1025 million

The Environment Agency's stated purpose is, "to protect or enhance the environment, taken as a whole" so as to promote "the objective of achieving sustainable development" (taken from the Environment Act 1995, section 4). Protection of the environment relates to threats such as flood and pollution. The vision of the Agency is of "a rich, healthy and diverse environment for present and future generations"

[PurpleGorilla]

Rivers flood.

[BolshieBastard]

Rivers flood.

And the EA is supposed to mitigate that by actually opening flood defences? Wake up.

[EternalOptimist]

Unprecedented flooding ?
How can it be unprecedented when it happened last year ?

[DimPrawn]

And the EA is supposed to mitigate that by actually opening flood defences? Wake up.

He's hoping all the boomers drown.

[EternalOptimist]

And the EA is supposed to mitigate that by actually opening flood defences? Wake up.

The EA used to be responsible for dredging and they would take the 'dredge' and use it to shore up the embankments. a sort of double bubble.
The responsibility was removed by the EU and passed onto the landowners themselves.
The landowners have also been handed a double whammy, first , they got no money to do the dredging, second, the 'dredge' has been classified by the EU as toxic waste, and now has to be removed, at great cost.

If someone had wanted to sit down and work out the best way to flood these poor b***rds, they would have invented the EU, and the so called environmentalists.

[darmstadt]

The EA used to be responsible for dredging and they would take the 'dredge' and use it to shore up the embankments. a sort of double bubble.
The responsibility was removed by the EU and passed onto the landowners themselves.
The landowners have also been handed a double whammy, first , they got no money to do the dredging, second, the 'dredge' has been classified by the EU as toxic waste, and now has to be removed, at great cost.

If someone had wanted to sit down and work out the best way to flood these poor b***rds, they would have invented the EU, and the so called environmentalists.

Not quite true, but facts are sometimes a rarity around here:

Under EU rules, it can be placed on the bank side but if it is double-handled – i.e., moved again – it becomes controlled waste and must be removed to landfill at a cost of £140 per cubic metre.

To overcome this problem, the drainage board is very keen on using a suction dredger. Cutter-suction machines such as the one illustrated – with smaller versions available – are the perfect answer, as the spoil can be pumped some distance from the dredging site without falling foul of EU rules.

EU law does not deal specifically with
dredged material, nor is there any intent
to do so. Nevertheless, a number of EU
Directives have an impact on the
management of dredged material, either
directly or indirectly

EuDA - Home
http://www.european-dredging.eu/pdf/EULawOnDredging.pdf

[BolshieBastard]

The EA used to be responsible for dredging and they would take the 'dredge' and use it to shore up the embankments. a sort of double bubble.
The responsibility was removed by the EU and passed onto the landowners themselves.
The landowners have also been handed a double whammy, first , they got no money to do the dredging, second, the 'dredge' has been classified by the EU as toxic waste, and now has to be removed, at great cost.

If someone had wanted to sit down and work out the best way to flood these poor b***rds, they would have invented the EU, and the so called environmentalists.

Oh, so it was the EU and not the EA who opened the flood defence in York was it? Must have missed that one.

[EternalOptimist]

Oh, so it was the EU and not the EA who opened the flood defence in York was it? Must have missed that one.

No, the EA have to answer for that one

[VectraMan]

I wondered how long it would take somebody to use flooding as a reason to leave the EU.

We have some shiny new flood defences round here (from a couple of years ago) and it hasn't flooded yet. There are a lot of rivers and there are 20+ million odd houses, but when a few hundred houses get flooded by one river it's all over the TV news as the end of everything. They should start by listing all the areas that are absolutely fine despite people choosing to live near a river against all common sense because it looks pretty.