Search results

Another key point is that the Somerset Levels have fantastic soil for farming BECAUSE the land has flooded frequently over the centuries and deposited fertile aluvium. If it wasn't for this there wouldn't be so many people living there in the first place.

I think this is probably right, incredibly harsh though it seems. We need to deal with local issues of poverty and global issues of disease and climate change.

You've just reminded me of another point. Why should the government help these people who've bought a house on a floodplain when there are millions of (mostly young) people who can't afford to buy a house at all through no fault of their own?

Still far more common than houses getting flooded though. And a lot more distressing, I would argue.

Yup, fair enough but the general point stands.

It sounds really harsh but the powers that be have to undertake a cost-benefit analysis. If central London flooded, millions of homes and businesses would be destroyed and the country would come to a standstill. In a similar way, the EA continue to protect Seaford, some of which IS below sea...

I'm sorrry but I massively disagree. Only approximately 1,500 homes in the UK Have been affected by flooding in the last year, whereas as 430 people die from cancer every day and a similar number suffer from dementia. People who live in floodplains should expect to be flooded. It isnt worth...