Login Register

Cameron and Paterson 'misleading' over flood defence spending

By Western Daily Press  |  Posted: January 17, 2014

The Somerset Levels are a changed landscape – here between Curry Rival and Burrowbridge PICTURE: RICHARD AUSTIN

Comments (4)

Floods in Somerset look set to spark a Commons row as the Government is accused of misleading the public over how much it is spending on flood defences.

As the row over dredging continues, Prime Minister David Cameron and Environment Secretary Owen Paterson have come under fire for claiming the Government is spending more money on defences than previously.

Critics say Defra officials failed to mention that the spending figures included millions of pounds of contributions expected from developers, councils and other non-government sources.

The row erupted as Somerset MP Ian Liddell-Grainger secured an adjournment debate in the House of Commons in which he intends to highlight what he calls the "catastrophic" failings of the Environment Agency.

Related content

Next Wednesday MPs will hear accusations that the agency is failing to maintain the dredging of the rivers Parrett and Tone to save money, a claim the agency denies.

But as conservationists and farmers went into battle over dredging, Mr Paterson came under fire for claiming "this Government is spending more on flood defences than any previous government".

Updated Defra figures show the Government is spending £2.34 billion in the current four-year spending review period (2011–2015) compared with £2.37 billion spent in the previous four years (2007-2011). His claims are based on partnership funding from non-government sources which is expected to reach £148 million over the current spending period.

Mr Cameron told the Commons earlier this month: "In this current four-year period, we are spending £2.3 billion, compared with £2.1 billion in the previous period." It later emerged that the PM's figure of £2.3 billion was for the period 2010-11 to 2013-14, which includes the final year of the last Labour government's financial commitments, when spending reached a high of £670 million. The £2.1 billion was for 2006-7 to 2009-10.

Friends of the Earth climate campaigner Guy Shrubsole said: "Owen Paterson's own department has now been forced to admit it has cut flood defence spending, despite claims to the contrary by the beleaguered Environment Secretary. On the basis of these figures, it appears both Mr Paterson and the Prime Minister have misled Parliament and the public. They must apologise, but most of all they need to get serious about defending the country from increasing flooding as climate change worsens."

Shadow environment secretary Maria Eagle said: "The Prime Minister must now stop repeating his misleading claim that more is being spent in the current four-year period than in the previous four years, when these new figures reveal that is simply not true. The Government should also stop including money that they hope to attract from external contributions but have so far failed to secure."

A spokeswoman for Defra said: "We are spending £2.3 billion on flood defences and along with partnership funding this is more than ever before. We have also committed to record levels of future capital investment."

Mr Liddell-Grainger has asked UK ministers to apply for European Union funding to tackle the flooding, which left 11 per cent of Somerset's Sedgemoor district – some 16,000 acres of top quality farmland – under water. The EA says it spent £20 million on dredging but it may not be the best long term solution.

Read more from Western Daily Press

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters


  • eyeopener  |  January 17 2014, 3:12PM

    Paterson couldn't get the figures right about the badger population (he later claimed that they had moved the goal posts! Paterson couldn't manage to get the cull to produce meaningful statistics about how many badgers killed were infected by bTB and then we find that the statistics for cattle infected by bTB were overstated. Who but the most ardent government supporter would trust Paterson to give anything but misleading information about flood defences?

    |   9
  • Charlespk  |  January 17 2014, 1:23PM

    And it wants properly dredging down the middle not the pathetic scraping of the sides we've been seeing on TV. In the old days they had Navis out on the moors with big buckets doing the job properly. Morgan_Sweet is obviously a local. . They need to start listening to the locals before it's too late.

    |   -7
  • morgan_sweet  |  January 17 2014, 12:32PM

    I would dispute the statement 'top quality farmland' this is an exaggeration, most is permanent pasture that has always been liable to flood. However recent periods of flooding are not acceptable and I would agree that dredging the Parrett etc should be regularly carried out. I don't know why the press and newbies keep referring to the flooded area as the 'levels' the levels have not flooded for decades since it is the Moors that flood in order to protect the Levels. The whole area is the Somerset Levels and Moors, the Levels being the mainly clay areas near to the coast whilst the Moors (as all locals know) are the inland low lying areas that have endured the floods. Understandably the authorities have taken the decision to protect the Towns by the Levels (Bridgwater and Burnham) from flooding along with the Tone affecting Taunton by allowing the Moors to act as a water dump. Now the problem has become too great and this practice has become unacceptable and must be addressed as a matter of urgency.

    |   5
  • Charlespk  |  January 17 2014, 9:39AM

    It's time all the clowns that continually attack those who had, and still have the job of bringing this country back from the most disastrous period of government in living memory, started putting the blame back where it really belongs. . There is no Gordon Brown Money Tree. . Most of our problems can be laid squarely at the feet of flaky 'environmentalists', encouraged by Left Wing Governments who have reversed the centuries of intelligent land management that always required hard work and endeavor, qualities that are now increasingly in short supply. . Quango lead outfits like Natural England and the Regional Development Agencies have just slowly neutered all that has kept this country green, properly drained and well fed and watered over the generations.

    |   -6