Showing posts with label measures. Show all posts
Showing posts with label measures. Show all posts

Sunday, 25 March 2012

Britain Has 'Underestimated' Flood Threats

For the last 50 years we have been concreting over our countryside, neglecting our drainage systems and busily building on flood plains.In other words; living as if flooding is a problem that happens elsewhere.

Now, a new report from scientists at Durham University says the UK has been lulled into a false sense of security, when weshould have been preparing for a period of floods on a scale "beyond most people's living memory".

The scientists looked at rainfall and river flow patterns over the last 250 years, since 1753.

They found that the UK's weather fluctuated between very wet and very dry periods, each lasting for a few years at a time, but also between very long periods of a few decades that can be particularly wet or particularly dry.

They discovered that from the late 1960s to the late 1990s, the UK was relatively flood-free.

Now, they say records show we can expect a period of increased flooding, similar to that experienced before the 1960s.

Professor Stuart Lane from Durham's Institute of Hazard and Risk said: "We are now having to learn to live with levels of flooding that are beyond most people's living memory.

"More than three-quarters of country's flood records - on which risk estimates were based - started during the 1960s.

"We have not been good at recognising just how flood-prone we can be. We have probably underestimated the frequency of flooding much more often than we are used to."

May, June and July last year saw their highest level of rainfall since British records began.

A second report out today from the cross party Environment Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee says the infrastructure set up to deal with last summer's floods is in chaos and the eight hundred million pounds funding pledged by the Government is "inadequate."

The MPs said at the moment, no organisation has overall responsibility for surface water flooding at a national or local level, nobody was responsible for issuing flood warnings and it was unclear who was responsible for overflowing drains.

They also recommended that the Environment Agency should take a strategic role in dealing with surface water flooding nationally, providing advice and guidance to local authorities who should have a statutory duty to deal with surface drainage.

Chair of the Committee, Michael Jack MP said: "The public will not forgive the Government if it is not seen to be responding to the lessons learnt from the floods of last summer.

"Our report has shown how confused and chaotic was the infrastructure when it came to preventing and dealing with surface water flooding.

"The Government must bring clarity to this situation so that the public, wherever they live, can have peace of mind that every effort is being made to avoid a repeat of the fiasco of last summer."

The Local Government Association too has waded in.

In response to the EFRA Committee's report, they agree that under the current system, it is often unclear who has responsibility for managing flood risk and maintaining drainage systems.

They say that in some parts of the country a myriad of different bodies - including the Environment Agency, councils, private landowners and water companies - have these powers but often do not share information with each other.

They recommend that water companies should be forced to co-operate with local authorities to prevent a repeat of last summer's floods, council leaders said today.

For once, then, the MPs and the scientists are in firm agreement: rather than dismissing last summer's floods as a one off event, they say we must be prepared for worse to come.

Saturday, 4 February 2012

Tuition fees: 27 universities seek last-minute changes

More than a fifth of England's universities have applied to change their fee packages, just weeks before the application deadline.

The Office for Fair Access said 27 of England's universities had sought to lower fees to make use of new measures that could allow them to expand.

Universities blame the late announcement of these measures by the government.

Ministers say changes should not disadvantage any student.

But the National Unions of Students said tens of thousands of students now faced weeks of uncertainty because of the changes.

Maximum tuition fees will rise to as much as £9,000 a year next autumn.

Universities were required to submit their plans for higher charges, bursaries and fee-waivers for certain groups of students back in April. These were then assessed by the fair access regulator, Offa.

This was before the government published its proposals in the Higher Education White Paper, which was delayed by several months.

The plans included allowing universities charging less than £7,500 a year in fees to expand by bidding for 20,000 degree places.

This was widely seen as a last-minute measure to bring the overall cost of higher fees down for the government after it became clear that more universities than expected were planning to charge maximum fees.

Offa said it had received applications from 27 institutions wishing to reduce their average fees to £7,500 or below in order to bid for the 20,000 places set aside for this purpose.

It also said it had received new access agreements from seven publicly funded further education institutions wishing to bid for some of these places.

The watchdog says it will assess the revised agreements and inform universities and colleges of its decisions by November 30.

In the meantime, institutions must contact applicants affected by the changes and let them know. Would-be students will then have the chance to reconsider their options.

Offa also said it would consider any further changes from universities still wishing to change their access agreements.

Nicola Dandridge, head of umbrella group Universities UK, said: "This has come about because universities were asked to set their 2012-13 fee levels and financial support by April this year, before the details of student number controls had been decided.

"The delayed publication in June of the government's White Paper then shifted the goal posts [of student number controls]."