You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'Food for Thought' category.
I was gratified to receive comments to my post on my telegraph blog that were largely in agreement with my thoughts. Especially it was good to get a comment from Rachel who confirmed that in her own experience the drains were inadequate to the task.
I posted another message in the same vein as follows
Charles Clover makes a similar point to my earlier post about the problem of drainage and how new estates are more than likely to be built on flood plains. It is of course more dificult to use simple drainage schemes to protect property on a flood plain, but not impossible. The trick is to identify possible escape routes for the water and then not block them as well. Defensive barriers in the long run will prove ineffective and prohibitively expensive.
Unfortunately, so far there is no evidence that public bodies are taking any notice of these solutions, either through planning regulations or the application of ordinary common sense.
I posted this in my.telegraph blog.
I have just been viewing a report on BBC 24 about the forthcoming review of the civic response to the recents floods in Yorkshire. In it the reporter repeated that the floods were unpredictable and extraordinary. The changing patterns of weather in this country make this trite remark sound very complacent. He also mentioned the flood defences or lack of them.
We would not need flood defences if we stopped building on flood plains, stopped paving and tarmacing every available surface, planted more trees and stopped clearing mature trees and finally where there are existing towns at risk they were protected by adequate flood drains under roads and pavements. Forty years ago when I lived in Johannesburg, SA, there were regular storms when an inch or more of rain fell in a an hour or so. The huge drains allowed the water to run off roadways almost as fast as it fell and there was never any risk of flooding to properties of any sort. We have to accept that the recent heavy rain is likely to be repeated on more or less regularly in the future and that building defensive wall to prevent floods will be a waste of time and money.
There were two more hopeful news items recently. Gordon Brown inserted the word economic before the Israeli/ Palestinian roadmap. That does make sense. Until the Palestinians are given a chance economically there will never be peace. But we will have to wait and see.
Then I heard that the BBC will be looking to create better balance in all its output. Let’s hope that this means a balanced view of world news, not the present total preoccupation with what really amount to neighbourhood gossip. It would appear that first thing in the morning the newsroom chooses 3 or 4 pieces of tittle tattle and they become the news stories of the day on every BBC news channel. You have in the UK to wait for the World Service at 1.00 am to hear what has happened in the rest of the world.
This government with its awful handling of the 15 sailors held briefly by the Iranians and now released has actually dragged the United Kingdom into utter disrepute. I can only assume that ministers were once again incapable of revealing simple truths. It presumably never occurred to anyone to just let the sailors tell their stories openly to all the press. No, every single piece of information has to be twisted and spun to cover up the truth or create some false impression.
How low can the Royal Navy sink? In Nelson’s day the despatches of commanding officers were published so there was no chance of a cover-up. Nowadays that would seem to simple. And as a result the Navy becomes the laughing stock of world opinion.
I have long been unhappy with BBC news output. It is far too parochial and shows symptoms of journalistic laziness such as too many government originated stories.
In particular I find most annoying the Radio 4 Today programme habit of forecasting the days news and announcements. Items that start with “The department of XYZ will announce today…” to my mind is a technical breach of a publication embargo on a press release. They seem to get away with it day after day and I can only assume a too cosey relationship between Today journalists and the government departments concerned.
The BBC 24 News programme often picks every possible grain of interest out of a story, bringing in endless specialists to speculate and pontificate. This is lazy. It is only too easy to pick a few stories and then call on known talking heads to fill out the air time rather than search out many more stories from around the globe. As a recent example, Aljazeera English ran a story about fighting in the capital of Somalia and a further news item on the Arab peace plan for Israel with commentary from both sides while News 24 was going over the Iranian capture of British sailors ad infinitum. I finally heard about Somalia on the BBC World Service later on that night. It appears that they take the lazy way out by running and re-running a very parochial story which is easily got together. It is particularly noticeable when there is a home news story which could be of popular interest. On days when there is no such story, the actual scope of their news widens considerably.
Many people have complained in the past how BBC news is biased towards the South East of England and this has not really changed.
The recent outbreak was obviously a serious news item. However, it could not warrant the endless news coverage in every form of media, the top billing and the never ending stream of experts. It would appear that our UK media is so lacking in energy and vision that it falls with gratitude on any story which can be covered by sending a reporter and cameraman to stand outside a deserted factory in the middle of the night and relay banal platitudes to us.
I was vindicated in this belief when one reporter ventured into a nearby town to drum up indignation and fear, only to be met with a wall of total indfference. Well done the people of Suffolk!
The ship is now flying a flag….Wow did somebody important read my previous post?
Madeira suits us a holiday destination, a timeshare in the Royal Savoy Vacation Club, right at the sea, yet close by the amenities of Funchal itself. The weather at this time of year is balmy rather than hot, and so far there has been no rain. There is enough activity to be interesting without the crowds of young boisterous youngsters to make us oldies irritated.
An excursion on a large catamaran during which we saw pilot whales and dolphins was a memorable morning. The food has been good and the scenery is magnificent.
Anchored out in the bay is a sinister ship, an American military support vessel, its deck cargo shrouded in white canvas. There is little sign of life on board and there appears to be no traffic with the shore, although at night it is brightly lit. The locals say that similar ships are fairly regular visitors which often stay several weeks. Presumably there is some strategic significance in its presence here off out-of-the-way Madeira. What makes it sinister in my eyes is that it flies no flag. The smallest pleasure craft flies its national flag and navies have always gone into battle with ensigns aloft. In fact the lack of an ensign is regarded as a dubious ruse de guerre. But here we have an US Navy auxiliary ship reduced to skulking in friendly waters. Failure to reveal its true colours is not I think a matter of economic necessity for a cash-strapped Defense Department but rather some tactic in the War on Terror. Surely a great nation should not have to adopt the tactics of stealth and subterfuge practised by its enemies?
war on terror
