I have immense sympathy for all those who have been affected by the flooding over the last couple of days in England, places such as Tewksbury and Gloucester. Just as I had sympathy with all those other parts of England that have flooded over the past few weeks, for example Sheffield and even small villages near to me such as Lambley and Gunthorpe.
However, I was at first surprised that the media is suddenly blaming the Government and the issue is only now being raised in Parliament. Then the penny dropped, this time the flooding is in the South, where most of the media and politicians live, and in the case of places on the Severn and Avon, where many of them have second homes. For those of you not familiar with the UK, this is typical of the English establishment, a flood in the North is local news story, a flood in the South is a national disaster.
I am sure that part of the remedy in the future, for the UK’s flooding problems, is a change in building regulations to force new houses to be built with water retention polices, such as porous drives, underground tanks, and soakaways that do not feed directly into the drainage systems. A scheme such as this is being called for by the MP for Nottingham South, Alan Simpson, and MP who has the River Trent running through his area. We must also stop building in areas prone to flooding.
Dear me.john, I have edited one word of your comment, but I think the meaning remains clear. I am puzzled by your reference about working class? I never mentioned working class. I am, and I said I am, sympathetic to all of those affected by the floods. The point I made, and one that has generally been agreed with, is that the media gave much, much more coverage to the problems in the Gloucester and Tewksbury area, they gave much less to Sheffield, and much, much less to Hull.
You doubt there is a North/South divide in influence, you are entitled to your view, but as far as I can see the data support me. Life expectency is higher in the south, incomes are higher, the BBC is there (and its people are fighting the move to Manchester - when the move is complete 50% of BBC employees will still be in London).
To summarise my points
1) Sympathy with all affected
2) Protest at the lack of coverage for the major problems in the North
3) A call for more control into new building in the flood plain, making developers pay for measures to mitigate the impact of the houses.
Anyway me.john, many thanks for taking the bother to read the blog, and I wish you and yours well. Hopefully, you will find other articles you can agree with.
Posted by: Ray Poynter | August 24, 2007 at 12:30 AM
You sanctimonious b******....there are also working class families and the socially excluded within Gloucestershire flooded areas, it is not just a 'northern' Phenomenonum. Politicions and media are resident all over the UK get real with the 'divide' arguements!
Posted by: me.john | August 23, 2007 at 11:50 PM
Yes, I have noticed a marked difference in the weight of coverage given to these floods vs. the last ones.
Though, to be fair this is traditionally a quiet domestic news week because it is the first week of the school holidays for many. Most years we would have been treated to either traffic jams or beaches on the front pages at this time of year. If I'm right, the last floods further north hit during the first days of the Brown government so at least they had something else to be talking about in the newspapers.
The other mitigating circumstance I suppose might be simply geography. It takes only 100 minutes get to Tewkesbury from London (when the roads are open at least) - I know because I was there on Saturday visiting soggy relatives. Even CNN managed to get someone to Tewkesbury whereas the wild north is clearly just too far for same-day news coverage.
All the same it is inexcusable to be so biased in coverage regional events and I'm sure it will not go unnoticed in the North. Again.
Posted by: Lee | July 24, 2007 at 07:36 AM