The stop-go approach to addressing flood risk is unacceptable

300 areas under threat but main difficulty is what to prioritise

The failure by inter-departmental flood-risk management committees to meet for periods of up to six years is unacceptable and reflects a stop-go government attitude to climactic events. Serious flood events generate a flurry of activity to signify political concern and engagement while, at the same time, capital investment is limited and economic policies contribute to global warming.

Eight major flood events occurred during the past 66 years, seven of them since 1993. The latest, in 2009 and again last winter, set new rainfall records and the outlook is bleak when scale and frequency of extreme weather events are factored in.

The Office of Public Works is the lead agency in planning for flooding and coastal surges and, last autumn, the Government allocated €430m for a six-year flood defence programme. The agency has become something of a whipping boy for the farming community that accuses it of failing to maintain drainage systems and allowing rivers to silt up.

But flooded winter fields in the midlands have been as predictable as time and funding should be devoted to the protection of priority areas involving hospitals, town centres and homes.

READ MORE

The concern of the Comptroller and Auditor General was that, in the absence of risk management meetings, money had been spent on flood programmes without the full benefit of comprehensive analysis and strategic plans. It is an understandable concern and emphasises the need for judicious investment and long term planning.

But some Independent TDs behaved as if last winter’s flooding could have been prevented if only those meetings had been held. They ignored rainfall and landscape realities and promoted an’us’ and ‘them’ mentality whereby officialdom was both distant and uncaring.

Detailed river catchment management and flood risk programmes have finally been completed. Their long-delayed production is certain to generate intense competition between flood-prone areas for limited resources and local politicians will be centrally involved.

Having identifying 300 areas at risk, the really contentious work will involve designating those places that can be protected at a reasonable cost and those that cannot.