We need better sea defences urgently
I WRITE with reference to George Wheatman's article on flooding in the December 9 edition and that attributed to Mark Simmonds MP, in the December 30 edition, reporting on the progress of the Flood and Water Management Bill.
Boston owes Mr Simmonds a great debt and its full support at the next General Election for his tireless efforts to put Boston's case for better investment and flood protection to the Government.
At the last debate on the Flood and Water Management Bill, presented to the Commons on December 15, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Hilary Benn MP, is reported in Hansard as saying: "The hon Member for Boston and Skegness (Mark Simmonds) has more reason than just about anybody in the Chamber to be concerned about coastal erosion and rising sea levels.
"It is not just a question of the Environment Agency trying to frighten anybody; there is a problem and we have to share it. The important point is the spirit in which that is entered into."
The minister appears to avoid the urgency of the issue. Merely sharing the problem is inadequate.
There is no point in trying to put a better gloss on the projections from the Environment Agency.
The facts speak for themselves: Boston urgently needs better protection from rivers and the sea.
Some experts predict the melting ice caps could cause the sea level to rise significantly by the end of this century, engulfing the Fens.
Saving Lincolnshire, and Boston in particular, is of national strategic interest.
Lincolnshire feeds the nation. A significant rise in the sea level could put tens of thousands of people's lives at risk.
There is no strategic national interest in building a bypass around a town that could disappear under the North Sea.
Forget the bypass for the immediate future. Bostonians must concentrate their efforts on keeping the sea out and on keeping their homes and businesses safe.
S V Woodliffe Via e-mail
Comments
by Alan Jervis, Boston
Sunday, January 17 2010, 9:59PM
“Are we going to pay for another study to come to nothing, there has been the london road bridge and the by-pass now it is flood defences.
Although I have not been against any of these projects, and I must say they are all long overdue for the area, and would also benifit the area, I do feel that unless we have a big yes as to the project going ahead, this will probably be another waste of tax-payers monies, which we can ill afford in these recession days
Are the council tax payers going to foot the bill for all these studies or should it be the environment agencies or the people who would most benifit, mainly the farmers, but they are already being hit by the supermarkets etc.
Although we need it who is going to foot the bill ?”