Will anyone miss the flood committee?
On its first day in charge of Lincolnshire County Council Reform UK abolished one of the authority's most important and powerful committees. The Flood and Water Management Scrutiny Committee oversaw nearly every aspect of flood defence in a county that has been devastated by flooding in recent years. Despite cross-party pleas to save it, Reform UK's new council leader Sean Matthews said he wanted to save money and "streamline" the authority. But will scrapping the committee make any difference to the experiences of those who live with the threat of flooding?
How much of a problem is flooding in Lincolnshire?
Forget politics for a second. Let's start with geography.When it comes to flooding, Lincolnshire is one of the most vulnerable places in Britain; this low-lying region is criss-crossed by a complexity of rivers and drains.The county also has more than 50 miles (80km) of coastline and nearly all of this needs defending from the North Sea.Every drop of rainfall that falls on Lincolnshire must be managed. This means either pumping it out to sea via the river and drainage network or diverting water and storing it.And the flood risks are far from being theoretical. In recent years Lincolnshire has been battered by a succession of powerful weather systems. Most notably Storm Babet and Storm Henk between October 2023 and February 2024, when 900 homes were flooded and 13 river defences were seriously damaged. According to the Met Office, this part of the country recorded its wettest ever winter on record, experiencing a month's rain in just a 24 hour period.
What did the committee do?
No one ever lost sleep over the scrapping of council committee, right?Well, drive through this watery landscape on a rainy November morning and you might see their point. Conservative councillor Ian Carrington, who sat on the Committee said "it was very unfortunate" that it had been scrapped."The committee did not just listen and scrutinise, it took steps to improve the protection that the people of Lincolnshire enjoy from the scourge of flooding", he said.Defending Lincolnshire from flooding involves a number of public bodies as well as specialist officers from the Council.These include The Environment Agency, which plays a leading role in protecting people and property.There are also at least 15 Internal Drainage Boards or IDBs. These IDBs have specialist local knowledge and operate hundreds of pumping stations, sluices and flood gates.There are lots of moving parts in a flood defence plan.The Flood and Water Management Scrutiny Committee was there to try to make them all work together. It made recommendations, including calls for more government money and it would hold to account the myriad private and public bodies.
Why was it axed?
The Flood and Water Scrutiny Committee met four times a year. It involved at least 18 councillors and dozens of other specialists.These were drawn from the council itself, from the IDBs, The Environment Agency and private companies such as Anglian Water.Conservative councillor Ian Carrington said the recent experiences of big storms in Lincolnshire demonstrated the need for the committee: "When you have been through the appalling experiences that many of our local residents have been through, any dilution of our ability to improve the situation has to be deeply worrying." he said.But Reform UK scrapped the committee on its first day in charge of Lincolnshire County Council.
The new administration said the change would save money and simplify the council.Reform UK Council leader Sean Matthews, said that flooding will now sit within the Environment Committee, which already deals with issues such as waste and pollutionMr Matthews said: "I want there to be more meetings about flooding in the county and by moving it under the umbrella of Environment we get to talk about it more." he said."We will work longer and harder on flooding than ever before." he added. Labour group leader Councillor Karen Lee described the change as "Reckless, foolhardy and wrong".
What will the impact be?
As the climate changes, as rain events become more frequent and more severe, it is clear that properties in Lincolnshire are under an increasing threat.The immediate responses to flooding incidents are unlikely to change in the short term. There are well-rehearsed protocols between the council, the fire service and the police.Seasoned professionals who work hard to mitigate the worst of what nature throws at us.But the longer-term strategies of defence, response and recovery will also need to function effectively; what we learn from flood events, whom we hold to account and where we spend the money to improve protection for communities.All this against a backdrop of tightening budgets.
Even the government's Environment Secretary Emma Hardy has described the state of the UK's flood defences as being in the 'worst state on record' Despite resounding criticism from its political rivals Reform UK is arguing that its "simplified" approach will better serve the thousands of vulnerable residents, some of whom look nervously to the skies every time the clouds darken.Cllr Sean Matthews denied he was watering-down the council's role: "Absolutely not. We were elected on a mandate of reducing waste and simplifying the council, and this [decision] will do that."
Listen to highlights from Lincolnshire on BBC Sounds, watch the latest episode of Look North or tell us about a story you think we should be covering here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
The deadly hidden dangers of heatwaves - and how to keep yourself safe
Nearly 600 deaths are expected across England and Wales due to the current heatwave, scientists have warned. Researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Imperial College London estimate around 570 excess deaths between Thursday and Sunday, based on historic mortality data. The new research follows a World Weather Attribution (WWA) research group study which found the heatwave has been made about 100 times more likely and 2-4C hotter due to climate change. Temperatures could reach 30C on Saturday, following highs of 29C in Coningsby, Lincolnshire, on Friday, according to the Met Office. It comes as a second amber heat health alert in two weeks came into force on Friday. The alert, which covers London, the East Midlands, South East, South West and East of England, will last until 6pm on Tuesday. Here, The Independent looks at how you can keep yourself safe during a heatwave: Prevent dehydration The government advises staying hydrated during hot weather by drinking fluids regularly throughout the day, particularly if you are active. Water, diluted squash and lower-fat milks are recommended. While fruit juice, smoothies and soft drinks can seem refreshing, they often contain high levels of sugar, which may contribute to dehydration. It's best to limit how much of these you consume and opt for diet, sugar-free or no-added-sugar alternatives instead. If you're heading out, take a refillable bottle of water with you, and carry extra if travelling by car or public transport. Alcohol can dehydrate the body, so choosing alcohol-free drinks or alternating alcoholic drinks with water is advised. Protect yourself from the sun The sun in the UK is strong enough to cause sunburn, with children especially vulnerable to skin damage. To reduce your risk, follow these sun safety measures: Stay in the shade between 11am and 3pm, when the sun is at its strongest Wear loose, light-coloured clothing made from tightly woven fabric, such as long-sleeved shirts, trousers or long skirts Protect your head, neck, face and ears with a wide-brimmed hat Use sunglasses to shield your eyes from the sun Apply sunscreen generously and top it up regularly, especially after swimming or using a towel. The NHS recommends using sunscreen with a sun protection factor (SPF) of at least 30 and a UVA rating of four or five stars. How to keep your home cool Homes can become uncomfortably warm during hot weather, especially at night when trying to sleep. To keep indoor temperatures down, consider the following steps: Keep blinds and curtains closed on windows that face direct sunlight during the day If your home has external shutters or shades, keep them closed too Try to sleep or rest in the coolest part of the house When it's cooler outside than indoors, typically during the night, open windows if it is safe, and create a cross-breeze to help air circulate Use electric fans if the indoor temperature is below 35C, but avoid directing airflow straight at your body, as this can contribute to dehydration Make sure heating systems are switched off Turn off any lights or electronic devices not being used, as they can generate extra heat If the temperature outside is cooler, especially in shaded areas, consider spending time outdoors Public spaces such as places of worship, libraries or supermarkets may be cooler than your home. If they are nearby, visiting one can offer a helpful break from the heat. Heat exhaustion happens when the body gets too hot and struggles to cool down. It's not usually serious if you cool down within 30 minutes, but if untreated, it can develop into heatstroke, according to the NHS. Signs of heat exhaustion include: Tiredness or weakness Dizziness or feeling faint Headache Muscle cramps Nausea or vomiting Heavy sweating Strong thirst Heatstroke is more serious and occurs when the body's temperature rises to dangerous levels and can no longer cool itself. Symptoms include: Confusion or disorientation Loss of coordination Rapid heartbeat Fast breathing or shortness of breath Hot, dry skin (not sweating) Seizures Heatstroke is a medical emergency. Call 999 immediately and try to cool the person down while waiting for help. Who is most at risk during hot weather? While anyone can feel unwell in the heat, some people are more vulnerable. These include:
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Starmer still faces Labour anger over risk of ‘two-tier' disability benefits
Keir Starmer is battling to stem the revolt over his cuts to disability benefits, with about 50 Labour MPs concerned the new concessions will create a 'two-tier' system where existing and new claimants are treated differently. Senior government sources insisted things were 'moving in the right direction' for No 10, with the whips phoning backbenchers to persuade them to support the bill on Tuesday. Government insiders said they believed they had peeled off enough of the original 120-plus Labour opponents of the legislation to win the vote, after the work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, promised to exempt current disability claimants from the changes, and to increase the health element of universal credit in line with inflation. However, rebel MPs will attempt to lay a new amendment on Monday giving colleagues a chance to delay the bill, which will still involve £2.5bn of cuts to future disability benefits. The continuing row over the changes is likely to blight the week that will mark the first anniversary of Labour's return to power. In an interview on Thursday, Starmer admitted to a range of mistakes – including using the phrase 'an island of strangers' in an immigration speech, and hiring his former chief of staff Sue Gray. His government has made a series of U-turns in the last 12 months, but his handling of the welfare bill might be the most damaging episode of them all. Starmer will next week be hoping to draw a line under the difficult period, in which the government has also reversed cuts to winter fuel payments and changed course over holding an inquiry into grooming gangs. Dozens of Labour MPs are continuing to criticise the welfare cuts on a Labour WhatsApp group. Many MPs are still undecided about how they will vote and are pressing for more assurances that it is ethical and legal to set up a division between current and future claimants. Disability charities have said the bill remains 'fatally flawed' and will lead to an 'unequal future' for different groups of disabled people, making life harder for hundreds of thousands of future claimants. The government confirmed on Friday night that people who have to make new claims for Pip after November 2026 will be assessed under the new criteria. This means those reapplying after losing their Pip or who have fluctuating health conditions will not have the level of their previous awards protected. Starmer defended the bill on Friday, saying it struck the right balance. The changes will protect 370,000 existing recipients who were expected to lose out after reassessment. The prime minister said: 'We talked to colleagues, who've made powerful representations, as a result of which we've got a package which I think will work, we can get it right.' Asked how the government would pay for the £3bn of concessions, which experts believe will have to be funded by tax rises or extra borrowing, Starmer replied: 'The funding will be set out in the budget in the usual way, as you'd expect, later in the year.' There would need to be at least 80 rebels to defeat the bill, and government sources were quietly confident they had given enough ground after Meg Hillier, the chair of the Treasury committee, said she would back the legislation following changes. Others were unconvinced. One leading rebel said 'everyone but a handful of people is unhappy', even if they do end up reluctantly backing the changed legislation. Another expressed frustration that No 10 and the whips were 'trying to bounce people into agreeing before we've seen enough details'. Rachael Maskell, the Labour MP for York Central, a leading opponent of the bill, said: 'They are going to have to go back to the negotiating table … deaf and disabled people's organisations are rejecting these changes as it fails to address future need and gives no security for people with fluctuating conditions, for instance where people are in remission.' Other critics who plan to vote against the bill include the MP for Crawley, Peter Lamb, who said: 'Despite many improvements to the system set out in the bill, at its core the bill remains a cost-cutting exercise. No matter the level of involvement of disability groups in co-producing a scheme for new applicants, to save money the new scheme has to result in people with high levels of need losing the support necessary to wash themselves, dress themselves and feed themselves.' Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion Simon Opher, the MP for Stroud, said he still opposed the bill. 'The changes do not tackle the eligibility issues that are at the heart of many of the problems with Pip [personal independence payments]. The bill should be scrapped and we should start again and put the needs of disabled people at the centre of the process.' Diane Abbott, a leading figure from the left of Labour, said the rebellion was 'far from over', while another Labour MP said: 'The bill starts from the premise of cuts, not reform. It's also arse about face in terms of impact assessments and co-production. It's simply a negotiated dog's dinner. In that sense, nothing has really changed except the fact they've negotiated more [people to] misguidedly to sign up to it.' One thing Labour MPs are pushing for is more clarity on the review of the Pip system, due to be done before autumn by Stephen Timms, a work and pensions minister. Many expect that process to change the points system from the current proposals. Some in the party also want Starmer to reinstate Vicky Foxcroft, who quit as a whip to vote against the bill before the U-turn was made. Stella Creasy, a leading Labour MP who had initially signed the amendment to delay the bill, said she wanted to see more details. 'We need to understand why we would treat one group of claimants differently from another,' she said. A Labour MP from the 2024 intake said: 'I'm waiting to look at the details before making any decisions. Many are in the same place as me and need to get something more than a midnight email on an issue of this much importance to hundreds of thousands of people.' The Labour MPs opposed to the changes are citing a fundamental rejection of the idea that a Labour government will be making disabled people worse off. At the same time, many of them have also been alienated by what they say is a No 10 operation that is out of touch with the parliamentary party, and has tried to strongarm MPs into backing the legislation with threats and promises of preferment. 'Good will has been lost and there is still huge suspicion about whether they will try and pull a stunt at the last minute,' said one Labour MP. The majority of disability charities and campaign groups still opposed the cuts. Ellen Clifford, from Disabled People Against Cuts, said: 'Many people who rely on Pip to survive have fluctuating conditions which means our support needs can go up and down. By penalising existing claimants if we go out of and then go back to the benefits system depending on our health, more people will be denied the support they need. 'This is exactly why no disabled people's organisation across the whole of the UK has welcomed these concessions because we know the complexities of the social security system and bitter experience from years of cuts that there are many ways in which grand sweeping statements about protections translate to very little in practice when you go into the detail of it.' The disability equality charity Scope said that despite the concessions, an estimated 430,000 future disabled claimants would be affected by 2029-30. Its strategy director, James Taylor, said: 'It is encouraging that the government is starting to listen to disabled people and MPs who have been campaigning for change for months. But these plans will still rip billions from the welfare system. 'The proposed concessions will create a two-tier benefits system and an unequal future for disabled people. Life costs more if you are disabled. And these cuts will have a devastating effect on disabled people's health, ability to live independently or work.' Additional reporting by Frances Ryan
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘Unless you see it, you can't believe how bad it is': the peer demanding a minister for porn
When the Conservative peer Gabby Bertin arrived for a meeting with the the science and technology secretary, Peter Kyle, earlier this year she startled him by laying out an array of pornographic images across his desk. 'They were screengrabs showing little girls, their hair in bunches, and massive, grown men grabbing little girls' throats,' she says. She had selected images which appeared to depict child abuse, and yet were easily and legally available on a popular website. 'Unless you see it, you can't quite believe how bad it is.' The minister appeared shocked and upset by the images, she recalls, so she quickly tidied them away and later shredded them. Bertin has noticed that her desire to talk frequently and openly about extreme pornography is not shared by all her Westminster colleagues. 'I've definitely seen people swerve at lunch, not wanting to sit next to me for fear of what they're going to hear coming from my mouth,' she told fellow delegates at the launch meeting of her pornography taskforce this week, prompting a flutter of sympathetic laughter. Since being appointed by the former prime minister Rishi Sunak to lead an independent review into the regulation of online pornography in December 2023, Bertin has observed how a double taboo has made most politicians extremely reluctant to engage. Some simply find the subject hugely embarrassing; others stay silent because they do not wish to appear prudish by criticising the proliferation of extreme and often illegal pornographic material online. She is frustrated by this reticence. 'You can't leave the pitch on this stuff just because you're worried about being accused of being too strait-laced,' she says. The government needs urgently to appoint a minister for porn, she recommends, to ensure that the issue gets the attention it deserves, rather than being passed reluctantly between the Home Office and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. A former adviser to David Cameron, Bertin has gathered cross-party support for her work and says she emails Keir Starmer so regularly about the issue that she has 'practically become his pen pal' (if you can have a pen pal who delegates to officials the responsibility of replying). 'We're really British about it so we don't want to have a graphic conversation about sex and porn,' she says, in an interview in the Westminster office she shares with several other peers. 'But you've got to shout about it as loudly as possible. The reason why we've got into this mess is because nobody has really wanted to talk about it.' By mess she means a situation whereby online pornography (which is viewed by an estimated 13.8 million UK adults every month) is not regulated to the same degree as pornography watched in cinemas or videos, despite the fact that videos have been redundant for decades and vanishingly few people now visit cinemas to watch porn. The absence of scrutiny has created an environment where much of the content created is, she says, 'violent, degrading, abusive, and misogynistic'. She also means a situation where a member of her own party had to resign after twice watching porn (perplexingly tractor-themed) on his phone, as he whiled away time on the green benches in the House of Commons. 'People have slightly lost the plot on porn. Would someone 20 years ago have just taken Playboy into the Commons, and had it lying on their lap? It just shows what an extraordinary place we've got to,' she says. 'You can do what you like in your private life – I don't have a problem with that – but you can't watch porn in the House of Commons, and you shouldn't be watching porn at your desk. There's a place for these things and it's not in the office.' Her review, published in February, made 32 recommendations. Last week the first of these became government policy, when officials announced that pornography depicting strangulation would be made illegal. Her new taskforce of 17 people, bringing together representatives from the police, the advertising industry, anti-trafficking organisations and violence against women charities, will focus on how to ensure harmful online content is better regulated, trying to bring parity between the scrutiny of offline and online content. She pays tribute to the 'hugely innovative side' of the porn industry, which has long driven technological advances in webcams and internet speeds, fuelled by the sector's enormous capacity to turn profit, but she has not invited any representatives on to the taskforce, wary of anything that might let the industry 'mark their own homework'. This week Ofcom announced that major online providers, including the UK's most popular pornography site, Pornhub, had agreed to implement stronger age-verification measures in compliance with the Online Safety Act, to prevent under-18s from accessing adult material. Those platforms that do not comply with the measures face being fined 10% of global turnover or being blocked in the UK. Ofcom is also responsible for monitoring whether sites distributing user-generated pornography are protecting UK viewers from encountering illegal material involving child sexual abuse and extreme content (showing rape, bestiality and necrophilia, for example). However, other forms of harmful pornography that are regulated in physical formats are not subject to similar restrictions online. It is this grey, unscrutinised area that Bertin's panel will focus on, as well as calling for better processes to respond to stolen content, working out how people depicted in pornographic videos can request that the clips be removed from sites, and how to build safety mechanisms into AI tools that create sexually explicit content. Officials at the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) guided her through short clips of extreme material to help her understand the nature of easily available harmful content. She remains disturbed by the material she saw – content designed to appear to be child sexual abuse, set in children's bedrooms – roles played by young girls, who may be over 18 but are acting as children. 'The titles are very problematic, things like: 'Daddy's going to come home and give his daughter a good seeing to' or 'Oops I've gone too far and now she's dead' or 'Kidnap and kill a hooker.'' This content would be prohibited by the BBFC in the offline world, but is unregulated online. During research for her review, she met representatives from global tech companies, and told them how when Volvo invented the three-point safety belt they gifted the patent to the rest of the industry because staff realised the innovation was so vital to raising safety standards. 'My pitch was that they have a duty and responsibility to double down on trying to get technology that can clean up these situations, and they should share that technology,' she says. 'Taylor Swift can whip a song off a website as soon as anyone tries to pirate it. There's no reason why the firms can't come up with technology to sort this out.' Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Posing for photographs, she edges away from a watercolour of Margaret Thatcher hung on the wall by one of her colleagues. 'Let's do it without Thatcher in the background. That's not my doing by the way – I share the office,' she says semi-apologetically, before rapidly adding: 'I mean I love Thatcher, obviously.' But she may be making an important distinction. In a 1970 Woman's Hour interview, Thatcher said the rise of pornography was a 'frightening' manifestation of a newly permissive society that she believed was undermining family life. Bertin describes herself as a liberal conservative and wants to be clear she is neither anti-porn nor running a moral crusade. 'Consenting adults should be able to do what they want; I have no desire to stop any kind of sexual freedom. But restricting people from seeing a woman being choked, called a whore, and having several men stamp on her – for example – is not ending someone's sexual freedom. This is the kind of content we want to end.'
