Flood taxation

Of late the UK has been inundated with bad weather, leading to considerable floods in the South West, and now the South East of the country.  The damage has been significant, livelihoods considerably affected and people have been harmed.  As I write there is not too much prospect of relief from the weather systems that are causing the wind and rain, and the levels of soil saturation mean that less rain is needed to produce severe flooding. For more technical information on such matters I refer you to my colleagues in the Flood Hazard Research Centre.

As this situation has worsened central government has come under considerable attack for reducing resources around flood defence.  A few outspoken people during vox pop interviews in stricken areas have complained that it has taken too long to mobilize the army to come to their aid. Some have noted a causal relationship between global warming and the unusual position of the jet stream, which is dragging this weather across the UK from the Atlantic.

This is mid-emergency, and it would perhaps be unreasonable to criticize those who have fairly immediate reactions.  In crises most will ask how has this happened, why me, and who could or should have prevented it?  A search for an externally attributed cause.  Of course, if global warming, or climate change, is a principal player in all this then we are all complicit in this disaster, at least in the developed world.  Moreover, government funding policies can only ever be predicated on past data, and this particular event would have been impossible to model in the detail required by those seeking to blame policy makers.

I do not want to let policy makers off lightly, however.  The UK government, and its opposition, are clearly not fully committed to a green agenda (as I have commented before).  Whilst the politicians have been out in force, visiting flood zones and being seen to talk compassionately with victims of the storms, I hope they see beyond the photo opportunity and possible opinion poll boost.

Ed Miliband's wellington boots filled with mucky water, soaking his suit trousers, whilst he invoked global warming as the cause.  His solution - to invest more in flood defences.  This needs doing, but that will no halt climate change and it will not prevent far greater problems than those currently facing the UK.  A bold and truly sensitive politician would say, this is bad but it could be a lot worse if we do not seriously go green.

But, we do need flood defence and budgets are tight.  Central government can reallocate money, but a better response would be to start a short term flood tax scheme. All tax payers in the UK would have to contribute, even if they do not live in a flood zone (declaration: I do live in a flood zone, with a flood defence built and maintained by the Environment Agency following severe flooding here in the 1980s).  This could amount to a fairly small sum per annum over a short number of years.  The investment would be named and allocated to flood defence work, and the public good would be the protection of the economic and domestic infrastructure of the whole UK.  Floods damage property, ruin farms, and prevent people getting to work among many other economic effects.  Meanwhile, the government should look to restructure its overall taxation policy in order to stimulate growth in alternative energy supplies, and to increase the costs for those relying on hydrocarbons, in line with analyses made by Thomas Friedman.

I found this image quite ironic:

Image from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/uknews/9236030/England-and-Wales-braced-for-flooding-as-heavy-rain-wreaks-havoc.html

If one were god fearing - and on Darwin's birthday I must clarify that I am not - one would see this as divine retribution, avenging the crimes of the gas guzzlers.