You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
?
Dunno if somewhere with an average population density of 5,590 people per square km flooded do you think that would be a big thing?
All of it? I'd think that would constitute one, aye.
Just wait a few years and we'll find out.
Quality use of the words If and Would. London-on-sea is as we know tidal. I would expect it to take up more column inches than Donny, Hebden, Carlisle, Somerset etc..
It would be such a mega-deal that they would probably jack the whole country up an put it on stilts.
They could raft up on all those wooden platters they eat avocado off.
Yes, because it would be a national emergency - i.e. whole country impacted by the downstream effects.
If where I live was flooded I would not expect it to be a national emergency as impact is localised, a local emergency if you will.
Joris would instantly blame the flooding on the Evil EU.
Can't predict anything else about it.
Yes, because it would be a national emergency – i.e. whole country impacted by the downstream effects.
If where I live was flooded I would not expect it to be a national emergency as impact is localised, a local emergency if you will.
Pretty much this.
Human welfare - involving loss of life, illness or injury, homelessness, damage to property or disruption of a supply of money, food, water, energy, communication or health services
The environment - involving the chemical, biological or radioactive contamination of land, water or air or the disruption or destruction of plant life or animal life
Human welfare – involving loss of life, illness or injury, homelessness, damage to property or disruption of a supply of money, food, water, energy, communication or health services
The environment – involving the chemical, biological or radioactive contamination of land, water or air or the disruption or destruction of plant life or animal life
Exactly this.
Are we talking groundwater flooding, fluvial flooding, tidal flooding, sewer flooding, watermains flooding, reservoir flooding or a good old classic surface water flooding OP?
Yes - of course they would.
Assuming this thread is about the Governments (non)response to the flooding up north rather than Venice being literally underwater, a better question would be "Would the Government declare a national emergency if Slough flooded?
The answer is obviously No because Slough is awful on every level.
The answer is obviously No because Slough is awful on every level.
A decent government would be looking to actively flood Slough
Quality use of the words If and Would. London-on-sea is as we know tidal. I would expect it to take up more column inches than Donny, Hebden, Carlisle, Somerset etc..
+1
It's like when London struggles in with 6" of snow and someone in Scotland posts a photo of their farm track under 6ft asking what the problem is. There isn't one because 9 million people didn't need to use that farm track (so it neither struggles, or gets turned into compacted ice).
Hypothetically if PART of London flooded, lets say Notting Hill, that would get more press coverage than Rotherham flooding because it has a larger population than Rotherham.
That and when people say ........ has flooded, they really mean a few streets down by the river. It's not like hurricane season in the USA where entire cities really do flood. If Sheffield/Rotherham/Doncaster was actually flooded, now that really would be newsworthy to the handful of people left in the UK not drowned.
Somebody built the Thames barrier because something
Quote the whole thing...
Today, the government has a definition of what constitutes an "emergency", under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 but it does not use the phrase "national emergency".
Such an emergency can be declared when "an event or situation threatens serious damage to":
Human welfare – involving loss of life, illness or injury, homelessness, damage to property or disruption of a supply of money, food, water, energy, communication or health services
The environment – involving the chemical, biological or radioactive contamination of land, water or air or the disruption or destruction of plant life or animal life
....
Serious - events which need sustained government co-ordination, such as the swine flu outbreak in 2009 and the 7 July 2005 London bombings
If there was a storm surge and the barrier failed then yeah it would probably be a national emergency.
Just the cost and hassle of relocating all those civil servants and business HQ staff from their offices with a nice river view would be rather inconvenient.
Then there is the risk to Tate Britain and so on.
Remember the Somerset levels flooding? A relative handful of houses along the River Parrett in a safe tory seat/wealthy area with influential friends. It got more coverage than the very serious flooding in East Yorkshire around the same time. It's certainly not a level playing field when it comes to press coverage, govt response etc.
BTW, the Thames Barrier was designed for a notional 1000 year Return Period flooding event. It has been very close to being overtopped a couple of times. Bear in mind that the flood scenarios are based on what is now slightly past its sell-by-date thinking/science. Climate change is going to make this very interesting in the coming years. The barrier's primary function is to keep very high tides, or storm surge waters, out of London. It's worked well to date. (I'm sure someone on here works there).
The type of flooding we've seen recently is a completely different type of flooding, basically it's water from the sky not the sea.
Given that it depends on a series of tunnels for its population to get around I'd imagine water would be a tad more of a problem than in Rotherham.
But in answer to your question, as long as you get a skinny, decaffe, organic, free-trade Frappawhappachino that costs the same as the GDP of Portugal,served to you by a man with full-sleeve tattoos and a waxed beard then all's well.
If not, then its a national emergency that could escalate to include everything up to full scale nuclear conflict
The type of flooding we’ve seen recently is a completely different type of flooding
I know. It is the most probable and damaging cause of flooding in London though with the biggest impact on central London.
Another similar scenario, according to some, would be if the Richard Montgomery went up.
A decent government would be looking to actively flood Slough
Anyone know which parties are offering this in their manifestos?
Floating voter here 😉
But in answer to your question, as long as you get a skinny, decaffe, organic, free-trade Frappawhappachino that costs the same as the GDP of Portugal,served to you by a man with full-sleeve tattoos and a waxed beard then all’s well.
Awww, bless the middle aged northerners trying to recall what London was like 10 years ago.
It's all about the roadmen and hypebeasts now granddad.
BillOddie
Subscriber
a better question would be “Would the Government declare a national emergency if Slough flooded?
Probably yes- because thanks to the lib dems, they actually have a good chance of winning Slough in the general election.
Not for any other reason obviously
It got more coverage than the very serious flooding in East Yorkshire around the same time.
Let's not loose sight of the fact that all the national newspapers are based in London, and Somerset is a bunch easier and quicker to get to than Yorkshire. It's partly why this sort of thing happens. See also; fracking threat to village in Sussex (45 mins down the M23) versus actual fracking in Lancs (4.5 hours up the M6). It's not always the bastard Tories
Surely they'd declare it a public holiday?
Somebody built the Thames barrier because something
That ‘s reaching the end of its useful life due to climate change, so as somebody said up there “ we will find out soon’
As much as non Londoners aren’t bothered by what happens in London there is no escaping its importance to the uk so we would all have some kind of nock on effect. At a minimum I would think emergency services would have to be moved into London affect cover elsewhere.
Edit: as El Shalimo already said
It’s like when London struggles in with 6″ of snow and someone in Scotland posts a photo of their farm track under 6ft asking what the problem is. There isn’t one because 9 million people didn’t need to use that farm track (so it neither struggles, or gets turned into compacted ice).
Hypothetically if PART of London flooded, lets say Notting Hill, that would get more press coverage than Rotherham flooding because it has a larger population than Rotherham.
Let's not kid ourselves here. That's not the reason.
The reason is that the UK power base is in London. The prioritise their own needs and wants above everything else. They don't care about the needs of the northern 80% of the country.
Simples
Would depend on whether the trains still worked so all the other towns around the country can still get their drugs for the weekend.
Let's not ignore the fact that a chunk of London flooding potentially knocks out a lot of housing and direct employment for maybe a million people, plus the knock on effect via the impact on national government, major national employers, international financial markets....
And it's not if, it's when. I left insurance in 1999 but I know at that point industry bodies and government were having conversations about when the barrier failed.
Wasn’t there a Rutger Hauer film where this happened?
A big flood could similar damage to that caused by the water in New Orleans, that level of evacuation would be a big undertaking and given limited space in the south east where would the evacuees go?
Calais?
P and O would love the extra business
Why does the idea of central London flooding make me think of ‘Ark Fleet Ship B’?
The Film is Split Second its currently on Netflix or Amazon.
Let’s not kid ourselves here. That’s not the reason.
I think it probably is. If you live in Liverpool and think that Kensington and Chelsea is a suburb of London a bit like Toxteth or Everton. Then you'd be forgiven for wondering why London Boroughs get more news time than entire cities, it's because they are individually bigger than entire cities (or at least very large towns).
In fact come to think about it, London does flood fairly regularly (often enough that the ground floor of my old office wasn't insured against flood risk). And as this thread shows, the rest of the country didn't infact hear about it.
The reason is that the UK power base is in London. The prioritise their own needs and wants above everything else. They don’t care about the needs of the northern 80% of the country.
Simples
You say that, but "They" isn't some Illuminati style lizzard overlords controlling the news and politics. Boris doesn't phone up the BBC and tell them how many minutes to devote to flooding in Huddersfield.
I think there is a problem of perception though. The news had someone who's house flooded ranting about how no one cared or was helping because they weren't important. Missing the irony that a camera was filming them and it's not like Michel Gove personally delivers the sandbags to Embankment or carries the wet sofas out of basement flats in Hammersmith.
The rhetoric of "you've been ignored" may have a basis in the truth, but it's also been hyped up enough to give us Brexit! And the rhetoric only flows one way, the population south of Watford haven't spent the past week thinking of ways to ignore the flooding., in the same way the population of Huddersfield probably haven't spent the past week worry about how businesses paying the surcharge for crossrail are going to cope with the cost and schedule overuns.
If the whole country flooded it would be a National emergency.
Just a small spot is a local emergency.
Surely?
I think you find Theresa Villiers will personally deliver sandbags now, not Michael Gove 😉
They don’t care about the needs of the northern 80% of the country
..but I thought that 80% was largely empty of anything barring the bits which are full of a sense of greivance?
The Film is Split Second its currently on Netflix or Amazon.
I just looked it up, I forgot about the xenomorph knockoff, I just remembered the flooding.
A decent government would be looking to actively flood Slough
THey built a flood relief Jubilee river for this. OK it's Slough South 😉 , but it's there and fills regularly. Slough itself is out of the flood zone, so sorry to dissappoint
population of Huddersfield probably haven’t spent the past week worry about how businesses paying the surcharge for crossrail are going to cope with the cost and schedule overuns.
If only we could worry about our very own transpennine crossrail
On the subject of railways, once HS2 is completed London will become more important as its draws more business in, certainly from the midlands and likely from the north as well and push house prices up as south of Birmingham will be easily within commuting distance.
Derby and Nottingham will be easily commutable with HS2
But in answer to your question, as long as you get a skinny, decaffe, organic, free-trade Frappawhappachino that costs the same as the GDP of Portugal,served to you by a man with full-sleeve tattoos and a waxed beard then all’s well.
Awww, bless the middle aged northerners trying to recall what London was like 10 years ago.
It’s all about the roadmen a
yes and he forgot the cold brew, bubble-tea and nitro that have been and gone since the heady days of 2010.
I think it probably is. If you live in Liverpool and think that Kensington and Chelsea is a suburb of London a bit like Toxteth or Everton. Then you’d be forgiven for wondering why London Boroughs get more news time than entire cities, it’s because they are individually bigger than entire cities (or at least very large towns).
indeed, the central part of Manchester (bordered by Ancoats/the station and train lines) basically fits inside the boundaries of Hyde park
... but nobody lives in Hyde Park and not that many live in central Manchester either
What point are you trying to make?
… but nobody lives in Hyde Park and not that many live in central Manchester either
What point are you trying to make?
the SIZE.
No offence to anyone (and speaking as a non-London/SE resident), but the uncomfortable truth is there isn't much of national importance outside of London.
Troll thread should be recognised as such.
"the SIZE." is a crap metric. Northumberland is bigger than any city in the UK. It's meaningless
Try harder, then come back and do try to articulate your thoughts so that others can understand your message
It’s meaningless
everything has meaning, you just have to find it..
Is it bigger is more important?
Size isn’t everything
I’m lost, why does the UK media cover London more? Is it because most of its employees live there?
What does declaring a national emergency actually mean? - this sounds like just a plaintive cry to "do something" when there is in reality very little that can be done.
The Military can already be deployed to help with a civil emergency anyway under the MACA procedures (Military Aid to the Civil Community) - No "National Emergency" declaration necessary.
Reality is that as a society we have chosen to have more of these flooding events by burning carbon to heat the atmosphere hence running the water cycle faster. Dredging rivers and shouting at the EA will make sweet FA of a difference.
The people who live in flood prone areas had better get used to this sort of thing - it isn't an emergency .. its the new normal.
there isn’t much of [b]national[/b] importance outside of London.
Apart from the vast majority of the nation obviously 👍
Well yes neal, but they're dispersed across hundreds of smaller conurbations, 4 nations and an area hundreds (guessing here) of times the size of London. With the odd iconic building that is recognised outside of their own place (hence why the Glasgow fire was on national news).
What does declaring a national emergency actually mean?
KFC running out of chicken?
That’s one of the good things about living in Macclesfield. When locals mention flooding I can enter Yorkshire man mode. “Call this flooding” etc.
Surely there are some bits of London that flood already that we don’t hear about up north?
With the odd iconic building that is recognised outside of their own place
You can keep your buildings and I’ll stick with my rolling hills and beautiful scenery 😉
Maybe, as mountain bikers, some of the bits outside London are of national importance. Trees and hills and stuff like that.
Also, lots of things that people in cities need to survive (like food and water) come from outside of cities.
urely there are some bits of London that flood already that we don’t hear about up north?
Loads, on a weekly basis, normally due to a water leak taking out some elecricity supply and causing an explosion. They are pretty local, but it's quite a thing at the moment.
It’s all about the roadmen and hypebeasts now granddad.
Easily the most informative thing I've seen posted all day! 🙂
The news becomes London centric when it is mostly based there. Economic, political stories are focused their obviously but I do find that other items especially on slow news days can focus on London issues.Human nature will make people see the world from their own perspective and close to home. I think since the bbc moved parts to Manchester there is a slight lean to the north for some issues. If you are in the north your perspective may vary.
KFC running out of chicken?
Fair point
I’ve argued for some time that central government should move out of London. Perhaps rotate around the country to a different region every 4 years. It would certainly give our esteemed elected a different perspective. And perhaps reduce the costs associated with doing business in one of the worlds most expensive cities, free up more than 600 properties/second homes, and allow the Palace of Westminster to become a paying tourist attraction. Priorities may change when BoJo can’t get across Lincolnshire to take his seat in Boston’s House of Commons.
the GDP of lundun village on it's own is higher than some countries - and not made up ones either, real ones with hospitals and stuff - e.g. netherlands, sweden and switzerland
that's what the relative difference is.
“the SIZE.” is a crap metric. Northumberland is bigger than any city in the UK. It’s meaningless
Try harder, then come back and do try to articulate your thoughts so that others can understand your message“the SIZE.” is a crap metric. Northumberland is bigger than any city in the UK. It’s meaningless
Try harder, then come back and do try to articulate your thoughts so that others can understand your message
Population then, London and Nortuberland are about the same size. But London has 28x the population. Is it any real surprise that it gets 28x more news coverage?
I’m lost, why does the UK media cover London more? Is it because most of its employees live there?
Surely in the most part, it is due to approximately the same number of people living in London as Scotland and Wales combined. Similar to Scottish news media covering the central belt and Welsh news media focusing on the SE iirc.
Yes, because it would be a national emergency – i.e. whole country impacted by the downstream effects.
Really? How would it affect the rest of the UK?
THey built a flood relief Jubilee river for this. OK it’s Slough South
Jubilee River was to protect the rich residents of Windsor and Maidenhead. The main benefit for Slough is its a handy place to do drug deals, or commit suicide.
Really? How would it affect the rest of the UK?
Depends which bit of London was flooded.
Westminster - parliment, Whitehall.
The city - collapse of the banking system
Museums - loss of antiquities
National archives
British Library
Or just the hit on GDP. If somehow the M25 became a big bund wall.
Scotland gdp for 2018 $218 billion
London metropolitain area $1trillion. Losing four and a half Scotlands would be a bit of a national emergency dont you agree?
Those things either have zero impact upon me or are the same as the doncaster area flooding
Yes, because it would be a national emergency – i.e. whole country impacted by the downstream effects.
Really? How would it affect the rest of the UK?
I’m sure you have a bit of an inkling and others know more but... should the Thames Barrier break and the hundreds of buildings of National and International significance, along with 350 000 homes, etc etc be flooded then we would all end up paying one way or another. Insurance payments would surely skyrocket...
I shouldn’t have attempted to answer the question, hopefully someone will come along and provide a more thorough answer. The idea that someone living in Edinburgh, working for the NHS would be immune (I’m in much the same situation by the way) from its effects seems naive. I’m not sure the NHS will see anywhere near the funds it needs in the near future, but you could kiss goodbye to getting anything if London flooded. (I presume we mean a huge area of London here).
I have absolutely no idea the answer to this question, but what was the National effect of London being blitzed?
Those things either have zero impact upon me or are the same as the doncaster area flooding
Really?
Just as a starter for ten, someone* in the hypothetically flooded department of health isnt going to be able to pay nurses wages if its underwater are they.
*or pay the trust, which pays the hospital, that pays the department, that runs your payroll. But the net effect would be the same.
Nope - I work in the scottish NHS which is completely separate and has nothing to do with London
Next!
Derby and NottinghamLong Eaton will be easily commutable with HS2
Nope – I work in the scottish NHS which is completely separate and has nothing to do with London
Next!
do they treat myopia?