The UK Government’s Intelligence and Security Committee recently met to discuss the implications to national security of recent UK flooding.
Prior to this information had also been placed on the site of Paul Flynn MP.
Information had been available for many years that wide spread flooding would occur in the UK after December 2006. Some information is withheld in this post as it should form part of a criminal or otherwise inquiry. Evidence will show there were deliberate and intentional actions taken to ensure that models of predictions of UK flooding were not verified or prevention strategies implemented. Actions taken with full knowledge of the implications. Widespread flooding in the UK.
Other information has not been placed here.
Prior to this information had also been placed on the site of Paul Flynn MP.
Information had been available for many years that wide spread flooding would occur in the UK after December 2006. Some information is withheld in this post as it should form part of a criminal or otherwise inquiry. Evidence will show there were deliberate and intentional actions taken to ensure that models of predictions of UK flooding were not verified or prevention strategies implemented. Actions taken with full knowledge of the implications. Widespread flooding in the UK.
Other information has not been placed here.
This is the proposal that the Government’s consultants wanted to back as a use for the Millennium Dome. An environmental management centre. Both English Partnerships and Jones Lang LaSalle had information on flood predictions and prevention strategies. This was part of the business case which made the proposal attractive.
The UK's Chief Scientific Sir David King has confirmed that he was never consulted in the Millennium Dome competition process, when a short listed proposal that addressed flood management in the UK was being considered.
The agenda for the 2005 G8 Perthshire was climate change and Africa. Sir David King gave global publicity to the assessment that "climate change was a greater threat than terrorism".
This submission to a United Nations Environment and Development-UK report, commissioned by the UK Government, is the probable origin of both the above. This was written after being recommended to the UK Cabinet Office by DEFRA to advise on the sustainable development implications to Regulatory Impact Assessment, a datum for UK legislation. This work was refereed to in the UNED submission.
Part of those recommendations use sustainable flood management as an example. Based on the knowledge that flooding in the UK was imminent.
The opening of the competition for the Millennium Dome coincided with the outbreak of FMD in the UK. This report was sent to Prime Minister Tony Blair in March 2001, his thanks were sent by return of post. The section Land Use Scenarios refers briefly to flood prevention strategy. In the knowledge that widespread flooding in the UK was imminent if appropriate action was not taken.
When it was sent to First minister Alex Salmond in August 2007 a background preamble was requested.
A UK Chief Constable had access to predictions of UK flooding. Police officers deemed that the reason why prevention strategies could not be implemented was criminal not terrorist related. As it was criminal and the incidents were not in the area covered by their force, they could not take any action.
6 weeks later the pattern of UK flooding began. 4 days after the projections indicated they would happen. As far as I am aware that Chief Constable has not contacted any inquiry to report he had credible evidence of an environmental threat but decided not to respond as an operational decision based only on legal limitations was made. I now understand the officers who made the decision were not anti-terrorist officers.
Under US guidelines UK flooding would probably be considered a terrorist related incident. I have spoken to an officer from the Metropolitan police anti-terrorist branch. On the basis of what I have told him, he finds it credible that the UK flooding could be considered as a terrorist incident and an investigation should be carried out.
At present they do not want to be involved as they feel it should be up to regional authority in areas affected. As a specialist he may have access to similar guidelines. Regional services have up to now refused to open an investigation as, without looking at the evidence they do not consider it terrorist related. I consider it is, US guidelines consider it probable and Met anti-terrorist officers consider it plausible.
I was not called to give evidence at the recent inquiry. Why?
This is just part of appropriate evidence on flooding and national security.
No comments:
Post a Comment