That was 2007

2007 is memorable for the floods and the way they were reported in the media and exploited by the climate change lobby for their own ends.

National news appeared to forget Hull was under several feet of water until the leader of their council - Carl Minns - started jumping up and down very publicly. As soon as places like Reading, Oxford and Worcester were affected then it was headline news. The reason why Hull never made it to headline news I think was because their flooding was not caused by the River Humber flooding but by inadequate drainage systems. No one could make capital of that. If you build more houses you need to upgrade drainage systems - simple.

As Keith says at Zen Mischief, York flooded - that's not news -it always floods. Worcester and Evesham always flood - the Rivers Severn and Avon are notorious for it. I'd been to Worcester 3 times at different times of the year before I realised that the pub I thought was by the river was actually by the race course!

Here in Lincolnshire, Cambridgeshire and Norfolk - the Fens - we did not flood. Has anyone stopped to ask why? We're situated on the biggest flood plain in the country - the Rivers Witham, Welland, Great Ouse and Nene and their tributaries draining 13 counties did not cause flooding this summer even though we had the same amount of rain as anywhere else.

The answer is simple. We have a sophisticated drainage system which is monitored 365 days a year. We have dedicated teams of people from the internal drainage boards who work round the clock to ensure we do not flood. We also have thousands of acres of both salt and freshwater marsh which can be flooded when necessary to protect property. All our pumping stations are built so that if there are very high water levels the pumps will still work as they will be above the water level - unlike Hull where the pumps for their sewage system were at ground level.

We have a very fine balance between man and nature here. It works because we do not underestimate nature, and we work with it. We sell water from the Great Ouse to Essex so that they do not have to build more reservoirs. None of this sort of thing gets in the media but to me it is admirable and shows what can and should be done in areas such as around the Severn and the Avon. We need to have areas near many of our rivers which can be flooded like sponges to take up excess water. Ultimately this is one of the schemes which will need to be considered in order to safeguard lives and property.

If you must build in areas of potentially serious flooding then why not build houses on stilts - i.e. have the garage at ground level with storage areas, use waterproof plaster, ceramic tile floors, electrical sockets at waist height and no electrical wires running at floor level. These modifications would add very little to the cost of a new house and would save everyone millions.

I do not believe in climate change except as an ongoing global phenomenon. The Thames used to freeze. We used to be able to grow oranges and peaches in this country. The climate has always changed - no one really knows why. If we could stop all the volcanoes then we might have some chance of affecting it - but that it about as likely as pigs growing wings and flying. The North West Passage between Europe and Asia has always been a bit of a hit and miss affair if you look back in history so why is it remarkable that it is open this year?

My other big issue with 2007 is the Princess Diana inquest. Many people will not believe the verdict. Conspiracy theories do not die that easily. The people who believe in these theories will always believe she was taken out by the security services because she was pregnant/about to get married. These people will not accept the inquest verdict because anything that smacks of the Establishment is regarded as suspect and part of the cover up.

There are questions to be answered but they would have been best answered when the bodies were first brought back to the UK. The inquest should have been held then and an accidental death verdict recorded. The reason given at the time was that the French investigation was not complete. Every body that is brought back to the UK from abroad where there has been a sudden death has an inquest held on it. An inquest is not meant to cover all the circumstances of the case, but just to establish how the person died under broad headings. If things are not clear an open verdict could have been recorded. The inquest could have been re-opened at a later date if more evidence came to light. Why were these bodies treated differently? To me that is the major question which needs answering.