Reply from Malcolm Kerby to Elliot Morley MP, DEFRA
23 November 2003
Re. Coast Defence Happisburgh.
Dear Mr Morley,
Thank you for your letter dated 13th November .
I note all of your comments therein and shall respond to them in order.
As you correctly point out you did receive Norman Lamb MP together with a ‘delegation’ of Happisburgh residents in May of this year, the 13th to be precise. You will no doubt recall I was a member of that ‘delegation’. Let there be no doubt I was then and remain grateful for the opportunity to meet with yourself and your officials.
The major problem with that meeting, as became apparent, was the different agendas. Yours appeared to be based on the assumption that the people of Happisburgh had little or no understanding of DEFRA’s policy on coastal defence presumably because our Local Authority had failed to explain it adequately or effectively. Plan was to offer us tea and sympathy, explain you intend to do nothing and the rationale behind your total lack of support. That would then be it ! We should have returned to Norfolk accepting your version of our future and that would be an end to the matter.
Our agenda was rather more hopeful and constructive in that we dared to believe that if we could ably demonstrate how divisive, unfair, unjust and unworkable your criteria and point score policy is in practice then maybe, just maybe common sense would prevail and you would look again at that policy. How wrong can one get, two things that are most certainly not synonymous are common sense and DEFRA !
You say that “Since then officials have sought to ensure a common understanding of the situation with North Norfolk District Council.” Not so. In reality, officials have sought common policy statements in an attempt to limit the damage to the lead authorities resulting from the thousands of letters from DEFRA and no.10 attempting to’ pass the buck’ to NNDC. As your chief engineer proved the day after our meeting when he informed the then assembled throng of lead authority engineers and executives that they were to blame for the people’s misunderstanding of DEFRA’s policies because they (the local authorities) were not controlling the expectations or thoughts of the people well enough. Little else sums up the DEFRA attitude and approach more than that !
I totally agree you have continued to explain your position to both myself and other residents. Indeed we are sick to our back teeth of your constant mantra criteria, criteria, criteria and DEFRA’s refusal to apply prudence and common sense. What you have singularly failed to do is listen and respond. DEFRA have got it wrong, the people know that, the lead authorities know that but you will not listen to reason.
You go on to speak of “inappropriate attempts by some to seek to blame the department’s engineers in a personal way.” Come, come Mr Morley are you seriously telling me it is inappropriate to seek the truth? I think not, we have a right to know if one man or indeed any man has adversely affected our future in coast defence terms, especially one who is in our employ !
Whether or not you accept my views about your criteria and priority score arrangements is immaterial and does not change the fact that they are discriminatory. They were conceived and designed to discriminate and that is precisely what they do. However discrimination on any grounds other than need or urgency is, in my view, wholly unacceptable. The people of Happisburgh and North Norfolk are taxpayers just as you and others in this country are.
What is entirely inappropriate is that the Norfolk coast is the most volatile, dynamic populated coast in Europe and we have a Government department seemingly doing nothing to address that situation whilst wasting millions of pounds of taxpayers money on criteria, and many other hare brained schemes that will not benefit the taxpayer one iota.
You also speak of “future levels of DEFRA funding for flood and coastal defence” and the need for “a means of setting schemes in order of priority and the priority point score arrangements have been developed through wide consultation for that purpose”.
Wide consultation indeed. Mr Morley I have to hand a list of your consultees. All quango’s (most under your control) or vested interests. No elected members. Some consultation !
I also have a copy of the consultees responses to your (then) proposed criteria and point score system, some brought forward and included in their responses some very relevant anomalies in the DEFRA thinking, most were ignored or overridden by DEFRA. Never mind, what does democracy matter when it comes to DEFRA and coastal defence? Ah distant dreams, dreams of consultation being meaningful (elected members) and not just a paper exercise en route to imposition !
Minister we are on the sharp end of your ill founded divisive policies. Engage with us. Undertake meaningful discussion and consultation with us. Let us seek a way forward which is genuinely in the best interests of all the taxpayers in this country including those in Happisburgh and North Norfolk.
Your current policy flies in the face of ‘good housekeeping principles’ and is storing up even greater problems and consequently an even greater financial burden for the taxpayer. As has already been clearly demonstrated the failure of successive administrations to address our problems in a ‘stitch in time’ cost effective manner has resulted in devastation and far greater cost.
It is a financial betrayal of the British taxpayer if the coast defence problem here is not addressed now before the cost in every sense, escalates still further. There is no sound economic argument for your current stance.
I certainly do not suggest that DEFRA in any way would design a system of prioritisation which would deliberately or specifically exclude Happisburgh or North Norfolk as a whole. However it is absolutely undeniable that your current system does precisely that. You say you have undertaken to keep the priority system under review. Then keep your word, review it as a matter of urgency. Despite all your protestations and assertions to the contrary the currently employed system is divisive, unfair, unjust and pretty much unworkable for the lead authorities.
Some weeks ago I sat in on the debates in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, quietly contemplating everything.
What came through loud and clear was just how remote it all was and how easy it is for a politician to condemn a community, as if by remote control. He or she fells no pain. We do that part ! How easy it must be in the plush, opulent (no expense spared here) almost surreal surroundings of Westminster to rip the heart out of a community behind some kind of policy façade such as criteria and not even get splattered with that community’s blood and guts. All as a direct result of his or her inappropriate policies. No, we the people have to cope with the socio-economic deprivation. You only create it, we have to live with it. as indeed do the local authorities for it is they who ultimately have to bear the Governmental cost burden, not DEFRA.
Your recent remarks about the string of properties at immediate risk were indeed most telling. The fact that you are prepared to “just have to let them go” and “there is no provision for compensation” is a clear indicator of the morally bankrupt attitude and policies of DEFRA. That you are allowed to operate in such a fashion in modern times beggars belief.
You have now rejected all requests for assistance from the people, their elected members at Parish, District and Parliamentary level of this area. Therefore any, indeed all losses due to coastal erosion from this point in time at Happisburgh are indisputably your responsibility and yours alone. All doubt is now removed.
As and when those losses occur I shall do everything in my power to ensure the world is in absolutely no doubt who holds direct responsibility. DEFRA will no longer be able to ‘hide behind the skirt’ of the local authority and dishonestly point the finger of blame at them. Next time it will be a little more difficult to explain things away with your usual ‘spin’ and play on words! Next time DEFRA alone will have to bear the burden of it’s own incompetence. The days of lame excuses are over.
Minister your prowess in communicating precisely what you and your department will not do is matched, I feel sure, by your prowess in communicating precisely what you and your department will do. Accordingly would you kindly inform me by return of your precise intentions regarding Happisburgh. What is your policy for the Happisburgh to Winterton section of our coast? Obviously you must have a clearly defined strategy in place under which you are currently operating what is the cost of that strategy? You will of course appreciate, as taxpayers we must ensure that you are spending our money wisely and with due regard to best value practice. Please do not worry about the complexity or detail of your response providing it is comprehensive and complete. I am convinced we shall be able to understand it.
How very regrettable that you felt you must decline the invitation to our meeting. I note you have given no indication of when you will be able to come to Happisburgh. Do you not feel Minister, that as the individual wholly responsible for the current situation at Happisburgh you owe it to the people to justify the ‘sentence’ you are passing on them face to face.
No surprise really, as I have been warning the people of Happisburgh what is so easy in Westminster, is so difficult out here in the real world.
Few politicians would have the stomach for it, especially when their policies are so transparently bereft of joined up thinking, fairness and justice. And so short sighted to boot !
I note it was not your diary preventing your attendance. I am therefore left with no alternative other than a firmly held belief that your policy on coastal defence is indefensible and you know it.
If you had any faith or belief that your adopted path in this matter were just, fair and whiter than white you would have been here defending it. The old adage applies ‘actions speak louder than words’.
Yours most sincerely,
M.R.Kerby
Co-ordinator Coastal Concern Action Group.