Environment chairman resigns. - Page 3

topman · 12th January 2016, 17:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillyHeckaslike

So whose job is it then?

People who are employed to do that. CEOs aren't employed to do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by barney bear

He wasn't doing his own job so he was unlikely to do anybody else's !

I think that If large storms are predicted and you are the head of the Environment Agency then logically you should be on hand to oversee any disasters. The statement he approved "at home for the holidays" was clearly wrong as he wasn't "at home" he was at A home that he happens to own 4000 miles away.

Why should people from as far away as Norfolk have to travel to Cumbria and Yorkshire to help the rescue and clean up efforts if he can't be bothered to come back to Britain. I saw fire service personnel in Cumbria over Christmas from at least 5 different counties, I'd be willing to bet a lot of those people had volunteered to help those in need.

Maybe he thought he had a team in place to help him while he was away. Like i say I'm not too sure he the outcome would have been any different if he'd have been here in the UK.

Borg Warner · 12th January 2016, 21:25

The outcome at best would have been the same, mostly likely worse though. Never a good idea having senior management around when there's a crisis, makes the staff nervous and gives the paparazzi a big fat target.

The only responsibility he would most likely have would be conceding to the activation on the EA's Major Incident Plan. After that it would be over to the EMT to run the show. I think where the EA were let down is their handling of the media. They should have kept them on a very short leash and not let them do their usual trick of stirring things up; making the news and not reporting it.

yelnats · 12th January 2016, 21:55

What's up with you lot ?
It's about responsibility-think The Blitz, Churchill,George VI and the Queen,in London throughout,visiting the East End etc.If you care ,you're there.
Good riddance for me.

Borg Warner · 12th January 2016, 22:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by yelnats

What's up with you lot ?
It's about responsibility-think The Blitz, Churchill,George VI and the Queen,in London throughout,visiting the East End etc.If you care ,you're there.
Good riddance for me.

Yes but I'm pretty sure none of them were about when the actual bombs were falling.

Always best to leave dealing with such matters to those that can. Anyone turning up for a (caring?) photo shoot serves no useful purpose.

yelnats · 12th January 2016, 22:32

'in London throughout the blitz',it's in all the history books !
The man himself agrees,thats why he fell on his sword,which, in itself,,is creditable I suppose.
'nuf said ?

WillyHeckaslike · 13th January 2016, 21:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Borg Warner

It is the home owner's responsibility to protect their property in situations such as these ...

It is the Environment Agency's responsibility to manage the flood risk from the rivers and the Sea, not the homeowners. The homeowners were not responsible for the flood-strewn debris and trees which no doubt contributed to the problem and the damage/destruction of bridges. The homeowners were not responsible for the flooding of the pumping station for the Foss barrier, a system which ultimately failed them despite concerns being raised in an official report as far back as 2004.

The "chap" was the chairman of the outfit which has specific responsibility for the problem, the buck effectively stopped with him so he had a very specific interest in his role to keep his finger on the pulse and to ensure that everything possible was being done to combat the situation. Firsthand experience focuses the mind and it does serve a useful purpose for people in authority to be seen by and to be accessible to those on the ground in times of crisis. And if they are the right person for the job it is something that they will want to do and not feel obliged to do. The "chap" will have had contacts at ministerial level and quite possibly with the PM himself and that level of authority can quickly get you extra and maybe some unforeseen resources - heavy-lift capacity, earthmovers or even a road across a field.

Re staff helping from other areas sectors, I'll grant you the FS and I will also add the much-abused military but ... LA's???? There will have been LA staff in the effected areas who were not themselves flooded and they won't have lifted a finger to help. Hell will freeze over before they have the mindset and the right terms of employment which dictate that in addition to their everyday job they also have a duty to respond and to serve the public when called upon to do so in times of crisis. The military do not have thousands of spare people sitting around waiting to deploy to undertake civic tasks of which many could easily be fulfilled by other public employees that are either on scene or nearer to it. And I would think that the same could be said of the FS re out of area tasking.

WillyHeckaslike · 13th January 2016, 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by topman

People who are employed to do that. CEOs aren't employed to do that.

Err, he was not the CEO.

So people should be employed to fill sandbags and not delegated and diverted from their everyday job ... otherwise who will do their job. Eh?

Borg Warner · 13th January 2016, 21:59

I base my comments on working in the Emergency Planning field for a number of years for a LA as well as a DNO. I used to liaise with other utilities, private companies, the military, the emergency services, local and national government and local press ensuring that our plans were integrated and that when either one of us needed help it would, wherever possible, be provided.

Chief Exec’s, along with politicians, royalty and anyone else who could not make a useful contribution where not welcome during an emergency. If in this case if the “chap” had turned up he would have been singled out by the press and asked a series of leading questions which he would not have been able to answer, creating an unnecessary diversion and serving only to satisfy the career ending blood lust of the media. His resignation serves no useful purpose.

West Mids Fire service were deployed to the area and the army were drafted in a lot earlier in this case as well, quite possibly following lessons learnt from the Somerset Levels’ flooding.

And yes it is the home owner’s responsibility to protect their property. Not the LA, the EA or any other government body. I made no comment on the responsibilities of the EA in that context.

Jules · 13th January 2016, 22:29

Tis the same in many areas
People high up who aren't dependant on the income are not fully committed to their roll

topman · 14th January 2016, 05:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillyHeckaslike

Err, he was not the CEO.

So people should be employed to fill sandbags and not delegated and diverted from their everyday job ... otherwise who will do their job. Eh?

Yes should have spotted that, however my point still stands.

13th January 2016, 22:29	#29
Jules This is my second home ZT 260 SE Twilight and 10 other 75 ZT's :O Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Conwy NORTH WALES Posts: 11,094 Thanks: 512 Thanked 1,116 Times in 763 Posts	Tis the same in many areas People high up who aren't dependant on the income are not fully committed to their roll __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] Newbies do now!! 1. Plenum drains..all 3 or 4 year dependent 2. Cooling fan..All speeds functioning 3. Bonnet cable divider block

12th January 2016, 21:25	#22
Borg Warner I really should get out more....... None Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Suffolk Posts: 2,579 Thanks: 494 Thanked 657 Times in 402 Posts	The outcome at best would have been the same, mostly likely worse though. Never a good idea having senior management around when there's a crisis, makes the staff nervous and gives the paparazzi a big fat target. The only responsibility he would most likely have would be conceding to the activation on the EA's Major Incident Plan. After that it would be over to the EMT to run the show. I think where the EA were let down is their handling of the media. They should have kept them on a very short leash and not let them do their usual trick of stirring things up; making the news and not reporting it.

12th January 2016, 21:55	#23
yelnats Avid contributor MGZT-T CDTI+135 AUTO Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: nr Lichfield Posts: 161 Thanks: 26 Thanked 16 Times in 12 Posts	What's up with you lot ? It's about responsibility-think The Blitz, Churchill,George VI and the Queen,in London throughout,visiting the East End etc.If you care ,you're there. Good riddance for me.

12th January 2016, 22:32	#25
yelnats Avid contributor MGZT-T CDTI+135 AUTO Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: nr Lichfield Posts: 161 Thanks: 26 Thanked 16 Times in 12 Posts	'in London throughout the blitz',it's in all the history books ! The man himself agrees,thats why he fell on his sword,which, in itself,,is creditable I suppose. 'nuf said ?

13th January 2016, 21:59	#28
Borg Warner I really should get out more....... None Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Suffolk Posts: 2,579 Thanks: 494 Thanked 657 Times in 402 Posts	I base my comments on working in the Emergency Planning field for a number of years for a LA as well as a DNO. I used to liaise with other utilities, private companies, the military, the emergency services, local and national government and local press ensuring that our plans were integrated and that when either one of us needed help it would, wherever possible, be provided. Chief Exec’s, along with politicians, royalty and anyone else who could not make a useful contribution where not welcome during an emergency. If in this case if the “chap” had turned up he would have been singled out by the press and asked a series of leading questions which he would not have been able to answer, creating an unnecessary diversion and serving only to satisfy the career ending blood lust of the media. His resignation serves no useful purpose. West Mids Fire service were deployed to the area and the army were drafted in a lot earlier in this case as well, quite possibly following lessons learnt from the Somerset Levels’ flooding. And yes it is the home owner’s responsibility to protect their property. Not the LA, the EA or any other government body. I made no comment on the responsibilities of the EA in that context.