Should taxpayers pay to replace household goods/structural repairs for those who didn't take out household insurance and were affected by the recent floods?

[Bubble99]

Mr Brown has only pledged £14 million so this could be a non-starter, anyway.

With so many schools, health centres etc damaged there is probably not even enough to cover repairs for those.

BUT.

What about the others?

Elderly and infirm should be covered, without question, IMO. Replacing carpets,fridges and freezers for a section of society who are not necessarily able to deal with insurance renewals (if they ever had them) should be automatic, IMO.

But. How about families who have lost their massive plasma screens and whatnot (I can't afford those, and our insurance payments are not easy to find.)

Is it fair to say that their plight (by that I mean the not being insured bit) is caused by their own financial mismanagement/not prioritisng?

Must be my 'ull accent m2p

I personally don't begrudge those in need a second hand replacement of lost essentials but would bet there'll be those finding second hand an "insult" and grumbling that they should have been given new replacement goods.

I'd also ensure that they conbtributed £2 a month each month thereafter for say 10 years to a social fund to be ringfenced to help people in a similar situation in the future.

I'd also publicise and ensure news coverage of the real truth of what the uninsured are actually receiving to assist them, so everyone is left in no doubt that if you are uninsured you get the bare minimum and you have no choice but to join a social fund to assist with helping those who are in the same boat in the future.

octo - "I know that tradional farming communities would have lived on this land and continue to do so - but why aren't they now protected either by defences or government insurnace initiatives. Sea level rise isn't a new phenomenon"

I live in the area that peachy is talking about and atm the actual main towns are largely protected. I've seen photos of floods back in the 70's that would have filled our house to half way up the stairs. But in the the 70's they built good flood defences all along the river so there have been no floods in the town since that date. However since then we have had some pretty scary tides - due to rainfall and strong winds - that come unpleasantly close (within inches) to the very top of those defences - defences built to withstand as as then unimagined extremes . And the surrounding districts are flooded regularly - something that is to a certain extent expected and utilised as it provides rich grazing land in the summer - but increasingly the floods are affecting hamlets and village that used to be dry, above the old flood level. And BTW guess where all the new houses in the town (by the thousand) are being built. On the old 'water meadows', so-called because they flooded every winter. Clever eh?

I have bulidings and contents insurance. And I'e never claimed for flooding. But I have this niggling little feeling that the first time I do I'll find I'm not covered for it or if I am I won't be able to renew.

Why is this country so crap at managing weather disasters? How many times must those communities endure flooding before something is done about it? Victorian drains not designed to take heavy rain - come off it............SORT IT OUT THEN. Equally, come summer (one day it will) HOSEPIPE BAN cos of no rain for a few weeks. FFS - find a way of recycling the water from the flooding instead of waiting for it to seep into the ineffective victorian drains. Other countries with much more extreme conditions than ours manage far better. When will we invest money in this instead of debating whether or not our taxes will pay for someones plasma tv

"Other countries with much more extreme conditions than ours manage far better. "

But that is precisely the point ladylush. If you regularly suffer extreme weather you are prepared for it. It's worth while spending vast sums on protecting against something that frequently happens. But we are used to mild temperate weather here. Which is why local councils rarely get it right with the gritters and trains grind to a halt when it snows. You can choose I suppose, to pay more council tax to get every potential eventuality covered, or accept the risk that you might be inconvenienced (which is all it usually is) once in a while. The more extreme conditions like the ones that cause the flooding, are rare, although getting less so, and probably will force a change of policy.

Your last sentence is my point Om. These situations are no longer rare, and neither are droughts. Do you not think we pay enough taxes already? Isn't our income tax one of the highest? Our money is mismanaged (robbed) by the government. Rant over.

They still are relatively rare though. Compared to other countries.

Not rare enough to warrant no preventative measures.