Latest news with #rationing
Times
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Times
From chicken to potatoes, Britain's never grown less of its own food
Last month, a campaign group called Save British Farming organised a small protest in Westminster featuring vintage tractors and banners that declared: 'Ration books are coming.' The idea that Britain could run out of food and need rationing seems alarmist, and more appropriate, perhaps, for VE Day. But some experts say Britain's food system is starting to look precarious and the days when you could walk into a supermarket and expect to find pretty much any fruit, vegetable, meat or dairy item on any day of the year will soon be at an end. 'The party's over — that's gone. We're in a new era now,' said Tim Lang, professor emeritus of food policy at City, University of London and the man who coined
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Mass immigration means the water will run out and we are not prepared
The boss of Southern Water has told households that they need to ration their water use because the region is 'drier than Sydney, Dallas, Marrakesh and Istanbul'. Needless to say, given the appalling way most of these privatised companies have been run, Tim Mcmahon was denounced for blaming the consumer for the failings of his business. Why don't you repair the leaks properly and invest more in infrastructure before passing the buck, was a characteristic response. But Mr Mcmahon has a point. We often forget that rainfall levels in London and the Home Counties are among the lowest in Europe. In some years, the annual total in Essex is even below that of Jerusalem. However, our rain normally falls throughout the year rather than in monsoon-like summer deluges, which means the reservoirs and aquifers are routinely replenished and the water retained. Rain is needed, indeed expected, in winter and spring; yet the first four months of this year have been exceptionally arid. Some areas have had their driest start to the year in almost a century. We have seen heath fires raging and reservoirs emptying and it is just the start of May. Water is our most precious commodity yet we are reckless with its use because we always imagine there will be no shortages. When there are – as during the drought of 1976 – and we have to use standpipes, everyone complains about the lack of resilience and then forgets about it once the heavens open again. The population of England in 1976 was 46 million; today it is 57 million. Moreover, most of the increase has been in the very areas where rainfall is lowest. So the demand is growing while supply is not keeping up. Even in a normal rainfall year this would be problematic. In a drought, a crisis looms. Mr Mcmahon says the answer is to reduce demand by rationing, But the solution, surely, is to increase supply. This country is cursed by short-termism in public policy and especially where water is concerned. It is more than 30 years since the last major reservoir was opened in England at Carsington in Derbyshire. A four-decade planning battle has been waged over a new reservoir near Abingdon which would supply the parched South East. Southern Water is planning to construct a reservoir near Portsmouth but it will be years before it comes on stream. The Government has promised to speed up planning for new water projects, even as it seeks to build 1.5 million new homes, mostly in areas with shortages. If ever there was a failure of joined-up thinking, here it is. It is madness to keep building houses, mainly to meet the demands caused by years of mass immigration, if the water is running out. There is an answer. Since our maritime climate brings great variations in rainfall, and parts of the country have copious amounts, we could move water from the places that have got it – but don't need so much – to drier, more populous parts that risk being left parched. Indeed, it is an answer that has been staring us in the face for more than 80 years. A national water grid was proposed back in 1943 by the engineer J F Pownall. He produced plans for a canal running down the spine of England at the 310ft contour and connecting the most populated towns and cities. This Grand Contour Canal would have no locks, other than at the entry and exit points, and would serve as a grid able to distribute water around the country. Needless to say it never got built. A canal was seen as old hat in a world in thrall to the internal combustion engine and despite the fact that many countries have such schemes (as, indeed, did the Romans). It is another good idea that fell victim to the post-war insularity that has suffocated the life out of a country that was once adventurous and innovative but became tentative and lacking in ambition. The Grand Contour Canal joins the nuclear power stations we never built, the tidal energy we could have had and the bigger airports that never materialised (and never will). We have a national grid for electricity, so why not a national water grid? It is hardly a new concept: the ancient Chinese built one nearly 2,000 years ago while aqueducts testify to Roman ingenuity in this field. Yes, we can build more reservoirs, but they will take years. We could and should open more desalination plants beyond the one that currently lies dormant in east London. But the former cause major local issues, as Abingdon has found, while the latter are seen as inefficient and bad for the environment. We don't need a Pownall-style scheme to use the existing river and canal systems much better to move water around. It already happens in some parts, such as the provision of water to Merseyside from north Wales. A study by the Institute of Civil Engineers a few years ago concluded that a grid is both feasible and cheaper than building new reservoirs in the South. One option is to tap the vast reservoirs in Wales and transfer the water from the Severn to the Thames through a pipeline or aqueduct linking the two rivers. Better still, use the existing canals. Overall responsibility for policy lies with the National Rivers Authority and the Environment Agency, who are opposed to inter-regional transfers on grounds of cost (although it would be a fraction that of HS2). They decided as long ago as 2006 that the demand could be met by other means, such as new reservoirs, but have failed to take into consideration the huge population increase in the meantime. Some objections are irrational, seeing the transfer of 'the North's water' to the South East as somehow unethical, though we move electricity and gas around without moral qualms. It is simply a matter of time before a drought puts water resources under stress and everyone starts to ask why successive governments and their agencies did nothing to prepare. Thames Water expects demand in drought years in the South East to exceed supply by some 60 million litres per day by 2035, so where will it come from? While repairing leaks is important, it is not sufficient. It is one thing to face the prospect of power blackouts because of the net zero policy. Just wait until the water runs out. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
06-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Mass immigration means the water will run out and we are not prepared
The boss of Southern Water has told households that they need to ration their water use because the region is ' drier than Sydney, Dallas, Marrakesh and Istanbul '. Needless to say, given the appalling way most of these privatised companies have been run, Tim Mcmahon was denounced for blaming the consumer for the failings of his business. Why don't you repair the leaks properly and invest more in infrastructure before passing the buck, was a characteristic response. But Mr Mcmahon has a point. We often forget that rainfall levels in London and the Home Counties are among the lowest in Europe. In some years, the annual total in Essex is even below that of Jerusalem. However, our rain normally falls throughout the year rather than in monsoon-like summer deluges, which means the reservoirs and aquifers are routinely replenished and the water retained. Rain is needed, indeed expected, in winter and spring; yet the first four months of this year have been exceptionally arid. Some areas have had their driest start to the year in almost a century. We have seen heath fires raging and reservoirs emptying and it is just the start of May. Water is our most precious commodity yet we are reckless with its use because we always imagine there will be no shortages. When there are – as during the drought of 1976 – and we have to use standpipes, everyone complains about the lack of resilience and then forgets about it once the heavens open again. The population of England in 1976 was 46 million; today it is 57 million. Moreover, most of the increase has been in the very areas where rainfall is lowest. So the demand is growing while supply is not keeping up. Even in a normal rainfall year this would be problematic. In a drought, a crisis looms. Mr Mcmahon says the answer is to reduce demand by rationing, But the solution, surely, is to increase supply. This country is cursed by short-termism in public policy and especially where water is concerned. It is more than 30 years since the last major reservoir was opened in England at Carsington in Derbyshire. A four-decade planning battle has been waged over a new reservoir near Abingdon which would supply the parched South East. Southern Water is planning to construct a reservoir near Portsmouth but it will be years before it comes on stream. The Government has promised to speed up planning for new water projects, even as it seeks to build 1.5 million new homes, mostly in areas with shortages. If ever there was a failure of joined-up thinking, here it is. It is madness to keep building houses, mainly to meet the demands caused by years of mass immigration, if the water is running out. There is an answer. Since our maritime climate brings great variations in rainfall, and parts of the country have copious amounts, we could move water from the places that have got it – but don't need so much – to drier, more populous parts that risk being left parched. Indeed, it is an answer that has been staring us in the face for more than 80 years. A national water grid was proposed back in 1943 by the engineer J F Pownall. He produced plans for a canal running down the spine of England at the 310ft contour and connecting the most populated towns and cities. This Grand Contour Canal would have no locks, other than at the entry and exit points, and would serve as a grid able to distribute water around the country. Needless to say it never got built. A canal was seen as old hat in a world in thrall to the internal combustion engine and despite the fact that many countries have such schemes (as, indeed, did the Romans). It is another good idea that fell victim to the post-war insularity that has suffocated the life out of a country that was once adventurous and innovative but became tentative and lacking in ambition. The Grand Contour Canal joins the nuclear power stations we never built, the tidal energy we could have had and the bigger airports that never materialised (and never will). We have a national grid for electricity, so why not a national water grid? It is hardly a new concept: the ancient Chinese built one nearly 2,000 years ago while aqueducts testify to Roman ingenuity in this field. Yes, we can build more reservoirs, but they will take years. We could and should open more desalination plants beyond the one that currently lies dormant in east London. But the former cause major local issues, as Abingdon has found, while the latter are seen as inefficient and bad for the environment. We don't need a Pownall-style scheme to use the existing river and canal systems much better to move water around. It already happens in some parts, such as the provision of water to Merseyside from north Wales. A study by the Institute of Civil Engineers a few years ago concluded that a grid is both feasible and cheaper than building new reservoirs in the South. One option is to tap the vast reservoirs in Wales and transfer the water from the Severn to the Thames through a pipeline or aqueduct linking the two rivers. Better still, use the existing canals. Overall responsibility for policy lies with the National Rivers Authority and the Environment Agency, who are opposed to inter-regional transfers on grounds of cost (although it would be a fraction that of HS2). They decided as long ago as 2006 that the demand could be met by other means, such as new reservoirs, but have failed to take into consideration the huge population increase in the meantime. Some objections are irrational, seeing the transfer of 'the North's water' to the South East as somehow unethical, though we move electricity and gas around without moral qualms. It is simply a matter of time before a drought puts water resources under stress and everyone starts to ask why successive governments and their agencies did nothing to prepare. Thames Water expects demand in drought years in the South East to exceed supply by some 60 million litres per day by 2035, so where will it come from? While repairing leaks is important, it is not sufficient. It is one thing to face the prospect of power blackouts because of the net zero policy. Just wait until the water runs out.
