Bonuses for failing flood defence bosses should be paid back

The Telegraph has reported that despite claims that water bills would have to rise to pay for additional flood defences, directors of the Environment Agency received bonuses of an average 10%, with the agencies chairman Baroness Young receiving a generous £24,000 (15%) bonus to add to her already over generous £163,000 salary. At a time when people are still without drinkable water, are repairing the flood damage caused to their homes, and are facing future water and insurance cost increases, should those in charge really be awarded such large bonuses?


To add insult to injury, it appears that the Environment Agency had their concerns over the possible effects of flooding. At a board meeting, "concern over the inadequacy of evacuation plans in some areas of England and Wales and … that there may be a serious risk of loss of life in significant floods" was raised, but evidentially nothing was done to prevent this and rectify the issues. Considering that three people have died in Tewkesbury as a result of the flooding to date, we fail to see how they have done an acceptable job which warrants five figure bonuses.

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience.  More info. Okay