Today I am asking you the question again:
Should we cancel the River Thames Scheme?
The need for a downstream extension to the Maidenhead, Windsor & Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme (i.e. the Jubilee River channel completed in 2002) was recognised when we first flooded in January 2003.
Today, twenty years, four floods and £70m later I have to ask you whether this project (the River Thames Scheme without Channel One that was removed from the project in July 2020) should continue and if not, what alternatives are there? The project is being promoted on the basis of ‘environmental enhancements’.
The second question is: If the River Thames Scheme project is cancelled – who takes the blame for £70m and 15 years wasted on the RTS. There seems to have been a lack of honesty, openness and transparency over a long period of time. There are unanswered questions in respect of partnerships, project funding and management.
Finally, how do we manage three decades worth of sediment and aggradation in the bottom of the Thames without dredgers, operators and disposal facilities?
Sensible and short responses below please:
If all parts can’t be completed then yes it should be cancelled and the money spent on dredging to save the village of wraysbury from continuing to flood
Should they not complete what they started?
They have committed this amount of money, they now need to finish it.
It should be completed, to take the load from the relief channel. Otherwise, there is no saving for Wraysbury.
Nikos – The total cost of RTS channels 2 and 3 plus weir works and Desborough Cut deepening is over £500m. The project has not been approved yet and if/when constructed will be of ever-reducing benefit upstream.
No, we were let down by our previous councillors voting against our wishes , it now needs reinstating.
Andrew – I remember that the Councillors simply said that the project was unaffordable. RTS Channel One was removed from the project without consultation. We were simply informed by Cllr DC after the event.
Anything that takes the water away from our stretch of The Thames is a MUST! The scheme has to continue and dredging is a part of it. The EA have actually told us “the river is self-dredging” what a joke. We are sick and tired of getting flooded.
Sarah – Spot on!
I agree totally with Sarah W. The water MUST be channelled away from our village – as promised – and the dredging needs to be done regularly.
RTS should be reinstated for our 4 wards,
I want our communities and our future communities to have the same degree of flood protection as those currently served by the Jubilee River and those that will be served by the planned RTS.
Our four villages should not be left out of the scheme which was considered the best option for all boroughs from Windsor to the Thames in Richmond. In my humble opinion any flood alleviation scheme finally chosen by Datchet to Hythe End Team will be inferior to the planned RTS.
21 years since the 2003 floods. Promises and broken since then and still lots of talk but no final decision.
Again this is my humble opinion but I blame the government and/of EA for not including our 4 villages in the Julbiler River Scheme at the time of its construction or after its completion.
And RBWM for raising our hopes by joining the partnership approach and then a couple of years later came out of it for whatever reason and leaving our four villages in our current state