It was Christmas when bad weather started to batter the UK. Weeks in, and with flood warnings affecting much of England, news coverage is turning to who, or what, is to blame. We check out what the papers say.

Looking back on UK flooding

Surrey and Dorset were among the first to experience torrential rain just before Christmas last year. Energy companies came in for criticism when they took what was deemed an unacceptable amount of time to reconnect homes after storms took out power lines.

The Somerset Levels have borne the worst of the flooding. Originally under sea, this unique landscape was artificially drained and irrigated in the 17th century to create farmland, the BBC explains. Since then, the area has been prone to flooding.

And now, more is on the way. The Guardian reports flooding has come to properties with swimming pools after the Thames broke its banks. Meanwhile, the Royal Marines have been drafted in to assist the Environment Agency in shoring up the stricken Somerset Levels.

Blame climate change

The Met Office recently announced the UK had 151 per cent of its average rainfall for the first half of January. Government science advisor Lord Krebs told the Today Programme the UK must be prepared for more heavy downpours as the climate warms.

But until relatively recently, the question of climate change’s role in the flooding had been largely absent from media reports. Carbon Brief’s analysis reveals climate change featured in a minority of the 3,000-odd stories.

That’s starting to change: this weekend, the Met Office released a report that suggests some of the weather we’ve been experiencing may have occurred due to climate change. We’ve summarised the report here.

Met Office chief scientist, Julia Slingo, explained on Radio 4’s The World This Weekend on Sunday that there’s no definitive answer on the link  between the storms and climate change. However, the more intense storms off the Atlantic taking a more southerly track, as well as the more intense extreme rainfall we’ve been experiencing are consistent with a warming world, according to the Met Office’s analysis. Her remarks were featured in the Telegraph, Times, Independent and on the BBC website.

Climate scientist Myles Allen, from the University of Oxford, told the Science Media Centre:

“There are simple physical reasons, supported by computer modelling of similar events back in the 2000s, to suspect that human-induced warming of the climate system has increased the risk of the kind of heavy rainfall events that are playing a major role in these floods. But it is important to remember that other meteorological events that have caused flooding in the UK, like the rapid melting of late Spring snow in 1947, may have been made less likely by global warming. So just saying “climate change is increasing flood risk” is too simplistic: these kinds of floods (those driven by heavy winter rainfall) may be becoming more frequent, others perhaps less frequent. What is clear is that just looking back at the historical record to plan flood defences or set insurance premiums is increasingly misleading. The climate is changing, and the sooner we understand in detail what these changes mean for Britain, the better.”

What to do?

Pressure is mounting on the government and the Environment Agency to do more to combat the floods. And dredging– removing silt and other matter from riverbeds – has become a major bone of contention. The Prime Minister and farmers are calling for much more dredging  to be done, soon.

But others – including the Environment Agency – have argued dredging is not a long term solution, and could make the problem worse. Hydrologists quoted in New Scientist say it’s far better to slow down water flow and encourage sustainable drainage systems. Or, for fans of big bits of kit, there’s the option of building a giant artificial lagoon, which could generate electricity as well as control the risk of flood. It’s worth remembering the words of hydrologist Hannah Cloke, however. She says the deluge has been so sustained it’s hard to know what could have prevented flooding.

Longer-term solutions are also on the mind of the Committee on Climate Change. It has warned little is being done to manage the UK’s future risk of flooding. It told the BBC that building continues on flood plains, gardens are still being paved over and urban green space is being lost. Yesterday, the committee’s head, Lord Deben, again criticised successive governments’ approach to flooding, pointing out the Treasury’s historical unwillingness to spend money on big infrastructure projects and condemning cuts to the Environment Agency’s budget.

Increasing numbers of column inches are being devoted to what the government should do. Both Telegraph columnist Geoffrey Lean and a Financial Times editorial urge the government to implement a long-term flood plan designed to cope with increased risk of flooding in the future.  Of course, there’s always the option of stopping all foreign aid payments and redirecting them to the floods – according to the Mail, at least – though politicians seem unimpressed with that bit of reasoning.

Blame the Environment Agency

It’s hardly surprising that the situation is starting to wear thin for residents coping with floods for over a month. Tempers are sorely tested, and locals have started to criticise the Environment Agency for failing to dredge as much as they think it should have.

Scenting a golden opportunity for passing the buck, politicians have eagerly joined the EA blame party – with communities minister Eric Pickles blaming the whole thing on the agency’s advice.

But the Mail on Sunday wins the prize for most lurid condemnation of the Environment Agency, citing a 2008 paper that, it says, places the safety of water parsnips and other obscure aquatic wildlife over that of the people of the Somerset Levels. The paper has since been updated and doesn’t reflect EA policy, but no-one seems to care much.

The Prime Minister has mounted a rather tepid defence of the agency, though he has not countered those calling for the resignation of the EA’s chief, Chris Smith, the New Statesman reports. Smith has hit back, arguing in the Guardian that politicians are using the Environment Agency as a “political football for a good media story” when the agency has spent as much as it could on flood defences. Smith’s term ends in July, and he currently seems disinclined to step down any sooner.

Blame the government

Smith may face opprobrium from supporters of the EA, too, following news from the Guardian that frontline staff are bearing the brunt of funding cuts – despite his assurances to the contrary. But commentators quoted in the piece save most of their opprobrium for the government’s decision to cut the agency’s staff and budget. That might not have been the most sensible plan, according to ITV, which estimates the cost of the floods will far outweigh the savings the government hoped to make.

Others have criticised the government for failing to connect the dots between climate change and flooding. Prince Charles also criticised the government, saying the floods were

“a classic example of what happens if we pay little attention to the accumulating impact of climate change on the larger picture”.

Individual ministers have come in for criticism. Environment minister Owen Paterson has refused to acknowledge that there may be a link between more intense rainfall and climate change. The Guardian criticises Paterson’s decision to cut funding for adaptation to climate change by 40 per cent. And according to the Mail, cabinet colleagues are also concerned about his apparent unwillingness to entertain the advice of scientists.