Sir – Way back in time, when people first began working the land, they soon realised the land would need draining and they did this by digging drainage channels (ditches) and, because the only way they had to do this was by hand, they would only dig the ditches where they were needed and where they would have the most effect.


Over the centuries, the ditches and rivers were maintained regardless and so keep the land drained and allow the people to grow food.


That is until about 30 or 40 years ago, when someone sitting up in the ivory tower, twiddling their thumbs, suddenly had the idea that if they pleaded poverty and stopped maintaining the ditches and river, the money saved could be spent on holding so-called training seminars in five-star hotels and talk about how to deal with the resulting floods — and they came up with the idea of spending millions of pounds on flood defences.


I think we should be asking those in the ivory tower which is best: waste millions of pounds on flood defences (which, in many cases, are useless) or spend millions of pounds on flood prevention and do the job properly? As the old saying goes, prevention is better than cure.
Keith Brooks, Horspath