Home : Networking : News

Defra spent half a billion on IT, cut flood money

The Conservatives have said that the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spent a billion pounds on consultants while cutting back on flood defences.

By Nicole Kobie, 29 Oct 2007 at 17:06

gallery

The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has been criticised by the Conservative Party for spending a billion pounds on consultants over the past five years, including some £491 million on IT and telecoms alone, while cutting back on flood defences.

According to the figures, obtained by that party in a question tabled in parliament, some £290 million of that five-year bill was spent while the agency cut £15 million from the flood defence budget - controversial given the flooding which hit the country over the past summer.

The billion pound bill is triple what the Environment Agency spent on building new flood defences last year. Some £491 million of that five-year bill is from IT and telecoms, the figures said.

The Conservative shadow secretary of state for the environment, food and rural affairs Peter Ainsworth said: "This is a staggering sum of money which would be hard to justify even if Defra was functioning properly. But it isn't. While consultants are getting rich on taxpayers' money, Defra is failing farmers, failing rural communities, and failing to control climate change emissions."

But a Defra spokesperson said the criticism was unfair: "The budget to deliver improved flood defences has not been cut. The government is committed to protecting people from flooding and spending is at record levels. £15m of the Environment Agency's £428m budget was held back in 2006/7, and this was more than made up in the following year's allocation. The move did not affect either operational readiness or the state of defences."

The spokesperson continued: "Defra has a responsibility to manage its budget with care and to provide best value to the taxpayer. We take this responsibility very seriously and strive to use the most cost effective means to continue to deliver in our key business areas. In some instances using the private sector represents better value for money than developing capacity in house."