As the flood waters rise again in Uckfield, Catlin issues a timely warning. He has been given to understand that the published figures for the 1987 flood levels in Lewes were based on guesswork. The flood water height board at the time was in the council yard behind the old fire station. It was not high enough to record the water level - the flood rose above it. So, he is told, the actual height could only be guessed at.
Yet it is those figures, he understands, on which DEFRA reports are based and more importantly it is on these figures that the heights for the defences on the proposed Phoenix Development are based too. A programme for flood relief works is due to be announced in the autumn. These, costing £2m will "make safer" an area from the Phoenix Causeway to the bottom of South Street.
Yet, no work is proposed for the Cliffe Bridge - which Catlin perceives as the weakest link. He thinks any protective barriers north of the bridge would channel more water to it. "Will the channel be dredged?" he asked a senior council official. "No. Cliffe Bridge will always be a bottle neck, but if the channel is dredged, it will only allow more tidal water up." So now we know. Silly Catlin thought that the deeper channel would keep the high water mark lower.
I make no secret of the fact that I have lodged an objection to the proposal for an incinerator at The White Hart Hotel. What I really object to is the fact that this is a retrospective application for work already done and an incinerator already in use. My opinion is that those wishing to carry out possibly contentious schemes, do the work and apply retrospectively in the hope it shall be allowed to remain.
This and 90% of planning applications are often approved (or not) by officers acting under delegated powers. No elected members are involved. Do we not elect members to represent us? Catlin thinks all planning matters should be open to full debate.