WE can all agree that the floods have caused havoc. We can all also agree that action is clearly needed to tackle the situation.

Homes have been flooded, while insurance premiums will be hiked.

Millions of pounds in lost business has also drained away, while most people in the county were disrupted – some severely – in one way or another.

All this is undisputed.

But what happens next is where the arguments begin.

The £125m flood channel known as the Western Conveyance is the main plan being talked about by officials, MPs and council leaders.

There is widespread backing for it and widespread hope, in Oxford at least, that it will be given Government cash.

Yet not everyone is so sure.

Abingdon and Wallingford town council leaders say they have fears that what is done to protect Oxford could end up increasing the flood risk in their areas.

Others downstream of Oxford have similar concerns – concerns that echo those of Wraysbury residents who blame a similarly large-scale scheme near Windsor for flooding them this month.

Oxford is right to demand action to protect itself in the future. At the same time, towns and villages must be protected.

It is clear that the Government cannot pay for everything and choices will have to be made. But those decisions should be made on the basis of accurate information about the impact on others.

If it goes ahead, the £125m flood channel scheme must be designed to not make things worse for others down the river.