UK floods: Cameron gives lukewarm backing to Environment Agency boss

Prime minister says now is not the time to change personnel as he tours flood-hit south-west

David Cameron talks to Environment Agency workers on Chesil beach in Dorset. Photograph: Andrew Matthews/PA

David Cameron has given lukewarm backing to Lord Smith, the chairman of the Environment Agency, over his response to the flooding, saying now is "not the time to change personnel".

As he began a 24-hour tour of the flood-hit south-west, the prime minister rejected the idea that Smith, whose term ends in July, should resign but said there would be "time later on to talk about these things".

It came as the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, condemned the "disgraceful" finger-pointing between various government ministers and the Environment Agency over their reaction to the storms, which have been devastating parts of the country since before Christmas.

Cameron has blamed a lack of dredging in the Somerset Levels, with Eric Pickles, the communities secretary, apologising "unreservedly" and criticising the failure of experts at the Environment Agency.

However, writing in the Guardian, Smith has hit back at those playing politics with the crisis, pointing out that Treasury spending rules are responsible for the failure of the agency to spend more on dredging last year. In a retort to Pickles, Smith said his staff knew 100 times more than any politician about flood defence protection.

A car lies half submerged after the Thames flooded in Datchet, Berkshire. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images

Meanwhile, Owen Paterson, the environment secretary, has reportedly complained to the prime minister about "grandstanding" by Pickles, who took over responsibility for leading the government's action on flooding while he is recovering from an emergency eye operation.

In a further bout of back-biting, an anonymous cabinet minister described Paterson as "stupid" for failing to take the risk of climate change seriously since his appointment as environment secretary in 2012.

Downing Street sought to play down the cabinet splits at a briefing with journalists on Monday morning. The prime minister's official spokesman insisted Paterson was doing an "excellent" job and also said Cameron fully "associates himself" with Pickles' apology for mistakes made in the past.

However, he was unable to say who was now leading the response to the flooding on behalf of the government. Asked who was in charge, the spokesman said it was a cross-party effort to tackle the storms, with different cabinet ministers likely to chair each meeting of the Cobra disaster committee.

Cameron will stay overnight in the west country, which is the area worst affected by the floods, as parts of the south-east brace for more badweather to come.

Rescuers take people to safety in Walton-on-Thames, Surrey. Photograph: Oli Scarff/Getty Images

Speaking on his trip to the south-west, Cameron stressed the need for the government to focus on action rather than blame at this point. However, he appeared to give only qualified support to Smith, who has vigorously defended the role of his staff "working their hearts out" to deal with the floods.

Cameron told Sky News: "This is not the time to change personnel. Everyone's got to focus on the job in hand. I'm only interested in one thing: everything the government can do is being done to help people, help businesses, help farmers.

"There will be time later on to talk about these things [resignations]. Right now everybody has got to focus on the job in hand."

Despite Cameron's attempt to present the government as united, Labour accused him of overseeing a cabinet fighting like "ferrets in a sack". Maria Eagle, the shadow environment secretary, has been granted an urgent question in the House of Commons over the issue, as water on parts of the river Thames in Berkshire and Surrey reached record levels.

Miliband said: "It is a disgrace that you have government ministers today pointing the finger at each other when they should be rolling their sleeves up and helping those who are affected.

"The government needs to explain why their response to the flooding has been so slow to help the victims and why their planning has been so inadequate.

"The Department of the Environment actually downgraded flooding as a key objective when the Conservatives came to power.

Evacuations in Datchet. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images

"But really what the public wants is a prime minister and a government focused on them, getting on with the job, not pointing fingers at each other or other people and trying to shut off blame."

There is still a lack of clarity about exactly why the Somerset Levels were not given the money for dredging in recent years, despite warnings from farmers in the area that failure to keep this up posed a flood risk.

Writing in the Guardian, Smith also denied all knowledge of a document suggesting that in 2008 it had been EA policy to allow more frequent flooding on the Somerset Levels.

He also told the BBC: "When I hear someone criticising the expertise of my staff in the Environment Agency that know 100 times more about flood risk management than any politician ever does, I am afraid I am not going to sit idly by."

Swans on South Parade in Worcester. Photograph: Richard Vernalls/PA

He added: "The Environment Agency is bound by the rules laid down by government, so when someone says they are bound by the advice laid down by the Environment Agency, what they are actually doing was following the Treasury rules that are laid down setting out how much we can spend and how much we cannot spend on any individual flood defence scheme."

He said the rules applied to urban and rural areas. He explained: "It has to come to £8 of benefit to every £1 of cost, and that calculation determines what we can contribute to any flood defence scheme."

He added: "In Somerset the maximum we were allowed under those rules to do was £400,000. A year ago we put the maximum we can do on the table and said here it is and now we need other people to come to the table as well. That did not happen. We were not allowed to do the full dredging … The situation has now completely changed because not only has the government come up with extra money for dredging, the Treasury has said the rules will not apply for the Somerset Levels."

Treasury sources said there were limits on what could be spent according to how much benefit it would provide. However, they said there were no specific caps on what could be spent on flood defences or more specifically on dredging, and argued that flood protection scored highly in terms of benefits.