The Met Office – what is the point of it?

Staffed entirely by global warming nutters the Met Office finally admitted in the Autumn that the world was not getting hotter and thus that its long term forecasts were …wrong. But at least we can rely on its short term forecasts then? Er…no.

The Met Office three-monthly outlook at the end of March 2012 stated: "The forecast for average UK rainfall slightly favours drier than average conditions for April-May-June, and slightly favours April being the driest of the three months." The Met Office has now ‘fessed up and states: "Given that April was the wettest since detailed records began in 1910 and the April-May-June quarter was also the wettest, this advice was not helpful."

But maybe that was a fluke? Er. Try this one: 20 December 2012: "For February and March the range of possible outcomes is also very broad, although above-average UK-mean temperatures become more likely". This week: The Met Office confirms that it could have been the coldest March in the UK for 51 years.

I could go on and on. The fact is that The Met’s long term forecasts have all be wrong and its short to medium term forecasts are sometimes wrong and sometimes right. Now if my three legged cat Oakley was making forecasts he would be right sometimes and wrong other times.  But Oakley would cost the taxpayer far, far less. Is the Met Office a) fit for purpose or b) good value for money or c) neither?