A couple of weeks ago we raised the issue of whether local councils should foot the bill to remove rubbish thrown into canals in their area, rather than BW [see blog post].
The lack of clarity about whose responsibility clearing water-borne rubbish should be comes up in a report in the Worcester News. Because the rubbish concerned is piled up against a bridge crossing the River Severn, there is a three-way pointing of fingers between BW, the Environment Agency and Worcester City Council, with no-one putting their hands up to accept responsibility [read Worcester News article online].
We think that since most rubbish in waterways originates from residents in an area, the local council should bear the cost, just as they would for removing rubbish littering the streets. That would leave BW and EA with more money for maintaining the structures of the waterways.
What do you think? Add your own comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Getting local authorities to take responsibility for rubbish clearance from waterways is a good idea.... in theory. However in practice it is unlikely to happen. The Basingstoke canal is a good example of what happens when local authorities are involved.
The Basy is owned by Surrey and Hampshire County Councils. There are six riparian boroughs. Three of these pay nothing towards the waterway, although they once agreed to do so, and Surrey's contribution is well below their promised figures. Why? Because they are kept short of money by government too.
The only way we might get local authorities to make a contribution, either in kind or financial, is if government make them do so. Our targets should be the cabinet, not councillors. However public debate about this does no harm, and keeps SOW's concerns alive in public.
Post a Comment