Lynda Waltho MP secured the debate on "Funding of British Waterways".
You can watch the debate via this link. (Move slider forward to 7 hrs 46 mins 50 secs.) [Firefox plugin] [Mac plugin]
You can read the transcript of the debate via this link.
The debate lasted 30 minutes until the House adjourned. Lynda Waltho MP spoke about the issues regarding funding for British Waterways.
Eight members made additional points. Huw Irranca-Davies, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, replied.
MPs from opposition parties were notable by their absence.
3 comments:
I watched the debate and missed the rest of TV that evening as it was the last item of the day and didn't get started until well after 10 pm.
It was attended by some stalwart supporters of the waterways but, strangely, there were none on the Tory and Libdem benches. Last week I wrote to my MP, Michael Fabricant, encouraging him to attend. He has a great record of supporting the canals but sadly he seems to have had more important matters to attend to on Monday evening.
It was a shame that Linda Waltho MP who opened the debate gave a number of 'facts' that weren't quite accurate (whomever wrote her brief needs to be reminded that Google is your friend) but she delivered the essence of the message and was supported by a number of interventions from others in attendance.
The Minister Huw Irranca-Davies opened by remarking how well-attended the debate was, an indication he said of how strongly debates on the waterways are always attended. I wondered if he was being facetious or whether it was just that MPs don't take End of Day Adjournment debates seriously - I don't recall noticing more than 10-12 in attendance.
The Minister wouldn't be drawn on direct questions from MPs about the rumoured sell-off of the family silver on the grounds that he didn't want to preempt the results of internal discussions and suggesting that all would be revealed in the pre-budget speech on Dec 9th.
That sounded ominous to me but at least we don't have long to wait. Once we have a clear idea of what this government plans we can decide whether to rally troops and stage another round of national protests like those we organised in 2006/7 when DEFRA made swingeing cuts to maintenance budgets. As this issue is potentially about as much as £45 million per annum out of BW's budget - which could increase the current maintenance deficit by 150% - this issue is many times more serious than the £12 million of cuts made by DEFRA in 2006.
The Minister also announced that the new waterways policy 'Waterways for Everybody' would be released for consultation before the December recess - that is about time, it was originally promised in July.
Along with senior representatives of all the waterways stakeholder groups, SOW have been working with DEFRA on the re-write of the existing policy (Waterways for Tomorrow) and whilst we were generally pleased with the general content of the last draft we saw, there was wide concern that the document didn't adequately cover the fundamental question of future funding. We understand that the release has been purposely delayed until after the pre-budget speech and wonder whether that is a good or bad omen. Perhaps we will get an inkling in a few days from the contents of the pre-budget.
So we won't be short of reading material for Xmas and whatever the contents, we will have enough time to make sure that all parties have no doubt what we expect them to do for our waterways. Watch this space!
Sadly, as it was an adjournment debate, it would have to wait until after the day's business was completed, which would normally be late in the evening. At 10pm, any MP would normally be wanting to go home or back to their constituency unless they had a particular interest in the subject being discussed. Many MPs also do use public transport and would have to rush off to the station to catch the last train out.
I don't watch adjournment debates, but perhaps the minister was being accurate and it may have been well-attended - how many MPs were present for the last bit of 'real' business for the day? I suspect not many.
Adjournment debates are basically technical parliamentary activities, so the fact that the minister had to be present for this would have ensured that the government are aware that the topic did have a wider concern. We need to ensure that our MPs are aware (and remain aware) that the subject will not go away.
DaveD suggested that the attendance at the adjournment debate may have been as good as the Minister suggested, especially as it was late in the day. He was correct.
Candy Atherton, former MP (and narrowboat owner), informs me that it was an extremely well attended debate. It seems that as adjournment debates 'belong' to the MP who 'wins' them, usually just the MP and the minister attend.
Also, as the debate 'belongs' to the sponsoring MP it is very rare for MPs from another party to attend.
As DaveD said we need to ensure that our MPs know about the issue. A simple way to do that is to use http://www.writetothem.com to ask them to support EDM 233. Also ask them to ask the Treasury why they are considering an action that put bring the future of the waterways at great risk - the Treasury will have to answer.
Post a Comment