tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-44267216728930350852024-03-05T13:35:51.438+00:00Save Our WaterwaysThe campaign to secure improved funding for the canals and waterways of the UK.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-81096443928872809712010-06-25T15:24:00.000+01:002010-06-25T15:24:04.611+01:00Minister Gives Assurance on BWIt seems we weren't the only ones to spot a lack of substance in the Waterways Minister's statement earlier in the week.<br />
<br />
Tristram Hunt, MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central, asked the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Caroline Spelman) about her plans for the future of British Waterways. Waterways Minister Richard Benyon repeated what he had said in his statement a few days earlier that the government would be "looking in detail at options for a third sector model that will be appropriate for British Waterways, including the possible inclusion of Environment Agency navigations", adding that no decisions would be taken until after the spending review.<br />
<br />
Unsurprisingly, Mr Hunt sought more detail, stating that "in order to become a proper third sector organisation, British Waterways needs an appropriate financial settlement following the comprehensive spending review and a longer contract with Government to replace annual grants". He asked whether British Waterways' property endowment could be put in a charity-locked mechanism, so that the Treasury "does not sell it down the canal".<br />
<br />
The minister, in reply, did give some sort of re-assurance: "The answer to his question is yes. For the third sector model to work, British Waterways will have to have access to its estate, or a large proportion of it, for it to gear up funding for sustainable funding in the future. I can assure him that it will not proceed unless it is locked in in that way."<br />
<br />
So he seemed to be saying that if BW is to move to the "third-sector" this would be properly funded, seemingly retaining a large proportion of its property, so that it would be sustainable in the future. He also seemed to be saying that the third-sector move would not take place unless it was properly funded.<br />
<br />
As we suggested on Tuesday, a half-baked, cash-starved, third-rate new organisation would be the worst possible outcome, so we suppose we must take some comfort from whatever crumbs of good news appear on the table!<br />
<br />
The text of the exchange can be read in full <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100624/debtext/100624-0003.htm#10062478001168">here</a>.<br />
<br />
.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-89890877677285248692010-06-22T19:52:00.002+01:002010-06-25T15:24:38.065+01:00New Minister Announces, er... NothingWe now have a new government minister with responsibility for the waterways, in the person of Richard Benyon MP. Some people have expressed high hopes for MR Benyon, as he is a riparian landowner alongside the Kennet and Avon Canal and has an involvement with the Kennet and Avon Trust.<br />
<br />
This week, Mr Benyon issued a statement about the waterways. Or rather, he got someone to make the statement on his behalf in the House of Lords. This could be interpreted as indicating that waterways are so low down on the government's priorities that they couldn't even find a few seconds for Mr Benyon to make his statement in the House of Commons himself!<br />
<br />
His message gives a rather mixed message. He said that the new Government would continue to look at the possibility of creating a "third sector" model for British Waterways, as this may fit neatly with the government's so-called "big society" philosophy.<br />
<br />
However, he warned that nothing could be decided before the outcome of the Government's Autumn Spending Revue, as the Government's main objective was to reduce the deficit.<br />
<br />
He gave the same reason for his decision not to proceed with a new Government waterways strategy. (Can he be referring to Defra's "Waterways for Everyone" strategy? What are the implications if this is abandoned?)<br />
<br />
Mr Benyon also suggested that any "third-sector" waterway body could include the Environment Agency's navigations (such as the Thames, the Nene and the Great Ouse). This suggestion has been welcomed by the IWA, which has campaigned for a nation waterway "conservancy" but is likely to be fiercely opposed by many boaters based on EA waters.<br />
<br />
Today's Budget statement talked of most government departments facing financial cutbacks of 25% so there must be very little hope of any improvement in waterway funding for years to come. If BW is to evolve into a third-sector organisation or if a national waterway conservancy covering BW and EA navigations was to be created, just how effective would they be if they are not set up on a sound financial basis? A half-baked, cash-starved, third-rate new organisation would surely be the worst possible outcome for the secure future of our waterways?<br />
<br />
The text of Mr Benyon's statement, as relayed by Lord Henley, can be read in full <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wms/?id=2010-06-21a.100.2&s=waterways#g100.3">here</a>.<br />
<br />
.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-34247142631760568422010-05-13T10:18:00.004+01:002010-05-14T10:31:54.306+01:00Your chance to influence the new government's waterway policySo far we haven’t seen the new government policy for the waterways and we all have an opportunity to influence what that might be by writing to our MP (this can be done by email; just enter you postcode at <a href="http://tinyurl.com/6nqee">They Work You</a> look for 'Send a message to your MP') and ask them to express your views to the new Minister.<br />
<br />
We suggest that you base your letter on the following key issues (it is important for you to use your own words);<br />
<br />
a) Your concern about the future of the waterways<br />
b) The last Labour budget endorsed BW’s plans to move to charitable status. If that is to succeed, it is vital that BW’s property portfolio remains intact<br />
e) The outline policy document ‘Waterways for Everyone’ has wide support from all waterways user groups and it is important that the current consultation process continues.<br />
<br />
Be sure to ask your MP to ask the Minister for a response as they are then required to respond.<br />
<br />
Do it now, before you forget!<br />
<br />
Will ChapmanWill Chapmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00627270371694355133noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-16479713310511422712010-03-26T23:56:00.007+00:002010-03-28T19:41:52.991+01:00Waterway WatchThe Chancellor's budget announcement that BW is to move to the 3rd sector is an exciting development; one that justifies much of the campaigning that has been going on since the SOW protests of 2006 whilst being a signal for us to switch from protest-mode to a more positive yet still pro-active role.<br /><br />We know from ongoing consultations on BW's 2020 Vision that they foresee a future that integrates stakeholders into the management structure at the top level and closer, better defined, working relationships at the sharp end with communities.<br /><br />At the top end, the favoured proposal is that stakeholder representatives would populate the important Members Council, a body which would have the duty to scrutinise activities and nominate and select future Trustees. Members of this Council would be democratically selected by stakeholder groups. Trustees would replace the current Board and be unpaid.<br /><br />At the grass roots, local navigation offices would have Waterway Committees which would seek to improve communications with local users. This is where SOW's Waterway Watch initiative fits in.<br /><br />We know that over 30,000 boats and 13 million users make 260 million visits each year to BW waterways. [The Thames and the Broads are each believed to enjoy a similar degree of popularity and many of the following suggestions could apply equally to other navigations.] Most boat owners and the vast majority (95%) of other users are not members of our stakeholder organisations. Clearly, we need to find a way that will engage the active support of this substantial group of largely unrepresented users.<br /><br />It seems likely that the majority of users will be residents of a riparian community. Most may not be aware of contribution that the waterway makes to their way of life but SOW believe that these residents would respond with concern if it was suggested that their waterside environment was to change for the worse. As the main recipients of the economic and social benefits that our inland waterways bring, the residents of riparian communities have the most to lose if decline sets in. It is common knowledge that BW is under-funded to the tune of £30 million/pa and for each year that this continues the current maintenance backlog of £100 million will increase; circumstances that can only mean the condition of our waterways will decline even further. Given the current economic climate it is extremely unlikely that this gap will be filled by central government.<br /><br />DEFRA's new 'Waterways for Everyone' draft policy document encourages greater community engagement and specifically asks the question 'How do we engage local communities?' <br /><br />Most riparian communities are already covered by the extensive network of stakeholder bodies that comprise IWA branches; angling and cruising clubs; water sport clubs; community boat associations, canal and restoration societies, waterway festivals, etc. <br /><br />SOW used these community links when we staged the protests of 2006/7 and we believe the change in government approach coupled with wide cross-party support for the waterways presents an opportunity to tap into that community spirit once again but this time as a call for self-support rather than protest.<br /><br />Over the past few weeks SOW has been talking to BW and a number of stakeholder groups about an initiative we call Waterway Watch. The idea is simple. We call a number of meetings in key waterway communities to explain to our supporters and other local residents that without community support, there is a risk that their local waterway could fall into steady decline. We would point out that BW's move to the 3rd Sector is an opportunity for each community to make a contribution that will help prevent that decline and give its residents the power to shape the waterway for the future.<br /><br />As the name implies, Waterway Watch is not dissimilar to a Neighbourhood Watch that draws on the success of schemes like Towpath Tidy. However, each community Watch would have opportunities to play a wider role than just the protection and upkeep of the waterway that passes through their community. <br /><br />The range of activities in which an individual Watch community might become involved will depend largely on the skills and enthusiasms of the local supporters that they attract but a typical community Watch would aim to have the active support of:<br /><br /> - All users – walkers, dog owners, anglers, cyclists, canoeists, etc well as boaters<br /> - Parish and District councils, local MP and MEP<br /> - Schools and higher education establishments<br /> - Business community, youth groups, local societies<br /> - Police and emergency services (crime and access issues<br /> - Local media<br /><br />Every community is a potential source of professional and practical skills that might be attracted to a local Watch to help with opportunities and problems facing navigation authorities, examples might include:<br /><br /> - monitoring unlicensed boats and mooring over-stays, perhaps manage local moorings<br /> - bidding for contracts for vegetation control, towpath maintenance....<br /> - repair of assets and services, clearing fly tipping, locate rubbish points, etc<br /> - acting as intermediaries on planning issues<br /> - communicate views on matters of wider concern to local MPs and MEPs<br /> - gaining access to lottery and EU funding for community projects<br /> - new community initiatives - water festival, community boat; youth activities<br /><br />Transferring such activities to community level will present opportunities to identify cost savings. Restoration societies have shown that there is a wide range of talent that can be tapped to assist with all manner of tasks that would lead to the betterment of one's local community. Just looking at the examples of vegetation control and towpath monitoring, SOW estimates that a national Watch movement has the potential of saving BW £2-3 million a year in costs and recovered income.<br /><br />Although individual community Watches might decide to raise funds for local projects and activities, SOW don't see WW as a membership-based structure that competes with other stakeholder groups for members. Nationally, the WW movement wouldn't be run by any single stakeholder group, it would be a joint initiative by stakeholders and run locally by residents drawn from all users and vested interests in that community. Each community Watch would link with the local navigation authority through the existing user group network.<br /><br />Central to the idea is the use of state-of-the-art web technology to provide a central point of focus and communication. A central portal would link together all active WW groups and thereby facilitate a constant exchange of ideas and contacts which could also be the source of donations and increased access to philanthropic, lottery and European funding. <br /><br />We see members of existing waterway support groups as having the potential to form a Watch in their community and invite anyone who is attracted to this idea to contact us via campaign@saveourwaterways.org letting us know how you would like to help. <br /><br />We also welcome your comments - positive or negative - and any suggestions you may have. If you have an idea of how a local community can improve the way or reduce the costs of something that is done on the waterways, please let us know.Will Chapmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00627270371694355133noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-45331030933507216252010-03-24T15:53:00.000+00:002010-03-24T15:53:40.928+00:00Budget Statement Confirms "Mutual" Intention For British WaterwaysBritish Waterways has moved a step nearer becoming a "mutual" organisation, similar to a charitable trust, after today's budget statement. <br />
<br />
The previously-announced proposals are part of the Government's plans to rationalise its many "Arm's Length Bodies". <br />
<br />
British Waterways says that the proposals will give communities greater involvement in the running of their local waterways, provide a more stable long-term footing for the network and, over time, reduce costs to the taxpayer. <br />
<br />
BW notes that the Budget statement recognises the importance of BW's property endowment in helping to fund the long-term care of the waterways and recommends that it be "charity locked" for the benefit of the network. <br />
<br />
The Government proposals states: "at present the favoured option is a charitable trust responsible for managing waterways assets on a long lease with the non-operational property endowment held in a "charity locked" arrangement. However further work is needed to identify the exact form of mutual and the detail of its governance and relationship with government."<br />
<br />
BW chairman Tony Hales welcomed the statement, saying: "This is a significant moment in the history of our inland waterways. A mutualised canal network will give the communities that have grown up around the waterways since the 18th Century an increasingly important role in the way they are run in the future.<br />
"The proposal reflects a widely-held, cross-party and stakeholder view that the waterways are a national treasure which should be moved into the third sector if we are to unlock the enormous public support that there is for them. This is a tremendously innovative model for reinvigorating the waterways, it will ensure their continued revival and safeguard against a return to the decline and dereliction which they faced in the last century." <br />
<br />
There are more than 600 "Arm's Length Bodies" sponsored by the UK Government, including 152 Service Delivery organisations, some of which are to be merged. <br />
<br />
The H M Treasury document "Reforming Arm's Length Bodies" <a href="http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/budget2010_armslengthbodies.pdf">can be downloaded here</a>. Specific mention of BW appears on page 10.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-36539253949022740492010-03-11T17:37:00.001+00:002010-03-11T17:39:07.125+00:00Community Support - The Future of Our Waterways<b>Background</b><br />
Given the economic climate that faces us over the next decade, it is extremely unlikely that any government is going to cover the £45 million operating deficit that faces our navigation authorities each year. This annual deficit has forced British Waterways to operate at 85% of the level required to maintain a steady state of maintenance for several years now and as a result has accumulated a £100+ million backlog. A backlog that clearly worsens each year.<br />
<br />
These are familiar statistics to those active in the waterways movement and over the past few years we have made sure that our supporters are aware of the crisis. However, we have failed to get the same message across to the 95% of waterway users that are not members of our stakeholder organisations.<br />
<br />
We know quite a lot about this vast body of users. British Waterway's estimate that 11 million people make over 260 million visits a year to BW waterways. Our guess is that similar if not greater numbers apply to the Thames. An average of over 20 visits per person implies that most live close to a waterway and they appreciate the contribution it makes to their way of life. The majority are probably sensitive to their environment and care about its future. Above all, as the main recipients of the benefits that our inland waterways bring, they have the most to lose if decline sets in.<br />
<br />
Like boaters and anglers they will lose a valued recreational resource; like walkers and cyclists they will lose a source of exercise and a traffic free route and like us all they will lose a haven for nature and a valued part of our heritage. But as members of a waterway community, they will also lose jobs and passing trade and experience declining property values.<br />
<br />
Clearly, the waterway movement needs to gain the active support of this group. Fortunately, they are relatively easy to reach. The inland waterways pass through an estimated 250 parliamentary constituencies. That roughly equates to 18 million people and it seems likely that they include most of BW's 11 million users as well as a significant number of our members. In many of these communities to there is already an existing network of supporters in the form of members of user group branches and angling, cruising clubs and water sport clubs; supporters of canal and restoration societies, waterway festivals, community boats, etc.<br />
<br />
With that reach of supporters, surely we can organise gatherings in our waterway communities to explain to our neighbours that without community support, they risk seeing the waterways that are such an intrinsic part of the fabric of our community falling into rapid decline.<br />
<br />
<b>Taking the Opportunity</b><br />
DEFRA's 'Waterways for Everyone' encourages greater community engagement and the EA is looking at how they can make better use of volunteers. BW's 2020 Vision goes a step further by foreseeing a future that draws on volunteer skills and expertise by integrating stakeholder groups into its corporate structure and forecasting income from charitable donations. <br />
<br />
We support this general direction but concentrating on existing stakeholder groups misses a key target. The 11 million users are unrepresented by existing stakeholder groups and will remain out of the loop unless we find an initiative that will attract their attention so that they, in effect, also become stakeholders.<br />
<br />
SOW calls this initiative Waterway Watch (WW). In some ways it is not dissimilar to Neighbourhood Watch and draws on the success of Towpath Tidy except that each community WW would be encouraged to take a wider role than simply assisting with the protection and upkeep of the waterway that passes through their community. <br />
<br />
The range of activities in which individual WW communities might become involved will depend largely on the skills and enthusiasms of the local supporters that they attract. Typically, a local WW might take on the role of assisting the navigation authorities in monitoring unlicensed boats and mooring over-stays and taking on some of the tasks of vegetation control. Others might act as intermediaries with local parish and district councils in planning issues, etc. and communicating views on matters of national concern to local Mps.<br />
<br />
Think of the wide range of talent that is attracted by the likes of restoration societies; a similarly broad selection of talent surely exists in local communities waiting to be tapped to assist with all manner of issues that directly affect their own well-being. SOW estimates that just looking at the examples of delegating vegetation control and towpath monitoring to a community Watch has the potential of saving BW as much as £3-5 million a year in costs and recovered income.<br />
<br />
SOW doesn't see WW as a membership-based structure (thereby eliminating the thorny issue of competing with other stakeholder groups for members), although individual community WWs might decide to raise funds for local projects and activities.<br />
<br />
Nationally, the WW movement wouldn't be run by any single stakeholder group, it would be a genuinely joint initiative by local residents drawn from all users and vested interests in that community and would link with the local navigation authority through the user group network. The creation of each community group would, however, clearly depend greatly on the support of the members of stakeholders and presumably would provide an opportunity to promote the interests of individual stakeholder groups.<br />
<br />
Central to the idea is to use web technology to provide a central point of focus and communication. This central portal would link together all active WW groups and thereby facilitate a constant exchange of ideas and contacts which could also be the source of donations and increased access to philanthropic, Lottery and European funding. The creation and management of this website could be achieved by volunteers though it may be prudent to pay an outside body to create the initial structure. The cost of hosting the actual web site would be minimal and could almost certainly be maintained primarily by volunteers. <br />
<br />
We envision that the website would be owned by a non-profit company limited by guarantee which has guarantors rather than shareholders. The guarantors contribute a nominal predetermined sum to the company. The aim would be to get all participating stakeholders to become guarantors for the company, so that all have a joint interest in making it work. Any surplus would either be ploughed back into the company to meet its objectives, or distributed for charitable purposes.<br />
<br />
The important role of disseminating the concept and news of progress through local and national media might also be achieved by volunteers but it seems logical to suggest that this is done jointly by one or more of the professional teams that already exist within navigation authorities and larger stakeholders using feeds generated by local WW groups.<br />
<br />
<b>Taking the Initiative</b><br />
Other than endorsing the concept, SOW doesn't believe this is an initiative that should be taken by the navigation authorities or an individual stakeholder group. In the same way that we launched 49 protests to the cuts in 2006/7, it will benefit most by being recognised as community action. I believe that if we all share the responsibility of promoting the idea to through our members to other users at large, then we will identify individuals in a selection of key communities that will show enough interest to form fledgling groups to explore the idea.<br />
In my case I have had positive feedback from discussions in my community and I have been in touch with several individuals in other areas who are either already involved in a similar initiative or are willing to explore the idea in their community.<br />
<br />
SOW believes that our inland waterways face dereliction if we cannot persuade our local communities to exercise some ownership of their section of the waterway, and it is up to us to convince them that the future of our waterway heritage really does lie in their hands. <br />
<br />
<i>2nd March 2010</i> - Will Chapman - campaign@saveourwaterways.org <br />
<br />
Any comments?<br />
<br />
Download this discussion paper <a href="http://www.saveourwaterways.org/documents/WWCommunitySupport.pdf">here</a><br />
<br />
.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-42511696775699651122009-12-07T10:29:00.013+00:002009-12-07T13:24:42.860+00:00BW to keep Property and go "Mutual"?There has been a lot of head-scratching over the weekend following an article in <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/dec/04/civil-service-cuts-brown-budget">The Guardian</a> reporting on an interview with Liam Byrne, the chief secretary to the Treasury. The article reads:<br /><span style="font-style:italic;">A total of £16bn will be saved by pressing ahead with the sale of public assets from April. Assets for sale will include the Dartford crossing, the Tote, the student loans portfolio, Ordnance Survey and the Land Registry. In some cases ministers will wait for assets to recover their value after the recession. "This is not a firesale," Byrne says. "But this is stuff we will bring to the market when the price is right over the next two to three years." <span style="font-weight:bold;">Assets such as British Waterways will be reorganised as mutuals.</span></span><br /><br />So what did this mean? On the face of it, BW is not being lumped in with other assets to be sold off, but it does not promise that BW won't be separated from its property assets, which is a current concern of many people, as witnessed by the <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/protectourcanals/">Online Petition</a>, now in the "top ten" of current petitions on the Downing Street website.<br /><br />"Mutual" status suggests something that is paid for or owned by those who benefit from it. How could this idea be reconciled with the fact that only a small percentage of waterway users (boaters and anglers) contribute any money to them directly? The only practical way that the other 95%+ of users can contribute is through taxation.<br /><br />Perhaps the term "mutual" is misleading and this is just another way of describing the "third sector" model that BW has said it wants to become?<br /><br />The mystery may have been solved this morning, as the Government has issued a report called "<a href="http://www.hmg.gov.uk/frontlinefirst.aspx">Putting The Front Line First</a>" which outlines how the Government hopes to <span style="font-style:italic;">"drive up standards by strengthening the role of citizens and civic society, to free up public services by recasting the relationship between the centre and the frontline, and to streamline the centre of government, saving money for sharper delivery"</span>.<br /><br />The report states: <span style="font-style:italic;">"We are publishing now a portfolio of assets to discuss ownership options with the private sector, including full or partial sale or mutualisation. We will consider new ownership structures that release value from the government estate by creating one or more public property companies"</span>.<br /><br />A chapter of the report's <a href="http://www.hmg.gov.uk/media/52715/oep-assetportfolio.pdf">Asset Portfolio (pages 5 to 7)</a> is specifically about British Waterways and includes the section:<br /><span style="font-style:italic;">"At Budget 2009, it was announced that BW would transfer its property activities (including<br />joint ventures) into a wholly-owned property subsidiary – in order to ensure clear separation<br />of, and focus on, both maximising gains from its property and best management of the waterways.<br /><br />"This process is being taken forward by BW in consultation with HM Treasury, the Shareholder Executive and Defra. However, the Government recognises that there may be benefits in considering alternative structures for BW’s business as a whole, including its property portfolio. We will therefore consider alternative models for the business as a whole, such as mutual or third sector structures. As part of any such future structure for BW, therefore, there may be opportunities for the private sector to invest in the portfolio.<br /><br />"Under any scenario, ensuring the continued maintenance and protection of the waterways will continue to be an important objective for the Government."</span><br /><br />BW has taken this to mean an end to the speculation about a property sell-off [<a href="http://www.waterscape.com/features-and-articles/news/2600/government-welcomes-3rd-sector-debate-for-waterways">link</a>]. Many waterway users will find this re-assuring although the property portfolio only contributes a part of BW's income. There would still be the problem of obtaining enough additional funding to maintain our waterways adequately.<br /><br />And reading between the lines the report does not rule out the possibility of some of the property being sold off over time...<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">[Click below to add your own opinion.]</span><br /><br />.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-91942073142613194802009-12-03T15:18:00.007+00:002009-12-04T11:29:25.123+00:00What's going at Marsworth?A couple of weeks ago someone noticed that two planning application had been submitted by to demolish the Marsworth yard and build 14 houses on the site. On closer investigation it turned out the applicant was H2O one of BW's property development partners. (To view the applications and submissions visit <a href="http://tinyurl.com/yepu8c2">http://tinyurl.com/yepu8c2</a> and search for references 09/01945/APP and 09/01946/ACD).<br /><br />At the time of the discovery just a couple of days remained before the deadline for objections but the reach of the internet ensured within a few hours the word had spread and a number of people and stakeholders put in their objections.<br /><br />As one might expect, the objections express a mix of concern about the loss of part of our heritage, appearance, style and number of the proposed new buildings and whether the current boating facilities would be retained. One respondent complained about a local press feature which reported a BW representative as saying 'demolition was expected to start on Nov 30th.'<br /><br />A few of us made the point that the planning process should halt until BW had performed its obligations to consult with its stakeholders on what is clearly a sensitive issue. It wasn't long before Stuart Mills, BW Property Director published an informative clarification in which he apologises for not consulting with a 'wider range of stakeholders' and states that boaters facilities will be relocated (see <a href="http://tinyurl.com/5abxc">http://tinyurl.com/5abxc</a>). This was followed by an invitation to local boaters to attend an open meeting on Dec 10th with BW and the developers H2O. The date clashes with the local IWA Chiltern Branch Christmas celebration but at least the proper consultation process is starting.<br /><br />Ed Fox, PR Officer from BW, added that it's going to be all right anyway because BW have already got 'plans' to sort out the boaters issues and preserve the odd crane and bit of the wharf. But good intentions aside, the fundamental issue is that NONE of this is written into the current planning application(s). BW don't have any planning approval to construct alternative boaters facilities, nor is there any way to legally enforce the preservation of any parts of the old yard based on the current planning application. Some commentators have observed that the suggested site for the replacement boater facilities is itself in a conservation area which, if true, may mean that the chances of getting permission granted are minimal if not zero.<br /><br />What people don't seem to realise is that the outcome of the planning application dictates only what must happen; anything else can be and usually is avoided. IF the current planning applications are allowed, then neither BW or the developers are under ANY obligation to provide relocated facilities or preserve any heritage, so no amount of bolting of stable doors will change anything.<br /><br />Our hope is that someone will raise these points at the meeting on December 10th.Will Chapmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00627270371694355133noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-50680013335159052502009-12-01T15:01:00.000+00:002009-12-01T16:15:53.948+00:00MPs debate Canal FundingAn Adjournment Debate was held in the House of Commons on 30th November.<br /><br />Lynda Waltho MP secured the debate on "Funding of British Waterways".<br /><br />You can <a href="http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=5195">watch the debate via this link</a>. (Move slider forward to 7 hrs 46 mins 50 secs.) <small>[<a href="http://port25.technet.com/pages/windows-media-player-firefox-plugin-download.aspx">Firefox plugin</a>] [<a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/mac/default.aspx">Mac plugin</a>]</small><br /><br />You can <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm091130/debtext/91130-0022.htm#09120112000002">read the transcript of the debate via this link</a>.<br /><br />The debate lasted 30 minutes until the House adjourned. Lynda Waltho MP spoke about the issues regarding funding for British Waterways.<br /><br />Eight members made additional points. Huw Irranca-Davies, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, replied.<br /><br />MPs from opposition parties were notable by their absence.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.saveourwaterways.org/images/debate.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; border: 1px solid #c0c4cc;" src="http://www.saveourwaterways.org/images/debate.jpg" alt="" /></a>Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-34152725277140727192009-11-28T00:02:00.000+00:002009-11-28T00:02:17.193+00:00Waterway Funding to be debated in ParliamentA debate in Parliament on the funding of our waterways has been secured. This comes at a time when public awareness is being raised about the shortfall in funding the waterway system and how that could be made worse were the Government to sell-off BW's property portfolio, profits from which make up a significant proportion of BW's income for maintaining canals. <br />
<br />
Linda Waltho has won a ballot to secure an End of Day Adjournment Debate on <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/about_commons/speakers_office/edadjourns.cfm">Monday 30th November</a> on the subject "Funding for British Waterways". You will be able to watch this on the BBC Parliament channel. <br />
<br />
It might be worth contacting your MP with some background information on the effects of underfunding and encouraging them to attend the debate. <br />
<br />
Bob Laxton has put forward Early Day Motion 233 "Inland Waterways and Funding". <br />
<br />
The motion notes that nearly half of the money that BW needs to maintain the network comes from its property portfolio, and that cuts in BW's grant-in-aid mean a shortfall in the money needed to properly fund the waterways of about £40m. It calls for the inland waterways to be made a national park and for BW's property portfolio to be protected so that it can provide a secure funding stream. The full text of the motion <a href="http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=39776&SESSION=903">can be read here</a>. <br />
<br />
At the time of writing 26 MPs have signed the motion. <a href="http://www.writetothem.com/">Please contact your MP</a> and encourage him or her to sign. Tell them it's EDM 233.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-91267069756638966642009-11-24T22:55:00.001+00:002009-11-24T22:56:58.161+00:00Please Help - Another E-Petition to sign!As speculation about whether the Government will sell off BW's assets continues to cause alarm, a new petition has been launched on the Downing Street web site. <br /><br />The speculation follows an item on The Politics Show, although nothing has been said by the Government. However, what is clear is that the Government will be looking for ways to rake in money to plug some of the deficits. We, who are concerned for the future of the country's waterways, should look for ways of trying to persuade the Government that depriving BW of a key source of income is not a good idea. <br /><br />The new E-Petition on the Downing Street website simply reads:<br /><span style="font-style:italic;">"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to protect our canals by not selling off property owned by British waterways."</span> <br /><br />The petition creator explains the reasons for the petition: <span style="font-style:italic;">"Further to recent announcements concerning the potential sell-off of properties owned by British Waterways by the Treasury, we petition the Prime Minister to give assurances that our canals will be protected and recent levels of investment, a credit to Labour, is maintained.<br />"Our canals are great source of pleasure for many people in the country, providing a source of employment through tourism and associated businesses. They're also home to many forms of wildlife. Without proper management this will ebb away and the network return to a state of decay and ruin.<br />"We urge the Government to allow British Waterways to retain its property portfolio, protecting its essential source of revenue and ensure the sustainability of its work."</span> <br /><br />The IWA and other organisations are encouraging people to sign this petition, and we would, too. Some people are doubtful as to whether such petitions have much effect but the Powers That Be will certainly be aware when a petition on a particular issue is gaining a lot of support. If the Government is still making up its mind, a demonstration of the strength of feeling might just tip the scales. The IWA points out: <span style="font-style:italic;">"The worst outcome now that this is in the public domain, would be if this petition receives scant support. That might give Ministers the impression that there are few waterways supporters who care very much about the issue. On the other hand, if it is well supported, the Government, this close to an election, is very sensitive to actions it might take which may lose votes."</span> <br /><br />Please look at the petition by following this link <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/protectourcanals/">http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/protectourcanals/</a> and, if you agree with it, add your name to the more than a thousand already there! <br /><br />Please tell other people about the petition, too, to help boost the numbers! <br /><br />When you have done that, please consider visiting this site: <a href="http://www.writetothem.com/">www.writetothem.com</a> and sending a message to your own MP. You could aquaint them with a few facts about the financial situation BW is in and how taking away the income from its property portfolio will make things even worse. You could mention recent examples of how the fabric of the system is falling apart and ask them to ask questions of the Environment Secretary or other ministers concerned.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-48157934387622462092009-11-19T23:35:00.001+00:002009-11-19T23:36:07.313+00:00The Future of the Waterways – Communities Working together<i>A Paper for Discussion....</i><br /><br />At the National Festival in August the IWA announced the Save Our System (SOS 2010) campaign. Members of Save Our Waterways (SOW) and other waterways' enthusiasts could be forgiven for being a mite confused as the name and detail of the campaign seemed strangely familiar. <br /><br />SOW takes this as a compliment and, as such, we had no problems in deciding to support the aims of the campaign along with other boating user groups.<br /><br />The central theme of the campaign is to encourage the formation of community-based advocacy groups who will identify and promote local benefits and issues to their communities at wide. The Winter 2009 issue of IWA's 'Waterways' magazine encourages branches and regions to take the lead and convene local meetings with other stakeholders and centres of influence. This is a great opportunity for IWA to demonstrate the grass roots influence that should be part and parcel of an organisation with 18,000 members, and I look forward to being contacted by my local branch.<br /><br />As IWA Chairman, Clive Henderson has pointed out, the cut recently announced by DEFRA has virtually wiped out the £5-10 million annual saving that BW will be squeezing from their operating costs over the next 10 years. <br /><br />These savings have largely come at the cost of jobs and, as such, this seems a particularly pernicious act on Government's part. Furthermore, there are now renewed reports that BW's property portfolio is to be put up for sale and if there is any substance in this report we have solid grounds for mass protests. <br /><br />Clearly any campaign activity needs to allow enough time to influence election manifesto promises and as the election date could be as early as the first week in May 2010, it is clear that we need to making preparations for a campaign no later than March. We organised 50 protests in November 2006 from scratch in 6 weeks so we can surely achieve that by working together with determination and commitment.<br /><br />SOW believes that any protest should focus on stopping the 'sale of the family silver' and to use the £30 million funding short-fall to emphasize the critical state of BW finances. As long as this country is recovering from the recession, we suggest that it will be counter-productive to focus the campaign on trying to get DEFRA or any other government department, to cover the £30 million funding shortfall. In our view, the answer to medium and long term funding is to transfer more financial responsibility to local and regional authorities.<br /><br />When the re-write of 'Waterways for Tomorrow' is released this winter, it is expected to contain numerous references to 'greater community' involvement. It will also feature the research commissioned by DEFRA/IWAC which clearly demonstrates that waterways are a sound economic investment as well as meeting universally held social objectives. <br /><br />The central theme of the BW AGM in October, 2009 was its 2020 Vision, which sees its future as a Third Sector, charity-like organisation that relies more heavily on volunteers, public donations and working more closely with local authorities. Comparisons were made with comparable Third Sector organisations that are managing their 'estates' without being reliant on financial support from government. Organisations like the RNLI, RSPB, Ramblers and, notably, the National Trust and the Woodland Trust, do so with the support of thousands of volunteers and significant fund raising activities. <br /><br />The better use of volunteers has, of course, long been a point of contention with BW. The culture within BW – from top to bottom – needs to change dramatically from one that gives lip-service to the concept to one that embraces the volunteer culture and delegates functional and managerial responsibilities to volunteers. WRG and the societies that run restoration projects and manage navigations on a volunteer basis are excellent examples of professionalism that should be an intrinsic part of a Third Sector BW and we all need to find ways to catalyse the formation of complementary groups in other areas of expertise. The formation of community support groups would be a good start.<br /><br />BW have a significant advantage in this regard. As NABO has pointed out, which other Third Sector organisations have such a large body of boat-owning stakeholders with a vested interest of perhaps as much as a billion pounds? Which other body has a defined market of property-owners along 2,200 miles of waterway? Which other body takes care of a recreational resource that passes through the local community of nearly 20 million people (250 parliamentary constituencies)? All of these people are potential supporters of any initiative that will want to protect and improve the recreational value of our waterways.<br /><br />The idea that riparian communities should play a greater role in the upkeep and future of their local waterway makes a lot of sense. It is, after all, local residents that reap most of the benefits of a thriving, vibrant waterways: the recreational benefits; enhanced property values; the trade and related jobs from passing boaters, walkers, cyclists, anglers etc. Conversely, it is the anti-social behaviour of those local residents that use the waterway for fly-tipping and honing their graffiti skills – acts that cost BW millions each year to clear and deter paying visitors. Factor this with statistics from BW's surveys which suggest that 95% of users are local people enjoying the towpaths as a means of personal recreation and it is clear that local authorities should be taking more responsibility for the costs of maintaining the waterside in good order. <br /><br />With or without a protest campaign, we could make good use existing waterside festivals to start to build community-based groups of activists from all types of users. We must find ways to involve all types of users; it simply must be a priority to make sure that we have non-boating interests properly represented.<br /><br />At the beginning of 2009, SOW chaired a meeting in Westminster where the heads of major user groups briefed Ann McIntosh, Shadow Environment Minister, on the major issues facing the waterways. During that meeting, the idea of a National Waterways Authority was raised and Ms McIntosh referred us to <a href="http://www.qualityoflifechallenge.com/">a website</a> which contained a series of documents that represented current Conservative thinking, thinking that we presume will become a part of their election manifesto.. <br /><br />The most relevant of these is entitled <a href="http://www.qualityoflifechallenge.com/Policy_Water.htm">'Water – The First Essential'</a> and it makes a powerful case for a National Water Association which would regulate all aspects of sustainable water management. The rationale for a single overseeing body is that <i>'integrated water management cannot be provided while the responsibilities for regulating its interrelated components remain in different hands'</i>. Central to this is the European <a href="http://www.wfduk.org/about_wfd/">Water Framework Directive</a> (WFD) which is targeted to be implemented by 2015. The paper was written<br /><br />While the NWA <i>'would have overall responsibility for all matters related to water, is not intended that it should act as an arm of government. It is intended that it should be an instrument of all those who have a direct interest in the good, long term management of water. In voluntary terms, it is more like the CPRE or the Wildlife Trusts whose strength lies in their local organisations.'</i> The NWA envisages the establishment of volunteer community groups based on local water catchments. Bodies – such as private companies, local interest groups, local authorities, community collective, etc – would be invited to tender for the responsibility to establish these community catchment groups and ensure that they were fully integrated into the local decision process.<br /><br />The document names British Waterways as one of these 'bodies' and it may be more than coincidence to that much of BW's 2020 Vision plan is designed to neatly fit this proposal. The proposal is that BW <i>'be entrusted with responsibility for navigation and recreation in all inland and transitional waterways, man-made and natural. The Port of London Authority would be disbanded and its duties subsumed by BW. The former EA responsibilities relating to navigation and recreation would also be transferred to BW. The new BW would be regulated as a service provider by the NWA in order to ensure that it acted in a sustainable manner and balanced navigation and recreation needs against the other components of sound integrated water management.'</i><br /><br />The devil in this proposal is the detail. Clearly, a straight merging of EA (and by implication other navigations too) would attract a significant amount of opposition from waterway stakeholders. <a href="http://www.saveourwaterways.org/documents/strategic-waterways-authority.pdf">SOW's paper on the concept of a strategic waterways authority</a> approached this particular issue in a less contentious way but there are clearly many other implications of such a dramatic new concept that need to be debated by all stakeholders with a view of reaching a consensus before Conservative election policy is finalised. <br /><br />Will Chapman<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Please add your thoughts on this by clicking the link below.</span>Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-27771108595483255742009-11-17T11:23:00.000+00:002009-11-17T11:23:57.102+00:00BW Talks Down Sell-off StoryFollowing an item on The Politics Show on Sunday 15th November, speculating that the government could be about to sell off British Waterways' property asset portfolio, BW has played down the story. <br />
<br />
BW points out that the government decided earlier in the year, following a Treasury-led review, that British Waterways' 1,400 canalside properties should not be sold. (<a href="http://www.saveourwaterways.org/news/index.htm#bwproperty">See earlier story</a>.) <br />
<br />
BW chairman, Tony Hales, said: "We were comforted by the Government's report in April. We generate almost half of our annual maintenance budget through property-related activities which have been fundamental to the renaissance of our 200-year old waterways over the last decade. Without it the public cost of caring for the waterways would increase significantly. With the reduction in grant funding in recent years the income we have generated from property and other sources has been crucial to the funding and revival of the 2,200-mile network." <br />
<br />
"Earlier this year we proposed setting up a "national trust" for the waterways to safeguard their future and lessen the call on the public purse. The proposal, which has received widespread support, would only be possible with the income we generate from our property and with long-term government funding agreements." <br />
<br />
It seems possible that the programme was running with the story from earlier in the year as there is not thought to have been any new decision about BW, although BW acknowledges that the government keeps all assets under review in the light of the current financial situation. <br />
<br />
It would be a very short-sighted decision if the government were to sell off BW's property portfolio. Not only would the amount raised not be great in a recession, but it would deprive BW of a vital source of income, meaning that the government would have to pump additional money into BW in the future just to maintain the system at a basic level. <br />
<br />
This might be a good time to <a href="http://www.writetothem.com/">contact your MP</a> to make sure they are aware of this and to encourage them to use what influence they may have to help ensure that BW's assets are not flogged off in a pointless fire sale.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-22057770530525378152009-11-05T20:26:00.002+00:002009-11-05T20:34:56.623+00:00Who Pays for Waterways?<span style="font-style:italic;">Who Pays for Waterways? Who should pay? SOW's Will Chapman stresses that we need to keep the plight and opportunities of the waterways in the public eye:</span><br /><br />Even before the recession, the navigation authorities have been severely under-funded. Brititish Waterways is short by as much as £30 million a year and, as a result, cannot do even the minimum maintenance required. This is having an effect on the condition of canal assets, such as bridges and locks, dredging canals and maintaining towpaths and the surrounding vegetation.<br /><br />On top of that, there is an unreasonable expectation from some local authorities who seem to think that vandalism caused by local residents should be cleaned up by the navigation authority rather than themselves. In some areas fly tipping is a major problem, with supermarket trolleys, household furniture, fridges, bikes, tyres, etc. being dumped in the canal and left for BW to remove. BW spends between £8-10 million a year on clearing up after local residents.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic; font-weight:bold;">Local Groups Can Help, Too</span><br />Fortunately, some local authorities recognise their obligations in this regard but it is by no means universal. Credit should also be given to those local organisations like the Birmingham Canal Navigations Society (BCNS) that organise regular cleaning parties of Black Country canals. I think that one of these recently removed 12 supermarket trolleys from a single lock!<br /><br />If our inland waterways are to survive the long recovery period that will be necessary as we come out of the current recession, we will need more cooperation from local authorities and groups like the BCNS as it is extremely unlikely that any additional support wil be coming from central government (in fact, they have recently imposed yet another cut of £5 million).<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic; font-weight:bold;">Should Users Bear The Costs?</span><br />It's not practical to fund waterways by increasing the charges to boaters and anglers - by far the greatest number of users of the waterways use the towpaths rather than the water. Annual surveys by British Waterways show that of 250+ million visits each year, over 95% of those using the towpaths are enjoying a family walk, exercising dogs, etc. and it is generally accepted that they could only be ‘charged’ through their local council.<br /><br />Cyclists are subject to permits in some areas but these are usually free even though cyclists are amongst the main beneficiaries of towpaths, with many using the towpaths to travel to and from work.<br /><br />The remaining 5% of users are those who actually make use of the water - boaters and anglers. These users do pay and some would say heavily (an average narrowboat will pay some £500 a year for the right to cruise and probably another £1,000 for mooring all before the cost of fuel etc). Members of angling clubs pay for fishing rights (around a £1,000 a mile I understand) and also pay up to £25 each for a rod license. Businesses that depend on the waterway – marinas, boat yards, boat hire firms, moorings etc. also pay BW for the privilege of having a connection to the water.<br /><br />All told these charges raise about £20 million per annum from 33,000 boats and an estimated 500,000 anglers. Money from the rod license, which amounts to over £20 million a year, goes to the Environment Agency for maintaining fish stock but doesn't contribute directly to the upkeep of the waterway itself.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic; font-weight:bold;">Bridging The Funding Gap</span><br />The issue for the future is therefore how can the millions who use the waterways cover the £30 million annual gap? It seems unfair - if not self-defeating - to expect those who are already paying to more than double their contribution as they are less than 5% of users. As the vast majority of people who enjoy the canals (and also benefits from the jobs and passing trade) are local residents, then local authorities should take on more responsibility.<br /><br />Of course, local authority budgets are already hard pressed, but the £30 million shortfall spread amongst the residents of over 250 parliamentary constituencies through which waterways pass (about 19 million people) seems a reasonable return for an amenity that brings a substantial return to the community. An about-to-be-published Government funded study shows a return of £10-15 on every £1 invested in waterways.<br /><br />It's time for more Local Authorities to wake up to the opportunities that waterways can bring and to be wary of the folly of neglecting these wonderful assets.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-2509493370745423312009-09-15T20:23:00.004+01:002009-12-03T00:05:16.866+00:00IWA Launches S.O.S. CampaignThe Inland Waterways Association announced the launch of its Save Our System campaign at its National Festival at Ratclife-on-Soar.<br /><br />The campaign was launched in repsonse to the depth of the cut in grant-in-aid for British Waterways for 2010-2011. BW's funding is being reduced from this year's £57,448,000 to just £47,848,000, representing a reduction of over 16.7%.<br /><br />IWA Chairman Clive Henderson called for IWA's local branches, along with other waterway societies and organisations, to identify issues of poor maintenance and slipping standards, especially those affecting safety, and to collect evidence of problems caused by underfunding locally that will allow a national picture to be constructed the make clear the effects of these cuts so that the underfunding can be reversed.<br /><br />IWA wants local waterways stakeholders to assist its S.O.S. 2010 campaign by reporting evidence of problems caused by underfunding via a link on its website: <a href="http://www.waterways.org.uk/SOS2010">www.waterways.org.uk/SOS2010</a>.<br /><br />IWA's campaign is supported by Save Our Waterways, along with major boating organisations. We would urge you and your local society, cruising club, angling club, walking group, etc. to help the campaign by contributing evidence through the above link.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-73037416531588249282009-04-29T18:08:00.000+01:002009-04-29T18:08:48.531+01:00British Waterways announces Vision for FutureBritish Waterways has today launched proposals for its future, entitled "Twenty Twenty - a Vision for for the Future of our Canals and Rivers".<br />
<br />
This is the result of a major strategic review that has taken place and follows the government's decision to allow BW to retain its successful property portfolio. <br />
<br />
The plans include increasing efficiencies, opening up new funding and partnership opportunities, creating closer links with local communities and the start a move towards the waterways achieving a 'third sector' trust or charitable status similar to that of the National Trust. <br />
<br />
As a first step towards greater efficiency, BW proposes a restructure of its own operations in England and Wales, by removing an entire layer of management and creating eleven new, smaller, 'hands-on' waterway units. The move would make around 100 office staff redundant, but the £10 million annual saving would be redirected towards waterway maintenance. <br />
<br />
Under the new structure, BW would put a greater emphasis on working with volunteers and local communities. <br />
<br />
BW Chief Executive, Robin Evans, said: "Our absolute priority must be to maintain investment in the waterways and this means reducing spending elsewhere. Our proposed new structure will both redirect important funding to essential maintenance work but also make us much more responsive to customers and partners." <br />
<br />
In the longer term, BW calls for some fresh thinking about what the waterways mean to Britain and how their sustainable future might be secured. It proposes that, by 2020, it should become a third sector 'public interest company' or trust. BW believes that such a change could stimulate greater participation in the waterways by volunteers and other individuals, enhance openness and accountability for communities and waterway users, create opportunities for new sources of income such as grants and donations, and ensure the historic network is held in trust for the nation. <br />
<br />
More information about BW's proposals can be found on its website, here: <a href="http://www.britishwaterways.co.uk/twentytwenty">www.britishwaterways.co.uk/twentytwenty</a>.<br />
The document "Twenty Twenty - a Vision for for the Future of our Canals and Rivers" can be downloaded <a href="http://www.britishwaterways.co.uk/media/documents/twentytwentybrochure.pdf">here</a>.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-53598903735979844152009-04-02T12:23:00.000+01:002009-04-02T12:23:52.835+01:00Waterways Parliamentarian of the Year AwardThe Inland Waterways Association has this year awarded the title of "Waterways Parliamentarian of the Year" to David Drew, MP for Stroud. <br />
<br />
The award was made in recognition of his notable contribution to the Cotswold Canals restoration and also for his work in chairing two select committee inquiries into British Waterways. <br />
<br />
These select committees had done much to inform MPs and to raise the profile of the waterways in Parliament over the last year. <br />
<br />
Read <a href="http://www.waterways.org.uk/News/LatestWaterwaysNews/DavidDrewMP-IWAParliamentarianoftheYear2009">IWA News Release</a>.<br />
<br />
The award of this title by the IWA reflects the positive relationships that now exist between waterway organisations and parliamentarians.<br />
<br />
MPs have instigated a number of debates and enquiries that help to keep the needs of the waterways in the minds of the ministers who make the decisions. Ministers have shown a willingness to listen and to take on board ideas from waterways organisations. This shows how far things have moved on from two years ago when ministers were seeing waterways as a soft touch and waterways organisations were mounting protest demonstrations.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-58637465561058472322009-03-31T16:40:00.002+01:002009-04-02T16:58:45.404+01:00Where have all the protests gone?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/images/castlefield03.jpg" imageanchor="1" linkindex="45" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="176" src="http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/images/castlefield03.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>There have been a few people who have asked what has happened to all the protest demonstrations that Save Our Waterways was involved with a couple of years ago.<br /><br />Well, some folks love a good bun-fight and certainly there were plenty of boaters and others interested in waterways who were prepared to come and blockade canals and wave placards to make their voices heard at a time when there was much anger over the swingeing funding cuts made by Defra.<br /><br />Some people have expressed disappointment that we are no longer mounting such protests. However, it was realised that it was no longer necessary or worthwhile to continue to protest. For one thing, it you keep doing something then it is no longer news and the press loses interest. For another thing, the protests actually achieved a great deal in terms of grabbing the attention of politicians.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/images/portlandbasin03.jpg" imageanchor="1" linkindex="46" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/images/portlandbasin03.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>Local MPs came to give their support at the demonstrations and have been involved in a series of debates and enquiries into aspects of the waterways. They badgered ministers with questions from constituents. Ministers took notice of this upswelling of feeling and a further tranche of funding cutbacks that had been threatened (an extra 2.5% cut in November 2006) failed to materialise.<br /><br />The "flat cash" funding of waterways for this year (whereby the money available remained the same with no allowance for inflation), while being a cut in real spending power, was still better than the deeper cuts that had at one time been threatened. The money situation is not good, but you can be sure that, had waterways supporters not stood up and made a noise, things would have been much worse.<br /><br />The waterways minister of the time, who had failed to connect adequately with users, was replaced by Jonathan Shaw, who took a more positive approach than his predecessor and showed that he was actually listening. He helped to set up an inter-departmental group for waterways issues, helping to ensure a co-ordinated approach when issues crossed government department boundaries. He also supported the ongoing update of the Waterways for Tomorrow charter for the future of the waterways.<br /><br />When you have ministers who are moving in the right direction, you support them and work with them rather than embarrass and frustrate them with further protests. So, over the last year or so, rather than engage in further protests, Save Our Waterways has been active in less visible ways. It has involved, with other waterways organisations, in useful discussions with those who make decisions as well as those who aspire to do so.<br /><br />Save Our Waterways seeks to represent the interests of the many casual users of the waterways. These are probably the majority of users, although they do not contribute financially other than through taxation. This is one reason why Will has been promoting the idea of local councils paying more towards the upkeep of waterways in their area.<br /><br />Save Our Waterways may not have been in the limelight recently but it has nevertheless been busy behind the scenes!Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-54850075588431629822008-12-04T11:44:00.004+00:002008-12-06T12:56:11.733+00:00EA calls off sale of Thames Lock Keepers' HousesThe Environment Agency has cancelled its plan to sell off some of its lock or weir keeper houses and rent out others. This follows a wave of protests and a petition on the 10 Downing Street website. <br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKLjmj5OLYqyDSQ3f0udUcTAv7qvLvmLNz1El4-uHdR9arf8Vc4qJyLP0Zk_jaYchS1OZ0AIkLdaLfXeqAaw5fK2sENXls79mz7XBVXUEDo0QyV8XVUsBzuI8yFwAKIgbdySvMLZ2pqhQm/s1600-h/stjohns.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 250px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKLjmj5OLYqyDSQ3f0udUcTAv7qvLvmLNz1El4-uHdR9arf8Vc4qJyLP0Zk_jaYchS1OZ0AIkLdaLfXeqAaw5fK2sENXls79mz7XBVXUEDo0QyV8XVUsBzuI8yFwAKIgbdySvMLZ2pqhQm/s320/stjohns.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5275905318128343906" /></a>In June the Environment Minister Phil Woolas and local MPs met with EA and it was agreed to put the proposals on hold until it has completed "a full review of waterways staff roles and responsibilities, and terms and conditions". <br /><br />As a result of this review, EA has pledged to ensure that there at resident keepers at all 45 locks and major weirs on the Thames. EA's Howard Davidson said "issues such as flood risk and response to incidents outside normal working hours have been key to our considerations." <br /><br />EA will still sell five houses that are away from the river, but only after the staff living there have been moved to properties close to locks. <br /><br />The new proposals, which have to be discussed with staff and unions, have already been welcomed by campaigners and supporters. Cookham lock keeper's wife Kim Benge, who has played a key part in the campaign, said "We are thrilled with the news today. Much work still needs to be done but we are truly delighted with this outcome. The River Thames is a safer place today because of it." <br /><br />MP Martin Salter, who had compiled a file of incidents at locks and weirs where intervention of resident lock-keepers had saved lives or prevented serious injuries, described it as "fantastic news for everybody who cares about the future of the Thames." He added: "I have no doubt that the weight of public opinion coupled with strong Parliamentary pressure were crucial." <br /><br />Michael Shefras of Thames User Group (Navigation) said: "We were all delighted to be informed that the proposed plan to sell some of the Lock Cottages has been completely cancelled and that resident Lock Keepers will continue to live in the Lock Cottages. Many Thames organisations worked tirelessly opposing the plan. SOW will continue to work with the Thames User Group (Navigation) who are to continue consultations with the Thames Waterways Staff as they progress the Better Ways of Working process to ensure proper service to all who cruise the Thames."Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-63357141647935024632008-11-26T17:53:00.002+00:002008-11-26T18:23:35.800+00:00Budget Bonus for BW<span style="font-weight:bold; color: #0e2c86;">...but is there a sting in the tail?</span><br /><br />There was good news for British Waterways in the Chancellor's Pre-Budget Report this week.<br /><br />As part of the Chancellor's measures to give a "fiscal stimulus" to the economy, a grant to BW of £5m will be brought forward from the planned 2011-12 budget. The money will be used as part of a £33m major works programme to repair a range of historic locks, bridges, embankments and reservoirs and dredge channels in waterways across England and Wales.<br /><br />This shows an acknowledgement that Britain's historic waterways provide excellent value for money for the nation, generating in excess of £500m to the economy each year.<br /><br />Bringing forward this chunk of cash means that vital work can be carried out sooner and, hopefully, the employment and commerce generated will do its bit towards helping to re-vitalise the economy.<br /><br />However, it was also announced that, as part of the Operational Efficiency Programme, a team led by Gerry Grimstone will review British Waterways' model for managing its canal-side property portfolio and assess how best public value might be delivered from these assets.<br /><br />This is causing alarm amongst many waterway enthusiasts, as they fear that the implication is that BW will be forced to sell off its property portfolio through a kind of "fire-sale" and might not even get any of the money!<br /><br />The fact that a review has been announced doesn't necessarily mean that the assets will be sold off - although that is always one of the possible outcomes. One argument against selling off property at the moment is that it would not bring in sufficient money, with the current downturn in property prices.<br /><br />Another outcome might be the placing of BW's property and investment operation into a new private sector company run by BW, separate from the public sector navigation operation, as recommended by the KPMG report.<br /><br />Other points of view state that BW management is somewhat naive to imagine that they could build up a huge property portfolio to help finance its navigation operation, without that portfolio being eyed up and plundered by governments of one colour or another.<br /><br />So what do you think? Will the extra cash now help? Will BW end up losing its property assets? What does it mean for the future of the waterways?<br /><br />Add your comment now to have your say!Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-3053239892362428342008-10-07T13:00:00.002+01:002008-10-07T13:12:28.528+01:00New Minister Announced<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://iwc2.labouronline.org/166019/images/uploads/166019/L_4cba508a-5baa-97b4-75ce-00f8e7612711.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px;" src="http://iwc2.labouronline.org/166019/images/uploads/166019/L_4cba508a-5baa-97b4-75ce-00f8e7612711.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />The new minister who will have responsibility for waterways is to be <a href="http://iwc2.labouronline.org/166019/biography">Huw Irranca-Davies</a>.<br /><br />Huw is MP for Ogmore in South Wales and was Parliamentary Under Secretary of State in the Wales Office before getting his new job in the Environment department.<br /><br />Waterway users will be hoping that Huw will quickly familiarise himself with the many issues that are of great concern, not least the current inadequate funding for waterways. It will also be hoped that he will continue with the encouraging progress made by his predecessor, Jonathan Shaw.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-65735170710735955222008-10-06T14:44:00.005+01:002008-10-06T16:54:13.829+01:00Ministers Moved in ReshuffleTwo ministers closely involved with the waterways have been moved in the Government's reshuffle. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Jonathan Shaw</span>, the former Defra Minister with responsibility for waterways, has moved to the Department for Work and Pensions as a Parliamentary undersecretary of state.<br /><br />Many waterway groups felt that Mr Shaw took a more positive approach than his predecessor. He helped to set up an inter-departmental group for waterways issues, helping to ensure a co-ordinated approach when issues crossed government department boundaries. He also supported the ongoing update of the <a href="http://www.defra.gov.uk/Environment/water/iw/tomorrow/index.htm">Waterways for Tomorrow</a> charter for the future of the waterways.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Phil Woolas</span> who, as Minister for the Environment had overall responsibility for areas that included waterways, has become Minister of State for Borders and Immigration at the Home Office.<br /><br />As a local MP, Mr Woolas takes an interest in the Huddersfield Narrow Canal, which goes through his constituency. Earlier this year, he travelled on a boat up the locks from Uppermill to Diggle, speaking with boaters about issues of concern to them.<br /><br />While we wish Mr Shaw and Mr Woolas well in their new jobs, it is sad to see sympathetic ministers move onwards. It takes time for waterways organisations to build relationships with those who make decisions and it takes time for new ministers to gather all the threads of what is going on in their area of responsibility. We hope that enough momentum has been started for recent progress to be continued under new management!Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-79824977354534834212008-07-01T00:55:00.020+01:002008-07-07T15:39:18.904+01:00EFRA: Sharing the Costs of Canal RestorationBritish Waterways should not be expected to bear most of the financial risk for the restoration of canals, says a further report from the EFRA committee.<p>The House of Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee (EFRA) has today published a follow-up report on British Waterways which concludes that if Government wants to obtain the public benefits of canal investment, it should bear the costs.</p><p>The report notes that it is estimated that in the first seven years after public investment in waterside regeneration, there are about £6 worth of direct economic benefits for every pound of public money invested. It also notes that these are usually public benefits rather than financial benefits to BW.</p><p>The Committee says that canal restoration can produce knock-on benefits such as more jobs and visitor income. But the risks have to be spread more widely among the public sector instead of just BW, which often gets little immediate direct benefit from such work.</p><p>The report noted the improvements in the relationship between BW and DEFRA, which had been adversely commented upon in EFRA's original report on BW in 2007. The Committee welcomes the setting up the Interdepartmental Working Group which could lead to a more flexible approach to waterway funding.</p><p>The Committee's inquiry was prompted by BW’s decision in February this year to withdraw from the partnership to restore the Cotswold Canals.</p><p>The Committee concludes that BW should have consulted its Cotswold Canals restoration partners about its withdrawal earlier, so that they could have had a chance to see if alternative funding was available.</p><p>The Committee is "unconvinced" of BW's need to spend up to £600,000 on a report by consultants on its future structure when it is by its own admission short of money. It seems unlikely that there wasn't the expertise within BW, DEFRA or the public sector to conduct the study at lower cost, something which BW should now explain.</p><p>British Waterways’ chairman Tony Hales welcomes the report as "an extremely useful contribution to the debate". He adds that the committee's work could only help to enhance the prospect for future waterway restorations.</p><p>BW disputes the amount it is paying to consultants, giving a figure of£350,000. The results from this study, due this month, are expected to "set the framework for a debate on the longer term strategy for the waterways in the period to 2020".</p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">(The committee's full report can be read <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmenvfru/438/43802.htm">here</a>.)</span></p><p></p><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);"><b>SOW's View</b></div><div style="color: rgb(51, 51, 255);"><b><span style="font-size:78%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Will Chapman writes: </span></span></b></div>The opinion by the EFRA Select Committee that BW should not be expected to carry the risks of canal restoration is clearly good news for BW and goes some way to justify their decision to pull out of the Cotswold Restoration.<p>BW has a statutory responsibility to keep existing waterways open and safe for navigation. As that is a task that needs £125 million to do properly and as they only have £100 million to do the job it is clear that there is no money to spend on non-navigational matters. This particularly when they have the Mon & Brec to repair and the £10 million costs of last years floods to cover.</p><p>EFRA also questions whether it is sound management to spend several hundred thousand on the KPMG structure review. As useful as that study might be, I would agree but I was under the impression that BW initiated the study because they were asked to do so by the former Waterways Minister. If that is the case, should not Government pick up that tab (as indeed they should the cost of containing last year's floods)?</p><p>All in all, this announcement is encouraging. It demonstrates a growing realisation that the waterways have a profound impact on the agendas of many other Government departments and we can only hope that the Ministers responsible will recognise this by supporting the Interdepartmental Working Group - another recommendation of EFRA - that has been set up by Waterways Minister Shaw to garner support for the waterways from all its beneficiaries.</p>Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-57712061362092198272008-06-22T21:31:00.003+01:002008-06-22T23:58:49.275+01:00EA holds back on Thames Lock Keepers' houses saleIt is being reported that the Environment Agency is putting on hold its plan to sell off 10 houses and rent out 12 others. This follows a wave of protests and a petition on the 10 Downing Street website. <br /><br />After a meeting with Environment Minister Phil Woolas and MPs Martin Salter and Theresa May, the EA has agreed to put the proposals on hold until it has completed "a full review of waterways staff roles and responsibilities, and terms and conditions". <br /><br />In a statement, EA said that no action will be taken to sell or rent lock houses until negotiations on the full review are completed. It was anticipated that this will take six months but their guarantee would continue until all negotiations are completed or 1st January 2009, whichever is later.<br /><br />EA also said that any future review of the lock keepers' houses would involve the MPs as well as lock keepers' representatives.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4426721672893035085.post-59294756795252058702008-05-19T00:06:00.004+01:002008-05-19T00:51:58.643+01:00Selling off the silver?At the end of April, the Environment Agency announced plans to sell off 10 lock keepers' houses and rent out 12 more.<br /><br />As the reaction to this has been building up, British Waterways has hinted that it may be considering doing something similar. A review just announced will look at ways of getting its historic buildings to make "a greater contribution to the cost of maintaining the waterways network". One idea is to transfer property to "specialist associate company part-owned by BW" (to rent out the houses?) while another idea is to sell some of the property top generate money for canal maintenance.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/rochdale/roc672.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; border: 1px solid #c0c4cc;" src="http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/rochdale/roc672.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br />The problem with selling family silver is that once it's gone, it's gone. You can't sell it again. You don't own your heritage any more.<br /><br />And what will happen once the lock keepers have been moved out and new owners or tenants move in? They may not be canal fans. They may not like the clanking of paddle gear at 6.30 am and demand restricted opening hours. They may not like boats being moored near their pretty cottages.<br /><br />And what about the waterways staff themselves? Living on site has always had advantages, such as being able to respond quickly to problems.<br /><br />If BW and EA had properly adequate funding, they would not even need to consider selling their historic property.<br /><br />You can help the campaign against the sale of Thames lock keepers' houses by asking your MP to sign <a href="http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=35864&SESSION=891">Early Day Motion 1587</a>.Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12729523557219015134noreply@blogger.com3