Whose Rubbish Is It Anyway?

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.

"Flat Cash" for BW Confirmed

So Defra has at last revealed its allocation of funding for 2008-9 and BW is to get roughly the same as it did last year (as speculated before Christmas). Is that good or bad? Well a bit of both, really.

Why is it good? Because it could have been worse! There might have been a cut in the amount of money as there was last year. This moderately good outcome must be, at least in part, due to the continuing campaigns of Save Our Waterways, Inland Waterways Association and others, and the lobbying of MPs by supporters. It must also be due in part to the enlightened approach of the new Waterways Minister Jonathan Shaw. He has shown a willingness to meet and listen to waterway users and made positive initiatives such as setting up an Interdepartmental Working Group for waterways.

Why is it bad? Because it is still not enough! It is based on the amount given last year after the severe cutbacks had been made the previous year. BW is short of somewhere in the region of £25 million a year. It had to make huge reductions to its maintenance and repair programme this winter and this will only lead to larger repair bills in the future and could lead to further failures such as that at Gilwern.

We need you to keep up the pressure on MPs and ministers! Watch this website for the next stages of our continuing campaign!

Click on "Comments" to add your own opinion!

Talking Rubbish

How fair is it that money intended for maintaining our waterway heritage should be spent on clearing up after litter louts? But that is what happens all too often.

You know the score: lazy, selfish people can't be bothered to go all the way to the council amenity site with their old fridge, carpet, bag of clothing, building rubble, mattress or dead dog, so what do they do with it? Why, chuck it over the wall into the canal, of course. As often as not it will sink, so it's gone. Or at least gone until some unfortunate boater goes aground on it, or picks it up on the prop.

But litter louts don't have to go to the trouble of carting large items of household waste down to the cut - small items of rubbish like a beer bottle, coke can, plastic bag or fast food container are easier to carry, and actually float on the water. Okay, litter louts drop such stuff everywhere, but when they drop them on the street, eventually a council employee will come along and pick them up. But litter floating on the canal just stays there, accumulating. And, being on water, it is much more difficult to remove. So most small items of rubbish stay there and the larger items usually get removed only when they cause problems.

Clearing up of this rubbish has to be done by British Waterways from their limited budget. Clearing up litter in other public places is normally the responsibility of the local council, but if the litter happens to end up in the canal, then BW foots the bill. Sensible? Hardly.


But there is some good news in Lancashire. Pendle Borough Council has agreed to work in partnership with BW to help clear rubbish accumulating in the 10-mile stretch of Leeds and Liverpool Canal through the borough. Area committees are to be involved in organising annual litter-picks on the canal in their districts. The council has vowed to get tough against people found depositing litter in the canal with on-the-spot fines. The council is also investigating the provision of extra dog poo bins along the towpath.

The council is not taking on the responsibility for clearing the rubbish, but it acknowledges BW's financial difficulties and is willing to get involved in steps to help. Hopefully other councils will see this as a sensible way forward, rather than just complaining to BW about the state of the waterways, so that more of BW's money can be spent on maintaining the canals.

Perhaps there should be an obligation on councils to remove rubbish from the canals in their areas. After all, it is their local residents who put the rubbish there!

Blow to Cotswold restoration

Cash-starved British Waterways has withdrawn from its involvement in the Cotswold Canals Partnership (see our news report). This follows the diversion of significant funds for the urgent repairs to 16 miles of the Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal in Wales.

"Our existing waterways must take priority" says Robin Evans and, while that is undoubtedly true, it hardly explains why BW is walking away from the Cotswolds scheme. BW has already re-directed the money earmarked for the rebuilding of Vale Royal lock to the Mon and Brec. A large number of other repair and maintenance works scheduled for this winter were also put on hold to save money. Why is BW pulling the plug on the Cotswold Canals at this stage? Could it be that the flattening of the housing market has reduced the expected income from BW's property interests?

This news is very alarming for all waterway restoration groups. But the cutting back of maintenance and repairs is alarming for existing waterway users. If another catastrophic failure should occur, where will BW find the money to sort it out? This all comes back to our main campaigning theme - the need for waterway funding to be put on a secure, predictable and adequate basis and not subject to the dubious fortunes of DEFRA.
Click "Comments" link to add your own comment on this.

Praise where praise is due!

The Inland Waterways Association has announced that it is to give an award to the "Waterways Parliamentarian of the Year" at an Awards Dinner at the House of Commons in April.

The IWA hopes it will become an annual event in recognition of those parliamentarians who have been prominent in their support for the inland waterways over the year.
Among MPs whose names have already been mentioned are Charlotte Atkins and Michael Fabricant, both of whom have been successful in calling debates in the House on behalf of the waterways movement in the past year, although other names are also being speculated upon.

It is vital that the need to remedy the underfunding of the waterways remains high on MPs' agendas, and it is to be hoped that this event will help to achieve this. To that end, Save Our Waterways continues to encourage supporters to write to their MPs, especially with concerns about the effect on their local canals and rivers.

We applaud the IWA for this initiative and think it is good to show appreciation to MPs who have helped to fight for improved funding for the waterways.

Waterways minister Jonathan Shaw MP and Mr Speaker Martin will be attending the evening.

More details of the IWA sponsored event at http://www.waterways.org.uk/News/Pressreleases/ParliamentaryAwards (external link)
One thing that is not mentioned is who the judges are. We await the result with interest.

Minister talks sense!

Phil Woolas, the DEFRA Minister of State, this week answered a question from Bob Spink MP by acknowledging the vital role waterways play in Britain today.

Mr Woolas wrote: “We fully recognise the economic, environmental and social benefits of the inland waterways and the role they can play in supporting Government objectives in health, recreation, regeneration, social inclusion, conservation of heritage and the environment.”

He went on: “British Waterways has been involved in over £2 billion worth of urban and rural regeneration over the last decade and a further £7 billion of waterside regeneration is under way. Its canals also contribute to flood mitigation. In terms of tourism and leisure use, there were 268 million visits to British Waterways last year by boaters, anglers, cyclists and walkers.”

This is an important point we are trying to get across - 268 million visits! There are only around 30,000 boat on British Waterways system, which goes to demonstrate that the overwhelming majority of people who enjoy the benefits of the waterways are not boaters! Yet boaters are the ones who are being leant on to help make up the funding deficit through increased licence and mooring fees.

Fishermen make a small contribution through their rod licence, but most waterways users pay nothing at all directly. This is why the government should make sure that the contribution that people do make, through taxation, gets through to the organisations that have to keep the canals and rivers operating.

Flat Cash for BW?

The Waterways Minister, in his meeting with waterways stakeholders (see Will's report) stated that he expected BW's funding settlement to be based on Flat Cash. This would mean that the amount would remain roughly the same, with no increase to allow for inflation.
If this were to prove correct, it would clearly be better than the deeper cuts that some had speculated about.

However, it would still be a cut in real terms, on top of the cuts made over the last year. It would do nothing to reduce the maintenance backlog that is now increasing, with BW having put off some of the repairs and maintenance it had planned this winter.