House of Commons - Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Seventh Report

10 BRITISH WATERWAYS' PARTNERSHIP WORKING

98. As part of its restoration and regeneration work, British Waterways (BW) is often required to work in partnership with local authorities, Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), private companies and the voluntary sector. We heard mixed evidence about how effective BW was in this regard. England's RDAs said that, on the whole, the relationship "appears to be good", although it could be improved through "greater strategic involvement at the regional level".[182] Evidence from local authorities about relations with BW was mixed, with some critical of BW.[183] Waterways users said that the relationship between BW and local authorities could be "strained" at times.[184] During the course of our inquiry, BW experienced problems in its partnership working with the Cotswold Canal restoration project after BW announced it was reluctant to carry the risk for the project, "with or without grant cuts".[185] At the time of publication of this Report, BW remains "committed" to the project.[186]

99. We received evidence that suggested BW was not as transparent with partners as should be the case.[187] Sadly, this has sometimes led to disputes with partners over funding arrangements and technical specifications, and therefore in cost overruns and significant delays in the delivery of projects.

100. We were surprised to hear that BW "currently has no formal relationship" with the Local Government Association (LGA). BW believed such a relationship would be beneficial for a variety of reasons, such as helping to meet the demand for 10,000 additional marina berths in the next ten years and encouraging greater consistency in terms of the monies local authorities paid BW for towpath repair and maintenance work.[188] LGA also said it was "keen to develop a stronger relationship" with BW, for example to "establish areas of common interest and a shared approach to influencing and responding to relevant government policy" and to "promote good practice and closer working with individual local authorities".[189]

OUR VIEWS

101. It is inevitable that there will be some variance in British Waterways' (BW) partnership working from area to area. However, BW has room for improvement in the way it works with others on projects. Given the complicated nature of partnership arrangements, it is vital that BW devote resources to developing mutual trust with other organisations in the public, private and voluntary sectors. It should also ensure that it employs good management at all levels who can demonstrate effective communication and listening skills. We support a closer formal relationship between BW and the Local Government Association (LGA) so that examples of best practice can be collated and promoted to those areas where the relationship between BW and local authorities can be improved.

Expansion of the network

103. One of British Waterways' ambitions, set in 2002, is to create an "expanded" waterways network: since 2000, over 200 miles of derelict canals have been restored. The Inland Waterway Amenity Advisory Council (IWAAC) recently reported that about 90 waterway restoration and development projects are currently live in the UK.[190] IWAAC expressed concern, however, that these projects were threatened by BW's funding uncertainty, a view shared by other witnesses.[191] In evidence, BW told us that it did not have sufficient resources "to support widespread restoration" and that such projects had to be "driven locally".[192] BW told us its main role with these projects was often to bring partners together to create a funding package. However, BW itself faced the risk if the cost of a project exceeded that set out in the funding package. For this reason, BW was not able to support a large number of projects with risk because, if the cost of the project did exceed the funding package, BW would have less money to spend on the existing network.[193] This is what appears to have occurred with the Cotswold Canal project, where costs have exceeded initial expectations and a £11 million funding gap needs to be met.[194]

104. BW's Chief Executive told us that the 200 miles added to the network since 2000 had cost BW "considerably more money than the funding that was originally allocated to them". As a result, he had decided that BW would not take on further projects unless the organisation was "absolutely certain before we start that we know what the costs are and … where our income is going to come from".[195]

OUR VIEWS

105. BW faces a paradox in that one of the organisation's ambition is to create an expanded network yet, in order to achieve this, it must divert scarce funds from the maintenance of the existing network. We strongly support the expansion of the existing waterways network, where possible. We accept, however, that restoration projects often come at a cost for BW, despite initial capital costs from lottery funds and from other sources, because the income generated from the canal network mile-for-mile rarely covers BW's costs of maintenance. Several current, and potential future, restoration projects—including the Cotswold Canal—are in jeopardy because BW can not afford to carry the risk associated with such projects. Government itself often benefits from expansion of the network because of regeneration effects and the income generated through property development. Given these benefits, Government should make clear in its response its current position on the expansion of the network, and how it aims to address the real possibility that many projects will not get off the ground because of the funding pressures on BW.

BW's relationship with the Environment Agency

106. BW works with the Environment Agency (the Agency) on a number of levels:

the Agency regulates a number of activities that British Waterways undertakes including fish movements, fisheries management and third party water abstraction from British Waterways' waters;

the Agency works in partnership with British Waterways on navigation matters including waterways regeneration schemes and the Olympics;

the Agency works with British Waterways to ensure it integrates waterway management with other uses such as water abstraction;

British Waterways supports a number of the Agency's activities, including providing flood defence and engineering support.[196]

107. The Agency and British Waterways signed a collaboration agreement in 2000 to support better working between the two organisations. Since then, the Agency says the two have jointly developed a "wide range of initiatives", and have held regular bi-lateral meetings.[197] In particular, the Agency says BW staff provide support "during flood emergencies"; the Agency warns that it will become "increasingly important" that the two organisations work together on flood risk management "as climate change affects UK weather patterns".[198]

108. In June and July 2007, England and Wales experienced severe floods in various locations. In a press release, BW announced it was at "full stretch" dealing with the problems, by rescuing stranded people, digging channels to divert water and operating locks to send water through the system and out to rivers. During the June floods, all waterways in Yorkshire were closed to boat traffic.[199]

OUR VIEWS

109. Severe flooding is likely to become an increasing occurrence owing to the effects of climate change. Canals can sometimes act as important flood relief mechanisms and BW staff may consequently find themselves increasingly engaged in such 'extraordinary' activities as occurred during the June and July 2007 floods. In this context, it is crucial that communication and partnership working between BW and the Environment Agency is of an extremely high standard. In its response, BW should set out its current strategy for flood risk management and for responding to flood emergencies, and say how it expects this role to develop in the future. We call upon Government to ensure that its independent review of the 2007 floods fully takes into account the role of BW and its waterways network in the future strategy for flood risk management and emergency flood response.

182 Ev 16, para 5 Back

183 Ev 384; Ev 379. Back

184 Ev 139, para 58 [Simon Robbins]. See also Ev 285 [Horseboating Society]; Ev 309 [Residential Boat Owners' Association]. Back

185 Ev 210, Annex C Back

186 "Cotswold Canals Restoration Update", British Waterways press release, 11 June 2007 Back

187 Q 365 [Dr Paul Woollam] Back

188 Ev 114 Back

189 Ev 383 Back

190 Inland Waterway Amenity Advisory Council, Inland waterway restoration & development projects in England, Wales & Scotland, December 2006, p 3 Back

191 Inland waterway restoration & development projects in England, Wales & Scotland, p 3; Ev 118, para 4.12 [Steve Davis & Paul Woollam]. Back