Lock 45

My MP Paul Rowen (Rochdale Canal) has signed the EDM 90 by Charlotte Atkins as he did her earlier one in the last session. I've just noticed that EDM 53 has vanished from the list. Anyone know why?

This post seems to have 'died' yet the problems for British Waterways remain. I would like to 'liven' it up somewhat. I think that the post from Ridgeways (February 28, 2006) began to hit the nail on the head in his first four paragraphs. When the Rochdale Canal was about to be taken over by The Waterways Trust and then maintained by British Waterways on its behalf, staff from BW were at some pains to make contact with as many representatives of the waterside communities as possible to get them 'on side' with the view that their involvement would help BW in its problems with things such as vandalism etc. This approach was enthusiastically taken up in my area. (Incidentally, while this forum is clearly primarily for boat owners and canal users, it should not forget that the canals are part of the tourism industry of the British Isles and the canalside communities must be an important consideration in whatever BW decides to do.) Since that time there has been a change in BW's attitude and not for the better! Profit is now its major concern and the effect is hugely damaging to what its purpose in life should be i.e. maintenance and repair of the canal system. The folly of attempting to become a 'business' capable of providing and existing on independent financial income from government grants is pretty clear and the government, if they are at the back of this idea, would want that wouldn't they? But how can a business be financially independent with a 200-year old infrastructure, some of it not having received an iota of maintenance for over 50 years, manage without considerable input from government finances? It seems ludicrous to me as the loss of government grants would require alternative sources to provide millions of pounds a year. There is as part of this change in attitude a change in policy whereby bankside staff are being put into roaming gangs which re-act to any problems over a wide area, no longer attached to a particular canal or part of a canal. This destroys any real connection between themselves and the local residents. It also makes it virtually impossible for them to do their job properly as they will not know a piece of a canal in sufficient detail to be able to sort a problem out before it becomes an expensive disaster. This must be the case all over the system, but the effect is particularly bad on the Rochdale. I feel the whole approach of BW now needs a serious reappraisal and, if I'm right and you agree with me, you should all be making the point to them. The problems created by DEFRA may not be helping but if canals have to close it will not be entirely DEFRAs fault.

It should be understood that there is considerable effort going into the setting up of canalside developments - and I don't mean more damned houses and apartments - which will benefit from and give benefit to the canal system. These will not 'take off' while there is doubt about the future of any canal. The Rochdale is a particluar case where there is a great desire locally (Littleborough) for a marina. BW have a lot of work to do here: to provide a proper water supply and to ensure that proper maintenance programmes are carried out. Repeated minor lock failures, not necessarily on the scale of the catastrophic failures of the recent past, will ensure the practical death of the Rochdale - death by a thousand cuts! My impression is that BW either don't understand this or is putting its collective head in the sand. BW may one day become financially independent of the government, although I doubt it, but in the meantime it needs the subsidies and grants and these should be maintained and increased for the foreseeable future, not just for the benefit of boaters and canal users but for the communities that live alongside the system.