Future of Waterways To Be Debated In Parliament

[Mad Harold]

3 hours ago, Midnight said:

The River Calder at Cooper Bridge. After the serious flooding on Boxing Day 2015 I produced a wide-ranging report for the Boat Club including the dangers of members wading down the flooded jetties in their underpants (yes some really did). In discussions with an EA manager at the nearby sewage works he confirmed that raw sewage is discharged into the river when the flood level reaches 6ft and above. Battyeford cut is just a few hundred metres downstream and as the flood gates leak and the gates at Battyeford lock are reversed by a flood of 4.5 metres and above, raw sewage seeps into the canal.

 

 

Thanks for that info Midnight. 😰

Not happy to read it though!

[Arthur Marshall]

On 19/11/2022 at 17:58, wandering snail said:

And that will continue while CRT don't monitor discharges but rely on the EA and the water companies to do it. A seasonal metaphor about turkeys and Christmas seems apt here.

No point in telling CRT, they're not interested and don't monitor it. The EA or the water company are apparently responsible for checking what goes in to the canal system.

The EA have said a while ago they no longer have the resources to check pollution events, even when reported by members of the public.

[Orwellian]

Link to the debate for anyone interested enough. https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/22b0e1d0-5597-4646-91cb-b67ecb079d37

 

To be fair to Fabricant he wasn't too bad. The minister reminded those present if the intention of creating CRT was to move financial support for it's waterways from the taxpayer. She also said a decision on future grant would be made ' forthwith' I let you look up the definition of what that means.

[matty40s]

On 21/11/2022 at 12:58, Arthur Marshall said:

The EA have said a while ago they no longer have the resources to check pollution events, even when reported by members of the public.

Even less so since the Conservative Gov voted for it to happen carte blanche.

[Orwellian]

7 minutes ago, Orwellian said:

Link to the debate for anyone interested enough. https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/22b0e1d0-5597-4646-91cb-b67ecb079d37

 

To be fair to Fabricant he wasn't too bad. The minister reminded those present if the intention of creating CRT was to move financial support for it's waterways from the taxpayer. She also said a decision on future grant would be made ' forthwith' I let you look up the definition of what that means.

Meanwhile DEFRA budget has been cut quite drastically https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/22/defra-facing-500m-real-terms-cut-after-autumn-statement?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

[Arthur Marshall]

Looks like there were about six MPs in the room? About as pointless an exercise as you can get.

[frangar]

Just now, Arthur Marshall said:

Looks like there were about six MPs in the room? About as pointless an exercise as you can get.

Not quite as pointless as just moaning about it on an internet forum......

[Arthur Marshall]

2 minutes ago, frangar said:

Not quite as pointless as just moaning about it on an internet forum......

Probably about the same, I suspect. Most of what goes on on forums is pretty pointless - I think it's Sturgeon's Law, "95% of everything is crap".

[Alan de Enfield]

15 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I think it's Sturgeon's Law, "95% of everything is crap".

 

Is that just in Scotland ?

[haggis]

41 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Is that just in Scotland ?

Possibly but that's her opinion of Westminster 🙂 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, haggis said:

Possibly but that's her opinion of Westminster 🙂 

 

Theodore, not Nicola. Someone told him that 95% of everything he wrote was crap. He replied as above.

[Midnight]

A whole lot of back slapping but better to talk about than ignore it. Michael Fabricant did a good job. Am I right in thinking NABO was the driving force?

[Ray T]

CRT Press Release

 

22nd November 2022

 

FUTURE OF THE UK’S WATERWAYS DEBATED IN PARLIAMENT

 

Today, Tuesday 22 November, the future of the UK’s canals and waterways, with a particular focus on the 2,000 miles cared for and looked after by the Canal & River Trust charity, was debated in the House of Commons.

 

Michael Fabricant, MP for Lichfield and chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Waterways, initiated the debate, before many other MPs, including Rebecca Pow, the Minister for Waterways, responded.

 

The debate opened with Michael Fabricant MP setting out the unique contribution to the nation of the Trust and its waterways, from the economic impact through to the huge social and environmental benefits to society.

 

The debate heard how the Canal & River Trust, formed in 2012 to protect and preserve its waterways across England and Wales, is awaiting the outcome of the UK Government’s review of its funding contract beyond 2027.  The current grant is fixed until 2027 and is declining both in real terms and as a proportion of the Trust’s total income. MPs spoke about how, with the increased threat from climate change events not envisaged in 2012, the Trust is increasing its expenditure on the core national infrastructure in its care. Hence, continued funding from Government beyond 2027 is essential to protect the many benefits from waterways, minimise risk to its numerous neighbouring communities and avert the network’s long-term demise.

 

Michael Fabricant MP explained how the delays to the Government’s review was causing great concern for waterway users and will soon start to hinder the Trust’s ability to plan for the future, with so many important long-term projects to deliver.

 

Rebecca Pow, Minister for Waterways, responded to the debate by commending the array of colleagues present at the debate and acknowledging the role of volunteers and the huge range of public benefits delivered by the inland waterways, from leisure and recreation through to industrial heritage, mental wellbeing and as the green corridors that canals forge through both the countryside and urban areas.

 

The Minister also spoke about ensuring the critical infrastructure of the canal network is resilient to climate change and how it can help meet net zero targets, not least through active travel and the transfer of water to support the security of public water supply.

 

On funding, she acknowledged the Trust has very effectively worked on generating other income streams to reduce its dependency on government funding and that Government was ‘looking with a laser focus’ at all the issues that have been raised and the continued funding case for the grant into the future.  She said Government has to get the decision right, which is why time is being taken, but an announcement on the Trust’s funding beyond 2027 would be made ‘forthwith’.

 

Richard Parry, chief executive at the Canal & River Trust, commented: “The Trust’s work to protect and preserve our historic canal network delivers wide ranging benefits to society and it was good to see this unique value, that only comes from a resilient and adequately funded canal system, acknowledged on all sides of the House.

 

“The nation’s 250-year-old canal network is old and fragile. In partnership with Government, we bear a huge financial responsibility for its day-to-day care to keep it safe and available for millions of people to enjoy. As we continue our discussions with Defra around our ongoing grant, we welcome the cross-party recognition of the importance of the canal network and remain focussed on achieving an outcome that will enable us to meet the rising cost of sustaining the nation’s historic waterways, managing the potential risk to all the places they run through and delivering our statutory responsibilities for the long-term.

 

“We welcome today’s debate and look forward to working with Defra to ensure that the case for the waterways’ future funding is evaluated thoroughly and, together, securing the future of this critical national network that is both a treasured part of our history and plays such a vital role in our society today.”

 

Ends

 

For further media requests please contact:

Jonathan Ludford, Canal & River Trust

m 07747 897783 e jonathan.ludford@canalrivertrust.org.uk

 

[alan_fincher]

3 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Probably about the same, I suspect. Most of what goes on on forums is pretty pointless - I think it's Sturgeon's Law, "95% of everything is crap".

 

That's one hell of a sewage discharge!

[Allan(nb Albert)]

1 hour ago, Midnight said:

A whole lot of back slapping but better to talk about than ignore it. Michael Fabricant did a good job. Am I right in thinking NABO was the driving force?

You are right in thinking that but it seems that NABO is being modest.

It remains to be seen if governments interpretation of 'forthwith' is the same as that found in dictionaries.
Friday is a good day to announce bad news.
 

[wandering snail]

1 hour ago, Midnight said:

A whole lot of back slapping but better to talk about than ignore it. Michael Fabricant did a good job. Am I right in thinking NABO was the driving force?

The debate was announced following ITV Central News getting in touch with me at NABO about doing a feature in which Fabricant, Parry and a bod from Defra would also feature. I see he quoted me at the end of his speech. Autographs will be available.....I just hope it helps, otherwise we're looking at canals gradually closing apart from maybe 3 and CRT concentrating on paying off bonds and shoring up pension pots with what they'got left. The silly thing is, the grant is barely 1% of Defra's budget yet means so much to the survival of the canal system.

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, wandering snail said:

the silly thing is, the grant is barely 1% of Defra's budget yet means so much to the survival of the canal system.

 

But, it is over 10% of the savings DEFRA have got to make - a big chunk that they can 'find' in an instant, citing C&RTs failure to meet the agreement and acting fraudulently - no one (outside of the canals) could argue  that they should have the grant renewed with that sort of background history,

[wandering snail]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

But, it is over 10% of the savings DEFRA have got to make - a big chunk that they can 'find' in an instant, citing C&RTs failure to meet the agreement and acting fraudulently - no one (outside of the canals) could argue  that they should have the grant renewed with that sort of background history,

Yep. We're still looking at lumpy water contingency planning, just in case!

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

But, it is over 10% of the savings DEFRA have got to make - a big chunk that they can 'find' in an instant, citing C&RTs failure to meet the agreement and acting fraudulently - no one (outside of the canals) could argue  that they should have the grant renewed with that sort of background history,

Various people keep harping on about CRT acting fraudulently because they got caught fiddling the accounts. If that's really a  crime,  every businessman in the country should be in court tomorrow. Nobody, ever, presents genuinely accurate accounts - that's why god invented accountants. The only crime is getting caught by being stupid, which they did. No-one in authority thinks what they did was particularly important or criminal except a few idiots who just want another stick to beat CRT with - usually either those who have either fallen foul of CRT one way or another, or who have no real interest in the canal system but like to stir it a bit.

I'm intrigued by the "many other MPs," though. The bit of fillum I could bear to watch showed about six. Were there more, could anyone tell?

[Allan(nb Albert)]

17 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Various people keep harping on about CRT acting fraudulently because they got caught fiddling the accounts. If that's really a  crime,  every businessman in the country should be in court tomorrow. Nobody, ever, presents genuinely accurate accounts - that's why god invented accountants. The only crime is getting caught by being stupid, which they did. No-one in authority thinks what they did was particularly important or criminal except a few idiots who just want another stick to beat CRT with - usually either those who have either fallen foul of CRT one way or another, or who have no real interest in the canal system but like to stir it a bit.

I'm intrigued by the "many other MPs," though. The bit of fillum I could bear to watch showed about six. Were there more, could anyone tell?

Not sure where you get the idea from that people keep harping on about CRT falsifying its accounts. It is two Key Performance Indicators in the approved 2019/20 Annual Report that CRT admit to falsifying. Nothing to do with accountants.

[IanD]

7 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Is that just in Scotland ?

Theodore, not Nicola... 😉

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

Not sure where you get the idea from that people keep harping on about CRT falsifying its accounts. It is two Key Performance Indicators in the approved 2019/20 Annual Report that CRT admit to falsifying. Nothing to do with accountants.

True. I suffered such a  loss of interest in the whole unimportant matter that I got confused between one set of rubbish numbers and another one. As everybody with any sense (or has ever been involved in businesses which purport to measure "performance") is quite aware that all "key performance indicators" quoted by any business are largely faked I can see why no-one cares about this much apart from those I have described above.

If they were all true, we really would have a world-beating economy with a deliriously happy workforce looking forward to Monday mornings  with big smiles on their faces.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

5 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

True. I suffered such a  loss of interest in the whole unimportant matter that I got confused between one set of rubbish numbers and another one. As everybody with any sense (or has ever been involved in businesses which purport to measure "performance") is quite aware that all "key performance indicators" quoted by any business are largely faked I can see why no-one cares about this much apart from those I have described above.

If they were all true, we really would have a world-beating economy with a deliriously happy workforce looking forward to Monday mornings  with big smiles on their faces.

Pleased to see that  you have put your hand up.. I hope loss of interest will not prevent future posts.