The Defra funding cuts to navigation authorities - a personal perspective

By John C. Fletcher, IWA National Chairman

The story so far:

IWA became aware of cuts in the grant in aid to navigation authorities from the Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) soon after they occurred. This included very large cuts in March 2006 - after the business plans had been produced but just before the financial year began. Thus when ministers have talked about "in-year cuts in grant" they have been able to ignore this figure, while users such as ourselves have felt it important to note is was part of the cuts "after the budget was set and after business plans had been constructed". Mid way through the year there was another significant cut, which is all that Ministers will accept as "in-year cuts" and there was a threat of withdrawal of a further percentage later in the year.

Another difference of perspective relates to the job losses which have occurred within British Waterways. Defra have argued that they were not caused by the cut in grant in aid. My perspective is that British Waterways has always been looking for efficiency and cuts in the work force could have occurred, and mostly been achieved by natural wastage and restructuring. The grant cuts forced British Waterways into redundancy arrangements because of the short time-scale in which cuts had to be achieved and this has been devastating to a number of staff personally involved, but has been wasteful in a business planning sense. It makes the unions representing those members natural allies.

I was able to briefly discuss my concerns with the Deputy Prime Minister while attending a function with him during July. British Marine Federation (BMF) and Royal Yachting Association (RYA) had employed a parliamentary advisor for the Labour Party Conference and sought to raise the profile of the issue. A member of Council represented us at that same Conference.

I drew attention to the situation in my widely reported opening speech at the National Festival and IWA began to consult through its structure on appropriate action to consider and continued the task of informing and influencing parliamentarians. With commendable initiative, but without the constraints of a democratic influence, a few individuals (many of them IWA members) used their communicative talents set up an informal group "Save Our Waterways" and this sparked off the more public demonstrations which subsequently came about and to which considerable support was given by a wide range of user organisations, national (including IWA) and more local.

BMF and RYA retained the on-going services of their parliamentary consultant and IWA joined in co-funding her modest consultancy fees. It is known that Defra anticipated that the height of campaigning would be at British Waterways' Annual Meeting and they did not anticipate the campaign being sustained. Meanwhile a large number of user organisations who had come together for other purposes agreed to work together to fight the cuts and I crafted, with their agreement, a "Unity" press release which was issued to that effect, and there was also agreement to include the informal grouping of Save Our Waterways. I drew to SOW's attention the potential for the new format of e-petitions to the Prime Minister, which they took up with considerable success and support from IWA. Towards the end of last year IWA Council set aside £40,000 towards campaigning and commissioned Waterway Images to provide a lead in the overt campaigning and in communicating with our branches, corporate members and individuals.

Relevant Early Day Motions and eventually the highly successful Adjournment Debate came about as a result of the influence of our parliamentary consultant or spontaneously as a result of lobbying of parliamentarians. I have personally addressed parliamentarians within the Palace of Westminster. It was there that I learned, before the formal announcement, that there was to be a Select Committee Inquiry into the funding of British Waterways. We have now submitted our written evidence and are aware of the excellent quality of a number of submissions from other user organisations and the trade and been able to judge the complimentary nature of our various submissions.

There are some fundamental problems of campaigning which could become self-fulfilling prophesies and which are of particular concern to the trade organisations and also, no doubt, give rise to concern in the navigation authorities themselves. It is self evident that if under funded the waterways will deteriorate. That deterioration will not happen or be evident all at once. The trade is hesitant that over-selling the risks to the quality of the waterway experience could deter potential users and cause a trade down-turn. The navigation authorities must be concerned that worries about the sustainability of their operation could deter third-party funders and further jeopardise their financial stability.

The stated position of Defra Ministers has moved as time has gone on, but while there has been increasing lip service by them to the achievements of the navigation authorities there has been little change in their stance, other than the threatened further reduction of 5% cut in grant in aid at the end of 2006/07 was withdrawn.

During a Radio 5 Live interview the Waterways Minister, Barry Gardiner, said that the 2006/07 cuts were one off. Immediately before Christmas his department announced the settlement for 2007/08 and it was little changed from the cut budget of the current year. The Minister has not yet replied to my letter, which was written on Christmas Eve, questioning him about this. During my interview with Defra Minister Lord Rooker on The Politics Show during the weekend of the November demonstrations there was an indication that in settling the grant in aid for the three years after that it would not be based on what I described as "the artificial low starting point of the current reduced grant in aid". There is now every indication that that will be the starting point and that rather than inflationary improvements there will be on-going annual cuts.

Defra seem paranoid that British Waterways are helping us (all user organisations?) with our campaign. Of course it would be most improper for an agency of government to act in this way. I have to say, however, that, as has become their practice, British Waterways have responded openly when we have addressed to them questions about the issues that they face and have briefed user organisations on their perception of the implications for users of their services. The Environment Agency have tended to continue their previous mode of playing things closer to their chests, but have lumped most of the cuts which related to waterways in the current year on flood control measures. In total they have a much larger budget to manipulate.

I have been able to express my concerns to a Treasury Minister, Ed Balls, at a function I was chairing and had a useful and constructive exchange with him, although the issues are not formally within their area of influence at this time.

Courtesy BMF I faced the Minister at The Boat Show, and his perception of the situation is still at considerable variance to our own, which makes an impossible basis on which to begin to discuss what these days is described as "blue sky thinking" about alternative funding opportunities in the future. Of course he will try and put the best political slant on issues he can, but there are perhaps three significant areas of difficulty.

• He admits that waterways were underfunded prior to British Waterways beginning to tackle the backlog of maintenance. We agree that Government put in considerable extra funding to assist in dealing with the serious safety issues which resulted. We have not reached any measure of agreement on what is the minimum necessary funding level for sustaining the waterways (whatever the source of that funding).
• He seems only capable in thinking about the total grant to waterway organisations and not in terms of value for money of "subsidy per visit" (compared to, for example, English Heritage structures).
• He thinks that, despite only 3% of the visits to British Waterways waterways being boat owners, boaters should pay a lot more for the privilege of making the waterways more attractive to other users and can conceive of no way or value in looking for grants to offset the other 97% of visitors who contribute very little.

Last week's cruise past Parliament was symbolic and the flotilla itself was brilliantly organised by St Pancras Cruising Club. BMF and IWA arranged a media and hospitality boat (left - as seen by SCARS' Chairman aboard EARNEST) on which there were a considerable variety of media representatives and our Vice President, David Suchet, did us proud. We were also able to host a number of supportive MPs from all three major parties, and representatives of all the organisations which had signed up to the Unity press release. Yet again it was a vehicle for prime time exposure in the media.

It should be noted that the politically ambitious Secretary of State at Defra has shown little direct involvement in the issues related above, but it has been noted recently that he has responded to some of the MPs letters in turn prompted by letters from IWA members.

Hereon:
Campaign Events

The value of the events is that they are, and are perceived to be, a groundswell of campaigning by the grass roots. Reasonable diversity and "local ideas" assist this perception. They have offered opportunities for all concerned waterway organisations to campaign together locally. Publicity material and logistical support can be provided by the national organisations. Co-ordinating the dates, as in the first weekend in March, allows the generation of better publicity at a national level. Key events within the totality of all events may provide particular media opportunities which have a national impact. We are approaching local elections when both local councillors and MPs will want exposure to the media on popular causes. It will be increasingly important that they attract a range of users which is wider than "boaters". As we have got parliamentarians talking about waterways so we need all users of the waterways demonstrating and articulating their enjoyment of inland waterways. A wide range of our members can actively contribute to the campaign in a way which we hope they will find enjoyable and rewarding.

The media pressure generated will have on-going pressure on parliamentarians. "The problem" (as they see it) "is not going away".

Political - in the pipeline

We hope to have the opportunity to give oral evidence to the Efra Select Committee.

We need to meet the minister and work through areas of disagreement and then go on to "blue sky thinking" about the future without in any way letting him off the hook for the current problems caused by his decisions.

We need to raise the profile amongst constituency parties and will be looking for contacts who can raise potential motions for party conferences.

Particularly as we run up to local elections and as we approach Comprehensive Spending Review settlement (see below) we need to keep as many parliamentarians interested and if possible, involved, and on-going letter writing and attending surgeries lets them know of the numbers of voters who share a concern for the future of the waterways. Bluntly, it "softens them up" for when we have opportunities to address them directly and personally.

Political - in the future

For their own reasons politicians in Defra are unlikely to look for funding sources outside Defra, and they are skint, having "lost" £200m in the current year. They are therefore unlikely to be in a position to make any significant gesture towards the under-funding of navigation authorities, even if they wanted to do.

The government as a whole is facing increasing financial pressures, with inflation less well controlled and, inevitably, prosecuting wars, or the aftermaths thereof, has been expensive. In looking at forward spending the Treasury will try and cut spending in all departments. They will almost certainly, however, over-cut budgets in order to provide themselves with the wherewithal to redistribute surpluses where it is most expedient to do so. By sustained campaigning we have to make it expedient for there to be spending on those interests which we particularly share.

Finally we need to be creative as we look to alternatives ways of funding and managing navigation authorities as a whole and wider waterway interests and this includes both independent navigations with no government contributions at present, and such other wider interests as the waterway museums which have for a long time been fighting the inequity of not being "free" to users.

I hope this makes IWA position clear and the role it has played and will continue to play, crystal clear both to members who also support us with their subscriptions, and to those supporters who may be potential members in the future.

Index for this issue     Index of all Canal Cuttings issues      Home Page

Site design and content © 2002 - 2005 Sankey Canal Restoration Society
Site design by Phil D.Long