20 MAY 2003  

MR JIM STIRLING, MR JIM MCINTYRE, MR EUAN DOBSON, MR STEVE INCH AND MR JIM MCCONNACHIE

  Q80  Mr Hamilton: Supplementary to that, in your response earlier you indicated that presently all licences are in the public sector through yourselves. Were you looking at putting them out to private and, if so, why?

  Mr Stirling: The system we used to operate in Scotland was that any boat owner who wished to use the canals bought what we called a licence which included the mooring because in Scotland we owned all the moorings. We conducted a review of that system over the last two years or so prompted by comparisons between England and Scotland and by our desire in the Lowlands to create the facility for the private sector to create moorings, so what we did was we separated out and we now have two methods of payment. One is a licence fee, and in Scotland for 12 months that is £100, and there are shorter ones for transit craft and such like. To gain a licence you require to have a mooring. Now at the moment the moorings still all belong to British Waterways because there are not very many, but you do not have to have a British Waterways mooring for which you also have to pay money, a mooring permit. But the long term aim is, say, for example a private housing developer wishes to develop a housing site and maybe put a marina in it, that developer would want to be able to charge people for tying their boats up within that marina, so he would charge them a mooring fee the same as any other marina would, and all those boats would need to pay British Waterways £100 and say they had a mooring permit. So we separated out to give the possibility of the private sector providing new moorings. So it is not a privatisation and it is not passing things over to the private sector; it is creating an opportunity where the private sector could invest in the provision of moorings.

  Q81  Mr Hamilton: This is quite important. I know in Europe, especially in the south, with new developments part of the selling product is that you have a mooring and you can use a canal, but what you are saying is that transferring it across the private sector you still retain control?

  Mr Stirling: You still need a licence to float on our water, to use our canals. There are two issues. It is like road tax—

  Q82  Mr Hamilton: But if they have a mooring they can then apply for the licence?

  Mr Stirling: Yes.

  Q83  Mr Hamilton: But you are giving away the right, as it stands now, of you having control of the moorings?

  Mr Stirling: Well, I do not know if it is a "right". We currently in Scotland own all the moorings. In England we own less than 20% of moorings on canals.

  Q84  Mr Hamilton: That means we are doing something good in Scotland, does it?

  Mr Stirling: Just in Scotland. Let me take a step back. Prior to the re-opening of the Lowlands, all of our customers essentially were salt water customers, and our competition is the salt water market—Kip Marina, Craobh Haven, whatever—so we are not in a monopolistic position or anything like that so we had a market test for our rates, but as we come to inland boating in Scotland on canals, currently we are the only people who own any moorings—not that there are very many, 200 or something like that. It was to create the facility where private sector could create moorings if they so desired. It does not mean they have to or we will not—we will still continue to create our own moorings.

  Q85  Mr Robertson: How would that be for somebody whose home backs on to the canal? Could they apply for a mooring?

  Mr Stirling: It depends whether they own the edge of the canal. We tend to own the edge of the canal.

  Q86  Mr Robertson: You do. So if I bought a house that edged on the canal and decided to put a rowing boat there, I would apply for a licence from you?

  Mr Stirling: Yes.

  Q87  Mr Joyce: Gentlemen, we have a submission from Scottish Amateur Rowing Association, a Mr Paul Mackie,[8] and I just wondered if you would have an opinion if I gave you the essence of it: "I have been advised of a review of the job creation potential from the modernisation of the Union Canal. This project is a major threat to the sport of rowing in Edinburgh . . . Job creation should only take place with regard to enhancing the sporting activities . . . This project is actually threatening such activities." Leaving aside the fact that I can only presume the Scottish Amateur Rowing Association does not have any unemployed people amongst its ranks, do you have any comment about why they would be concerned about modernisation on the canal?

  Mr Stirling: Rowing has taken place on the Union Canal within the city of Edinburgh since about the 1880s. It is a well-established sport on the canal; there are two schools, there are universities and there is at least one adult rowing club. Ever since the start of the Millennium Link project, we have been talking to the rowers in the Edinburgh stretch of the canal. Recently there was a liaison committee formed chaired by a member of IWAAC, the Inland Waterways Amenity Advisory Council, a statutory body set up by the Secretary of State to advise the Secretary of State and British Waterways Board. The liaison group with the rowers was chaired by a Scottish member of IWAAC. Our understanding is that we have reached a sensible arrangement and agreement with the rowers to do with exclusive use and shared use of the canal. Essentially we wish to keep schools rowing safely so we have agreed with the rowing people that there would be periods during the school term when rowing takes place where the children have exclusive use of the canal and other craft will not be allowed to pass. At other times there would be shared use and experienced rowers would know what to do; obviously a lot of the adults go out at seven o'clock in the morning when there are no boats anyway. So I am surprised by the letter you have received from the secretary of Scottish Amateur Rowing Association. We have been talking to the rowers for a long time, and to the rowers on the Union Canal for a long time; I was at the user group meeting in Falkirk in March when all of the users of the canal, including the rowers, were there, and there was a report from this member of IWAAC about the discussions that had taken place, and I did not hear a voice of dissent at that meeting so I thought we had come to some arrangement. All I can say is that this is a new development as far as British Waterways is concerned.

  Q88  Mr Carmichael: I understood that there had been a change in the extent to which access was allowed for rowing training which is essentially what we are dealing with here, I think. Is that not the case?

  Mr Stirling: There were agreements about time-zoning for exclusive use of particularly schools rowing, and at other times there would be shared use of rowing by adults and by craft, and there would be advisory signs up on the towpath. The schools were to put flags up I think at either end to tell boats not to use the canal and we would provide the guidance to the boat skippers and such like. It is more of a safety issue than any other. We would always wish to promote combined use of our Waterways rather than exclusive use of our Waterways by any one group, and it is about accommodating all of the uses and coming to sensible management arrangements as to how you do that.

  Q89  Mr Carmichael: It was fairly clear from the letter from the SARA here that they have an on-going feeling of grievance. I understood that there had previously been some arrangement that it was almost a seasonal access and that that had changed. Is that correct?

  Mr Stirling: No, not at all. As far as I am aware, there is no ban on usage of the canal by any party other than, as I said, when the children are rowing and, if I remember rightly, there are fifteen minute slots which allow the restaurant boats to go through. It is worked out for all users. I do not have all of the details in front of me but I am not aware of us saying to rowers they cannot use the canal. I am aware of rowers saying other people cannot use the canal, but I am not aware of us saying that rowers cannot use it.

  Q90  Mr Carmichael: Given the historic use of the canal for rowing, is there a prospect for you directly to go back to the SARA and pursue this with them?

  Mr Stirling: I will refer this letter to the member of IWAAC who is chairing the group. We would rather it was chaired by somebody who is independent of British Waterways but who has an interest in the overall use of the Waterways, so I will refer this letter to the member of IWAAC who is chairing that group.

  Q91  Chairman: Finally, if we could take a look at security, because of the accessibility of the canal you might remember that some concerns were raised with us on our first visit to this subject for safety, particularly for children. What security features now exist along the length of the canal?

  Mr Stirling: I think the first thing we would say from British Waterways' point of view is the busier the canal is the safer it is, so the more the towpath is used or the more the waterway is used, the safer it is for all users. Even incidences of shall we say antisocial behaviour have dropped considerably since the very early days of it being open. We have had some incidences recently of some difficulties but, in the main, the incidences of people stoning boats or whatever are far reduced from what they were in the first few months of opening. There are some complaints from residents that we have improved access to areas where people could not get to before. In one of the areas we erected a fence along the back of the properties concerned; in other areas there is not an awful lot you can do—there is always going to be a consequence of opening up the canal for everybody, and what we have been about is opening up the canal for everybody. We mentioned last time that there are police patrols on the towpath. They are continuing: they are useful: I met with Strathclyde police not very long ago and there are no major concerns and I would be delighted if somebody would tell me—well, I would not be delighted to be told I was wrong but I would be delighted to receive the information if there are areas that we have not picked up on, but problems are localised and no different from problems about buses and trains and all the other issues that affect the canal today.

  Q92  Mr Robertson: This is my favourite subject! When we discussed the canal before we talked about introducing lighting, particularly under the bridges. Have we done anything about that?

  Mr Stirling: I think we probably disagree on that, Chair. We are not that keen on having lighting under the bridges. We think it encourages people to hang about underneath the bridges. I might be wrong because we have not spoken to the police for a long time but we did speak to I think they are called architectural liaison officers at the early stages of the Millennium project, as we were trying to design out these issues. Look at the original Falkirk tunnel, for example, which is beside the railway tunnel in Falkirk. That has been lit as part of the project so the tunnel is lit but it is only lit during the day. The tunnel is not lit at night—and that would be our policy: that we do not encourage these areas to be lit because we do not encourage people to hang about in them.

  Q93  Mr Robertson: What about the towpath and the cycle paths, where obviously they are very popular?

  Mr Stirling: At the moment there is not much lighting on the towpath. Wester Hailes is lit but I do not think there are many other areas of towpath that are lit. In the long run I am sure that is something that we would welcome looking at with our local authority partners in particular. We have a long term 10-year plan to have CCTV over virtually all of the canal. We have started CCTV in the Glasgow area; we have CCTV at Falkirk and in Wester Hailes, and we have a longer term plan to do more of CCTV. There is always a debate as to whether it should be lit or not, and that is something that I think we would need to discuss further with the police forces and our local authority partners.

  Q94  Mr Robertson: I have the impression that the vandalism has reduced somewhat from something you said when we talked about Wester Hailes earlier, and what you said about Falkirk.

  Mr Stirling: The vandalism is definitely less than it was.

  Chairman: Is that the whole length of the canal?

  Q95  Mr Robertson: What about accidents? Have we got a list of accidents? How many are there, and what kinds are they?

  Mr Stirling: We will record accidents to the public if we know about them. There are not very many.

  Q96  Mr Robertson: Can I bring up my favourite subject? Something you said you thought was a good idea was telephones. Now you have written to me telling me this is not a good idea any more because of vandalism, and yet you are telling me that vandalism is a lot better. Which is it?

  Mr Stirling: I think you have got me there because I think I wrote to you saying that we would try and put up signs and that it was a good idea, but the bottom line is we have not put up any signs.

  Q97  Mr Robertson: I link it also to accidents, and that is why I ask you about accidents. My greatest concern is the kids who cause problems, and you remember we discussed the one jumping off the bridges and into the water and they drown and nobody can help them because maybe there are no rings to throw into the water, and there is no telephone that one of his pals can run to and phone. I understand the vandalism point, but if that is not a problem then why can we not trial this, because if we save one life it is worthwhile? You did agree that you thought this was an idea worth trying, and I think we should try it.

  Mr Stirling: I think we agreed that signage with a helpline number was a good idea.

  Q98  Mr Robertson: Do you want me to quote your answer?

  Mr Stirling: Yes. I have no problem if my memory is wrong.

  Q99  Mr Robertson: What you said was, "On the vandalism one the concept of a help line is quite interesting because we actually do have one . . ."—and you said it was a Free Phone Canals number and at that point I said that I had never heard of it—"At any time you can telephone the number Free Phone Canals and you will automatically be put through . . .", so that was where we talked about the signs that have not appeared. Now, I still say along with that the occasional telephone would not be a bad idea, along the lines of a motorway, where you can signpost a phone which is one mile one way or one mile the other.

  Mr Stirling: We have 2,000 miles of canals and river in the British Isles—