HLF INQUIRY

  1.  The invitation to provide evidence to the Committee is welcome and timely as the Council has been considering the role of the HLF in respect of waterways restoration projects in the course of its current study of waterway restoration priorities. This evidence is based on the findings of the final report which is about to be published.

IWAAC

  2.  IWAAC is the statutory body (set up under the Transport Act 1968) to advise British Waterways (BW) and the Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and the Regions on matters affecting the use of the Board's 3,200 km national network for recreation and amenity. Council Members (list Annex A) are appointed by the Secretary of State for their individual experience and expertise rather than as representatives of particular bodies or interests. The Council supports the sustainable restoration and development of the inland waterways of Britain which represent a major national heritage asset (cf IWAAC's 1996 Report "Britain's Inland Waterways: An Undervalued Asset" and the "Final Recommendations" submitted to the Waterways Minister at the DETR in July 1997 (copies enclosed*[13])).

THE NATIONAL WATERWAYS HERITAGE

  3.  Inland waterways (canals and navigable rivers) are a key element in the nation's transport history and in the history of civil engineering. The main canal building era (1760 to 1830) went hand in hand with the world's first industrial revolution. The system retains important historic structures, many listed or scheduled (BW alone has more than 2,000 listed and 135 scheduled as ancient monuments, including entire waterways such as Scotland's Union Canal). The water regime provides habitats for a range of flora and fauna along the banks. Many lengths are of national importance to wildlife conservation (the BW network has 64 Sites of Special Scientific Interest). Some are of European significance under the EU's Habitat Directive. A minority is still used for freight carrying and there are new uses such as water transfer and telecommunications routes. However, the prime uses tody are recreational boating and many other formal and informal leisure activities.

  4.  A vigorous movement to restore former commercial waterways that fell into disuse with the growth of rail and road transport has grown up over the last 50 years. This is inspired largely by the voluntary sector. Restoration projects revitalise the waterway heritage, generate new jobs and development and provide new tourism, leisure and recreation opportunities. Much has been achieved (more than 700 kms restored) but activity depends on funding which is inherently unpredictable. The HLF's approvals for some waterway projects, including the major £25 million grant for the Kennet and Avon Canal project, led to hopes that even though funding elsewhere was becoming harder to obtain, it should be possible to look to the HLF for funding on a large scale.

RESTORATION PRIORITIES STUDY

  5.  Against the background of heightened expectations and funding limitations, the Government decided in 1997 that an overview of restoration priorities was needed. The forthcoming report contains the Council's assessment of some 80 restoration projects in terms of when they appear to be ready for major funding. It includes an independent assessment of historical and wildlife conservation interest of those lengths of waterway and other structures which are the subject of restoration schemes. These assessments were carried out by IWAAC Members on the Study Working Group, consulting where necessary with external experts.

 HLF ASPECTS

  6.  The then Chairman of the HLF Trustees wrote to welcome the IWAAC exercise in view of the Fund's own canals policy review reflecting its now more limited resources. The Fund introduced a moratorium on waterway projects pending the outcome of the study but has continued to take decisions on cases received before the study began.

  7.  The Council has liaised with HLF throughout its study. The Fund has stressed that nature conservation and industrial archaeological importance should be properly considered; the importance of free access for the public to the waterway (in the light of suggestions being made in some quarters that charges might be introduced for towpath use) and the need to address the issue of "additionality" in relation to work on the publicly funded waterways.

HLF AND CANAL RESTORATION FUNDING

  8.  The Fund's current criteria for canal projects were published in March 1998. The HLF has promised early revised guidance following the Council's study. The HLF is the only National Lottery funding body to which applicants can now turn for significant restoration work, but the emphasis on preserving historic structures over getting heritage waterways operational again (and the general presumption against new lengths unless their role in making a historic waterway re-useable is readily apparent), means that some projects face severe extra difficulties. Schemes that fall outside the HLF criteria and are not in a special area for funding will find life particularly difficult. The benefits to be obtained from restoration in these areas will be reduced as a consequence.

IWAAC'S VIEWS FOR THE COMMITTEE'S CONSIDERATION

  9.  The relevant points from the Council's forthcoming report which the Council would like the Committee to consider are:

—  HLF is a mainstay of waterway restoration funding and its commitment must be maintained.

—  The switch of National Lottery funding to the new sixth good cause is unfortunate for waterway restoration because the HLF has been driven to review its canals policy in the light of the reduction in its resources. There will be a loss in terms of built and ecological heritage conservation and the variety of other benefits which follow from waterway restoration.

—  It is crucial that the HLF retains its distributor status of Lottery funds post 2001 or there could be no sources of funding for significant heritage projects on the waterways.

—  HLF should be willing to commit funding to selected and worthwhile large schemes perhaps programmed over several years, as well as smaller ones.

—  The Council has no views on the geographical distribution of HLF waterway grants to date, and does not dissent from the Fund's stipulation that historical importance must be central to all grant applications, but wishes the Fund to recognise the value of restoring heritage waterways as a whole to operational use and so be more flexible in the application of its criteria for funding necessary short new sections or new structures.

—  The Council has recommended to Government the establishment of a Waterways Heritage Trust (on the lines of the successful Railways Heritage Trust) to draw in and disburse funds for waterway restoration from public and private sources. If established, HLF could be one of the appropriate funding sources for this body.

June 1998