Litter on Canal Towpaths Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Lord Evans of Rainow

Main Page: Lord Evans of Rainow (Conservative - Life peer)

Litter on Canal Towpaths

Lord Evans of Rainow Excerpts
Thursday 20th November 2025

(1 day, 6 hours ago)

Grand Committee
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Asked by
Lord Evans of Rainow Portrait Lord Evans of Rainow
- Hansard - -

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact that litter on canal towpaths owned and maintained by the Canal and River Trust is having on urban communities.

Lord Evans of Rainow Portrait Lord Evans of Rainow (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, it is a pleasure to open this important debate on an issue that has caused concern for canal users up and down the country. Outdoor recreation is essential for people’s well-being and health. We want more people to get out and about and the tow-paths are fantastic open spaces. Sadly, this summer, many of our tow-paths looked like Birmingham during the bin strike, discouraging people from using them for outdoor recreation. We need to change.

Earlier this year, campaigners began to speak out about the appalling amount of litter on our canal tow-paths. The Cleaner Canals Campaign has been documenting this growing problem on social media. Thanks to its efforts, the media has reported on the problem, with stories appearing on BBC News and in the Sunday Times, the Islington Tribute and the Prime Minister’s own local newspaper, the Camden New Journal. The photographic evidence shows that coffee cups, pizza boxes, Deliveroo takeaway packaging and beer cans have been piling up on the tow-path all summer. This is because people living in the centre of our cities are using our canal tow-paths as recreational spaces and there are no bins.

Residents in Stockton-on-Tees, Hayes, Islington, Manchester and even the Prime Minister’s own constituency of Camden have all raised litter as a huge problem. This is clearly a national issue. I live in Macclesfield. The principal engineer for the canal in my own area, built in 1831, was Thomas Telford. The canal is a great resource for walkers, runners and boaters, located on the edge of the Peak District. Historically, it transported coal, raw cotton, silk and finished goods into Manchester and down to the Midlands along the Grand Union Canal. What has connected Macclesfield to the world is now a vital outdoor space for local people. I use it regularly for marathon training. It is an idyllic and beautiful part of the country.

Until two years ago, the Canal & River Trust, which manages a number of our navigable canal tow-paths in England and Wales, provided bins all along our tow-paths, so that canal users could dispose of their litter responsibly. This is a question of personal responsibility, but it is also incumbent on the taxpayer-funded Canal & River Trust to maintain bins so that people can do the right thing and responsibly dispose of their litter. The trust, which has just welcomed Campbell Robb as its new chairman, says that it has saved £500,000 annually by removing the bins. Additionally, it has claimed that removing the bins has not caused an increase in litter. The evidence gathered by campaigners is clear: litter is a huge problem on urban tow-paths. In urban areas, the Canal & River Trust lets business premises to cafés that operate on the tow-path. Much of the litter that we see is an externality of business activities that directly benefit the trust.

It is important to remember that the trust has a statutory responsibility to manage litter on the tow-paths, as Ministers have confirmed in previous Answers to Written Questions. The background to the trust’s decision to cut bin services is its claim that it does not have the finances to maintain the bins. It is not only cutting bin services but campaigning for additional taxpayer funding from government. However, the £500,000 that the trust says that it has saved is just 1% of the £50 million that it receives from the taxpayer. The amount that it saved from removing the bins across London and the south-east was £250,000. At the same time, the Canal & River Trust’s latest annual report revealed that pay for its executive team has increased by £300,000 since the bins were removed. The CEO’s pay is now over £200,000 a year.

This is the reality. The Canal & River Trust is cutting vital public services while increasing pay for the top team. We must not forget that this is a taxpayer-funded body that receives over £15 million a year. Many people would be shocked by those numbers. What can the Canal & River Trust do? It can bring back our bins. It can start engaging properly with the many volunteers who take time out of their day to do what the trust is legally responsible for—tackling litter. It can also reassess its priorities, putting public services and not executive pay at the top of the list.

Noble Lords may be asking what this has to do with the Government. The Canal & River Trust is not an arm of government, but it does have statutory duties and Ministers should hold it to account for its actions. Can the Minister say what conversations they have had with the new CEO of the Canal & River Trust, Campbell Robb? Has the department raised with him the issue of litter on tow-paths, and what powers does it have to monitor the trust’s performance against any statutory duties? I invite the Minister to tackle this head-on in discussions with the trust to see what can be done to bring back the bins.

In closing, I quote Elena Horcajo who, before going to work, volunteers to pick up litter on our tow-paths to make canals cleaner. In Charlotte Ivers’s excellent article in the Sunday Times, Elena said:

“I’ve spoken to absolutely everybody to find a way to fix this issue … I see the Canal & River Trust doing absolutely nothing … Your whole job is to take care of the canal, so show that you care for the canal”.


We all, especially the Canal & River Trust, have a duty to care for our canals. I hope the Minister will help campaigners like Elena to get this issue resolved.