Litter on Canal Towpaths

Lord Murray of Blidworth Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Grand Committee

[Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con)]

My Lords, I shall not repeat at length the points so eloquently made by my noble friends Lord Evans and Lord Trenchard. I will, however, make one or two slightly different points.

As my noble friend Lord Trenchard has identified, litter by canals can have three principal impacts. The first are environmental—the plastic and other waste, as referred to by my noble friend. Secondly, there are the public health and safety risks that arise from the presence of waste, particularly biological waste, dog waste in particular, and those posed by debris building up in channels and drains, which can obstruct water flow and, in turn, damage canal infrastructure, which will probably cost a good deal to correct.

Thirdly, there are the further economic costs in relation to the disposal of litter, particularly litter that has got into the waterway itself. The Canal & River Trust estimates that the costs of dredging are £100 to £200 per cubic metre, depending on certain variables. It is undoubtedly true that the trust has removed a lot of bins, and it would probably say that it is not going to fit any new ones unless the local councils or others are going to pay to collect them. The trust would probably say that that is part of the funding squeeze it says it is experiencing. Avoiding new bins has been its practice for many years, although the policy of removing them is undoubtedly new. Trust staff rarely pick litter but, as has been observed, there is a ready body of willing volunteers who are vital to the administration of the canal network who help in many ways, including through picking litter, as has been identified by my noble friends.

I know that the Canal & River Trust is seeking to rationalise its estate and in particular to sell property that is not core to the waterways, to try to plug what it perceives to be a spending gap. The property that was transferred to the trust included a number of buildings that were some distance from the network. The obvious targets have already been sold, but there are still some more to be sold in relation to the canal network that may raise further money. It must be said that some of these properties are probably better cared for in private hands, because there is not money in the trust to maintain those properties.

So far, it is certainly the case that the trust has not sold any of the family silver of the canal network. However, the trust seems to have an effective investment team that is reinvesting the money for a return, and I suggest that funding should go towards the types of maintenance that we have heard about in the debate. It would certainly be a great shame if the trust felt it was necessary to mothball parts of the network in order to sustain those parts that run through urban areas.

Canals are a vital part of our national heritage and a much-loved outdoor recreational resource. Clean water, clean banks and clean tow-paths are a legitimate and reasonable expectation. Section 89 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 places a statutory duty on relevant bodies to keep the land they are responsible for clear of litter and refuse. For canals in England and Wales, that duty falls primarily on the Canal & River Trust, and the Government should ensure that it is complying with those statutory obligations.

The Minister may be suffering from déjà vu because he made that very point himself in a debate on 13 June in Committee on the Environmental Targets (Public Authorities) Bill, and he was reminded in that debate of the same point having been made by his fellow Minister, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary at Defra, the noble Baroness, Lady Hayman, who also drew attention to the statutory obligation in relation to the clearing of litter. Can the Minister update us on what has gone on since 13 June in relation to communicating with the trust on actioning its statutory obligations? I suspect that the trust may say that the bins are being cut to save money, but that does not excuse its statutory obligation. Clearly, it should take steps to address this issue and ensure that the litter that we see, particularly in urban areas, is dealt with as swiftly as possible.