Remove Red Tape

Water & Marine: Inland waterways

These regulations cover the management of inland waterways, the right balance of interests among waterway users, protection of employees, canal classification, Environment Agency boat registration schemes and British Waterways employee pension rights, and applications for hire boat licences.

We want to hear your views on what more we can do to deliver a simpler, less bureaucratic and more effective system whilst maintaining safe access for all. For example could the enforcement of the Environment Agency (inland Waterways) Order be improved by providing for a statutory Code of Practice for hire boats.

You can find all regulations that relate to inland waterways below to the left. Please note the transfer of British Waterway’s statutory obligations (including those covered by some of these regulations) to the Canal & River Trust in June will be subject to parliamentary consideration and approval in the next few months of the draft Transfer Order under the Public Bodies Act 2011.

Visit the Water and Marine theme landing page here.

Tell us what you think should happen to these regulations and why, being specific where possible:

• Should we scrap them altogether?
• Could their purpose be achieved in a non-regulatory way (eg through a voluntary code?) How?
• Could they be reformed, simplified or merged? How?
• Can we reduce their bureaucracy through better implementation? How?
• Can we make their enforcement less burdensome? How?
• Should they be left as they are?

100 comments on “Water & Marine: Inland waterways”

1. Bill Pickles on April 11, 2012 at 7:25 pm said:

   We need legislation that gives everyone access and suitable, reasonable use of our inland waterways while protecting the environment. Then we will be able to work out the ‘right balance right balance of interests among waterway users’. It works in Scotland and many other parts of the world.

   Until such time, do not scrap the Wye Navigation Order!Comment Tags: access
2. D Clarkson-King on April 11, 2012 at 9:39 am said:

   The use of rivers and access to them should be open for all. Recreation is for everyone and with a growing unhealthy population the promotion of access to rivers for all sports and leisure use it obviously a good thing. Canoe, gorge walks, fishermen, rafts, tubing, swimming, rowing the list goes on. Open access to free flowing waterways makes sense. No one owns the water, from cloud to rain to river.Comment Tags: access
3. paul smith on April 10, 2012 at 7:55 pm said:

   The overwhelming number of comments on this debate supporting open (responsible) access to our rivers for paddlers swimmers etc is interesting. It appears that most anglers may already have accepted that they have got away with their selfish attitudes for too long and like it or not they are going to be sharing the rivers with the rest of the public who after all fund the EA through their taxes,and don’t need to kill anything to enjoy a day out.Comment Tags: river access for all
4. Ingo Tancsik on April 9, 2012 at 5:54 pm said:

   Steve Carrington, you want to fish? Fine, go ahead, I do both fishing and canoeing, come off your high horse and live and let live! Anglers do NOT own the actual water !Comment Tags: access, boat access, Canoe, kayak, Public access
5. Ingo Tancsik on April 9, 2012 at 5:46 pm said:

   I’d like to see more access for recreational users similar to Scotland where there is a right to use rivers by ALL. I’d also want to see legislation to clearly stating that rivers are there for all of us and that the actual water can be used by all for responsible, recreational purposes. Why do riparian owner in this country think they own the actual water as in contrast to most other european countries?Comment Tags: access, boat access, Canoe, kayak, Public access
6. Barney Phillips on April 7, 2012 at 8:00 pm said:

   Research has shown that all phsyically navigable rivers are legally navigable, certain elements of the angling community and others, frequently attempt to stop canoists and other small boaters from excersing their right to navigate these rivers. A clear statement of the right to navigate all rivers (as already exists in scotland) would do much to solve this problem. This arangement works in Scotland, so should work for the rest of the UKComment Tags: river access
7. Matthew Greene on April 7, 2012 at 5:48 pm said:

   The water access situation needs to be the same as it is in Scotland,our historic rite of navigation was not in question until the industrial revolution put mills on river banks,and a perceived ownership of water to power them.
   These industries have left the river bank !
   If I walk along a public foot path,though woods,across farm land and over a moor,I will pass over areas that other
   people shoot,Rabbits, Pheasants,Deer,Grouse etc.,I am not expected to contribute to their hobby,the same go’s
   for people who fish,my canoe makes no more disturbance than a log floating down a river.
   In practice VAA have never worked,and every, year more people enjoy wild swimming,canoeing and kayaking,a more open approach to river access would give more people a vested interest in the future upkeep and wellbeing of our rivers and waterways.Comment Tags: access
8. Douglas Malpus on April 7, 2012 at 2:48 pm said:

   Clarification on the navigation of waterways in England and Wales. I am a canoeist and I find that far too often fishy folk think they own our nations rivers. Make it clear that they own fishing rights, banks and beds, where appropriate but they do not own the water that I paddle on. The right to navigate our rivers is a within the law and an ancient right. See caffynonrivers.co.ukComment Tags: Caffynonrivers, canoeing
9. Heather Thomas on April 6, 2012 at 9:53 pm said:

   There needs to be clear legislation put in place that protects residential boat dwellers in the same way as people who have any other sort of tenancy agreement. We need security of tenure.
   There needs to be an end put to British Waterways & I would also like to see transparency in the way that BW & BWML are transferred to the new Trust to ensure that it will be run to the benefit of its customers and not to the benefit of the Director’s bonuses.Comment Tags: British Waterways, BWML, CWT, liveaboard
10. Roger Huffadine on April 4, 2012 at 11:50 am said:

    The “Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998″ Section 2 (5) (c), prohibit trained and certified Examiners for the Boat Safety Scheme [BSS] from conducting gas safety checks on boats that are (iii) used primarily for domestic or residential purposes; – unless they are fitted with a ‘bubble tester’

    This means that such boat owners have to use a “Gas Safe” examiner for that part of the BSS Certification.

    The end result is that the boat owner is left More Exposed to Risk

    This happens because a BSS examiner conducting gas safety checks – on a non residential boat – will use 5 minute time frames for the measurements – as mandated in the BSS documentation

    However

    A Gas Safe inspector is mandated under Gas Safe regulations to use a 2 minute time frame for the checks – this is less than 50% of the time used by the BSS regulations.

    The end result is that instead of ensuring more stringent testing for residential boats – the opposite is true.

    and

    The residential boat owner pays significantly more for their BSS examination – for two reasons – they have a more limited selection of examiners – and these examiners have a higher cost base from being on the Gas Safe register.

    The “Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998″ Section 2 (5) (c) – needs to be re-examined and preferably permit BSS Examiners to conduct gas safety checks on boats without the need to become Gas Safe registered.

    This would result in more stringent checking [improved safety] and an overall reduction in cost to residential boat owners
    • Roger Huffadine on April 4, 2012 at 11:59 am said:

      I should have mentioned that the Health and Safety executive can make an order to permit BSS Examiners to conduct these tests – without the need for re-drafting of the Gas Safety and Use Regulations
11. U Bannur on April 3, 2012 at 10:52 pm said:

    New regulations to prevent british waterways board or its subsidiaries ( BWML) from bullying their tenents and showing off their dominant position especially in area where moorings are saturated like in London. With their annual contracts , the terms and conditions of which can be changed as and when unilaterally by BWML, the contract is not worth the paper it is written on.
    Introduction of statutary rights akin to home dwellers for the boaters and licence holders. The mooring contract should be akin to leasehold for home dwellers.
    For people with cruising licence, look into reasons for immobility after 14 days before swooping in to take over. They should be treated on the par with homelessness on land and be provided accomodation when necessary.
    In that sense, the BW or in future the Canal and Waterways trust should act like council and take responsibility for the people with no moorings rather than harass them.
    No charitable body should get rights like a government organisation to take over and destroy boats without being held accountable except for judicial review. Such procedures are beyond most boaters as they are time consuming and involve tenacious pursuit and large financial burden to undertake and the BW seems to be taking advantage of this situation.Comment Tags: BWML, canal and waterways trust, market dominance, Security of Tenure
12. R Croft on April 3, 2012 at 10:25 am said:

    New inland waterways regulations need to be introduced to protect the rights of liveaboard boaters.

    Despite numerous campaigns over the years, government-funded research and the current acceptance that boats provide a low cost and environmentally-friendly form of accommodation, boat dwellers are still not protected by statutory law, and have no real security of tenure.

    Liveaboard boaters are frequently subject to intimidation, bullying and threats of eviction from British Waterways (BW) and its subsidiaries, and the severe lack of moorings in the London area mean that BW can continue to abuse its dominant position in the market.

    I would like to see:

    Greater security of tenure for liveaboard boaters

    Fairness and transparency in BW/BWML’s pricing

    Freedom and protection from bullying and intimidation by BW and its subsidiariesComment Tags: BWML, liveaboard, market dominance, Security of Tenure
    • Mark Rainsley on April 11, 2012 at 7:50 am said:

      The only limitation on access rights to rivers should be scientifically verified environmental considerations…not the selfish desire to have exclusive use of the rivers, to extract fish.

      Access agreements are an utter failure – any minister should ask how many miles of equitable access they have actually achieved, before quoting standard policy. The Scottish Land Access approach is the only way forward in a 21st Century nation.