CANALS, WEST MIDLANDS

HC Deb 24 May 1974 vol 874 cc758-75

11.5 a.m.

Mr. John Stonehouse (Walsall, North)

I am glad to have the opportunity of raising a problem which is causing a great deal of concern in the West Midlands and elsewhere.

There are about 2,000 miles of canals in the United Kingdom. This asset is greatly under-used, and has been neglected during recent years. I am glad to note the increasing attention that is being given to the need to improve these canals and to make use of them for transport.

I am concerned about the 200 miles or so of canals in the West Midlands and the Black Country in particular. I understand that there are more canals in the Black Country than there are in Venice. We have all heard about the problems of the canals and waterways in Venice; they have been much publicised. There has not been nearly as much publicity about the canals in the Black Country. I hope that this debate will help to focus the attention of the Government and opinion generally on the problem. It has been too long neglected.

There are three aspects to which I wish to refer: first, safety; second, amenity; third, economic viability. In recent years many young children have died from drowning because they have been able to gain access to unprotected and overgrown canals. That is deplorable. Last year alone five young children died from drowning in Walsall. Those young lives could have been saved if the canals that are unsupervised had had sufficient fencing. They could have been saved if the waterways had been brought up to good conditions and had been supervised by wardens. They could have been saved if action had been taken to improve the canals.

I am glad that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary recently announced, in answer to a Question of mine, that a committee of inquiry into safety in inland waterways is to be set up. I hope that that inquiry will be able to focus attention on the dangers.

But there is no need for us to wait for that inquiry for action to be taken on improving our canals, particularly in the West Midlands. Those canals are unsupervised because nobody seems to be able to take a direct interest in their supervision. The British Waterways Board has done an excellent job in certain localities, but in other areas disused canals have been left neglected. They have become eyesores, dumps for rubbish, and they are a danger to health and hygiene and to life itself.

I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Department of the Environment, who is to reply to the debate, will be able to give us some indication of what will be done in the very near future to increase safety standards around canals. I propose that, as an emergency measure, special grants be made available to the authorities concerned to enable adequate fencing to be built around the canals that are disused and neglected, and that the fencing should be at least as good as that along railway lines. It is as dangerous for children to play around these neglected canals as it is for them to play on railway lines.

The second aspect of the subject that is of concern is amenity. In the West Midlands we have some very attractive canal improvements, particularly one recently completed in Warley. That is an example of what can be done. I believe that, with improvement, canals could become good recreational centres for boating, walking and other activities.

It is probably better for the canals to be kept as waterways rather than being filled in, because the cost of filling in is considerable. I believe that it works out at about £200,000 per mile. If all the canals were filled in, a new drainage system would have to be installed, which in the West Midlands could cost as much as £20 million. Therefore, on cost grounds alone it would seem to be wise to keep the canals as waterways. Indeed, if they are improved, their asset value to the environment could be considerable.

I am told that there are some 290,000 anglers in the West Midlands. I am amazed by that figure. Quite where they go to fish, I do not know, bearing in mind how many of the rivers are polluted. But if the canals could be cleaned up, they could be stocked with fish, and that would give an attractive recreation to people who wish to fish in the area.

But many of the canals are polluted, and I should like the Minister to say what is being done about pollution. I read an article in the Observer by Mr. Smith some time ago when he gave the astounding information that Wolverhampton Corporation had an agreement to discharge untreated sewage into the Wolverhampton main canal. I hope that that is not correct. If it is, I hope that that practice will be discontinued and adequate sums spent on a proper sewerage system. Many industrial undertakings, even today, are discharging polluted water into the canals, and that is an aspect of the problem that must be dealt with.

Some canals are off the main line and there is no obvious value in maintaining them. In those instances there may be a case for filling in and using the land available for other uses. They could be used for other recreational activities. I hope, therefore, that a positive attitude will be taken to the use of canals for recreation rather than continuing to allow them to fall into disuse and neglect.

Thirdly, anyone who considers the problem of bulk transport in Britain must be amazed that we have neglected the canal system in Britain as a means of transport. Recently, there became available a report of the Inland Shipping Group, which had analysed the prospects for improving the use of canals in Britain for bulk transport. The report makes interesting comparisons with other European countries. It is clear that other countries have been able to make better use of their waterways than we have.

If we were able to improve our canal system and make better use of it for transport, it could be linked with the European system, thus saving costs as well as bringing us in touch in transport terms with a valuable network in Europe. I understand that the economic viability of canal transport is indisputable, particularly in these days of fuel shortages and the need to economise on imported fuels, and even when we have North Sea gas and oil flowing into Britain in large quantities we shall still need to economise.

I understand that 1 ton of freight can be shipped 250 miles on water per gallon of fuel compared with 58 miles by road. It is estimated that a single barge train of 10 units can replace 70 30-ton lorries. The Chairman of the Inland Shipping Group has estimated that the canals of Britain could carry 20 per cent. of Britain's bulk transport, thus reducing costs, easing road congestion, reducing noise and conserving fuel, as well as improving the environment.

I hope that the Minister will comment on the report of the Inland Shipping Group and tell us the reaction of the Government to the recommendation that the Government should establish an inland shipping planning and financing division within the Department of the Environment or the Department of Trade. I should be glad if the Minister would also say what steps are being taken to co-ordinate action on the improvement of canals for inland transport with the British Waterways Board and the other authorities concerned.

The canals in the West Midlands can be a very attractive source of recreation. Many of them now are neglected. They produce a danger to children. They are a danger to health. I hope that as a result of the debate today—and I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr. Edge) and my hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, South (Mr. George) are here to support my plea—and the attention that we are bringing to this problem, early action will be taken to improve the canals in the West Midlands and to save young lives in particular.

11.18 a.m.

Mr. Bruce George (Walsall, South)

I shall seek to be non-controversial so as not to inflame the passions of the only Conservative Member present, the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mr. Biggs-Davison). It is difficult to be politically controversial on a subject like canals. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Stonehouse) has said, the issue of canal safety is causing concern in the West Midlands. I do not propose to spend all of my time talking about canal safety, but I shall cover some of the ground mentioned by my hon. Friend.

I must declare an interest—not a financial interest. There is a canal at the bottom of my garden, but that in no way prejudices my approach to the subject.

The Black Country is at the industrial heart of the nation. Enormous wealth has been created in this area since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, but this great wealth was created at the cost of developing an environmental disaster area. One economist put it succinctly when he said: The desire to create the Jerusalem of economic growth in England's green and pleasant land has so far resulted in a conspicuous lack of both greenness and pleasantness. Few areas of the country can be so lacking in greenness and pleasantness as parts of the Black Country. Thankfully, the era of environmental irresponsibility is over.

It is a paradox that the enormous canal network created in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and for so long thought to have declined to total insignificance is experiencing a renaissance or resurgence. A great deal of encouragement has been given by successive Governments of late to our canal system and I hope that that encouragement will develop even further in the future.

Our canal system can not only play a more vital role in developing a more rational policy towards freight transport but can be utilised for recreational environmental and social purposes. When they were created, the major use of canals was economic, for the transportation of goods from one part of the country to another, and it is obvious that with imagination this role can be extended. I believe that some of our transport problems can be solved by a dynamic approach to our inland waterways system.

I speak mainly about canals in the context of the West Midlands. I believe that we must develop them. We must attempt to preserve the heritage and culture of this part of the country. It is all very well to say that canals are a symbol of the past and that in many ways the past is regretted. However, I believe that our urban areas can foster our canal network to our mutual advantage.

Canals offer to the populations living in urban areas a secluded environment clear of noise, fumes and the dangers of road traffic. One writer has called the canal system "linear parks". Others have described canals as "green fingers" linking the Black Country with more pleasant areas outside it.

Canals are used extensively, and can be used more extensively, for canoeing and for angling. Angling is very much in the tradition of Black Country sport. The canals can also be used for towpath walking. No one needs go to the Pen-nines to walk over attractive countryside. We have attractive areas for walking and rambling almost in the centres of our urban areas. Canals are often havens for wild life and interesting flora and fauna. The conservationists would have an interest in preserving our canal network.

All this requires positive thinking rather than negative thinking and imagination rather than reaction, and I am pleased to say that in their structure plans most of our Black Country boroughs have shown a dynamic approach towards our canal system and are in process of developing their plans to utilise fully the resources at our disposal. But it requires financial assistance and other encouragement from the central Government, and I hope that it will come.

Tribute must be paid to voluntary bodies like the Black Country Society and other organisations which, at a time when both central and local Government did not properly harness our resources, sought to drain canals of refuse and to instil in the population a sense of enthusiasm for the amenities on their doorsteps. One interesting feature of our canal system is that very often canals are blocked from public view. There may be thousands of people living near canals who do not recognise the existence or the potentialities of them.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North referred to the great problem of accidents in canals. This is an emotion-charged area. Whenever there is the loss of a young life, it immediately precipitates an outburst amongst local residents which is reflected in the newspapers. This is right and just, because we cannot tolerate any loss of young lives. But it is not always the canal filled with water which is a danger. Often children fall into canals which are partly filled, and in many ways these canals are the most injurious to health.

In the past 21 years 30 children have been drowned in the Wallsall area. Although that averages only one and a half or two a year, it is much too high. In one small stretch of canal 12 children have been drowned, and our local coroner has a file which grows annually.

This is an indictment of the way that we run our affairs, despite the efforts of local authorities. We cannot tolerate this un-acceptably high level of deaths. Canals are potential dangers, but, then, so are roads.

Some of the solutions suggested are perhaps impractical. Obviously, there are a number of canals which must be filled in, and many have already been dealt with in this way in the Black Country. There are other stretches which are candidates for this approach. But the cost is very high, and it would have to be done selectively.

Fencing is another solution. But we do not want indiscriminate fencing. One of the attributes of our canal system is accessability, and this is the difficulty facing those concerned about child safety. The amenity lobby will say that canals must be made accessible and that fences must be removed. Then those most concerned about child safety say that fencing must be put up, otherwise the canals are a danger to life. Clearly, there is a problem for the Minister and the local authorities as they try to reconcile the two interests, and, obviously, the interests of children must be to the fore.

Safety officers and borough engineers say that in some cases fencing can be dangerous. This may be hard to appreciate. A young child might be attracted to a fence, attempt to clamber over it, and end up in a canal. What is more, although a fence does not provide a barrier to a young child, it will provide an almost insurmountable barrier to would-be rescuers. Although there must be fencing along certain stretches and dangerous sections like locks, again indiscriminate fencing will not yield the right results.

The main solution lies in education. By that I mean not only the education of young children to the dangers of canals, but the education of parents. People living near canals must be made to realise that they are a danger and that they have to be ever vigilant.

My own local authority and the local police have done a great deal in this direction. My local newspaper, the Walsall Observer, has mounted a campaign, aided by my right hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North, to publicise the great dangers of canals to children. Children should be educated in the rules of water safety. My local authority has spent a great deal of money training young children in swimming baths and developing propaganda. This is the best long-term answer, with fencing and filling in as important secondary measures.

It may appear contradictory to say so, but environmentalists to whom I have spoken say that the solution to child safety is not in closing canals but in opening them up to the public. This is often hard to appreciate. The argument is that if canals are disused children can walk along towpaths and fall in with no one available to rescue them, whereas if the canals are fully utilised and their environmental attractions are recognised they will be properly used, people will walk along tow paths and their presence will be a block to enthusiastic young children who may be tempted to go too close to the canal. This matter must be fully recognised. The more people there are the less the danger there might be to young children.

The eighteenth century capitalists—I use that word in no pejorative sense on this occasion—unwittingly bequeathed to the modem age a priceless asset: the canal. I hope that the debate will help to publicise the enormous potentialities, not only within our areas but within the country as a whole, of the canal system and industry in helping to ease our transportation problems as well as providing recreational, leisure and social aspects. To the Earl of Dudley, to Iron-mad Wilkinson, to those eighteenth and nineteenth century businessmen who so ruthlessly exploited the area but bequeathed something priceless to us, we should offer our thanks.

11.31 a.m.

Mr. Hal Miller (Bromsgrove and Redditch)

I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Stone-house) for drawing the attention of the House to the subject of the safety and improvement of canals in the West Midlands, which is, after all, the hub of the canal system just as it is the hub of the railways and the motorway systems in this country. As a West Midlands Member, I am proud of that fact and conscious of the responsibilities of that area on those grounds.

The hon. Member for Walsall, South (Mr. George) drew particular attention to the safety aspects. I wish to draw attention to the alternative uses of canals and perhaps the lack of co-ordination between some of their functions. In these days of increasing water shortage in this country, I think we need to pay close attention to the functions of the canals with their reservoirs and possibilities for the use and distribution of water.

Connected with that point is the function of canals as part of our drainage system. I fear that there is a possibility, under the new and enlarged regional water authorities, that these uses have not been brought to their attention and are not within their consideration to the extent that those of us who are concerned with canals would wish.

Turning to the recreational uses of canals, those stretches which are not primarily required for transportation or for boating still have a valuable function for anglers. These uses are to some extent conflicting. Therefore, I suggest that stretches which are not still through routes have great recreational value for fishermen. Before we consider filling in more canals, we should bear in mind the great need of this growing sport for easily accessible stretches of water.

On the subject of improvements, there is a conflict between the recreational and commercial uses of canals, especially when we consider dredging. The considerations applying to stretches of water to be used for each purpose should apply there also.

The main waterway running through my constituency is the Birmingham and Worcester Canal. It has a more beautiful scenario than that referred to by the hon. Member for Walsall, South. However, it has the same problems of safety. Indeed, the particular conditions of some of the locks give cause for concern.

I should like more safety equipment to be available at locks. Although those who originally constructed the canals were known as navigators, unfortunately those who now make use of them are not so skilled in the art of navigation and, therefore, are not so aware of the elementary precautions for safety—I will not describe it as safety at sea—on the water. Recently there was a tragedy not far from my area. A gallant headmaster was drowned when trying to rescue one of his charges who had fallen into a lock. The most dangerous section of a canal is where a lock is sited, because of the turbulence of the water created through the functioning of the lock. I think we need to pay more attention to the provision of life-saving equipment at locks. I am conscious of the renowned Tardebigge flight—one of the major flights in this country and certainly the most beautiful. There is a great lack of such equipment, as I can verify from a sponsored walk that I undertook quite recently.

The condition of canal banks is a general point. It is of concern to fishermen and those who like to walk along towpaths, and it must inevitably affect the efficiency of canals for drainage and the other purposes to which I have referred.

I support the right hon. Member for Walsall, North in drawing the attention of the House to this important subject. I have pleasure in offering him every support on this occasion.

11.37 a.m.

Mr. Geoff Edge (Aldridge-Brownhills)

I am pleased to support my right hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Stonehouse) and my hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, South (Mr. George) on the subject of the problems of canals in the West Midlands. As a West Mid-lander born and bred and a Black Countryman who has lived the early part of his life on the banks of Black Country canals and later on the banks of a canal in Buckinghamshire, I can understand the comment made by the hon. Member for Bromsgrove and Redditch (Mr. Miller) that canals have two faces. One day they are green and very pleasant, almost like the banks of rivers, ideal for fishing, and a great weekend attraction for families from the conurbations. But they also have the aspect of green or yellow polluted water. The yellow and orange canal often looks at its best in the urban areas with ash banks devoid of vegetation and looked upon as areas having little potential for recreation.

The West Midlands canals have dangers and also potential for recreational use. We are all aware of the great problems that canals present to young children with the ever-present danger of drowning accidents.

The West Midlands and the Birmingham Black Country conurbations have the greatest concentration of canals and a more dense canal network, even after the infilling of recent years, than almost any other part of the country and most parts of Western Europe. Many of those canals are partly disused and are overgrown. They are unfenced and, therefore, create a danger to children who find themselves attracted to the waste land forming the canal banks. Often these canal banks are deserted, except for other children, and if a child falls in, there is no one there to whom others can turn for help. By the time help is obtained it is often too late. Therefore, we need to look carefully at the problem of canal safety.

Every time a child is drowned there is a great cry for the infilling of canals. However, we must have a sense of balance. If we were to fill in every canal in the West Midlands, which is what some people, particularly parents, have cried out for after the tragedy of losing a child aged 4 or 5 not only should we face the enormous cost of creating new water supply and effluent disposal systems, but we should deprive people in the area of the opportunity of boating, for which part of the system is used. Part of the Wyrley and Essington canal which flows through my constituency is widely used for boating purposes.

If we were to carry out a programme of infilling we should also, and perhaps more importantly, sever irrevocably the national canal system, because it is in the heart of the conurbation that the canal system links the Trent with the Thames and the Severn. If the system is not properly maintained in the West Midlands, it will not be possible to set out on the Thames and end up on the Trent or the Mersey. That opportunity would be lost for ever, and that would be a tragedy.

The logical conclusion to suggesting the infilling of canals is that we should infill rivers, because some rivers are infinitely more effective as a way of drowning than the canal system is ever likely to be or has been in the past. We must have a sense of proportion about this. Much of the canal system must remain, but there should be an urgent survey of the canals in the West Midlands to see what safety provisions can be made. Life-saving equipment and lifebelts are often provided on river banks but they are absent from the canals, even in the most frequented part of the system.

Secondly, we should consider the whole matter of fencing the most dangerous portions of the canals. Thirdly, we should ask whether it is necessary to maintain every scrap of the canal system that we have inherited. There are many miles of canals in the West Midlands which to all intents and purposes are unnavigable, stretches are overgrown and the brickwork on the banks has decayed, but nothing is done either to put the canals in working order or to fill them in. Many of the more backward sections are often canal arms which served factories during the Industrial Revolution, but they are now disused and should be closed for ever.

All reasonable canal enthusiasts and members of the Black Country Society, such as myself, accept that it is no longer realistic to argue that every drop of oily water and every stretch of reed-filled canal ought to be maintained. There should be an urgent survey throughout the West Midlands by the British Waterways Board and the local authorities within a specified time, and proposals should then be put to the Minister stating which portions of canal it is proposed to fill in and which portions it is proposed to maintain and—hopefully—develop for other purposes.

But that cannot be done without cash. For too long our canal systems have been starved of money. There has not been the necessary money to maintain the banks in proper repair. The banks of some sections of canals are subject to heavy erosion, with the result that the towpaths become narrower and progressively more unsafe. Money is needed to infill canals, and legislation is necessary to ensure that disused canal arms are not cut off from the main part of the system and left as cesspits for industrial effluent. That is what is happening to parts of the canal system.

In Tipton part of the canal is separated from the main system and is used solely by industry for the supply of water. It is developing into a growing pool of oily water on people's doorsteps. Such things ought not to happen. Combined with the pressure for infilling, there should be a real effort to consider developing the recreation potential of the canal system. In some cases it would be appropriate to plant trees and develop walkways, but that is not the only solution, and it is not a solution that would commend itself to all the people in the Black Country, because there is a growing interest among the people there in the role of industrial archaeology and in seeing the sinews of the Industrial Revolution, rusty and derelict though they may be. There is tremendous interest in travelling through the Dudley Tunnel by legging and in examining canal aqueducts and engineering feats which have often been destroyed, and I therefore repeat that the industrial archaeology aspect should be considered.

There is tremendous recreation potential in the area. Already the work of the Bliss Hill Museum at Telford in developing an industrial museum which includes Reynolds' famous canal is attracting a growing number of visitors.

Mr. Speaker

Order. I hope that the hon. Member will forgive me for intervening. I trust that he will allow the Minister time to reply. This debate must end at 12 o'clock.

Mr. Edge

Yes, Mr. Speaker; I was about to conclude my remarks.

There should be a careful examination of the canal system to see what needs to be infilled and what needs to be developed for recreation purposes, what can be used for industrial archaeological museums, and so on. I look forward to some sign from the Minister that the long period of neglect of the West Midlands canal system will come to an end and that within a short time there will be positive proposals for the development of the system.

11.46 a.m.

The Minister of State, Department of the Environment (Mr. Denis Howell)

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Stone-house) for raising this matter today and to hon. Members who have taken part in the debate for the constructive manner in which they have approached the safety and amenity aspects of this subject and tried to point out the possibilities that exist for improvement.

I regard the canals as of tremendous importance in the development of leisure facilities as a whole. In coming back to office as Minister for Sport, I was surprised to learn how many advisory bodies there were on water matters, both statutory and voluntary, and how enthusiastic they all are, which is no doubt why there has been a comparatively large turn-out for today's debate.

The House as a whole takes such an interest in canals that I have just reconstituted the Inland Waterways Amenity Advisory Council, which is the consumer group to the British Waterways Board, which runs the canals, and I thought it right to put back on that council two Members, one from each side of the House, who, unfortunately, had been removed from the council by my predecessor. I thought that that would be a good way of maintaining a direct link with those Members who have been writing about their problems, and I am sure that things will work out well. I know that John Barratt, the chairman of the council, welcomes the interest that is shown in this subject and the appointment of Members from both sides of the House. Until recently Mr. Barratt was county planning officer for Staffordshire, so by a coincidence he is a good Midlander who is interested in maintaining the canals.

The canal system is a product of the Industrial Revolution. It was never thought of in terms of recreational use, and I am sorry that the canals have fallen into considerable disuse over the years, with the result that there is now a tremendous backlog of maintenance work to be done. The British Waterways Board, quite properly, continually draws my attention to the problem.

The amount of money that is needed for work on the towpaths alone is enormous. I believe that we ought not to be closing canals but opening many more and even building new ones. The whole question of how one polices the canals and puts the towpaths in good order is one which local authorities and the board must consider jointly in order to provide the necessary solutions, and it will not be easy to produce the money, either.

Some hon. Members might be surprised that I should talk about opening up new canals, but I have been making speeches on the subject recently. With the new regional water authorities and the National Water Council dealing with water as a whole, we now have opportunities in this regard. Although we had a lot to say about the reorganisation of water administration introduced by the previous administration, we certainly support the principle of dealing with water as a whole.

Our need in this country is the transportation of water from areas like Wales and Scotland, where there is plenty, to areas like the South-East, East Anglia and the South-West where there is a scarcity. I have made it clear already to the authorities—I hope that I carry the House with me—that it would seem to make more sense to dig canals, to transport the water through canals which can be used for other purposes like boating and angling, than to dig holes underground and transport the water in pipes, which has been the traditional method for many years. If I may call this fresh thinking, I hope that hon. Members will agree that it makes sense in the transport of water at the same time to improve recreational amenity.

Mr. Clement Freud (Isle of Ely)

The Minister mentioned boating and angling. Is he aware of the enormous controversy and enmity between boaters and anglers on the canals?

Mr, Howell

I do not believe that there is any enmity between those two groups. There are conflicts, as the hon. Member for Bromsgrove and Redditch (Mr. Miller) said when the hon. Member for Isle of Ely (Mr. Freud) was not present. I have it in mind to mention this matter.

There is a conflict, and regional sports councils and my national advisers are doing their best to resolve it. More and more, anglers and boaters are co-operating in arrangements about hours when it is sensible to fish and not disturb the water and those times, later in the day, when it would be sensible for boats to set sail. As a former angler myself—I occasionally cast my float now, although usually in the sea—I am glad to say that anglers on the whole get up early and want to follow their pastime when the boating people are not so ready to start out. It is by accepting these facts of life that we can make some progress.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North was right to emphasise the fatalities which have occurred and which are a serious concern to us. I agree with most of the facts that he gave about waterways in the Birmingham area, so I will not go over that ground again. I think that five children have been killed in the last two years in Birmingham, and that is a matter of great concern to us all.

I do not think that fencing is the answer. Experience is showing that the answer is much more likely to be found in opening up the canals, having wardens and encouraging people to be about. There have been some extraordinarily interesting experiments supporting this line. For example, by opening up the canals and having wardens, which we might call the halfway stage between the two arguments, on the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, where about 30 young people were killed between 1958 and 1967, which was tragic, between 1968 and 1974 the number dropped to three, which is a significant improvement. In London there have been no fatalities since all the canals were opened to the public in June 1968. These are two striking sets of figures showing the success which can be achieved with the right sort of public approach. By opening up the canals in this way and making safety the predominant consideration, we encourage people to respect water as well as enjoy it. 1 am glad that all who have spoken have supported that view.

We have a lot of unfortunate evidence about fences. People make holes in fences. The very fact that a fence has been erected is an attraction in itself in most cities to young people to get over it, under it, or through it. In a very unhappy case at Winson Green in Birmingham last year, when a boy of four was drowned, the workmen erecting the fence testified that the children involved had uprooted the fence posts before the concrete was dry. So we cannot rely on fencing to produce the desirable ends, and it is unconstructive to do so. It is also much more sensible, for the reasons which have been given and which I will not go over again, not to fill in canals.

Local authorities have a tremendous role to play. I recently opened the Ashton Canal at Manchester which had been stagnant, full of rubbish and in a terrible state. Everybody advised the British Waterways Board to fill it in, as it had no further use. But, for the argu- ment stated by my hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr. Edge) —that this would disrupt the Cheshire ring of canals and interfere with the totality of navigation—it was decided to reject that approach.

Two or three thousand volunteers turned up week after week to clean the canal. They did a splendid job. The local authorities and the board have joined together to lay out the towpath with greens and trees. As I went along it on the day I opened it, we were cheered at almost every lock by the local inhabitants, starting from the centre of Manchester. We agreed that it was a marvellous place for hikers and walkers and for people to sit and stroll on a Sunday morning. It has produced a new dimension in the leisure opportunities for the people of industrial Lancashire. I am sure that that is the approach to these matters that we want. There is plenty of legislation to enable local authorities to involve themselves in these matters, and I hope that they will do so.

My right hon. Friend also mentioned freight. The British Waterways Board is anxious to do what it can to encourage the greater transport of freight, which obviously has attractions, but in the West Midlands the width of the canals makes it almost impossible for freight to become an economic proposition. However, if anyone can come up with economic propositions we should be very interested, because we want to do all we can to encourage them. But we have to recognise the difficulties. We have just received the report of the Inland Waterways Association, which my right hon. Friend also mentioned. This is being urgently considered by Ministers in my Department, particularly by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Transport Industries.

I am grateful to all hon. Members for having taken part in this debate. I am grateful also to my hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills for his point about industrial archaeology. Those of us who wish to protect and preserve our industrial heritage cannot do so if we go around filling in the canals which are an essential part of that heritage.

The great problem in this area in future is that more and more people will want to use the canals and will want them restored. 1 share that view, and I am glad to know that it is the view of my hon. Friends as well. The difficulty is that there are already signs that the canals are becoming over-congested. More and more people in the cities want to put boats on the canals so that they can travel, for example, from the Thames to the Trent. This underlines the importance of the West Midlands canals as a central part of the inland water highway of this country.

For all our citizens we shall try to use the canals in the way that I have suggested—constructively, while at the same time taking every possible step to maintain safety. I repeat that that can best be done by opening them up, spending money on them and making them attractive to the public. Then, as I have shown, questions of safety automatically fall into proper perspective.

I thank all hon. Members who have taken part in the debate.