NO NO NO to privatised waterways! our urban spaces are being devoured by developers don't let them get their money grabbing hands on our waterways, canals and towpaths.

geraldine ryan, london,

This will mean ''Fees'' for ANY and every boat using the waterways....for using the locks - or any British Waterways owned 'asset'....well OVER and above ANYTHING charged at present - not forgetting the 'use of Land owned by BW & therefore walkers will be charged '...bloody endless !! Grrrrr

B.Meredew, London,

Something needs to be done. They can't just sell off the waterways and make it something exclusive.

Elke, London,

what would happen to all of the boats, where would they go?

jess, Cornwall,

'...selling off a swath of the Government’s £337 billion of assets. '

The waterways are NOT 'Government assets' to be sold off to the highest bidder - they are the assets of Britain and the British people.

There most certainly shlould be a public referendum on this latest piece of asset-stripping by this government. How are waterways users going to continue to enjoy the waterways heritage if all the mooring places are bought up by people only interested in making money? Mooring fees are likely to go through the roof, boaters' facilities will be replaced by more profit-making enterprises and that freedom we prize so highly will not exist any more.

I'm sure that the government will argue that private purchase of the waterways will lead to major improvements but I wouldn't believe them to oblige them - look at the railways!

Ann Walker, Lincoln, UK

This is appalling! Selling the waterways to the private, making money on the back of the environment, gradually destroying what is left of nature in this country, triggering potential conflict between areas for water distribution, possible extra fees for the consumers in order to maintain privately these waterways.
This governement rather than 'washing their hands' for the problem of lack of water in the South of England should instead look at undertaking a national scheme that would bring the extra volume of water from the North down to the South.

Andre Suwalsky, WORTHING,

We retired a couple of years ago, bought a narrowboat and looked to live a simple, gentle life. We rid our lives of' 'stuff' and thought we could survive cheaply cruising the waterways - our beautiful heritage.
In the past 2 years, both licences and mooring fees have increased and red diesel is on its way out.
Initially I loved the fact that warehouses were being renovated and didn;t mind that new builds were popping up everywhere, until I found that the narrowboats were becoming the pariahs of the waterways. NO MOORING - PRIVATE LAND - NO BOATS!
We go out of our way to be friendly to everyone, to talk to people and to educate children about the waterways and its history. People are fascinated by the boats and want to know so much. It is really heartening the interest it inspires.
If this proposal comes to fruition, ordinary people like us will be driven from the canals and the life we planned and worked so hard to achieve will be lost to us forever,

Linda, The Waterways, UK

Public Refererendumrequired! Preposterous, totally inexcusabily irresponsible and 'scary' ! Surely we have seen over & over the lack of investment , moral/parental management and accountability that ensues, due to focus on profit, costs and share holders. All these infrastructures and services get 'milked' and 'run down'. Look at our water companies, Royal Mail, Railways, British Telecom, Area Electricity Boards(for whom I worked for 17 years). These merely become a commodity in a pyramidal profit making system, another aspect of our lives ending up in the hands of temporary profit seeking investors in other countries. From an ecological, environmental and sustainable point of view it is appalling, totally the wrong direction - the knock on effects and implications have not been thought through. Trying to 'sell our family silver". Whosoever has their name and rank attached to this 'hair brained' scheme should have their judgement,professionalism & positions called into question.

Natalie Flemington, Howden and York, Yorkshire

The problem with all these "get-rich-quick" schemes involving selling of swaths of assets, is that you can only sell them once!!!
- And its usally a very much one-way process, thats usaully regretted 5years down the line.

I have to admit, im apalled that anyone can even suggest actaully going though with a plan like this. And i for one will not be back any such movement. Big Mistake.

Danirel Hutchinson, Tarporley, Cheshire

Judging by all the relevant and commonsense comments so far -stating the blindingly obvious to those of us who have any knowledge of recent history and capable of rational, responsible perspective, sadly we have people in positions of 'power' who are not fit to hold office.

Natalie Flemington, Howden and York, Yorkshire

I would like to say I'm shocked, but I'm not. Another one of Gordon's harebrained schemes that will see the waterways community flattened. Let the developers in so they can build another "exclusive" development of luxury flats. That's just what we need.
This shortsighted, illiberal government has caused more damage to our society in the last 10 years than I would ever have thought possible. I'll never vote for them again.

Chris Davies, A boat (for now?),

What a disgracful proposition. The canals are a national asset and should be improved to provide green arteries through our urban centres and provide good links between them with towpaths being improved to provide inclusive access for all (except illegal motorcycle use!), the provision of such facilities could go a long way to encourage local journeys to be made without using cars.
Gordon should read what Jonny two Jags had to say on the subject in his white paper 'waterways for Tomorrow'.
The thought of selling off land to the likes of Tesco is abhorrent. The government should be backing/funding BWB to regenerate OUR assets in a way that will benefit all users. A revitalised and improved canal system would benefit many people in many different ways, if we sell them off there will be a huge disbenefit to many at the expense huge profits for a few - who will no doubt be major backers of the Labour party. They might even set up yet another quango to run what bits are left with water in

Murray, Kegworth, UK

and presumably the public has no say in the sale of these public assets? cheers Gordon, here's your p45, now clear off.

phil, London, uk

The waterways are a national asset to be enjoyed by the whole population and paid for by the whole population from taxes. If this is sold as a commercial enterprise the waterways system will have disapperaed under building within 20 years. This is just another way for Brown to have more money to waste on consultants and gimmicky schemes.

Steve, Kegworth,

An appalling prospect.

Another reason why New/Old/Same or whatever "Labour" claims to be these days will not be getting my support in future.

Jonny, London,

I few years ago, I saw a French sci-fi film whereby a group of unscrupulous businessmen were trying to buy France from the current French government. It wasn't a black comedy and I thought it was a sign of things to come.

This effort to privatize the canals -- any canals, anywhere -- is the thin edge of the wedge for the realization of that future French nightmare.

And, you'll all know that it's too late when they -- being the Government -- start selling off all the roads and bridges.

Roger, Bellmere, QLD, Australia

All this government seems to concentrate on is the sale of the nation's assets. They' seem to have sold everything but the kitchen sink so far and at the worst possible prices.

Politicians are a law unto themselves and are completely removed from realisation of what the nation wants.

No wonder less than a third of the nation bothers to vote at general or local elections, because politicians operate like Fred Karno's army!

Pull out of Europe, reduce the numbers of immigrants, halve the numbers of MP's, do away with regional assemblies, restore a true national rail network and listen to public opinion.

The next politician who vows to put himself out and address these real concerns will win the next general election.

trevorjd, Torbay, Devon

what worries me what happens if the canlas get sold canals will be filled in and built on.

i,macmputerbuddie, millport , north ayrshire

Treasury bureaucrats rule the roost again. EVERYTHING these days is simply about "cashflow". The old saying is increasingly relevant "They know the cost of everything and the value of nothing".

Gerry Watts, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

We all know that any money raised by Brown will be wasted as they are incapable of delivering value for money anywhere. They may as well burn the money. A good point is that selling everything off reduces the future power of government.over our lives. Since they are incompetent this will be a big plus. The most successful thing Brown did was to release the Bank of England from political control. Perhaps he's learnt from this.

Derek Emery, Bedworth, UK

If you want an explanation of why these things happen read "Rule By Secrecy" by NY Times journalist Jim Marrs.

Gerry Watts, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

This has to be one of the worse suggestions this government has yet come up with - having carved up Iraq do they now want to carve up the UK? Is money the only thing that motivates their ill thought out plans? The English countryside is beautiful and so are its tranquil waterways - leave them alone!
Ivana Wattis, Greenwich

Ivana Wattis, london,

For many city-dwellers riverside paths and canal-side paths are their countryside and provide their only space for peace, quiet and exercise.

Oh well - say goodbye to all that! Hello to wall-to-wall glass and steel apartments. Hello to restricted access to canal-side paths, limitless charges on people who live on the river and leisure space sold off to the highest bidder.

Mark, London, UK

The Government have a proven track record of swallowing up money meant for other purposes ever since Winston Churchill robbed the Raod Fund, when he was Chancellor in the 1920s. If this mony vanishes down the Government drain it will only be a matter of time before British Waterways comes round again with the begging bowl.
So far as BW valuable "Heritage" sites are concerned, such as historic wharves, museums etc, the bean counters will be licking their lips and waiting to turn them into sterile developments with little or no relevance to the priceless and unique national asset that our waterway system provides. So far as any relief to road congestion and pollution, forget it. A waterway system where all wharves and boatyard sites are taken fopr development will be analagous to a railway without stations.

David Blagrove, Towcester, Northants

I think this is a terrible idea. Some things are better held in trust for the country, either to preserve their natural beauty or because they're part of the infrastructure. Canals and waterways are both!

And what a backwards idea, to sell land next to water to developers, just when we should be planning for the effects of stormier winters which will increase the risk of flooding.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Jessica, Reading, UK

What about the Millions of anglers that use the canal system regularly? Or does the government no longer care about the man in the street?

John Sime, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire

Now I have heard just about everything........
It will be "privatising our air supply", "taxing our gold fillings" and "selling off our territorial seabed" next.

Oops, I shouldn't have suggested that last one....some government "spinning" advisor might read this and be desperate for some "browny points".

steveh, oxford, england

No! No! No!
We try to encourage our children to go fishing. It's peaceful and out in the fresh air. Better than sitting glued to a game console.
We like to walk along the banks of rivers and canals and watch the boats and wildlife and scenery. Sell off these National Treasures [not assets] and you will see what happens. Ugly monstrosities allong the banks and restricted movement. We can't fish at Runneymede. The Car Park costs too much. We get free parking at Halfords/Homebase, but the fishing isn't nearly as good. We can't fish at Windsor. The parking is too expensive, and the only car park near the river is always full..
Thatcher's Supermarket ideology, price it and sell it off, has led to a worse rail network than we had before Privatisation.
The Treasury has plenty of money coming in. Spend it on UK citizens who have paid their dues, and get out of Iraq. The money wasted on that war would give pensioners a decent rise. Enough is Enough.

Beryl Russell, Windsor, England

What is striking in this article is the absence of perspective on the impact of canal freight could have on road congestion.
Canals are under-used and other European countries are seriously looking at inreasing their role as they provide a low emission, environementally friendly transportation infrastructure.

Ludovic Windsor, London ,

Privitise the government and its services maybe the money raised would reduce the ever growing tax burden

Robert Peake, Malaga, Spain

So that'll pay for the Tax Credits fiasco. What then???

edward, ipswich,

Good public access to water encourages healthy activities and awareness of our environment.

We have amongst the lowest level of public access to inland waterways in the world, This sell off will further reduce the already limited access as profit from development will take priority.

In the last century many public rights of way leading to water have been lost to development, and these cannot be reclaimed once they are built on.

We became a great nation on the back of our close relationship with our nations waters, and access to that for the general public is being removed, often permanently, or held in private, again mainly for profit.

Brevan Miles, Southampton, England

Keep BWB and their land in public ownership and rather than flog off or leasing the land bring in "partner" stakeholder groups alongside BWB in a UK LLP framework to:

(a) invest in building properties on the land (non UK pension funds or Islamic investors interested in a simple REIT clone);

(b) develop and ¨manage the properties;

(c) live in the properties built on it.

This "Land Partnership" model combines:

(a) affordable housing; with

(b) a good pension investment,

(c) a fair return for developer partners who need not risk a penny of capital;

(d) a return for BWB far greater than flogging off either themselves or their land;

Such a "Land Partnership" is not Rocket Science. But you won't hear about it from anyone paid by the hour, rather than the outcome.

Chris Cook, Linlithgow, UK

We need this money to pay for many things;
Polish and Bulgarian social security entitled claimants
Deportees incentives to deport themselves because we can't
Foreign criminals in our jails
Cash payments for abuses of the 'human rights' of prisoners
The cost of monitoring terror suspects 365 days a year
Legal aid to asylum seekers from across the globe
Housing and benefits to asylum seekers
Housing and benefits to illegal immigrants
Housing and benefits to 3 million out of work 2 million of those claiming 'disability'
2 perpetual wars
Islamic state schools
Spiralling Government wages and 'claims'
800 thousand public sector jobs and pensions
EU subsidies
EU ministers
etc...etc...
So Gordon is considering selling more assets belonging to the people to bail out this corrupt government and his own binge now pay later financial policy, which is coming home to roost just as he gets to number 10. No surprises there really.

David Thijm, Stourbridge, UK

It is strange that the Government can decide to sell something it "owns". As I "own" part of the government perhaps I should have a say in what it sells.

This has to be one of the most disgraceful ideas I have ever heard.

Why does the Government need more money? It would appear that there money management is akin to the previous (probably still current) leaking pipes of our water system.

Perhaps Gordy should try mending the pipe rather than finding another tap.

Phil Mitchell, Reading, Berkshire, UK

Surely there has to be a reality check here - in fact the Government has no assets other than those temporarily under their control but which are actually the assets of the British people. Does the nation actually want common land such as tow paths and river banks sold off, leading to over development and yet further pollution, not to say destruction of public amenities?

Judith, London,

Why not just sell off the whole country and be done with it? Is nothing sacred anymore? Everything is about making more money these days, it disgusts me. No government should be allowed to sell or change anything that any subsequent government cannot reverse. They are only in power for a relatively short time yet seem to have the power to make irreversible changes. We all know the Tories were also guilty of this, hence our appalling railways. This country belongs to the people and it is being literally destroyed by government.

Victoria Cheston, London, England

I know a chap in France who owns and is buying up all the canal boats and has been converting them to Grain boats for the grain harvest. His family is a historic family of canal boat people (he is very rich by the way)

If France can in private hands move a large part of its agriculture freight onto the water ways, and at all times be profitable. Why cannot we have a few companies doing the same.

Most industry is near canals, and nearly all agriculture industry on land next to canals.......

I realise trucks are the domanent form of transport but besides tourism on canals and land speculation I see no other profit,,, profit should be formed from freight transportation as well as a matter of policy. myself I would part finance anyone wanting to be involved in canal freight are there any other eople out there wanting to get involved

My name is found in most search engines as an editor so I am easily contactable

Nicholas Iles, Oswestry, Shropshire

As a previous labour party member I regularly told John Denham that Gordon Brown was 'a legend in his own mind' as his figures did not add up. We now know of the huge black hole in government finances and this is the way Gordon Brown will fill it. Unfortunately it's a one off. I don't own a boat but you know what will happen to the licence fee and you will walk the tow path past the back gardens of wealthy home owners instead of looking at countryside

Philip Galvin, Southampton, UK

The scheme to develop housing and offices next to Canary Wharf is "dubbed Wood Wharf" for a very simple reason.

The site IS Wood Wharf -in the West India Docks, a name which goes back to the 19th century mahogany trade. Think of all the woodwork in City banks, pubs and bars.

The timber trade continued there until 1966 when it moved to the Surrey Docks - so Wood Wharf is a "real" name - not some developer's label.

British Waterways inherited the remaining dock lands not already sold for development from the London Docklands Development Corporation.

Ken Welsby, London, UK

It will be really pleasant, meandering in your boat between concrete canyons of supermarkets.

Wasn't it Margaret Thatcher who was said "to know the price of everything, and the value of nothing"? Perhaps we ought to buy Gordon a handbag!
Perhaps if we privatize the canals they will be as well run as the railways?

Arthur Dann, King's Lynn, England

It shouldn't be long before number 10 would be viable as a tourist attraction as the house of horrors, perhaps it already is.

David Stanley, Gourge, France

Prap their kingships might consider "selling off" the Lake District or Snowdonia to the highest bidder, be nice for executive housing, they would.

Geoff Ellis, Wemouth, UK