In the meanwhile our fundraising efforts must continue. The David Suchet Appeal continues to progress beyond our best expectations. It has currently reached £150,000, well on its way to the target of £200,000. I must stress that we are committed to hand over every penny of the target sum and that we still need the very positive support of our members and of anyone who has the future of the restoration at heart. I am sure that how we perform at this crucial stage will determine how we are perceived for many years ahead. Already we have risen strongly in public esteem and it is vital that we continue this momentum.

I cannot stress too strongly how much we are in David Suchet’s debt. His public support for the Trust continues to be invaluable. He has also contributed generously in financial terms and we are very grateful for all that he and Sheila are doing for us. In June, David traveled to Willenhall to present and narrate the most recent of the Laurence Hogg videos which features the Lichfield and Hatherton. We could not have hoped to have such an active Vice-President who also has a busy professional life to deal with.

Finally, an appeal to all our members, and to anyone who reads these words and has the work of the Lichfield and Hatherton at heart. Although we have now reached our one thousandth membership the number of active members is still lower than current work loads require. I fully understand that a large proportion of our membership is expressing its support through joining and that the receipts from these subscriptions forms the backbone of our income. Even so, I am uniquely placed to see the heavy demands which are placed on our Directors whose remits extend far beyond their formal titles. As our work expands we urgently need more volunteers to come forward. We need professional and technical skills of all kinds but especially anyone with engineering and designing experience. I know how difficult it can be to make the initial move but now, more than ever before, we need help and any approach, no matter how informal, will give us the opportunity we need.

The Chairman’s message continues to be an up-beat one. It is all too easy to be obsessed with the current problems and thereby lose sight of past achievements and current progress. If we were to review where we stood at this time last year and then see where we are now we would see just how much has been achieved. If we can maintain the same rate of progress in the months ahead there will be no holding us. In a summer when the "closed for ever" Huddersfield Narrow was reopened we have every reason to feel positive.

BIRMINGHAM NORTHERN RELIEF ROAD
A lot of water has passed under the bridge since I last reported on the BNRR, and it continues to flow strongly as I write. Unfortunately it is still virtual water although we are hopeful that the bridges may become concrete in the near future. Resolution of the BNRR crossings is crucial to the future of our two restoration schemes and I must once again use much of these notes to record the important events that we are involved in.

Our political campaign for resolution of the problem has continued unabated, with strong support from local MPs including questions in the House by Dr Tony Wright and Michael Fabricant and many representations to Ministers from other MPs, local authorities, waterway bodies and individual supporters. Of particular importance has been some behind-the-scenes commercial pressures on MEL. We have found many friends in our campaign for justice and their cumulative pressure is now becoming irresistible.

COMMONS SELECT COMMITTEE
CBW27 reported on the strong support for our case for BNRR crossings in the House of Commons ETRA Select Committee's Fourth Report on Inland Waterways. The Government's response was published in May:

"We note the Committee's concern about the effect of the Birmingham Northern Relief Road on the Lichfield and Hatherton Canals but we regret the decision cannot be changed. We are encouraging the various parties to work together to resolve this issue. Active discussions are taking place and we wish them every success."

It was most disappointing that they were still re-iterating the irrelevant mantra that the decision cannot be changed when they were not being asked to change the decision but to intervene to solve the problem. However, this stock response perhaps disguises a change of heart as it now appears that Government is actively involved, of which more later.

SOUTHERN ROUNDABOUT CULVERT
As reported in CBW27, we have already agreed the design and price with CAMBBA for construction of the Southern Roundabout Culvert 155 at Churchbridge to enlarged dimensions for the canal. At a meeting on 3rd July it was confirmed that through our partnership with The Waterways Trust we could now guarantee the funding payments according to an arranged schedule over 2 years from our David Suchet Appeal income. The support of TWT has been vital in reaching this agreement.

Although this work was originally scheduled for early May it had not started by early July but was increasingly imminent. The site can be seen from a lay-by on the north side of the A5 just east of the existing Churchbridge roundabouts,

opposite the houses, and is next to where a new temporary pylon has been built. As construction may take only a few weeks it could be finished by the time you read this - but I said that last time !

MOTORWAY CULVERT
Agreement on the second culvert, the Motorway Culvert 144 west of Walkmill Lane has proved more elusive. Despite our requests to CAMBBA to redesign this as an enlarged structure combined with the Washbrook culvert as for 155, and to give us a price on the same basis, this was not done and the design for smaller culverts was continued. We were then doubly shocked to receive in early May an estimate of £345,000, compared with the £130,000 (+ VAT) negotiated for the first culvert of similar dimensions, plus a demand from MEL for an additional £500,000 'liquidated damages', and all this to be agreed by 1st June ! Unlike the first culvert this price included profit and overheads and was not based on a detailed design, but the real killer was the £½m to cover the risk element of any possible contractual delays. As the government's original decision in 1997 (which they are so keen not to change) required MEL to carry the full cost of any loss of toll income consequent on construction of the canal crossings, this demand for disruption compensation, and its payment up front even if no such delay occurred by the end of the contract, was completely outrageous.

OUTRAGEOUS DEMANDS
It had been obvious to us over many years that MEL were unsympathetic and unhelpful, and we had begun to suspect that they were being actually obstructive, despite their obligation to "facilitate" our plans for the canal crossings, since they had repeatedly strung us along and not acted on promises made to provide information and undertake design and costings. It appeared that the good relations that we had established with their contractors CAMBBA leading to the agreement on the first culvert and our ability to finance it had been somewhat of a surprise to them. They have always banked on the canal restorations not happening and refused to deal with us seriously. Whilst attributing motivations can be a dangerous thing, it seemed to us that MEL were now deliberately attempting to obstruct our progress by their wholly unjustified demands.

We have powerful forces helping us behind the scenes, which MEL have continually under-estimated, and this situation brought increased pressure from them on MEL and, to some extent unfortunately, on CAMBBA and its constituent companies. CAMBBA were willing to help but would not risk acting without MEL's agreement. MEL would not act without excessive amounts of money and instructions from the Highways Agency. It was clear that the matter could only be resolved by Government ministers instructing MEL to comply with their obligations under the Concession Agreement on 'facilitation' and on carrying loss of toll income, but by then the general election had been announced and Ministers and MPs were unobtainable.

POLITICAL INTERVENTION
There was little we could do at this crucial stage except sit tight and hope common sense prevailed. 4 years of political campaigning had ensured that the issues were well known where it mattered and could no longer be ignored. MEL's 'deadline' was seen as the false bargaining point it really was and Ministers were reliably reported as recognising that MEL were making "wholly unreasonable demands". The election resulted in the former DETR being divided between 2 new Departments and the departure of John Prescott whose ill-advised original decision to ignore his Inspector's recommendations has caused us all this trouble. When the dust settled we found that waterways were now under DEFRA (the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs), but at least we had some continuity with Lord Whitty remaining as Parliamentary Under-Secretary with responsibility for waterways.

Now, at last, the Government seems to have realised that they can no longer continue to wash their hands of this issue and just leave it to us and our supporters to solve, and we were told in late June that high level discussions between senior civil servants and MEL were urgently taking place, with Ministers considering issuing instructions to resolve the matter. We met CAMBBA on 3rd July when they confirmed that design work for the enlarged culvert had at last commenced, underwritten by the Government, although its financing was still under discussion.

As we go to press the 'deadline' for an agreement has been extended to 9th July and matters rest on a knife edge.

CRANE BROOK VALLEY AQUEDUCT
The Lichfield Canal crossing of the BNRR requires a new aqueduct and a replacement deep lock and we are making progress with their design and financing. £250,000 has been generously offered by the Manifold Trust, subject to certain conditions, to help construct the aqueduct concurrent with the motorway, and some of this grant can be used for the detailed design work with the balance going towards construction. Although this will not cover the full cost, which is not yet known in detail but was earlier estimated at about £500,000, it should enable at least the abutments and central pillars to be installed and some work on the trough. We are, of course, continuing to seek additional funds to finish the job through the David Suchet Appeal and elsewhere.

MEL are required to install the aqueduct foundations at their expense, which obviously needs the design of the superstructure that they will carry to be agreed. Accordingly, CAMBBA have now produced an 'Approval In Principle' document which proposes a composite structure with steel beams supporting a concrete trough of two spans between a central pier and closed abutments. We have asked for changes to some dimensions and commented on other details but the design appears to be a practical one with the trough capable of being constructed either in-situ or off-line. However, CAMBBA say they do not have the resources spare to work this up into a detailed design so we have had to engage our own engineering consultants to do this and have also asked them to design the structure for the deep lock, the foundations of which need to be integrated with the aqueduct.

The deep lock is required to raise the canal level to cross over the road and will be immediately adjacent to the eastern end of the aqueduct. Roy Sutton has previously produced concept drawings of the aqueduct for us and has now also drawn the lock and its connection to the end of the aqueduct. This is complicated by the aqueduct being skew to the road but it does give space for water control structures; by-wash and back pumping. We are most grateful to Roy for his considerable professional assistance. We hope to construct at least the end wall of the lock, being integral with the aqueduct abutment, and the full structure if we can obtain the necessary additional finance and land. However, we have made it clear to CAMBBA that we expect to build most, if not all of the aqueduct and issues of ownership, maintenance and finance are being addressed.

DONATIONS & GRANTS
There will be a full list of recent contributors elsewhere but I must thank you all for your continuing magnificent level of support which has now brought the David Suchet Appeal up to £150,000 in cash and pledges. This very nearly covers the full cost of the first culvert at Churchbridge, for which we may yet be able to avoid the VAT, but the Appeal continues of course with further funds required for the other crossings. Contributions of all sizes are equally welcome and the total so far represents over 800 individual donations.

Donations for our ongoing restoration work are also welcome and we are pleased to have been given two grants recently towards work on Lock 26; a £400 grant from Lichfield City Council and £2,000 from the W.A.Cadbury Charitable Trust.

As presaged last time, some changes to the format of this report reflect the ever increasing media coverage we are attracting and the impossibility of reporting on it all in detail. However, copies of all the press and magazine reports mentioned are kept by me in the Trust's cuttings albums, now well into a 3rd volume, the latest of which is often on display at meetings and events, and can be consulted by arrangement at any time. Reports this time cover the period 5th April to 5th July.

Further work on the offside wing wall has now built it up to almost the top including the reconstruction of the narrow flight of stairs, but excluding the brick paving at bank level which has been left until cement droppings from above have ceased. The combined visit from KESCRG and London WRG helped with this further excavation and back filling. We are now starting the repair of the main chamber wall on the towpath side.
Thanks to all volunteers, particularly the brick cleaners.
A grant of £2000 from William A Cadbury Trust has been gratefully received towards the cost of employing builders for the main chamber walls.

Tireless brick cleaning at Lock 26; Barry Kenn, Bill Cole and Trevor Morris		Local work party busy with site preparation

Waterways Recovery Group repairing the main chamber wall in Lock 26
(Photos by Jan Horton)

At Darnford

Water levels continue to fall. Roy Sutton, Honorary Consultant Engineer to IWA visited the site and dismissed the possibility of leakage through the main Bentonite lining, the temporary dam, and (in any significant quantity) through the stop planks. He commented favourably on the standard of workmanship including the seal between the Bentonite and the piling.

As to the cause of the leakage (over and above evaporation), he thought the most likely possibility was vertically down the joint between one pile and the next passing between clay seals on either side of the piling and down into the sandy subsoil. This problem does not occur in existing canals because the piling passes into the original puddle clay.

He recommended a remedial procedure comprising peeling back the Bentonite and sealing the joints between piles with a modern sealant before replacing the Bentonite. We intend to carry this out in October ready for the next water abstraction period.

Meanwhile until this solution has been proved we have decided to suspend piling and hence the Sponsored Piling. All piles already sponsored will have inscriptions fixed soon. We would like to thank everyone who has contributed.

The watered section at Darnford under a fresh fall of snow		WRG North West busy earth moving and building up the embankment
(Photos by Jan Horton)