Jump to content

Struggling with C&RT


tafelberg

Featured Posts

Ok when British waterways were our Lords and Masters, I paid my license and mooring and sat back while they looked after the waterways. Now they have changed management I see them asking for volunteers to do the same work that the BW staff used to do, clearing rubbish etc.

 

My mooring fees and license go up in price and yet C&RT are going to use volunteers to do work they used to pay for. I also note that the Staff member who used to live in the lock cottage at Uxbridge lock has been thrown out so they can sell the property!!!! (he has now moved with his wife on to a boat next door to me, I was actually thrown off my mooring so he could moor there but thats another story).

 

I just wonder how other people feel about the transition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my cunning plan.

 

They should get themselves around Uxbridge and Denham and actually get people to pay for licenses and moorings where they are due.

 

However I would point out, that I don't need a cunning plan.

 

C&RT are not my responsibility.

 

I find it hard enough to afford my licenses and moorings. I'm not criticising their actions, simply trying to understand what is going on.

 

I suppose it's like saying...lets cut funding for the roads and ask for volunteers to dig them up because we don't have as much money as we used to.

 

For me...either charge me for a license, or I'll work on the canal. You ain't getting both. I suppose it also depends how you see the canals, who does it belong to? If it belongs to all of us then we all have a responsibility to contribute to it's upkeep, wether by paying moorings and licenses, if it is owned by the government...then it's surely their responsiblity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So your licence and mooring fees account for less than 15% of CaRT funding. The goverment is cutting funding.........what is your cunning plan to make up the shortfall in funding?

 

That is not answering the question. The licence goes up, and paid jobs are replaced by volunteers. Are you happy with that?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's early days and we should give CART chance. When you look at how little money CART/BW get for managing the whole canal network it's amazing we have any navigable canals at all.

 

And that's before the T&M breach...

 

 

Whilst I don't disagree with your sentiment, lets not forget that CRT came into this knowing exactly what it involved. Indeed, all those working in CRT have hands on experience, because they are the same people who worked for BW. If you have ever been involved with TUPE you'll know what I mean.

 

BW had many faults, but it's main interessest was the canal, and the navigation of it. I'm not so sure that CRT has the same attitude towards keeping the canals navigable. Although the current breech of the T&M will be a good baptism of fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we all had your attitued then the canal network would just fall into disrepair, in an ideal world the revenue would pay for people to do the work and all would be well but its not.

 

But this is like saying we should all care for our roads otherwise they will just fall into disrepair if the government get a bit short of cash?

 

I suppose we come back to who owns the canals? If I own the canals, I'm responsible for their upkeep. If the government own them. Guess what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we all had your attitued then the canal network would just fall into disrepair, in an ideal world the revenue would pay for people to do the work and all would be well but its not.

 

Welcome to the discussion :cheers: It would help, if you clarify who you are addressing, so that other participants know how to respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not answering the question. The licence goes up, and paid jobs are replaced by volunteers. Are you happy with that?

 

No I would not be happy with jobs being replaced by volunteers. Do you have evidence for that?

The only way to stop jobs being replaced by volunteers is to increase the CaRT income. If they do not increase licences and people are not happy to donate then unfortunately I do not know how to stop redundancies.

Collecting licences fees from the few boats that are not licensed will make no difference when you take into account the cost of collecting those licence fees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But this is like saying we should all care for our roads otherwise they will just fall into disrepair if the government get a bit short of cash?

 

I suppose we come back to who owns the canals? If I own the canals, I'm responsible for their upkeep. If the government own them. Guess what.

 

 

 

Good point, if I'm responsible for the upkeep, do I own the canal? I'm liking this new thinking.

 

Oi, get of my canal...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point, if I'm responsible for the upkeep, do I own the canal? I'm liking this new thinking.

 

Oi, get of my canal...

 

Yes, here's the deal, if I own the canals, I decide who uses them! :-)

Edited by tafelberg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of us seem to gain an aweful lot of pleasure from the canals, it seems to me that it is quite natural, if I am in the position to do it, to put something back. Yes CRT are asking for volunteers, they are a charity, but it is not compulsory. Our group of volunteers in Braunston is predominantly retired people which is to be expected and probably 50% boat owners. They are all motivated because of their desire to improve the canals. Yes, it would be nice if someone came along and did all this work, but this is the real world, if we dont make an effort the canals will deteriorate even further. Funnily enough, those doing the volunteering are gaining a lot of pleasure and self satisfaction from their efforts

Whether we like it or not CRT is what we have and it is up to us to learn how to deal with it. It is far from perfect, but we have far more chance of changing things from the inside as authorised volunteers that those who sit on the sidelines watching.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remain optimistic that C&RT will come good, but it won't happen overnight. A lot of things have got to change and it may take 5-10 years to achieve a funding and volunteer model that starts to show significant improvements.

 

Challenges like the current breach on the T&M won't help things along. The breach on the Mon & Brec in 2007 ended up costing £8.5m as BW decided to do extensive relining to prevent further breaches on that stretch. The reports I've seen regarding the T&M near Dutton Hollow suggest that the bank was suffering erosion in several places due to the heavy rainfall apart from where the breach occurred. It remains to be seen what the repairs will cost and what other repair works are cancelled as a result.

 

However, the new Trust does at least have the option to launch a repair appeal similar to those run by the National Trust. It will be interesting to see if this event initiates the first appeal of this kind.

Edited by MikeV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose what I'm struggling with is the paradigm shift between a government organisation to a trust. Oh, and what about all those Marina's owned by British Waterways Marinas Limited, do they still get money from them?

As I said, it is far from perfect, there are many parts of the CRT organisation which are still living in the past, and in some cases seem to be contrary to what is good for the canals. All I can say is that we have seen a very recent change in attitude by some staff and even gained concessions by appealing direct to the trustees when discussions with management have failed. There is a need for different thinking from both sides before we will see much improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's early days and we should give CART chance. When you look at how little money CART/BW get for managing the whole canal network it's amazing we have any navigable canals at all.

 

And that's before the T&M breach...

 

For the record, boaters provide BW/CART with a gross income of about £35m a year which is the same as government grant this year.

 

CART will spend around £80m on the waterways this year only about two thirds of the amount needed.

 

It is not a case of giving CART a chance because the predictions they have made indicate that the waterways will continue to deteriorate over the period of government guaranteed funding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I think it's a good idea for CART to develop a volunteer "arm". We already volunteer on the Cotswold Canals and it's a very rewarding thing. It's not for everyone but that OK because it's not compulsory! There is a lot of goodwill towards canals and many folk would take pride in maintaining their little bit of it. It may only be grass cutting, litter picking and a bit of painting but if that frees up cash for the big stuff then it is very worthwhile.

 

We came through Braunston locks the other day and there was a bunch of people painting the gates. I'm told they were volunteers. They were certainly happy, smiley and very proud of their work.

 

I think BW took a lot of stick, some of which it deserved and some of which it did not. CART are never going to be perfect and will inevitably start out looking a lot like BW. Let's give them a few years to bed in and then see where we are.

Edited by boingy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok when British waterways were our Lords and Masters, I paid my license and mooring and sat back while they looked after the waterways. Now they have changed management I see them asking for volunteers to do the same work that the BW staff used to do, clearing rubbish etc.

 

My mooring fees and license go up in price and yet C&RT are going to use volunteers to do work they used to pay for. I also note that the Staff member who used to live in the lock cottage at Uxbridge lock has been thrown out so they can sell the property!!!! (he has now moved with his wife on to a boat next door to me, I was actually thrown off my mooring so he could moor there but thats another story).

 

I just wonder how other people feel about the transition.

 

There are a limited range of circumstances where a landlord can evict a legal tenant which includes:- the tenant not paying the rent, the tenancy agreement coming to an end, the tenant causing a nuisance, carrying on a trade or business at the property without consent, or the tenant is in breach of some other obligation contained in the tenancy agreement.

 

If the cottage was rented to the BW worker as part of his employment agereement (ie a tied cottage) CaART cannot evict him even if they sell the property, or he leaves the employmemnt of CaRT. I can only assume that the BW worker either agreed to give up his tenancy, in which case some sort of compensatuion would be due, or his rental of the cottage was subsequent to his employment commencing, not tied to his employment, and the rental agreement was on a fixed term basis.

 

The workers Trades Union would know all of this so, despite it being an unhappy experience for the Worker, I suspect you are not being told the full story.

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a limited range of circumstances where a landlord can evict a legal tenant which includes:- the tenant not paying the rent, the tenancy agreement coming to an end, the tenant causing a nuisance, carrying on a trade or business at the property without consent, or the tenant is in breach of some other obligation contained in the tenancy agreement.

 

If the cottage was rented to the BW worker as part of his employment agereement (ie a tied cottage) CaART cannot evict him even if they sell the property, or he leaves the employmemnt of CaRT. I can only assume that the BW worker either agreed to give up his tenancy, in which case some sort of compensatuion would be due, or his rental of the cottage was subsequent to his employment commencing, not tied to his employment, and the rental agreement was on a fixed term basis.

 

The workers Trades Union would know all of this so, despite it being an unhappy experience for the Worker, I suspect you are not being told the full story.

 

Now that's VERY interesting, I'll see if I can have a quiet chat with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only problem I see with CRT, is they don't converse. Everything has to be dragged or cajoled from them through FOI, (which they tried to wriggle out of when setting the trust up). This then ignites the towpath telegraph and hearsay. Which they have yet to realise, is not good for their business.

A little more openness from CRT would probably go a long way with boaters. Explaining funding, expenditure etc.Maybe that is down to the council.

When Robin Evans was asked by the parliamentary committee about the likelihood of a major breach, he informed them that there were measures in place to cover it. He also gave assurances that licences would not increase by more than inflation+2%.

Although I don't see CRT as bullies, I do see a bullish attitude from them, which seriously needs to be addressed, if they really do want us on side. I am sure if they were a little more open, a lot more of us would feel the urge to volunteer.

I have only seen pictures of the breach, but the enormity of fixing it was clear in my mind and the first thing I thought, was an appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only problem I see with CRT, is they don't converse. Everything has to be dragged or cajoled from them through FOI, (which they tried to wriggle out of when setting the trust up). This then ignites the towpath telegraph and hearsay. Which they have yet to realise, is not good for their business.

A little more openness from CRT would probably go a long way with boaters. Explaining funding, expenditure etc.Maybe that is down to the council.

When Robin Evans was asked by the parliamentary committee about the likelihood of a major breach, he informed them that there were measures in place to cover it. He also gave assurances that licences would not increase by more than inflation+2%.

Although I don't see CRT as bullies, I do see a bullish attitude from them, which seriously needs to be addressed, if they really do want us on side. I am sure if they were a little more open, a lot more of us would feel the urge to volunteer.

I have only seen pictures of the breach, but the enormity of fixing it was clear in my mind and the first thing I thought, was an appeal.

 

Very well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote - We came through Braunston locks the other day and there was a bunch of people painting the gates. I'm told they were volunteers. They were certainly happy, smiley and very proud of their work.

 

We were enjoying ourselves, we are on target to complete the repaint of three locks this year (the group was only formed in March 2012)+ we are undertaking other projects on our patch.

I have no doubt that Alans quoted figures are correct and I accept in the short term the the volunteers work is often a cost rather than a saving. Given time and continuing progress I believe, as volunteers, we can make a real difference.

Whatever the case, any preventative maintenance we as volunteers do, is helping to preserve the canals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only problem I see with CRT, is they don't converse. Everything has to be dragged or cajoled from them through FOI, (which they tried to wriggle out of when setting the trust up). This then ignites the towpath telegraph and hearsay. Which they have yet to realise, is not good for their business.

A little more openness from CRT would probably go a long way with boaters. Explaining funding, expenditure etc.Maybe that is down to the council.

When Robin Evans was asked by the parliamentary committee about the likelihood of a major breach, he informed them that there were measures in place to cover it. He also gave assurances that licences would not increase by more than inflation+2%.

Although I don't see CRT as bullies, I do see a bullish attitude from them, which seriously needs to be addressed, if they really do want us on side. I am sure if they were a little more open, a lot more of us would feel the urge to volunteer.

I have only seen pictures of the breach, but the enormity of fixing it was clear in my mind and the first thing I thought, was an appeal.

 

 

 

 

 

Well put and I thought the same this is an example of an appeal that could work, although appeals normally raise money prior to the work being completed which is not what's needed here. Matched lottery funding for dredging anyone.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But this is like saying we should all care for our roads otherwise they will just fall into disrepair if the government get a bit short of cash?

 

That is exactly what does happen.

 

In the mid to late 90s there was a policy of allowing "safe and gradual deterioration" of all but the primary A roads with widespread use of "Unsuitable for motor vehicles" on roads that were not the main route into a village.

 

It was only the fact that Parish councillors cared (plus a few maintenance engineers) and were willing to put pressure on Highway Authorities that the policy failed in rural areas.

 

Have a drive around many urban areas, where there is not the same concern or expertise and the potholes will tell you that the policy is still alive and kicking there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.