CRT No Longer Wish To Meet With Boaters

[RockSodem]

It was one of those 10 million who broke into my boat and stole my TV and other items.

 

This attitude really needs stamping on NOW, the longer this attitude exists the harder it will be to change

not a helpful comment.

[NB Alton]

Brian, your post demonstrates perfectly the wealth of knowledge and willingness that is being overlooked because of a lack of the basics.

A while back I posted a thread about cc'ers being the eyes and ears of the waterways, it was rightly pointed out that we all are, surely this is a resource far too valuable ignor.

Thanks Wanted. As for being the eyes & ears, you're spot on. I've been trying to get something done regarding low water levels & some key areas that need dredging on the Macclesfield summit. Despite numerous discussions/ request regarding this with our area Waterways Manager & Supervisors, I'm told this isn't really a problem & it's possibly that the problem is more the draught of my boat as they get few comments or complaints from other users. Yesterday one of CRT's own workboats got stock for quite a long time in one of those spots, last year John Dodwells boat Helen was also stuck in one of them, with one of my customers helping get him free. I wouldn't mind so much if I was told that nothing could be done for 2 or 3 years or that they simply didn't have the money, but I'm told it's not a problem.

 

Despite this I really want to work with CRT rather than against them.

[kbarber]

And so peace broke out. Until the next time.

 

Seriously, a couple of thoughts have occurred to me while reflecting on this thread.

 

First, one thing that's very much in evidence is passion. More than one poster has spoken of it. I believe that passion exists in CRT as well as among forum members. That's one reason language has sometimes been undiplomatic. But the bottom line is that, even if we don't agree on how things should be done, we all - yes, ALL have the same overall goals (I think Tuscan has summarised the situation pretty neatly here). That means that, provided we don't let spats like this divert us too much, we have a great future to look forward to - the energy expended here is a fraction of the whole and much more is being put into the waterways; how can we lose.

 

It reminds me a little of industrial relations on the railway (certainly in the late 1980s/early '90s). There were vehement disagreements about how things should be done. There was the annual pay round sabre rattling dance. But - with exceptions - both sides were able to work together and produce a setup that had the lowest subsidy of any in Europe, that worked as well as any and that was in a virtuous spiral of improvement even in the depths of the 1980s recession. I don't see why shouldn't be able to do as well, given the energy and commitment and passion that's on show upthread.

 

Second, can we beware of using enemies (real or imagined) to create group cohesion? Sure, it can be an excellent way of getting a disparate group working together. (I've deliberately sown 'enemy' talk for precisely that purpose on occasion, so I know it works.) But ultimately it doesn't create a stable group that will keep going in the long term. That has to come about through the group struggling through the bonding process and learning to work together. And the group I have in mind here isn't CWDF, it's CWDF and C&RT working together for the future of our waterways.

 

The reason I say this is that I'm a little concerned by the tendency to dismiss (sometimes even demonise) IWA. (It's even more in evidence in the 'Lock ladder consultation' thread.) I think there's a lot wrong with IWA - and here I will come out and say I am an IWA member, and say it from that perspective. I think that's partly because it is an older organisation and, like all old organisations, has come to be run by committee people and organisation people - the type who enjoy rules, constitutions, standing orders, procedures, stuff like that. (If you think IWA's bad, just look at the synodical government structures of the Church of England - another organisation I admit to being a member of.) My circumstances mean I simply can't get involved in IWA's formal structures, my 'awkward squad' instincts mean I couldn't bear to for more than one or two terms if I did, so my contribution is to volunteer at the National and I leave it at that.

 

But that's by the by. The really important point is that IWA are not an enemy. They may be too wrapped up in organisational stuff to be a helpful friend/ally. They certainly have a wider remit than just boaters (and could be subject to Charity Commission interest if they didn't represent those wider interests) but I believe they, too, ultimately want what's best for the waterways.

 

So I want to suggest that our task is to release the passion we all have and find ways to work together in using it. In that, I think CWDF may have a particular role beyond being another route for views to be conveyed to C&RT, for I suspect what's going on here may ultimately catalyse others (IWA and far beyond) to raise their game. I think, thanks to the individuals who have taken the initiative, CWDF is already punching far above its weight (if C&RT will forgive a warlike metaphor), but I believe that could well end up being among our lesser achievements in the longer run.

 

About time I shut up, perhaps. Here's to the future!

[davidc]

I'm not sure that we need a list like that at the moment. Someone already tried to produce a smaller list than that - it caused a lot of discussion and divergence

 

If we had some kind of mandate, I think it would have to be reasonably vague to be able to embrace the CWDF membership

 

I think it would have the work canal in it, or inland waterway (Rivers), I think it may have boat in it as we are largely a group who have stuff to do with boats. What else might it have, and what sorts of verbs might go in?

 

Richard

 

Here's a though we keep it simple the mandate being along the lines of For the good of the inland water ways

 

And when a problem or subject arise debate them in our usually manner and see if we as a collectives can come up with idea's that CRT can run with and also visa versa so its a two way street between a partnership of CRT + uses and us the boaters.

[blodger]

 

Are NHS foundation trusts, charitable organisations for the waterways?

 

Otherwise you are comparing chalk with cheese.

Chalk and cheese where membership is meant to bring dividends

[Mick and Maggie]

The almost certain implementation of a cap on 'tax relief' has put many charities into a tail spin. In a report commissioned by Price Waterhouse Cooper, the Charity Finance Group and the Institute of Fundraising. The report describes the reality as 'a perfect storm' and goes on to reveal that charities have all experienced a net reduction across all income streams. Not only that but the majority have already been hit by Government spending cuts. What is obvious is that the competition for public cash is going to get even harder.

Caron Bradshaw, CEO, of Charity Finance Group, said: “If further evidence were needed, that the Government are 'foot shooting' with policies which undermine the long term future of many charities, this is it. In the light of these results the relief cap is a frightening prospect, which will bring minimal benefit to the exchequer but blow a further hole in the sectors’ finances. Tentative promises of consultation are not enough. The damage has already started and George Osborne must rethink."

The reports creates a worrying picture of the state of the sector. It is possibly the worst time to make the leap into the third sector. Whilst it has been trumpeted by the ex BW group as a resounding success that CaRT has been created. The reality is that the government wanted shut of British Waterways and there was no real opposition to handing over the reigns. The vast majority of charitable fundraisers unsurprisingly admit that raising money has been harder in the past year and the tax relief cap will make the situation much worse.

The situation hardly creates a set of ideal conditions for charities to make long term investment decisions. Not only do investments have to generate income and protect capital, but risk has to be justified and trustees cannot play fast and loose with the funds. Trustees have to monitor and be accountable for the performance of their portfolios.

Some long established charities now see the only option for survival being to enter into a merger with other charities. I expect it to get even tougher in the next few years as the current funding caps become the new norm. Plus the continuing uncertainty around what the Government might do next.

There is no charity in the third sector in its right mind that is ever likely to want to partner a merger with CaRT. The 'poke in the eye' that was the governments 'bailout from the EA infrastructure transfer' gives some insight into the ministers thinking and expectations for the future of CaRT. So what next for CaRT. The next year or two should provide CaRT with a remarkable opportunity prove its mettle. CaRT is going to need every penny it can get just to tread water. There's is an old saying that "Directors are like teabags - you never know how strong they are until you put them in hot water." Well, they're all in hot water now.

Coffee anyone?

[cotswoldsman]

I think (by CRT's figures) if 0.35% of canal visitors are providing 30% of CRT's income then they should be treated as a valued customer, not a "usp".

A USP does that mean I have to plug myself into my computer? Better speak to my son and find out how I do that.

[RLWP]

Apologies for this, my head is full of random stuff (as usual)

 

I was wondering what we have that we can offer to C&RT?

 

Richard

[blodger]

Apologies for this, my head is full of random stuff (as usual)

 

I was wondering what we have that we can offer to C&RT?

 

Richard

CaRT would like blind support for any of its endeavours; There's probably a majority giving it so the minority do not count?

[Athy]

A Greeno for Sally for continuing the conversation, rather than just making one post and buggering off again. It is appreciated, Sally, even if not everybody agrees with what you say.

 

Nailora, welcome back! Wasn't it you who was earnestly seeking a boat a few weeks ago. What progress? (Sorry if I've got the wrong person).

[Narrow Minded]

Nb Alton wrote:

 

Boaters, CRT & all users need to pull together to make sure our unique canal & river system is here for many more generations to come.

 

So after 17 pages of forum debate, ranting and jumping to conclusions the voice of reasonableness comes to the surface. Sally has said boaters are at the heart of the CRT thinking. Lets move on from there. Many clearly want better communication with CRT, CRT want the same thing but the don't have unlimited resources so we need to come up with positive suggestions for improvement.

 

Many have said the User Groups don't work and perhaps they are a hang up from the BW days. There are 11 waterway areas so how about a consultation committee comprising of 10 boaters elected by everyone with a home mooring in the area plus 2 constant cruisers elected by those registered as constant cruisers. They meet every two months with the waterways manager and other CRT staff. CRT agree to listen and respond and boaters agree to be positive seeking solutions rather than whinging or harping on about the past. Minutes are published and all boaters know how to contact the members of each committee. Shot down the details but it has got to be better than what exists.

 

Shot me down but come up with an alternative!

 

Mike

[Doodlebug]

The problem is theres not much we can do about anything. If canal and river trust decided one day to triple the licence fee we would just have to pay. Or have our boats taken away.

 

We are at their mercy, and since they don't think our views are important it seems slightly dictatorish. They dictate what we must do/pay and we have no way to argue our points.

[Jigsawged]

Apologies for this, my head is full of random stuff (as usual) I was wondering what we have that we can offer to C&RT? Richard

I posted an idea on the lock ladder thread that could work and be beneficial to CART - a forum user survey in a proforma style with photographs. Given the diverse locations of the many forum users, I am sure that they could be asked to conduct a survey at their local locks, probably at no cost to the Trust, rather than using expensive contractors to do the job. Could be seen as an olive branch with future possibilities....if only they will engage with us again.

 

I'm sure that they would object on H&S grounds though, notwithstanding that we use the blasted things anyway sometimes.

[Mick and Maggie]

If canal and river trust decided one day to triple the licence fee we would just have to pay.

 

I think that is just scaremongering - there various iterations of legislation dating back to the days of Peter Rachman. The word "Rachmanism" entered the OED as a synonym for the exploitation and intimidation of tenants.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Mick and Maggie

[jenlyn]

This is the first "public" rift we have had with CRT. It certainly got a bit heated, but we are all grown ups and my gut feeling is that tensions were high and it had to blow.

I honestly don't think it's the end, theres too much at stake.

I know john will not give up, it's not in him, and I know there are people at CRT that are more than able to accept this as a hiccup. Ok so it will be a bit awkward for a while, but we will brush ourselves down and move on.

Obviously we do need to form an association of some sort, and that probably has to be our next step.

I guess we knew all along really, but thought we could bluff it out.

Tomorrow's another day, hope it's flippin sunny.

[nailora]

@Athy, you're thinking of someone else, possibly - I have Bobbybass's boat. Due to other commitments I only visit the forum a few times a month - hope you've all been well.

 

One thing I've been up to is studying for the exam that will allow me to remain in the same country as my husband. The exam is called "Life in the UK." Did you know that the UK's values and principles include a strong sense of democracy and political tolerance, and that among the responsibilities of UK residents are volunteering and community work? It's on the exam and must be true!

 

Therefore a clear solution to frustrations is fostering political tolerance through volunteer work and community engagement with a charity...?

[jenlyn]

Therefore a clear solution to frustrations is fostering political tolerance through volunteer work and community engagement with a charity...?

Try telling a bloke that.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

From facebook -

OPEN LETTER RE “boats do not pay their way“ To John Dodwell C&RT Executive:
Well I’ve just heard that ‘boats do not pay their way’ in the C&RT equation as we are only worth a third of the income to the coffers!
Your words I believe: “And Yes, boats are very important. We know towpath users like to see them. They produce not far off 30% of the gross income. But boats do not pay their way. I’m not suggesting they should. However, it helps to recognise that boats are only part of the picture – and an important part. The Government didn’t enter into that 15 year contract because of 35k or so boat owners but because of the 10m or so towpath users, the benefits of regeneration/ rural and town economies, health, tourism, heritage etc etc.”
My wife and I are in our mid 60s and have been BW/C&RT customers as boat owners and licence payers for 10 years, full time continuous cruisers the last 6 years travelling many hundreds of miles and locks each year.
There has been a sharp deterioration in the navigation, moorings and facilities over the last two or three years.
Well John I’ll tell you now that I won’t be picking up any more rubbish, broken glass or dog poo off the tow path, dragging tree branches, furniture and dead animals out of the lock when the gates won’t open or close, dragging shopping trolleys out of the navigation channel, and any rubbish I get round my prop will not be coming aboard through the weed hatch to be disposed of in a responsible manner. I certainly won’t be helping cyclists with my puncture repair kit, tools or bicycle pump! And any visitors who ask me to borrow my BW key so they can use the C&RT toilet can go and whistle!
Your ‘pact’ with the government and Sustrans to encourage visitors to the canals, particularly commuter cyclists, is based upon a false premise as without the care and diligence of many boaters the canals would just be a number of festering stagnant ditches surrounded by rubbish!
Check out the Coventry Canal where not many boaters go now because of the rubbish and poor facilities and condition of the canal. Look at the surrounding area of Camden locks where there’s nothing but broken glass and empty beer cans.
You are obviously sat in an ivory tower, looking at the canals through rose coloured glasses. C&RT are nothing but a management company! Tom Rolt must be turning in his grave!
The government of this country turned its back on the canals after the WWII and it was boaters and canal enthusiasts like Rolt who got the system open and running again. Boaters are the lifeblood of the canal!
We are licence payers and you have an obligation in law to provide a safe and adequate environment – we boaters have given the C&RT a fair opportunity to improve the dire mess that BW left behind.
We put up with badly balanced lock gates, difficult paddle gears, leaking lock walls, loose brickwork, vicious spillways, missing guard rails, submerged masonry etc. etc .
We get complemented every day about the condition of our boat. “What lovely flowers”, they say!
Anyone that comes into contact with us we say ‘you can get involved – just Google the Canal and River Trust’ Well no more my friend – As I don’t enter into your equation now, so you don’t enter into mine!
Your customer, Graham Beven.
Narrowboat "Maid Of The Mist" #508938

 

To my mind the "boaters do not pay their way" accusation says it all.

.... and this from someone who is a boater himself.

The facts of the matter are that CaRT and BW before it have a statutory obligation to maintain the waterways. However we are told that since 2004 BW/CaRT have spent less than needed to prevent deterioration and the trustees simply have no plan which will reverse this situation going forward.

This year, CaRT needs to spend about £130m on its waterways. If we are lucky, it might spend £80m.

 

 

[nicknorman]

But the thing is, boaters don't pay their way - fact. I don't really have an issue with JD's quoted message because its true and irrefutable. Without government (taxpayer's) grants, the system would collapse regrardless of licence fees. This seems to me to be a separate issue to the reported change of CRT's attitude whereby they don't want to engage with the likes of John and his meetings (which I for one got a lot out of). The former is a fact, the latter is an unfortunate and unwise change of heart. Let's hope its a blip that will be corrected.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

But the thing is, boaters don't pay their way - fact. I don't really have an issue with JD's quoted message because its true and irrefutable. Without government (taxpayer's) grants, the system would collapse regrardless of licence fees. This seems to me to be a separate issue to the reported change of CRT's attitude whereby they don't want to engage with the likes of John and his meetings (which I for one got a lot out of). The former is a fact, the latter is an unfortunate and unwise change of heart. Let's hope its a blip that will be corrected.

The fact is that BW/CaRT has a statutory duty to maintain its waterways for navigation. This would exist irrespective of any contribution made by boaters.

 

It is therefore very wrong for a trustee to say boaters are not paying their way, particularly when fellow trustees have agreed that future increases in licence fees will be pegged to inflation for the next three years.

 

It would seem that John Dodwells fellow trustees disagree with him on this matter.

[George94]

bill,its matty seeing as you want to get personal.

I move boats amongst other things, for a living, and see most of the network on a regular basis.

Stop pretending this won't affect you at some point soon.

I only pinpointed the problems on the s oxford to alert other boaters as to potential delays.

I am dismayed at the towpath negligence this year. Far worse than last year and being encouraged by the new hessian sausages.

you use a scythe now, john dodwell says ok, but not too often.

so next year you cant scythe it clear because a little sign has been installed .

"Conservation Area"

 

Wake up, see what is happening, or if you keep trolling, fek orf

 

He's not trolling, he's expressing another point of view.

[George94]

The fact is that BW/CaRT has a statutory duty to maintain its waterways for navigation. This would exist irrespective of any contribution made by boaters.

 

It is therefore very wrong for a trustee to say boaters are not paying their way, particularly when fellow trustees have agreed that future increases in licence fees will be pegged to inflation for the next three years.

 

It would seem that John Dodwells fellow trustees disagree with him on this matter.

 

Your mind is very muddled. C&RT has a duty to maintain the canals, but it needs income to do so, and boaters' licence fees don't provide enough. So it is entirely proper and correct to remind people of the fact that boaters are in fact receiving a massive subsidy from the Exchequer.

[RichardN]

 

Your mind is very muddled. C&RT has a duty to maintain the canals, but it needs income to do so, and boaters' licence fees don't provide enough. So it is entirely proper and correct to remind people of the fact that boaters are in fact receiving a massive subsidy from the Exchequer.

 

Yes that is the reality. I think John Dodswell put it very well and find some of the comments since (eg evil dictatorship) quite wrong.

[blackrose]

Ironic how most people on this forum couldn't wait to see the back of BW because they thought CRT would be better. Just goes to show, be careful what you wish for...

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Ironic how most people on this forum couldn't wait to see the back of BW because they thought CRT would be better. Just goes to show, be careful what you wish for...

Ironic that those people in BW who said they could be largely independent of government grant now admit to underspending on the waterways since 2004 and have used it as a justification to continue doing so.