jam pudd

I chose to use Aten lighting on 01664 569457 Speak to Jo or Saul. They've been most helpfull and competetive and I had no problem returning and replacing til I got what was right. These are two very genuine people to deal with. They even converted Band Q wall lights for me FOC with my order. This year I boght and od table lamp and they sent me just one bulb to fit. Just good honest and reliable folks. We have LED throughout our boat and with two 135 watt sola panels hardly ever need to run engine when moored for a week or more. If I had a house built I'd go 12v LED!

Yep, no worries fitting in diagonally in the shorter locks. Just be carefull of cills but provided you keep close to front gates going down you'll be fine. Some gates leak badly so it would help if you can check them out before you go through where appropriate. If possible partner with another through the Wigan flight. Go as early AM as possible, try to avoid bank hols, weekends or school holidays........ youths can be a problem. We had none but did witness a pair of boats that the owners had to tell a couple of late teenagers to get off the gunnels! Allow a good five hours on your own 4 hours paired. Bob

We went this August/September in our 60 footer but didn't suspect any problems if we were 62 ft. Advise would be to avoid going with a draft greater than 30" on the skeg. BW advise 24" but nobody checks. The real draft/length issue is when on Savick Brook. A few bends are very sharp and if the water is low then grounding would cause problems - not just for you but for followers. We had good depth in S Brook cos of heavy rainfall but it would be very difficult during prolonged dry spell. Reserving a slot is essential (suggest now to get ideal 2012 dates.) The Douglas/Ribble crossing is something special.We had a pilot, Jim Wilkinson 01772 691082 and were thankful for this cos it was a murky day and there's little room for error on the fast tidal rivers. He showed us some photos of "unfortunate" boats which made mistakes....no joke. £50 well spent for 3 hours of help (and humour). He was involved in the Link project so has lots of tales to tell on route. Great experience and while you're up that way do go to Liverpool Albert Docks.

I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT APETHY ON THIS SITE OR ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE BOATERS MANIFESTO! I WAS REFERING TO THE VERY FEW BOATERS WHO RESPONDED TAKING PART IN THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION CONDUCTED BY BW/CT/AND DEFRA TO ESTABLISH OUR THOUGHTS ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TRUST. MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT AS FEW AS 350 RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED. THE FIGURE MAY BE INACCURATE BUT BUT MY CLEAR RECOLLECTION IS THAT VERY FEW OF US BOTHERED TO PARTICIPATE - DUE TO APETHY!! BOB ELLISON

Below is the response I received from Roger Hanbury of Canal trust to my questions. I trust it is helpful to participants. Bob Ellison Dear Bob, Thank you for your email and my apologies for not responding earlier. ERS are confident that they will be able to handle the election properly in the event of a large number of candidates standing for any of the elections. The STV counting is undertaken using well tested software. We have engaged ERS, the leading independent provider, to give everyone involved the assurance that the election is run properly. ERS handle about 2000 such projects each year and service a very wide ranging client base – you can see more at http://www.erbs.co.uk/clients.php . In these circumstances we do feel it is necessary to offer further independent scrutiny. Indeed this is not something which ERS normally offer. The election papers/electronic votes will all be handled by ERS exclusively who will receive all paper and electronic ballots. They will do this within their established protocols and all the vote opening and counting will be done once the election is closed. I hope this covers your points Kind regards Roger

Sorry for delay in responding..... No I'm not a stalking horse, just an opinionated saddo with a keen interest in matters which affect me - plus an abhorrence to apathy which seems to exist – emphasised by the very few of us who contributed to the original consultation! Anyway as I've said several times, my objective has been simply to attempt to engender more interest in what we hope to get from our councillors. All I seem to have done is spike some rather belligerent responses. So.... I'm outa here! Best wishes to candidates. Bob

All reasonable questions here. I'm not a candidate because I'd rather get on and enjoy the time I have left cruising the network than fighting uphill battles. I've done my bit for my fellow man in another life and at 70 yrs. I'm happy to leave to others the work at hand sorting out the mess left us by Defra and BW. I have no ulterior motive participating on this and other forums. My intention has been simply to spark deeper debate over the problems we all face with the transition to Trust status and onwards. I certainly do not act for any candidate. With regard to multi-identities; I have inadvertently registered three times due to inexperience “blogging” combined with messing up pass words. In all cases my name and boat name has been clear, unlike so many other prominent participants in this and other forums. I find it regrettable that some of my posts have met with such belligerent responses. If in asking a candidate what or how he intends to do on our behalf I'm considered to be arrogant by some responders then how can we judge if he or she is worth a vote. When a politician calls at our doors do we not question his attitude to specific issues? I have a broad back but I believe that much of the rhetoric coming through these debates is deterring others from joining the election forums. We are all loosing out if I am correct. Yes, I'm passionate about getting our waterways in better shape. Yes, I believe that the existing BW management has failed for too long to deal with the significant maintenance issues and no, I don't believe insufficient funds has been the main problem – it's the way much of it is spent that needs thorough investigation. And I believe that our councillors will need to be very tough characters to push and push and push for this to occur! I doubt many disagree with me that a route and branch shake-up is required. For too long our increasing licence fees have funded the entrepreneurial aspirations of BW senior management – individuals who are first and foremost civil servants. For too long management has treated the boaters complaints and objections as irritants. And, for too long they've been paid way above their true worth! Yes, these comments may seem arrogant to some readers. However, perhaps the forum might be more meaningful if participants stopped slagging off members (who are thought to be arrogant) and deal with issues they think need quick attention once the council is formed. Would that not be more helpful to candidates? I believe that if meaningful good is to come our way after transition then we'll need four very, very special candidates to win and work resolutely to make their mark as councillors. Let's hear from them sooner rather than later. This really is my last word on this election on this forum. (Do I hear hooray from a few quarters?) Bob Ellison

Likewise I agree that the "Boaters manifesto" has some good points. It's just a pity that it's principle objective of making significant improvements to our waterways is endangered by some rather radical proposals. That said I've read Alan Fincher's presentation on his blog site and am unable to identify any proposal he has in mind to make improvements other than hoping to make the new managing regime more accountable than BW ever was. He does say; quote" Too many bad decisions have happened under BW and there has never been a mechanism to challenge,....." Question for Alan- Please will you identify five of these "bad desisions" made by BW over the past two years? Also if it was in your power to instigate just one improvement which would benifit the boater universally what would this be? Again, congrats to all who put their heads above the parapet but the electors do need to be told more about candidates objectives.

I believe that the key issue is that candidates, after giving us a resume of their past personal achievements (boating and work background) they must also tell us what they consider to be the most important issues they will edeavour to do for the boaters in return for their very considerable financial contribution towards the upkeep of our waterways - unequalled by any other group apart from the tax payer of which we all are, one way or another. So...... come on candidates tell us what you'll do for us!

Yes, it is a "political" council and all your logic is sound and not far from mine. The principle reason thatI suggest our reps have sound management experience is purely that they are more likely to argue strong business cases when recommending changes to the management regime (of the established BW structures. Our councillos will need to be adept at both pulling apart the obvious failings of the past but also, and this is key, be well versed in presenting sound changes. individuals with business exp[erience are more likely to understand the bigger picture. Whoever stands should be congratulated but I hope that the candidates present us with some idea of what they'll endeavour to do for the boater rather than just present themselves as being well met, tolerant and able to see all sides of an argument! Bob

Hi Alan, I do apologise for taking so long to respond to your queries. Family commitments and being in a poor dongle reception area is the cause. Like you I also like to get responses to questions even if the answers aren't as I'd expect. Your replies are certainly fulsome and are giving you the advantage of setting out your stool for the electorate. I'll now respond to your queries as best I can. Ref your time spent cruising: Yes, of course this meets the minimum criteria I'd expect my choice candidate to have so as to be confident that he/she is experiencing widely the poor maintenance we endure. I'm not sure what percentage of boaters on the water exceed your time/mileage but there are huge numbers of boats cruising for long periods in the spring/summer/autumn. Perhaps a good number of these will consider standing at the election so that we have a meaningful selection of candidates. We're out for seven months and throughout our travels we talk to boaters on the same mission; to cover the entire network. Naturally all boat owners must be represented well and I certainly wouldn't want to see any special group represented separately. I anticipate we'll all automatically get the benefit from strong independent councillors who we both agree are desperately needed. It's the way the job at hand is tackled that we mostly differ slightly over, that's all. And yes I'm aware my comments aren't couched as perhaps they might be but they are intended to cause reaction in order to enliven the debate so that we electors can grasp the metal of those putting up. With regard to my earlier“experience” and “baggage” comments: I believe that it would be a distinct advantage if our councillors have had sound senior management experience so that they are likely to be better equipped in dealing on our behalf with the financial machinations of the Trust bearing in mind the old regime will no doubt be fielding innumerable googlies in the early days. By baggage I mean that I believe our best interests wont be served by those who have a track record working closely with BW. Yes, I'd like to chose a group of councillors who “cut to the chase” rather than serve up bull sxxt but the odd dose of “management speak” would be useful when trying to bring some non-group members along with you. Meeting experience is also very useful and tact is extremely important but diplomacy must be properly mixed with setting out or protecting objectives. Best wishes in your endeavour. Bob

My intention to spark some meaningful debate on this election is working!! Dealing with the above points quickly; I do speak from extensive experience of meetings as an operations director of a UK service company with 150 plus outlets; as owner founder of my own service company with 50 outlets and 10years on county and district councils and as a director on a local enterprise board. I’m glad agreement is coming forth that we need smart capable people and that some responders agree that our boater reps will be better equipped if they have sound senior management backgrounds - capable of “assisting” the Trust’s management perform efficiently. Do I hear some of you say. “How the ‘eck will they do that”? Well, if we elect four very capable people who are really smart then they’ll figure out how best to act when they get there. If you put thirty five individuals into a group, set them a challenge then very soon leaders emerge and lesser characters follow. We’ve just got to make sure that the boater reps have all these qualities and quickly utilise leadership skills. I foresee (BW) senior management, through their carefully chosen Trustees, serving up non-confrontational agendas and reports for the Council to chew over. Therefore, our boaters group will need to be pretty skilful, cutting to the chase quickly to ensure that the meetings don’t become talking shops. They must have the ability to persuasively shape the council in its early days. The council must become a real force to be reckoned with as an advisory body to the Trust. If not the whole exercise will be a huge disappointment to all who want the Trust to succeed. AND YES, for the benefit of cyclists, ramblers, birdwatchers,gongoozlers et al BUT for the boaters first and foremost!! Bob Ellison

My recent apology to the IWA leadership and suggestion that they shouldn’t represent us on the council because of divided loyalties has sparked the welcome degree of debate which I had hoped for. Now can we please have some debate about how we want to be represented on CaRT? I’ll kick off by saying that I believe a group of “committee junkies” carrying BW baggage wont achieve the improvements we need on our waterways. Equally I’d be very concerned if we end up electing any of the “barrack room” zealots who have been looking for BW management blood this past year or more. It’s my hope that we elect strong independently minded individuals who “currently” cruise the network. They should be boaters who are on the water for most of the year. They should be out there with us, continually experiencing first hand the result of appalling maintenance and witnessing the only too evident waste of financial and manpower resources. For my part our council representatives don’t need to have spent a life time in their boats but they must have travelled the network extensively AND have been on the water for most of the past two or three years. To my mind, knowing how things once were isn’t too important. What is vital, however, is that they share our passion for making the urgent and necessary improvements we need and expect in return for our spiralling licence fees. But to represent us effectively they’ll need to be experienced dealing with business affairs at a corporate level. AND know how to persuasively put across the strong arguments for change of management style and structure at the top of CaRT. I’m sure that I’m not alone in looking forward to the days when grounding on bends or getting drenched from leaking lock gates isn’t common. Also perhaps we’ll be less inclined to “hope” that our next water point will be operational instead of expecting it not to be. Perhaps, along with the hike in pump-out fees, we’ll have more that can be relied on to work. AND much, much more. So, come on candidates, sell your selves to us.

Before I get castigated for knocking the IWA ability to represent us on the new Trust's Council my comments are based on more recent results. I'm fully aware that the IWA founders were responsible for saving the network (almost) as we now know it. This appreciated by just about every boater, I'm sure. My concern is that this and other representative groups have long associated relationships with BW and it is this fact that I believe will hinder best representation on the council if any of these folks are elected. For example the annual IWA waterways festival will need close intimate cooperation between CaRT and the organisers. This is an important IWA activity and their reps on the council are bound to feel hindered when CaRT needs a tosting for perceived bad management by the council on other matters. In my opinion they are unlikely to be strongly outspoken when needs must for the general baoters' benifit. The old saying..."scratch my back...and I'll scratch yours" comes to mind and we must guard against this at the forthcoming election. Bob NB Jam Pudd