[When is a charity not a charity?]

Books can if course be self published especially one like this. Vanity project probably.

[When is a charity not a charity?]

38 minutes ago, Tim Lewis said:

apart from CRT and BW logos there is no publisher noted so I assume that it was published by them 

 

Thanks. So where did you 'pick it up' from?

[When is a charity not a charity?]

11 hours ago, Tim Lewis said:

Just picked up a copy of Tony Hales’s book on the formation of CRT, notes this on a potential charity:

Can you please tell us the title and who publishes it?

[When is a charity not a charity?]

2 hours ago, David Mack said:

Meanwhile, over on the dark side, Victor is fuming with the 'revelation' that CRT is legally a limited company, registered at Companies House, and that by not using the word "limited" in their branding they are misleading the public.

Presumably he has never read to the bottom of any page on the CRT website where it says:

"Canal & River Trust is a charity registered with the Charity Commission no. 1146792 and a company limited by guarantee registered in England & Wales no. 07807276."

It really is time he packed it in. He's clearly incapable and sadly can't stop pretending he's a campaigning journalist.

[When is a charity not a charity?]

"The Peter Principle was first identified by Dr Laurence J. Peter, a sociologist, lecturer and business consultant, in his 1968 book of the same name. It states, "In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence."

In other words, if you work in an organization with a top-down management structure and you are good at your job, you will likely be promoted until you reach one rung above your level of competence. Dr Peter called this level your "final placement."

[The National Bargee Travellers Association has slammed plans to raise licence fees on canals like the Kennet and Avon]

1 hour ago, Higgs said:

 

The marina abides by a contract. It's a business contract. Nothing to do with boaters. And a licence in the marina has nothing to do with the law.

 

 

 

 

Yes it does. It's contract law.

[The National Bargee Travellers Association has slammed plans to raise licence fees on canals like the Kennet and Avon]

Even more proof!

2 minutes ago, Athy said:

Thank you for your kind words. No, I am not a meteorologist.

You obviously are, so perhaps you'd let us all know if it will be raining over the Easter weekend.

 

46 minutes ago, Athy said:

CARTs assertion that canals are "increasingly vulnerable to the threat of cliomate change" is surely specious. Are they suggesting that canals haven't got hotter in the summer and colder in the winter over the last 200 or so years?

 

Which just proves how little you understand about climate change.

[The National Bargee Travellers Association has slammed plans to raise licence fees on canals like the Kennet and Avon]

36 minutes ago, Athy said:

CARTs assertion that canals are "increasingly vulnerable to the threat of cliomate change" is surely specious. Are they suggesting that canals haven't got hotter in the summer and colder in the winter over the last 200 or so years?

Which just proves how little you understand about climate change.

[Private Eye on CRT]

6 hours ago, wandering snail said:

Nothing to laugh about here from Private Eye. The last sentence is disengenuous to say the least. None of the proceeds from all these sales of our heritage go directly to maintaining the system, however many times this is said as a justification. This is not allowed so any proceeds are invested. The fate of the iconic Braunston Stop House is also at risk again as Braunston Marina have pulled out of leasing it.

No but the income from the investment does. And selling it to someone who restores and maintains it is surely a good outcome. If it is of heritage interest it should be protected by listing.

[Aire & Calder gets a new 'big-boat']

2 hours ago, fanshaft said:

also removing the unwritten restriction on self penning by barge crews.

This was always a ridiculous practice. So it's ok for a newbie leisure boater to use the big automated locks on the A&C but not a crew member on a commercial vessel. 

[Aire & Calder gets a new 'big-boat']

32 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Largest vessel ever welcomed to the Humber as near 20-year record sunk

Rather unfortunate wording don't you think?

[When is a charity not a charity?]

15 minutes ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

 

That is a good question. Sorry for the delay, I have been doing some boating today.

 

There are broadly two ways that I can think of:

 

1)  as part of the financial memorandum - typically put in place between a government department and an agency/quango/public corporation that they sponsor, to set out various principles that the agency etc has to follow, reporting requirements etc. This is normally agreed by both parties, in my experience;

2) as part of a grant letter or a funding agreement that is tied to a particular slug of money. Put crudely, if the organization wants the money then they need to sign up to these terms. Again, there is scope for debate as to whether the "rules" are appropriate, or proportionate to the risk that they are being used to manage.

 

So the sponsor department (DEFRA in this case) does not need an specific authority - all this is ancilliary to the powers that is uses to pay the grant to CRT. In theory (I am not a lawyer) their actions could be challenged by means of judicial review, but I am not aware of this ever happening in this area of activity. 

Don't apologise I would much rather go boating.

 

I'm not a lawyer either but I think you are saying that a party that has a legal right (as opposed to a legal duty) may limit those rights by entering into a contract for another benefit eg money.

[When is a charity not a charity?]

6 minutes ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

Your first point is correct. Just because CRT (or any organisation) has the legal powers to do something, it doesn't mean they would be "allowed" to do it.   

So who or what would prevent them and by what authority?

[When is a charity not a charity?]

3 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

If we take the Univesities as an example,  they are exempt charities under the Charities Act. They may not register with the independent Charity Commission and are not subject to its control.

 

CRT, as a company limited by guarentee, registered with the Charity Commission in 2012. 

 

 

Charities should be inependent of government and the ONS decission may well result in CRT's charitable status being removed. 

 

To avoid this, it would appear that Defra are attempting to remove its control over CRT.

 

Thanks for that. It sounds like neither CRT not DEFRA (nor the Charities Commission for that matter) were aware that this might be a problem when they did what they did. Or has charity law changed since 2012?

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

If that happens, then presumably any future payments from DEFRA will become a charitable donation, rather than a grant.

There's a risk that if they give up control they stop giving money. Could this issue explain the delay in making a decision on renewal of grant?

[When is a charity not a charity?]

13 hours ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

This article makes a category error. There are loads of charities that are in the public sector, for example

• British Library
• Thousands of schools that are in Academy Trusts
• Further Education Colleges (on which the ONS have recently opined)
• etc etc

I note that Allan(nbAlbert) has made no comment on this post. Does he agree with it and if so does he consider it is also a problem for these other public sector charities as he alleges it is for CRT?

[Private Eye on CRT]

This sounds like Allan (nb Albert) but it could be just co-incidence.

[C&RT License Survey]

1 minute ago, fanshaft said:

They also couldn't possibly have foreseen the huge expenditure required to make the reservoirs safe and to cope with breaches such as on the Calder & Hebble.  Income from property and other services  has actually risen beyond expectations, but expenditure on maintenance has also had to rise while inflation is seeing the value of the fixed grant from DEFRA fall in real terms.

Are you sure about that David? Evans mentions the Mon & Brec breach in that article and bemoans the refusal of government to fund it. He and others must have considered the probability of similar or greater failures. Their judgement was that the (illusionary) additional funding from simply becoming a charity would fund all future expenditure.

[C&RT License Survey]

3 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

I always had Johnson down as the person responsible for the changes in law arising from the transfer order. 

As Legal Director he certainly was but he was also an advocate for the principle.

[C&RT License Survey]

The 'third man' was of course Nigel Johnson the Legal Director and I believe that after he and Evans left CRT following their 'success' they were then engaged to advise on the similar creation of what is now English Heritage. Dean Davies is still at CRT. I wonder if he's still as enthusiastic?

[C&RT License Survey]

50 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

That was one monumental error if ever I saw one! 

 

What WERE they thinking of?!

This man didn't think so https://www.civilserviceworld.com/in-depth/article/interview-robin-evans

[C&RT License Survey]

It would be pointless just like all the discussion about boat licence charges. You really should get a life.

[C&RT License Survey]

7 minutes ago, IanD said:

I don't think it was BW trying to escape from government control so much as the government wanting to get the canals off their books -- and since they couldn't realistically privatise them, hiving them off to a charity so that making the books balance was *their* problem was the next best thing...

You're wrong.

[C&RT License Survey]

8 hours ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

It is justification for appearing in the Public Sector Classification Guide that is important to Defra, I would suggest.

 

A charity is controlled by its trustees but government are saying the Secretary of State has ultimate control.

To be accurate it is the ONS that is saying they are and they state they follow lots of national and international quidance. https://www.ons.gov.uk/methodology/classificationsandstandards/economicstatisticsclassifications/ukeconomicstatisticssectorandtransactionclassificationstheclassificationprocess#background

I have tried searching for the information on how they decided the classification for CRT but without success.

I agree it seems odd given all the effort that was put in by BW to escape from Government control.

[C&RT License Survey]

5 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

For the classification to be recinded requires various documents that give control to government to be altered.

Defra is currently trying to do this.

Having read more of the ONS information it seems it is mainly about government financial accounting than any meaningful functional control over CRT.

[C&RT License Survey]

41 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

It is in the latest Public Sector Classification Guide which was issued on 31 January. CRT was classified as a public body in September 2015 backdated to its formation in 2012.

 

It is classified as a "public non-financial corporation" as it is judged to be under government control.

 

Thanks for that information from the ONS which is very interesting. British Waterways was a 'public corporation' and government control over it was greater than it currently has over CRT. If DEFRA decide not to continue providing funds after 2027 I wonder if this classification will continue?