Jump to content

Is CaRT fit for purpose?


Midnight

Is CaRT fit for purpose?  

79 members have voted

  1. 1. In your opinion is CaRT fit for purpose?

    • Yes
      22
    • No
      57
  2. 2. In your opinion should the CEO, Richard Parry as be replaced?

    • Yes
      56
    • No
      23


Featured Posts

10 minutes ago, frangar said:

Boaters are the only user group that pays directly in any meaningful way. Fishermen pay very little by comparison. I’d happily pay £50 more a year if they were banned from canals. We and the wildlife would benefit. 

I am afraid the maths does not add up. To make canals exclusive for boaters one would need to contribute 3 times as much as you do now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, churchward said:

I am afraid the maths does not add up. To make canals exclusive for boaters one would need to contribute 3 times as much as you do now.

 

I meant merely to replace the amount the maggot drowners contribute. I realise that it would need to be much more to replace everything else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Steve Bassplayer said:

 

Well I'm not sure of CRT's latest mission statement, but I think the 'About Us' web page sums up what they think their role is. 

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/about-us

 

Quite a strong emphasis on 'wellbeing' for the 'millions' of customers who visit the waterways, maybe not so much the wellbeing of those trying to plan trips on a boat at the moment. ?

 

 

So why didn't that get asked that in the first place?
I see an "agenda" here.

And to add, how about you coming up with a proposal that would suit a ALL the users over the whole country?

Edited by Graham Davis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

 

So why didn't that get asked that in the first place?
I see an "agenda" here.

And to add, how about you coming up with a proposal that would suit a ALL the users over the whole country?

There's always an agenda when there's a survey! They are organised to prove a point, not find out facts. Bit like government enquiries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, frangar said:

Boaters are the only user group that pays directly in any meaningful way. Fishermen pay very little by comparison. I’d happily pay £50 more a year if they were banned from canals. We and the wildlife would benefit. 

A good number of years ago Waterways World magazine reviewed the just published BW Report and Accounts of the time. The following month's issue included a letter from a boater who noted that the income from anglers was about 1/10 of that from boaters, and expressed a willingness to pay 10% more for his boat licence if we could be rid of the anglers. That of course prompted a response about the waterways being for a wide range of users, not just boaters etc. etc. 

Given CRT's much wider remit than BW ever had, as the basis of government funding, there is no chance now of fishing being banned or even significantly restricted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, David Mack said:

A good number of years ago Waterways World magazine reviewed the just published BW Report and Accounts of the time. The following month's issue included a letter from a boater who noted that the income from anglers was about 1/10 of that from boaters, and expressed a willingness to pay 10% more for his boat licence if we could be rid of the anglers. That of course prompted a response about the waterways being for a wide range of users, not just boaters etc. etc. 

Given CRT's much wider remit than BW ever had, as the basis of government funding, there is no chance now of fishing being banned or even significantly restricted.

That would be a great pity. I know I’m far from alone in my views which I have voiced to CRT
 

Maybe I should start a campaign.....

Edited by frangar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Whilst it is interesting to see the views of boaters who are 'on' the forum, DEFRA cannot and will not be influenced by what a small vocal minority have to say.

 

There are specific measures which were agreed would be KPIs and were included in the legal paperwork when everything was handed over from BW to the new Charity.

 

C&RT do undertake satisfaction surveys, of around 10,000 boaters per annum and, whilst the numbers are declining,  those surveys show that generally the majority of boaters are satisfied with C&RT

 

2016/17 = 76%

2017/18 = 70%

2018/19 = 61%

2019/20 = 67%

 

Vistor satisfaction is also starting to fall

 

2016/17 = 85%

2017/18 = 91%

2018/19 = 92%

2019/20 = 81%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CRT have never ever received 10’000 replies to any survey.

Edited by Jon johan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jon johan said:

CRT have never ever received 10’000 replies to any survey.

CRT have never ever received 10’000 replies to any survey.

CRT have never ever received 10’000 replies to any survey.

CRT have never ever received 10’000 replies to any survey.

CRT have never ever received 10’000 replies to any survey.

CRT have never ever received 10’000 replies to any survey.

 

 

Despite repeating it 6 times still doesn't make it what I actually said.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Despite repeating it 6 times still doesn't make it what I actually said.

No I agree, but your post inferred that 10,000 had replied, even though not directly. Their usual response percentage for those particular surveys is around 11%, but 86% sounds better if you don’t mention the actual number who bothered to reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some of you are looking too deep and seeing stuff that isn't there. I used to write surveys as part of my job. Answers on a  scale of 1 to 10 aren't worth a light and are used to get the answers you want. Yes/No is very simple - first used by Formulae One hotels BTW.

Either you are satisfied that CaRT are doing a good job (fit for purpose) or you think it's time for change (IMO the cubs could do better) Forget what would replace them that's not what is being asked. it's simple really. Right now are you happy with CaRT's custodianship of the waterways or Not! - Simples!!

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rivelin said:

Wellbeing is a proven benefit of being near water, so that's good, but the millions who benefit are "visitors". The "customers" are the boaters that pay licence fees I would have thought. 

 

4 hours ago, Steve Bassplayer said:

 

Well I'm not sure of CRT's latest mission statement, but I think the 'About Us' web page sums up what they think their role is. 

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/about-us

 

Quite a strong emphasis on 'wellbeing' for the 'millions' of customers who visit the waterways, maybe not so much the wellbeing of those trying to plan trips on a boat at the moment. ?

 

CRT's 'About Us' has the Chairman's fingerprints all over it.

Folks continually have it in for the CEO, but maybe you should look further. Richard Parry doesn't workalone.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, frangar said:

Boaters are the only user group that pays directly in any meaningful way. Fishermen pay very little by comparison. I’d happily pay £50 more a year if they were banned from canals. We and the wildlife would benefit. 

A few hours navigating followed by a little fishing makes me doubly happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jon johan said:

No I agree, but your post inferred that 10,000 had replied, even though not directly. Their usual response percentage for those particular surveys is around 11%, but 86% sounds better if you don’t mention the actual number who bothered to reply.

Which rather goes to show that the vast majority are neither so pleased by nor so upset by CRT that they feel the need to express their views.  So in the opinion of silent majority it seems that CRT are probably doing an OKish (but not outstanding or disastrous) job.

Edited by David Mack
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Heartland said:

I notice Stanley Ferry have completed the lock gates at No 1 Lock Diglis.

 

And very nice they are too - we went through on Friday, and it seemed a minute or two faster than previously.

 

6 hours ago, Detling said:

CRT have spent lots of money on two rebrandings in under 10 years, have lost a lot of staff who understood waterway maintenance and have tried to bring the system into the 21st century, by using contractors.

 

The move to contractors happened with BW - it's not particularly a CRT thing. The biggest change was when BW introduced "omnibus contracts" c. 2001. The scope and contractual arrangements have evolved over the years (I think they're now called "Civil Engineering Construction Framework Contracts") but effectively CRT is doing what BW had done for many years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jon johan said:

eNo I agree, but your post inferred that 10,000 had replied,

 

I don't see how you can take :

 

C&RT do undertake satisfaction surveys, of around 10,000 boaters per annum

 

And make that to infer that I meant they got 10,000 replies.

I think most boaters are aware that C&RT send out an invitation to comment on aspects of their performance to approx 1/3rd of all licence holders, each year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Richard Fairhurst said:

 

The move to contractors happened with BW - it's not particularly a CRT thing. The biggest change was when BW introduced "omnibus contracts" c. 2001. The scope and contractual arrangements have evolved over the years (I think they're now called "Civil Engineering Construction Framework Contracts") but effectively CRT is doing what BW had done for many years.

 

And BW/CRT are not unique in that. Just about every organisation that has responsibility for the construction, maintenance and repair of infrastructure does the same.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

And BW/CRT are not unique in that. Just about every organisation that has responsibility for the construction, maintenance and repair of infrastructure does the same.

And in just about every case it's led to work being done to a lower standard by people paid less than they were before, and therefore caring less about the quality of their work. Especially as, if it has to be done again, possibly even properly this time, it won't be them doing it.

In the end, of course, it costs the first company more as they have to pay twice to get the job done, and the second company makes more money by doing the job badly so they get to do it twice. And that's what keeps the economy going... Or it would if the second company wasn't based offshore so all the profits disappear overseas!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Which rather goes to show that the vast majority are neither so pleased by nor so upset by CRT that they feel the need to express their views.  So in the opinion of silent majority it seems that CRT are probably doing an OKish (but not outstanding or disastrous) job.

I don’t agree with any of that I’m afraid. I believe many know surveys are loaded and prefer not to fill them in. 
Generally looking at social media platforms, CRT are becoming increasingly unpopular. 

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.