Jump to content

Canal & River Trust showcases to Parliament the importance of the nation’s waterways


Ray T

Featured Posts

There is no such organisation as "Active Travel". Active Travel England is an executive agency of DfT which, inter alia, advises it on disbursing funds such as the various tranches of the Active Travel Fund (originally called the Emergency Active Travel Fund). This particular fund is directed to local authorities, but there's nothing to say that future funding opportunities will necessarily be so constrained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem I have is simple.

 

If CRT try to influence MPs by such things as this Boaters howl.

 

If they sit back and CRT don't manage to get any money from government (let alone maintain the current level) boaters will howl.

 

IMO they can't do right for doing wrong in the eyes of many boaters.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jerra said:

The problem I have is simple.

 

If CRT try to influence MPs by such things as this Boaters howl.

 

If they sit back and CRT don't manage to get any money from government (let alone maintain the current level) boaters will howl.

 

IMO they can't do right for doing wrong in the eyes of many boaters.

 

The problem being C&RT have not met the conditions of the grant and the claims they have made have been proven to be fraudulent, I would suggest that however much 'boaters howl' the C&RT / DEFRA grant is unlikely to be renewed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The problem being C&RT have not met the conditions of the grant and the claims they have made have been proven to be fraudulent, I would suggest that however much 'boaters howl' the C&RT / DEFRA grant is unlikely to be renewed.

Probably you are right however it doesn't help if the majority of boaters are antagonistic to CRT whatever they do.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The problem being C&RT have not met the conditions of the grant and the claims they have made have been proven to be fraudulent, I would suggest that however much 'boaters howl' the C&RT / DEFRA grant is unlikely to be renewed.

I hope that the delay in an announcement is, at least in part, due to DEFRA applying due diligence the the 2019/20 Annual Report. Unfortunately, CRT's dishonesty has played into governments hands. I think the best that boaters can hope for is zero post 2027 funding but the door left open for reconsideration at a later date.

 

I understand that the APPG Waterways is meeting today to hear Richard Parry talk about future funding.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

I think the best that boaters can hope for is zero post 2027 funding but the door left open for reconsideration at a later date.

CRT was supposed to become self-funding over time, but clearly that isn't anything like the case yet, or in the foreseeable future. So if government turns off the funding tap, there must be a strong likelihood of CRT handing the keys back, meaning that the future of the waterways will once again become a direct government responsibility. I can't see government wanting that outome, so I suspect it is more likely that they will be seeking to come to a reduced level of funding which helps the public purse (compared to the current position), but which doesn't result in too many howls of protest from CRT, boaters, or other waterway organisations.

Edited by David Mack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, David Mack said:

CRT was supposed to become self-funding over time, but clearly that isn't anything like the case yet, or in the foreseeable future. So if government turns off the funding tap, there must be a strong likelihood of CRT handing the keys back, meaning that the future of the waterways will once again become a direct government responsibility. I can't see government wanting that outome, so I suspect it is more likely that they will be seeking to come to a reduced level of funding which helps the public purse (compared to the current position), but which doesn't result in too many howls of protest from CRT, boaters, or other waterway organisations.

 

Given the current maintenance problems it's difficult to see how the government can cut the grant without just such howls of protest. Whether they take any notice is another problem entirely, going by their tin-eared response to protests about other funding cuts... 😞

Edited by IanD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, David Mack said:

CRT was supposed to become self-funding over time, but clearly that isn't anything like the case yet, or in the foreseeable future. So if government turns off the funding tap, there must be a strong likelihood of CRT handing the keys back, meaning that the future of the waterways will once again become a direct government responsibility. I can't see government wanting that outome, so I suspect it is more likely that they will be seeking to come to a reduced level of funding which helps the public purse (compared to the current position), but which doesn't result in too many howls of protest from CRT, boaters, or other waterway organisations.

 

Written into the transition documents is a clause that states (something to the effect of)

 

If C&RT fail to meet their KPIs the Member (B) Minister of state  - DEFRA - can take the 'system' away from C&RT and give it to another Charity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Written into the transition documents is a clause that states (something to the effect of)

 

If C&RT fail to meet their KPIs the Member (B) Minister of state  - DEFRA - can take the 'system' away from C&RT and give it to another Charity.

 which inevitably will be looking for a similar amount of government support as CRT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are various options open to 'member B'

 

From 'sacking the lot of them' to giving it to another charity  (who hopefully will not be empire building)

 

 

28. Classes of Member

28.1 There shall be two classes of Members, as follows:

28.1.1 “A Members” shall be those individuals who serve on the Council, appointed in accordance with Article 29 and the Rules, and collectively the A Members shall be known as the Council.

28.1.2 The “B Member” who shall be the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

 

 

Exercise of the Special Powers

30.4 The Special Powers are as follows:

30.4.1 the B Member may remove any or all of the Trustees of the Trust and may make such replacement appointments as the B Member considers fit by serving notice on the Trust in writing (“the Trustee Replacement Power”);

 

30.4.2 the B Member may remove any or all of the A Members and may make such replacement appointments as the B Member considers fit by serving notice on the Trust in writing (“the A Member Replacement Power”); and

 

30.4.3 the B Member may direct that the Protected Assets (subject to attendant liabilities) shall be transferred to another institution which is regarded as charitable under the law of England and Wales with objects compatible with those of the Trust or to be held upon trust for the objects of the Trust by a person or institution which has been appointed as trustee of the Waterways  Infrastructure Trust on such terms as the B Member thinks fit (subject to the requirements of charity law) (“the Transfer of Assets Power”).

 

 

30.6 For the avoidance of doubt, the exercise of the Special Powers by the B Member shall not be subject to any rights or powers or require the consent of any of the A Members, but in determining whether the B member has become entitled to exercise the Special Powers or in exercising them, the B Member must act in the way that he or she reasonably and in good faith considers to best further the objects of the Trust for public benefit.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we have to remember that, every year, Canal & River Trust produces KPI's on waterway condition that are equall to or better than the previous year. They also comfortably exceed the requirements of the grant agreement by a wide margin. Furthermore CRT claims that it's financial performance is great and in the upper quartile against industry recognised measures.

 

In addition, the protector gives CRT a glowing report each year.

 

The only way that CRT can really convince government that it needs post 2027 funding is to massively overspend. At one point they were suggesting just that but seem to have retreated from this position.

 

 

 

  • Horror 1
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.