Government CRT funding statement

[IanD]

9 hours ago, DandV said:

I too doubt that the government will increase funding in the current circumstances.

 

The government will only make changes if it is politically expedient for it to do so.

This will need persuasion. A lot of persuasion.

CART needs to actively persuade them of the need,   and demonstrate the benifits, as well as reassuring the government that it striving to make its operations more cost effective. It does however seem to have belatedly realised this.

One wonders if previous management was just too close to its political masters.

Persuasion though would undoubtedly be enhanced  if there was much more demonstrable support from the affected parts of the community.

In your case, the boating community.

You need to be seen supporting the case for a more sustainable operating model.

You owe to to those volunteers and agitators that got you back all those miles of canal. 

 

But it's much easier to moan endlessly about CART executive bonuses and blue signs -- and throw out empty think-tank buzzwords like "smarter management" and "new thinking" and "resource re-allocation" -- than it is to recognise where the real problem lies and actually do anything which might help.

 

For example, supporting the Funding the Canals campaign, or any other canal-promoting organisation, with effort and/or money, or badgering your MP, or volunteering, or anything positive... 😞

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

11 minutes ago, IanD said:

For example, supporting the Funding the Canals campaign, or any other canal-promoting organisation, with effort and/or money, or badgering your MP, or volunteering, or anything positive... 😞

What organisation do you think will be the most effective for campaigning the canals and ultimately the boaters nationally?

[IanD]

Just now, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

What organisation do you think will be the most effective for campaigning the canals and ultimately the boaters nationally?

 

If enough people and all the other disparate canal/boating related groups get together to support it instead of fighting like ferrets in a sack about their specific and sometimes incompatible interests, Fund Britain's Waterways.

 

https://waterways.org.uk/fund-britains-waterways

 

Maybe they need separating out from the IWA financially somehow to make this work, not sure.

 

But it seems obvious to me that a single campaigning voice with widespread support -- and one clear aim, as in their name! -- stands more chance of getting a change in government policy than a rag-tag bunch of small separate organisations whose purpose is not always clear, often local not national, and ignores the elephant in the room...

[Alan de Enfield]

8 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

What organisation do you think will be the most effective for campaigning the canals and ultimately the boaters nationally?

 

 

The RYA, they are already well known to all Governments, sit in on Government boaty meetings and have represented the Government fighting the EU over Red-Diesel (and got EU court cases against boaters stopped)

 

The RYA is viewed by inland waterways boaters as caring about lumpy water only and is old admirals with scrambled egg around their caps. The RYA actually offers / conducts Inland waterways boat handling courses, and works to have legislation amended etc etc etc.

 

 

The RYA has over 110,000 personal members and 1,500 affiliated clubs and classes, which represent some 350,000 active boaters throughout the UK. We are the national body for dinghy, motor and sail cruising, all forms of sail racing, RIBs and sportsboats, windsurfing and personal watercraft and a leading representative body for inland waterways cruising.

 

The RYA’s primary objectives are:

• sustaining and defending recreational boaters’ freedoms and rights

• promoting responsible and sustainable boating

• increasing access and opportunity for all to participate.

 

We set and maintain an international standard for recreational boat training through a network of RYA recognised training centres, world-class courses and educational material. The RYA is responsible for one of the UK’s most successful Olympic medal winning sports. Our coaching and development schemes actively support our country’s top sailors, from talented juniors to Olympic and World Champions.

[TheBiscuits]

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The RYA

 

You do know they are on the steering group as part of the Fund Britain's Waterways thing?

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

You do know they are on the steering group as part of the Fund Britain's Waterways thing?

 

Yes - but I think they have got the clout and contacts to actually run the campaign rather than the IWA which rather seems to have lost its way over the years.

[IanD]

12 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Yes - but I think they have got the clout and contacts to actually run the campaign rather than the IWA which rather seems to have lost its way over the years.

Fund Britain's Waterways includes the RYA, as well as the IWA and many other organisations.

 

The RYA focuses mainly on lumpy-water boats, many of its objectives aren't relevant to the canals (see the list you quoted), it has very few members on the canals, and many boating people and organisations don't see it as useful for them.

 

The IWA has indeed lost its way and influence since the heady days of restoration in the 20th century -- not helped by the many other splinter groups and organisations which have emerged since.

 

It and the IWA (and the NBTA and all the others...) are each one of the "rag-tag bunch" I referred to, and this is part of the problem FBW may help to solve -- along with the "no, not them, *we* should be in the driving seat" attitude which I think your post demonstrates... 😉

 

It doesn't matter who uses their clout and contacts, the RYA or IWA or anyone else -- if all the disparate groups join/work together, they will have a much stronger voice. And this won't happen if one existing organisation -- the RYA, IWA or anyone else -- is in charge.

 

Fund Britain's Waterways has a much clearer statement of what their aim is than any of the associations, which might actually resonate with both the government and the public and get more support -- nothing to do with yachts (which will automatically put some people off because they're for the elitist rich) or narrowboats (hey, what about us wideboats!) or travellers (ugh, water gypsies) or a local town/city (I don't live there)...

Edited July 20, 2023 by IanD

[Lady M]

Also the government seem to think that the RYA represents inland boaters.

[magnetman]

The only people we hate more than the Romans are the [word removed]ing Judean Peoples Front!

[Alan de Enfield]

17 minutes ago, IanD said:

It doesn't matter who uses their clout and contacts, the RYA or IWA or anyone else -- if all the disparate groups join/work together, they will have a much stronger voice. And this won't happen if one existing organisation -- the RYA, IWA or anyone else -- is in charge.

 

Which it appears the IWA is !

 

The chair of the IWA is also the chair of the FBW

Why does the bottom of the FBW page have a link to "Donate to the IWA"  (NOT the FBW but the IWA directly)

 

Why are the FBW webpages part of the IWA website and not standalone ?

 

The link takes you to :

 

 

We are the charity that works to protect and restore Britain’s 7,000 miles of canals and rivers.

We campaign for better existing waterways and help bring forgotten waterways back to life. Your donation will help to fund major campaigns such as the Protect Our Waterways campaign.

Much of our work is carried out by our dedicated volunteers. Your support can make the difference.

If you would prefer to donate via text message, please click here. You can also donate online via Charities Aid Foundation (https://www.cafonline.org/) – and then search for IWA using our charity registration number: 212342.  For electronic banking payments, our CAF account details are: sort code 40-52-40 and account number 00005178.

 

[wandering snail]

49 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

If enough people and all the other disparate canal/boating related groups get together to support it instead of fighting like ferrets in a sack about their specific and sometimes incompatible interests, Fund Britain's Waterways.

 

https://waterways.org.uk/fund-britains-waterways

 

Maybe they need separating out from the IWA financially somehow to make this work, not sure.

 

But it seems obvious to me that a single campaigning voice with widespread support -- and one clear aim, as in their name! -- stands more chance of getting a change in government policy than a rag-tag bunch of small separate organisations whose purpose is not always clear, often local not national, and ignores the elephant in the room...

The Fund Britain's Waterways donation page should appear as separate from IWA donations in the next day or two, it's being sorted!

[IanD]

10 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Which it appears the IWA is !

 

The chair of the IWA is also the chair of the FBW

Why does the bottom of the FBW page have a link to "Donate to the IWA"  (NOT the FBW but the IWA directly)

 

Why are the FBW webpages part of the IWA website and not standalone ?

 

The link takes you to :

 

 

We are the charity that

 

works to protect and restore Britain’s 7,000 miles of canals and rivers.

We campaign for better existing waterways and help bring forgotten waterways back to life. Your donation will help to fund major campaigns such as the Protect Our Waterways campaign.

Much of our work is carried out by our dedicated volunteers. Your support can make the difference.

If you would prefer to donate via text message, please click here. You can also donate online via Charities Aid Foundation (https://www.cafonline.org/) – and then search for IWA using our charity registration number: 212342.  For electronic banking payments, our CAF account details are: sort code 40-52-40 and account number 00005178.

 

 

You did read what I said, didn't you?

 

"Maybe they need separating out from the IWA financially somehow to make this work, not sure."

 

They're supposed to be an umbrella group so *somebody* has to get it started, but no doubt a more widely distributed steering committee will be needed -- and very likely separating out from the IWA to fend off exactly objections like yours.

 

Which it has to be said come over more as a "Why not the RYA that I suggested?" protest -- ignoring the obvious reasons why this won't work, some of which I suggested -- rather than anything constructive... 😉

 

8 minutes ago, wandering snail said:

The Fund Britain's Waterways donation page should appear as separate from IWA donations in the next day or two, it's being sorted!

 

Good, it needed doing 🙂

 

As soon as this happens, maybe people might consider making a donation to FBW? After all, I'd have though most posters*** on CWDF would rather the canals continue as a viable resource than see them shrink and collapse... 😞

 

*** except for some who it seems would be delighted since it would prove their doom-mongering was justified and/or they were right to leave them... 😉

Edited July 20, 2023 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

you did read what I said, didn't you?

 

"Maybe they need separating out from the IWA financially somehow to make this work, not sure."

 

They're supposed to be an umbrella group so *somebody* has to get it started, but no doubt a more widely distributed steering committee will be needed -- and very likely separating out from the IWA to fend off exactly objections like yours.

 

Which it has to be said come over more as a "Why not the RYA that I suggested?" protest -- ignoring the obvious reasons why this won't work, some of which I suggested -- rather than anything constructive... 😉

 

Yes I did read it but there was no indication or implication that FBW should be separated from the IWA - but I note you did edit the page 10 minutes after posting it.

[Nightwatch]

On 10/07/2023 at 17:26, matty40s said:

3rd May

I would have ceased being concerned by this time. Pushing up daisies as they say.

[IanD]

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Yes I did read it but there was no indication or implication that FBW should be separated from the IWA - but I note you did edit the page 10 minutes after posting it.

 

Yes, to clarify things, that's what edits are for. I didn't change that statement, and I've also posted something very similar several times before when FBW came up i.e. that they needed to be separate from the IWA.

 

For the purpose of trying to get more funding for our waterways, as a clearly single-purpose group encompassing multiple differing organisations I think they are self-evidently a better choice than the RYA, IWA, NBTA, or anyone else.

 

Assuming they get enough support from boaters and boating organisations, of course... 😉

Edited July 20, 2023 by IanD

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The RYA ... are the national body for dinghy, motor and sail cruising, all forms of sail racing, RIBs and sportsboats, windsurfing and personal watercraft and a leading representative body for inland waterways cruising.

Even the RYA admit that their inland waterways role is subsidiary to their main interest.

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

I think the replies from the few that responded after my “which organisation question” highlight the concerns that most boaters have. There isn’t one organisation that they would trust to give their backing/funding too. The FBW need a clear separation financially/administration from the IWA, are the RYA a canal voice/backer or offshore? IWA,NABO,NBTA seen little worthwhile action over recent years.

 So you see, who do we trust to do the job? We wait to see.

Edited July 20, 2023 by BoatinglifeupNorth

[IanD]

6 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

I think the replies from the few that responded after my “which organisation question” highlight the concerns that most boaters have. There isn’t one organisation that they would trust to give their backing/funding too. The FBW need a clear separation financially/administration from the IWA, are the RYA a canal voice/backer or offshore? IWA,NABO,NBTA seen little worthwhile action over recent years.

 So you see, who do we trust to do the job? 

 

It seems that this is exactly what they're trying to do, at least financially...

 

As far as admin is concerned, if FBW takes off I'm sure people from other organisations will get involved, but without the IWA admin support it would never have got off the ground.

 

I do find it slightly annoying that many canal boaters have been complaining for years that there isn't any strong effective organisation to represent their interests -- especially keeping the canals going! -- but when it looks like one might actually happen they just raise objections because it's not fully-worked-out and perfect from day one... 😞

Edited July 20, 2023 by IanD

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

14 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

It seems that this is exactly what they're trying to do, at least financially...

 

As far as admin is concerned, if FBW takes off I'm sure people from other organisations will get involved, but without the IWA admin support it would never have got off the ground.

 

I do find it slightly annoying that many canal boaters have been complaining for years that there isn't any strong effective organisation to represent their interests -- especially keeping the canals going! -- but when it looks like one might actually happen they just raise objections because it's not fully-worked-out and perfect from day one... 😞

 But surely they could of seen the obvious concern boaters would have had before it was launched, everyone else seemed to see it and ask the same question as soon as they went to the funding page with the blurred lines of IWA/FBW donations. 
 Maybe the IWA will metamorphosis into the FBW or vice versa in months/years to come?

 

[peterboat]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Which it appears the IWA is !

 

The chair of the IWA is also the chair of the FBW

Why does the bottom of the FBW page have a link to "Donate to the IWA"  (NOT the FBW but the IWA directly)

 

Why are the FBW webpages part of the IWA website and not standalone ?

 

The link takes you to :

 

 

We are the charity that works to protect and restore Britain’s 7,000 miles of canals and rivers.

We campaign for better existing waterways and help bring forgotten waterways back to life. Your donation will help to fund major campaigns such as the Protect Our Waterways campaign.

Much of our work is carried out by our dedicated volunteers. Your support can make the difference.

If you would prefer to donate via text message, please click here. You can also donate online via Charities Aid Foundation (https://www.cafonline.org/) – and then search for IWA using our charity registration number: 212342.  For electronic banking payments, our CAF account details are: sort code 40-52-40 and account number 00005178.

 

I dumped the IWA ages ago when it supported the Broad boats to pay more, many others left as well, I am only in the Residential boat owners now the rest can whistle

[Graham_Robinson]

Just how many boat owners are members of the IWA?

[IanD]

All of which shows why FBW is needed, not the IWA or RYA or NABO or NBTA or... 😉

[wandering snail]

2 hours ago, IanD said:

All of which shows why FBW is needed, not the IWA or RYA or NABO or NBTA or... 😉

Just to point out that it was NABO who initiated this and invited other groups to join together with this one aim. IWA has got the resources that most of the other 34 groups who have so far joined this initiative haven't so it seemed to make sense for them to take on the webpage etc. Of course, if any of you can  think of a better way to attempt to get the waterways adequately funded, bearing in mind that there is no alternative authority apart from CRT with all its failings to get behind, then we'd all in FBW support you instead. It's a lot of work so we'd be very grateful. 

[IanD]

11 minutes ago, wandering snail said:

Just to point out that it was NABO who initiated this and invited other groups to join together with this one aim. IWA has got the resources that most of the other 34 groups who have so far joined this initiative haven't so it seemed to make sense for them to take on the webpage etc. Of course, if any of you can  think of a better way to attempt to get the waterways adequately funded, bearing in mind that there is no alternative authority apart from CRT with all its failings to get behind, then we'd all in FBW support you instead. It's a lot of work so we'd be very grateful. 

 

I meant that's why it needs a focused body like FBW to take this on, all the other organisations (who are supporting and helping, well done...) have their own aims and agendas which is understandably where most of their time/money/effort goes. The more organisations and boaters FBW get behind them to present a united front, the more chance they have of getting something done.

 

(so long as they don't then get torn apart by internal squabbling like the government...)

 

How CART could work with FBW remains to be seen, maybe as a "charity" (partly funded by the government) they can't really join what is effectively a campaign against government policy, however much they agree with its aims... 😞

[LadyG]

15 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

I meant that's why it needs a focused body like FBW to take this on, all the other organisations (who are supporting and helping, well done...) have their own aims and agendas which is understandably where most of their time/money/effort goes. The more organisations and boaters FBW get behind them to present a united front, the more chance they have of getting something done.

 

(so long as they don't then get torn apart by internal squabbling like the government...)

 

How CART could work with FBW remains to be seen, maybe as a "charity" (partly funded by the government) they can't really join what is effectively a campaign against government policy, however much they agree with its aims... 😞

I think this is confused thinking, there is not a government policy discouraging the use of inland waterways. The government has a pot of money to return to the various stakeholders, and it is up to interested parties to make a case for funding.