Government CRT funding statement

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

23 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

 Have you just realised how CaRT fritter away a lot of money on little projects here and there, that in the end mounts up?

No,

but for me it’s been a case of living in hope and staying optimistic,

and I may now have given up hope that this bunch (CRT) will come good,

 

I think what’s really pissing me off is parry’s appeal to boaters for help after their (CRT) fk up. 

 

Edited August 15, 2023 by Goliath

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

15 minutes ago, Goliath said:

No,

but for me it’s been a case of living in hope and staying optimistic,

and I may now have given up hope that this bunch (CRT) will come good,

 

I think what’s really pissing me off is parry’s appeal to boaters for help after their (CRT) fk up. 

 

I’ve supported CaRT since having a boat and know most that work my area. It’s the lack of action side of CaRT with regards to CMoorers that gets me, CMers who are taking over and spoiling what were once decent places to stop, now it’s getting more difficult with the “I’ve broken down” boaters that set up camp.

Edited August 15, 2023 by BoatinglifeupNorth

[magnetman]

1 hour ago, Goliath said:

I 

a lovely idea. 

 

 

 

 

 

When you want your cat to stay away from home its called a Cattery. 

 

This place should be called a Buggery. 

 

 

Edited August 15, 2023 by magnetman

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

32 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

I’ve supported CaRT since having a boat and know most that work my area. It’s the lack of action side of CaRT with regards to CMoorers that gets me, CMers who are taking over and spoiling what were once decent places to stop, now it’s getting more difficult with the “I’ve broken down” boaters that set up camp.

well, I think the only thing we can do is keep on boating as much as we can and enjoy it while we have it,

 

that Crooked House burning down has taught me (reminded me) to make the most of what we got while we got it. 
 

I’m on me way to explore new (for me) waters 👍 Enjoy

[matty40s]

It's not just CRT having funding stagnant or worse. 

 

[IanD]

2 hours ago, matty40s said:

It's not just CRT having funding stagnant or worse.

 

No, it's everything the government doesn't give a sh*t about and would rather get off its books and into the safe hands of the private sector... 😞

 

Including the NHS... 😞 😞 😞

Edited August 16, 2023 by IanD

[MtB]

21 hours ago, Rob-M said:

But to have any chance of attracting more funding CRT have to try and demonstrate that canals are more than a floating playground for those that can afford to buy a boat.  Taking funding from other sources for non-navigation related projects is something they have to do.

 

Admittedly if navigation stops and the canals become delightful undisturbed havens for wildlife smelly ditches then they might become more less attractive to non boaters instead as well.

 

FTFY.

 

 

[IanD]

The fundamental problem is that the government is not telling/funding CART to preserve the canals in good working order (usable by boaters!) as a valuable part of our industrial heritage -- meaning, prioritising spending on maintenance of locks/paddles etc -- but more as a linear green park for the population as a whole, hence the proliferation of blue signs that many boaters find ridiculous.

 

Unsurprisingly CART's KPIs and publicity material and press releases reflect this, they really have no choice if they want to even keep the funding level as it is -- and as so often (see schools, NHS...) dumb/misguided KPIs are not a good way of getting the best solution, they often end up as box-ticking exercises where -- like exams -- the target becomes passing not actually delivering. Or appearing to pass by fiddling the results... 😞

 

CART have pretty much admitted this (see Richard Parry's videos) but there's not a fat lot they can do about it without a change in government mindset about what the canals are actually *for* and how they should be funded-- and the last time this happened was under Labour in 1968 with the enthusiastic backing of Barbara Castle, who was Minister for Transport at the time. Anyone think Mark Harper as MfT for this government is likely to do anything similar? Is he even aware that the UK canals exist?

 

I suppose the chances of things improving for the canals after the next GE -- assuming Labour wins -- are pretty damn small, but it's difficult to see how they could be much worse than the current shower... 😞

 

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

9 minutes ago, IanD said:

Unsurprisingly CART's KPIs and publicity material and press releases reflect this, they really have no choice if they want to even keep the funding level as it is -- and as so often (see schools, NHS...) dumb/misguided KPIs are not a good way of getting the best solution, they often end up as box-ticking exercises where -- like exams -- the target becomes passing not actually delivering. Or appearing to pass by fiddling the results...

 

It shows their intentions by the fact that the KPIs DO NOT include any 'navigation' targets.

There are KPI for the number of visitors, the condition of the towpaths and the number of accidents (for both employees and visitors) but nothing for 'boats or boating'.

 

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It shows their intentions by the fact that the KPIs DO NOT include any 'navigation' targets.

There are KPI for the number of visitors, the condition of the towpaths and the number of accidents (for both employees and visitors) but nothing for 'boats or boating'.

 

When you say "I shows their intentions" you seem -- as so often -- to be implying that CART are an evil empire hell-bound on eliminating boaters in favour of cyclists, fishermen, walkers and so on.

 

AFAIK their KPIs reflect the requirements that the government put on them as a condition of the grant -- which as you say exclude anything about boaters or boating, because the government doesn't "get it".

 

From CARTs comments -- including from Richard Parry -- they seem just as unhappy with this situation as boaters are.

 

What else do you suggest they could do, apart from trying to meet these KPIs? If they spend more money on maintenance (and less on non-boater encouragement) their performance -- according to the government-set criteria -- would get worse, with the likely consequence of further grant reduction -- how does this help the canals?

Edited August 16, 2023 by IanD

[MtB]

17 minutes ago, IanD said:

CART have pretty much admitted this (see Richard Parry's videos) but there's not a fat lot they can do about it without a change in government mindset about what the canals are actually *for* and how they should be funded-- and the last time this happened was under Labour in 1968 with the enthusiastic backing of Barbara Castle, who was Minister for Transport at the time. Anyone think Mark Harper as MfT for this government is likely to do anything similar? Is he even aware that the UK canals exist?

 

As with many things, the pendulum swings too far each way. Currently there is no interest whatsoever from government in maintaining the waterways as navigable, only as a nature reserve type thing for everyone to visit and feed the ducks or admire the wildlife. 

 

Eventually as the ability to navigate shrinks away and boaters lose hope/interest and sell up, and the canals all become like the Basy at Woodham, full of never-move liveaboard rotting hulks, the public will slowly begin to press for 'restoration' again. 

 

I see this taking a couple of generations to fully come to pass though. 

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

When you say "I shows their intentions" you seem -- as so often -- to be implying that CART are an evil empire hell-bound on eliminating boaters in favour of cyclists, fishermen, walkers and so on.

 

 

 

We all know that C&RT did not set the KPIs, they were set by the Government (or DEFRA) so it should be obvious to whom I am referring.

 

Yes C&RT are 'an evil empire'  simply in existence to build an empire, but I will not accept criticism of them which is not due to them (much as I responded yesterday to an unfounded criticism of the BSS)

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

We all know that C&RT did not set the KPIs, they were set by the Government (or DEFRA) so it should be obvious to whom I am referring.

 

Yes C&RT are 'an evil empire'  simply in existence to build an empire, but I will not accept criticism of them which is not due to them (much as I responded yesterday to an unfounded criticism of the BSS)

So "their intentions" was referring to the Government/DEFRA?

 

If so -- and this wasn't how it read -- I agree with you 100% 🙂

 

Like many other problems in the UK today the buck stops with the government, though they'd much rather the blame was attached to somebody else, and will use all possible diversionary tactics (squirrel! asylum seeker! blue signs!) to make this happen -- and boaters blaming CART for things that are not their fault (as so often seen on CWDF) is another sad example of this, it's playing into their hands... 😞

 

11 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

As with many things, the pendulum swings too far each way. Currently there is no interest whatsoever from government in maintaining the waterways as navigable, only as a nature reserve type thing for everyone to visit and feed the ducks or admire the wildlife. 

 

Eventually as the ability to navigate shrinks away and boaters lose hope/interest and sell up, and the canals all become like the Basy at Woodham, full of never-move liveaboard rotting hulks, the public will slowly begin to press for 'restoration' again. 

 

I see this taking a couple of generations to fully come to pass though. 

 

I hope not, but it's going to need a change in government mindset before things get much better again. Whether this starts (in a small way?) after the next GE or later remains to be seen -- even if Labour win they've got far higher priority things to address than the canals, thanks to mess the policies of this government has left the country in... 😞

Edited August 16, 2023 by IanD

[Allan(nb Albert)]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

So "their intentions" was referring to the Government/DEFRA?

 

If so -- and this wasn't how it read -- I agree with you 100% 🙂

 

Like many other problems in the UK today the buck stops with the government, though they'd much rather the blame was attached to somebody else, and will use all possible diversionary tactics (squirrel! asylum seeker! blue signs!) to make this happen -- and boaters blaming CART for things that are not their fault (as so often seen on CWDF) is another sad example of this, it's playing into their hands... 😞

 

 

I hope not, but it's going to need a change in government mindset before things get much better again. Whether this starts (in a small way?) after the next GE or later remains to be seen -- even if Labour win they've got far higher priority things to address than the canals, thanks to mess the policies of this government has left the country in... 😞

A more pressing problem is that CRT have not yet accepted government's most generous offer. It is not something that can be imposed upon them.

 

They can accept but would then have jusify to a future government why they accepted a deal that they claim will see the waterways fall into disrepair.

 

Alternatively, they can refuse. In that case, they might end up with nothing.

 

[David Mack]

8 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

They can accept but would then have jusify to a future government why they accepted a deal that they claim will see the waterways fall into disrepair.

 

Alternatively, they can refuse. In that case, they might end up with nothing.

Hobsons Choice. I can't see that if a future government is minded to provide more funding to CRT, that CRT's acceptance of the current deal would be an obstacle. But if a future government is not minded to fund CRT, then having an agreement for the next few years is better than nothing.

[IanD]

50 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

A more pressing problem is that CRT have not yet accepted government's most generous offer. It is not something that can be imposed upon them.

 

They can accept but would then have jusify to a future government why they accepted a deal that they claim will see the waterways fall into disrepair.

 

Alternatively, they can refuse. In that case, they might end up with nothing.

 

I assume "most generous" was meant sarcastically, because a cut in already inadequate funding is hardly that, is it? 😞

[Allan(nb Albert)]

15 minutes ago, IanD said:

I assume "most generous" was meant sarcastically, because a cut in already inadequate funding is hardly that, is it? 😞

Well it was certainly more generous than I expected ... 

[Alan de Enfield]

3 hours ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

Well it was certainly more generous than I expected ... 

 

 

To be honest, Once DEFRA realised that C&RT were telling 'porkies' about hitting KPIs , and, falsified the company accounts AFTER they had been signed off by the board, I expected they would be told, we'll honour the agreement to 2026/7 and then you are on your own,

Edited August 16, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[David Mack]

4 hours ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

Well it was certainly more generous than I expected ... 

 

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I expected they would be told, we'll honour the agreement to 2026/7 and then you are on your own,

Cutting off CRT without a penny would have been politically unacceptable. What government has offered is the minimum they think they can get away with, without causing too much of a fuss.

Edited August 16, 2023 by David Mack

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I did not think that CRT would be cut off without a penny for exactly the reason you give. I did, however think that tapering off would be by a greater amount and over a shorter time frame.

With regard to "you are on your own", Defra are certainly moving in that direction albeit very slowly. They are trying to dismantle anything that suggests they have control over CRT. Whilst the ONS classification remains in place, I understand that the SoS has resigned as 'B' member and that Defra no longer requires a 'Protector'.

Both are moves that distance Defra from CRT.

[IanD]

If it's any consolation, CART and the UK canals aren't the only organisation with this problem -- NASA is just as bad...

 

https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/08/nasas-buildings-are-even-older-than-its-graying-workforce/

 

Edited August 18, 2023 by IanD

[uncle nick]

Does anyone know, or is it even calculated and published, what percentage of total funding CaRT spend on actual maintenance /improvement of the navigable system (eg lock maintenance) compared to tow paths, fishing stuff, bug hotels? 
Since the ‘other stuff’ is of benefit to all of society, surely it should be 100% government funded via taxation, be it income tax, VAT or whatever. 
Leaving the CaRT to concentrate on maintaining the actual waterways. 
Or am I being to simplistic?

[David Mack]

8 minutes ago, uncle nick said:

Does anyone know, or is it even calculated and published, what percentage of total funding CaRT spend on actual maintenance /improvement of the navigable system (eg lock maintenance) compared to tow paths, fishing stuff, bug hotels? 
Since the ‘other stuff’ is of benefit to all of society, surely it should be 100% government funded via taxation, be it income tax, VAT or whatever. 
Leaving the CaRT to concentrate on maintaining the actual waterways. 
Or am I being to simplistic?

 

Towpaths are part of the navigable system. Fishing is an activity in the main available only to those who are members of clubs which lease fishing rights, so an activity which has its own income and costs, just like boating. So neither would, on your logic, be funded by the taxpayer. Spending on bug hotels is peanuts in the bigger picture.

[Midnight]

11 minutes ago, uncle nick said:

Does anyone know, or is it even calculated and published, what percentage of total funding CaRT spend on actual maintenance /improvement of the navigable system (eg lock maintenance) compared to tow paths, fishing stuff, bug hotels? 
Since the ‘other stuff’ is of benefit to all of society, surely it should be 100% government funded via taxation, be it income tax, VAT or whatever. 
Leaving the CaRT to concentrate on maintaining the actual waterways. 
Or am I being to simplistic?

There some on here think the 'other stuff' is essential waterways spend. So expect incoming.

1 minute ago, David Mack said:

Spending on bug hotels is peanuts in the bigger picture.

But about the same cost as fixing a paddle.

[uncle nick]

2 minutes ago, David Mack said:

1 minute ago, Midnight said:

There some on here think the 'other stuff' is essential waterways spend. So expect incoming.

Towpaths are part of the navigable system. Fishing is an activity in the main available only to those who are members of clubs which lease fishing rights, so an activity which has its own income and costs, just like boating. So neither would, on your logic, be funded by the taxpayer. Spending on bug hotels is peanuts in the bigger picture.

Yes I appreciate completely that the ‘other stuff’ is an integral part of what makes the canal system an enjoyable place to use, and part of the appeal for me. 
All I meant was, to try and separate essential maintenance costs from total running costs. 

To better try and explain what I mean; I also have a 1950’s motorbike, essential costs are petrol, oil and replacing any bits that break (or fall off and are lost), ‘other stuff’ is insurance, bike leathers, club membership etc.