Who carries the can?

[Paul C]

Just now, Allan(nb Albert) said:

The projections were based upon British Waterways’ business plan for the 
Comprehensive Spending Review period from 2011/12 to 2014/15, extrapolated out to 2026/27. They included the effects of the Defra funding agreement and 
projected increase due to charitable benefits.

 

Ok I'm not going to thoroughly research them. What was the basis of that?

[Arthur Marshall]

2 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

The projections were based upon British Waterways’ business plan for the 
Comprehensive Spending Review period from 2011/12 to 2014/15, extrapolated out to 2026/27. They included the effects of the Defra funding agreement and 
projected increase due to charitable benefits.

 

The last of which was deliberate magical thinking - make the numbers up to ensure you get the result you want. Nobody involved would have believed a word of it. It's called management technique - every government department, and every big business does it. Reality is irrelevant, because it isn't NOW.

[magnetman]

I thought this thread was going to be about traditional fresh water storage apparatus on narrow boats. 

[Midnight]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Personally, I doubt that anyone in management ever gave a toss about whether income and investment projections were sensible or fairytales, they just looked at their salaries, bonus conditions, expense allowance and pension contributions and took the job.

Whether they had any interest in the canal system at all I rather doubt. Probably they now think it's rather nice and they can milk it for another year or two before moving on.

Anyone know what Allan Leighton is making a pig's ear of now?

 

I think Arthur's analysis of the situation is much closer to the facts than any of the other guff posted on here. 
Whether or not 3% is a good return, C&RT management have demonstrated yet again they are not up to meeting targets in any area without fiddling the numbers. 

[ditchcrawler]

No one will carry the can, they never do

[magnetman]

14 minutes ago, Midnight said:

 

I think Arthur's analysis of the situation is much closer to the facts than any of the other guff posted on here. 
Whether or not 3% is a good return, C&RT management have demonstrated yet again they are not up to meeting targets in any area without fiddling the numbers. 

 

I wonder if the CRT should branch out and perhaps look to get a christmas number one.  

 

Band Aid did it back in the day. 

 

Maybe a well versed sob story about broken balance beams and holes in the clay could work and earn them endless millions while revitalising the chart success of otherwise dead, buried and boring pop stars. 

 

 

 

 

[Paul C]

Ultimately, it will go back into government hands. But they're going to have a good go at squeezing boaters for cash; and mothballing a number of lesser canals, before the inevitable.

[ditchcrawler]

1 minute ago, Paul C said:

Ultimately, it will go back into government hands. But they're going to have a good go at squeezing boaters for cash; and mothballing a number of lesser canals, before the inevitable.

Well I can't see it being privatised, who would want it

[Midnight]

28 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Well I can't see it being privatised, who would want it

 

I think a lot may go to the various voluntary groups with a little bit of funding. The Avon trust manage to do it. I'm sure the Ashby Canal Society would have a good go, but I wouldn't fancy the chances of the Huddersfield Canal Society.

[David Mack]

17 minutes ago, Midnight said:

 

I think a lot may go to the various voluntary groups with a little bit of funding. The Avon trust manage to do it. I'm sure the Ashby Canal Society would have a good go, but I wouldn't fancy the chances of the Huddersfield Canal Society.

But most of their channel and weirs are maintained by EA out of separate funding, with bridges also being the responsibility of others. The Avon Trust's income only has to cover the locks and other navigation works.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

33 minutes ago, Midnight said:

 

I think a lot may go to the various voluntary groups with a little bit of funding. The Avon trust manage to do it. I'm sure the Ashby Canal Society would have a good go, but I wouldn't fancy the chances of the Huddersfield Canal Society.

It might be a false memory but I seem to recall that with the IWA vision of a National Conservancy and possibility of CRT taking over EA waterways, ANT broached the idea of CRT becoming responsible for navigation on the Avon.

[matty40s]

1 hour ago, magnetman said:

 

I wonder if the CRT should branch out and perhaps look to get a christmas number one.  

 

Band Aid did it back in the day. 

 

Maybe a well versed sob story about broken balance beams and holes in the clay could work and earn them endless millions while revitalising the chart success of otherwise dead, buried and boring pop stars. 

 

 

 

 

Do They Know Its Pissing Out Over There....

FILL THE HOLES 2024

 

classic chart topper...

 

 

Edited August 22, 2023 by matty40s

[magnetman]

34 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

It might be a false memory but I seem to recall that with the IWA vision of a National Conservancy and possibility of CRT taking over EA waterways, ANT broached the idea of CRT becoming responsible for navigation on the Avon.

 

There was talk of the CRT taking over EA management of the Thames at some point. 

 

I imagine as @David Mack pointed out earlier with the Avon this would probably have been just locks and moorings management rather than full scale infrastructure management. I think the EA would still have dealt with flooding and pollution. 

 

I don't know if thats the case but some people were glad because despite the EA being almost useless the CRT would have been even worse. 

 

 

 

Edited August 22, 2023 by magnetman

[Creaking Gate]

I struggle to see the difference between this site and NBW (Telling it like it is); some of the comments range from straight out aggressive to a joke. Not hugely surprised the OP was a long time NBW participant - Always looking for trouble and negativity from a distorted / biased view.    They did the same thing on NBW forum as i recall. 

[NBDensie]

15 hours ago, IanD said:

 

Except that as far as I can see nobody has actually "highlighted a failure to deliver" compared to what other comparable institutions (similar size and portfolio) achieved over the same period.

 

Saying "they haven't delivered what was in the prospectus 10 years ago" is meaningless, because I think most people are aware that the financial assumptions made/projected when CART was set up were -- to say the least -- unrealistically optimistic.

 

The blame for this can be shared between a government keen to get the canals "off the books" and naive CART management who fell for their spiel and thought they could magically transform CART funding, in spite of having no real evidence that this was possible -- and as it turns out, it wasn't.

 

Having all these magic "commercial freedoms" to supposedly be able to close the funding gap sounds remarkably similar to another over-optimistic proposal dating back to 2016, that has also failed to deliver on what was promised -- because what was promised could never have been delivered in reality... 😞

 

And thinking that by borrowing money and investing it in property you could make money to fill a government funding gap is the same thing that has lead multiple local councils into disaster and bankruptcy, much more spectacularly than anything CART has done. Compared to this, making a 5% gross return on investment is pretty good, isn't it?

Did CRT borrow money to buy property?  I think you will find CRT's property was simply transferred over from BW. 

 

In any case the % return must have a wide range of error since it depends on the estimated capital value of the property which in some cases could be rather difficult to sell.

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, NBDensie said:

Did CRT borrow money to buy property?  I think you will find CRT's property was simply transferred over from BW. 

 

In any case the % return must have a wide range of error since it depends on the estimated capital value of the property which in some cases could be rather difficult to sell.

 

In the last couple of years C&RT have borrowed large tranches of money at commercial interest rates to buy additional assets (property) which appear to be making an income lower than the loan is costing (after admin and interest charges are deducted)

[IanD]

11 minutes ago, NBDensie said:

Did CRT borrow money to buy property?  I think you will find CRT's property was simply transferred over from BW. 

 

In any case the % return must have a wide range of error since it depends on the estimated capital value of the property which in some cases could be rather difficult to sell.

Apparently they did borrow money, at least according to another poster.

 

You're right about the uncertainty; my point was that slagging off CART over "only" getting a a return of 5% gross/3% net is hardly a valid criticism, but it's just being pushed by CART-haters -- like "blue signs" and "executive bonuses" as a reason for CARTs financial problems.

 

If you're going to look for a stick to beat CART with, then at least pick real ones where there is a real failure that they bear responsibility for, not an imaginary one or one which is completely out of their control -- like the funding gap "failing to meet projections".

 

5 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

In the last couple of years C&RT have borrowed large tranches of money at commercial interest rates to buy additional assets (property) which appear to be making an income lower than the loan is costing (after admin and interest charges are deducted)

You mean, just like many other organisations have done, because the value/income from such property has been hit by Liz Truss's incompetence and the Ukraine war?

 

They all did it in the hope of making a profit -- which similar investments did in the past -- but this didn't happen this time. Remember the old warning "The value of investments may go down as well as up"?

 

But then I suppose if CART hadn't done this to try and close the funding gap, you'd have slagged them off for that too...

Edited August 23, 2023 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

They all did it in the hope of making a profit -- which similar investments did in the past -- but this didn't happen this time. Remember the old warning "The value of investments may go down as well as up"?

 

Some managed to actually get quite a good return - my company pension provider achieved 7% in 2022/2023

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Some managed to actually get quite a good return - my company pension provider achieved 7% in 2022/2023

As did mine, because they invest in share sectors that went up following Truss/Ukraine. Pity they dropped the previous year though... 😞

 

All of which has nothing to do with CART, who AFAIK are not a big player in the stock markets (and I'm sure would be slagged off if they were...) -- and as I'm sure you know a figure for 1 year is also pretty meaningless given investment volatility... 😉

[Allan(nb Albert)]

4 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

In the last couple of years C&RT have borrowed large tranches of money at commercial interest rates to buy additional assets (property) which appear to be making an income lower than the loan is costing (after admin and interest charges are deducted)

CRT have borrowed £150m at just under 3% using (mainly) non-operational property as security. Some of this money would have been used to buy property and some invested in a new "diversified" fund managed by a third party.

Being able to borrow large amounts of money was one of the reasons for taking CRT out of the public sector as already stated.

The idea of diversification is supposedly as a hedge against poor performance of the property portfolio.

 

[Mike Todd]

19 hours ago, Midnight said:

 

I think a lot may go to the various voluntary groups with a little bit of funding. The Avon trust manage to do it. I'm sure the Ashby Canal Society would have a good go, but I wouldn't fancy the chances of the Huddersfield Canal Society.

The much cited NT, Wey, are now finding much the same issues as CaRT as they are only funded out of licences and similar sources, not a subsidy from the main NT