Rochdale Canal

[Midnight]

After what must be a record for the length of time open, the Rochdale is currently closed between Lock 80 & Lock 65 owing to "subsidence" . A real shame as one of our members who has been trying to get back to the Club from Worcester since October (first the landslide at Tardebigge, then the flooded Severn) had just reached Castlefield when the news broke. The Rochdale Curse strikes again!

[dmr]

34 minutes ago, Midnight said:

After what must be a record for the length of time open, the Rochdale is currently closed between Lock 80 & Lock 65 owing to "subsidence" . A real shame as one of our members who has been trying to get back to the Club from Worcester since October (first the landslide at Tardebigge, then the flooded Severn) had just reached Castlefield when the news broke. The Rochdale Curse strikes again!

 

I hope this is not a serious issue, and not the "long term closure due to invented problem" that you have predicted.

There is already some "subsidence" somewhere down that way where the ground has sunk next to a paddle, but this is hopefully very different to the sort of subsidence that happens on the Marple Flight.

[Hudds Lad]

33 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

I hope this is not a serious issue, and not the "long term closure due to invented problem" that you have predicted.

There is already some "subsidence" somewhere down that way where the ground has sunk next to a paddle, but this is hopefully very different to the sort of subsidence that happens on the Marple Flight.

This one?

 

"Please be advised navigation is currently closed between Lock 65 Alfred Street, and Lock 80 Coal Pit Lower, to allow our engineers to carry out investigations into some subsidence at Lock 67, Tannersfield Middle.

Our engineers will carry out the initial investigations from tomorrow Friday 12 January and throughout the weekend.

A further update will be provided Monday 15 January."

[Midnight]

1 hour ago, dmr said:

 

I hope this is not a serious issue, and not the "long term closure due to invented problem" that you have predicted.

There is already some "subsidence" somewhere down that way where the ground has sunk next to a paddle, but this is hopefully very different to the sort of subsidence that happens on the Marple Flight.

 

I hope so too. The source who mentioned the invented closure suggested it would affect the Summit

[Adam]

The subsidence causing the closure was reported by a boater (he mentioned on the Rochdale canal group he had seen / reported it), so likely no foul play from CRT.

[Ian Mac]

Its a sodding big hole - will post a foto when I've recovered from being well miffed that a good guy and a person of lower standing got elected to council. It would appear that doing a Boris works!

[Midnight]

8 hours ago, Ian Mac said:

Its a sodding big hole ...........

 

Any opinion as to when navigation will resume, Is it likely C&RT will offer assisted passage? I'm trying to help our Club member get back to his mooring. 

[Ian Mac]

1 hour ago, Midnight said:

 

Any opinion as to when navigation will resume, Is it likely C&RT will offer assisted passage? I'm trying to help our Club member get back to his mooring. 

I believe it is well worth asking them.

[dmr]

How close to the lock is this?  It looks like there is a hole at each end so this is part of a passageway where a lot of water has flowed?

[Ian Mac]

At the back of the first picture (portrait one) is the lock wall. It is about half way down the offside of the lock and drains into the bywash. It has a decent flow on it when the lock is full. That lock is in good nick otherwise so fills on the bottom gates, with the small leakage through the top gates.

[Brave Horse]

Not looking hopeful.  Today's update suggests it's not going to be a quick job.  No further update due for 12 days. 

[Midnight]

No assisted passage available. I feel sorry for our new club members who are now stuck on the wrong side of the Pennines. They are new to boating having had their electric boat built at Worcester. With the constant ongoing problems on the L&L, the Huddersfield and Rochdale they must be wondering why they bothered. When these issues permeate to the Midlands and South boaters down that way may agree C&RT under the leadership (🤣) of Richard Parry are a disaster. He needs to go before the whole system falls apart.

 

 

Edited January 20 by Midnight

[IanD]

15 minutes ago, Midnight said:

No assisted passage available. I feel sorry for our new club members who are now stuck on the wrong side of the Pennines. They are new to boating having had their electric boat built at Worcester. With the constant ongoing problems on the L&L, the Huddersfield and Rochdale they must be wondering why they bothered. When these issues permeate to the Midlands and South boaters down that way may agree C&RT under the leadership (🤣) of Richard Parry are a disaster. He needs to go before the whole system falls apart.

 

How exactly would getting rid of one man fix things? Do you think replacing him with someone who promised Boris-like to deliver the world but signally failed when faced with funding realities would help?

 

You're making Parry a scapegoat for problems that he can't do anything about, lack of money to maintain an ancient bit of infrastructure being the fundamental one... 😞

 

Ever since the restored canals like the Rochdale opened twenty-odd years ago the problem has been getting worse, because these added expensive-to-maintain sections (lots of locks over high hills with water restrictions) to the network which are now needing more and more work with less and less money to pay for it.

 

This has got worse since CART was formed with optimistic fundraising aims which could never have realistically been delivered, and it's continuing to get worse as real-cost funding drops every year and maintenance costs -- labour and especially materials -- continue to rise.

 

Yes this has happened while Richard Parry was in charge, but I can't see what anyone else could have done differently or better given the funding/cost/need imbalance, or how getting rid of him can magically fix this -- which is going to carry on getting worse in future, even with license fee increases... 😞

Edited January 20 by IanD

[Midnight]

7 minutes ago, IanD said:

How exactly would getting rid of one man fix things? Do you think replacing him with someone who promised Boris-like to deliver the world but signally failed when faced with funding realities would help?

 

You're making Parry a scapegoat for problems that he can't do anything about, lack of money to maintain an ancient bit of infrastructure being the fundamental one... 😞

 

A better man might make more use of the money they do have. If he is so good how come he was removed form TFL?
"He was paid £503,271, including £367,534 compensation for loss of office after being forced to make way for current Tube boss Mike Brown. Mr Parry, now a director with First Group, refused to comment." - Evening Standard

[IanD]

1 minute ago, Midnight said:

 

A better man might make more use of the money they do have. If he is so good how come he was removed form TFL?
"He was paid £503,271, including £367,534 compensation for loss of office after being forced to make way for current Tube boss Mike Brown. Mr Parry, now a director with First Group, refused to comment." - Evening Standard

 

Anyone replacing Parry as the head of an organisation like CART would get paid a similar amount, it's a job not volunteering for a charity. 

 

How do you think the money could be "used more efficiently"?

 

This sounds like the mythical "efficiency improvements" touted by the Government as the panacea for organisations like the NHS amd social services and [lots of other things], which basically mean getting rid of people and then wondering afterwards why things don't work any more.

 

Go on, there's your challenge -- given the same income and costs as Parry, how would *you* do things better? No mythical savings where removing blue signs will somehow pay for locks, how would you basically get 50% more work done for the same money?

[Midnight]

38 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Anyone replacing Parry as the head of an organisation like CART would get paid a similar amount, it's a job not volunteering for a charity. 

 

How do you think the money could be "used more efficiently"?

 

This sounds like the mythical "efficiency improvements" touted by the Government as the panacea for organisations like the NHS amd social services and [lots of other things], which basically mean getting rid of people and then wondering afterwards why things don't work any more.

 

Go on, there's your challenge -- given the same income and costs as Parry, how would *you* do things better? No mythical savings where removing blue signs will somehow pay for locks, how would you basically get 50% more work done for the same money?

 

I would get rid of all the non-essentials (you know what they are and most are not blue) and reduce the management structure, redirecting the money into the front line essentials. Maintenance would be the top priority and by that I mean dropping the wait 'til it breaks policy' . Parry of course will deny that exists but I suspect most on here believe it to be the case. Spend zero on promoting towpath visits and vanity projects (The EA waterways manage without them), but I would keep the team who produce the stats they are bloody mathmatical wizards - on second thoughts, sack them too and just pluck visitor numbers out of the air when asked. (Some think they already do). As I'm Yorkshire based, I'd look very hard at the three routes over the Pennines and weigh up the pros and cons of focussing resouces on just one. 

 

Finally I would find out where you are moored and make sure the canal there suffers equal amounts of closures as we have had to suffer for the past five years then ask you if you had changed your views. Oh come to think of it I wouldn't need to do that Parry is well on the way to achieving the same end.

 

Now here's a challenge for you. Tell me what wonderous things Parry has achieved including all the targets and promises made when he took over.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 20 by Midnight

[ditchcrawler]

22 minutes ago, Midnight said:

Now here's a challenge for you. Tell me what wonderous things Parry has achieved including all the targets and promises made when he took over.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think he has but I doubt anyone else would ether 

[IanD]

1 hour ago, Midnight said:

 

I would get rid of all the non-essentials (you know what they are and most are not blue) and reduce the management structure, redirecting the money into the front line essentials. Maintenance would be the top priority and by that I mean dropping the wait 'til it breaks policy' . Parry of course will deny that exists but I suspect most on here believe it to be the case. Spend zero on promoting towpath visits and vanity projects (The EA waterways manage without them), but I would keep the team who produce the stats they are bloody mathmatical wizards - on second thoughts, sack them too and just pluck visitor numbers out of the air when asked. (Some think they already do). As I'm Yorkshire based, I'd look very hard at the three routes over the Pennines and weigh up the pros and cons of focussing resouces on just one. 

 

Finally I would find out where you are moored and make sure the canal there suffers equal amounts of closures as we have had to suffer for the past five years then ask you if you had changed your views. Oh come to think of it I wouldn't need to do that Parry is well on the way to achieving the same end.

 

Now here's a challenge for you. Tell me what wonderous things Parry has achieved including all the targets and promises made when he took over.

 

 

Thanks but I'm perfectly well aware of all the Northern closure problems, since that's where I've spent most canal time in the past few years -- including the saga of getting the boat from Sheffield to Anderton with multiple route changes and delays due to closures, the Rochdale was my last choice... 😞

 

It's easy to say "get rid of the non-essentials" without saying what -- so, which ones? Don't forget not to p*ss off the government who want the canals to be used by lots of non-boaters, which is why they justify the grant...

 

48 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I don't think he has but I doubt anyone else would ether 

Which was exactly my point -- there were lots of over-optimistic predictions/promises made when CART was formed, most of which didn't happen but realistically never had any real prospect of doing so.

 

Blaming Parry for this and saying it would all be much better if he was gone is simply making him the scapegoat for the entire mess, which in the end comes down to reducing funding against an increasing spend needed to maintain the system. No amount of moaning about Parry is going to fix this, and anyone replacing him would face exactly the same problem... 😞

 

Edited January 20 by IanD

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Midnight said:

I would get rid of all the non-essentials (you know what they are and most are not blue) and reduce the management structure, redirecting the money into the front line essentials.

Perhaps you could set out in detail, for those of us who do not know, what these non-essentials are, and how much money might be saved if they were cut.

 

Please can you provide evidence that CRT has excess management structure, perhaps by comparison with the structure of similar organisations, and again show how much money might be freed up for additional front line essentials (taking into account that those additional front line essentials will also require managing).

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

1 hour ago, Midnight said:

 

I would get rid of all the non-essentials (you know what they are and most are not blue) and reduce the management structure, redirecting the money into the front line essentials. Maintenance would be the top priority and by that I mean dropping the wait 'til it breaks policy' . Parry of course will deny that exists but I suspect most on here believe it to be the case. Spend zero on promoting towpath visits and vanity projects (The EA waterways manage without them), but I would keep the team who produce the stats they are bloody mathmatical wizards - on second thoughts, sack them too and just pluck visitor numbers out of the air when asked. (Some think they already do). As I'm Yorkshire based, I'd look very hard at the three routes over the Pennines and weigh up the pros and cons of focussing resouces on just one. 

 

Finally I would find out where you are moored and make sure the canal there suffers equal amounts of closures as we have had to suffer for the past five years then ask you if you had changed your views. Oh come to think of it I wouldn't need to do that Parry is well on the way to achieving the same end.

 

Now here's a challenge for you. Tell me what wonderous things Parry has achieved including all the targets and promises made when he took over.

 

 

 

 

 

their mind set needs a shake up,

priority must be the Navigation, 

they’re so tied up in self promotion they’ve forgotten their purpose; to care for the Navigation

 

CRT need to accept there’s a shortage of money because of their piss weak management and stop blaming boaters such as itinerants and dossers for the shortfalls

 

 

 

 

[Midnight]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

 

Thanks but I'm perfectly well aware of all the Northern closure problems, since that's where I've spent most canal time in the past few years -- including the saga of getting the boat from Sheffield to Anderton with multiple route changes and delays due to closures, the Rochdale was my last choice... 😞

 

It's easy to say "get rid of the non-essentials" without saying what -- so, which ones? Don't forget not to p*ss off the government who want the canals to be used by lots of non-boaters, which is why they justify the grant...

 

Which was exactly my point -- there were lots of over-optimistic predictions/promises made when CART was formed, most of which didn't happen but realistically never had any real prospect of doing so.

 

Blaming Parry for this and saying it would all be much better if he was gone is simply making him the scapegoat for the entire mess, which in the end comes down to reducing funding against an increasing spend needed to maintain the system. No amount of moaning about Parry is going to fix this, and anyone replacing him would face exactly the same problem... 😞

 

You haven't addressed my challenge as I did yours

 

50 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

their mind set needs a shake up,

priority must be the Navigation, 

they’re so tied up in self promotion they’ve forgotten their purpose; to care for the Navigation

 

CRT need to accept there’s a shortage of money because of their piss weak management and stop blaming boaters such as itinerants and dossers for the shortfalls

A point of view some on here fail to recognise.

 

 

 

Edited January 20 by Midnight

[IanD]

51 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

their mind set needs a shake up,

priority must be the Navigation, 

they’re so tied up in self promotion they’ve forgotten their purpose; to care for the Navigation

 

CRT need to accept there’s a shortage of money because of their piss weak management and stop blaming boaters such as itinerants and dossers for the shortfalls

 

 

So how much of their £250M annual budget is spent on "self-promotion"?

 

My guess is a fraction of a percent which isn't even going to make the tiniest dent in the budget shortfall, so if you've got any actual numbers to show it's much bigger please provide them. 

 

CARTs remit is to run the inland waterways for the benefit of boaters but also all the other people who use them, as has been made crystal clear in recent years by both CART amd the government who are their paymasters.

 

If you want their only priority to be to treat them as a Navigation for the sole benefit of boaters, spend all their money on locks amd paddles and dredging, and ignore other users -- which I suspect is what you mean -- then it wouldn't be unreasonable (or unexpected...) for the government to say that the 35000 boaters should pay for it instead of taxpayers, which would roughly treble license fees even to keep the current level of funding -- which I think everyone agrees is insufficient. Allow for this and the boaters who would pack it in as a result amd I suspect the fee would be at least 5x higher than today.

 

Would that make you happy?

Edited January 20 by IanD

[Midnight]

58 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Perhaps you could set out in detail, for those of us who do not know, what these non-essentials are, and how much money might be saved if they were cut.

 

Please can you provide evidence that CRT has excess management structure, perhaps by comparison with the structure of similar organisations, and again show how much money might be freed up for additional front line essentials (taking into account that those additional front line essentials will also require managing).

Are not capable of figuring that out for yourself?

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

4 minutes ago, Midnight said:

You haven't addressed my challenge as I did yours

 

A point of view some on here fail to recognise.

 

 

 

👍

I’m drinking beer today so instead of winding myself up I’m out of this argument,

 

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, Midnight said:

You haven't addressed my challenge as I did yours

A point of view some on here fail to recognise.

 

You didn't answer anything, just said "they could save loads of money on management etc" with no numbers to back this up.

 

See post above about why "Navigation" is only one of CARTs priorities, as they've said many times.

 

What you keep doing is moaning about Parry and CART and how it would all be better if some magic person and organisation ran things much better, while refusing to address the root cause of the problem.