More C&RT Dishonesty?

[IanD]

2 hours ago, MtB said:

Good point. 

 

But remind me, where does the government get its funds from? 

 

Us taxpayers. Unfortunately we don't get to decide where they spend our taxes... :--(

[MtB]

10 hours ago, IanD said:

Us taxpayers. Unfortunately we don't get to decide where they spend our taxes... :--(

 

Do you hold that changing the management would help then?

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

28 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Do you hold that changing the management would help then?

 

 

 

But, would it matter who the 'management' is, they only have so much income and too much needed to do with it. Result = rationing !

Maybe they should increase their income to match the required expenditure ? (I wonder how that'd go down with the public)

[IanD]

42 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Do you hold that changing the management would help then?

 

 

Yes, because the government is not just running a canal network, they are in charge of our entire society and economy, and their policies can have a huge effect on people's lives -- and unlike CART they have their hands on the levers of power and money, they can for example raise large amounts cheaply and easily to invest in infrastructure (or the NHS...) by either issuing long-term bonds/gilts or "quantitative easing" (printing money).

 

Government finances are not like household ones, no matter how much certain politicians try to say that they are when crying crocodile tears abut how they can't afford something they don't want to do. Funnily enough, they seem to be able to afford to spend vast sums of money on the things they do want to do, whether these are of benefit to the public or just them and their mates... 😞 

[Tacet]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

But, would it matter who the 'management' is, they only have so much income and too much needed to do with it. Result = rationing !

Maybe they should increase their income to match the required expenditure ? (I wonder how that'd go down with the public)

But if you were included on the management, there would be £10s of millions of additional revenue each year.

[Alan de Enfield]

16 minutes ago, Tacet said:

But if you were included on the management, there would be £10s of millions of additional revenue each year.

 

Have you realised that the 'management' under discussion is the Government ?

(Following MtBs post 14 hours ago, and subsequent posts)

[magpie patrick]

17 hours ago, IanD said:

So which "remainder waterways" canals does that leave that could be closed to actually save money then?

 Further to this,

 

Remainder waterways that are navigable

 

BCN other than the New Main Line, the "branch to Black Delph" (connecting with the Stourbridge) and the B&F (all of which are Cruiseway) 

Chesterfield Canal west of Morse Lock (which is a restored scheme but I've no idea how it was funded) 

Ripon Canal between Bell Furrows Lock and Ripon (again, a restoration since the act)

Wendover Branch

Erewash north of Tamworth Road Bridge

Leeds and Liverpool west of Aintree*

Bridgwater and Taunton

 

*This is an interesting one, as whilst it wasn't restored as part of the Liverpool Link, the value of the link depends on this length of canal - where that leaves the funding contract issue would keep the lawyers busy I suspect

The Peak Forest and Ashton were upgraded to Cruiseway but a drafting error listed this as from lock 1 at Marple, and thus on a technicality the Marple flight were not upgraded! This error may have been corrected 

 

This list isn't definitive - one problem of course is that the act doesn't list remainder waterways - they are "the remainder" of waterways that aren't on the other two lists

 

[IanD]

33 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

 Further to this,

 

Remainder waterways that are navigable

 

BCN other than the New Main Line, the "branch to Black Delph" (connecting with the Stourbridge) and the B&F (all of which are Cruiseway) 

Chesterfield Canal west of Morse Lock (which is a restored scheme but I've no idea how it was funded) 

Ripon Canal between Bell Furrows Lock and Ripon (again, a restoration since the act)

Wendover Branch

Erewash north of Tamworth Road Bridge

Leeds and Liverpool west of Aintree*

Bridgwater and Taunton

 

*This is an interesting one, as whilst it wasn't restored as part of the Liverpool Link, the value of the link depends on this length of canal - where that leaves the funding contract issue would keep the lawyers busy I suspect

The Peak Forest and Ashton were upgraded to Cruiseway but a drafting error listed this as from lock 1 at Marple, and thus on a technicality the Marple flight were not upgraded! This error may have been corrected 

 

This list isn't definitive - one problem of course is that the act doesn't list remainder waterways - they are "the remainder" of waterways that aren't on the other two lists

 

Not much of the network then, and as you say even less of the expensive-to-maintain-lock-heavy bits -- (most of) the BCN is the only exception.

 

Do you know roughly how big the EP and Millennium grants were for the Rochdale and HNC, which it seems would have to be paid back (about 70% but more probably 120% with interest) if they were closed?

39 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Have you realised that the 'management' under discussion is the Government ?

(Following MtBs post 14 hours ago, and subsequent posts)

Probably -- but it doesn't make your earlier claim about how you could miraculously improve CART's finances any more credible, which is what was being commented on... 😉 

Edited April 19 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

This list isn't definitive - one problem of course is that the act doesn't list remainder waterways - they are "the remainder" of waterways that aren't on the other two lists

 

"(d) a new obligation imposed on the Board to deal with
all waterways not in the category either of Commercial
or Cruising waterways, i.e. the remainder (termed for
the sake of convenience the ‘Remainder waterways”)
in the most economical manner e.g. either retention,
elimination or disposal, as most appropriate.

(e) local and certain other statutory and charitable
authorities were given powers to enter into agreements
with the Board for maintaining or taking over any
Remainder waterways or parts thereof and to assume
full responsibility or (in the case of local authorities)
for making financial contributions towards the cost
of maintenance in inland waterways".

 

 

 

"3.6.3. On the other hand the Board has certainly acquired or
assumed obligations in the course of years from which it would
now be extremely difficult, if not impracticable, to get free.
Before deciding — in the case of a Remainder waterway, for
example — that it could be closed or eliminated, consideration
needs to be given in each case to the nature and extent of the
obligations involved. These questions are reviewed in Chapter
15."

 

 

Section 15 of the Fraenkel Report (20 pages) Reviews the staus of the remainder waterways, costs of maintaing them vs costs of closing them etc etc etc and is a 'good read'.

 

The first of the 1974 reports was limited to 234 navigable kilometres and strongly recommenced that they be upgraded to the Cruising category, For the first group maintenance agreements bad already bean concluced:- Ashton and lower Peak Forest Canal (22.5 km, agreement pending), eyewash Canal (17 km), Grand Union Canal, Slough Arm (9 km), Monmouthshire & Brecon Canal (52 Km), Caldon Canal (28 km). The second group lacked agreamendt: - Birmingham Canal Navigations (82 km), being priorities 1, 2, 3.1 and 3.2 of the 1970 Working Party report, see paragraph 15.5.3), Grand Union Canal, Welford Arm (3km), Kennet & Avon Canal (9 km), Hamstead Locj to Hungerferd), The Board was unable to support the Council's recommendations for the second group “owing to thelr limited liabitity”.

 

The summary shows a table of the costs.

 

 

 

 

12 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Probably -- but it doesn't make your earlier claim about how you could miraculously improve CART's finances any more credible, which is what was being commented on... 😉 

 

No miracles involved , just an outsider looking in with an open mind and identifying alternative sources of income from existing resources.

[magpie patrick]

28 minutes ago, IanD said:

Do you know roughly how big the EP and Millennium grants were for the Rochdale and HNC, which it seems would have to be paid back (about 70% but more probably 120% with interest) if they were closed?

 

 Total funding for the Rochdale was £24 million or thereabouts, around half from the Millenium Commission, the rest from EP and local authorities. (Remember when local authorities had money?) 

 

I think the HNC was of the order of £30 million

 

 

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Section 15 of the Fraenkel Report (20 pages) Reviews the staus of the remainder waterways, costs of maintaing them vs costs of closing them etc etc etc and is a 'good read'.

The summary shows a table of the costs.

 

 

 

 

From which you have to remove those that aren't navigable, or are now cruiseway, or in some cases no longer belong to BW/CRT! (St Helens for example)

 

Edited to add - I will do that at some ppoint but don't have time at the moment

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

 Total funding for the Rochdale was £24 million or thereabouts, around half from the Millenium Commission, the rest from EP and local authorities. (Remember when local authorities had money?) 

 

I think the HNC was of the order of £30 million

 

 

 

From which you have to remove those that aren't navigable, or are now cruiseway, or in some cases no longer belong to BW/CRT! (St Helens for example)

 

Indeed, it was simply to show the level of investigation they went into when deciding which remainder canals to retain, to dispose of or upgrade to Cruising canal.

 

Two committees (North & South) were set up to review, and they considered everything from the legal costs if a canal was closed but a bridge or lock was left in existence and someone fell, to what responsibility they would retain for (say) a bridge that was an access bridge and couldn't be removed, responsibility for flooding if the canal was unable to take surface water, etc etc.

[IanD]

25 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

[snip]

 

No miracles involved , just an outsider looking in with an open mind and identifying alternative sources of income from existing resources.

Such as? Realistic and costed ones please, not concepts viewed through rose-tinted spectacles... 😉 

 

I suppose it's theoretically possible that you've got a load of brilliant ideas that neither anyone in CART or the consultants they paid to advise them on fundraising could come up with, but it seems unlikely -- apart from anything else, with that level of financial acumen I'd expect you to be a billionaire by now... 🙂 

Edited April 19 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

9 minutes ago, IanD said:

Such as? Realistic and costed ones please, not concepts viewed through rose-tinted spectacles... 😉 

 

I suppose it's theoretically possible that you've got a load of brilliant ideas that neither anyone in CART or the consultants they paid to advise them on fundraising could come up with, but it seems unlikely -- apart from anything else, with that level of financial acumen I'd expect you to be a billionaire by now... 🙂 

 

The answer is still NO.

 

You can request, you can beg, cajole or even threaten, say its all bullshine, make inuendo - I don't care.

I know my idea(s) would bring a considerable income in & I don't need your approval or agreement.

[IanD]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

The answer is still NO.

 

You can request, you can beg, cajole or even threaten, say its all bullshine, make inuendo - I don't care.

I know my idea(s) would bring a considerable income in & I don't need your approval or agreement.

I smell bullsh*t...

 

If you're so brilliant at moneymaking ideas, why aren't you a retired CEO sleeping on a mattress stuffed with £50 notes on a superyacht?

 

Hey guys, I've got a *much* better (but top secret!) idea than Alan's on how to *double* CARTs income, all I need is a million quid or so to get it off the ground... 😉 

Edited April 19 by IanD

[David Mack]

18 hours ago, magpie patrick said:

Off the top of my head the Northern BCN is remainder and navigable, there are probably others. There aren't that many of them though. 

I think the only Cruiseway sections of the BCN are the Main Line/ New Main Line from Aldersley to Gas Street and Farmers Bridge, Netherton Tunnel Branch, Dudley Canal west of Windmill End and the Birmingham and Fazeley (including the Digbeth Branch as far as Warwick Bar). Everything else is remainder.

At the time of the 68 Act, none of the BCN was regarded as being of any use for pleasure cruising, and the sections listed above were the minimum necessary to connect other cruising waterways.

[IanD]

1 hour ago, magpie patrick said:

 Total funding for the Rochdale was £24 million or thereabouts, around half from the Millenium Commission, the rest from EP and local authorities. (Remember when local authorities had money?) 

 

I think the HNC was of the order of £30 million

 

From which you have to remove those that aren't navigable, or are now cruiseway, or in some cases no longer belong to BW/CRT! (St Helens for example)

 

Edited to add - I will do that at some ppoint but don't have time at the moment

 

Using your calculations, that suggests that closing the Rochdale and HNC would cost CART something like £65M -- plus the other direct costs such as draining/making safe, so let's say £70M -- this could easily be more (£75M? £80M?) depending on closure costs.

 

CART annual spending on the canals and rivers is about £200M per year, which covers everything including rivers and reservoirs. For the sake of argument, let's assume they send £140M on canals (could be less?), so the closure costs would be at least half of the entire canal maintenance budget for a year.

 

How much money per year would closure save? The Rochdale and HNC total 53 miles long, which is about 3% of the canal network. If costs were equal per mile over the network closure might save £4M per year. Now these canals do have a lot more locks than most (about 120, about 6% of the network total IIRC) but then they're also used far less often than many others, which should reduce wear and tear.

 

Some of the numbers are (educated) guesswork, but it looks like it would take between 10 and 20 years for CART to make up the closure costs from annual savings -- and in the meantime they'd take a massive financial hit, which they'd presumably have to borrow money to finance. At 5% interest rates this would cost them about £3M a year at the start, so maybe £15M over the 10-year payback period -- which adds about 20% to closure costs, which means we're now up to 12-25 years break-even period, maybe even longer.

 

I can't believe that anyone with any understanding of business would think that this is a good idea... 😞 

Edited April 19 by IanD

[Hudds Lad]

2 hours ago, magpie patrick said:

I think the HNC was of the order of £30 million

The grant received from the Millenium Commission was £12,840,000, they originally offered £15,000,000 but English Partnerships whittled this down.

Total estimated cost of the restoration since the formation of the Huddersfield Canal Society in 1974 was £45,000,000 (incidentally the Society is 50yrs old today!!).

[IanD]

8 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

The grant received from the Millenium Commission was £12,840,000, they originally offered £15,000,000 but English Partnerships whittled this down.

Total estimated cost of the restoration since the formation of the Huddersfield Canal Society in 1974 was £45,000,000 (incidentally the Society is 50yrs old today!!).

 

I'm sure the the HCS will be happy (birthday!) that closure is unlikely to happen then... 🙂 

[magpie patrick]

30 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

The grant received from the Millenium Commission was £12,840,000, they originally offered £15,000,000 but English Partnerships whittled this down.

 

 That makes sense on the basis that MC money was capped at 50%* (HLF could be up to 75%) and EP was the bulk of the match funding, so with £12,840,000 from other sources MC would be capped at the same amount

 

*unless you were proposing a fancy dome in Greenwich, in which case the sky was the limit!

Pasted out of XL, a quick analysis of the Frankael list - red is navigable remainder waterway now

 

Some of the BCN length have now been transferred out of BW/CRT, and some isn't navigable. but I haven't corrected the figure

 

Canal	Notes	Status	Length (km)
Ashton		Now cruiseway
BCN	Except NML, B&F and to Delph	Not all navigable, some now transferred	122*
B&T	Not connected		23
Caldon		Now cruiseway
Chesterfield		Transferred out of CRT (Part)
Cromford		Not navigable
Erewash		Part Cruiseway
GUC	closed branches	Transferred out of CRT (Part)
Grantham		Not navigable
HNC	Grant aided restoration		27
K&A		Now cruiseway
Lancaster		Not navigable
Leeds and Liverpool	West of Aintree only		17
MBBC		Not navigable
Mon & Brec		Now cruiseway
Nottingham		Not navigable
Oxford	Old loops	Not navigable
Peak Forest		Now cruiseway
Pocklington	Part navigable - not connected
St Helens		Transferred out of CRT
SSYN	Sheffield Canal only	Now cruiseway
Shropshire Union	closed branches	Transferred our of CRT
Swansea		Not navigable
F&C		Scotland
Monkland		Scotland
Union		Scotland

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, magpie patrick said:

Pasted out of XL, a quick analysis of the Frankael list

 

Some examples (Page 207)

 

BWB have disposed of more than 160 km of waterway.
Transfers to other authorities covering some 45 km include:
(1) Monmouthshire & Brecon Canal;

the Monmouthshire length and Crumlin Arm (17.5 km) to various District Councils for redevelopment.

The Board retain rights
to transport of water and sales but the Councils are
responsible for water-channelling or piping as
necessary.

(2) Grand Western Canal: transferred intact (17.5 km) to
Devon County Council for amenity, including light
boating.

(3) Cromford Canal; the upper section (8 km from
Ambergate to Cromford) to Derbyshire County
Council for amenity, including light boating.

15.5.8 Substantial sales totalling some 110 km have been
made piecemeal on the following Remainder waterways:-
Ashton Canel, Birmingham Canal Navigations, Chesterfield,
Cromford, Lancaster, Manchester Bolton & Bury, Nottingham
and St Helens Canals, Shropshire Union Canal (Newpart,
Trench and Shrewsbury Branches}, Swansea Canal.

No navigable lengths have been sold. 

 

There is quite a bit more.

Edited April 19 by Alan de Enfield