C&RT to receive some extra government funding

[Allan(nb Albert)]

5 hours ago, Hand Weaver said:

My understanding is that this £6.5m is basically the inflation linked uplift that wasn't paid due to the Grant bring frozen?

 

Yes it's a small amount but, credit to Campbell Robb for managing to get this payment but the important thing is, it makes the government actually acknowledge there is a funding shortfall going forwards.

Unfortunately, your understanding of the grant agreement is completely wrong. It was designed to reduce funding over the longer term. As such grant has never been fully inflation linked.

 

With regard to grant now being frozen, this actually works to our advantage and is a change to the agreement. Without it grant would be even less than it is now.

 

Quote

the COVID-19 pandemic caused the measure of indexation used within the grant mechanism to turn negative which would have resulted in a reduction of the grant in 2021 to 2022. This outcome was not foreseen in the original grant agreement. Grant calculations have been adjusted to mitigate the impact for 2021 to 2022.  In line with the original grant agreement, the amount paid in 2021 to 2022 will be the maximum amount paid for the remaining years of the grant agreement which ends in March 2027

 

[Allan(nb Albert)]

10 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Was that when their grant was frozen dues to them making fraudulent claims re the KPIs and changing the accounts package once it had been signed off by the board ?

 

There was no obligation on government to provide funding after 2027 but there was  a commitment to carry out a review of CRT's performance and make an announcement by 1 July 2022. This was delayed whilst further enquiries were made into statements made in the accounts.

 

Following an FOI by Allen Richards

 

 

CRT's 2019/20 Annual Report was used as the baseline for Defra's investigation into CRT's performance carried out last year. The report was fairly upbeat with only 3 KPI's being worse than the previous year. One of those had a detailed explanation, the other two did not. It is suggested that CRT falsified its Annual Report in an attempt to influence the outcome of the investigation.

CRT falsified it Annual Report AFTER -

• approval by its board of trustees, for the chair, Allan Leighton to sign it on their behalf
• board instructions given to the legal and governance director (and company secretary), Tom Deards to file at Companies House and Charity Commission
• chief executive, Richard Parry telling the board that he would arrange to publish on CRT's website
• Richard Parry quoting a KPI at CRT's APM (later falsified)
• a formal vote by CRT's Council of Members to 'receive' the approved report
• publication of the approved report on CRT's website
• filing of the approved report at Companies House

Having done the above, CRT falsified the report to alter two KPIs where performance was down on the previous year. As Defra would have already been aware of one of the KPI's, Tom Deards sought Defra comments for a letter to be sent from CRT's chair to the Secretary of State (the letter was a requirement under the grant agreement). He failed to tell Defra that the annual report had already been approved and it was being falsified. He failed to tell Defra that a second KPI was also being altered. Meeting minutes confirm that Defra commented and the letter was sent.

Richard Parry had the approved Annual Report removed from CRT's website and replaced by the falsified report.

Tom Deards had the falsified Annual Report filed with the Charity Commission. 

CRT did not file the falsified Annual Report with Companies House (doing so would draw attention)

Following a complaint to the Charity Commission, Tom Deards, on behalf of the trustees, admitted that CRT had altered the report and named Richard Parry, Allan Leighton and deputy chair Jenny Abramsky as responsible (Deards failed to mention his own role and why he failed to report the falsification to his board, as was his duty).

The falsified reports on CRT's website and the Charity Commission have been reverted to the board approved reports. An information request has determined that no record exists of the board approving the changes made even retrospectively.

Allan Leighton will not serve his full term of office but will stand down at the next AGM.

CRT's falsification of its 2019/20 Annual Report is not related to the freezing of grant for the reason already given. However, it could be argued that it soured relations between Defra and CRT resulting in a poor outcome for the new ten year grant.

 

The 2019/20 Annual Report was used as a basis for measuring CRT performance for the post 2027 grant. The AR showed that all but two of over 20 KPI's had been achieved. CRT subsequently altered the report such that all KPI's where achieved.

 

Whilst Defra were aware of this, they decided to ignore it. They were prepared to accept CRT's assurance that all was well and the condition of the waterway was improving ...   

 

Compare the 2019/20 Annual Report with CRT's latest report which tries to close the stable door after the horse has bolted by showing that CRT failed to achieve the majority of its KPI's.

Edited February 9 by Allan(nb Albert)
typos

[Tear Up The Plan]

Intriguing. I’m pleased to have found this thread. It’s never simple, is it? 

[MtB]

On 06/02/2026 at 14:02, Allan(nb Albert) said:

Both ONS and BoE suggest less than 100% CPI inflation.

 

Normal people use RPI, which unlike CPI, includes housing costs. 

 

Nobody pays housing costs obviously, so CPI is the one to use. 

 

OTOH, maybe boaters don't experience accommodation cost inflation....

 

 

 

[Allan(nb Albert)]

47 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Normal people use RPI, which unlike CPI, includes housing costs. 

 

Nobody pays housing costs obviously, so CPI is the one to use. 

 

OTOH, maybe boaters don't experience accommodation cost inflation....

 

 

 

CRT use CPI rather than CPIH or RPI.

 

Are you suggesting that they are not normal?

[MtB]

16 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

CRT use CPI rather than CPIH or RPI.

 

Are you suggesting that they are not normal?

 

Are you suggesting CRT is a human being, paying for their accommodation?