BW's plans

[Yoda]

Anyone notice in the papers this weekend about BW's plans to turn into a trust?

 

I know its been on here but the release to the papers seems to be a herald of imposition and higher charges to their uses.

[Keeping Up]

All the users? Or just boaters?

 

We've just had a 4-page A3-sized leaflet delivered with our local paper, all about the canal from Stoke Bruerne to Leighton Buzzard, entitled "Your Local Canal, It's a breath of fresh air".

 

Inside it says "best of all it's open 365 days a year and it's FREE!" - does this mean I can claim my licence fees back?

[GUMPY]

Anyone notice in the papers this weekend about BW's plans to turn into a trust?

 

I know its been on here but the release to the papers seems to be a herald of imposition and higher charges to their uses.

 

Having been at the BWAF meeting on Friday, there were no specific plans about monies announced.

They are not even sure how they are going to proceed into the "Third Sector"

What was said is that its a ten year plan and not something for next year.

 

HOWEVER

 

Over lunch I was chatting to Simon Salem and he "let slip" that BW have plans for charging over stayers and the charges will have to be paid before the next licence is issued. If its not paid then the licence will be withheld until it is. If no licence is issued then BW can section 8 the boat and remove it.

He also hinted at the fact that marked visitor moorings may become chargeable using the same process.

[luckyjack]

Anyone notice in the papers this weekend about BW's plans to turn into a trust?

 

I know its been on here but the release to the papers seems to be a herald of imposition and higher charges to their uses.

 

If bw do turn into a trust it should be with the proviseo that customers and stake holders have a say in how there local area is run but also how main management operates and who's in charge.

It should also alow more volunteer works to be undertaken.

funding may get easyer if bw can claw back some money (not from boaters) but from uther so called users

and local authoritys as they benafit from the cut also.

if anything as boaters we should be making sure we have a voice or some control over this new trust.

Now is the time to stick together for the better of the cut.

[Dominic M]

Anyone notice in the papers this weekend about BW's plans to turn into a trust?

 

I know its been on here but the release to the papers seems to be a herald of imposition and higher charges to their uses.

It made the news headlines this morning on R4's Today programme. They also interviewed Robin Evans who spoke about them being a "heritage" body rather than a commercial venture, which was good to hear. They still want the government to continue with funding of course and they still wish to retain their commercial arm, which he claimed brings in £45 million p.a. He referred to the property portfolio pointing out that BW had a large number of listed properties.

 

The whole tone seemed very different from before, when I think most of us felt that BW were looking to become a profitable enterprise. And many of us thought that was impossible. Now that has been recognised. I've always felt that the waterways should be viewed as a national treasure, not a business venture. I'm not at all sure about their commercial arm though - operating 18 marinas and imposing restrictive trade practices on their moorers - such as only letting them use BWML as a brokerage rather than customer freedom of choice - sticks in my gullet, unsurprisingly.

[Charlie Breakfast]

Hmmm...

 

I also listened to the Today program this morning . I thought his "plans" and thoughts for the future very wooly. Weasel words if ever i heard them!

 

I came away with the distinct impression that Robin wanted continued financial support from the govt, more freedom to do what he wanted and a change of status which would bring him more in line with Charitable type organisations like the National Trust. He seemed to think this would help attract volunteer support (getting mentioned a lot this) and create a better impression with the public.... now away from public accountability to Govt and with no shareholders where will the overview and strategic controll be to stop him doing whatever he wants?

 

Well ,sorry, as far as I'm concerned BWB (whatever its called) does not see the boating fraternity as important nor the protection of our heritage. As far as they are concerned heritage is 'Disneyland 'heritage .... if it attracts the casual punter so they can spend money great...otherwise its just a fiscal headache. Any real doubts about this should be dispelled by the fate of their boat collection, archives ,museums and the poor repair of what should be listed buildings and structures.

 

Whatever organisational structure he worms into place we will continue to see our intrests come 2nd to commercial property deals/sell offs and the titivating up of the cut whilst neglecting the major structures...

 

So far I dont have any bad conduct marks on this forum so I will refrain from suggesting a solution ...So please dont get me wrong... its only a mildly held view of mine , no rant here , BWB management are just a bunch of nice people earning an honest bonus.. honest!

 

Chas

[Yoda]

Well if it's going to dive £30 million into the red this year, BW needs to think on it's feet for once. DEFRA should have given them the right amount of money so that there was some left over from administration.

 

The idea that you can nationalise and then run it so badly that it stops, so you have to turn it into a trust has had its day. This is a complex company and requires the finance level that it started with, not the paired down offering that DEFRA has given it over the years.

 

If BW cannot operate now, how is it going to operate under a trust? It will have to go back to government control and what will they do then poor things.

[carlt]

Well ,sorry, as far as I'm concerned BWB (whatever its called) does not see the boating fraternity as important nor the protection of our heritage. As far as they are concerned heritage is 'Disneyland 'heritage .... if it attracts the casual punter so they can spend money great...otherwise its just a fiscal headache. Any real doubts about this should be dispelled by the fate of their boat collection, archives ,museums and the poor repair of what should be listed buildings and structures.

So the system, as it stands, is rubbish and is not interested in the heritage aspect, of our waterways. but you moan when they say they want to change.

 

Maybe you think they should stay the same, then, because if you criticise the change, before it even happens then that's one of the few options.

 

Perhaps you'd rather see it privatised?

 

If you want to see "Disneyland heritage" then you should, perhaps, go and spend a day at a "state owned charity" English Heritage castle, caernarfon, perhaps, then go and spend a day at the Tussauds run Warwick Castle and, if you don't get arrested for thumping the annoying "Castle Princess", report back on which felt the most "Disney".

 

Those of us who've been screaming for change, for years, had better give them a chance, now they might be coming round to my way of thinking.

 

A day at Tussaud's Warwick Castle cost my family the equivalent of a year's membership to EH, by the way, giving me free access to hundreds of historic sites, many not , economically, worth preserving.

[Charlie Breakfast]

So the system, as it stands, is rubbish and is not interested in the heritage aspect, of our waterways. but you moan when they say they want to change.

Yes as it stands it is not good. Do you think it is? I want change. I do not moan about change per se. However i do question the vague mutterings we hear as they give me no confidence that things are being planned that will improve things...I.could be wrong but on past experiance i dont think so. You on the other hand, on the basis of what they have said so far, seem pretty happy to trust BW to make honest changes that will benefit boaters and the cut

Maybe you think they should stay the same, then, because if you criticise the change, before it even happens then that's one of the few options.

I am casting doubt on the transparency and clarity of what BWB are planning. Obviously this does not imply support for the status quo, or in any way restrict other options.

Perhaps you'd rather see it privatised?

No...I have argued for a long time its the cheap short term profit orientated actions that are harming the cut.

If you want to see "Disneyland heritage" then you should, perhaps, go and spend a day at a "state owned charity" English Heritage castle, caernarfon, perhaps, then go and spend a day at the Tussauds run Warwick Castle and, if you don't get arrested for thumping the annoying "Castle Princess", report back on which felt the most "Disney".

Been to both....dont disagree with you...but is it realistic to suggest that a change to "trust status " by BWB will result in an English Heritage approach by BWB...

Those of us who've been screaming for change, for years, had better give them a chance, now they might be coming round to my way of thinking.

The difference between us is I doubt they are genuinely coming round to a different way of thinking and I suspect that what we are witnessing is a political manouvere designed to give Bwb maximum independence with minimal constraints. Having achieved this you believe they will make things better, I suspect they will pursue profit and bonuses.

A day at Tussaud's Warwick Castle cost my family the equivalent of a year's membership to EH, by the way, giving me free access to hundreds of historic sites, many not , economically, worth preserving. As a statement of fact I agree...If you think BWB will reflect a similar worthy attitude as EH after any management changes I disagree.

[carlt]

I believe that BW have to change and there are worse models than EH or NT to follow.

 

We can either give them a chance to change, hopefully prodding them in the right direction, or we can just be completely negative and mutter doom and gloom.

 

I think this is BW's best and, possibly only, hope of avoiding total collapse.

 

What they must do, however, is find a way of spreading the cost to all canal users, not just boaters.

[dasboot]

I believe that BW have to change and there are worse models than EH or NT to follow.

 

We can either give them a chance to change, hopefully prodding them in the right direction, or we can just be completely negative and mutter doom and gloom.

 

I think this is BW's best and, possibly only, hope of avoiding total collapse.

 

What they must do, however, is find a way of spreading the cost to all canal users, not just boaters.

Recognition that the canals will never make money as a stand alone operation has always been essential. Broader recognition that they generate income in the local areas they pass through and therefore merit state investment is crucial. Was it the recent EFRA report that showed that for every £1 spent on maintenance and restoration, £6 was returned to the local economy.

 

Therefore the canals are a sensible public investment, creating a return for the national economy in both income and jobs. Protecting them through a trust/EH type set up has to be the best way forward. Better than the decade of speculative development that the recession (every cloud has a silver lining) has knocked on the head as a long term sensible strategy.