NABO Waterways Condition 2009

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Many thanks to those who took part survey.

 

Results and full report here

[johnthebridge]

Many thanks to those who took part survey.

 

Results and full report here

Thanks for that Allan, but I'm never sure what these surveys actually do show. Is this a true picture or a distorted one?

370 opinions, whilst valid, represent what, 1%-ish of the total number of boats registered? I'm the the first one out of the blocks when it comes to being critical of Waterways, but this sort of statistic can be used to the benefit of both parties. BW might say, "Only 370 out of 30,000?", whereas NABO might regard it as the vast majority of their membership (I've no idea if it is), and indicate that it's the "majority" speaking. If my sums are correct, 7000 years of boating represents about 19 years for each of the 370 that returned the survey, which would indicate that most are experienced boaters whose opinions are valuable, but it still leaves questions in my mind about the ultimate worth of these things.

Disraeli's (?) "Lies, damn lies and statistics" comes to mind.

[cotswoldsman]

Thanks for that Allan, but I'm never sure what these surveys actually do show. Is this a true picture or a distorted one?

370 opinions, whilst valid, represent what, 1%-ish of the total number of boats registered? I'm the the first one out of the blocks when it comes to being critical of Waterways, but this sort of statistic can be used to the benefit of both parties. BW might say, "Only 370 out of 30,000?", whereas NABO might regard it as the vast majority of their membership (I've no idea if it is), and indicate that it's the "majority" speaking. If my sums are correct, 7000 years of boating represents about 19 years for each of the 370 that returned the survey, which would indicate that most are experienced boaters whose opinions are valuable, but it still leaves questions in my mind about the ultimate worth of these things.

Disraeli's (?) "Lies, damn lies and statistics" comes to mind.

 

i have to say I agree with your observations on this survey.

I am not sure what people expect BW is short of money. OK so you arrive at a lock and things are not 100% so what!! Yes I think paddles are getting more difficult but then I am getting older. I think what we tend to forget is that maintaining the canal system is not easy.

As I have said before I am a CCer and have never come across a major problem.

[Big John]

Many thanks to those who took part survey.

With respect, Allan, I think that was for me to say and you to acknowledge.

[cotswoldsman]

With respect, Allan, I think that was for me to say and you to acknowledge.

 

??????? please explain?

[Innkeeper]

??????? please explain?

Think john was a bit disappointed he hadn't had time to publicly thank all respondents himself - the report hit the web page before the official press release went out - Alan passed on the thanks! John has lived with this for the past months and a lot of midnight oil burned during that time!

 

On the subject of the responses - NABO did check with specialists who indicated that a survey response of this size (and the figures quoted above were only the one from BW Waters) is very good as a guide - Mori and the like do less than a thousand people to give voting intentions from the whole population?

I sat last week with one Waterway Manager who showed me a list of more than 7,900 repairs, faults on her (clue) canals alone. Mr Evans keeps telling us the system is better than its ever been - we all know its very dodgy in fact!

[cotswoldsman]

Think john was a bit disappointed he hadn't had time to publicly thank all respondents himself - the report hit the web page before the official press release went out - Alan passed on the thanks! John has lived with this for the past months and a lot of midnight oil burned during that time!

 

On the subject of the responses - NABO did check with specialists who indicated that a survey response of this size (and the figures quoted above were only the one from BW Waters) is very good as a guide - Mori and the like do less than a thousand people to give voting intentions from the whole population?

I sat last week with one Waterway Manager who showed me a list of more than 7,900 repairs, faults on her (clue) canals alone. Mr Evans keeps telling us the system is better than its ever been - we all know its very dodgy in fact!

 

Was it a survey or a questionnaire?

 

 

And was it just NABO members

[Innkeeper]

Was it a survey or a questionnaire?

 

 

And was it just NABO members

John my dictionary defines a survey as "to take a general or comprehensive view of or appraise, as a situation, area of study, etc."

and a questionnaire as "A form containing a set of questions, especially one addressed to a statistically significant number of subjects as a way of gathering information for a survey."

So the answer is one and the same!

 

And the responses were from a range of organisations I believe less than 50% were NABO. (Sure that will get updated officially bfore the day is out!)

[Allan(nb Albert)]

??????? please explain?

 

I think this XP from uk.rec.waterways explains -

 

It was me that made this board aware that this survey was taking place and

was open to all boaters, not just NABO. When I found the report published

but nobody had posted a link to it I took it upon myself to do so and thank

those that had contributed.

 

I should, perhaps, make it clear that promoting the survey here and on

Canalworldforum was my only contribution to this project - a couple of

minutes rather than the many days that John has spent on it.

 

I am sorry if I gave the false impression that I had anything to do with the

production of the report.

 

Regards

 

Allan

 

 

[Innkeeper]

I think this XP from uk.rec.waterways explains -

 

It was me that made this board aware that this survey was taking place and

was open to all boaters, not just NABO. When I found the report published

but nobody had posted a link to it I took it upon myself to do so and thank

those that had contributed.

 

I should, perhaps, make it clear that promoting the survey here and on

Canalworldforum was my only contribution to this project - a couple of

minutes rather than the many days that John has spent on it.

 

I am sorry if I gave the false impression that I had anything to do with the

production of the report.

 

Regards

 

Allan

 

Thats noted Allan - hard for all us part timers to coordinate better sometimes - the official release has gone out today - basically as far as I am concerned the more people that get it and see it the better and when its repeated next year hopefully the numbers responding will be higher again. The cooperation between several boater groups on this helped it a lot!

 

Edited December 12, 2009 by Innkeeper

[MartinC]

On the subject of the responses - NABO did check with specialists who indicated that a survey response of this size (and the figures quoted above were only the one from BW Waters) is very good as a guide - Mori and the like do less than a thousand people to give voting intentions from the whole population?

 

Not sure who the specialists are. Yes, Mori use a sample of 1k or less but their work plan requires them to have answers from all of them to make it a valid sample. I would think I had failed if I got this level of reply to a survey on a topical subject aimed at a targeted audience, as opposed to a sampling. I agree with the previous comments. A response of circa 1% would, if I was a spin doctor, lead to prompt headlines "vast majority of boaters happy with canals".

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Not sure who the specialists are. Yes, Mori use a sample of 1k or less but their work plan requires them to have answers from all of them to make it a valid sample. I would think I had failed if I got this level of reply to a survey on a topical subject aimed at a targeted audience, as opposed to a sampling. I agree with the previous comments. A response of circa 1% would, if I was a spin doctor, lead to prompt headlines "vast majority of boaters happy with canals".

 

In that case the vast majority of the public would like BW's property portfolio sold off!

 

I did not see anything in the survey that said you should only respond if you were unhappy with the canals. What makes you assume that the 1% who responded were not a typical cross section of the boating public?

[johnthebridge]

In that case the vast majority of the public would like BW's property portfolio sold off!

 

I did not see anything in the survey that said you should only respond if you were unhappy with the canals. What makes you assume that the 1% who responded were not a typical cross section of the boating public?

 

Two points here.

Firstly, your remark about the property portfolio.

I don't think one could extrapolate from the "non-response" anything that would indicate that people would be happy with that particular decision. Having said that, I'm not sure myself that it would necessarily be a bad thing. The remit for British Waterways is usually perceieved as a body to look after the canals. The property portfolio does not appear to have contributed in any way to that end, and an argument could be made for hiving it off and allowing a strictly maintenance based organisation being allowed to do just that. Blimey! BW run by engineers, rather than bean counters! IKB would be proud-ish.

If you'll allow me, your second remark appears to me as though you're being somewhat prickly and defensive about this survey. I don't feel that the writer was assuming anything about those who responded, but merely commenting. Can you, in turn, say that this tiny percentage was in fact a "typical cross section of the boating public"? From my own experience of these things, the sort of people who do respond to these surveys can usually be portrayed as, shall we say, keen.

Edited December 12, 2009 by johnthebridge

[cotswoldsman]

John my dictionary defines a survey as "to take a general or comprehensive view of or appraise, as a situation, area of study, etc."

and a questionnaire as "A form containing a set of questions, especially one addressed to a statistically significant number of subjects as a way of gathering information for a survey."

So the answer is one and the same!

 

And the responses were from a range of organisations I believe less than 50% were NABO. (Sure that will get updated officially bfore the day is out!)

 

Sorry I did not check with the dictionary what I was interested to know was if it was a survey done on the basis of a random sample of people who use the waterways including walkers, fishermen and boaters etc. or was it a questionnaire that was only available to those who knew how to get hold of the questionnaire if you understand what I mean!!

[Innkeeper]

Sorry I did not check with the dictionary what I was interested to know was if it was a survey done on the basis of a random sample of people who use the waterways including walkers, fishermen and boaters etc. or was it a questionnaire that was only available to those who knew how to get hold of the questionnaire if you understand what I mean!!

The survey was instigated following general comments made by boat owners and users that the oft repeated mantra by Robin Evans that “the network is now in better shape than at any time in decades." was not generally accepted by this section of its users.

NABO felt that a properly thought through set of open questions that basically asked boaters who quite apart from normal taxation also actually pay for the use of their waterways, might be useful.

This was publicised not only by NABO but by TBA, RBOA, IWA, DBA and via SOW as well as the Waterways press. Of the responses 38% were NABO members, 26% belonged to RBOA and 45% to the IWA. 23% of the replies came from boaters outside the core 5 invitee groups - interesting that more than half of all responses were from people who were members of at least one other group.

So the aim was to try and elicit a response from boating users about their experience during the last boating season. It goes without saying that any survey will generally get response from those who are perhaps more "keen" and we all know that numbers and percentages published can often be interpreted how the reader wishes to interpret.

What is undeniable is that there are enough responses to give at least a debate to the claims made by RE and that prior to its publication initiatives have begun with and by BW on a local basis all over the country to discuss repair priorities with boating users. Whilst sceptical that they will deliver, its a start!

 

None of the detail is hidden on this - the complete surveys reports for BW and other Agency's waters (all 150 plus pages) can be found at http://www.nabo.org.uk/current/survey.htm

 

My own personal take is that cosmetically the canals have looked in reasonable shape this year. However paint and cut grass at points where other users might see it do not hide (for long) the broken assets and serious potential for collapse seen when travelling on its waters. Interesting that EA in particular have done a better job on this user group.

[Innkeeper]

Not sure who the specialists are. Yes, Mori use a sample of 1k or less but their work plan requires them to have answers from all of them to make it a valid sample. I would think I had failed if I got this level of reply to a survey on a topical subject aimed at a targeted audience, as opposed to a sampling. I agree with the previous comments. A response of circa 1% would, if I was a spin doctor, lead to prompt headlines "vast majority of boaters happy with canals".

Two separate PR agencies - one a boater - advised on this - at worst a response of this size will give a real indication of general views and weight to an argument.

[sueb]

Two points here.

Firstly, your remark about the property portfolio.

I don't think one could extrapolate from the "non-response" anything that would indicate that people would be happy with that particular decision. Having said that, I'm not sure myself that it would necessarily be a bad thing. The remit for British Waterways is usually perceieved as a body to look after the canals. The property portfolio does not appear to have contributed in any way to that end, and an argument could be made for hiving it off and allowing a strictly maintenance based organisation being allowed to do just that. Blimey! BW run by engineers, rather than bean counters! IKB would be proud-ish.

If you'll allow me, your second remark appears to me as though you're being somewhat prickly and defensive about this survey. I don't feel that the writer was assuming anything about those who responded, but merely commenting. Can you, in turn, say that this tiny percentage was in fact a "typical cross section of the boating public"? From my own experience of these things, the sort of people who do respond to these surveys can usually be portrayed as, shall we say, keen.

Don't forget BW's property portfolio includes a lot of the historic buildings and structures on the system

Sue

[johnthebridge]

Don't forget BW's property portfolio includes a lot of the historic buildings and structures on the system

Sue

I certainly haven't forgotten that, but I'm afraid the cynic in me thinks that British Waterway's record concerning the maintainence and upkeep of these buildings has not been a shining example of "the way to do it". There are scores, if not hundreds, of examples of the crass attitude that BW has displayed towards these buildings and structures over the years. I said there is an argument for disposing of the lot, but of course the question then remains-under which particular caring government department are they to be allocated?

[Allan(nb Albert)]

As is the way with forums, I think we are sidetracking ourselves - although there is nothing wrong in that.

 

BW have been underfunding the waterways by £30m a year, so the system must be decline and a backlog of maintenance is building up again. My concern is BW's chief executive, has made a very public statement that is blatantly incorrect. Furthermore, BW is not correcting it but attempting to perpetuate it. Unfortunately we now have Labour MP's congratulating themselves on govenment spending of £750m-£800m (the figure varies) over the last ten years and saying that the waterways are in better shape than at any time since WWII. The effect of this is that any changes to funding arrangements that government makes will not take into account the extra spend needed to clear this backlog (about £250m-£300m).

 

So my question is what can be done to use NABO's report to ensure that sufficient investment in the waterways takes place to reinstate them to the condition before Robin Evans took office?

[johnthebridge]

As is the way with forums, I think we are sidetracking ourselves - although there is nothing wrong in that.

 

BW have been underfunding the waterways by £30m a year, so the system must be decline and a backlog of maintenance is building up again. My concern is BW's chief executive, has made a very public statement that is blatantly incorrect. Furthermore, BW is not correcting it but attempting to perpetuate it. Unfortunately we now have Labour MP's congratulating themselves on govenment spending of £750m-£800m (the figure varies) over the last ten years and saying that the waterways are in better shape than at any time since WWII. The effect of this is that any changes to funding arrangements that government makes will not take into account the extra spend needed to clear this backlog (about £250m-£300m).

 

So my question is what can be done to use NABO's report to ensure that sufficient investment in the waterways takes place to reinstate them to the condition before Robin Evans took office?

 

You've asked the $64,000 question Alan. Is anything to be done? Personally, I don't think so. Where, exactly, is the money going to come from?

It grieves me to say this as an old Socialist, but this so called "Labour" government has made a complete Horlicks of this country's finances. I'm not going to bang on about that, as everyone knows the whys and wherefores, but the buggers really have gone to town with the dosh. A general election looms-Brown won't say it, Cameron daren't say it, but really! Look at us. Are we in the shit? We undoubtedly are, but Brown et al. have their fingers in their ears whilst humming loudly. I'm afraid that people like Evans and his overpaid cronies are just the middlemen, doing the Government's bidding and telling them what they want to hear. When will people get it? A survey, however worthy, just ain't gonna cut the mustard with this lot.

You've heard the expression, "All pigs fuelled, primed, and ready for take-off"? In my opinion, Evan's/Stirling's utterances regarding the condition of the canals falls into the same category.

When will people also begin to get it that canals are small fry? They might matter to 370 boaters, or to the people on here, but when it comes to it, the Government don't give a toss about something which in the outside world is viewed as a minority interest. To repeat what I said at the start, where, exactly, is the money going to come from? I have absolutely no idea.

Sorry. Rant over.

Edited December 13, 2009 by johnthebridge

[Innkeeper]

You've asked the $64,000 question Alan. Is anything to be done? Personally, I don't think so. Where, exactly, is the money going to come from?

It grieves me to say this as an old Socialist, but this so called "Labour" government has made a complete Horlicks of this country's finances. I'm not going to bang on about that, as everyone knows the whys and wherefores, but the buggers really have gone to town with the dosh. A general election looms-Brown won't say it, Cameron daren't say it, but really! Look at us. Are we in the shit? We undoubtedly are, but Brown et al. have their fingers in their ears whilst humming loudly. I'm afraid that people like Evans and his overpaid cronies are just the middlemen, doing the Government's bidding and telling them what they want to hear. When will people get it? A survey, however worthy, just ain't gonna cut the mustard with this lot.

You've heard the expression, "All pigs fuelled, primed, and ready for take-off"? In my opinion, Evan's/Stirling's utterances regarding the condition of the canals falls into the same category.

When will people also begin to get it that canals are small fry? They might matter to 370 boaters, or to the people on here, but when it comes to it, the Government don't give a toss about something which in the outside world is viewed as a minority interest. To repeat what I said at the start, where, exactly, is the money going to come from? I have absolutely no idea.

Sorry. Rant over.

Good rant John and hard to disagree.

The reason NABO undertook the survey I have explained above, (and perhaps because we had a chance of reaching a good number). The advice we are getting however is that instead of worrying, as you quite rightly say, about this forum and the canal world in general we need to somehow reach all those that basically dont care at the moment. The General Public each of whom will have their own issue. Hence headlines about a possible catastrophe if maintainance is not done - rather than how much harder it is to work a paddle in Huddersfield! Oh and it was 370 specific to BW Water - there were a further 88 on non BW waters.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Good rant John and hard to disagree.

The reason NABO undertook the survey I have explained above, (and perhaps because we had a chance of reaching a good number). The advice we are getting however is that instead of worrying, as you quite rightly say, about this forum and the canal world in general we need to somehow reach all those that basically dont care at the moment. The General Public each of whom will have their own issue. Hence headlines about a possible catastrophe if maintainance is not done - rather than how much harder it is to work a paddle in Huddersfield! Oh and it was 370 specific to BW Water - there were a further 88 on non BW waters.

 

I get the feeling that those that don't care include government as well as the general public. We can all do a bit on both fronts. I was out "volunteering" this morning ( I won't say doing what or waterscape will want to interview me!) and I have also written to my MP over the weekend -

 

[some personal information removed]

.......... I am writing to express my concern about the slow decline of inland

waterways administered by British Waterways despite an investment of

£800m over 10 years by the present government.

 

The current waterways minister, Huw Irranca-Davies appears to agree

with the chief executive of British Waterways, Robin Evans, that the

waterways are in a better state than they have been for decades despite

under spending on maintenance by £30m per annum.

 

Can you ask the minister -

 

If he accepts the findings of the National Association of Boat Owners

Waterways Condition Survey 2009 that "inland waterways managed by

British Waterways are in a parlous

state."(http://www.nabo.org.uk/current/survey.htm)

 

What action is to be taken against those who have misled government

concerning the condition of our waterways.

 

What action government intends to take to ensure that British Waterways

spend the £125m a year needed to stop further deterioration (out of an

income of £220m).

 

I used www.writetothem.com - its almost as easy as an e-petition - I suspect that if 100 boaters used www.writetothem.com to inform MP's regarding the state of the waterways we would not have MP's saying in the house that "the waterways are in a better condition now than at any time since WWII."

 

However, if you write to your MP, I suggest you keep it general by referring to the NABO report in addition to any specific maintenance issues within his/her area. It is also worthwhile asking your MP to ask the waterways minister to take some action.

Edited December 13, 2009 by Allan(nb Albert)

[johnthebridge]

Good rant John and hard to disagree.

The reason NABO undertook the survey I have explained above, (and perhaps because we had a chance of reaching a good number). The advice we are getting however is that instead of worrying, as you quite rightly say, about this forum and the canal world in general we need to somehow reach all those that basically dont care at the moment. The General Public each of whom will have their own issue. Hence headlines about a possible catastrophe if maintainance is not done - rather than how much harder it is to work a paddle in Huddersfield! Oh and it was 370 specific to BW Water - there were a further 88 on non BW waters.

 

You say that you need to "reach all those that basically don't care at the moment." How are you going to do that? I think the problem is self-evident. Why should others care? What is there for them to "care" about? The canal system? Usually either perceived as a playground for the privileged boat owning "middle classes", or as the last refuge of the drug taking drop out crusty brigade.

Most people know little about it and have other far more pressing issues in their lives. Just because you, or others, do care, that in itself doesn't strengthen your case. You, and the canal enthusiasts on here are very much in the minority, and I would hazard a guess that this government, or it's successor, will have far more pressing matters to attend to in the coming years. You will, I'm afraid, no longer be flavour of the month.

A dystopian view, I will admit, but I really think that there will be some hard decisions made in the near future.

It's all been too "good" for too long.

[Jason Wilson and Family]

You've asked the $64,000 question Alan. Is anything to be done? Personally, I don't think so. Where, exactly, is the money going to come from?

The money is there, it just isn't being used effectively. How many BW employee's are devoted to the policing, observation and maintenance of the actual canals and associated structures? How many are paper-pushers? How much money goes into dredging or repairs? How much goes into installing "bollards" that no one needed? How much is spent on surveys that the boating public never see?

 

The problem isn't money. They've sold off their work fleet boats and sunk money into land. They've taken on numerous projects to "improve" the waterways with useless quasi-bollards and pointless signage when they could have been fixing existing problems. They've an army of people who sit in cubicle but how many lock-keepers or poundsmen (think that's what they were called). Fire the lot of the paper-pushers, then hire some boaters who love the canal to patrol sections of it, work with volunteer groups to handle small things. When they do that they'll start catching problems before they get big, they'll cater to the people who use the waters and it will stop being such a bureaucratic nightmare. For now they'll keep sinking money into non-issues and other pockets and then complain about having too little dosh.

[cotswoldsman]

In that case the vast majority of the public would like BW's property portfolio sold off!

 

I did not see anything in the survey that said you should only respond if you were unhappy with the canals. What makes you assume that the 1% who responded were not a typical cross section of the boating public?

 

I am sorry Allan I am just not convinced that this survey/questionnaire reflects all boaters. During the course of a years cruising I do speak to a lot of boaters and I don't hear all this BW knocking. This year I have done the Ribble Millennium Link and The Liverpool Link certainly would not have been able to do those 10 years ago.