British Waterways

[carlt]

illegally making cyclists and walkers not have seperated bits of path under health and safety rules.

Could you quote the piece of H&S legislation that prohibits shared paths?

 

It would be at odds with "Local Transport Note 2/04 - Adjacent and Shared Use Facilities for Pedestrians and Cyclists", I believe.

[mayalld]

Just filled in the questionaire adding that another thing I did on Bw towpaths was to jump out of the way of cyclists and to curse BW for illegally making cyclists and walkers not have seperated bits of path under health and safety rules.

 

And that is illegal is it?

 

Which Act makes it illegal? Possibly the "There should be a law against anything I don't like, oh yes, if I was running the country, blah blah Act 2011"

[cotswoldsman]

And that is illegal is it?

 

Which Act makes it illegal? Possibly the "There should be a law against anything I don't like, oh yes, if I was running the country, blah blah Act 2011"

 

Hey david that is good

[Tiny]

And that is illegal is it?

 

Which Act makes it illegal? Possibly the "There should be a law against anything I don't like, oh yes, if I was running the country, blah blah Act 2011"

 

If it isn't against the law why do councils divide our pavements into pedestrian lanes and cycle lanes. They never spend money if they don't have too.

[carlt]

If it isn't against the law why do councils divide our pavements into pedestrian lanes and cycle lanes. They never spend money if they don't have too.

If you read the document I referred you to then you may understand why some Paths are shared and some are separate.

 

There is no law that says a footway/cycle path should be shared or separated I have designed both types without being thrown in jail.

[Giggetty]

If you read the document I referred you to then you may understand why some Paths are shared and some are separate.

 

There is no law that says a footway/cycle path should be shared or separated I have designed both types without being thrown in jail.

Are any of these personally acquainted with canals?

 

Advisory panel in place for New Waterways Charity

 

26th Jan 2011

 

An independent Advisory Panel has been set up by defra to provide advice to the Government as British Waterways makes the transition from public corporation to charitable body in England and Wales.

 

Andrew Hind CB has been appointed as Chair of the new independent Advisory Panel on First Appointments and Transition. Dinah Nichols, Roger Clarke and Robin Ritzema have been appointed as members.

 

The panel will advise the Secretary of State for the Environment on the appointment of ‘Transition Trustees’ to represent the interests of the new charity and, in the future, sit on its Board of Trustees once it has been set up. All appointments will be made on merit and political activity will play no part in the selection process.

 

The panel met for the first time on 21 December and will remain in place until the new charity’s Board of Trustees has set up its own appointments procedures.

 

Roger Clarke is Chair of Think Global which promotes learning for a just and sustainable world. He also holds positions as the Chair of the Civil Society Advisory Board at Defra, Board member of the Peak District National Park Authority, the Woodland Trust, British Trust for Conservation Volunteers and is a member of the Expert Panel at the Heritage Lottery Fund.

 

Andrew Hind CB stepped down as Chief Executive of the Charity Commission in August 2010 after six years’ service. His previous positions include Chief Operating Officer of the BBC World Service, Deputy Chief Executive at ActionAid and Director of Finance and Corporate Services at Barnado’s.

 

Dinah Nichols CB is a former Director-General for Environment in DETR and Defra, where she was the sponsor for British Waterways. She is currently Chair of the National Forest Company, a non-executive Director of Pennon Group plc and a Trustee of the Land Trust and Keep Britain Tidy. She sits on the Policy Advisory Committee of the Campaign to Protect Rural England.

 

Robin Ritzema is an independent consultant and an accredited independent public appointments assessor. Formerly a senior civil servant in the Department of Education, Cabinet Office and elsewhere, he has extensive experience in the fields of education and science policy and management, in the UK and overseas

[mayalld]

If it isn't against the law why do councils divide our pavements into pedestrian lanes and cycle lanes. They never spend money if they don't have too.

 

Of course they do!

 

If there is one thing that councils are rather good at, it is wasting money on needless projects,

 

You conclusions that if a council does something, doing something diferent must actually be illegal is breathtaking in its boldness, and shows a reckless enthusiasm for guessing as to what is illegal.

 

However, as your message suggests that not only do you think it was a good guess, but that you STILL think it might be illegal unless somebody can prove a negative, could I offer This link which includes official advice about segregated and unsegregated use, which ought to debunk your assumption.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Are any of these personally acquainted with canals?

 

Advisory panel in place for New Waterways Charity

 

26th Jan 2011

 

An independent Advisory Panel has been set up by defra to provide advice to the Government as British Waterways makes the transition from public corporation to charitable body in England and Wales.

 

Andrew Hind CB has been appointed as Chair of the new independent Advisory Panel on First Appointments and Transition. Dinah Nichols, Roger Clarke and Robin Ritzema have been appointed as members.

 

The panel will advise the Secretary of State for the Environment on the appointment of ‘Transition Trustees’ to represent the interests of the new charity and, in the future, sit on its Board of Trustees once it has been set up. All appointments will be made on merit and political activity will play no part in the selection process.

 

The panel met for the first time on 21 December and will remain in place until the new charity’s Board of Trustees has set up its own appointments procedures.

 

Roger Clarke is Chair of Think Global which promotes learning for a just and sustainable world. He also holds positions as the Chair of the Civil Society Advisory Board at Defra, Board member of the Peak District National Park Authority, the Woodland Trust, British Trust for Conservation Volunteers and is a member of the Expert Panel at the Heritage Lottery Fund.

 

Andrew Hind CB stepped down as Chief Executive of the Charity Commission in August 2010 after six years’ service. His previous positions include Chief Operating Officer of the BBC World Service, Deputy Chief Executive at ActionAid and Director of Finance and Corporate Services at Barnado’s.

 

Dinah Nichols CB is a former Director-General for Environment in DETR and Defra, where she was the sponsor for British Waterways. She is currently Chair of the National Forest Company, a non-executive Director of Pennon Group plc and a Trustee of the Land Trust and Keep Britain Tidy. She sits on the Policy Advisory Committee of the Campaign to Protect Rural England.

 

Robin Ritzema is an independent consultant and an accredited independent public appointments assessor. Formerly a senior civil servant in the Department of Education, Cabinet Office and elsewhere, he has extensive experience in the fields of education and science policy and management, in the UK and overseas

 

Roger Clarke is acquainted with canals. He attended the last BW annual meeting and spoke on his experiences with the YHA. I have no doubt BW showed him one before or after the event.

 

I hope I am wrong but suspect the old attitudes prevail and we will be poorly represented during the transition period and beyond.

[Pluto]

Are any of these personally acquainted with canals?

 

 

The panel met for the first time on 21 December and will remain in place until the new charity’s Board of Trustees has set up its own appointments procedures.

 

Roger Clarke is Chair of Think Global which promotes learning for a just and sustainable world. He also holds positions as the Chair of the Civil Society Advisory Board at Defra, Board member of the Peak District National Park Authority, the Woodland Trust, British Trust for Conservation Volunteers and is a member of the Expert Panel at the Heritage Lottery Fund.

 

Andrew Hind CB stepped down as Chief Executive of the Charity Commission in August 2010 after six years’ service. His previous positions include Chief Operating Officer of the BBC World Service, Deputy Chief Executive at ActionAid and Director of Finance and Corporate Services at Barnado’s.

 

Dinah Nichols CB is a former Director-General for Environment in DETR and Defra, where she was the sponsor for British Waterways. She is currently Chair of the National Forest Company, a non-executive Director of Pennon Group plc and a Trustee of the Land Trust and Keep Britain Tidy. She sits on the Policy Advisory Committee of the Campaign to Protect Rural England.

 

Robin Ritzema is an independent consultant and an accredited independent public appointments assessor. Formerly a senior civil servant in the Department of Education, Cabinet Office and elsewhere, he has extensive experience in the fields of education and science policy and management, in the UK and overseas

Natural heritage seems to be rather well represented, with built heritage getting none. It suggests that they will not be well informed regarding the conservation of the built heritage, which is probably the key requirement for any body overlooking what BW, or its successor, does.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Roger Clarke is acquainted with canals. He attended the last BW annual meeting and spoke on his experiences with the YHA.

 

I seem to recall Roger Clarke's main activity at the Youth Hostels Association was closing them.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I seem to recall Roger Clarke's main activity at the Youth Hostels Association was closing them.

 

You probably read that rumour in February Waterways World.

[Richard Fairhurst]

 

I was a member of the YHA at the time. Lots of my favourite hostels were closed under the Clarke regime. Capel-y-Ffin in Powys is still the one I'm saddest about.

[fanshaft]

That doesn't square with the quote that salaries will be protected in the transfer. One other thought. If EA is included in this charity, what happens to their Managers and bosses?

Sue

 

That is true under TUPE. But gradually, or even quickly (!), the present directors will move on and be replaced with less highly paid individuals.

 

David L

 

Not quite sure why you picked on Train Drivers woulod have thought they were worth every penny. You could have said that they will be paid a lot less than say the director scotland of Lloyds bank who received £1.8 million last year before that he was a director of failed bank HBOS

 

I picked on train drivers as an example with which I am familiar with my work in the rail industry , and to show that £50,000 isn't such a high salary as some people think. I have the greatest of respect for train drivers having travelled in the cab with them often as part of my job. Actually with a bit of overtime or Sunday working train drivers and high grade signalmen can earn up to £70,000 - and yes worth every penny. But with that level of salary you would expect the chief executive of a multi-million pound enterprise/industry/service/whatever to be paid somewhat more than £50,000 suggested earlier. That's all.

 

regards

 

David L

Edited February 3, 2011 by fanshaft

[Fred_Smith]

They should leave the name alone but get rid of some of the logos like the reeds by the bridge

[david and julie]

But with that level of salary you would expect the chief executive of a multi-million pound enterprise/industry/service/whatever to be paid somewhat more than £50,000 suggested earlier. That's all.

 

In the private sector these people would have been down the road years ago.

 

I was being generous when I said £50K.

[Giggetty]

In the private sector these people would have been down the road years ago.

 

I was being generous when I said £50K.

I saw this on the BW website today:

 

National Press Releases

 

"British Waterways launches new National Angling Advisory Group

08 February 2011

British Waterways has launched a National Angling Advisory Group in order to gain valuable feedback on its work. The members have been chosen for their individual expertise in angling, their knowledge of specific geographical regions and their experience of working in the charitable sector."

 

What is the equivalent body for boaters?

Edited February 16, 2011 by Giggetty

[Richard Fairhurst]

Well, there's a question. Historically there were two 'national user group meetings': the boating one and the towpath users' one. A while back (10 years or so?) BW combined them into one, called WUSIG - Waterway Users & Special Interests Group - which would meet twice a year.

 

In reality, WUSIG (I attend as an observer) is largely dominated by boating groups and boating discussion. I don't think that was ever the intention, it's just that there's a lot of boating stuff to talk about; that waterways are rarely "core" to the non-boating groups; that boating people happen to be quite outspoken and you might even say we all go on a bit ; and that, as a result, most of the non-boating people have stopped attending. I guess that's why there's now a dedicated angling group.

 

So the answer to "what's the equivalent body for boaters?" is officially, none; in practice, WUSIG.

[Giggetty]

Well, there's a question. Historically there were two 'national user group meetings': the boating one and the towpath users' one. A while back (10 years or so?) BW combined them into one, called WUSIG - Waterway Users & Special Interests Group - which would meet twice a year.

 

In reality, WUSIG (I attend as an observer) is largely dominated by boating groups and boating discussion. I don't think that was ever the intention, it's just that there's a lot of boating stuff to talk about; that waterways are rarely "core" to the non-boating groups; that boating people happen to be quite outspoken and you might even say we all go on a bit ; and that, as a result, most of the non-boating people have stopped attending. I guess that's why there's now a dedicated angling group.

 

So the answer to "what's the equivalent body for boaters?" is officially, none; in practice, WUSIG.

 

I wrote to my MP recently:

 

"Proposed British Waterways Charity

 

I was concerned to learn of the 24% reduction envisaged by DEFRA of the BW annual grant to 2014-2015. This is £12.3m less than last year and will amount to a cumulative deficit of £48m over the planned period. This must threaten the viability of the proposed new Waterways charity.

 

British Waterways admitted in 2009 to maintenance backlog costs of £30m. There have also been staff reductions, including those of lengthsmen and lock-keepers, essential for the detection of early leakage problems. Already there has been an unanticipated bank breach in your own constituency) which flooded local farmland and cost much to repair (http://www.waterscape.com/features-and-articles/news/2244/stourbridge-canal-breach). Bringing the total cumulative deficit up to £78m will greatly increase flooding and other risks to your constituents who live by or who are otherwise dependent on the Stourbridge and Staff & Worcs canals..

 

I appreciate that many economies have to be made by us taxpayers with respect to the bankers’ gambling debts. However, it seems that these were to be settled by the last government through 14-year Government Bonds. Surely this redemption period gives time for a Plan B, certainly for the Big Society and voluntarism to find its feet?"

 

He duly passed my enquiry onto the Minister. Here is his reply:

 

 

"Thank you for your letter of 19 January, on behalf of several of your constituents, about funding for British Waterways (BW).

 

I can assure you that the Government remains committed to ensuring a sustainable future for our inland waterways. On 20 December 2010 BW received its Grant-in-Aid allocation for 2011/12 to 2014/15 following the Spending Review. BW will receive £41.5m in 2011/12 and then £39m a year for the following 3 years of the Spending Review period. BW's allocation is realistic in the light of the very difficult fiscal situation and the need for the Government to reduce the level of the deficit. Taking account of BW's other sources of income, only about 50% of spend on the waterways (core waterways and major works) comes from the government grant. SW will make efficiency savings and identify other cost reductions to help mitigate the impact of the reduced level of Government support on waterways expenditure. BW also expect their commercial income to rise over the SR period. Therefore, the reduction in BW's Grant-in-Aid will result in an average reduction of about 11% in their overall spend on their waterways in England, and Wales over the SR period.

 

Our determination to ensure a long term future for the waterways was demonstrated by our announcement in October 2010 that BW would be moving from being a public corporation to become a charity within civil society. A civil society model for British Waterways reflects the Government's commitment to big society as well as our confidence in BW to work with others to build a sustainable future for the waterways under a charitable model. A charitable company will not only give users and communities more responsibility for governance of the waterways, it also has the potential to enable the new body to access new income streams and greater public support at a time when there is considerable pressure on other sources of income. Potential sources of new revenue include fundraising activities, donations, charitable grants and legacies, an ability to borrow against the body's property assets and facilitation of wider commercial opportunities. Charitable status would also facilitate a step change in volunteering, enhanced local partnership working and a range of cost efficiencies. Our plan is for the new charily robe set up in 2012 subject to Parliamentary time and consent.

The Government will give the new charity the best start it can afford, with the transfer of the property portfolio and a long term contract. As a first step the Government has provided a new long term commitment to a grant allocation at the 2014/15 level (£39m) to 2022/23 inclusive (covering the next two SR periods) that will enable the development of a funding plan which gives confidence to the incoming Trustees otthe new charity. The amount and length of the contract will be subject to negotiation with the Trustees, who will be appointed this April."

 

(signed R Benyon MP)

 

My BW region has just announced 65 redundancies (middlegrade, project engineers etc)

Edited February 19, 2011 by Giggetty

[Tiny]

Good to know that according to the government the waterways are all sorted then! Policy is always to either waffle at them or ignore them that complain. Governments do it, BW do it, councils do it and, barring a revolution it works a treat.

[sociable_hermit]

I picked on train drivers as an example with which I am familiar with my work in the rail industry , and to show that £50,000 isn't such a high salary as some people think. I have the greatest of respect for train drivers having travelled in the cab with them often as part of my job. Actually with a bit of overtime or Sunday working train drivers and high grade signalmen can earn up to £70,000 - and yes worth every penny. But with that level of salary you would expect the chief executive of a multi-million pound enterprise/industry/service/whatever to be paid somewhat more than £50,000 suggested earlier. That's all.

 

regards

 

David L

 

There are some mitigating factors, though. Drivers, Controllers and Signalmen cannot really workshare - they have no PAs to do half their work, because it's impossible to split the tasks up like that. If you're in the hot seat, it's all down to you. They also work highly antisocial shifts and are directly responsible for the lives of passengers and colleagues. Personally I'd welcome any moves to make BW's exec more accountable and also more in touch with the operational end of the organisation. Not sure whether there's really a requirement for the Board to work shifts, but I'd certainly welcome moves to ensure more BW staff are on duty at the weekends, when more boats are generally on the move, and that might include an executive presence from time to time.

 

TBH though, I think comparisons with different employment sectors is a red herring. What matters is value for money within BW. At the moment I do not believe that BW's Board offers good value for money, either for tax payers in general or boat licence holders. Other people do similar work to a higher standard for less money, even when they aren't facing budget cuts. Network Rail's Ian Coucher did a good job of turning NR around (though he has his critics), but he still handed back his bonus last year because they were busy laying off Permanent Way staff. I daresay he still took a very large salary, but at least the thought was there. He recognised how it would look, and decided not to take the p*ss. BW, on the other hand, still seem to think they're beyond reproach. They are out of touch with reality and unfortunately being surrounded by sycophants desperate to grab hold of the reins isn't helping.

[Tiny]

There are some mitigating factors, though. Drivers, Controllers and Signalmen cannot really workshare - they have no PAs to do half their work, because it's impossible to split the tasks up like that. If you're in the hot seat, it's all down to you. They also work highly antisocial shifts and are directly responsible for the lives of passengers and colleagues. Personally I'd welcome any moves to make BW's exec more accountable and also more in touch with the operational end of the organisation. Not sure whether there's really a requirement for the Board to work shifts, but I'd certainly welcome moves to ensure more BW staff are on duty at the weekends, when more boats are generally on the move, and that might include an executive presence from time to time.

 

TBH though, I think comparisons with different employment sectors is a red herring. What matters is value for money within BW. At the moment I do not believe that BW's Board offers good value for money, either for tax payers in general or boat licence holders. Other people do similar work to a higher standard for less money, even when they aren't facing budget cuts. Network Rail's Ian Coucher did a good job of turning NR around (though he has his critics), but he still handed back his bonus last year because they were busy laying off Permanent Way staff. I daresay he still took a very large salary, but at least the thought was there. He recognised how it would look, and decided not to take the p*ss. BW, on the other hand, still seem to think they're beyond reproach. They are out of touch with reality and unfortunately being surrounded by sycophants desperate to grab hold of the reins isn't helping.

 

This spending money you don't have seems to be a spreading virus. Our local county council has cut services furiously to 'save money' but not only are the fat cats in charge still paying themselves large sums (including over the odds expenses for them and the councellors who rubber stamp their latest whims. But they are advertising to take on more highly paid staff to manage the money better - while in the same meeting planning to close local schools, old peoples facilities and even the local toilets as 'we all have to suffer together.

 

Maybe their and BWs new slogan could read 'We have never had it so good but you have never been had so good.'

 

Edited February 18, 2011 by Tiny

[Allan(nb Albert)]

My BW region has just announced 65 redundancies (middlegrade, project engineers etc)

 

Is it possible to post or provide a link to the announcement because BW told us it was about 60 office jobs which was taken to mean HQ not regions.

 

65 x 10 or 11 regions is rather a lot!

[Giggetty]

Is it possible to post or provide a link to the announcement because BW told us it was about 60 office jobs which was taken to mean HQ not regions.

 

65 x 10 or 11 regions is rather a lot!

No link. I heard this by word of mouth from a BW employee following an 11am announcment on 15/2/11. I note the observation re HQ posts, with which it may have been confused.

Edited February 18, 2011 by Giggetty

[Allan(nb Albert)]

No link. I heard this by word of mouth from a BW employee following an 11am announcment on 15/2/11. I note the observation re HQ posts, with which it may have been confused.

It will be the 60 (or is that now 65) at HQ. As you know BW is cutting its major works program dramatically. These are the above £50k projects that are controlled centrally (including the funds which are not part of regional budgets). I suspect they now have less need for project engineers.

[canaldrifter]

Throughout human history the 'haves' have scored over the 'have-nots'.

 

Is it any wonder that there is belief in judgment, heaven and hell?

 

Personally I think those who are content with what they have, score far higher than those who inflict pain and suffering on others and themselves to retain what they have, and gain more.

 

(Sorry! Have I gone all philosophical?)

 

Tone