Jump to content

K&A Trust v Narrowboatworld


KenK

Featured Posts

Just a little under the belt, Roger.

 

I was an active early member of SOW. For a whole season I used my boat with banners to cruise the system on a recruiting campaign, with the help of others. I did my best to keep SOW on track as a protest organisation, which is what most members wanted at that time. I could see that the direction it was being taken by the chairman and his constitution was not going to be useful. Local councils won't have the money to contribute to waterway upkeep. They still don't. I was kept off the committee because they didn't want anyone who didn't tow Wills' line. I left.

 

I did not sit on the sidelines.

 

Similarly with NABO, of which I am a member still. I was Vice Chair for four years. I represented NABO on no les than six committees, not counting numerous user groups. I gave that up when I could see it was being heavily 'steered' by one forceful individual. I did not sit on the outside sniping at council, as others did.

 

As I said then and still say, you can't change things from the outside. I will add that sometimes you can't on the inside either.... but I had a damned good try.

 

I stayed loyal to NBW and its editor until suddenly I found myself out-of-favour because I disagreed with him. I jumped before I was pushed.

 

But yes, I can see where you are coming from, if you've been listening to those who dislike me... bless 'em.

 

You can't be passionate and hold strong opinions about the waterways without making enemies.

 

So be it. Watch this space.

 

Tone

 

So, basically, you are a team player?

 

...

 

As long as you can be captain!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a little under the belt, Roger.

Or could that be an accurately observed question...it very much depends on your point of view I suppose

 

I was an active early member of SOW. For a whole season I used my boat with banners to cruise the system on a recruiting campaign, with the help of others. I did my best to keep SOW on track as a protest organisation, which is what most members wanted at that time. I could see that the direction it was being taken by the chairman and his constitution was not going to be useful. Local councils won't have the money to contribute to waterway upkeep. They still don't. I was kept off the committee because they didn't want anyone who didn't tow Wills' line. I left.

 

I have no problem with people who choose to leave something in which they no longer have confidence or agree with. I've done the same myself with the IWA. But then why continue for months and months sniping at the organisation that you have chosen to leave. State your reason for leaving clearly and unequivocally, straight to the organisation, and then leave without further public comment, particularly vitriolic comment, and then you can do no more. That seems to me to be the correct way to do it.

 

Roger

Edited by Albion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken I am not trying to argue with you personally just trying to understand why it is presumed that hire boaters spend more in pubs, restaurants and shops than boat owners. When I was on K&A I had to eat every night, lunch etc and most nights that was in a pub, when I did not eat in a pub I either bought my food from a take away or a shop. I purchased coal from the coal boat. I watched a family arrive on changeover day at Bradford (think it was a Oxford hire boat) and they had enough bags from Tesco to keep them going for a week and then loaded enough beer to last a month, not sure where it was all bought but I am sure Tesco were pleased!!!

 

I know you are not and I think everyone has a right to their opinion. When we go boating my wife likes to cook and we don't spend as much on pub meals. If you compare the K&A liveaboards to holidaymakers they probably do not spend as much as they are probably on a much tighter budget. However that wasn't my point, in BW's eyes hireboats are good, liveaboards, who are not in some cases paying for a mooring, are not. Therefore liveaboards get the blame for the congestion but when I was there in the summer my perception of the problem was that the dramatic increase in the number of hire boats was more to blame. It's not about money but the whole concept of how the waterways system should be used and managed so we do have one in the future. My original rant was in regard of NBW's article, its interesting how these debates throw up so many different ideas.

 

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Similarly with NABO, of which I am a member still. I was Vice Chair for four years. I represented NABO on no les than six committees, not counting numerous user groups. I gave that up when I could see it was being heavily 'steered' by one forceful individual. I did not sit on the outside sniping at council, as others did.

 

I, too, have been a member of NABO, IWA and RBOA but quickly realised that they did not represent my interests (nor the wider canal using community) and they had no intention of changing, nor did they welcome suggestions from anyone outside the inner circle.

 

As for "sniping" I have no interest in the organisations but, when they claim to represent my interests then I will disagree.

 

Expressing an opinion, on an internet forum, is not "sniping". If it was then you would, surely, be the pot calling the kettle black.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roger

 

Because I was asked to write a controversial column for NBW, I did.

 

Are you saying that once having tried and failed to change things we should then give up and shut up?

 

One thing I will add. Despite all the snide criticism that I get on this forum from a certain very vocal, but inactive quarter, I have never been proved wrong about anything I said in that column, thus far. If I am I would hold up my hand and admit it.

 

With regard to being a team player (a remark I picked up on because a poster on my ignore list was quoted) I used to play rugby. I wouldn't want to stay on side if they decided to just play soccer.

 

But that's enough about me :P

 

I'm off to see Fairport Convention in York.

 

Tone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there, I have finally registered after just reading posts for the best part of three years!

 

I am primarily, a once a year hirer, and have been doing this since around 1988, and been all over the system.

 

This thread about narrowboatworld has struck a chord with me. There is a lot of aggressive and negative moaning on a lot of messageboards, wether it be canals, football, expats or whatever. But really, the moaning, almost constant ranting on narrowboatworld is quite outstanding. Its like going into a pub and coming across someone mouthing off at the bar while on his 8th pint, while everyone else in the pub goes about their business and ignores him (which i suspect is what a lot of people have done with NBW)

 

Theres a section on NBW reviewing certain canals "telling it like it is" which is precisely what it isnt!! Its "telling it like I think it should be told" which is something entirely different.

 

I dont want to re-tread all the moaning about BW, heavens knows that can be done about all sorts of things (and I've been hiring since 88). Just seems to me there's a lot of uncertainty, almost fear, out there from people who really dont know what's going to happen to the waterways in the future. Thats understandable, particularly if you live on the waterways, as you see funding going down year on year.

 

Nobody knows what the waterways system is going to look like in 5 years time. There are lots of remainder waterways our crowd havent done yet and I fear they wont be there in 5 years time to visit.

 

You'll never get cyclists, anglers, walkers, residents, liveaboards, owners, hirers, restorers and operators to agree all the time (much like the highways really!). What is needed is support and some plans that everyone can work towards. Mud slinging and ranting, in the end, wont do anything except turn people off. Which is precisely why I'm on here and not on NBW!!

Edited by slackwater
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying that once having tried and failed to change things we should then give up and shut up?

 

Not at all, providing it is sensible and constructive criticism that can be used by the criticised organisation to realise the error of its ways and make the necessary changes (if genuinely required). Your criticism at the time certainly didn't come across like that and seemed more of a personal vendetta against anyone and anything within. You may not have seen it that way but that was how it appeared from the outside and, IIRC, there were comments on uk.rec asking you to 'give it a rest' when it became tedious and repetitive.

 

In my case, having decided to leave the IWA and, because I had been a past active member (area committee member etc), been asked by them to give my reasons for leaving, which I did, I decided that that was all I could do to change such an organisation so I made no further comment and took no further action.

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you are not and I think everyone has a right to their opinion. When we go boating my wife likes to cook and we don't spend as much on pub meals. If you compare the K&A liveaboards to holidaymakers they probably do not spend as much as they are probably on a much tighter budget. However that wasn't my point, in BW's eyes hireboats are good, liveaboards, who are not in some cases paying for a mooring, are not. Therefore liveaboards get the blame for the congestion but when I was there in the summer my perception of the problem was that the dramatic increase in the number of hire boats was more to blame. It's not about money but the whole concept of how the waterways system should be used and managed so we do have one in the future. My original rant was in regard of NBW's article, its interesting how these debates throw up so many different ideas.

 

Ken

 

Having spent the second half of my childhood (late 60’s) ‘growing up’ near Bristol and having worked and lived in Bristol, I recall how the Avon and Kennet was, together with Concord and the SS Great Britain, things that ‘belonged to us’, things that locally, we were proud of.

 

It was regular walks with my dogs along the developing canal in those days that first sparked a personal dream to one day live on the canal system.

Ironically, it was the lack of availability of legal residential moorings that derailed those plans, as a solicitor I couldn’t afford to be seen to be flouting the law.

Now, finally, too many years later, I can fulfil my dreams within the current legal structure of the system by CCing.

 

This thread, therefore, is of great interest to me for lots of reasons.

 

I suspect (from everything else you have said) that you may have meant to say that it shouldn’t be about money rather than it isn’t about money.

 

I am weary of seeing over demand problems like this solved by financially squeezing the demand until it fits the supply.

I once lived in Tunbridge Wells where the council, to solve a lack of town parking spaces simply kept putting the parking fees up until the demand matched the supply, it worked fine, if you were one of those who could afford it. Then they used all that money to build a nice big shopping centre and completely killed off the interesting ‘living breathing ’ heart of the town.

 

I don’t think an argument based on who brings in the most revenue, is in this case, in the long term interests of the waterways.

Given that it was wealthy capitalists who founded the waterways, poor working class people who worked them, capitalists who tried to kill them off (the canals ) and a bunch of enthusiastic radicals who saved them, I don’t think anyone has a morally better right to use them than anyone else.

 

It would be nice to think that an alternative solution could be found, not just the easiest.

 

Actually, given that we are talking about West country folk, I know there wont be an easy solution. Long ago I worked as a litigation solicitor in Bristol ( I sharpened my advocacy skills defending Glastonbury festival urchins ) and it is my experience that the locals don’t like to be told how to live and think, one could, for example, always guarantee an acquittal from a Bristol jury whenever a ‘hanging’ judge tried to tell them they really had no option but to find the defendant guilty!

 

 

Joshua

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The clubs are not on the "inside" they are merely clubs that are not taken seriously, with the exception of poacher turned gamekeeper, the IWA.

 

It doesn't make Sue's point at all. I have no interest in being in a club that has no interest in me. What is the point?

 

There is a need for a national organisation that is interested in fighting for the interests of all canal users, not just their little clique.

 

The NABO carries no respect, because of its "OBN" reputation and the IWA has capitulated, in the hope that it can become the new BW.

 

The others are just niche societies (NABO included) who are not interested in anyone else's interests but their own.

 

They don't want to change so there is no point getting back on the "inside" because the rhetoric hasn't changed since when I was there.

On the contrary it is very easy to change Nabo from the inside. There are vacant positions on council and I found it very easy to go from mins sec to chairman, I then ran it my way, anyone could do the same.

Sue

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary it is very easy to change Nabo from the inside. There are vacant positions on council and I found it very easy to go from mins sec to chairman, I then ran it my way, anyone could do the same.

Sue

 

 

Should it have been run the members way , chair is inner circle i would think and the complaints here are about the inner circle running things how they want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

join the inner circle if not happy or make views known to the inner circle rather than winge here

Sue

 

Yes, I seem to remember what happened when the inner circle became aware of my views.

 

He abused his position as editor of the magazine to launch a personal attack on me.

 

(a remark I picked up on because a poster on my ignore list was quoted)

 

Yes, you have already mentioned that I'm on your ignore list repeatedly.

 

Now, so far as I can see, that can be for one of three reasons;

  1. You have actually deluded yourself that I care whether you ignore me.
  2. You have deluded yourself that there are others on CWDF who care who you ignore.
  3. You can't remember what you had for breakfast and forgot that you already did the "look, look, I'm ignoring him" bit of narcisism.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

join the inner circle if not happy or make views known to the inner circle rather than winge here

Sue

 

All this talk of joining the Inner Circle to gain influence is deeply disturbing, and illustrates one of the main issues I have with NABO, whose structure is both unrepresentative and undemocratic, yet it claims to represent the views of it's members. Further more, my experiece is that any attempt to influence change is ignored by those already in the positions of power.

 

Whilst NABO has, so called, Regional Representatives, there is no Regional membership structure, and as a consequence no mechanism through which members can collectively nominate and vote for their Regional Representative, or through which the Regional Representative can canvass the views of those they are supposedly representing.

 

The present proceedure enables any new Regional Representaive or other Council member to be appointed directly by the existing Council from a list of people submitted to the Council by any individual member. This procedure has led to some people securing an influential voice on the Council without any real means of engaging the view of the Ranks and File Membership.

 

I have made these view known to two previous Chairs, a previous General Secretary, and at least two other (still in post) Council members to no avail. I offered to write a discussiion paper on the subject, and to attend a Council meeting to represent my proposals, but I never received a response from any one of them, despite assurances that they would raise the matter at Council.

 

I have my own views as to why those that I contacted did not wish the Organization to address the democratic representation issues I was raising, and when NABO started to persue the personal agenda of several Council members which, in my view, a significant proportion of members would not support if canvassed, I cancelled my membership. I have yet to see any reason why I should reinstate my membership.

 

Edited to add:- I wish to make it clear that Sueb is not one of those NABO Council members to whom I spoke. It was after I had discontinued my membership of NABO that I worked out who she was.

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

join the inner circle if not happy or make views known to the inner circle rather than winge here

Sue

Do the "inner circle" not look at the busiest canal forum an look at potential members' concerns, then?

 

It isn't "whingeing" Sue, its "discussing" and if your club isn't paying attention, then trying to change in order to attract more members, then there is no point paying subs, to be called a "whinger" (or does "whingeing" magically transform into "genuine concerns", once you've got our dollar?).

 

You seem to expect people to buy something that they don't like, in the hope that it will change into something they do...This isn't effective marketing.

 

I would join an organisation that offers what I want, not rejoin an organisation that didn't and shows no evidence of having changed, since I stopped paying my dues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

join the inner circle if not happy or make views known to the inner circle rather than winge here

Sue

 

The only circle me dear should be the membership , make my views known ? easy just cancelled membership and payment of subs.

As for whinging , is it everyone who complains given that label ? Your words and attitude say everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only circle me dear should be the membership , make my views known ? easy just cancelled membership and payment of subs.

As for whinging , is it everyone who complains given that label ? Your words and attitude say everything.

 

It would be a very useful exercise IMO for membership organisations to conduct exit surveys. All members not renewing should be asked why they are leaving. If a trend is discovered, not representing members' interests for example, then action could be taken to rectify to rectify the problem and prevent further loss. If, however, dissatisfaction with the leadership was established as the problem then would any change be likely?......Hhmmmmm?

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may well be correct Mike, but given the gross inaccuracies and badly researched journalism that regularly appears on NBW, how can you be certain that their attacks on BW are based upon accurate information, or biased opinion?

 

If you are aware of the truth in such matters, it would be helpful if you could post the details on this forum for debate.

 

Point taken David maybe you could start the ball rolling by identifying some GROSS inaccuracies to us and we can debate them individually. I'd appreciate it if filis wasn't cited as I thought that had died a death long ago! PS thanks Chrisp Ink for putting an informed comment on about NBW who aren't professionals and in the mainstream rely heavily on third parties for their editorial comment!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point taken David maybe you could start the ball rolling by identifying some GROSS inaccuracies to us and we can debate them individually. I'd appreciate it if filis wasn't cited as I thought that had died a death long ago! PS thanks Chrisp Ink for putting an informed comment on about NBW who aren't professionals and in the mainstream rely heavily on third parties for their editorial comment!

I have no intention of trawling through pages of journalistic rubbish to identify the gross inaccuraies in detail, but three that I can recall are the inaccurate reporting of Phlysis's little brush with the Authorities, Carl's past problems with BW over his two boats which were moored between Woolfhamcote and Braunston Puddlebanks, and alleged access problems to open a lift bridge near Oxford, which had been removed nearly a year earlier.

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I seem to remember what happened when the inner circle became aware of my views.

 

He abused his position as editor of the magazine to launch a personal attack on me.

 

 

Snipped

The joys of volunteers. I don't know which editor you refer to but I will apologise

Sue

 

All this talk of joining the Inner Circle to gain influence is deeply disturbing, and illustrates one of the main issues I have with NABO, whose structure is both unrepresentative and undemocratic, yet it claims to represent the views of it's members. Further more, my experiece is that any attempt to influence change is ignored by those already in the positions of power.

 

Whilst NABO has, so called, Regional Representatives, there is no Regional membership structure, and as a consequence no mechanism through which members can collectively nominate and vote for their Regional Representative, or through which the Regional Representative can canvass the views of those they are supposedly representing.

 

The present proceedure enables any new Regional Representaive or other Council member to be appointed directly by the existing Council from a list of people submitted to the Council by any individual member. This procedure has led to some people securing an influential voice on the Council without any real means of engaging the view of the Ranks and File Membership.

 

I have made these view known to two previous Chairs, a previous General Secretary, and at least two other (still in post) Council members to no avail. I offered to write a discussiion paper on the subject, and to attend a Council meeting to represent my proposals, but I never received a response from any one of them, despite assurances that they would raise the matter at Council.

 

I have my own views as to why those that I contacted did not wish the Organization to address the democratic representation issues I was raising, and when NABO started to persue the personal agenda of several Council members which, in my view, a significant proportion of members would not support if canvassed, I cancelled my membership. I have yet to see any reason why I should reinstate my membership.

 

Edited to add:- I wish to make it clear that Sueb is not one of those NABO Council members to whom I spoke. It was after I had discontinued my membership of NABO that I worked out who she was.

Nabo is run by its council. It conducts polls to get members views and it asks for members views.

I don't see how Nabo can be more democratic. It has no regional hierarchy, there is no barrier between members and the council. Members are welcome to come to any council meeting(the dates are published). Any member can stand for council. We would love a list of volunteers to pick reps from, it just doesn't happen

Sue

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only circle me dear should be the membership , make my views known ? easy just cancelled membership and payment of subs.

As for whinging , is it everyone who complains given that label ? Your words and attitude say everything.

I have worked to try and make the canals a better place for many years. It is a shame boaters won't work together but their various agendas are so disparate that all they do is work against each other, making life so much easier for the authorities.

Sue

 

It would be a very useful exercise IMO for membership organisations to conduct exit surveys. All members not renewing should be asked why they are leaving. If a trend is discovered, not representing members' interests for example, then action could be taken to rectify to rectify the problem and prevent further loss. If, however, dissatisfaction with the leadership was established as the problem then would any change be likely?......Hhmmmmm?

Roger

Nabo does. The main reason being old age.

Sue

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine things have changed that much, but a couple of years ago NABO only had a membership of around 2000. This is simply not enough for it to remain vibrant and get enough willing volunteers to run it without there being the likelihood of certain Council members "taking over", with their own agenda. I have hung on in there, being a member for a good few years. I think in the last year or so, the present regime, seem to be less reactionary and more likely to make me want to remain a member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine things have changed that much, but a couple of years ago NABO only had a membership of around 2000. This is simply not enough for it to remain vibrant and get enough willing volunteers to run it without there being the likelihood of certain Council members "taking over", with their own agenda. I have hung on in there, being a member for a good few years. I think in the last year or so, the present regime, seem to be less reactionary and more likely to make me want to remain a member.

Different Chairmen have different styles Nabo are lucky to have a good one. Love to see you come to a meeting.

Sue

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.