K&A Trust v Narrowboatworld

[haggis]

Having been a member of NABO for many years, I see a big improvement in how they do things now. The members are consulted a lot more than we were before and NABO is now taking on "bigger" issues than they used to. I used to think they were a bit parochial and did far too much BW bashing - if BW said something, it must be wrong. Also, we felt that NABO was almost a one man/woman band which followed the wishes of the chaiman and there didn't appear to be much consultation with other council members. We almost gave up our membership at that point but we are glad we stayed. Going back a few years to when i took the case for shared boaters licences to the Ombudsman, it was NABO who listened to what we had to say and helped our cause. Unlike another much larger organisation which just didn't want to know.

Lets face it, if a boater has a problem which he needs help and back up to fix, what other organisation will offer to help?

 

haggis

[Allan(nb Albert)]

You don't have to be a member of an organisation to have an opinion of how it goes about its business.

 

 

I think Carl has eloquently summed up what I was trying to say.

 

I will remember that when I write about BW's redundancy program

[carlt]

To get this in perspective the criticism of Nabo has come from about 5 members of this forum.

 

I am not saying that some criticism has merit but most is due to misconceptions on the part of these forum members. I feel this subject has taken up enough of the K&A Trust v Narrowboatworld. Anyone is welcome to pm me or to meet in person to discuss Nabo. I am a volunteer and I come on this forum for entertainment and relaxation.

Sue

If they are misconceptions, Sue, how come you say so often "Come and join and change it then."?

 

Once again you dismiss legitimate criticism with an arrogance that demonstrates your unwillingness to accept that, what claims to be a national representative body, has far too few members to actually be representative and needs to change, in order to grow.

 

Also, who are you to say that we cannot discuss, on a boaters' forum, the association that claims to represent boaters?

 

This is the perfect place to discuss the NABO, not PMing or meeting an individual...keeping it all quiet, again.

[deletedaccount]

They are on the web site.

Sue

 

You're not paying attention here

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Having been a member of NABO for many years, I see a big improvement in how they do things now. The members are consulted a lot more than we were before and NABO is now taking on "bigger" issues than they used to. I used to think they were a bit parochial and did far too much BW bashing - if BW said something, it must be wrong. Also, we felt that NABO was almost a one man/woman band which followed the wishes of the chaiman and there didn't appear to be much consultation with other council members. We almost gave up our membership at that point but we are glad we stayed. Going back a few years to when i took the case for shared boaters licences to the Ombudsman, it was NABO who listened to what we had to say and helped our cause. Unlike another much larger organisation which just didn't want to know.

Lets face it, if a boater has a problem which he needs help and back up to fix, what other organisation will offer to help?

 

haggis

 

I would particularly agree with the last sentence. It was NABO that took up the issue, on my behalf, of some privately licensed boats being subject to the MCA hire boat code and gained a positive resolution. I can't think of another organisation that would understand the issues much less be willing to help?

[David Schweizer]

To get this in perspective the criticism of Nabo has come from about 5 members of this forum.

 

I am not saying that some criticism has merit but most is due to misconceptions on the part of these forum members. I feel this subject has taken up enough of the K&A Trust v Narrowboatworld. Anyone is welcome to pm me or to meet in person to discuss Nabo. I am a volunteer and I come on this forum for entertainment and relaxation.

Sue

And the statements of support have come from about the same number of people. That, in my view, suggests a fairly balanced debate.

 

Just because you do not like the negative comments about NABO is not a sufficiently good reason for "telling" us that we must stop.

[carlt]

And the statements of support have come from about the same number of people.

Perhaps the low number of people even interested, in joining the debate, pro or con, is the most damning indictment of all.

 

Never mind those of us interested in encouraging change, in what should be our national representative body, listen to the silence of those who are not interested in the NABO, at all, and ask how you can draw those people in.

[Albion]

Perhaps the low number of people even interested, in joining the debate, pro or con, is the most damning indictment of all.

 

Never mind those of us interested in encouraging change, in what should be our national representative body, listen to the silence of those who are not interested in the NABO, at all, and ask how you can draw those people in.

 

I don't want to join in the pro/con debate because I have no personal experience on which to base a judgement but, if it helps NABO's understanding of the recruitment situation in anyway, I can say that they just never seemed relevant to me. In the many years that I owned boats and boated in this country it was just never an organisation that seemed to have any 'call' to me. I was in the IWA for many years (but since left) and joined/took part in other waterways organisations but, somehow, NABO never 'reached' me in a way that would encourage me to join. It's really difficult to say why but it is true. Somehow to me it felt like a specialist organisation in the same way the RBOA is specialist and yet, as I know/knew, it isn't. It's a most odd perception, but that's how I felt about it.

Roger

[David Schweizer]

I don't want to join in the pro/con debate because I have no personal experience on which to base a judgement but, if it helps NABO's understanding of the recruitment situation in anyway, I can say that they just never seemed relevant to me. In the many years that I owned boats and boated in this country it was just never an organisation that seemed to have any 'call' to me. I was in the IWA for many years (but since left) and joined/took part in other waterways organisations but, somehow, NABO never 'reached' me in a way that would encourage me to join. It's really difficult to say why but it is true. Somehow to me it felt like a specialist organisation in the same way the RBOA is specialist and yet, as I know/knew, it isn't. It's a most odd perception, but that's how I felt about it.

Roger

Your observations are very illuminating and should be taken on by the NABO Council members as an issue that needs to be addressed.

 

Before I was persuaded to join, I had a very odd impression of NABO as being the sort of organization that was populated by people in shiney boats who wanted to post a sticker in their window saying I "I own my own boat, and am a proper boater"

 

My friend was a member, and seemed to think they were worthwhile, persuading me to join. For a number of years I shared his view, however my experiences jaded that view and I became progresivly more and more disenchanted. When I cancelled my membeship, I completed and returned the "reasons why I am not renewing my membership" form, but no one contacted me for further information.

 

Nowadays I have an unfortunate view of NABO as an organization where an undemocratic structue is allowing a few good people to be hoodwinked by others with vested interest, who will leave as soon as they achieve their personal objectives.

 

Call that a jaundiced view if you like, but if it is my view. Those who wish to persuade me to change my view have to start where I am, not where they think I ought to be.

Edited February 4, 2011 by David Schweizer

[mayalld]

Tony may have a point about communications although the revamped web site and the rehashed NABO News has, hopefully, gone a long way to address this point.I am, however, intruiged by the description from DOR of its "very cliquey management". I would very much like to know on what basis this judgement is made. I don't know who DOR is and to my knowledge I have never seen him/her at meetings.

 

This seems to be a kind of NABO mantra.

 

Anybody who criticises can be dismissed by saying "I've never seen you at a meeting".

 

To me, that is a damning indictment of the organisation. Not only does NABO not care what non-members think, it doesn't care what members think unless they actually go to meetings.

 

In summary; unless you are prepared to join the clique your views don't matter.

[RLWP]

I don't want to join in the pro/con debate because I have no personal experience on which to base a judgement but, if it helps NABO's understanding of the recruitment situation in anyway, I can say that they just never seemed relevant to me. In the many years that I owned boats and boated in this country it was just never an organisation that seemed to have any 'call' to me. I was in the IWA for many years (but since left) and joined/took part in other waterways organisations but, somehow, NABO never 'reached' me in a way that would encourage me to join. It's really difficult to say why but it is true. Somehow to me it felt like a specialist organisation in the same way the RBOA is specialist and yet, as I know/knew, it isn't. It's a most odd perception, but that's how I felt about it.

Roger

 

It's a perception that is familiar to me. I have no real idea of who or what NABO are, beyond what I read here. I suppose I could go and look up what NABO are about, but then I could go and look up what any organisation I'm not a member of does.

 

I don't know what they do, what or who they are, and more importantly what I'd get from joining them beyond a window sticker and (presumably) a few magazines a year.

 

I can get that from the IWA, and I'm not sure why I'm a member of that either. Being a member of the CWDF is far more rewarding

 

Richard

[mayalld]

Are you suggesting that NABO listen to non-members rather than members?

 

Do you think that the views of NABO members differ from those of non-members?

 

What is this 'own agenda'? How does it differ from what members or non members want?

 

Am I suggesting that NABO listen to non-members? Yes I am. NABO aims to represent ALL boat owners, and if its agenda (whether set by all the members or by just the clique) differs from the agenda that the majority of boaters want, it can never achieve that aim. Yes, people could join and change the agenda, but that means dumping the aim of representing all boaters.

 

Do I think that the views of members differ from non-members? Yes, I do. I am satisfied that NABO's agenda means that people who disagree choose not to join, or leave. What remains is an unrepresentative cross section of boat owners driven by the agenda of the inner circle.

 

What is the "own agenda"; Top of the list is the fact that NABO council is, and has long been, a friend of the Continuous Moorer. Council seeks to oppose any move to regulate moorings, or to enforce the rules on people pretending to CC. They do this, oblivious to the fact that the vast majority of boaters obey the rules, and expect others to do likewise.

[David Schweizer]

Am I suggesting that NABO listen to non-members? Yes I am. NABO aims to represent ALL boat owners, and if its agenda (whether set by all the members or by just the clique) differs from the agenda that the majority of boaters want, it can never achieve that aim. Yes, people could join and change the agenda, but that means dumping the aim of representing all boaters.

 

Do I think that the views of members differ from non-members? Yes, I do. I am satisfied that NABO's agenda means that people who disagree choose not to join, or leave. What remains is an unrepresentative cross section of boat owners driven by the agenda of the inner circle.

 

What is the "own agenda"; Top of the list is the fact that NABO council is, and has long been, a friend of the Continuous Moorer. Council seeks to oppose any move to regulate moorings, or to enforce the rules on people pretending to CC. They do this, oblivious to the fact that the vast majority of boaters obey the rules, and expect others to do likewise.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

It identifies why any suggestions to introduce democratic representation will be hotly opposed by the ruling elite.

Edited February 4, 2011 by David Schweizer

[Chris Pink]

Am I suggesting that NABO listen to non-members? Yes I am. NABO aims to represent ALL boat owners, and if its agenda (whether set by all the members or by just the clique) differs from the agenda that the majority of boaters want, it can never achieve that aim. Yes, people could join and change the agenda, but that means dumping the aim of representing all boaters.

 

 

Please, my dear Mr Mayall, look in your dictionary , 'all' is not a synonym for 'majority'.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Chris Pink

[David Schweizer]

Grasp, in your grubby paw, the dictionary Mr Gnome, 'all' is not a synonym for 'majority'.

Come on Chris please. We have managed to maintain a degree of civility in this hotly debated issue.

 

I guess that you will not agree with some of the views being expressed, but please don't cause it to sink into an exchange of personal insults.

Edited February 4, 2011 by David Schweizer

[Chris Pink]

Come on Chris please. We have managed to maintain a degree of civility in this hotly debated issue.

 

I guess that you will not agree with some of the views being expressed, but please don't cause it to sink into an exchange of personal insults.

 

OK, OK, David, for you.

 

edited to add;

 

It would seem that Mr Mayall, from his manipulation of the quote below, would rather be insulted than treated politely. I have heard there are people of low esteem who commonly behave like this, though in this enlightened day and age there is no real excuse for such victim playing

 

http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Playing_the_Victim.html

Edited February 4, 2011 by Chris Pink

[mayalld]

Grasp, in your grubby paw, the dictionary Mr Gnome, 'all' is not a synonym for 'majority'.

 

Neither is is a synonym for 'minority'

 

Pursuing an agenda that is contrary to the interests of the majority cannot be claimed to be working for 'all' boaters.

[Midnight Rider]

To get this in perspective the criticism of Nabo has come from about 5 members of this forum.

 

 

Ok, I'll make it 6.

 

I have recently cancelled my membership of both the IWA & NABO after 5 years.

 

With regard to NABO I felt that while Stuart & Carole were there it was rather autocratic but things seemed to move forward, whether you agreed with their agenda is another matter. I would guess that even council members would have problems disagreeing with Stuart.

 

I now get the feeling, rightly or wrongly, that some jobs on the council are being taken on a bit of a 'caretaker' basis & the heart is not really in it.

 

Now before I get asked. no I have never attended a meeting and as a result I would not complain about the direction taken.

 

I felt that both organisations were worthwhile & was prepared just to support them with my subs. But now, times is tough, so I have cancelled.

 

Tony

[Chris Pink]

Pursuing an agenda that is contrary to the interests of the majority cannot be claimed to be working for 'all' boaters.

 

That may be your opinion, however it is not the stated aim of NABO

[mayalld]

That may be your opinion, however it is not the stated aim of NABO

 

Substitute boat owners then.

 

The point remains. NABO pursues an agenda that benefits a small number of boat owners, and is detrimental to most boat owners.

[Neil TNC]

But you stated "cannot give benefits" if you had said "are restricted in the type of benefits they can give" then I would not have challenged you, but what you stated was simply wrong. Even the IWA which you quote affords benefits to it's members by way of reduced entry fees and discounted products,etc. or do you not consider these to be benefits?

 

Sorry I did not make myself clear. I was giving the IWA as an example of a boaters related charity, which due to its present articles of association / chatitable aims will always be restricted in not giving material benefits to members. The IWA have looked at ways of circumventing this. The present discounts that the IWA give are really of no use to members, because they can get better deals elsewhere (for example, 5% discount at Midland Chandlers... just about anyone can walk in and get 15% discount, 20% on some special days.)This is as about as far as the IWA can go, without getting in trouble with the Charities Commission. AFAIK, this is because the discounts received would be less than the membership fee / non IWA members could get this discount.

The only real benefit given to IWA members was the discount and the 6? arm bands for "crew", given to those (including the hard working members/wrgies/officers, who run the National) attending the National in their boat. The Charities Commission put a stop to this.

 

Ok, I'll make it 6.

 

I now get the feeling, rightly or wrongly, that some jobs on the council are being taken on a bit of a 'caretaker' basis & the heart is not really in it.

 

 

Right lads (and lasses)...lets stage a takeover!

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Neither is is a synonym for 'minority'

 

Pursuing an agenda that is contrary to the interests of the majority cannot be claimed to be working for 'all' boaters.

 

The agenda that NABO is pursuing on the issue of continuous moorers is -

 

Strict enforcement of the 14 day rule and visitor mooring time limits.

 

Users involved in defining bona fide navigation guidelines acceptable to boaters, enforcement officers and eventually consideration by the courts.

 

(Taken from NABO news January 2011)

 

Perhaps another case of NABO not getting its message across?

[mayalld]

The agenda that NABO is pursuing on the issue of continuous moorers is -

 

Strict enforcement of the 14 day rule and visitor mooring time limits.

 

Users involved in defining bona fide navigation guidelines acceptable to boaters, enforcement officers and eventually consideration by the courts.

 

(Taken from NABO news January 2011)

 

Perhaps another case of NABO not getting its message across?

 

You and I know that isn't the case.

 

NABO are wasting the members money on lawyers to argue that anything other than a 14 day limit is illegal, and are opposed to the CC guidelines.

[AlanH]

I quite agree. Boaters won't join an organisation which works solely for boaters. All sorts of excuses are given but it boils down to - can't be bothered.

Sue

For many people, including me, boating is a leisure activity, not a lifestyle. We both work full time and regard our limited leisure time as precious. I make no excuses for not joining a waterways organisation. Where do you think I am, at school needing to excuse an absence? It is not that people are disinterested but they have limited available time. We already belong to a cruising club and the petty politics of that are more than enough without encountering more in some other organisation.

[canaldrifter]

Reading back over this thread it is apparent that past achievements of Nabo can be pointed to, some of them, like keeping joint-ownership boats out of the clutches of the MCA, very notable. Whereas the criticism here is all very arbitrary and unspecific, much of it based on speculation, past 'grudges' and personality dislikes.

 

As I have already stated, what I take from this thread is Nabo's poor record of PR outside of its own membership. This can be changed, hopefully.

 

Beyond that, there is no point in repeating what has already been said a few times, so I'll withdraw from this thread now and let the Nabo knockers get on with it.

 

Anyway, I have a fair bit of clearing up to do here after the storm. Apart from anything less than heavy being scattered all over the island, the lock house Rayburn-fired cottage central heating boiled during the night and became a steam system!

 

I'm cool.

 

Tone