What is the future of the canal system ?

[onionbargee]

Will the financial cuts mean the waterways will slide back into a bad state of repair, or do you have any hopes that a more user friendly, and competent owner will emerge out of this ?

 

My ideal has always been to see the whole system be made a national park, that is after all what it is.So it cant be abused and sold off.

[NB Lola]

Change is a constant.

 

My opinion is that current change is bad and my vote will reflect this. I do not expect that funding for BW will ever return to past levels. What is being done will change waterways and its management forever. The current senior management team will be the last at such silly levels of remuneration for the degree of responsibility.

 

The term "Owner" is interesting. I reckon it remains in public ownership but is partially funded in different ways. I am not sure this current change is sustainable, the big society is suffering from creeping death before it emerges.

 

So, in the short term, pain. In the long term less pain, but still pain. Annual charges will double within 3 years. The waterways will become exclusive and out of reach of many who currently enjoy this way of life and living.

[DeanS]

Will the financial cuts mean the waterways will slide back into a bad state of repair, or do you have any hopes that a more user friendly, and competent owner will emerge out of this ?

 

My ideal has always been to see the whole system be made a national park, that is after all what it is.So it cant be abused and sold off.

 

 

As a new boater, I'm still getting over the BW annual charges..let alone marina charges etc.

If the system falls into a bad state of repair, people like me will leave the system. BW and marinas will lose money.

Since I doubt they want to lose their "customers" en masse, I'm hopeful they will be able to keep things attractive, for their own good, and mine.

[Albion]

My feeling is that as BW has been underfunded to cope with the essential maintenance backlog (never mind the nice to do stuff) for some years now that the situation can only get worse. I don't see this improving under whatever regime controls the canals in future, charity or non-charity, to be honest. So, based on that scenario, what can be done about the situation? My gut feeling is that it will return to the situation that existed when I first started boating. Some canals will have to be re-designated as 'remainder' and treated as such. That means that some canals will be left to rot unless there is a safety issue. In the past you boated these canals at your own risk due to no dredging and no lock maintenance. There were no BW hit squads to call out when you found that a pound had drained (or been drained by local youth) and you had to survive on your own resources by running water down yourself etc. Parts of the BCN were a bit like this when I first started. Having said that, it did feel like real boating overcoming challenges etc but there are some challenges that you just cannot overcome. The other canals that will be 'cruiseways' will get the maintenance money but whether there will be sufficient for those nobody will be able to predict at the moment, I guess. It will probably end up as a balancing act between available funds and canals that require those funds. The fly in the ointment here are safety issues. If, for example, there should be a major breach or threat of a breach and it jeopardises the safety of housing nearby then funds will have to be found to repair/strengthen that breach. This could swallow major, major chunks of maintenance money and leave the normal maintenance short for a while.

We can only hope that things aren't as bad as I fear but I'm not optimistic frankly.

Roger

[Laurie Booth]

Sadly all the lights over Europe are going out, I shall not see them again in my lifetime.

[nb Innisfree]

We are on a roller coaster ride with the canals, many years ago it was on a downhill run and then started an uphill climb, now we are on or just over the apex, up and down it goes just like most things in life including the economy. No point fretting, it's all down to whether the population decide to keep them going. K&A has been a remainder canal for a long time now and is still successful and popular as ever. We have all just got to hold on tight.

[carlt]

If the system deteriorates back to how it was when I started boating, I'll be buying another canal boat.

 

There should be some bargains about, too.

[sueb]

I feel the canals will be for liveaboards only. Very few leisure boats around due to cost and lack of cruising routes. The bosses have their pay guaranteed so no hope there of any savings.

Sue

[Québec]

I know it won't happen, but wouldn't our canals be much safer under the aegis of the National Trust?

 

There's a lot in common...history, leisure, etc.

 

The NT is nearly four time the size in terms of 'normal' operating costs and made a £54m profit last year.

 

BW's operating costs, as far as I can tell, are c. £75m + c. £30m for 'essential/special maintenanace' and has a £30m - £50m 'funding gap'.

Edited February 21, 2011 by Québec

[Josher]

If the system deteriorates back to how it was when I started boating, I'll be buying another canal boat.

 

... it will be a Hilman Imp for me!

 

[cotswoldsman]

I feel the canals will be for liveaboards only. Very few leisure boats around due to cost and lack of cruising routes. The bosses have their pay guaranteed so no hope there of any savings.

Sue

 

I am a liveaboard does that exclude my boat from being used for leisure?

[sumajan]

Sadly all the lights over Europe are going out, I shall not see them again in my lifetime.

 

 

What a sad remark Mr Booth.

 

Remember my grandfather saying something like that when we sat in an air-raid shelter in 1940, then to we were being attacked by those who wanted to destroy our ways of life.

 

They failed miserably, although it did take a while and cost an awful lot. But, both he and I survived to see the attackers brought to heel.

 

BW promised and boasted about great things happening, most of which didn't.

 

We haven't been promised anything but reductions for the future.

 

The system is ( in fairness) a lot better than it was in 1972 and will take as while to return to that state. Lets chug on to see what happens.

 

In the meantime I'll dig out my old tarpaulin and crowbar.

Edited February 22, 2011 by sumajan

[MoominPapa]

Remember my grandfather saying something like that when we sat in an air-raid shelter in 1940, then to we were being attacked by those who wanted to destroy our ways of life.

Your grandfather was Sir Edward Grey? We are indeed in esteemed company!

 

MP.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

We would be in a better position to know the future of the system if BW/government would provide information as to its present condition.

 

About four years ago BW stated that it had £200m of maintenance arrears. We were also told that the system was being underfunded by over £30m a year. This figure (aka funding gap) is based on BW's 'steady state' model which determines how much needs to be spent, presuming maintenance arrears do not exist, to keep the waterways in good order.

 

However, the amount that needs to be spent is grows over time whilst the amount being spent is now falling (e.g. BW is spending £12m less this year than last). In other words the funding gap is getting larger over time.

 

I have been trying for over a year now to get some figures out of BW ( BW faces contempt of court charge) to no avail.

 

As far as I can determine, taking into account BW's prediction of a £17m contribution after ten years of being a charity, likely government funding, other sources of income and maintenance cost scenarios we may be looking at a £1bn of maintenance arrears in 2022.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Allan(nb Albert)

[billS]

Well, the NT seem to make a pretty good fist of running the River Wey. I was very impressed to get a sheet with the telephone numbers of the lengthsmen for the various stretches.

 

If they can keep expensive old houses, castles and estates in a reasonable state of maintenance and still make a profit, then they would get my vote to run the canals.

[Laurie Booth]

Your grandfather was Sir Edward Grey? We are indeed in esteemed company!

 

MP.

Fancy Sir Edward moaning about our canals in 1914

[MartinC]

I know it won't happen, but wouldn't our canals be much safer under the aegis of the National Trust?

 

There's a lot in common...history, leisure, etc.

 

The NT is nearly four time the size in terms of 'normal' operating costs and made a £54m profit last year.

 

BW's operating costs, as far as I can tell, are c. £75m + c. £30m for 'essential/special maintenanace' and has a £30m - £50m 'funding gap'.

 

Careful what you wish for.

 

The NT is controlled by Trustees who are "appointed" by the Council.

Only half the Council are elected the rest are "appointed". The Council decides the criteria for those seeking election, a bit like councillors being allowed to decide who is fit to join them. The result is that hardly any members bother to participate or even vote in elections.

 

The NT may have saved the South Stratford from closure, but this was only achieved with tremendous volunteer help. In the end that had to pass it over to BW and look at the history of cheap restoration carried out by the NT which is now coming to light.

 

NT do better financially (I thought all charities had to be non-profit making) but they only normally take on properties if they come with adequate endowment funding.

[Quinafloat]

It's easy to judge things based on BW's figures and see a bleak future. However if we are rid of BW's current leadership and their "visions", and we get some good accountants and purchasing people there may well be enough money in the pot to put everything right and keep it that way anyway. Just because BW say it cost X zillion to do something dos not mean it really does, or that it's the only way to achieve it. They have shown themselves to be adept at wasting truly vast fortunes.

 

John

[Guest]

Co-operatives?

[carlt]

Co-operatives?

Boaters....cooperating....

 

...You mad fool! It might just work!

[haggis]

It's easy to judge things based on BW's figures and see a bleak future. However if we are rid of BW's current leadership and their "visions", and we get some good accountants and purchasing people there may well be enough money in the pot to put everything right and keep it that way anyway. Just because BW say it cost X zillion to do something dos not mean it really does, or that it's the only way to achieve it. They have shown themselves to be adept at wasting truly vast fortunes.

 

John

 

Ah, but that's the problem. The existing directors who, they keep telling us, are doing a wonderful job and the canals have never been in better state, intend staying on in charge of the new charity set up. God help us!

 

haggis

Edited February 22, 2011 by haggis

[Quinafloat]

If the Egyptians can get rid of a leader, surely we can get rid of one. Pressure works, but you actually have to do something, and something the mass media is interested in.

 

How about a peaceful protest, outside the houses of parliament, on the river side. A few hundred boats should do it.

 

Just a lot of blaring horns and running engines. It could ruin their whole day.

 

Oh, and someone bring Joanna Lumley along to negotiate.

 

John

[canaldrifter]

If the Egyptians can get rid of a leader, surely we can get rid of one. Pressure works, but you actually have to do something, and something the mass media is interested in.

 

How about a peaceful protest, outside the houses of parliament, on the river side. A few hundred boats should do it.

 

Just a lot of blaring horns and running engines. It could ruin their whole day.

 

Oh, and someone bring Joanna Lumley along to negotiate.

 

John

 

This was done by Save Our Waterways.... and look what happened to that.

 

Tone

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Ah, but that's the problem. The existing directors who, they keep telling us, are doing a wonderful job and the canals have never been in better state, intend staying on in charge of the new charity set up. God help us!

 

haggis

 

One thing people can do is to read this.

 

Then read the first two comments and click on 'like' if you agree.

 

To me it seems terrible that we are now immune to stories such as this one. BW will tell us that it needs the money to maintain the waterways. Yes it does but it also needs money to prop up failing business ventures and pay directors an average of just under £400,000 again this year.

[furnessvale]

To me it seems terrible that we are now immune to stories such as this one. BW will tell us that it needs the money to maintain the waterways. Yes it does but it also needs money to prop up failing business ventures and pay directors an average of just under £400,000 again this year.

 

I have written to my (conservative) MP to complain about the excessive salaries of BW directors and the way they are trying to seamlessly enter the new "charity" on the same pay and conditions.

 

He has sent me a holding letter with a promise of a further response. It will be interesting to see if he tries to justify it.

 

Perhaps if others also wrote to their MPs it could start to embarrass the minister responsible. Sending an e mail to your MP is now a simple and quick operation.

 

George ex nb Alton retired