CaRT not known to Charity Commission.

[Mick and Maggie]

Like many others I have some reservations about the change from BW into CaRT.

So I have written about my concerns to the Charity Commission.

 

So far there has not been an application by anyone to register CaRT as a charity.

 

My letter and the reply from Charity Commission Direct can be found here.

[cotswoldsman]

I am no expert so I am sure I* will be corrected but my understanding is that it has not yet completed all the hurdles in Parliament to become a charity, so would be no point in applying at this stage, but please also note that it is Trust not a Charity.

 

I would also add that I am not one of the many boaters you refer to in your letter.

[David Schweizer]

I am no expert so I am sure I* will be corrected but my understanding is that it has not yet completed all the hurdles in Parliament to become a charity, so would be no point in applying at this stage, but please also note that it is Trust not a Charity.

 

I would also add that I am not one of the many boaters you refer to in your letter.

If the Trust is not to be a Charity, it will not need to register with the Charity Commissioners. However it will be too large to comply with the the requirements of (non registered) Charitable Status. Most Trusts are also Registered Charities so the technical differentiation is probably irrelevant. However, if it is not a Charity or of Charitable Status, I doubt that it could benefit from the advantages that such organizations enjoy.

 

As far as I understand it (and my experience is now 15 years out of date), the major difference between a Charity and a Trust is the way in which the Organization is constituted. Charities have to have a democratic system of management wheras Trusts do not.

Edited December 2, 2011 by David Schweizer

[mayalld]

Like many others I have some reservations about the change from BW into CaRT.

So I have written about my concerns to the Charity Commission.

 

So far there has not been an application by anyone to register CaRT as a charity.

 

My letter and the reply from Charity Commission Direct can be found here.

 

As C&RT will be established by parliament, there is a proper sequence of events to follow. You have to actually establish the thing before you register it.

 

It has been announced, and preparations are being made, but it doesn't actually have any legal existence yet.

[cotswoldsman]

If the Trust is not to be a Charity, it will not need to register with the Charity Commissioners. However it will be too large to comply with the the requirements of (non registered) Charitable Status. Most Trusts are also Registered Charities so the differentiation is probably irrelevant, andI if it is not a Charity or of Charitable Status, I doubt that it could benefit from the advantages that such organizations enjoy.

 

Sorry david my post maybe is not clear, I was just pointing out that it does not need to register for charitable status until it starts to accept donations, but my main point was that I do not think it has passed all the hurdles in Parliament and would not be able to register until that is completed.

[David Schweizer]

Sorry david my post maybe is not clear, I was just pointing out that it does not need to register for charitable status until it starts to accept donations, but my main point was that I do not think it has passed all the hurdles in Parliament and would not be able to register until that is completed.

I have added some further info to my post, but I agree that it almost cetainly will need to register, unless the Government sets it up as some sort of obtuse QUANGO.

Edited December 2, 2011 by David Schweizer

[Laurence Hogg]

I share Davids concerns too. Our group satrted the year with 15 active volunteers, we approached BW Volunteers manager for assistance and help with recruitment in April / May. Nothing has happened despite having exchanged 62 emails to try and set up a meeting and a press release. It is now December, our planned idea of bi weekly mid week work parties never got off the ground and our active number has fallen to around 5 members. BW volunteer co ordinators are no help to anyone and seem only interested in the own created BW volunteer jobs.

 

Theres also too many people round the table trying to magae this change, see below:

 

From: "Fran Read" <Fran.Read@britishwaterways.co.uk>Add sender to ContactsTo: undisclosed-recipientsChairs appointed for Canal & River Trust Waterway Partnerships

 

Search broadened out to remaining waterways

 

 

Canal & River Trust, the new waterways charity that will become the guardian of the canals and rivers in England and Wales in April next year, has appointed chairs to a number of the Waterway Partnerships that will play a role in the management of canals and rivers across the network.

 

 

 

Chairs have been appointed in Manchester & Pennine, North Wales & Borders, South Wales & Severn and Kennet & Avon. The chairs for the Partnerships in the West Midlands and North West, who have, to date, been trials, have been asked to and have agreed to continue. A chair has also been recruited for the Museums Partnership, which will be the successor to The Waterways Trust Museums Management Board.

 

 

 

Chairs are now being sought for the remaining Waterway Partnerships in the North East, Central Shires, East Midlands, South East and London and recruitment for the All Wales Partnership is continuing.

 

 

 

Canal & River Trust is also calling on volunteers who want to actively support the two-century old canal network to join their local Partnership and get involved and advise on how the waterways are used and looked after. Each Partnership will consist of at least eight volunteers who will be drawn from the local community and who will collectively have a broad spectrum of expertise relevant to the development of the waterways. Experience in fundraising, volunteering, finance, planning and regeneration, boating, environment, heritage, engineering, community engagement, and working with partners in local government are all relevant.

 

 

 

Appointed chairs of Waterway Partnerships

 

 

 

Manchester & Pennine: Professor Walter Menzies. Previously chief executive of the Mersey Basin Campaign, a third sector partnership dedicated to sustainable development through the improvement of waters, the regeneration of watersides and the engagement of communities and businesses. Walter has also held non-executive positions at Waterwise, Healthy Waterways Trust, Land Restoration Trust and Look 2011.

 

 

 

North Wales & Borders: Jim Forrester. Jim is currently director at Imperial War Museum North in Manchester where he has delivered services to over 2,500,000 visitors over the last ten years and drawn in champions, stakeholders and potential funders, raising substantial capital and revenue funding each year. Previously a boatbuilder on the canals, Jim has spent the last 27 years working within charities in a variety of roles; from boat conservator to director of a new branch of a national museum in the region.

 

 

 

South Wales & Severn: Jack Hegarty. Jack has been managing director of Wychavon District Council since 2004, where he leads a complex public sector organisation, builds relationships with Ministers, MPs and Councillors and deals with local communities and partner organisations at a national and local level. He was directly involved with the Droitwich Canal restoration for 11 years.

 

 

 

Kennet & Avon: Fleur de Rhe Philipe. Fleur has been a member of Wiltshire Council since 1997, currently as cabinet member for economic development and strategic planning. As company secretary of The Kennet & Avon Canal Trust for ten years Fleur was instrumental in setting up the partnership which achieved a grant of £25 million from the Heritage Lottery Fund to complete the restoration of the waterway.

 

 

 

North West: Professor Steven Broomhead. Currently professor of entrepreneurial education at Liverpool Hope University, Steven previously spent eight years as chief executive at Northwest Regional Development Agency, prior to which he was chief executive at Warrington Borough Council. He has held the position of chair at a number of private and public organisations.

 

 

 

West Midlands: Peter Mathews CMG. Peter is past chair of the Black Country Consortium, which works to coordinate regeneration in the Black Country area of the West Midlands, and chairman and managing director of Black Country Metals. A prominent business leader, Peter has held the position of chair at various national and international organisations including The World Recycling Conference, UKTI Advanced Engineering and the Midlands World Trade Forum.

 

 

 

Museums: Laurence Newman. Chairman, Epsom & St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust. Previously, Laurence spent 20 years with KPMG where he was the partner responsible for their Leisure and Tourism Consulting Group. He is also a non-executive director of Grove End Housing Ltd, a trustee of Creativity, Culture and Education and a member of the Advisory Board of The Foundation, a growth and innovation consultancy.

 

 

 

Tony Hales, chair of Canal & River Trust comments: “I am delighted that such a high calibre of people have come forward to chair these important positions of governance within the Canal & River Trust. Each will prove to be well placed to champion the interests of their local waterways. The Waterways Partnerships are integral to the stewardship and development of the network, providing new perspectives and insights, opening up new resources and ideas, and giving local people a greater opportunity to support their local canals and rivers: something that is integral to the success of the Canal & River Trust.”

 

 

 

A written record of all meetings will be publicly available on the web. All positions on the Partnerships will be un-remunerated, but agreed expenses will be reimbursed.

 

 

 

Those interested in joining a newly appointed chair on their local Waterway Partnership or in applying for one of the remaining positions of chair can find role descriptions and application details at: www.waterscape.com/trust from Thursday 1 December. Applications for membership open on Friday 9 December 2011.

 

 

ENDS

 

 

 

For further media information on this press notice please contact:

 

Fran Read, 020 7985 7263, fran.read@britishwaterways.co.uk

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I am no expert so I am sure I* will be corrected but my understanding is that it has not yet completed all the hurdles in Parliament to become a charity, so would be no point in applying at this stage, but please also note that it is Trust not a Charity.

 

I would also add that I am not one of the many boaters you refer to in your letter.

 

CART will have to be registered with the charities commission.

 

The Public Bodies Bill which gives the minister the required powers has yet to be passed.

 

The other major problem is viability -

 

Charity commission guidance states “trustees must: ensure the charity is and will remain solvent (and) avoid undertaking activities that might place the charity's endowment, funds, assets or reputation at undue risk”. We stress that each of the trustees are required by law to satisfy themselves of the viability of the trust. That is an individual responsibility and it is therefore essential for the figures to be robust enough to enable them to make a positive judgement.

 

So until the bill is passed and funding agreed at a level which satisfies all trustees then registration will not take place.

 

Well done to Mick and Maggie for writing.

[Chris Pink]

unless the Government sets it up as some sort of obtuse QUANGO.

 

Like British Waterways you mean?

Edited December 2, 2011 by Chris Pink

[Guest]

Like British Waterways you mean?

Precisely, same sh*t new name.

 

I live in hope that there will be improvements, but with the same old faces at the top....

Edited December 2, 2011 by Guest

[AlanH]

 

I would also add that I am not one of the many boaters you refer to in your letter.

Neither am I. What gives the OP the idea that he can speak for all boat owners?

 

He was just looking for something to bash BW/C&RT with and has been proved to be jumping the gun.

 

The sarcastic topic description of "BW are on the ball!" applies more to him in this case.

Edited December 2, 2011 by AlanH

[MartinClark]

 

My letter and the reply from Charity Commission Direct can be found here.

 

Sorry - can't read more than a few lines of white text on a black or dark grey background before my eyes go funny.

[carlt]

Neither am I. What gives the OP the idea that he can speak for all boat owners?

 

I agree.

 

When are the letter writers going to start airing their opinions as their own, rather than attributing them to boaters as a whole?

[Higgs]

From notes made trawling the net. And the Public Bodies Bill is expected to be complete by Christmas.

 

A 'Trust' is one of four legal structures for a Charity, England and Wales. A Trust is a relationship between 3 parties: 1. The Donor of the assets; 2. The Trustees who hold the assets; 3. The Beneficiaries.

 

Charitable Trust: The Governing document is The Trust Deed or, Declaration of Trust. This comes into operation when all the Trustees have signed. The Trustees are liable if the Charity is sued or, incurs liability.

 

All Charity organisations that have an income of more than £5,000 must register with the Charities Commission of England and Wales, in this case. Obviously, can't do this until the Quango's power is transfered to the Trust, following the Public Bodies Bill passing in Parliament.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

When are the letter writers going to start airing their opinions as their own, rather than attributing them to boaters as a whole?

 

I think, in the main, he did!

 

I have some serious reservations......

What I feel has become abundantly clear......

The new/old board is made up of individuals in which I have no trust.......

I believe that this would be a backward step......

I have a fundamental objection...........

I believe it will be misused as a method to intimidate.......

[carlt]

I think, in the main, he did!

 

But, no matter how many times you say "I", tacking on "Boat owners believe..." turns it into "I believe this....and boat owners agree with me".

Edited December 2, 2011 by carlt

[Steilsteven]

I think, in the main, he did!

 

I have some serious reservations......

What I feel has become abundantly clear......

The new/old board is made up of individuals in which I have no trust.......

I believe that this would be a backward step......

I have a fundamental objection...........

I believe it will be misused as a method to intimidate.......

 

Yes, in fact, he never says all boaters or boaters as a whole.

 

Another example of posters here slamming someone for taking the intitiative by throwing in red herrings.

If you don't agree with everything that someone says, fair enough but let's hear the reasons why. Putting words in people's mouths or in what they write doesn't help anyone.

 

Keith

[carlt]

Yes, in fact, he never says all boaters or boaters as a whole.

 

 

Boat owners feel that...

We also feel that...

Boaters without question...

 

This implies that the authors individual opinions are that of boaters as a whole.

Edited December 2, 2011 by carlt

[KenK]

Why not put the question the other way around.

 

Are there any boaters who post or belong to this forum who believe that the existing BW directors have done a good job?

 

If so please supply your reasons?

 

Are there any who believe that changing the name and becoming a trust will make any difference if the same people are running it?

 

If so why?

 

I answered no and no, to my own questions, over to you!

 

Ken

[jenlyn]

They do so love to manipulate and twist things in the girlie playground

[Steilsteven]

This implies that the authors individual opinions are that of boaters as a whole.

 

No it doesn't, it's what you've decided he's saying.

 

To me, it says that other boaters are in agreement with him, which can't be disputed because other boaters very well are.

 

Keith

[carlt]

Why not put the question the other way around.

 

Are there any boaters who post or belong to this forum who believe that the existing BW directors have done a good job?

 

If so please supply your reasons?

 

Are there any who believe that changing the name and becoming a trust will make any difference if the same people are running it?

 

If so why?

 

I answered no and no, to my own questions, over to you!

 

Ken

No and yes, hopefully.

 

The new Trust will be answerable to a body that has a totally different remit, than the one a government department answers to.

 

I hope that this change will be as monumental (no pun intended) as the National Heritage Act 1983, when English Heritage was formed.

 

Hopefully there will be a transition, at the top, from professional civil servants to professional conservators and civil engineers.

 

This won't happen overnight but I'm willing to wait and see.

 

 

To me, it says that other boaters are in agreement with him, which can't be disputed because other boaters very well are.

 

Ahh...so that is what you've decided he's saying.

 

What's the difference?

[Allan(nb Albert)]

But, no matter how many times you say "I", tacking on "Boat owners believe..." turns it into "I believe this....and boat owners agree with me".

 

The Charities Commission will read the letter as the personal views of an individual as Mike does not say he is representing any group. However, I understand they have received several communications from boaters expressing similar concerns. At the very least they will take it as "Some boat owners believe.....".

[carlt]

The Charities Commission will read the letter as the personal views of an individual as Mike does not say he is representing any group. However, I understand they have received several communications from boaters expressing similar concerns. At the very least they will take it as "Some boat owners believe.....".

Let's hope, at this stage, the naysayers don't get the whole thing kicked into touch, then.

 

The worst possible scenario is things carry on as they are, but with no government backing whatsoever.

[Steilsteven]

No and yes, hopefully.

 

The new Trust will be answerable to a body that has a totally different remit, than the one a government department answers to.

 

I hope that this change will be as monumental (no pun intended) as the National Heritage Act 1983, when English Heritage was formed.

 

Hopefully there will be a transition, at the top, from professional civil servants to professional conservators and civil engineers.

 

This won't happen overnight but I'm willing to wait and see.

 

 

Ahh...so that is what you've decided he's saying.

 

What's the difference?

 

The difference is that what you believed was the basis of your comment.

Surely, there's more value in discussing the content of Mick's letter rather than just who we think he's speaking for?

 

Keith