C&RT Council

[jenlyn]

I have been following this debate with some interest, particularly as I have been involved in the role of democratic reperesentaion for a good part of my adult life, and have experienced both good and poor models of Committee management.

 

The election process being put forward by BW seems to be quite fair, as it is presented. However, unless it is detailed elsewhere, there appeaers to be one major impediment to people being willing to accept nomination. The information provided gives no indication of the committment expected by Council members, nor where the meetings will be held. It is my experience that otherwise excellent people can be reluctant to allow themselves to be nominated without a guideline on these factors.

 

I may have missed the information about frequency and venue of the proposed Council meetings, and if so I may not be the only one. If this infomation has been published, a link to it's wherabouts might be useful.

I am using iPhone at min (so can't search properly), not near pc, but I am sure I saw more details of info via narrowboatworld somewhere

[alan_fincher]

I have been to the waterscape link and it basically tells me nothing about the election process.

Which is the problem, I think......

 

For example (hypothetically of course!) I might throw my name into the frame if I thought I could end up being one of four CWDF "sponsored" nominees.

 

However, I might well not (hypothetically of course!) choose to do so if I was competing to be the only name on the card.

 

My reasons for that decision (hypothetically of course!) might not mean I didn't think I could do the job well if selected. It might just mean that I felt someone who has not been as forthright in their views on as many things as I have stood a better chance of success, if a single name had to appeal to all-comers.

 

As Sir Nibble says, if we get all competitive about it, it would not be hard to drag up past posts by any of the more forthright amongst us that could start to divide us all. On the other hand, although someone that most people might think is an "all round good person" might not carry that "baggage", in my view they could be less effective in the role they were standing for if they have not been demonstrated to be "forthright" at least occasionally.

 

EDIT:

 

I have just had an almost show-stopping thought....

 

If restricted to just one nominee, would they have to be "pro pump-out" or "pro bucket and chuck it".

 

There are some big issues to be resolved!

Edited December 6, 2011 by alan_fincher

[Sir Nibble]

I was thinking less of a campaign within our own hustings to select a candidate and more about the wider contest, anyone can come on here and cut and paste. The timescale is already tight and without proper information unmanageable. Who do we hassle to get this information? In a triumph of optimism over experience I presume this stuff has all been worked out before firing the starting gun? It does look like it's being made up on the hoof.

[RLWP]

I was thinking less of a campaign within our own hustings to select a candidate and more about the wider contest, anyone can come on here and cut and paste. The timescale is already tight and without proper information unmanageable. Who do we hassle to get this information? In a triumph of optimism over experience I presume this stuff has all been worked out before firing the starting gun? It does look like it's being made up on the hoof.

 

Well, from the letter, I guess it would be one of:

 

British Waterways

 

The Waterways Trust

 

Canal & River Trust

 

Electoral Reform Services

 

The letter does say (first page, The Role of Council, Para 1)

 

Council is the guardian of the long-term values and purposes of the trust. It will have the power to appoint or dismiss the Trustees. While Trustees are responsible for determining policy and strategy, Council will have an important role in helping to shape policy, raising and debating issues, providing guidance, perspective and a sounding board for Trustees. Council will meet two times a year

 

So, minimum seems to be two meetings a year, I can see it being more involved than that.

 

It is an important role

 

Richard

[Sir Nibble]

Indeed it is an important role but the current situation of "get nominated and you'll find out" gives the lie to that. I do hope this isn't a Mugabe job with only a favoured few enabled to compete.

[alan_fincher]

I think it would be naive to assume if we are thinking this way that any other "Waterways" based organisation wasn't doing the same.....

 

IWA

RBOA

NABO

HNBOC

K&A Boaters

L & S Boaters

Every cruising club of any size

The Association of (Inland?) Cruising Clubs

 

etc, etc, etc.....

 

Even the "National Bargee Travellers", or whatever they are called.......

 

I don't think CWDF can be taken as any guarantee of success, particularly as has been said, anybody can look in from outside and demonstrate us to be on occasions a very divided group of people.

 

Not a reason not to try, certainly, but not easy at all, I suspect.

[AlanH]

Five pages and not a suggestion about how to select a nominee(s). Can I suggest that a separate thread is started purely for those who wish to be considered. Then a poll selecting nominees.

Edited December 6, 2011 by AlanH

[Higgs]

Timetable suggestion:

 

6th - 9th Dec: Candidate list

 

10th - 12th Dec: Poll to select 4

 

13th - 15th Dec: candidates' manifesto offerings

 

16th - 19th Dec: Poll to select 1

[deletedaccount]

The two people I've nominated have already declared their non-standing. However I would gladly vote for several other posters on here so I'm waiting to see who (if anyone) steps forward.

[alan_fincher]

Five pages and not a suggestion about how to select a nominee(s). Can I suggest that a separate thread is started purely for those who wish to be considered. Then a poll selecting nominees.

Do you not coinsider it important whether we would be looking for one CWDF name, or four ?

 

I think it might make a lot of difference both to who wanted to put themselves forward, and what support they might get.

 

I can't see how anyone can commit to it with so many unanswered questions.

 

Can anyone answer any of the questions, yet ?

[RLWP]

Do you not coinsider it important whether we would be looking for one CWDF name, or four ?

 

I think it might make a lot of difference both to who wanted to put themselves forward, and what support they might get.

 

I can't see how anyone can commit to it with so many unanswered questions.

 

Can anyone answer any of the questions, yet ?

 

Just now, I don't know if we have ten, four, one or none. Can we find out who is willing to stand before deciding how to choose them?

 

Richard

[AlanH]

Do you not coinsider it important whether we would be looking for one CWDF name, or four ?

 

I think it might make a lot of difference both to who wanted to put themselves forward, and what support they might get.

 

I can't see how anyone can commit to it with so many unanswered questions.

 

Can anyone answer any of the questions, yet ?

OK Lets start with a poll on how many.

[alan_fincher]

Timetable suggestion:

 

6th - 9th Dec: Candidate list

 

10th - 12th Dec: Poll to select 4

 

13th - 15th Dec: candidates' manifesto offerings

 

16th - 19th Dec: Poll to select 1

What evidence do you have that selecting just one potential candidate is best way to proceed ?

 

What will detewrmine whether our candidate or candidates even makes it on to a ballot paper ? Do you know ?

 

Irrespective of whether any do/does or not, can you say how many people I as a licence holder will be allowed to vote for when the time comes ?

 

Doesn't the answer to all those questions have some bearing on how we might proceed ?

[RLWP]

OK Lets start with a poll on how many.

 

Let's not

 

I can't see that it matters. I don't think we are electing the one, true CWDF representative here. If twenty of us want to stand and can get the nominees, what's wrong with that? It is what's probably going to happen in the rest of the world outside the forum anyway

 

Richard

[alan_fincher]

Just now, I don't know if we have ten, four, one or none. Can we find out who is willing to stand before deciding how to choose them?

 

My guess, (it is no more) is that you will easily find 4 prepared to be considered ?

 

Do I know enough yet to say if I would consider being in the list ? - No, I don't really think so!

 

You would be good at it Richard, so are you putting your name forward, or not, (or would you actually like to know more about the "job" and the process ?).

[Sir Nibble]

Looks like CaRT will be starting out with a sizeable credibility gap.

[jenlyn]

John Dodwell has posted on NBW, if it's any help? He also answers emails and questions asked.

[Ray T]

Sorry, but after trawling through all 5 pages I am confused as to what is and isn't happening.

[RLWP]

Looks like CaRT will be starting out with a sizeable credibility gap.

 

Do you want to borrow my feeler gauges?

 

Richard

 

Sorry, but after trawling through all 5 pages I am confused as to what is and isn't happening.

 

The new Canal & River Trust is going to have a council to guide it. They have sent out a letter to (I guess) license holders to get nominees. They want four elected boaters for the council. Each person standing will need ten license holders to nominate them

 

We could put up some potential candidates

 

Who is interested in standing?

 

Richard

[Guest]

Sorry, but after trawling through all 5 pages I am confused as to what is and isn't happening.

 

that's because nowt is happening at the mo, other than trying to agree a process for how many and who should be nominated.....a process it seems that is more complicated than putting a man on the moon....

[Higgs]

My guess, (it is no more) is that you will easily find 4 prepared to be considered ?

 

Do I know enough yet to say if I would consider being in the list ? - No, I don't really think so!

 

You would be good at it Richard, so are you putting your name forward, or not, (or would you actually like to know more about the "job" and the process ?).

 

I don't think anyone can absolutely define the position of council member, at the moment. But, they will be able to influence the selection of trustees, in the future. It will be a challenge and should give the council member a chance to be part of steering and criticising. But, will not be able to make changes. It will be a forum for discussion and argument. A sounding board for proposed policy decisions.

[Guest]

I don't think anyone can absolutely define the position of council member, at the moment. But, they will be able to influence the selection of trustees, in the future. It will be a challenge and should give the council member a chance to be part of steering and criticising. But, will not be able to make changes. It will be a forum for discussion and argument. A sounding board for proposed policy decisions.

 

and their removal it seems...

[Mac of Cygnet]

 

What will detewrmine whether our candidate or candidates even makes it on to a ballot paper ? Do you know ?

 

 

Well as far as I can see from the letter (from the Electoral Reform Society, by the way), if you are nominated correctly, then you will be on the ballot paper - that's the procedure in every other election I've come across. There may be dozens of candidates, or only a few. So that's one of your questions answered.

 

TBH, I don't see why CWDF should consider itself a 'party' putting forward a candidate - a more disparate group of boaters could hardly be imagined. I will vote in this election 1. if I agree with their 'manifesto' 2. I know them enough to think they will be able enough to make an impact. Whether or not they inhabit these forums.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Mac of Cygnet

[Starcoaster]

I think it's as simple as that they get the an official nomination and support of the 12 (or was it 15?) required people.

[jenlyn]

I think it's as simple as that they get the an official nomination and support of the 12 (or was it 15?) required people.

10!!!!!! Lol