C&RT Council

[Mick and Maggie]

I suggest that prospective candidates come forward right away so that we can have a hustings and start applying a little confidentiality.

 

Why do I start to ask myself CaRT want to be absolved from FoI, being secretive is a plus for a council member. Transparency at all times.

 

Let forum members in good standing for the election criteria put their names forward. The prospective candidate supply their aspirations in the form of a manifesto, however not limited to 150 words.

 

Depending on the election criteria - once we are clear on the number of votes that the electorate can cast - then decide in a poll who we would like to stand as our candidate(s).

 

1) How many realistic votes could anyone expect to get from the forum membership who fit the election criteria?

2) How many boats are currently licensed which will form the voter base?

3) Which party (NABO etc) do you expect the majority of other votes to be influenced by?

4) What level of voter apathy should we expect?

 

I think that there is a realistic possibility to get one or more forum members elected, but everyone will have to get on the hustings to secure a big enough vote by approaching boat owners that you know and suggesting our candidate(s)names.

 

Go for it...

 

Who wants my vote and why?

[fuzzyduck]

I was way ahead of you all

 

 

As DEFRA are considering boater elected Council members, I am throwing my tatty bowler hat into the ring. Vote for me.

 

I hereby introduce my manifesto. based on several years of reading this forum. I think there is something for everyone.

 

Anti Social behaviour.

1. Drinking and boating to be clamped down on, and hard. (unless of course, you and your partner / cat always have a bottle of gin at lunchtime.... purely to aid the digestion, we understand).

 

2. Real Ale to be made compulsory.

 

3. All bridge hoppers to punished harshly by flogging (Except where you've decided to live on a boat as a CCer, and need to commute to work, or send the kids to school, baby sit gran's dog etc)

 

4. Hirers who havn't got 500 hours or more formal training, to be made to hire that creepy bloke from the boat yard, as skipper for the week.

 

5. All boats to be fitted with an automatic way of turning down TVs and / or stereo equipment, to below that of the sensitivity level of human hearing. outside of the hours of 1 to 2pm on Febuary 29th.

 

6. Propex, or Eberspacher type blown air heating to be restricted to when the temperature drops to the point, where hell freezes over..

 

Enviromental.

1. The running of generators, and engines (for non propulsion reasons), to be restricted to between the hours of 11:00am and 11:05am on alternate Wednesdays. (Unless you really need to, to run your dishwasher)

 

2. Rosie and Jim dolls to be classified as toxic waste, and banned. Stiff new bylaws will ensure the owners are prosecuted. (Unless they wear period dress)

 

3. Renewed "Veg Pledge" to be combined with "Carbon Neutrality" policy. boaters will be encouraged to chop up, and use any dead tress that fall into the canal as firewood. We commit to allow them to grow, just for you

 

4. The encouragement of bio fuels to be adopted for propulsion. Swans, geese, cyclists, rude fishermen, ignorant boaters, canaltime hirers, people with hankies tied round their necks, that bloke who came up with the "considerate boater" scheme, Robin Evans, The Bankers, Tories, Liberals, The loony Left, people you just don't like, and Clive Henderson all to be reclassified as bio fuels

 

5. Boat safety scheme revised to include such items as; "quality of external paintwork", "lack of planters on roof", and "Does it have GuCCC painted on the sodding side?"

 

6. Snibble's Peachy Posterior, to be given the same premier status as the Anderton Lift, Foxton Locks or the Pontywhatsitsoddingcalled Aqueduct

 

Licencing.

1. 3 and 6 month licence cost to increase, to twice that of a 12 monthly licence. In addition, 1 day, 1 week, and 30 Day explorer licenses to be phased out. This will discourage anyone who calls em barges from floating on anything. They're obviously not worthy to kiss our period stylee boots.

 

2. 20% roses and castles discount, with an additional 10% discount avaliable for welded on washers.

 

3. 20% roses and castles supplement, with an additional 10% supplement for welded on washers

 

4. Fishing Rods to be classified as 70 Foot Widebeams for licensing purposes.

 

5. Bicycles to be classified as 70 Foot Widebeams for licensing purposes.

 

6. Dogs (not on leads) to be classified as 70 Foot Widebeams for licensing purposes.

 

7. Licenses for all boats but yours to double. (yours will halve)

 

8. 2000% additional revenue raised by introducing huge widebeam supplement, they take up more water, it's an outrage!!! Widebeam to be designated as; anything over 2'3" wide

 

9. The anti-social theiving scum, who evade licence costs, by having shorter boats, to be put to the sword.

 

10. The ignorant gits who own great big long boats, to be put to the sword.

 

Moorings

1. the mooring auctions to end, and to be replaced with early american style "mooring rushes", unless of course, you are very rich. In which case you will be able to buy hours head starts.

 

2. Overstayers on temporary moorings, to be charged their first born child, for overstaying the new 15 minute mooring limit. Obviously this doesn't include you, we know you needed to nip to Tescos 300 miles away.

 

Additional Revenue.

1. We will team up with Frank Abagnale to start a highly successful chain of canal side casinos.

 

2. We will team up with Robert Maxwell to start a highly successful chain of canal side Sushi Bars.

 

3. We will team up with Nick Leeson to start a highly successful chain of canal side online Poker Websites.

 

4. We will team up with Bernie Madoff to start a highly successful chain of canal side investment opportunities.

 

5. We will team up with Charles Ponzi to start a highly successful chain of canal side Virtual Pubs.

 

6. We will team up with Sir Robin Evans BSC, SSC, GSC to start a highly successful chain of .... Joking, we're not that stupid

 

Misc

1. Victor Swift to be made "Head of Tory Blue Sky Geriatric Rambling" with immediate effect.

 

2. Dave Mayall, and Chris Pink to be co-opted as joint heads of interpreting the rules.

 

3. Phylis to be made Head Of Responsible Boating.

 

4. Beards to be made mandatory for all. (Under various equal ops laws, this will include the women)

 

6. Council expenses arrangements changed, to allow such things as; moats, duck houses, blow and Hookers.

[AlanH]

Of course in order to stand the candidates will have to reveal their identity to the forums in order that they can be voted for.

[Starcoaster]

TOTALLY voting for FD.

[cotswoldsman]

Of course in order to stand the candidates will have to reveal their identity to the forums in order that they can be voted for.

 

Oh no you mean "come out of the closet"

[Mick and Maggie]

3. Phylis to be made Head Of Responsible Boating.

 

I was with you right up to this point, when I dithered a bit.

 

6. We will team up with Sir Robin Evans BSC, SSC, GSC to start a highly successful chain of ....

 

But anyone who bandies Lord Voldermorts name around has lost it for me!

[deletedaccount]

Does anyone have a link to the duties required of a council member? Have they even been published?

 

I'm not sure how someone can put themselves forward for an unknown commitment of time. Plus it's not paid, which means only certain type of person can even think about doing it. The rich and the retired mainly.

[cotswoldsman]

Does anyone have a link to the duties required of a council member? Have they even been published?

 

I'm not sure how someone can put themselves forward for an unknown commitment of time. Plus it's not paid, which means only certain type of person can even think about doing it. The rich and the retired mainly.

 

I guess where the meetings are held would be quite a big consideration. I imagine they will mainly be in The South!!!!!!

[David Schweizer]

May I put my two pennyworth into the one nominee/four nominee debate?

 

As I understand there are vacancies for four licence holding boaters, therefore, four (or more) people who are members of this forum can be nominated, and members can vote secretly for up to four of the published list of nominees if they wish, but they will not be Forum Nominees as seems to be being suggested, but nomination of the ten people who sign the nomination form

 

I do not see any basis for the assumption that limiting a forum based nomination to one person will enhance the prospects of that nominee being elected, if each licence holder can submit four votes there is a 400% better chance of one forum member being elected if there are four forum based nominees.

 

I agree that it could be worthwhile rallying members of the Forum to allow their names to be put forward, as we will probably have a better idea of how they think, than someone else who we have not even heard of.

 

At this stage I am not prepared to nominate anyone in public, and feel that it is for individuals to put their hat in the ring if they are interested. That interest could reasonably be stimulated by a PM to any member if ananother member feels it is approriate to furnish some encouragement, that member can then consider the option in privacy.

Edited December 6, 2011 by David Schweizer

[Mac of Cygnet]

Does anyone have a link to the duties required of a council member? Have they even been published?

 

I'm not sure how someone can put themselves forward for an unknown commitment of time. Plus it's not paid, which means only certain type of person can even think about doing it. The rich and the retired mainly.

 

Twice yearly meetings, so not unknown. Apparently expenses paid. So requirements are some time, ability, and enthusiasm.

 

Edited to say this info is from the letter received yesterday. I can't provide a link - perhaps it hasn't made it online.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Mac of Cygnet

[Sir Nibble]

May I put my two pennyworth into the one nominee/four nominee debate?

 

As I understand there are vacancies for four licence holding boaters, therefore, four (or more) people who are members of this forum can be nominated, and members can vote secretly for up to four of the published list of nominees if they wish, but they will not be Forum Nominees as seems to be being suggested, but nomination of the ten people who sign the nomination form

 

I do not see any basis for the assumption that limiting a forum based nomination to one person will enhance the prospects of that nominee being elected, if each licence holder can submit four votes there is a 400% better chance of one forum member being elected if there are four forum based nominees.

 

I agree that it could be worthwhile rallying members of the Forum to allow their names to be put forward, as we will probably have a better idea of how they think, than someone else who we have not even heard of.

 

At this stage I am not prepared to nominate anyone in public, and feel that it is for individuals to put their hat in the ring if they are interested. That interest could reasonably be stimulated by a PM to any member if ananother member feels it is approriate to furnish some encouragement, that member can then consider the option in privacy.

Unfortunately, the four votes for four posts is supposition. It seems ludicrously inept to me to call an election without complete clarity on such matters. Well, maybe it's not inept of course, it could be a means to limit participation. I'm less and less happy with this, by the time nominations are called for all of the electoral procedure and the precise nature of the post should be chrystal clear. As elections go this is so far, completely half arsed and I cannot believe a competant person would produce such a lash up if they are taking it in any way seriously.

[Mick and Maggie]

As elections go this is so far, completely half arsed and I cannot believe a competant person would produce such a lash up if they are taking it in any way seriously.

 

Organised by Robins Gang - £220,000 + £15,000 bonus. Value for money, to build and instill confidence for the future.

[RLWP]

<snip>

 

As elections go this is so far, completely half arsed and I cannot believe a competant person would produce such a lash up if they are taking it in any way seriously.

 

Perhaps the Electoral Reform people could answer that

 

alternatively, enquiries.hq@britishwaterways.co.uk

 

Richard

[David Schweizer]

Initially I said that I would prefer people who are interested in standing to throw their hat in the ring. However, as two more threads have been opened inviting propasals, I feel that there is a need to modify my earlier suggestion with a proposal that is broadly in line with normal democratic nomination procedure:-

 

People who wish to nominate others to have their name put forward can only do so after they have sought and received the agreement of the person who's name is being put forward.

[deletedaccount]

Info on council members, taken from the defra consultation:

 

 

3.5.0 The Council

 

3.5.1 The Council is guardian of the long term values (purposes) of the charity. It will exercise

its main power in appointing or dismissing the Trustees (dismissals would require a special

majority of 75%) and exercise other company law member powers such as appointing

external auditors and approving annual accounts. It will be responsible, through the

joint Appointments Committee, for the appointment or dismissal of the Chairs of Local

Partnerships.

 

3.5.2 The Council will not formally determine policy or strategy (that is the task of the Board of

Trustees), but will have an important role in helping to shape policy by:

• debating important points of strategy or principle to provide guidance and perspective to

the Board of Trustees;

• raising issues of concern for the Board of Trustees to pursue;

• being a reference point and sounding board to help the Board of Trustees to develop

proposals and policies;

• acting as the guardian of the long-term values of the charity.

 

3.5.3 The Council would be expected to meet approximately twice a year. The Council would

comprise around 35 to 50 individuals serving four-year renewable terms and chaired by the

Chairman of the Trustees. Rules about the Council’s quorum would need to be established as

part of the charity’s constitution.

 

 

3.5.4 A particular feature of NWC compared with many other charities is the very diverse nature of

the stakeholder interests in its activities. An important objective for the constitution of NWC

will be that the Council has appropriate representation from all those interest areas and that it

does not become dominated by just a few.

 

3.5.5 Therefore it is proposed that the constitution of the Council specifies various generic

stakeholder ‘constituencies’ from which the members would be drawn. It would be the task

of the Appointments Committee (described later) to identify from time to time appropriate

bodies within those specified constituencies to be invited to nominate persons as Council

members.

 

3.5.6 It is important that each Council member should engage effectively across their own

organisation, and act as a bridge between it and the charity. Once a stakeholder body or

group is invited to nominate a person as a council member it would be up to that body to

decide how to select the person – whether by election amongst its members, appointment by

its governing body or as an ex officio role of an existing officer (e.g. its Chairman).

 

3.5.7 Exceptions to the above would apply in some cases e.g. council members drawn from

employees of NWC would be expected to be elected from amongst the whole workforce.

The provision for co-option is to enable the Appointments Committee to select a small

minority of members of the Council to enable it to fill any perceived gaps in skill or

knowledge or to ensure an appropriate balance in terms of age, gender, race, etc.

 

3.5.8 In summary the proposed composition of the Council would be:

• 11 Local Partnership chairs as ex-officio members (i.e. as chair of a Local Partnership they

have the right to sit on the Council)

• 22 to 35 members nominated or elected by stakeholder bodies (boat owners, towpath

users, anglers, boating/tourism/leisure business, local government, employees, etc.)

• 3 to 5 co-opted members selected by the Appointments Committee to ensure appropriate

balance of skills, age, gender, race, etc.

 

3.5.9 Direct Elections to Council

 

3.5.10 Many charities have direct elections to their governance bodies from a subscribing

membership. As a brand new charity NWC does not have an established database of

individual users covering all its areas of activity from which such a subscribing membership

population could be built. As its fund-raising activities grow and develop it is likely that

appropriate databases will be built up which could, in time, be seen to be representative of a

broad range of its users. It is anticipated therefore that as NWC matures provision will have to

be made under the NWC constitution for a proportion of the Council to be directly elected,

and for that proportion to grow over time.

 

3.5.11 In one category of usage there is an existing user database, namely boat licence fee payers.

Notwithstanding the importance of retaining a structure for the Council that is representative

of all stakeholder users, the Government thinks there is a good argument for the provision of

some positions on the Council for members directly elected by all boat licence fee payers. The

number of such directly elected members could grow over time as other user databases are

developed – e.g. from databases of regular givers or other supporters such as volunteers, etc.

 

3.5.12 As an initial step, of the suggested maximum of 8 seats for private boaters, 4 could be filled

by nominations from boating organisations and 4 could be directly elected by licence feepayers. It must not be forgotten that in many cases members nominated by user bodies may

well have been elected by members of those bodies in the first place

 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/consult/files/A-New-Era-for-the-Waterways-FINAL.pdf

[alan_fincher]

I have tried asking these questions......

 

Will every person who provides a nomination with the required 10 supporters automatically make it on to the ballot "papers" for the election ?

 

If so, might this not present an extremely large number of candidates.

 

How many people will qualifying licence holders be able to vote for in the election ? As there are 4 "boater" positions, it would seem sensible that everybody voting can cast votes for up to these 4 people, so they can indicate their preference for each position.

 

However I have not so far seen the voting rules actually defined.

 

Here on the relevant Waterscape page.

 

Following comment from Sally Ash, also noted......

 

While more time would have been desirable, it was not feasible for this first set of elections. We do not intend to discourage anyone from putting themselves forward for election. However, in any election, it is people who are well networked who are likely to muster the largest number of votes.

[Josher]

All becoming clear now, just follow the sign ...

 

[Starcoaster]

Innit though. I was losing the will to live until FD posted.

Way to make life as complicated as possible.

'Baffle them with bull shit' seems to be the tactic being employed.

[Albion]

4. Beards to be made mandatory for all.

 

I was with you all the way and you would have got my vote until I came to this. I canardly support this item. I think it is riduckulous. I am amazed that you think it should be mandarinatory. If I wasn't so polite I'd tell you to duck off.

Roger

[Mick and Maggie]

I canardly support this item. I think it is riduckulous. I am amazed that you think it should be mandarinatory.

 

A well formed beard on a lady or gentleman forum member is a thing of beauty and to be encouraged. Its the same with facial adornments as well.