CaRT "Boater" Council Members

[alan_fincher]

OK, I think this has all got a bit confused, probably not at all helped by the fact actual information published so far on Waterscape is, in my view, so far very incomplete.

 

So I am starting a new thread to state where I believe we are, and to seek opinions on how we now move forward.

 

Lots of people have been suggested as nominees, but so far the only two to firmly say they would like to stand are myself and Dave Mayall, I believe. A further suggestion "Trackman", (sorry I don't know your real name, "Trackman"), has indicated here that he isn't currently doing so, although I think nobody should rule themselves out, particularly if up to four candidates known to CWDF members might prove to be a good thing. Also, I think some might wish to see people on a CWDF slate that have different views to both myself and Dave.

 

So, firstly, does anybody else who has been nominated wish to add their name to the list of "acceptances" ?

 

In theory more information, including nomination papers, gets published tomorrow (Monday 12th December).

 

I thought we had already established that anybody standing is expected to write a "manifesto" of up to 150 words, (see this post by Richard, RLWP). However looking through the link he has provided, and after searching elsewhere on Waterscape, I can't currently locate the reference to this 150 word manifesto, so am now unsure where that came from.

 

So, secondly, can anybody provide a direct link that refers to the manifesto, and/or the 150 words, please ?

 

As there is also nothing I can find that details exactly what is expected of a "boater" council member, I am also unsure what anybody might expect to see in such a manifesto. Obviously I can produce a CV of my canal and boating experience, or indeed what skills I think I might bring to such a role. But is that really what people want to see - I'm not sure ? Probably it is better to concentrate on "what I would seek to do, if elected", but I don't think that is made any easier by no formal statement I have yet found of the "job requirement".

 

So, thirdly, what do people wish to see in such a "manifesto" if I, Dave, or anybody else who may come forward, is to gain their support, please ?

 

Finally, if anybody has further questions or thoughts not raised in what I have said above, please feel free to add them to this thread, although I would like if possible to try and keep it as much on target as I can with "how do we move forward from here".

 

Many thanks,

 

Alan

[Guest]

The reference to the manifesto is in the papers we all got the other day.

 

First page of the 'Would you like to get involved with C&RT' document.

 

Half way down....

[cotswoldsman]

I was down the local pub here in Rufford last Friday and they were all talking about the election saying they want to nominate someone from there Marina.

[system 4-50]

So, thirdly, what do people wish to see in such a "manifesto" if I, Dave, or anybody else who may come forward, is to gain their support, please ?

 

Alan

An undertaking to elicit the views of boaters and to listen to those views.

To exercise the powers that you gain as a result of being elected in the best interests of all boaters (including future ones) which may or may not be in direct accord with what those views indicate. You are to be a representative not a delegate (I think that is the right way round).

To report back at intervals (but not minute by minute).

To maximise the use of the internet in this process where possible.

[deletedaccount]

When I asked BW about the role and duties, they replied with this:

 

BWcomms British Waterways

@

@userdeleted There's more in Defra's consultation http://bit.ly/mTuh9V (on page 8 and section 3.5.0)

[Midnight Rider]

May I suggest that those who are going to throw their hat in the ring say so on this thread, together with their manifesto & an indication as to whether they need CWF members to sponsor them.

[Rebotco]

 

 

So, thirdly, what do people wish to see in such a "manifesto" if I, Dave, or anybody else who may come forward, is to gain their support, please ?

 

Finally, if anybody has further questions or thoughts not raised in what I have said above, please feel free to add them to this thread, although I would like if possible to try and keep it as much on target as I can with "how do we move forward from here".

 

Many thanks,

 

Alan

 

 

Bearing in mind the fact that the Council is purely advisory and will have NO POWERS (except to appoint/dismiss Trustees), the info I would most need to know is

 

How would you seek to effectively influence the Trustees, who will be the ones making all decisions?

 

Secondly, an undertaking that you will ONLY promote the interests of BOATERS of all types.

Other canal groups will already have their interests supported by one or more of the other 28 Council members who are appointed, rather than elected.

 

By boaters' "interests" I mean the major policies/decisions on Navigation, Maintenance and Costs.

I do not mean boaters' "views" within these subjects, as there are as many views as there are boaters!

It is the attitude to these two overriding principles that will decide who I vote for, as that will determine the detail of day-to-day matters.

 

Brian

[Capt Ahab]

OK guys, I had better declare my intention to stand for council election. My reasons for standing can be found on my blog:

http://captainahabswaterytales.blogspot.com/2011/12/canal-river-trust-council-election.html

 

I would really like to thank the people who have agreed to nominate me and offered me your words of encouragement and support.

 

I can see that this process is going to draw out some really great candidates and if any of the names being bandied around the Forum are ultimately elected I am confident that the boaters interests will be well served.

 

Andy

[alan_fincher]

Thanks to all for some good input already.

 

The reference to the manifesto is in the papers we all got the other day.

 

First page of the 'Would you like to get involved with C&RT' document.

 

Half way down....

Yes, so it is. I wonder why they could not manage to say as much in the information they have put on-line on Waterscape. I think it unreasonable to assume that all licence holders have sufficient access to "snail mail" to necessarily see this kind of thing in a timely manner. I wonder if all continuous cruisers will actually have got their hands on a paper letter ? Probably not, I'd say.

 

I was down the local pub here in Rufford last Friday and they were all talking about the election saying they want to nominate someone from there Marina.

And I suspect it is being talked about at most marinas, boat clubs, and within many of the inland waterways related boating organisations, like IWA, RBOA, NABO, AWCC, HNBOC, as well as groups such as on the K&A and Lee & Stort. I personally would be surprised if the final list of people with 10 signatures on a piece of paper doesn't end up as fairly massive, as if the only limit on standing is finding 10 licence holders to nominate you, a lot of people may achieve that if they choose to.

 

Secondly, an undertaking that you will ONLY promote the interests of BOATERS of all types.

Other canal groups will already have their interests supported by one or more of the other 28 Council members who are appointed, rather than elected.

Yes, that is probably true, but can you actually find any information that says who many of these non-elected members are likely to be, other than as numbers within a broad category heading?

 

For example the proposed council make up says there will be 13 members who are from "Waterway Partnerships Chairs, Chair All Wales Partnership, Chair Museums Partnership".

 

I would be the first to agree that that sounds an awful lot compared to just four elected members to represent boaters generally.

 

But we can't conclude from that, or other parts of the proposed counil make up, which "other canal groups" will have their membership represented, and which will not, can we ?

 

OK guys, I had better declare my intention to stand for council election. My reasons for standing can be found on my blog:

http://captainahabswaterytales.blogspot.com/2011/12/canal-river-trust-council-election.html

Thanks for declaring your hand, which I take to mean you are now already definitely committed to standing, and have your proposers, and will therefore be looking for support from forum members.

 

I'll equally clarify my position. I would certainly like to stand, and think I have the skills time and energy to do what is required. However I personally am still working within a framework of using the forum as a primary place for deciding whether I will get the levels of support I feel will be needed in the real vote to actually get someone elected. If I became persuaded that there were other forum members who had a higher level of support than I felt I had, and I felt fully confident in them representing boaters generally, then I would probably withdraw my name, and throw my support behind the other candidates.

 

That, of course, may then lead some to renew the previous debate about the extent to which forum members can realistically make any attempt to come up with any kind of agreed "preferred candidate" list or not. This is where I still think the whole thing starts to get very tricky, but having declared my hand as wishing to stand, I think it is probably appropriate for any further views on that particular topic to come from other people, and not from me.

 

Alan.

[Capt Ahab]

Thanks to all for some good input already.

 

 

Yes, so it is. I wonder why they could not manage to say as much in the information they have put on-line on Waterscape. I think it unreasonable to assume that all licence holders have sufficient access to "snail mail" to necessarily see this kind of thing in a timely manner. I wonder if all continuous cruisers will actually have got their hands on a paper letter ? Probably not, I'd say.

 

 

And I suspect it is being talked about at most marinas, boat clubs, and within many of the inland waterways related boating organisations, like IWA, RBOA, NABO, AWCC, HNBOC, as well as groups such as on the K&A and Lee & Stort. I personally would be surprised if the final list of people with 10 signatures on a piece of paper doesn't end up as fairly massive, as if the only limit on standing is finding 10 licence holders to nominate you, a lot of people may achieve that if they choose to.

 

 

Yes, that is probably true, but can you actually find any information that says who many of these non-elected members are likely to be, other than as numbers within a broad category heading?

 

For example the proposed council make up says there will be 13 members who are from "Waterway Partnerships Chairs, Chair All Wales Partnership, Chair Museums Partnership".

 

I would be the first to agree that that sounds an awful lot compared to just four elected members to represent boaters generally.

 

But we can't conclude from that, or other parts of the proposed counil make up, which "other canal groups" will have their membership represented, and which will not, can we ?

 

 

Thanks for declaring your hand, which I take to mean you are now already definitely committed to standing, and have your proposers, and will therefore be looking for support from forum members.

 

I'll equally clarify my position. I would certainly like to stand, and think I have the skills time and energy to do what is required. However I personally am still working within a framework of using the forum as a primary place for deciding whether I will get the levels of support I feel will be needed in the real vote to actually get someone elected. If I became persuaded that there were other forum members who had a higher level of support than I felt I had, and I felt fully confident in them representing boaters generally, then I would probably withdraw my name, and throw my support behind the other candidates.

 

That, of course, may then lead some to renew the previous debate about the extent to which forum members can realistically make any attempt to come up with any kind of agreed "preferred candidate" list or not. This is where I still think the whole thing starts to get very tricky, but having declared my hand as wishing to stand, I think it is probably appropriate for any further views on that particular topic to come from other people, and not from me.

 

Alan.

Alan

Given the fact that the vast majority of boaters are dispersed and not affiliated to any particular body I suspect that much will rest on the content of the 150 word manifestos. Probably a more open field than we might think.

Andy

[alan_fincher]

Alan

Given the fact that the vast majority of boaters are dispersed and not affiliated to any particular body I suspect that much will rest on the content of the 150 word manifestos. Probably a more open field than we might think.

Andy

How many names are you expecting to be on the final ballot papers though ?

 

Unless I have missed something obvious, the only things you have to achieve to put yourself up are to get the 10 nominations. I don't think there is even anything that stops 11 licence holders all nominating each other, is there ? (OK, it's frivolous example, but it certainly gives the possibility of more than a few Monster Raving Loony party candidates, doesn't it ?)

 

I couldn't start to guess if the number of published candidates will end up being in the tens, or in the hundreds. If it proves to be in the hundreds, I can't see everybody who might vote reading each and every 150 word manifesto, and making an informed choice between all of them, frankly.

[Capt Ahab]

How many names are you expecting to be on the final ballot papers though ?

 

Unless I have missed something obvious, the only things you have to achieve to put yourself up are to get the 10 nominations. I don't think there is even anything that stops 11 licence holders all nominating each other, is there ? (OK, it's frivolous example, but it certainly gives the possibility of more than a few Monster Raving Loony party candidates, doesn't it ?)

 

I couldn't start to guess if the number of published candidates will end up being in the tens, or in the hundreds. If it proves to be in the hundreds, I can't see everybody who might vote reading each and every 150 word manifesto, and making an informed choice between all of them, frankly.

Alan

What you say is absolutely true. I have no idea of the number of people who might feel inclined to support me, nor even how many boaters will take the time to return the voting slips. Every journey starts with a first step and exercising the democratic process has merit in itself. Hey - we may both end up representing boaters - do you want a lift to Watford?

Edited December 11, 2011 by Capt Ahab

[ditchcrawler]

It will be interesting to see how they even organise the 10 seconders. If its all on a single nomination form anyone living where I do wont have a chance where as someone in the Midlands would have a much better chance of getting a form round 10 other boaters in the time allowed.

I would also imagine that if someone high in IWA puts their name forward they will canvas IWA members who will probably never heard of the others to vote for them.

[cotswoldsman]

 

 

If I became persuaded that there were other forum members who had a higher level of support than I felt I had, and I felt fully confident in them representing boaters generally, then I would probably withdraw my name, and throw my support behind the other candidates.

 

That, of course, may then lead some to renew the previous debate about the extent to which forum members can realistically make any attempt to come up with any kind of agreed "preferred candidate" list or not. This is where I still think the whole thing starts to get very tricky, but having declared my hand as wishing to stand, I think it is probably appropriate for any further views on that particular topic to come from other people, and not from me.

 

Alan.

 

Alan as you know I support your nomination for the council, but am rather concerned about this statement. It seems you are sitting on the fence.

 

 

 

And I suspect it is being talked about at most marinas, boat clubs, and within many of the inland waterways related boating organisations, like IWA, RBOA, NABO, AWCC, HNBOC, as well as groups such as on the K&A and Lee & Stort. I personally would be surprised if the final list of people with 10 signatures on a piece of paper doesn't end up as fairly massive, as if the only limit on standing is finding 10 licence holders to nominate you, a lot of people may achieve that if they choose to.

 

 

 

Alan.

 

I must say this has given me concern since the council thing was first announced as it does mean that organisations such as IWA, RBOA, NABO etc. could get more representatives via the back door. I do think candidates should have to declare if they are members of any of these organisation. Actually I think that if they are active members of any of these organisations they should not be allowed to stand in this part of the election.

[Tim Lewis]

Alan as you know I support your nomination for the council, but am rather concerned about this statement. It seems you are sitting on the fence.

 

 

 

I must say this has given me concern since the council thing was first announced as it does mean that organisations such as IWA, RBOA, NABO etc. could get more representatives via the back door. I do think candidates should have to declare if they are members of any of these organisation. Actually I think that if they are active members of any of these organisations they should not be allowed to stand in this part of the election.

 

Probably the most disturbing thing I have read in a while. Not that I intend to but do you seriously mean to state that many of the most committed boaters I know because, like myslf as an IWA branch chairman, who spend much time carrying out voluntary work for our waterways than i should be banned?, are WRG volunterers/boat owners also to br disbarred?

 

If anyone is going to be banned it should be boat owners who do not put something back into the waterways

 

Tim

[cotswoldsman]

Probably the most disturbing thing I have read in a while. Not that I intend to but do you seriously mean to state that many of the most committed boaters I know because, like myslf as an IWA branch chairman, who spend much time carrying out voluntary work for our waterways than i should be banned?, are WRG volunterers/boat owners also to br disbarred?

 

If anyone is going to be banned it should be boat owners who do not put something back into the waterways

 

Tim

 

Tim

I thought those organisations already had representatives on the council, it would appear I was wrong.

[carlt]

 

If anyone is going to be banned it should be boat owners who do not put something back into the waterways

 

Would sitting as a council member not be "putting something back"?

 

If the "representative" organisations already have allocated places then it would be a bit churlish to hijack the independent boaters' places too...not that such behaviour is surprising.

[cotswoldsman]

 

If the "representative" organisations already have allocated places then it would be a bit churlish to hijack the independent boaters' places too...not that such behaviour is surprising.

 

Do they? I thought they did when I put my other post but could not find it when I looked on Waterscape.

[alan_fincher]

Alan as you know I support your nomination for the council, but am rather concerned about this statement. It seems you are sitting on the fence.

John,

 

Previous discussion on the topic seemed to be heading in the direction that many forum members favoured some kind of process to choose which potential candidates they thought had the best chance of success, and I felt it fair to bear that in mind, even though I think such a process has the danger of producing conflict rather than unity.

 

Some even felt that our best chances were to throw our weight behind a single candidate, although I believe that was before it was suggested that voting will be on a single transferable vote basis, (still not something I have seen formally stated in CaRT materials themselves).

 

I'm not sure if anyone expected to be in the position by this stage of only two of us saying we would like to run, (or three, if you now count Captain Ahab, but who was possibly not one of the names being thrown into the frame by forum members themselves - I'm not sure on that point, without checking further).

 

So perhaps people who will be in a position to cast a final vote again need to express what they want to happen ? If the three of us are all on the candidate list, and each boater only gets a single transferable vote, it is obvious that to some extent we are all competing against each other, and lessening the chances over say just one name that had fallen out of the CWDF discussions.

 

I'm actually very keen to do it, but would be heavily dependent on forum members support, and there is clearly a call one has to make about your own support versus that that might be obtained by another good candidate.

 

If there is no great further debate on the point, and subject to obtaining my 10 sponsors, I will be standing, though.

 

I must say this has given me concern since the council thing was first announced as it does mean that organisations such as IWA, RBOA, NABO etc. could get more representatives via the back door. I do think candidates should have to declare if they are members of any of these organisation. Actually I think that if they are active members of any of these organisations they should not be allowed to stand in this part of the election.

 

Would sitting as a council member not be "putting something back"?

 

If the "representative" organisations already have allocated places then it would be a bit churlish to hijack the independent boaters' places too...not that such behaviour is surprising.

 

These elected "boater" positions, as has been said, represent a paltry 4 places in a council made up of 35 names. I think it is actually very hard to guess from the published make up here exactly who will fill a lot of the 28 non elected places.

 

So does anybody know ? To what extent do IWA, WRG, RBOA, NABOor any body else get representation at council without it being through one of the elected "boater" places ?

 

I personally think these elected places will be heavily contested, and inevitably names will come forward for people who do play key roles in some of the leading societies and organisations. I think one has to take that as a given.

[carlt]

Do they? I thought they did when I put my other post but could not find it when I looked on Waterscape.

I don't know...I took your word for it

 

Even if this is not the case, though, I would have thought they would be putting their own candidates forward, for the 4 available boaters' places.

 

Sliding another in, as a CWDF nominee would still be a bit naughty.

[cotswoldsman]

I don't know...I took your word for it

 

Even if this is not the case, though, I would have thought they would be putting their own candidates forward, for the 4 available boaters' places.

 

Sliding another in, as a CWDF nominee would still be a bit naughty.

 

Wow never known anyone to take my word for anything, except my children but they grew out of that when they were about 7!!!!

Having said that I am sure either on the trust or council places are reserved for those organisation, just can not find it at present.

As there are only 4 places for boaters on the council I think it is important that they represent boater and are not influenced by the lobbying of different boating organisations. The same reason as I was against the suggestion that at least 1 candidate should represent CCers.

 

John,

 

Previous discussion on the topic seemed to be heading in the direction that many forum members favoured some kind of process to choose which potential candidates they thought had the best chance of success, and I felt it fair to bear that in mind, even though I think such a process has the danger of producing conflict rather than unity.

 

Some even felt that our best chances were to throw our weight behind a single candidate, although I believe that was before it was suggested that voting will be on a single transferable vote basis, (still not something I have seen formally stated in CaRT materials themselves).

 

I'm not sure if anyone expected to be in the position by this stage of only two of us saying we would like to run, (or three, if you now count Captain Ahab, but who was possibly not one of the names being thrown into the frame by forum members themselves - I'm not sure on that point, without checking further).

 

So perhaps people who will be in a position to cast a final vote again need to express what they want to happen ? If the three of us are all on the candidate list, and each boater only gets a single transferable vote, it is obvious that to some extent we are all competing against each other, and lessening the chances over say just one name that had fallen out of the CWDF discussions.

 

I'm actually very keen to do it, but would be heavily dependent on forum members support, and there is clearly a call one has to make about your own support versus that that might be obtained by another good candidate.

 

If there is no great further debate on the point, and subject to obtaining my 10 sponsors, I will be standing, though.

 

 

 

 

 

These elected "boater" positions, as has been said, represent a paltry 4 places in a council made up of 35 names. I think it is actually very hard to guess from the published make up here exactly who will fill a lot of the 28 non elected places.

 

So does anybody know ? To what extent do IWA, WRG, RBOA, NABOor any body else get representation at council without it being through one of the elected "boater" places ?

 

I personally think these elected places will be heavily contested, and inevitably names will come forward for people who do play key roles in some of the leading societies and organisations. I think one has to take that as a given.

 

Alan as you know we will just go round and round so PM me and tell me where to send my sponsor form and lets get on with it.......

 

Edited to say: That will be 2 signatures Stan and myself and if you want can get a few more at least another 2 from a couple of locals where I am.

Edited December 12, 2011 by cotswoldsman

[alan_fincher]

I apologise profusely in advance for publishing a link to NarrowBoatWorld.

 

But as this one does claim to be penned directly by John Dodwell, and refers to what is being talked about above, I'll make an exception, as it says a bit more on the topic than I have so far been able to turn up anywhere else......

 

NBW Link - John Dodwell on CaRT Council Representation.

[Higgs]

I'm going to have to base my choice on how well I know the people standing; either personally or through their posts on this forum or elsewhere. I don't know how much weight can be given to any manifesto. " I want to make the World a better place ", easier said than done.

 

I should think the four boating council members will need to agree on their priorities as a group, keeping in touch with each other. No point in having too many differences on display at council meetings.

 

Hopefully, their strengths will compliment each other and each can speak on different points.

 

It's a new venture and will evolve.

[cotswoldsman]

I'm going to have to base my choice on how well I know the people standing; either personally or through their posts on this forum or elsewhere. I don't know how much weight can be given to any manifesto. " I want to make the World a better place ", easier said than done.

 

I should think the four boating council members will need to agree on their priorities as a group, keeping in touch with each other. No point in having too many differences on display at council meetings.

 

Hopefully, their strengths will compliment each other and each can speak on different points.

 

It's a new venture and will evolve.

 

I bet they will all say "I am passionate about boating"!!!

[Higgs]

I apologise profusely in advance for publishing a link to NarrowBoatWorld.

 

 

You have just linked to NBW, against your 'better' judgement. What are you going to do if you find yourself on the council with a member of NBW? Whatever your prejudice, you will have to address that. You are not all right, and they are not all wrong.