Elected boaters - If not the usual suspects then who...

[jam pudd]

My recent apology to the IWA leadership and suggestion that they shouldn’t represent us on the council because of divided loyalties has sparked the welcome degree of debate which I had hoped for. Now can we please have some debate about how we want to be represented on CaRT?

I’ll kick off by saying that I believe a group of “committee junkies” carrying BW baggage wont achieve the improvements we need on our waterways. Equally I’d be very concerned if we end up electing any of the “barrack room” zealots who have been looking for BW management blood this past year or more.

 

It’s my hope that we elect strong independently minded individuals who “currently” cruise the network. They should be boaters who are on the water for most of the year. They should be out there with us, continually experiencing first hand the result of appalling maintenance and witnessing the only too evident waste of financial and manpower resources. For my part our council representatives don’t need to have spent a life time in their boats but they must have travelled the network extensively AND have been on the water for most of the past two or three years. To my mind, knowing how things once were isn’t too important. What is vital, however, is that they share our passion for making the urgent and necessary improvements we need and expect in return for our spiralling licence fees. But to represent us effectively they’ll need to be experienced dealing with business affairs at a corporate level. AND know how to persuasively put across the strong arguments for change of management style and structure at the top of CaRT.

I’m sure that I’m not alone in looking forward to the days when grounding on bends or getting drenched from leaking lock gates isn’t common. Also perhaps we’ll be less inclined to “hope” that our next water point will be operational instead of expecting it not to be. Perhaps, along with the hike in pump-out fees, we’ll have more that can be relied on to work. AND much, much more.

So, come on candidates, sell your selves to us.

[alan_fincher]

They should be boaters who are on the water for most of the year.

It's a view, but how many boaters do you know who are actively boating large distances for "most of the year" ?

 

In my experience many live-aboards, and who certainly fully qualify as "continuous cruisers", do not necessarily move on that large a number of days, or huge distances.

 

What sort of number of days boated, (or miles covered, or locks worked - you choose the measure!) would qualify someone, in your view ?

 

I totally agree it needs to be committed boaters that actual do boat, (although others seem to think that the "living aboard" part is more important than the "miles covered" part, of course!).

 

For example I am standing, but am not a full time live-aboard boater.

 

I have boated on about 87 days this year, covered about 1,200 miles and over 900 locks.

 

Does that represent enough opportunity for me to experience the issues people face, maintenance or otherwise, in your view ?

 

What percentage of boaters do you consider to be "on the water" more than that, please ? (I'm taking "on the water" to mean you actually have to be travelling somewhere, to get this wider picture....)

 

A small practical problem for someone constantly on the move over large distances could be their ability to actually get to the meetings involved. I'm sure that isn't generally going to be a problem, but it needs to be borne in mind. Obviously they need to have means by which those they represent can easily contact them too - again not hard, but again a consideration.

[Guest]

It's a view, but how many boaters do you know who are actively boating large distances for "most of the year" ?

<SNIP>

 

Got to agree with that and you beat me to saying the same, only you did it more eloquently.....

[14skipper]

My recent apology to the IWA leadership and suggestion that they shouldn’t represent us on the council because of divided loyalties has sparked the welcome degree of debate which I had hoped for. Now can we please have some debate about how we want to be represented on CaRT?

I’ll kick off by saying that I believe a group of “committee junkies” carrying BW baggage wont achieve the improvements we need on our waterways. Equally I’d be very concerned if we end up electing any of the “barrack room” zealots who have been looking for BW management blood this past year or more.

 

It’s my hope that we elect strong independently minded individuals who “currently” cruise the network. They should be boaters who are on the water for most of the year. They should be out there with us, continually experiencing first hand the result of appalling maintenance and witnessing the only too evident waste of financial and manpower resources. For my part our council representatives don’t need to have spent a life time in their boats but they must have travelled the network extensively AND have been on the water for most of the past two or three years. To my mind, knowing how things once were isn’t too important. What is vital, however, is that they share our passion for making the urgent and necessary improvements we need and expect in return for our spiralling licence fees. But to represent us effectively they’ll need to be experienced dealing with business affairs at a corporate level. AND know how to persuasively put across the strong arguments for change of management style and structure at the top of CaRT.

I’m sure that I’m not alone in looking forward to the days when grounding on bends or getting drenched from leaking lock gates isn’t common. Also perhaps we’ll be less inclined to “hope” that our next water point will be operational instead of expecting it not to be. Perhaps, along with the hike in pump-out fees, we’ll have more that can be relied on to work. AND much, much more.

So, come on candidates, sell your selves to us.

 

Well it would seem from your comments you have no idea of what it must be like for BW to try and keep things working.I too would like to see no more leaking locks and all water points working etc etc etc.But l do my boating in the real world and understand the logistics of trying to keep the network moving you plainly by your comments do not.l think that under the circumstances BW do a good job on the whole and trying to keep up with the repairing the damage done by careless boaters / vandals is always going to be a thankless task.And with the economic out look for the future l don,t see things getting better any time soon.its always so easy to blame the management of BW and in some cases it maybe fair comment (wages etc )But the canal network of this country have a low priority to most people,except those who use them and other people really could not give a toss.Oh yes they like to walk round the marinas,have a drink at a canal side pub,watch boats go through locks,but if it was a case of spending the money on a new school/or health center etc or spend the money on a set of leaking lock gates you have got no chance.

We are the bottom of the food chain and no matter who we choose to be our voice,they will be fighting a up hill struggle and much as l would like to see it Don,t expect anything to change any time soon.

 

14skipper

[steelaway]

Alan

 

 

How do we get to vote. I'm beginning to become convinced by your views and statements that you could be a good representative

 

Alex

 

 

 

[CV32]

My personal view is we should have a representation of owners who are a mix of liveaboards on permanent moorings, CC'ers and weekenders - we all contribute to the coffers after all

[matty40s]

It's a view, but how many boaters do you know who are actively boating large distances for "most of the year" ?

 

In my experience many live-aboards, and who certainly fully qualify as "continuous cruisers", do not necessarily move on that large a number of days, or huge distances.

 

 

 

cough ,cough,nudge, excuse me.....

[alan_fincher]

Alan

 

 

How do we get to vote. I'm beginning to become convinced by your views and statements that you could be a good representative

 

Alex

Alex,

 

If they have fully spelt out the voting process, I have yet to see it.

 

I am assuming that as they contacted us all by snail mail in the first place, there will also be a mailed voting pack that goes out for the actual election. The assumption is that this will contain the (maximum of) 250 word statement by every candidate, so I'm thinking it could be a thick package!

 

I believe for this election you will either be able to vote by post or on the Internet. Obviously they will need controls that you only do one of those things, not both!

 

This is all "what I assume". If anybody can find a definitive statement of the process, it would be great if they can post a link to it.

 

Alan

 

cough ,cough,nudge, excuse me.....

So out of genuine interest, how do your figures for 2011 compare to those I have quoted for us ?

 

I would also point out people were suggesting you stood!

[pete.i]

My personal view is we should have a representation of owners who are a mix of liveaboards on permanent moorings, CC'ers and weekenders - we all contribute to the coffers after all

 

At last someone has said that. "we all contribute to the coffers after all"

[alan_fincher]

My personal view is we should have a representation of owners who are a mix of liveaboards on permanent moorings, CC'ers and weekenders - we all contribute to the coffers after all

 

At last someone has said that. "we all contribute to the coffers after all"

Well of course there are only 4 places in total, and I can think of far more ways you might choose to categorise boaters than that.

 

I agree a mix of boating backgrounds for the 4 elected council members would be desirable, but the complexities of the single transferable vote method of voting would I suggest mean it is highly unlikely you can predict what the final mix might be.

 

I actually think it is perfectly possible for a council member to represent a broad spread of interests. Just because you don't live-aboard doesn't stop you understanding the position of those who do, does it? (Or the other way around of course....).

 

I personally don't think that the future of boating on our canals and rivers is best served by promoting the interests of one type of boater over another. I think the migration from BW to a charitable trust represents a huge change, particularly for the boating population, and we are best served by trying to broker solutions acceptable to all, rather than by anyone with their own special interests trying to fight their corner to the detriment of other boating users.

[cotswoldsman]

A small practical problem for someone constantly on the move over large distances could be their ability to actually get to the meetings involved. I'm sure that isn't generally going to be a problem, but it needs to be borne in mind. Obviously they need to have means by which those they represent can easily contact them too - again not hard, but again a consideration.

 

Now alan I know you like historical boats etc. so maybe technology has passed you bye!!! Let me explain how easy it is for us people that move over large distance.

1. We have this thing called a computer (com-pu-ter) via this thing we connect to a thing called Internet (in-ter-net) this then allows us to send emails (E-mails) these are like electronic letters.

2. Mobile phone. This is a gadget that allows us to talk to other people without having a fixed land line. Now these things can be a bit confusing as some people think that they are a camera that you can use as a phone - this is incorrect.

3. Now comes the real modern invention that will help us get to 2 meetings a year. It is called a train, now these have been about for a few years and tend to be fairly close to canals. It can be a bit confusing because one of the main long distance train companies can be confused for a person that has never had sex.

 

Should you require any more information on modern ways to comunicate I am sure there people on here with far greater knowledge than me.

Edited December 29, 2011 by cotswoldsman

[Rod a mod from Tod]

Now alan I know you like historical boats etc. so maybe technology has passed you bye!!! Let me explain how easy it is for us people that move over large distance.

1. We have this thing called a computer (com-pu-ter) via this thing we connect to a thing called Internet (in-ter-net) this then allows us to send emails (E-mails) these are like electronic letters.

2. Mobile phone. This is a gadget that allows us to talk to other people without having a fixed land line. Now these things can be a bit confusing as some people think that they are a camera that you can use as a phone - this is incorrect.

3. Now comes the real modern invention that will help us get to 2 meetings a year. It is called a train, now these have been about for a few years and tend to be fairly close to canals. It can be a bit confusing because one of the main long distance train companies can be confused for a person that has never had sex.

Should you require any more information on modern ways to comunicate I am sure there people on here with far greater knowledge than me.

 

Never heard of it but is that the Cliff Richard Train Company?

[David Schweizer]

Now alan I know you like historical boats etc. so maybe technology has passed you bye!!! Let me explain how easy it is for us people that move over large distance.

1. We have this thing called a computer (com-pu-ter) via this thing we connect to a thing called Internet (in-ter-net) this then allows us to send emails (E-mails) these are like electronic letters.

2. Mobile phone. This is a gadget that allows us to talk to other people without having a fixed land line. Now these things can be a bit confusing as some people think that they are a camera that you can use as a phone - this is incorrect.

3. Now comes the real modern invention that will help us get to 2 meetings a year. It is called a train, now these have been about for a few years and tend to be fairly close to canals. It can be a bit confusing because one of the main long distance train companies can be confused for a person that has never had sex.

 

Should you require any more information on modern ways to comunicate I am sure there people on here with far greater knowledge than me.

Considering Alan's background in computing, I assume the above was intended to be ironic joke.

 

For what it worth, and given the messy way in which BW has conducted the voting process so far, it is reasonably to assume that they may not put the necessary safeguards into place, even if the means to do it is common knowledge.

Edited December 29, 2011 by David Schweizer

[cotswoldsman]

Considering Alan's background in computing, I assume the above was intended to be ironic joke.

 

 

 

Oh no.....david you found me out!!!

 

 

 

[jonathanA]

Alan

 

 

I'm beginning to become convinced by your views and statements that you could be a good representative

 

Alex

 

I concur - from what I've seen on this forum your posts are usually sensible and constructive unlike some other members who have put themselves forward.

 

I too think its important that we get a good cross section and also think thats its important that the council members reflect a reasonable geographic spread.

 

 

Whilst appreciating costwoldmans amusing reference to modern communications, I'd hope and expect that membership of the council would be a more serious undertaking than 2 meetings a year .... From my experience of a being a charity trustee - oh its just 4 meetings a year plus the AGM and of course we'd like you to chair this sub committee (another 4 times a year) and we need some one with your experience on this working group (1 meeting a month for 6 months) there should be a number of other meetings if its working properly and has any real purpose.

 

Jon

 

I

[alan_fincher]

Yes,

 

It is stated their could be work to do on other committees too......

 

I think it is naive to assume one's involvement would be limited to two meetings a year, and I would expect this to be something I would need to commit a fair bit of time too, (fortunately I took early retirement, so time I should have!).

 

Actually, whilst I'm sure John (Cotswoldman) made his comments at least partly in jest, I have tried using trains a fair bit when moving boats around, and whilst it has worked superbly sometimes, at others stations and canals simply are too far apart.

 

Whilst council members will be paid some expenses, there are references to hotel stays not being something automatically granted, so I still think that a boat dweller trying to get to a meeting and back in a day will sometimes face some challenges, unless they plan movements carefully to be somewhere they can access transport easily at the right time.

 

But I did say already all these things can be overcome - I certainly think at least one of the council members being full time live-aboard would be no bad thing.

 

Anyway, now about to set of for Loughborough banter!

 

Alan

[sueb]

It's a view, but how many boaters do you know who are actively boating large distances for "most of the year" ?

 

In my experience many live-aboards, and who certainly fully qualify as "continuous cruisers", do not necessarily move on that large a number of days, or huge distances.

 

What sort of number of days boated, (or miles covered, or locks worked - you choose the measure!) would qualify someone, in your view ?

 

I totally agree it needs to be committed boaters that actual do boat, (although others seem to think that the "living aboard" part is more important than the "miles covered" part, of course!).

 

For example I am standing, but am not a full time live-aboard boater.

 

I have boated on about 87 days this year, covered about 1,200 miles and over 900 locks.

 

Does that represent enough opportunity for me to experience the issues people face, maintenance or otherwise, in your view ?

 

What percentage of boaters do you consider to be "on the water" more than that, please ? (I'm taking "on the water" to mean you actually have to be travelling somewhere, to get this wider picture....)

 

A small practical problem for someone constantly on the move over large distances could be their ability to actually get to the meetings involved. I'm sure that isn't generally going to be a problem, but it needs to be borne in mind. Obviously they need to have means by which those they represent can easily contact them too - again not hard, but again a consideration.

Your last paragraph shows complete ignorance. Continuously cruising over large distances didn't stop me being Chairman of Nabo for three years and on Council for many more. This involved more than two meetings a year.

It isn't difficult. Sue

[Higgs]

Obviously they need to have means by which those they represent can easily contact them too - again not hard, but again a consideration.

 

A dedicated web site.

[David Schweizer]

Your last paragraph shows complete ignorance. Continuously cruising over large distances didn't stop me being Chairman of Nabo for three years and on Council for many more. This involved more than two meetings a year.

It isn't difficult. Sue

Alan's statement, far from demonstrating "complete ignorance" actually shows that he has considered how the issues of access to available public transport and communication would need to be arranged. It may not be difficult but it still needs to be planned.

Edited December 29, 2011 by David Schweizer

[MikeV]

But to represent us effectively they’ll need to be experienced dealing with business affairs at a corporate level. AND know how to persuasively put across the strong arguments for change of management style and structure at the top of CaRT.

This is the key element for any representative in my view. Going into a meeting and saying the locks leak and the canal at xxxxx needs dredging isn't make for any meaningful changes. It needs people that can think creatively and help the Trustees develop the organisation into new ways of working that get the required maintenance done more efficiently and effectively. Or, can see how volunteers, fundraising and other initiatives can bring more resources to bear on the problems faced by boaters.

 

I don't think the financial situation will improve for many years so getting more done with less will be the main imperative.

Edited December 29, 2011 by MikeV

[steelaway]

Yes,

 

It is stated their could be work to do on other committees too......

 

I think it is naive to assume one's involvement would be limited to two meetings a year, and I would expect this to be something I would need to commit a fair bit of time too, (fortunately I took early retirement, so time I should have!).

 

Actually, whilst I'm sure John (Cotswoldman) made his comments at least partly in jest, I have tried using trains a fair bit when moving boats around, and whilst it has worked superbly sometimes, at others stations and canals simply are too far apart.

 

Whilst council members will be paid some expenses, there are references to hotel stays not being something automatically granted, so I still think that a boat dweller trying to get to a meeting and back in a day will sometimes face some challenges, unless they plan movements carefully to be somewhere they can access transport easily at the right time.

 

But I did say already all these things can be overcome - I certainly think at least one of the council members being full time live-aboard would be no bad thing.

 

Anyway, now about to set of for Loughborough banter!

 

Alan

 

 

 

 

Before we can vote for anyone we really need more information on what is expected of our representatives

How much time would they be expected to commit to it.?

How expensive is it going to be, to be on the committee?

Much as it seems Alan is prepared to volunteer for this position, doe's he have the time or finances to commit to it ?------- but does any one ?

We need more information.

 

Alex

[cotswoldsman]

 

Actually, whilst I'm sure John (Cotswoldman) made his comments at least partly in jest, I have tried using trains a fair bit when moving boats around, and whilst it has worked superbly sometimes, at others stations and canals simply are too far apart.

 

 

 

Alan

 

alan I am sure you know that I think you would make a very good Council Member. Just now and again I do have to pick you up when I do not agree with what you say, and when you get elected (as I am sure you will) I will continue to point out when I think you are wrong, that does not mean you have to agree with me, as most people don't.

 

 

[jam pudd]

This is the key element for any representative in my view. Going into a meeting and saying the locks leak and the canal at xxxxx needs dredging isn't make for any meaningful changes. It needs people that can think creatively and help the Trustees develop the organisation into new ways of working that get the required maintenance done more efficiently and effectively. Or, can see how volunteers, fundraising and other initiatives can bring more resources to bear on the problems faced by boaters.

 

Hoorah!! At last, a very clear thinker.

It really should worry us if our “chosen ones” have little or no career experience resolving “corporate finance and service” problems. Surely this is what the old BW regime needs most help with? Our Council reps will serve alongside a wide group of minority interest group “partners”. If our aspirations for significant improvements are to be met then we must be careful who we elect. They must be capable of persuasively manipulating the council’s principle objectives to meet the boaters’ aspirations above these “partners”.

Rather cleverly, Defra, BW management and the Waterways Trust have put in place a band of Trustees who wont rock their boat (forgive the pun). Likewise the Council’s framework smacks of every effort being made by the above to keep the aggrieved boaters at bay. It is for this reason that we need a very smart capable group on the Council. Sadly thus far none of those showing their colours indicate they’re up to the job at hand.

That said, anyone prepared to put up for election deserves congratulating!

Bob Ellison

[Yorksboat]

Apologies for my impertinence but it seems Mr Ellison's comments indicate he has little or no experience of the psychology of how large groups work. I would also ask out of interest what Mr Fincher's experience of such groups is. 6 or 7 people representing boaters and the boating industry on Council do not a majority make; they will not be in a position to manipulate people or organisations and must not expect to put boaters' aspirations above anyone elses. What our elected members must do is seek to build partnerships with other Council members that will be beneficial to all. That is a two way process which requires listening, learning to understand and supporting the needs and aspirations of others. Partnerships of equals with respect for all, enabling all to achieve, resolving conflicts in a positive manner. I do however agree that we need smart, capable people who are up to the job. These qualities are more important than whether they are residential boaters, long distanec travellers or occasional cruisers. In what I have read of what he has written Mr Fincher suggests he has some of these abilities but my first vote will be for Ivor Caplan who I know will do a good job. Yes he is an IWA member but that is irrevelant as he is his own man and will work for the benefit of all boaters as he is already doing on the West Midlands Local Partnership.

[14skipper]

Can,nt help but notice how there seems to be several "new members" joining the forum,just to comment on this subject.Shades of political skulduggery in the crowds at election time

 

14skipper

Edited December 29, 2011 by 14skipper