CaRT

[Proper Job]

So the polls are closed and the voting is over.

 

So how did you decide the order in which to place the candidates?

 

What was you chosen criteria?

[matty40s]

Knowledge of candidates, looking beyond their 150 word statement at any supporting evidence, ie blogs, memberships and activity in that organisation. Ability to move forward in a debate.

Visible evidence that waterways and the infrastructure as a continued navigation for boats in the future was the most important criteria.

 

 

edited to add, Boaters Manifesto lost my vote when they TOLD me what my manifesto was........

Edited March 9, 2012 by matty40s

[bottle]

I picked those that were not affiliated/members of anything boat related.

[Lady Muck]

Supportive of issues that I feel strongly about.

Not a one-trick pony (i.e supportive of more than one issue).

Ones who I feel can have valid, constructive dialogue in order to get their point accross (i.e rational, realistic and not a moaner or a ranter).

Although I didn't put a woman as my number one choice I felt that it was important to not have an all male council, so the women might have got bumped up a bit by me as a result.

I was really put off by some of the campaigning (boaters manifesto for instance), because I felt it wasn't constructive, just broken record/relentless complaining and some quite batsh*t crazy ideas. (My opinion BTW)

[magpie patrick]

Supportive of issues that I feel strongly about.

Not a one-trick pony (i.e supportive of more than one issue).

Ones who I feel can have valid, constructive dialogue in order to get their point accross (i.e rational, realistic and not a moaner or a ranter).

Although I didn't put a woman as my number one choice I felt that it was important to not have an all male council, so the women might have got bumped up a bit by me as a result.

I was really put off by some of the campaigning (boaters manifesto for instance), because I felt it wasn't constructive, just broken record/relentless complaining and some quite batsh*t crazy ideas. (My opinion BTW)

 

There were two women in my top seven on their own merits (it might have been top five, I'm a bit hazy about that) and three in my top ten

 

While affiliation can be problematic, I don't get what some people have been saying about not previously involved in any organisations or with BW. For example, in parliament, when one party dominates for three or four elections, when they finally lose the ministers from the other party (or parties in the current case) have no collective experience of government. I'd like a few of the council to have some experience of, well, councils...

[Springer Skipper]

I had all the 150 wordy stuff,read it to death,did all to 33,Alan for me was THE Number ONE!Lets keep fingers etc crossed!

[MtB]

I picked those that were not affiliated/members of anything boat related.

 

Me too, and that yielded a surprisingly short list of candidates, unless I got it wrong.

 

Then out of those, I ranked highest those whose views coincided most closely with mine and I had the clearest understanding of (mostly from their posts on here). Then the remainder I ranked according to their Candidate Statements. NOT a five minute job, reading all those...

 

Even so, I found the Candidate Statements pretty useless for getting under the skin of what peeps were about, and no-one canvassed or contacted me directly in any way. The candidates posting on here were the only ones I really felt I had any handle on.

 

I found the whole process highly unsatisfactory really!

[Lady Muck]

There were two women in my top seven on their own merits (it might have been top five, I'm a bit hazy about that) and three in my top ten

 

While affiliation can be problematic, I don't get what some people have been saying about not previously involved in any organisations or with BW.

 

Neither do I, I thought that was bonkers. I'm happy with a mix of noobs, IWA members and people who have previous experience of dealing with Bw, I think that's healthy.

[Leni]

I see the other five Waterways Partnership Chairs have been appointed https://www.watersca...hairs-appointed

 

Do we know anything about any of these people? What do folks here think about them?

Edited March 9, 2012 by Leni

[carlt]

 

While affiliation can be problematic, I don't get what some people have been saying about not previously involved in any organisations or with BW.

I have no problem with membership, affiliation or complete control of an organisation, indeed I have stated that Peter Scott would have been up there at the top of my list, .

 

The problem is that Peter, and others, were being sponsored and promoted by the organisations that they were involved with.

 

Had they stated their independent status, whilst detailing their experience within the organisation they they are a member of, then that experience would have been a plus, as far as I am concerned.

[MtB]

Neither do I, I thought that was bonkers. I'm happy with a mix of noobs, IWA members and people who have previous experience of dealing with Bw, I think that's healthy.

 

I was under the impression that this election was for independent candidates, and there were seats already reserved for boating organisation reps. Was I wrong about that then?

[Rebotco]

I voted for all those who clearly stated that navigation/maintenance was their first issue and then ranked them in order of enthusiasm to pursue that agenda. Alan came out top of my list for both those reasons.

I am not unduly bothered that some of my choices were members of other boating organisations. It seems to me that anyone with a long term passion for the canals is likely to have joined one or other, and that for me was a positive consideration of their commitment.

With all its faults and shortcomings, this is the first time that users of the canal have had any say in its governance, and I think that is a huge measure of progress. It is really up to us and our representatives now to make it work with more success than the previous regime. I am more hopeful for the future, than I was satisfied with the past.

[alan_fincher]

I see the other five Waterways Partnership Chairs have been appointed https://www.watersca...hairs-appointed

 

Do we know anything about any of these people? What do folks here think about them?

Possibly the most worrying thing there is the fact that BW, the magazines & the man himself all now seem to simply refer to Tony hales as "Chair of Canal & River Trust".

 

There seems to be a degree of confusion here, and the conclusion of a debate elsewhere seemed to be that he is the transitional chair of the CaRT Council.

 

Rightly or wrongly a lot of people are very concerned that someone they felt failed them in a BW role now seems to be proclaimed as "Chair of CaRT" going forward, with no concept of a transitional appointment, or subject to ratification.

[carlt]

I was under the impression that this election was for independent candidates, and there were seats already reserved for boating organisation reps. Was I wrong about that then?

 

I imagine many, if not most, of the candidates were members of boating organisations, which I have no problem wit (being a member of a couple myself).

 

It is those that have declared that they will be representing those organisations that I have a problem with.

[Naughty Cal]

We really struggled with our choice of candidate. We didnt feel that any of the candidates represented our particular section of inland boating and as such nearly threw our vote away. In the end we voted for the person who we could most easily contact, so Alan you got our number 1 vote

[alan_fincher]

I was under the impression that this election was for independent candidates, and there were seats already reserved for boating organisation reps. Was I wrong about that then?

Broadly "yes"!

 

The IWA, NABO, RBOA, HNB(O)C didn't automatically get given council places, unless you count a position given to WRG as an IWA place, (as WRG is a subgroup of the IWA).

 

This is presumably why they then needed to put in their heavyweights as "boater" candidates, (although why the IWA wanted 4 initially and 5 eventually seems a bit less obvious - to me, anyway!).

 

I feel passionately that a degree of independent representation , free of any agenda of any of the organisations, is required, and that with only 4 "boater" places, those representing need to be committed boaters, more importantly than senior officers or trustees of an organisation. That said the decision that none of these organisations got representation by another route does seem an odd one, so I'm not surprised by the actions of those fielding a single candidate.

 

My very strong suspicion is that because of the size of the memberships of some, and the ability of those organisations to tell their members who to vote for, is that the end result may well be for only candidates promoted by a "sponsor".

 

I suspect most, if not all, the independents will really have struggled to come close, and in many cases will poll a tiny fraction of the vote compared to the "association" candidates. I sincerely hope I am wrong, of course!

 

Mike the Boilerman says that nobody has canvassed him directly, but I ask if I were to have tried doing that for any significant percentage of the (perhaps) 30,000 electorate, how would I go about it ? There is no "register of electors", no list of email addresses, or anything like that I can tap into. If it had not been a completely dead part of the boating "season", (I hate that term!), I might have been out canvassing on the towpath, but to be honest, to touch even a fraction of all those eligible to vote is simply not possible.

 

I have felt uncomfortable with trying to rely on the Internet way beyond everything else, but, for the next time, perhaps someone can suggest what else an "independent" can do ? Most of the "independents" haven't even visibly done much of that though - I wonder what they have relied on, because a 150 word statement will not get you top placing from too many people who don't know who you are, I think.

[Leni]

There is no "register of electors", no list of email addresses, or anything like that I can tap into. If it had not been a completely dead part of the boating "season", (I hate that term!), I might have been out canvassing on the towpath, but to be honest, to touch even a fraction of all those eligible to vote is simply not possible.

 

I have felt uncomfortable with trying to rely on the Internet way beyond everything else, but, for the next time, perhaps someone can suggest what else an "independent" can do ? Most of the "independents" haven't even visibly done much of that though - I wonder what they have relied on, because a 150 word statement will not get you top placing from too many people who don't know who you are, I think.

 

IMHO the internet is the only way, short of driving (boating) around with placards and a megaphone, like politicians used to do in the 'good old days'.

 

All the 'research' I did, into those of the 33 candidates about whom it was possible to discover anything, was done on the internet! My son's friends, most of whom have no internet access, knew this, which is why they asked him to ask me what I had been able to discover at their meeting to discuss for whom they would be casting their votes.

 

The internet is the way of communication of the future, and I don't think you should feel in any way uncomfortable about using it as you have, Alan. I think those candidates who didn't make use of it have shown themselves to be lacking in forward thinking, (to put it as kindly as possible) - or maybe so arrogant as to think they didn't need to canvass for votes?

[jenlyn]

I think those candidates who didn't make use of it have shown themselves to be lacking in forward thinking, (to put it as kindly as possible) - or maybe so arrogant as to think they didn't need to canvass for votes?

very true, tho I cannot for the life of me imagine who you refer to. Fincher has done a lot of research and solid work to help people to vote, sadly the other rep on here seems to have done very little :0)

[Lady Muck]

Maybe the IWA peeps are expecting their own members to vote for them and don't feel that they have to campaign. I await the results with intrigue.

[matty40s]

very true, tho I cannot for the life of me imagine who you refer to. Fincher has done a lot of research and solid work to help people to vote, sadly the other rep on here seems to have done very little :0)

 

I don't know, he has kept some candidates Campaign threads going for weeks, helping them all stay in the limelight.

[Guest]

Well given the snide and petty reference above that is clearly targeted at Dave I am quite happy to declare that I both nominated and voted for Dave Mayall.

 

I also voted for only one other candidate that of course being being Alan.

 

The others I felt I knew very little about nor felt I knew any more about them after reading their manifestos.

 

 

 

phat fingers on a phone edit...

Edited March 9, 2012 by MJG

[alan_fincher]

Maybe the IWA peeps are expecting their own members to vote for them and don't feel that they have to campaign. I await the results with intrigue.

To be fair the NABO man has put quite a lot on the web, though much of it on NABO pages.

 

His initial stance was something like, (my paraphrase, not his exact words), "I don't do forums, discussion groups, social media, etc, that is not my style", but his supporters have been openly promoting him via Facebook and Twitter!

 

Surprisingly given his "London-centric", "Social housing", "Human rights" agenda, I think Frank Kelly/Anthony may do quite well. He was being actively supported on the K&A boaters site, (though I suspect he may not know a huge amount about the K&A!".

 

I was howevey very disappointewd when I discovered this piece of nonsense advice on the K&A site.....

 

Don’t vote for any candidates as 2nd, 3rd etc choices that you don’t fully support – if you do, candidates that you don’t like will get more votes.

 

This was then being toted elsewhere on the Internet as good advice, but following it just meant your vote was far more likely to be completely wasted, when it might have helped someone, who, although not your first choice, would be far more your preference than those who do get in, (and who might have been your last choice!) To be fair they did publish a comment by me challenging this poor advice, but by then lots of people who also didn't understand STV were repeating it

[jenlyn]

I don't know, he has kept some candidates Campaign threads going for weeks, helping them all stay in the limelight.

Certainly helped cosmic, whom I think stood his ground rather well and won a lot of the Debates.

[Proper Job]

..................

Surprisingly given his "London-centric", "Social housing", "Human rights" agenda, I think Frank Kelly/Anthony may do quite well. He was being actively supported on the K&A boaters site, (though I suspect he may not know a huge amount about the K&A!".

 

As soon as I read the social housing, human rights bit my red pen went through his statement

[magpie patrick]

As soon as I read the social housing, human rights bit my red pen went through his statement

 

He was the 33rd one, whom I left off my list altogether

 

I am a member of the IWA, but I judged their candidates on their merits, however as some of them are personal friends, I'm not going to say where they were on the list (because in one case it was a long way down)