IWA in the CART

[jenlyn]

That's a shame, because 1) they were democratically elected and 2) their statement seems reasonable to everyone else, except perhaps CMers.

1. Really.

2. I ain't a cm'er!

Try doing a little research, it's better than making educated guesses

[Paul C]

1. Really.

2. I ain't a cm'er!

Try doing a little research, it's better than making educated guesses

 

 

There's plenty of threads on this forum which explain the election process in minute detail (I believe it was run by the Electoral Reform Society); and Tiger 1057, Tuscan and rgreg said it was reasonable.

 

I didn't say you were a CMer - just make the implication that genuine CCers (ie those who abide by the rules) have nothing to worry about, since IWA clearly say they support them in their latest statement.

[jenlyn]

There's plenty of threads on this forum which explain the election process in minute detail (I believe it was run by the Electoral Reform Society); and Tiger 1057, Tuscan and rgreg said it was reasonable.

 

I didn't say you were a CMer - just make the implication that genuine CCers (ie those who abide by the rules) have nothing to worry about, since IWA clearly say they support them in their latest statement.

I bow to your optimism and look forward to the IWA saving the canals and erecting picnic spots on Their favourite bit of towpath for all their diminishing membership.

 

I will point this out to you, I am probably one of the next generation of canal users (being in my very early 50's), the IWA has to convince my age group to join them. Not much chance of that I'me afraid and now they have jumped into bed with CART as well, so much for our elected independent boat representatives eh?

Edited October 3, 2012 by jenlyn

[alan_fincher]

I read it as a 12 month period, march 11 to march 12

 

 

This is the IWA comment with reference to your link.

 

"IWA Calls For Action On 'Continuous Moorers'With the successful launch of Canal & River Trust, IWA has been reviewing its campaigning priorities. Whilst inclusion of the Environment Agency's navigations within CRT remains the top priority the issue of so called 'continuous moorers' is fast climbing IWA's priority action list.IWA is very supportive of those who wish to live aboard their boat, and indeed for those genuine continuous cruisers who travel the system in a progressive journey. However problems are caused when large numbers of live-aboard boaters without a home mooring wish, for whatever reason, to stay within a narrow geographic area. The problems had been exacerbated by years of enforcement neglect by British Waterways.A recent survey by BW indicated that over a six-month period around 1000 boats without a home mooring did not move more than 5km and a further 1000 boats not more than 10km.The situation in the London area and also at the west end of the Kennet & Avon canal is acute. IWA has now raised its concerns at the highest level within CRT. At a recent meeting with Sally Ash (CRT Head of Boating) these concerns were explored in detail together with her plans to tackle the situation. IWA is not alone in having concerns with other organisations, including the trade, demanding action" 

 

If I have missed it elsewhere in the thread, I apologise, but what was trhe time period then ?

 

Looks like 6 months, not 12 ??

 

From when until when, please ?

[Tiger 1057]

This is the IWA comment with reference to your link.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Tiger 1057

[jenlyn]

If I have missed it elsewhere in the thread, I apologise, but what was trhe time period then ?

 

Looks like 6 months, not 12 ??

 

From when until when, please ?

They stated originally march 11 to march 12, I will find it and post it. I've had another sent to me today from IWA, not read it yet, but it's huge. I will try to paragraph it and post so it's readable.

[alan_fincher]

That's a shame, because 1) they were democratically elected and 2) their statement seems reasonable to everyone else, except perhaps CMers.

It could be said though that 3 of the 4, (I see Ann Farrell as rather different, not being actively an IWA trustee or actively supported by them in the election) were only "democratically elected" in much the same way as unions (for example) use their might and block votes to push their supported person through. It may be easy to dismiss any dissent as just whinging, but it is not just losing candidates who feel stronglythe election was never a level playing field, I can assure you!

 

I personally always felt that it was nigh on impossible from the outset for Henderson, Caplan and Welch to fairly represent all boaters, (but as a losing independent candidate, I would say that wouldn't I!), but feel the latest cosying up between the IWA and CRT makes this still even less likely.

 

Even as a purely "leisure boater", I find the IWAs attitudes to residential boaters fairly unhelpful - their support seems to be largely limited to the large breed of retirees aboard their relatively posh "floating cottages", who (surprise surprise) are the just the "residential boaters" most likely to be IWA members!

 

I personally still feel the whole "live aboard" versus "non live-aboard" thing is detrimental to us all as boaters. We may often have different agendas and priorities, but frankly are all in danger of losing out to a system that seems to care less and less about the boats and boating. In my view the waterways have a better chance of a future, and things will be better for us as boaters, if we try and build bridges where we can, rather than visibly be seen to be attacking each other half the time, whilst major problems go unresolved.

 

(Here endeth the lesson!....)

[Paul C]

I will point this out to you, I am probably one of the next generation of canal users (being in my very early 50's), the IWA has to convince my age group to join them. Not much chance of that I'me afraid and now they have jumped into bed with CART as well, so much for our elected independent boat representatives eh?

 

I've not joined them either, I'm neutral on them. I know they've done good work in the past but with the change to charity status, the role of IWA is possibly diminished, since they overlap in their aims somewhat.

 

It could be said though that 3 of the 4, (I see Ann Farrell as rather different, not being actively an IWA trustee or actively supported by them in the election) were only "democratically elected" in much the same way as unions (for example) use their might and block votes to push their supported person through. It may be easy to dismiss any dissent as just whinging, but it is not just losing candidates who feel stronglythe election was never a level playing field, I can assure you!

 

I personally always felt that it was nigh on impossible from the outset for Henderson, Caplan and Welch to fairly represent all boaters, (but as a losing independent candidate, I would say that wouldn't I!), but feel the latest cosying up between the IWA and CRT makes this still even less likely.

 

......

 

(Here endeth the lesson!....)

 

Democracy is rubbish......until you consider the alternatives to it.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Paul C

[Starcoaster]

1) A second 'really' from me

2) I have a paid for mooring and intend to do so for some time- yet I find the IWA being in bed with CART while the four people supposedly representing boaters on the council were all IWA candidates alarming.

 

Fully agree with what Alan just said.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Starcoaster

[jenlyn]

Greenie for Alan too. (Put much more politely than I could)

[Tiger 1057]

This is the IWA comment with reference to your link.

 

A recent survey by BW indicated that over a six-month period around 1000 boats without a home mooring did not move more than 5km and a further 1000 boats not more than 10km.

You continuously denigrate the statements made by IWA with regard to the 'percentage' of cc'ers who are in fact cm'ers. Yet no where have I seen any figures provided by you to the contrary. Perhaps you could enlighten us at to the figures that you believe to be correct together with the facts on which you base your estimation. At least the IWA have done so. Whether the figures provided by the IWA are correct I have no idea but I would like to think that they have not just picked the figures out of the air.

 

I have previously stated that I believe in self regulation rather than regulation which is imposed by others. However I have generally found in life that it is those that shout the loudest who actually contribute the least (most definitely not aimed at Jenlyn) yet who demand the most. I believe that the greatest threat is the abuse of a few to the detriment of many. The remedy is easy but not one which many would find appealing!

[alan_fincher]

You continuously denigrate the statements made by IWA with regard to the 'percentage' of cc'ers who are in fact cm'ers. Yet no where have I seen any figures provided by you to the contrary. Perhaps you could enlighten us at to the figures that you believe to be correct together with the facts on which you base your estimation. At least the IWA have done so. Whether the figures provided by the IWA are correct I have no idea but I would like to think that they have not just picked the figures out of the air.

I don't understand your words.

 

How can the IWA have any idea of the numbers of boats that do or do not move significant distances, other than data they borrow from BW or CaRT ?

 

The IWA have not provided any of their own numbers, have they - they can't.

 

The best they can do is to say they agree (or don't agree) with BW/CaRT's estimate, but they have no mechanism of their own for actually validating it, do they ? - How could they ?

[Tuscan]

We are where we are votes were cast in accordance with the rules, I think it's a shame we don't have more independents, but I think this will change next time round. Regardless of the exact figures I think most agree that we have a problem that needs to be addressed. I am not and have never been a member of the IWA but I do appreciate the canal that I enjoy now owes a lot to them. Lets see what proposals are made then we can have an informed debate.

[Tiger 1057]

 

The IWA have not provided any of their own numbers, have they - they can't.

 

The best they can do is to say they agree (or don't agree) with BW/CaRT's estimate, but they have no mechanism of their own for actually validating it, do they ? - How could they ?

You are absolutely right and I stand corrected. My point was that if a person disagrees with the percentages/numbers quoted they should inform us as to what they believe to be correct and what basis they were making that assertion.

 

I would suggest that in this instance if the IWA are repeating statistics provided by BW?/CRT they must tend to agree with them. I have no idea how they validate them but I would suggest it is not just based on sticking a finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing! Again I could be completely wrong.

 

It just appears to me that negativity abounds without people providing alternatives to dealing with the issue.

Having made that statement I am sure to be pointed in the right direction and corrected again lol