Boaters Representatives on CaRT Council

[cotswoldsman]

Soon be a year since the big revolution in boating....... Boaters were elected to look after our interests on the CaRT council. Have I missed anything what have they done for us? I know they endorsed the new mooring proposals that have since been seen to be very flawed and will effect all boaters.

I personally have no confidence in our Representative. Am I the only one?

I have heard of one boater that contacted a Council Member for advise and was advised by that member to join the Boaters Group that he also represented!!!!

[DaveC]

Soon be a year since the big revolution in boating....... Boaters were elected to look after our interests on the CaRT council. Have I missed anything what have they done for us? I know they endorsed the new mooring proposals that have since been seen to be very flawed and will effect all boaters.

I personally have no confidence in our Representative. Am I the only one?

I have heard of one boater that contacted a Council Member for advise and was advised by that member to join the Boaters Group that he also represented!!!!

 

 

John, I have never thought that our "reps" would have any clout with the new Trust - in fact at the time of the election I nominated Rosie and Jim to be our reps!

 

Dave

[cotswoldsman]

John, I have never thought that our "reps" would have any clout with the new Trust - in fact at the time of the election I nominated Rosie and Jim to be our reps!

 

Dave

 

Shame we never elected them!!!!

[alan_fincher]

John, I have never thought that our "reps" would have any clout with the new Trust - in fact at the time of the election I nominated Rosie and Jim to be our reps!

 

Dave

If everybody took a like attitude, that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, doesn't it, though?

 

Perhaps if we could have mobilised more that 26% of those eligible to vote to do so, and actually get them to think about the issues, and who best to represent them, we might have done slightly better.

 

Sadly we didn't, and if you just accept the inevitable, you reap what you sow.

 

I was prepared to hope that the four elected might do something for us, but have yet to see a jot of evidence that they are making any greater impact than if they were not there.

 

That doesn't, of course, mean they are not - but it certainly means they are not much use at engaging us, telling us what they are doing, or reporting any successes, (if they have had any, to date).

[cotswoldsman]

If everybody took a like attitude, that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, doesn't it, though?

 

Perhaps if we could have mobilised more that 26% of those eligible to vote to do so, and actually get them to think about the issues, and who best to represent them, we might have done slightly better.

 

Sadly we didn't, and if you just accept the inevitable, you reap what you sow.

 

I was prepared to hope that the four elected might do something for us, but have yet to see a jot of evidence that they are making any greater impact than if they were not there.

 

That doesn't, of course, mean they are not - but it certainly means they are not much use at engaging us, telling us what they are doing, or reporting any successes, (if they have had any, to date).

 

I agree with what you say Alan but then holding the election when it was difficult to engage with other boaters meant those belonging to a Boaters organisation had all the advantages. I would at least expect Council Members to engage with boaters be it via here, facebook or a Website yet I see nothing. I am sure they are keeping members of there Boaters Groups informed.

[alan_fincher]

I agree with what you say Alan but then holding the election when it was difficult to engage with other boaters meant those belonging to a Boaters organisation had all the advantages.

Other than by actually introducing rules that an organisation couldn't propose and directly promote and support candidates, I really don't see what could have been done to change that.

 

I don't think it would be practical to try and make such a rule. Would you then (say) ban an independent candidate campaigning on an Internet forum, because it offered an advantage over those who didn't exploit this route?

 

The only other possibility would have been the IWA exercising some self-restraint, and not proposing five of its senior officers for these four "boater" places - but then, given the result that have secured, what advantages would self-restraint have bought them. Not hard to see why they did what they did, (other than the 5 for only 4 places thing, which I'm not sure even they understood!....)

[jenlyn]

I am sure they are keeping members of there Boaters Groups informed.

 

Well don't be too sure. A recent IWA meeting in Uxbridge was devoid of information regarding the mooring proposals and none of the members knew anything about them.

[pete.i]

 

Perhaps if we could have mobilised more that 26% of those eligible to vote to do so, and actually get them to think about the issues, and who best to represent them, we might have done slightly better.

 

 

 

That doesn't, of course, mean they are not - but it certainly means they are not much use at engaging us, telling us what they are doing, or reporting any successes, (if they have had any, to date).

 

 

And that, as far as I am concerned, is the whole problem with our political system at present. No-one tells you anything (well no-one tells me anyway) about who they are, what they are going to do and when or why I should vote for them. It seems to me that candidates, whether they be for local government. national government or various bodies such as C.A.R.T. etc just expect voters to turn out. Sorry that just aint gonna happen without a hell of a lot of effort on the part of the candidates. Then, of course, we have the corruption and other stuff that has/is going on in government and that impacts on anything votey IMO. Yes I am aware that NOT voting does exactly what Alan has just said it will do but that, I'm afraid, is the nature of the beast. I have absolutely no idea how to change that apathy but change it must.

 

Pete

[DaveC]

My bit about Rosie and Jim was tongue in cheek for those that didn't realise it!

 

Alan, just for you - I did vote and no, none of the elected reps had my vote.

 

Although I voted I didn't think that the reps would have any clout and that is still my opinion.

 

Dave

[Wanted]

I haven't heard a squeak from our elected reps, but it would appear that Alan, Steve and John have all been involved and have fed back via this forum.

(there may have been others)

I wonder if more can be achieved from outside of the council or is it just that a flock of sheep are currently in place?

[cotswoldsman]

I guess I am just disappointed..........I had hoped that maybe boaters would have at last had a means of communicating with the powers that be at CaRT and that we as boaters would have been kept informed of what was happening within CaRT that might affect us be it good or bad. What we seem to have is a group of people that meet up and achieve nothing and I guess that is the reason why they do not see the need to communicate.

[Timleech]

I guess I am just disappointed..........I had hoped that maybe boaters would have at last had a means of communicating with the powers that be at CaRT and that we as boaters would have been kept informed of what was happening within CaRT that might affect us be it good or bad. What we seem to have is a group of people that meet up and achieve nothing and I guess that is the reason why they do not see the need to communicate.

 

It'll still be the same management making the decisions, I expect the council will only be peripheral most of the time.

 

Tim

[Tony Brooks]

And that, as far as I am concerned, is the whole problem with our political system at present. No-one tells you anything (well no-one tells me anyway) about who they are, what they are going to do and when or why I should vote for them. It seems to me that candidates, whether they be for local government. national government or various bodies such as C.A.R.T. etc just expect voters to turn out. Sorry that just aint gonna happen without a hell of a lot of effort on the part of the candidates. Then, of course, we have the corruption and other stuff that has/is going on in government and that impacts on anything votey IMO. Yes I am aware that NOT voting does exactly what Alan has just said it will do but that, I'm afraid, is the nature of the beast. I have absolutely no idea how to change that apathy but change it must.

 

Pete

 

 

Following the drift away from the original post.

 

Change will have to come from the top and I can not see that happening because it would wreck the "jobs for the boys" thing we have at present.

 

 

First we need to find a way of ensuring anyone entering an election actually has to work to get elected. This could start with PMs. I have said before that that constituency boundaries should be redrawn at each election so all constituencies become marginals. However that may well not be possible so as an alternative maybe the number of votes could be weighted in proportion to the last election's results so again the continuances would all be marginals. That on its own is not enough because we have to force the politicians to get out and face ordinary people so there also needs to be a ban on television and radio "political broadcasts" in the run up period plus a severe limit on the amount of money that can be spent on newspaper and poster advertising. I think the PM may not be so keen to protect his press buddies if he KNEW he had to face canvasing all the estates in his constituency at the next election.

 

Then we need a way of ensuring sensible "small party" and independent candidates are not priced out of standing. I think that would force governments to be much more citizen rather than big business focused.

 

 

The same would work at local council level as because independents would find it easier to get elected.

 

How one sorts out thing like the CART election is another matter BUT if BW had been far more open in its working and decisions maybe there would have not been the distrust and that in turn may have allowed a different organisational setup for CART. We would be hearing direct from the Board rather just hoping virtually powerless councillors pass such information as they can get back to us.

 

Quit how the present setup came to be viewed as acceptable by the government is beyond me other than they simply put their heads in the sand for years and ignored the more than adequate signs that the old BW Board Members (now running CART) had serious deficiencies. One can only again reluctantly conclude it is a case of "jobs for the boys".

 

I hope things change because if they do not I fear that last summer's riots are nothing to what we will have to face in the future - how many of us would actually welcome a European Spring with all that will entail for ordinary citizens?

 

OK of my soapbox and back to sensible technical things.

[sueb]

I thought our reps had achieved something. They agreed the mooring strategy . The IWA is happy with it. The boaters, if they can't be bothered to vote or join anything get what they deserve

[alan_fincher]

No-one tells you anything (well no-one tells me anyway) about who they are, what they are going to do and when or why I should vote for them. It seems to me that candidates, whether they be for local government. national government or various bodies such as C.A.R.T. etc just expect voters to turn out. Sorry that just aint gonna happen without a hell of a lot of effort on the part of the candidates.

Sounds like the considerable efforts I tried to go to to publicise that I was standing for a council place, and what I stood for, ether didn't reach you, or failed to move you then!

 

John has already stated some of the difficulties well,

 

There was an electorate of potentially around 29,000, but most of us did not have any mechanism at our disposal to reach the vast majority of it, to publicise our candidacy - well at least not beyond the just 150 words we were allowed as an election statement. It is very hard to make a case in just 150 words why people should vote you in in preference to any of the other 32 candidates.

 

As John said, it was held at a dead time of year, and most of those eligible to vote would have been nowhere near the canal or their boats at that time, making towpath campaigning a bit of a non-starter. The canal was actually closed where I live, due to the water problems at Marsworth reservoirs and Tring Summit.

 

So we were not able to do much beyond every trick we could pull on the Internet, to include exploiting social media and forums, but the reality is that perhaps 90% of those who might have voted for us either never, or seldom go near these things.

 

Not surprising then, I guess, that the IWA telling its boat owning membership that they should vote for those on their "slate" largely won the day.

 

If I'm honest, it was a major uphill struggle, and I'm quite pleased to have finished pretty near the top, given what I was competing against. But the true "independents" certainly had a fight on their hands - and I'm one who certainly tried fighting, and took nothing for granted.

 

I hope it has not killed people's hopes of Council to the point where the next elections are taken even less seriously.

[churchward]

OH dear what a bunch of victims and reactionaries we can be on here.

 

I know this will cut against the myths that can sometimes pass for truth on here but do we think the world was going to change just 6 months in from the start of CRT? Do we really think some magical other set of super heroes of representatives would have done?

 

Although I don't necessarily like the outcome of who got voted in despite being an IWA member it isn't some conspiracy of boaters organisations that did this. The voting population at large managed it.

 

A low turn out of just a little above a quarter of the possible votes is terrible and the apathy of the majority has had a big impact.

 

The assumption that it was the memberships of the IWA and other boating organisations that scuppered the vote by voting for their candidate is just wrong. The IWA has some 9000 members not all of which have a licensed boat on the CRT waters. So a subset of that 9000 would have been eligible to vote. Even of all of them voted in-line with what the conspiracy theory folk would have as the puppet masters (and they didn't) they could be out voted quite easily.

 

As far as my experience goes at no time was I asked, pressured or otherwise coerced to vote for a specific candidate. I didn't even get sent any details of the candidates by the IWA. I cast my vote by reading the 150 word statements and judging who rang true with my own sentiments and thoughts.

 

Personally I would like to have seen and see in the future a more varied representation and ideally with the key boating organisations having a separate set of seats on a council body. But that is going to take more than just my vote to achieve it.

 

So enough already, get over it and remember to vote next time.

[scrumpylurcher]

I cannot say I am impressed with the way that the IWA put up so many candidates and I have seen little since that tells me the boaters reps are actually doing anything or in fact feeding anything back to us boaters. However over the years I have had several cases of stalemate with BW that in the end were impossible to sort out. I had a similar problem this summer which I in the end referred to the trust through John Dodwell. Unlike previously this provided a speedy solution to the problem and I got a quick positive result.

I dont think we should have to refer to the Trust on everything but it was good to see someone prepared to get things sorted

[David Mack]

The only other possibility would have been the IWA exercising some self-restraint, and not proposing five of its senior officers for these four "boater" places - but then, given the result that have secured, what advantages would self-restraint have bought them. Not hard to see why they did what they did, (other than the 5 for only 4 places thing, which I'm not sure even they understood!....)

But did IWA actually propose 5 candidates? Or was it just that 5 individuals, active in IWA, put themselves forward and then asked the organisation to endorse them?

 

Not surprising then, I guess, that the IWA telling its boat owning membership that they should vote for those on their "slate" largely won the day.

 

I don't think it was IWA telling their members how to vote that made the difference. For the average boater faced with a list of candidates, none of whom (s)he knew personally and few if any of whom (s)he had ever heard of, the choice was either not to bother voting, or to vote for someone who had a recognisable affiliation. On that basis the independents and the representatives of small organisations didn't stand a chance.

[Tuscan]

OH dear what a bunch of victims and reactionaries we can be on here.

 

I know this will cut against the myths that can sometimes pass for truth on here but do we think the world was going to change just 6 months in from the start of CRT? Do we really think some magical other set of super heroes of representatives would have done?

 

Although I don't necessarily like the outcome of who got voted in despite being an IWA member it isn't some conspiracy of boaters organisations that did this. The voting population at large managed it.

 

A low turn out of just a little above a quarter of the possible votes is terrible and the apathy of the majority has had a big impact.

 

The assumption that it was the memberships of the IWA and other boating organisations that scuppered the vote by voting for their candidate is just wrong. The IWA has some 9000 members not all of which have a licensed boat on the CRT waters. So a subset of that 9000 would have been eligible to vote. Even of all of them voted in-line with what the conspiracy theory folk would have as the puppet masters (and they didn't) they could be out voted quite easily.

 

As far as my experience goes at no time was I asked, pressured or otherwise coerced to vote for a specific candidate. I didn't even get sent any details of the candidates by the IWA. I cast my vote by reading the 150 word statements and judging who rang true with my own sentiments and thoughts.

 

Personally I would like to have seen and see in the future a more varied representation and ideally with the key boating organisations having a separate set of seats on a council body. But that is going to take more than just my vote to achieve it.

 

So enough already, get over it and remember to vote next time.

 

 

 

Good post, we get what we vote for, but did we really think these reps would make much of a difference, I dont think any of the unsuccessful candidates would have been able to make much of an impact either. There will hopefully be more awareness and more opportunity next time round maybe those of a more political or activist bent should get attached and active within a boating organisation to secure a greater awareness??

[ditchcrawler]

I was speaking to one of the candidates that didn't get elected. That person is one of those chosen to be on one of the advisory councils (not sure if that is the correct title) Their feeling was that they could actually do more good there than they could have on the council.

[alan_fincher]

I was speaking to one of the candidates that didn't get elected. That person is one of those chosen to be on one of the advisory councils (not sure if that is the correct title) Their feeling was that they could actually do more good there than they could have on the council.

Yes, I think there is some mileage in that viewpoint.

 

I was approached about, and expressed interest in, being on the "Navigation" group, but sadly (for me!) was not amongst those chosen.

 

However, one of the other unsuccessful council candidates, Sue Cawson, was. I have no doubt that Sue will make a significant contribution to that role. (I'm less certain about some of the others chosen for that group, though....).

[sociable_hermit]

So we were not able to do much beyond every trick we could pull on the Internet, to include exploiting social media and forums, but the reality is that perhaps 90% of those who might have voted for us either never, or seldom go near these things.

Did you ask BW if you could buy a copy of their mailing list for licence renewals?

[Bimbly1]

Soon be a year since the big revolution in boating....... Boaters were elected to look after our interests on the CaRT council. Have I missed anything what have they done for us? I know they endorsed the new mooring proposals that have since been seen to be very flawed and will effect all boaters.

I personally have no confidence in our Representative. Am I the only one?

I have heard of one boater that contacted a Council Member for advise and was advised by that member to join the Boaters Group that he also represented!!!!

 

What specifically do you expect the CaRT council to have done for us in the short time since the organisation became a reality? What "quick fixes" are you looking for? And what, other than representing the interests of boaters in general, can we reasonably expect our elected representatives to do for an individual? Boater's organisations exist at least in part, to lobby authority, in this case CaRT, to deal with stated situations and are perhaps often better placed to represent the views of individuals that a direct approach to CaRT.

 

Organisational (and the associated cultural) change does not happen overnight. CaRT is only a few months old.

Some of the issues it is tackling are long overdue, e.g. overstaying on moorings in honey-spot areas but will not be dealt with quickly as it appears to be trying to do something BW would have avoided like the plague, by engaging with interested parties. So not a quick fix but signs of a willingness to make progress.

A positive response was had to suggestions for improvements to handrails on footbridges in the Staffs & Worcs canal and the manner in which BW initially acted without consultation resulting in the creation of a hazard to boaters.

The actions to repair breaches on the T&M were prompt and the initial results very positive. In fairness BW's response would probably have been as swift.

 

The concerns about some council members conflicts of interest with their boaters group activities have been much commented upon, generally adversely. I think that the jury is still out on that. Wether such activities are to the detriment of one or the other (or indeed both) organisations remains to be seen. Hopefully it will be to the benefit of all users of the waterways.

 

It will I suspect, be a year or three before we can reasonably see the benefits or otherwise of CaRT but in the meantime, we should be mindful that it is the people in CaRT who will by their actions or omissions, make or break it. My view is that we should support it with constructive criticism and see what results we get from that and not carp from the sidelines.

[Tuscan]

CRT is in its infancy even now it will still be carrying out plans and policies of BW these will take time to change. Things like the navigation committees are a great idea and moaning about the effectiveness or abilities of trust or committee members is a bit early and in some cases comes accross as sour grapes from some of those that didn't get elected whether intentional or not. Change is normally effected by constructive criticism and support and the recent meeting is evidence of this seeing as it was so well attended by CRT management and not hijacked as feared. Often you can be more outspoken from the sidelines which can also be no bad thing.

[alan_fincher]

Did you ask BW if you could buy a copy of their mailing list for licence renewals?

I feel sure, Data Protection act must apply here.

 

When you give CRT your mailing details for licensing purposes, I'm sure that does not permit them to release it to third parties for any other purpose.

 

Or if that is not the case, I'd be very disappointed.