Credit Due - Well Done That Man.

[alan_fincher]

He's probably not going to thank me for it (!), but I would like to post a public word of acknowledgement to "Jenlyn" for having the drive to have booked a room at the Malt Shovel, Cowley Lock, last night, to debrief to boaters in the Uxbridge area about the recent meeting with CRT at Milton Keynes, as well as hosting a general discussion.

 

This was nearly overwhelmed by its own success, and although a large upstairs room was booked, they struggled to fit in the large number of local boaters who had turned up - possibly flying in the face of some on here who tell us most boaters are not really interested, and can't be bothered to turn out in force.

 

There were one or two quite "strong" characters present who seemed to want to try pushing their own fairly narrow agenda, but all credit to "Jenlyn" and other organisers, most of the time the meeting was held on track, with the vast majority speakers giving a lot of intelligent input to the discussions.

 

I certainly learnt a fair bit more about boaters in that area, what their concerns are, and things that they would like to see happen that could improve certain things on that "patch".

 

There seemed to be a strong commitment by the end to form a local group, and put forward a couple of names who could be involved in future meetings with CRT, possibly also with ties to London Boaters.

 

All very positive stuff, I felt, so well done that man, and the others involved.

 

(Oh, and where else down that close in to London would you expect a pint of Doombar to come in at under £3! - Another plus!).

[Tuscan]

Going to be an interesting challenge for CRT to recognise the various boaters groupings and the level of representation they have, is this the beginning of Cameron's big society ? It's a good exercise to see if our boaters representatives buy into this local democracy which they should providing the groups represent ALL boaters.

[BEngo]

Going to be an interesting challenge for CRT to recognise the various boaters groupings and the level of representation they have, is this the beginning of Cameron's big society ? It's a good exercise to see if our boaters representatives buy into this local democracy which they should providing the groups represent ALL boaters.

 

 

I'm sorry but I don't think lots of groups of boaters is a good thing except for purely local issues. We can see this already where local decisions have national implications which are not thought out. Lots of groups also means lots of differing points of view, and gives a few the opportunity to push narrow but noisy themes which would not be supported by many other boaters. CART can then say " We have no idea what boaters want, because we can't get a consistent answer, so this is what we are doing. The boaters Council members are OK with it. If you don't like it, tough."

 

Alternatively, the cynic would say that since BW's tactic was often to try to divide the boater groups it did talk to then use that as it's justification more groups just gives CART a bigger opportunity to adopt the same tactic.

 

I realise that any volunteer organisation will get the leaderhip that the level of involvement of its members merits. To me the challenge is for the existing organisations to get on the ground, harness the strength of feeling out there and present CART with solutions which the majority are content to support. At the moment they are clearly not succeeding. (And yes, I have been involved. I'm not now because I don't have the time to spare to be involved properly, but will try again when I do.)

 

N

[cotswoldsman]

 

 

I realise that any volunteer organisation will get the leaderhip that the level of involvement of its members merits. To me the challenge is for the existing organisations to get on the ground, harness the strength of feeling out there and present CART with solutions which the majority are content to support. At the moment they are clearly not succeeding. (And yes, I have been involved. I'm not now because I don't have the time to spare to be involved properly, but will try again when I do.)

 

N

 

I think the point is (and was shown by the meeting last night) that most boaters have no confidence in the various boaters organisations and feel that they can better represent themselves With modern technology it is now easier to get your voice heard. These meetings are about trying to present CaRT with workable solutions that they know will be supported. I am feeling very good about what is happening and I know how much hard work Jenlyn is putting into this. I think it has already been shown that a vast number of boaters do not feel they are represented on Council by the Boaters Representatives. Yes it might look like a number of separate groups but this will end up having meaningful dialog with CaRT based on the results of these meetings.

[alan_fincher]

To me the challenge is for the existing organisations to get on the ground, harness the strength of feeling out there and present CART with solutions which the majority are content to support.

I can't disagree.

 

To be fair, attempts have been made to engage both our CRT council members, and also the established associations, who from my perception have shown very little interest, (so far). I hesitate to use words like "complacency", but it really does feel that way.

 

I don't think those involved in starting independent dialogues with CRT outside of the existing organisations necessarily wanted to be going down that route in the first place, but hit a brick wall in trying to use existing channels, which, intuitively should be the way forward, but in reality doesn't seem to be working.

 

The suggestion, I would say, is not that we want loads of small groups each individually talking to CRT, but if those of us who do, can go along with a collection of people who have each established some legitimacy in speaking for a "local" population, and we can start to build consensus between such people, CRT I feel have little option but to take it seriously as a communication channel.

 

One thing at these meetings is that you get asked "and who do you represent?", so if we can actually collectively demonstrate that behind us there are significant, (even if independent groups), all buying in, then I think we achieve greater credibility both with the CRT trustees, and the CRT managers actually running things on a day to day basis.

 

Not that we are not already being taken seriously as individuals, but I think knowing that we are talking to a lot of people out there who can't all attend CRT meetings themselves does help further the cause.

 

As an aside...

 

I know that members of RBOA have joined this site, and have observed much of the discussion. I was also told one wanted to communicate with me, and as a result Dan automatically upgraded him to a full forum member, to give him full access to personal messaging. So far I have not been contacted, but I'm happy to have a discussion with them, if they think I'm being unfair in my comments to either the RBOA, the IWA, (or any other boating assosciation), or indeed about the "visibility" of the elected boater representatives on Council.

 

(Just thought - check my PM inbox isn't full!....)

[boathunter]

I would suggest that these meetings can do nothing but good. Boaters up and down the country surely have more in common with each other than differences. I'm getting a good vibe from what's going on. Jenlyn appears to be going out of his way to make things equitable and get everyones opinion and encourage all to join in. I for one am extremely grateful, I was starting to worry that moving onto a boat might be like moving into a war zone.

[Tuscan]

Dialog is always good, organisations or associations will always act slower than individuals like yourself who are acting on their own account albeit sharing their views and concerns on forums like this so to accuse them and CRT of complacency is perhaps a bit harsh. These are still early days of the new organisation and new committee processes. What I hope is good and positive in addition to increasing CRT awareness of boater concerns is that the established boating organisations will wake up to the fact that there are issues out there that need discussing and they will get more proactive and also address some of these issues.

[alan_fincher]

There is also it seems to me with this a danger of "damned if you do, but damned if you don't".

 

If a small(ish) group of boat owners manage to get a serious dialogue with CRT, at least some on here make comments like "it would be good to know who you are truly representing" or "I wonder how much your views are reflected in the wider boating community, or how you will feed back to them".

 

But if someone takes the initiative to rustle up a large number of boaters in a neighbourhood, to try and get them on board, and to make them think about setting up a structure where they can give input, then we run the danger of hearing "what we don't need is lots of local groups".

 

I'm not completely sure what the answer is, or where this will land, but I certainly still firmly support those who are clearly putting a lot of their own time and money into trying to do something, when I see a vacuum in the areas where things should be happening.

 

Trust me, getting involved at all takes a lot of time, and Jenlyn is not the only one doing so. I hear another forum member is spending a lot of time in dialogue with CRT trying to discuss issues that are not directly their own, but where they strongly feel things could be better handled.

 

Give these guys your support, people!

[CathyC]

There is also it seems to me with this a danger of "damned if you do, but damned if you don't".

 

If a small(ish) group of boat owners manage to get a serious dialogue with CRT, at least some on here make comments like "it would be good to know who you are truly representing" or "I wonder how much your views are reflected in the wider boating community, or how you will feed back to them".

 

But if someone takes the initiative to rustle up a large number of boaters in a neighbourhood, to try and get them on board, and to make them think about setting up a structure where they can give input, then we run the danger of hearing "what we don't need is lots of local groups".

 

I'm not completely sure what the answer is, or where this will land, but I certainly still firmly support those who are clearly putting a lot of their own time and money into trying to do something, when I see a vacuum in the areas where things should be happening.

 

Trust me, getting involved at all takes a lot of time, and Jenlyn is not the only one doing so. I hear another forum member is spending a lot of time in dialogue with CRT trying to discuss issues that are not directly their own, but where they strongly feel things could be better handled.

 

Give these guys your support, people!

It seems that what's needed is a continuous cruisers' association. We are a group that has been under attack by CaRT and others for some time. Non CCs would be free to join and it wouldn't have to be lead by a CC, but whoever was elected.

[mayalld]

It seems that what's needed is a continuous cruisers' association. We are a group that has been under attack by CaRT and others for some time.

 

CCers haven't been under attack at all.

 

People who pretend to be CCers, but who actually continuously remain within less than a days cruise of their starting point all year have been under attack.

[Mick_B]

There is nothing wrong with a lot of small groups representing their own "local" interests/problems. But these smaller groups would gain by being affiliated to one larger group. As in one member of each group being a representative at a committee level of the larger group which then, could have a high committee to meet directly with C&RT.

[jenlyn]

Firstly, thankyou very much for turning up last night Alan. It was very much appreciated.

My main point of the meeting was to encourage boaters to stick to the 14 day rule. Much to my utter shock, there was a small armada this morning heading north and south, result perhaps?

The boaters who attended have set up a group page this morning with 70 members so far. They have arranged another meeting for the 14th of January to elect two reps, one leisure boater and one ccer.

I hope that if enough boaters can form these area groups, their reps will then get together to form a sort of council, enabling better contact between boaters and CART.

Fingers crossed!

[matty40s]

It seems that what's needed is a continuous cruisers' association. We are a group that has been under attack by CaRT and others for some time. Non CCs would be free to join and it wouldn't have to be lead by a CC, but whoever was elected.

I disagree entirely, I CC as I like to feel free of ties.

I lent a hand to the LondonBoaters (which is a loose collective of people, not an organisation) whilst I was down there, doing some research et al. I was also one of the first to highlight the proposals which BW were attempting to sneak through without sufficient consultation.

I would do the same in any area I was in at the time.

 

All credit to Jenlyn, finally getting off his turbociderpowered inflatable and doing his bit with his(winter) local boaters.

CaRT needs local solutions to local problems alongside national policies. If local boaters can repair water points to a correct standard, then let them do it, if they can provide nappy bins(with correct waste disposal arranged) next to elsan points so the elsans do not go out of order, then let them.

This is NOT about CC, this is about our boating freedoms, enjoyment and maybe our involovement with a living breathing organism called CaRT.

[alan_fincher]

It seems that what's needed is a continuous cruisers' association. We are a group that has been under attack by CaRT and others for some time. Non CCs would be free to join and it wouldn't have to be lead by a CC, but whoever was elected.

I'm sorry, but I have seen no great evidence that CRT is actually on the attack for CC-ers, or at least not for those that make sensible attempts to both "navigate", and not overstay.

 

I personally don't think a CC-er specific associations would be helpful, particularly if you believe that some of those "attacking" CC-ers are actually other boat owners.

 

I fail to see how anything that further creates an "us" and "them" divide is going to be profitable - we need to be trying to build bridges, not barricades.

 

I will work actively with any group that is trying to negotiate outcomes that represent a sensible balance between he needs of all canal users. A lot of my cc-ing friends, I'm relieved to find, feel exactly the same, do not seem to feel discriminated against by CRT, and don't ask for any special treatment because of their choice of not having a home mooring.

[boathunter]

There is nothing wrong with a lot of small groups representing their own "local" interests/problems. But these smaller groups would gain by being affiliated to one larger group. As in one member of each group being a representative at a committee level of the larger group which then, could have a high committee to meet directly with C&RT.

Personally I think to this. This is exactly what takes 5 years to say I like green as opposed to red. Life is too fast for comitees nowadyas. People want things now. It takes a day to discuss this stuff on a forum (for instance), not years so why drag it out. Peoples views are what they are, there is no need to suffer for years while flippin comitee's mull it over then say what noboby thinks, then years more discussing why they didn't properly represent the people they're supposed to. Anything that speeds up the process of discussion gets my vote. Faster, pussycat, faster.

[jenlyn]

I disagree entirely, I CC as I like to feel free of ties.

I lent a hand to the LondonBoaters (which is a loose collective of people, not an organisation) whilst I was down there, doing some research et al. I was also one of the first to highlight the proposals which BW were attempting to sneak through without sufficient consultation.

I would do the same in any area I was in at the time.

 

All credit to Jenlyn, finally getting off his turbociderpowered inflatable and doing his bit with his(winter) local boaters.

CaRT needs local solutions to local problems alongside national policies. If local boaters can repair water points to a correct standard, then let them do it, if they can provide nappy bins(with correct waste disposal arranged) next to elsan points so the elsans do not go out of order, then let them.

This is NOT about CC, this is about our boating freedoms, enjoyment and maybe our involovement with a living breathing organism called CaRT.

aaaah, dingy is on oars at the mo, some aviation fuel I mixed with the petrol saw said dinghy get sporty for about ten mins, then lots of rattling, a crunch and engine was in bits! One wrecked Honda :-)

[churchward]

I think the point is (and was shown by the meeting last night) that most boaters have no confidence in the various boaters organisations and feel that they can better represent themselves With modern technology it is now easier to get your voice heard. These meetings are about trying to present CaRT with workable solutions that they know will be supported. I am feeling very good about what is happening and I know how much hard work Jenlyn is putting into this. I think it has already been shown that a vast number of boaters do not feel they are represented on Council by the Boaters Representatives. Yes it might look like a number of separate groups but this will end up having meaningful dialog with CaRT based on the results of these meetings.

It is good for people to find a voice they are comfortable with and power to those that are putting efforts in to make views heard.

 

However, it is best not to start with exaggerated or unsubstantiated claims. I know that if someone holds a strongly held view that it may seem no other sane person can disagree or see otherwise but it doesn't make it so particularly if they meet like minded folk. How do we know that "Most boaters" (which must mean at least more than half) think this way? or that "vast number of boaters" feel something.

 

I don't see it myself. I agree there is evidence of people who wish to see some things go in another direction but I don't really see the organisations that seem so unpopular on here in some kind of membership crisis.

 

There is a lot to be said for specific pressure groups getting an important point or minority community heard. There is also a place for larger collective organsiations who are able to bring weight behind certain issues and call on a larger membership to achieve a specific goal. I don't see one excluding the need for the other.

 

There are many things that the IWA nationally and locally via the branches do for instance that is of real benefit to the boater now and in the future. I didn't see folk refusing to write to their MEP for example when the IWA asked for it when boating licences and red diesel legislation was being discussed.

 

Personally I would like to see a group, organisation or process begin with extolling the virtues of what they want to positively achieve rather than trying to criticise everyone else at every turn.

Edited December 8, 2012 by churchward

[alan_fincher]

.................but I don't really see the organisations that seem so unpopular on here in some kind of membership crisis.

Leaving aside the IWA, (where the majority of its members are I believe not boat owners), how much do you actually know about the balance sheets of organisations that are specifically boater or boat owner related?

 

I can assure you, from first hand attendance of an AGM, that at least one is struggling to keep its membership numbers up, and currently has annual expenditure well beyond any income gained from members subscriptions.

 

I'm certainly not gloating about that - I actually think its a great shame - but they pulled no punches that if thy can not reverse the situation, they will not survive.

 

I can't speak for other organisations with relatively low membership, but I'd be fairly surprised if their situation was not similar.

 

If you are only charging £15 or £20 for a membership, but expecting to mail maybe half a dozen or so magazines out each year, it is not hard to see that a large part of any income is already spent before you actually spend money on campaigns, on stalls at boating events, or on venues to hold meetings.

 

I think if traditional associations are to survive, and thrive, they have to find ways of drawing in new (and maybe younger) members, rather than watching an existing membership slowly declining, some of it buy "natural wastage".

[jenlyn]

Going to be an interesting challenge for CRT to recognise the various boaters groupings and the level of representation they have, is this the beginning of Cameron's big society ? It's a good exercise to see if our boaters representatives buy into this local democracy which they should providing the groups represent ALL boaters.

Does that "ALL boaters" remark include widebeams? ;-)

[churchward]

Leaving aside the IWA, (where the majority of its members are I believe not boat owners), how much do you actually know about the balance sheets of organisations that are specifically boater or boat owner related?

 

I can assure you, from first hand attendance of an AGM, that at least one is struggling to keep its membership numbers up, and currently has annual expenditure well beyond any income gained from members subscriptions.

 

I'm certainly not gloating about that - I actually think its a great shame - but they pulled no punches that if thy can not reverse the situation, they will not survive.

 

I can't speak for other organisations with relatively low membership, but I'd be fairly surprised if their situation was not similar.

 

If you are only charging £15 or £20 for a membership, but expecting to mail maybe half a dozen or so magazines out each year, it is not hard to see that a large part of any income is already spent before you actually spend money on campaigns, on stalls at boating events, or on venues to hold meetings.

 

I think if traditional associations are to survive, and thrive, they have to find ways of drawing in new (and maybe younger) members, rather than watching an existing membership slowly declining, some of it buy "natural wastage".

Indeed memberships go up and down its true and some may be falling I agree. This can and be for a number of reasons.

 

I don't know the full profile of the IWA and it's type of membership. If what you say is correct it makes more of a mockery of the claim by some that the IWA over influenced the outcome of the council elections as non-boaters would not get to vote would they.

 

It is difficult to see how my views need proving to you when you can type "I believe" against your assertions. But it is indeed my point in the first place above in response to Cotswoldman that sweeping statements don't help.

 

I agree though that all organisations need to show their relevance to newcomers and attract as wide as possible an age group as they can. That will be no different in any new organisation that may be created.

 

I guess I am more than just a little tired of the negative statements about how badly everyone else is doing about this that and the other. Particularly the IWA (as it is the organisation I know most about) when it does a great deal nationally and locally. It is interesting to note the canal clearance events that have been held in the Milton Keynes area (two this year) and the Northampton branches "adoption" of the Northampton arm are just two examples.

 

I say again let's be more positive. Why not be bold about what can, needs to be done rather than continually debate and picking over what people don't like about what is being done. That is the kind of organsiation, club, virtual or conventional I would like to associate with.

[Tuscan]

At the moment this is a small number of enthusiasts raising awareness . For it to be anything else there will need to be some positive aims and objectives either as a specific CC focussed group or a wider more inclusive grouping. The latter will I suspect be harder to achieve. Good luck.

[alan_fincher]

I don't know the full profile of the IWA and it's type of membership. If what you say is correct it makes more of a mockery of the claim by some that the IWA over influenced the outcome of the council elections as non-boaters would not get to vote would they.

I don't seem to have made myself clear on that point.

 

The IWA has a much larger membership than any other organsisation. Massively so I think. I think we were told about 4,000 of its members were boat owners, but that is is still, I think, well less than half its membership. So it is both true that most of its members are not boat owners, but it is still equally true that those who are had the potential make a massive impact on the result of Council elections. I don't see that one fact contradicts the other.

 

The memberships of NABO and RBOA must be tiny by comparison, but these differ in that they are specifically "boat owner" organisations.

 

It is difficult to see how my views need proving to you when you can type "I believe" against your assertions.

 

That comment is a bit lost on me, I'm afraid, unless you were just referring to where I said "where the majority of its members are I believe not boat owners"?

 

If so, I used that phrasing, because it is what has previously been said, but as I haven't researched IWA membership numbers in intricate detail, it may not be right. If you do know the true numbers,(overall members, versus boat owners), more accurately, then please share, because I for one would be interested. (EDIT: Sorry - On re-reading your last post, I see you say you don't know - I initially missed that).

 

One thing to always be conscious of with any such numbers is that Mr & Mrs Smith may both be members of an organisation (i.e. two members), but only own one boat, (one licence, one Council vote).

 

In my case if I'm a member of an organisation on my own, the are only getting one membership from me, but I own two boats, (althouh BW only interpreted that as one Council vote, even though initial statements about coucil elections sad "one vote per licence").

 

I' not trying to prove anything here, other than it is all very well being given a number, but that doesn't necessarily tell you exactly what is being counted.

 

I repeat that RBOA requested from Dan, (and were given), a route by which they can message me directly. If they want to have a discussion about anything I have said, they are welcome to do so. So far I have not been contacted - so perhaps they changed their mind?

Edited December 8, 2012 by alan_fincher

[churchward]

I don't seem to have made myself clear on that point.

 

The IWA has a much larger membership than any other organsisation. Massively so I think. I think we were told about 4,000 of its members were boat owners, but that is is still, I think, well less than half its membership. So it is both true that most of its members are not boat owners, but it is still equally true that those who are had the potential make a massive impact on the result of Council elections. I don't see that one fact contradicts the other.

 

The memberships of NABO and RBOA must be tiny by comparison, but these differ in that they are specifically "boat owner" organisations.

 

 

 

That comment is a bit lost on me, I'm afraid, unless you were just referring to where I said "where the majority of its members are I believe not boat owners"?

 

If so, I used that phrasing, because it is what has previously been said, but as I haven't researched IWA membership numbers in intricate detail, it may not be right. If you do know the true numbers,(overall members, versus boat owners), more accurately, then please share, because I for one would be interested. (EDIT: Sorry - On re-reading your last post, I see you say you don't know - I initially missed that).

 

One thing to always be conscious of with any such numbers is that Mr & Mrs Smith may both be members of an organisation (i.e. two members), but only own one boat, (one licence, one Council vote).

 

In my case if I'm a member of an organisation on my own, the are only getting one membership from me, but I own two boats, (althouh BW only interpreted that as one Council vote, even though initial statements about coucil elections sad "one vote per licence").

 

I' not trying to prove anything here, other than it is all very well being given a number, but that doesn't necessarily tell you exactly what is being counted.

 

I repeat that RBOA requested from Dan, (and were given), a route by which they can message me directly. If they want to have a discussion about anything I have said, they are welcome to do so. So far I have not been contacted - so perhaps they changed their mind?

I have attempted to explain the IWA and council voting elsewhere on here so won't fully go into it again. However, Lets say the numbers are correct and 4000 IWA have boats and so that was the total of votes available to influence the outcome. There were over 25,000 eligible voters. Therefore the IWA votes in in a minority (even if they all voted which I doubt) and although if (and it's a big if) they all voted to a man (or women) the same way it could become a significant minority. It is foolish to think that the IWA could have enough power over its membership to be able to tell it how to vote. I know I did not vote for only IWA candidates in my selection. In fact one of them I did vote for in my top 4 was you! Personally I think the outcome had more to do with the apathy of the non-voter.

 

The other possibility with the RBOA is that they are ignoring you?

 

Since I don't seem to be able to get my views heard or appreciated perhaps I should form my own splinter group?

 

Look I have no wish to get in to a deep argument over this I mean what I say when I would like the conversation to be about positive statements rather than sweeping statements and negative half truths.

Edited December 8, 2012 by churchward

[cotswoldsman]

It is good for people to find a voice they are comfortable with and power to those that are putting efforts in to make views heard.

 

However, it is best not to start with exaggerated or unsubstantiated claims. I know that if someone holds a strongly held view that it may seem no other sane person can disagree or see otherwise but it doesn't make it so particularly if they meet like minded folk. How do we know that "Most boaters" (which must mean at least more than half) think this way? or that "vast number of boaters" feel something.

 

I don't see it myself. I agree there is evidence of people who wish to see some things go in another direction but I don't really see the organisations that seem so unpopular on here in some kind of membership crisis.

 

There is a lot to be said for specific pressure groups getting an important point or minority community heard. There is also a place for larger collective organsiations who are able to bring weight behind certain issues and call on a larger membership to achieve a specific goal. I don't see one excluding the need for the other.

 

There are many things that the IWA nationally and locally via the branches do for instance that is of real benefit to the boater now and in the future. I didn't see folk refusing to write to their MEP for example when the IWA asked for it when boating licences and red diesel legislation was being discussed.

 

Personally I would like to see a group, organisation or process begin with extolling the virtues of what they want to positively achieve rather than trying to criticise everyone else at every turn.

 

I don't think I said that one group excludes any other group, and if being a member of IWA or whatever suits you then that is fine. I do not see what we are doing as a pressure group or some sort of revolutionaries. What we are trying to do is fully understand CaRT's problems and then hopefully help them find a solution I can only speak for myself but in the last 10 days I have had one meeting with CaRT and since then had 2 lengthy telephone conversations with a senior member of CaRT. We have discussed a number of possible solutions and will soon have a working document that hopefully will help. In the mean time we are holding meetings that ALL boaters are invited to so that they can also feel part of the process and give further input. A large number of boaters for one reason or another do not join structured organisations.

 

 

 

 

[alan_fincher]

The other possibility with the RBOA is that they are ignoring you?

Undoubtedly they are, and which of course they can.

 

My point is no more that they contacted the forum owner, saying they wanted to establish contact with me, and Dan upgraded them to a full membership to allow this.

 

All I am saying is that the communication channel that they requested exists if they do decide they want to use it. That's all.