Contacting Our CRT Council Boater Reps

[alan_fincher]

I have waited well in excess of two weeks to see if either Ann Farrell or Clive Henderson will reply to me on the email addresses that CRT have published for contact.

 

OK, I know it has been Christmas, but two weeks with not even an acknowledgement?

 

NOT impressed, I have tried again.

[Guest]

Just a thought -

 

have they been made aware of their CRT email addresses?

 

have they been shown how to log in and how to collect them?

 

To be frank corporate IT support in my many years of NHS experience is frankly rubbish. It requires multiple form filling just to get a log in ID, countersigned by some dweeb in a remote office a million miles away 'sorry we don't accept scanned/digital signatures'

 

It doesn't help but it may be down to CRT rather than the reps.

[jenlyn]

Just a thought -

 

have they been made aware of their CRT email addresses?

 

have they been shown how to log in and how to collect them?

.

 

Yes and yes.

[Guest]

Yes and yes.

 

If correct (no reason to doubt it) emails sent need to be sent with a delivery and read receipt request attached.

 

They can delete the latter before they come back but not the former.

 

If they receive but do no not at least reply with something then they are clearly not up to the job.

[Tuscan]

Alan, when standing as boaters rep , did C&RT send you anything regarding the role and responsibilities, would be good to publish it again to remind us what they should be doing.

[matty40s]

sorry for the apologists, but these people put themselves up for boaters representatives... and should have found out by now a year later how to make themselves contactable outside of the IWA network.

This whole episode should be put before the trustees (those people responsible for the future of OUR waterways) to show them how the "elected " persons are responding to concerns of boaters.

[MtB]

How about writing a proper letter, and sending it by recorded delivery asking formally how to contact them?

 

MtB

[BlueStringPudding]

sorry for the apologists, but these people put themselves up for boaters representatives... and should have found out by now a year later how to make themselves contactable outside of the IWA network.

This whole episode should be put before the trustees (those people responsible for the future of OUR waterways) to show them how the "elected " persons are responding to concerns of boaters.

 

Greenification for you, my friend.

[Ange]

I've said it before - it was just another plume in their cap of "oh look at me I care about the waterways". Lots of appointments in their diaries, why would they want to meet a bunch of boaters that aren't IWA members? Why can't they at lease be polite in their responses?

 

So far this bunch haven't impressed me at all. In fact I'm angry that some of them have, just because they've got the support of the IWA membership, stolen from us some incredibly passionate boaters that would have gone out of their way to do anything they could to make a positive difference.

 

We really need to mount a decent campaign to get boaters representatives who actually represent boaters next time. The seasonality last time didn't work - I'm hoping next time we can campaign during the cruising season with banners on boats, conversations at locks, etc. Rather than IWA scooping up their membership.

[PiRSqwared]

From the boater reps festive massage:

"From our perspective we can report that the issues that we have raised on behalf of boaters have been dealt with promptly and responsibly by managers within the Trust. We are often asked to ensure that boaters report problems they find while cruising to the local waterways manager. It really helps in resolving issues and developing future maintenance plans such as dredging. For our part, we are happy to be contacted on any general issues that you want us to take up with Trust management or the Council."

 

Underneath this example of creative writing are mailto links for each of the gang of four.

 

You'll find the whole message about half way down this:

 

My link

 

Whatever they are getting paid, it's too much.

Edited December 31, 2012 by PiRSqwared

[Higgs]

What exists is a corruption of anything I expected would be the purpose of a council group for boaters.

 

Ok, I've got a problem. I can't relate to them. They may condescend to speak boater, but they are most definitely in it for the leverage, on IWA agenda matters. Boaters (this one) waylaid.

 

They just come across as frauds. I'm sorry, but that's how stark it appears to me. I don't trust them.

[ChimneyChain]

I've owned and lived on now for over 15 years and ive never had the urged to ring anyone. Why do you need to talk to a representative anyway.

 

Darren

[Higgs]

I've owned and lived on now for over 15 years and ive never had the urged to ring anyone. Why do you need to talk to a representative anyway.

 

Darren

 

Part of the reason for the reps is to be informed and for their constituency to receive that information and for CRT to receive help, from the group, on behalf of their contituency, to inform CRT.

 

It would seem fairly logical to expect a reasonable amount of contactability with the reps and that their ruminations have a place for display so the constituents can be informed. Then obviously, the reps get feedback - and so it goes.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Higgs

[jenlyn]

I've owned and lived on now for over 15 years and ive never had the urged to ring anyone. Why do you need to talk to a representative anyway.

 

Darren

CRT are looking to make fundamental changes that could be bad for all the boating community. Because the reps are not putting out any information releases, most people are oblivious to these changes. Just as an instance, the 24hr mooring that you and I use sometimes, would only be usable possibly twice a year. After using that particular mooring twice, we would consequently be charged to use it. The reps did not inform us of this, yet were on the way to rubber stamping it for a go.

A small group of us tried to get information initially from these elected reps, but we hit a brick wall. I am not saying that all of CRT's ideas stink, but as the biggest paying user group of the canals, I believe boaters should be involved in any proposals for change to the system.

[cotswoldsman]

Alan I have heard from Clive Henderson but not impressed by his reply. I have now had a few emails from Vaughn Welch.

Not sure how they are supposed to meet with boaters as they seem to have agreed no method of reclaiming expenses from The Trust so I guess that means after 9 months they have not met many boaters. As I said before I have no problem with them getting expenses as long as they reflect that CRT is a Charity.

[Tuscan]

They have published their email links twice now, once on the website and again on the Christmas Message so Alan's original question is perhaps redundant however the curtesy of a reply would give you more confidence. I would like to understand what is the scope of the role (fromCRT's perspective) . From their christmas message boaters have been getting through to them was this through their CRT email address or the IWA? I propose to ping a mail as I would like to understand what if any has been the main issue/s that have been brought to their attention.

[cotswoldsman]

CRT are looking to make fundamental changes that could be bad for all the boating community. Because the reps are not putting out any information releases, most people are oblivious to these changes. Just as an instance, the 24hr mooring that you and I use sometimes, would only be usable possibly twice a year. After using that particular mooring twice, we would consequently be charged to use it. The reps did not inform us of this, yet were on the way to rubber stamping it for a go.

A small group of us tried to get information initially from these elected reps, but we hit a brick wall. I am not saying that all of CRT's ideas stink, but as the biggest paying user group of the canals, I believe boaters should be involved in any proposals for change to the system.

 

At the end of the day they do not represent ALL boaters you would not believe some of the replies I have had. If they are unable to receive expenses it means the only views they are getting in the main is from IWA meetings where they do get expenses. When I invited the members to attend a meeting of a cross section of boaters there main concern was reclaiming expenses.

You can take it from me that they live on a different planet and certainly do not represent ALL boaters. Another thing that concerns me is part of what I am trying to do is raise more funds for The Trust as members of IWA they have a conflict of interest on this subject. IWA members should be a taarget as "Friends" and better there money goes direct to CRT for maintance than going to IWA the majority of whose members are non boaters.

 

They have published their email links twice now, once on the website and again on the Christmas Message so Alan's original question is perhaps redundant however the curtesy of a reply would give you more confidence. I would like to understand what is the scope of the role (fromCRT's perspective) . From their christmas message boaters have been getting through to them was this through their CRT email address or the IWA? I propose to ping a mail as I would like to understand what if any has been the main issue/s that have been brought to their attention.

 

Haha would not take long to guess their main concern and it is the long term future of the system.

[jenlyn]

I think becoming a friend of CRT and donating by doing so is probably a better option than being in the IWA. I can't honestly see the benefit of the IWA at this present time. I know the IWA has done good things in the past, but to me they would be better just being incorporated into CRT.

[dor]

The fundamental problem to me is that the IWA claim to represent ALL waterways' users of which boaters, as we are constantly told, are a small minority.

 

It is therefore very wrong that they hold posts as BOATERS' representatives. Surely there will be conflicts of interest arising where the ideas of the IWA will not be in the best interests of boaters.

 

I don't have a problem with IWA having representation on the Council, but they should not be there as boaters' representatives. I feel that they abused their position and were fraudulently elected and the elections should be reheld at the earliest opportunity. Unfortunately C&RT think otherwise.

[alan_fincher]

They have published their email links twice now, once on the website and again on the Christmas Message so Alan's original question is perhaps redundant......

I don't agree.

 

A question that basically says "there has been ambiguity about how to contact you, so can you please confirm this is the correct way?" surely is worthy of an answer after two and a half weeks, even at Christmas time.

 

I am now at the stage when I feel complaint is quite reasonable.

 

I've owned and lived on now for over 15 years and ive never had the urged to ring anyone. Why do you need to talk to a representative anyway.

That's your prerogative, but I don't see why what you personally have had the urge to do, (or not do) is relevant to what some of us are trying to do.

 

We now have CRT, and a Council where we are supposed to have representatives and representation.

 

You may feel it unnecessary, pointless, or whatever, but these people have put themselves up for these roles, so should be prepared to do "what it says on the tin", namely represent boaters.

[Higgs]

the elections should be reheld at the earliest opportunity. Unfortunately C&RT think otherwise.

 

Although the thought of a rerun is appealing, I don't think it is necessarily going to produce a different result. CRT's statements made it clear, before the elections, that the reps were expected to communicate with their constituents. It would seem to follow that the reps should communicate, and specifically with the constituents.

 

A place that all 30 odd thousand can view this communication. The minutes of the meetings with CRT tell very little. Some of the more active members are seeking some response and reps do not seem to be making that process easy.

 

It is not good enough to have some decision filter through. We should all be able to go to an advertised bulletin board and read it for ourselves. A small ask, to provide access to the activity and thoughts. In this, CRT are not standing by their promises. Words are rather cheap currency. Actions need to follow.

[cotswoldsman]

Maybe like a lot of boaters I do not feel represented by the boating members of The Council. I heard that the election cost in the region of £50,000 to hold I do not think that I am getting value for money.

I personally think that The Trust genuinely thought that this council would make people feel more involved and I applaud them for that, unfortunately it is to big for them to have any meaningful discussion, trying to hold a meeting with 30 people all with different agendas is just not going to work.

I am not happy about having senior people from IWA representing me but I have to accept that is what boaters wanted. Having said that I think if the election was held again I doubt if we would have the same result. The topic of Council is part of the agenda for the meeting with The Trust and I will be interested to know what they think it has achieved so far.

[Higgs]

Having said that I think if the election was held again I doubt if we would have the same result.

 

Until there is an understanding, all around, I think the result wouldn't change much. The most immediate prerequisite is communication and to get the reps to lay out their stall in one specific place, for one specific group, without ambiguity.

 

If things continue in this present wooley way, then who knows. The argument for another look may be more viable; to have the present group of reps stand down - possibly all, but one.

 

Trying to be accommodating to both the present reps and the independents - I'd say, leave two of the current group, accept no further applications of candidates from the IWA quarter and fill the other two positions with independents. Some balance.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Higgs

[Tuscan]

I don't agree.

 

A question that basically says "there has been ambiguity about how to contact you, so can you please confirm this is the correct way?" surely is worthy of an answer after two and a half weeks, even at Christmas time.

 

I am now at the stage when I feel complaint is quite reasonable.

 

 

That's your prerogative, but I don't see why what you personally have had the urge to do, (or not do) is relevant to what some of us are trying to do.

 

We now have CRT, and a Council where we are supposed to have representatives and representation.

 

You may feel it unnecessary, pointless, or whatever, but these people have put themselves up for these roles, so should be prepared to do "what it says on the tin", namely represent boaters.

 

 

 

 

I have also emailed on a different matter and will advise if I get a reply. There is no ambiguity if you click the link on the Christmas message for each member there is an auto reply , what is about this that is confusing? What is wrong is not getting a reply even if it's just use the link given.

 

Does anyone know what the specific role is that the boaters reps signed up to do, as this is what they should be judged against. What does it say on the tin?

[alan_fincher]

There is no ambiguity if you click the link on the Christmas message for each member there is an auto reply , what is about this that is confusing?

My attempts to contact them predate the Christmas message by some considerable time I think.

 

What is wrong is not getting a reply even if it's just use the link given.

That's my complaint. I have apparently used the correct way to contact the four. Only one replied in a timely manner, and two not at all. I have yet t hear of anyone who has any answer on anything from Ann Farrell, I think.

 

Does anyone know what the specific role is that the boaters reps signed up to do, as this is what they should be judged against. What does it say on the tin?

Last time I looked BW/CRT had removed links to much of the stuff which was available when the elections were being held. This is an unfortunate trend with both Waterscape and subsequent web-sites, and I now know the only reliable way to be able to know what a BW/CRT document that was once published said is to download and retain a personal copy of the same.

 

Being wiser now, I now do a fair bit of that, but didn't download all the materials available during the election.

 

If you haven't already, why not ask the reps to supply the terms of reference they should be working to. They have after all had three Council meetings already, so presumably should have copies of their "job description"? Just don't expect the answer too quickly!