IWA Statement Released

[cotswoldsman]

IWA wishes to make it immediately clear that the Association, as a matter of policy, has always and continues to fully support continuous cruising and those that chose to live this lifestyle on the waterways, and also that of live-aboards, and we work closely with RBOA to achieve and support this. IWA believes that all boaters should follow the mooring rules and we have been strongly encouraging CRT to enforce the rules fairly and are pleased that it is starting to do so.

However, IWA also entirely agrees that enforcement is down to CRT, and equally, IWA believes that interpretations of the law are down to the courts and not individuals or organisations to decide.

 

We can categorically state that it is not IWA policy to ask members to collect information to pass to CRT on overstaying moorers. The impression that this might have been otherwise seems to have arisen from our recent national AGM (the minutes of which are available minutes at https://www.waterway...inutes_12_09_29 where the then national chairman Clive Henderson said "problem areas should be reported to Canal & River Trust."

 

Whilst said with the best of intention's, and following complaints from members on the topic, Vaughan Welch's comments in recent edition of Navigation are not representative of IWA's official viewpoint. Indeed in the next edition of Navigation Vaughan's column includes "IWA's view is clear in that we fully support the principle and rights of those who choose to live aboard boats or continuously cruise in accordance with the rules, it is of course the job of CRT to enforce those rules. Mindful of what has been said elsewhere IWA does not, and never has, encouraged boaters to photograph or spy on other boaters."

 

I guess it is all as clear as mud!!!

Though pleased to see that The IWA are spinning like mad.

Hopefully Vaughan Welch will now go and read the rules covering Continuous Cruising as he clearly did not understand them one month ago

Edited January 22, 2013 by cotswoldsman

[churchward]

I guess it is all as clear as mud!!!

Though pleased to see that The IWA are spinning like mad.

Hopefully Vaughan Welch will now go and read the rules covering Continuous Cruising as he clearly did not understand them one month ago

Actually I think the statement is clear in the IWA policy and looks to be saying Mr Welch is acting outside that policy. It is also good to see that the unproved view that IWA are actively roaming the towpath spying on folk is not true ( I have never been asked to do that) and nor a matter of policy. I am glad they have said something on the matter although I am equally sure that it is not going to stop all the hysteria around the subject.

 

Where did the statement come from have you got a link? I can't see it at the moment on the IWA website.

Edited January 22, 2013 by churchward

[cotswoldsman]

Actually I think the statement is clear in the IWA policy and looks to be saying Mr Welch is acting outside that policy. It is also good to see that the unproved view that IWA are actively roaming the towpath spying on folk is not true ( I have never been asked to do that) and nor a matter of policy. I am glad they have said something on the matter although I am equally sure that it is not going to stop all the hysteria around the subject.

 

 

 

I read it to say it is not IWA Policy to photograph boats, it does not say it has not been happening, bit the same as saying what Vaughan Welch said was not IWA Policy but it was still said on official IWA Publication, it would appear to me that Policy and what actually happens are 2 different things. So for me it remains "as clear as mud"

[Grace and Favour]

I read it to say it is not IWA Policy to photograph boats, it does not say it has not been happening, bit the same as saying what Vaughan Welch said was not IWA Policy but it was still said on official IWA Publication, it would appear to me that Policy and what actually happens are 2 different things. So for me it remains "as clear as mud"

 

Ah! - but is this

'Tidal mud' - occurring every 13 hours or so

Glamrock Mud - most popular in the 60's and 70'

Salon Mud - Applied regularly in order to make the user believe they are more beautiful

[churchward]

I read it to say it is not IWA Policy to photograph boats, it does not say it has not been happening, bit the same as saying what Vaughan Welch said was not IWA Policy but it was still said on official IWA Publication, it would appear to me that Policy and what actually happens are 2 different things. So for me it remains "as clear as mud"

I think they are being careful in their words as they know they will be picked over. I think some people may be doing it but not with the blessing of the IWA they may be acting as individuals. People would have read into any statement what they want. Even if there was silence that would be seen as confirmation, denying it opens claims of conspiracy and under the covers activity. It is rather like the old question "have you stopped beating the wife yet" there is no good answer.

 

The situation with Mr Welch is perhaps someone who has gone over the top possibly with the encouragement of a few hotheads in the branch. Many large clubs have a few individuals go off the rails sometimes it is not possible to govern everybody and what they say all the time it isn't a police state. I think what he has said is not right and not right the way it was said. However, There are clearly some people who think there is some kind of problem in Birmingham and perhaps there is a grain of truth in this. I can't judge on that though as I probably only go through Birmingham once a year or so. It is a big city with a lot of miles of canal so if anywhere is going to attract those that might want to buck the system it is probably there.

[gaggle]

If Welch and his ramblings have brought IWA into disrepute what are they going to do about him , bit of a loose cannon crashing around is he ?

[alan_fincher]

I thought at least one person who had been challenged about recording boat details had indicated it was in connection with a local IWA branch initiative though?

 

Just because the IWA issues a statement that nationally they have no such policy, does not of course mean it may not being considered a good idea within a local branch, (rather than just some wild-card IWA member acting alone), does it?

 

It's good to see them saying Welch's views are not the policy of the IWA, but as he is a national deputy chairman, a branch chairman and a trustee, those words sound rather hollow, unless they persuade him to step down from those roles, because he is voicing views they say they do not support.

 

He has too many "hats" in my mind, (including his CRT Council Elected Boater Representative one), for it to be sufficient to just say "he is entitled to his views, but they are not those of the IWA, so that's OK, then".

 

Many large clubs have a few individuals go off the rails sometimes it is not possible to govern everybody and what they say all the time it isn't a police state.

The problem being that in the case of West Midlands IWA, it is the branch chairman himself "going off the rails", which makes it a bit harder to ignore than if it were just other loose cannons within his branch. For a start he gets an automatic platform to air those views, something that might not be automatically granted to someone wishing to take equally extreme views in another direction.

[Neil TNC]

On thing for sure, the IWA will now end up even more insular.

They never really understood social media, right from the formation of the first e-mail lists and newsgroups.

[PiRSqwared]

The statement does not address Welch's pikey scum ramblings however

[Tuscan]

I think it's a pretty clear statement and must be seen as a severe reprimand to V Welch as in effect it looks like he will be forced to publish something of a retraction in his next article. I give them credit for that. As in the labour or Tory front bench trying to control branch activists I imagine there will be still some that will seek to be more pushy with what they see as a problem. Be interesting to see if he stands for reelection.

[churchward]

I thought at least one person who had been challenged about recording boat details had indicated it was in connection with a local IWA branch initiative though?

 

Just because the IWA issues a statement that nationally they have no such policy, does not of course mean it may not being considered a good idea within a local branch, (rather than just some wild-card IWA member acting alone), does it?

 

That is possibly so but I have not seen anything that says it is so other than some unsubstantiated statements on here.

 

I think it is true that the IWA Chairmans response about checking licences came from a question from a Milton Keynes branch person at the IWA AGM. So they may have been thinking about such a venture. I don't know if they carried it out and from what I have seen they were discouraged from doing so. Of course it doesn't mean that someone or a group of someones didn't do it anyway.

[cotswoldsman]

I think it's a pretty clear statement and must be seen as a severe reprimand to V Welch as in effect it looks like he will be forced to publish something of a retraction in his next article. I give them credit for that. As in the labour or Tory front bench trying to control branch activists I imagine there will be still some that will seek to be more pushy with what they see as a problem. Be interesting to see if he stands for reelection.

 

Yes I find myself agreeing with you I think the main pressure came from The Trust in the form of Roger Hanbury (trustee) with whom even I exchanged some emails on the subject of Vaughan Welch. I personally think that the IWA have lost the plot and must be concerned about membership dwindling since the formation of a Charity to manage the waterways. Especially now that CRT are far more prepared to listen to the views of Boaters.

Edited January 22, 2013 by cotswoldsman

[churchward]

The problem being that in the case of West Midlands IWA, it is the branch chairman himself "going off the rails", which makes it a bit harder to ignore than if it were just other loose cannons within his branch. For a start he gets an automatic platform to air those views, something that might not be automatically granted to someone wishing to take equally extreme views in another direction.

I agree he has mucked his nest. But even though it is the chairman of the branch that has gone astray my point still stands on organisations like this some folk go off the rails and cause trouble it just means the more "senior" the person is the more trouble it causes.

 

It will be interesting to read his next statement in the local IWA branch newsletter.

[cotswoldsman]

That is possibly so but I have not seen anything that says it is so other than some unsubstantiated statements on here.

 

I think it is true that the IWA Chairmans response about checking licences came from a question from a Milton Keynes branch person at the IWA AGM. So they may have been thinking about such a venture. I don't know if they carried it out and from what I have seen they were discouraged from doing so. Of course it doesn't mean that someone or a group of someones didn't do it anyway.

 

Not just on here all over facebook and twitter, to many people saying it for there not to be some grain of truth. Anyway hopefully it will stop now and if it was not happening then these mystery people who think they are members of the IWA will stop. (not quite sure why anyone would want to pretend to be from IWA can't be good for anyone's reputation)

[Tuscan]

Yes I find myself agreeing with you I think the main pressure came from The Trust in the form of Roger Hanbury (trustee) with whom even I exchanged some emails on the subject of Vaughan Welch. I personally think that the IWA have lost the plot and must be concerned about membership dwindling since the formation of a Charity to manage the waterways. Especially now that CRT are far more prepared to listen to the views of Boaters.

 

 

Yes I think the real issue that would scare me if I was on the committee of the IWA is how relevant is the IWA now that you have the Trust seemingly being more open than BW .

[Leonie]

I think it's a pretty clear statement and must be seen as a severe reprimand to V Welch as in effect it looks like he will be forced to publish something of a retraction in his next article. I give them credit for that. As in the labour or Tory front bench trying to control branch activists I imagine there will be still some that will seek to be more pushy with what they see as a problem. Be interesting to see if he stands for reelection.

 

Yes, credit for the knuckle rap and credit to the members who complained. We shall have to wait and see whether Welch does the right thing and retracts his rubbish.

[alan_fincher]

It will be interesting to read his next statement in the local IWA branch newsletter.

Well in view of John's original post, I suspect these words may appear verbatim.......

 

Indeed in the next edition of Navigation Vaughan's column includes "IWA's view is clear in that we fully support the principle and rights of those who choose to live aboard boats or continuously cruise in accordance with the rules, it is of course the job of CRT to enforce those rules. Mindful of what has been said elsewhere IWA does not, and never has, encouraged boaters to photograph or spy on other boaters."

 

It's not clear though from the announcement whether he will go beyond that.

 

And of course that doesn't change what he has said in e-mails with his "Boater Representative" hat on. It really only sets out where his views sit within the IWA.

[churchward]

Not just on here all over facebook and twitter, to many people saying it for there not to be some grain of truth. Anyway hopefully it will stop now and if it was not happening then these mystery people who think they are members of the IWA will stop. (not quite sure why anyone would want to pretend to be from IWA can't be good for anyone's reputation)

There may indeed by a grain of truth I am not saying otherwise but Facebook and twitter are not known sources of absolute truth in my view. There needs to be evidence.

 

After all several million Americans believe the moon missions never really happened and use Twitter and Facebook to discuss their conspiricy theories.

 

I also think that a few people writing down numbers and taking a few pics is hardly the worlds (or even the canals) biggest issue.

 

Yes I think the real issue that would scare me if I was on the committee of the IWA is how relevant is the IWA now that you have the Trust seemingly being more open than BW .

The context and landscape of the canal system has changed since the creation of CRT and IWA and other organisation need to adapt for sure.

 

The intent of the IWA and CRT are different though and I think it is also a mistake to think they must be the same. I am much more interested for instance in the restoration work and planning that the IWA do.

 

Well in view of John's original post, I suspect these words may appear verbatim.......

It could be so, we shall see. As one of the IWA members who wrote in commenting on Welch's chairmans article I hope that it goes beyond that.

Edited January 22, 2013 by churchward

[PiRSqwared]

Here is the relevant AGM minute:

 

Peter Caswell, Milton Keynes Branch, asked what the Association’s policy was in relation to branch

volunteers recording boat visitor index numbers in an attempt to prevent boat owners with continuous

cruising licences from setting up permanent moorings in the Milton Keynes area. Clive Henderson stated

that in recent public relations material published by Canal & River Trust, it was not the aim to use

volunteers in such a manner as evidence obtained in this way could not be used to obtain a prosecution but

the problem areas should be reported to Canal & River Trust.

 

Mr Henderson does not appear to answer the question - he states the CaRT policy about (presumably) CaRT volunteers and then adds some fudge.

[Joshua]

An apology would surely be hypocritical.

 

If Welch believes what he said and given how strongly he presented those views, it is hard to draw any other conclusion, he should stick by them, step down as a representative of the CRT council and the IWA and join the rest of us where he will have the chance to try and get re-elected on the platform of his true views.

[churchward]

An apology would surely be hypocritical.

 

If Welch believes what he said and given how strongly he presented those views, it is hard to draw any other conclusion, he should stick by them, step down as a representative of the CRT council and the IWA and join the rest of us where he will have the chance to try and get re-elected on the platform of his true views.

No apology if sincerely meant is hypocritical. If it was I would accept the apology like I would for anyone else. Whether there will be an apology or if it is sincerely meant is another question.

[jenlyn]

There may indeed by a grain of truth I am not saying otherwise but Facebook and twitter are not known sources of absolute truth in my view. There needs to be evidence.

 

After all several million Americans believe the moon missions never really happened and use Twitter and Facebook to discuss their conspiricy theories.

 

I also think that a few people writing down numbers and taking a few pics is hardly the worlds (or even the canals) biggest issue.

 

 

The context and landscape of the canal system has changed since the creation of CRT and IWA and other organisation need to adapt for sure.

 

The intent of the IWA and CRT are different though and I think it is also a mistake to think they must be the same. I am much more interested for instance in the restoration work and planning that the IWA do.

 

 

It could be so, we shall see. As one of the IWA members who wrote in commenting on Welch's chairmans article I hope that it goes beyond that.

 

Your precious excuses for your beloved IWA are pathetic, they got caught red handed. You can wipe as many of their bottoms as you like, but they will still be dirty. The sooner they get rid of the rot and replace it with fresh wood the better. Some of you really crack me up with your pompous non knowledge.

[churchward]

Your precious excuses for your beloved IWA are pathetic, they got caught red handed. You can wipe as many of their bottoms as you like, but they will still be dirty. The sooner they get rid of the rot and replace it with fresh wood the better. Some of you really crack me up with your pompous non knowledge.

Your post doesn't do much for your cause and brings any debate down to the lowest level and personally insulting.

 

I am not making excuses for anyone but I am trying to be reasoned against hysteria such as yours.

[Joshua]

No apology if sincerely meant is hypocritical. If it was I would accept the apology like I would for anyone else. Whether there will be an apology or if it is sincerely meant is another question.

That's my point, how can it be sincere?

 

What is he going to apologise for?

 

Laurence Hogg had no doubt what Welch was saying and would quite rightly feel betrayed if Welch apologised.

 

Edited for spelling

Edited January 22, 2013 by Joshua

[churchward]

That's my point, how can it be sincere?

 

What is he going to apologise for?

 

Laurence Hogg had no doubt what Welch was saying and would quite rightly feel betrayed if Welch apologised.

 

Edited for spelling

I know what I would like him to apologise for as it was part of what I asked for in my response to the IWA in complaint of the article but I shan't go into that here as I can see no reasoned debate possible.