Jump to content

CRT No Longer Wish To Meet With Boaters


cotswoldsman

Featured Posts

I think we are all engrossed in the future of our waterways, we are all looking at the same goals, but have different views on how we get there. It gets intense, and blood levels go up through frustration and fear that some are not getting it, how do we get over or past that point?

I work in Charity development and although I'm not that clued up on the ins and outs of CRT, I can't help but feel that they are missing some fundamental levels of how a charity works.

 

It is not acceptable to play at service user participation or communication. Especially when they are paying 800 quid plus a year.

 

If I were CRT I'd employ a specific engagement team that would be responsible for the two way communication between its users and management.

 

At present I can't help but feel we have a ring of steel around the management team that involve its users as a token gesture to appease them.

 

Your efforts, whilst excellent, should not be needed to set up communications, this should be led by the charity and form the heart of its mission. (If it is really a charity of course)

 

I'm not at all anti CRT and also want it to thrive but until they accept culpability and responsibility for its success and failures instead of blaming its users then I fear we may have stalled.

 

So CRT, I propose that your first move is to decide if you want to be a real charity with its users at heart or a forced charity where self preservation regardless is the game..

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gosh, where to start with all these comments! On boaters being marginalised, what I meant was that we don't have a 'marginalise the boaters' agenda, but if that's how lots of you feel, then obviously we've got to do something to change that feeling. Making changes to the existing user group format, including more voices, different agenda, more/different Trust representatives taking part and possibly changing the name would seem to us the logical and most efficient approach. It's not clear to me how introducing yet another separate suite of meetings would be better but if I've missed something, do tell me. What else should we be doing to make boaters happier and more trusting of us without prejudicing our other funding streams?.

 

'Where do we see boaters in the bigger scheme of things?' was another question someone asked. Answer is 'at the very heart of what we do'. Navigation and boaters after all constitute our 'usp'.

 

The really sad thing about today's discussion is the apparent need to polarise - you're either the CRT voice of darkness, or the boaters' voice of the angels. Issues are never black or white and it feels to me as if people often jump to conclusions on the basis of about 5% of the relevant information. The plague of social networks I guess.

 

 

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely a professional coordinated response would be to not blame social media, it's only as good as its input. Why not look at how you can utilise it to your advantage.

 

Again I appeal to you to drop your pointing finger and go back to the basics of communication. You recognise that even without a negative agenda the trust is making people feel marginalised which is a great start. I'd focus on that.

 

Rob

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

What else should we be doing to make boaters happier and more trusting of us without prejudicing our other funding streams?.

 

It seems prety clear and obvious if you are intent on maintaining your current user consultation paraphenalia then the formula used for boater representation within it needs amending drastically?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The main reason for my meeting was to discuss the length that is marked as "no mooring". This was implemented about 12 years ago when the new houses were built when one of the new householders complained to BW. BW, and C&RT, claim that they do not succumb to pressure like this but they clearly did in this case. Changing some of the unused LT moorings to visitor moorings was a secondary issue. The signage indicating where the LT moorings were is also very poor and as a result, as I am sure you are aware, hirers and others often moor up on the LT moorings, possibly taking your space.

Stopped on these moorings to clear the prop last year. dont think i had time to stop the boat before someone in the houses down the bank was screaming at me to move on. Would love to see the no mooring signs removed on this section. Will probably stop there on my way back this winter. Sorry to hijack this thread, carry on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gosh, where to start with all these comments! On boaters being marginalised, what I meant was that we don't have a 'marginalise the boaters' agenda, but if that's how lots of you feel, then obviously we've got to do something to change that feeling. Making changes to the existing user group format, including more voices, different agenda, more/different Trust representatives taking part and possibly changing the name would seem to us the logical and most efficient approach. It's not clear to me how introducing yet another separate suite of meetings would be better but if I've missed something, do tell me. What else should we be doing to make boaters happier and more trusting of us without prejudicing our other funding streams?.

 

'Where do we see boaters in the bigger scheme of things?' was another question someone asked. Answer is 'at the very heart of what we do'. Navigation and boaters after all constitute our 'usp'.

 

The really sad thing about today's discussion is the apparent need to polarise - you're either the CRT voice of darkness, or the boaters' voice of the angels. Issues are never black or white and it feels to me as if people often jump to conclusions on the basis of about 5% of the relevant information. The plague of social networks I guess.

 

In my opinion one of the major problems that has caused a lot of bad feeling was IWA favoured treatment in the last elections.

 

Also your approach to regional partnership committees has gone very wrong in some region there are turning in to closed shops and forgetting about the word partnership.

 

Boaters if treat right can become you major money stream I also including money saved with Volunteers

Edited by davidc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 'money saved' point is really valid, CRTs job is to provide an infrastructure that allowe its users to help it progress, whilst Sally et al appear to be banging the 'polarised' drum to death the rest of us really want to make this work.

 

One thing that has come from this is that I am feeling much more inclined to try and get involved (if CRT are willing to listen)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The model exists and works well for NT.

 

Taken from NT's web page

 

Our structure
We have implemented a streamlined structure designed to achieve the optimum relationship between trusteeship (a Board of Trustees) and representation of the wider interests of the nation, for whose benefit we exist (the Council). The structure is as follows:

  • Board of Trustees
  • Council
  • Committees of the Board of Trustees
  • Regional / Country Advisory Boards
  • Advisory Panels

 

Read the Governance Handbook for more information

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gosh, where to start with all these comments! On boaters being marginalised, what I meant was that we don't have a 'marginalise the boaters' agenda, but if that's how lots of you feel, then obviously we've got to do something to change that feeling. Making changes to the existing user group format, including more voices, different agenda, more/different Trust representatives taking part and possibly changing the name would seem to us the logical and most efficient approach. It's not clear to me how introducing yet another separate suite of meetings would be better but if I've missed something, do tell me. What else should we be doing to make boaters happier and more trusting of us without prejudicing our other funding streams?.

 

'Where do we see boaters in the bigger scheme of things?' was another question someone asked. Answer is 'at the very heart of what we do'. Navigation and boaters after all constitute our 'usp'.

 

The really sad thing about today's discussion is the apparent need to polarise - you're either the CRT voice of darkness, or the boaters' voice of the angels. Issues are never black or white and it feels to me as if people often jump to conclusions on the basis of about 5% of the relevant information. The plague of social networks I guess.

 

Sally, I've spent many, many hours at user group meeting over the years & I really don't feel like I'm being listened to, I send in a question before the meeting & then there is a printed answer which does not answer my question at all! When I raise this again! I'm told I'm wrong, that it isn't a problem. User group meetings certainly seem to be a PR exercise which local managers are doing it because they have to be seen to be doing it. There is rarely anything constructive coming from these meetings.

 

I live & work on the canals and I'm absolutely passionate about them, I truly want CRT to succeed & so do most boaters. We know that boats and boaters are at the heart of our canals, but it really does not feel like CRT understand that. On the whole boaters do not feel that they are valued customers & or stakeholders in CRT & our waterways. Sometimes when talking to CRT managers & Supervisors, it seems it would be much easier & simpler for them if we didn't have those damn boats on the cut ;-) .

 

"Wanted" makes some very valuable points in his post 326 above , really hitting the nail on the head of what I was expecting or hoping from the formation of CRT. I have spoken with John Dodwell & have a great deal of respect for him & what he's trying to do, working with CRT @ he seemed of the same mind.

 

Sally, thanks for posting your replies, it really is a good that you engaging with members of this forum. But it has to be said that people do need more than platitudes, more than changes to names of meeting or requests for suggestions. We want action, we want dialogue & good communication. If you can listen to boaters & really make them feel like there being listed to, then you really will have cracked the key to being custodians of our canals. Boaters don't expect miracles, most of us are very realistic in our expectations. Boaters, CRT & all users need to pull together to make sure our unique canal & river system is here for many more generations to come.

 

Cheers, Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Carlt, I do agree that the current boating groups do not really speak for me, nor do they provide particularly impressive/eloquent/articulate arguments for why they should represent my voice.

 

I know and love at least one charming CRT representative! They're not deliberately malicious. They're simply listening to what appear to be the most vocal, best organized voices - who also happen to garner the most clicks, media attention and sympathy. It's like how the Tea Party in America or UKIP here have seized a lot of media attention, when in fact they have relatively little political power. The classes of "People Who Hate Liveaboard Boaters" or "Old Dinosaurs Doing Favors For Old-Dinosaur Friends" are vocal, visible, well-organized and have a lot of ears.

 

The most productive solution is to remove the ears or replace them.

 

To be completely frank, the big boating-interest groups are for representing interests and they are being abysmally poor representatives. A potentially constructive solution is to form a more coherent grassroots group with better-articulated values, or to pressure the existing groups into providing better representation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think (by CRT's figures) if 0.35% of canal visitors are providing 30% of CRT's income then they should be treated as a valued customer, not a "usp".

At first I thought I was a port in my computer or a way of keeping my computer powered if the electric went off.

 

Then I remembered.......corporate speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Woopey' I've never been some bodies unique selling point before....

 

Well it had me confused, because I have been on at least one corporate training course where it was "Unique Sense of Purpose", which is rather different.

 

The problem with TLAs I guess!

 

EDITED TO ADD:

 

If you Google USP, you also get this, which I hope is not where we are headed!

 

HK_USP_45_surrounded_by_.45_caliber_Horn

Edited by alan_fincher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sally, I've spent many, many hours at user group meeting over the years & I really don't feel like I'm being listened to, I send in a question before the meeting & then there is a printed answer which does not answer my question at all! When I raise this again! I'm told I'm wrong, that it isn't a problem. User group meetings certainly seem to be a PR exercise which local managers are doing it because they have to be seen to be doing it. There is rarely anything constructive coming from these meetings.

 

I live & work on the canals and I'm absolutely passionate about them, I truly want CRT to succeed & so do most boaters. We know that boats and boaters are at the heart of our canals, but it really does not feel like CRT understand that. On the whole boaters do not feel that they are valued customers & or stakeholders in CRT & our waterways. Sometimes when talking to CRT managers & Supervisors, it seems it would be much easier & simpler for them if we didn't have those damn boats on the cut ;-) .

 

"Wanted" makes some very valuable points in his post 326 above , really hitting the nail on the head of what I was expecting or hoping from the formation of CRT. I have spoken with John Dodwell & have a great deal of respect for him & what he's trying to do, working with CRT @ he seemed of the same mind.

 

Sally, thanks for posting your replies, it really is a good that you engaging with members of this forum. But it has to be said that people do need more than platitudes, more than changes to names of meeting or requests for suggestions. We want action, we want dialogue & good communication. If you can listen to boaters & really make them feel like there being listed to, then you really will have cracked the key to being custodians of our canals. Boaters don't expect miracles, most of us are very realistic in our expectations. Boaters, CRT & all users need to pull together to make sure our unique canal & river system is here for many more generations to come.

 

Cheers, Brian

Brian, your post demonstrates perfectly the wealth of knowledge and willingness that is being overlooked because of a lack of the basics.

 

A while back I posted a thread about cc'ers being the eyes and ears of the waterways, it was rightly pointed out that we all are, surely this is a resource far too valuable ignor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it had me confused, because I have been on at least one corporate training course where it was "Unique Sense of Purpose", which is rather different.

 

The problem with TLAs I guess!

Indeed....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the aspects of all of this that seems to be at the heart of everything (and probably has been in all my time in business) is poor communication. That can occur on both 'sides' of the fence. Clear communication and a will to listen (more important in my mind than speaking) and understand is paramount. It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than it is to open it and remove all doubt!

 

Sally has offered the olive branch and we the boaters (well most of us are in this forum are boaters but not all I suspect) need to ensure we have an approved and workable avenue of communication with CRT so we can grasp that olive branch and work towards a much more fruitful relationship. CRT need to commit to that as well. There does need to be a process through which the communication process will work (and currently that seems to be John (minus bat and ball!), Jenlyn, Alan F and RLWP) - I don't see any reason to change that at the moment - they have done a sterling job in my opinion. I think we need this communication channel because the 'boater's representatives' are all IWA stalwarts and I am not convinced they have our interests at heart.

 

I think it is time to perhaps wipe the slate clean as far as any prejudices are concerned and start off again with both sides grasping tightly to that proverbial olive branch.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone else posted earlier there are some fundamentals that all boaters and CRT can agree on such as :

 

- Adequate depth to ensure safe navigation

- Sufficient mooring for the number of boats (visitor and towpath)

- well Maintained infrastructure ( some lock gates and paddles whilst not leaking are getting ever harder to operate)

- Boats moving every 14 days

- Reduction in overstaying and license evasion

 

I am sure there are others, if CRT and boaters can unite around how this is best achieved. Then the goodwill generated will help discussions on how to deal with the areas where specific groups of boaters disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I hope that thats the end of the initial 'hysteria' and the end of 'bats and balls' euphemisms. Hopefully we can now collectively move to phase two. Which is what do we want and when do we want it.

 

I believe that a membership of CaRT is the only way forward. The Minister himself said that he believed the new charity should be based around a membership. He actually urged that the charity would go that route. My first question to Sally Ash would be - why is it such a bad idea for the Trust to have a membership and all that it entails?

 

With the membership there would be regional demarcations and inclusion of various user groups. The membership would not be limited to boaters but for everyone who has an interest in furthering the future of the inland waterways.

 

For me there are two key players (CaRT - IWA) trying to do what one should be doing.

 

I have long believed that if CaRT was a membership organisation, the 'raison d'être' for the IWA would no longer exist. Now it seems to be a very cosy bed partnership between the two. Maybe there are some special reasons for the 'memorandum of understanding' between the IWA and CaRT. Reasons that we don't know about but could speculate on.

 

I would vote for CaRT to become a membership organisation every day of the week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone else posted earlier there are some fundamentals that all boaters and CRT can agree on such as :

 

- Adequate depth to ensure safe navigation

- Sufficient mooring for the number of boats (visitor and towpath)

- well Maintained infrastructure ( some lock gates and paddles whilst not leaking are getting ever harder to operate)

- Boats moving every 14 days

- Reduction in overstaying and license evasion

 

I am sure there are others, if CRT and boaters can unite around how this is best achieved. Then the goodwill generated will help discussions on how to deal with the areas where specific groups of boaters disagree.

 

I'm not sure that we need a list like that at the moment. Someone already tried to produce a smaller list than that - it caused a lot of discussion and divergence

 

If we had some kind of mandate, I think it would have to be reasonably vague to be able to embrace the CWDF membership

 

I think it would have the work canal in it, or inland waterway (Rivers), I think it may have boat in it as we are largely a group who have stuff to do with boats. What else might it have, and what sorts of verbs might go in?

 

Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I hope that thats the end of the initial 'hysteria' and the end of 'bats and balls' euphemisms. Hopefully we can now collectively move to phase two. Which is what do we want and when do we want it.

 

I believe that a membership of CaRT is the only way forward. The Minister himself said that he believed the new charity should be based around a membership. He actually urged that the charity would go that route. My first question to Sally Ash would be - why is it such a bad idea for the Trust to have a membership and all that it entails?

 

With the membership there would be regional demarcations and inclusion of various user groups. The membership would not be limited to boaters but for everyone who has an interest in furthering the future of the inland waterways.

 

For me there are two key players (CaRT - IWA) trying to do what one should be doing.

 

I have long believed that if CaRT was a membership organisation, the 'raison d'être' for the IWA would no longer exist. Now it seems to be a very cosy bed partnership between the two. Maybe there are some special reasons for the 'memorandum of understanding' between the IWA and CaRT. Reasons that we don't know about but could speculate on.

 

I would vote for CaRT to become a membership organisation every day of the week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The fly in that ointment is that I do not think membership has worked in NHS Foundation Trusts for patients!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.