CRT No Longer Wish To Meet With Boaters

[churchward]

This is rather disappointing news. Does that mean the meetings scheduled for September and the floating market are cancelled?

 

I suppose they may have come to the conclusion that they only wish to communicate with recognised representation from interested organisations rather than (what appears to them) unelected individuals.

 

I do think it is a shame that they do not wish to continue with sessions around the country to meet grass roots boaters.

 

Possible next steps are to join one of the existing organisations they will talk to or form a new organisation and get CRT to recognise its existence.

[RLWP]

Well it has happened so all the people who said "I told you so" are right, but at least we gave it a go. I was informed last night by Vince Moran that CRT no longer wish to engage directly with boaters but will revert to only attending User Group Meetings that they can control. It is a shame as I and other felt that maybe CRT had left some of the old BW baggage behind and at last were prepared to listen to their paying customers, It would seem that the paying customer they wish to listen to is not boaters. This is an extract from an email I received from John Dodwell on where boaters sit in CRT's thinking

 

 

And Yes, boats are very important. We know towpath users like to see them. They produce not far off 30% of the gross income. But boats do not pay their way. I’m not suggesting they should. However, it helps to recognise that boats are only part of the picture – and an important part. The Government didn’t enter into that 15 year contract because of 35k or so boat owners but because of the 10m or so towpath users, the benefits of regeneration/ rural and town economies, health, tourism, heritage etc etc.

 

 

I'm not clear about this quote John. Is John Dodwell saying 'we,CRT, don't care' or 'they, CRT, don't care'?

 

John is a CRT trustee, so he really should be saying the former. However he is one of the IWA trustees so could be saying the latter

 

Richard

[cotswoldsman]

Maybe it is time to make a stand and remind C&RT who we are. Needs to be something that will wake them up. IDEAS?

I am still in recovery mode but spent a lot of time thinking about this last night, I will share these once I recover. I am very concerned for Boaters future, as you can see from Dodwell's email we are being squeezed out and are just really an afterthought with CRT. Whatever we do needs to be properly structured and thought out not rushed. I have learned the hard way that to take CRT on and ensure boaters are heard requires proper organising.

Thanks everyone for your messages of support we will not be going away, I am now trawling through all my email correspondence with CRT so maybe people can get a better feel of the fact that things have been difficult but we kept going on the basis that even a small step forward was better than nothing.

[Hawkmoth]

Well done and thanks to John for his work. I hope you don't get too downhearted about this snub.

As others have hinted, some action may be appropriate, but I'm not smart enough to come up with ideas other than the, to my mind, non-runner of a licence fee strike. I don't know how it could be made to work.

Could it possibly be that maintaining the canals as workable for boaters is too expensive and that simply keeping them as a waterway would be more than 30% cheaper for them.

Bob

[carlt]

 

 

Possible next steps are to join one of the existing organisations they will talk to

Ah yes, because we have seen how effective they have been over the years.

 

With IWA completely in CRT's pocket (or is it the other way round?) and NABO too busy blowing the froth off their half of Mild to care I believe your second option of a new, more proactive organisation is the only way to go.

[Hawkmoth]

I wonder how many of us have joined the friends scheme?

Bob

[churchward]

Ah yes, because we have seen how effective they have been over the years.

 

With IWA completely in CRT's pocket (or is it the other way round?) and NABO too busy blowing the froth off their half of Mild to care I believe your second option of a new, more proactive organisation is the only way to go.

That would be my expectation also. Joining one of the existing organisations is an option but I assume that if that was desirable for folk they would have doen so already. Therefore a new boaters organisation is likely to be more attractive and hopefully effective.

[cotswoldsman]

This is rather disappointing news. Does that mean the meetings scheduled for September and the floating market are cancelled?

 

I suppose they may have come to the conclusion that they only wish to communicate with recognised representation from interested organisations rather than (what appears to them) unelected individuals.

 

I do think it is a shame that they do not wish to continue with sessions around the country to meet grass roots boaters.

 

Possible next steps are to join one of the existing organisations they will talk to or form a new organisation and get CRT to recognise its existence.

Until I hear from CRT that they no longer wish to come to to the social I am working on the basis that it is still happening.

The Floating Market will definitely happen as that is something completely separate, it was part of a process of bringing some new life to the centre of Birmingham and is supported 100% by Birmingham City Council and Brindleyplace. They have already asked for another one next year and also if it would be possible to do one to coincide with the Christmas Market. I think that unlike CRT they are serious about getting boater involved in Birmingham. I must add that for the floating market we have received a lot of help from West Midland Waterways Partnership and Dean Davies

 

 

I'm not clear about this quote John. Is John Dodwell saying 'we,CRT, don't care' or 'they, CRT, don't care'?

 

John is a CRT trustee, so he really should be saying the former. However he is one of the IWA trustees so could be saying the latter

 

Richard

I think what he is saying is we can now justify not doing things such as maintaining the towpath for boaters, that quote comes from an email exchange concerning the overgrowth of towpaths and tree problem for boaters.

[churchward]

I wonder how many of us have joined the friends scheme?

Bob

Not me. My standard answer to the canal side chuggers as been that I already pay enough to use the canal system and suffered a 3% above inflation per annum increase each of the last 3 years too.

 

I have in the last 3 years joined the IWA. Although some of the national reps and policies may be questionable I find my local branch very good and trying very hard to help the local canal system. The adoption of the Northampton branch to the Nene being and important example for me.

Edited August 15, 2013 by churchward

[davidc]

Do you think a campaign to send letters to our MP has any mileage also what about PM on line petitions.

 

What is everyone's thoughts, we have to do something??.

[RLWP]

I think what he is saying is we can now justify not doing things such as maintaining the towpath for boaters, that quote comes from an email exchange concerning the overgrowth of towpaths and tree problem for boaters.

 

Thank you. This will make for interesting discussions between John Dowdwell and his IWA supporters

[Ronniesonic]

Well done and thanks to John for his work. I hope you don't get too downhearted about this snub.

As others have hinted, some action may be appropriate, but I'm not smart enough to come up with ideas other than the, to my mind, non-runner of a licence fee strike. I don't know how it could be made to work.

Could it possibly be that maintaining the canals as workable for boaters is too expensive and that simply keeping them as a waterway would be more than 30% cheaper for them.

Bob

 

 

Bob- I fear your comment above is too close to the truth. I posted before that I have heard (high ranking Civil Servant) that C&RT have already stated they cannot maintain the system 'as is' from fiscal year 2015.

My guess is that that anywhere not used by boats or frequented by peeps where a revenue stream can be generated will be cast aside gradually. 35% or current revenue is certainly not to be sniffed at. I guess the majority of the remainder is via property etc?

Hope I am totally wrong but there is just not the funds & willingness by Central Government to bankroll 2000 miles+

 

Cotswoldman- You are a credit to your fellow boaters & thank you for your efforts.

[billS]

What were these meetings anyway? Who organised them and for what purpose?

[RLWP]

Ah yes, because we have seen how effective they have been over the years.

 

With IWA completely in CRT's pocket (or is it the other way round?) and NABO too busy blowing the froth off their half of Mild to care I believe your second option of a new, more proactive organisation is the only way to go.

 

Actually, we probably only lack a label. The social and meetings that Cotswoldman and Jenlyn has organised have been between us and CRT. But we are not 'official' even though we may represent a lot of people

 

Richard

[churchward]

Until I hear from CRT that they no longer wish to come to to the social I am working on the basis that it is still happening.

The Floating Market will definitely happen as that is something completely separate, it was part of a process of bringing some new life to the centre of Birmingham and is supported 100% by Birmingham City Council and Brindleyplace. They have already asked for another one next year and also if it would be possible to do one to coincide with the Christmas Market. I think that unlike CRT they are serious about getting boater involved in Birmingham. I must add that for the floating market we have received a lot of help from West Midland Waterways Partnership and Dean Davies

Thanks for the clarification. I hope it does go ahead. It may be a little more uncomfortable evening for them now though.

[cotswoldsman]

What were these meetings anyway? Who organised them and for what purpose?

They were simply meetings where boaters could engage with CRT so that CRT could hear what boaters had to say and so that boaters could understand the problems faced by CRT and engage to try and solve the problems or at least understand them better, but hey they wont be happening anymore so why worry. The door has been firmly slammed in our faces.

[churchward]

 

Actually, we probably only lack a label. The social and meetings that Cotswoldman and Jenlyn has organised have been between us and CRT. But we are not 'official' even though we may represent a lot of people

 

Richard

I think it will take more than just a label to make CRT recognise it.

 

Amongst other things I think for example it would need

 

A constitution/Mission ie its reason for being and intended outcomes.

 

Elected representation

 

A form of governance

 

I think it will be too vague otherwise for CRT given John's OP. As it stands it could be said that those attending the meetings thus far are representing everyone and no one other than themselves. None of the above would be that difficult for a group of determined people and the internet.

[Starcoaster]

That email is frankly disgusting. I agree that the part where it is grudgingly conceded that boats are important but only because walkers like to see them sums it up neatly.

 

Well CRT, we tried to play nice, but f*** you. What happens in the future and how us 35k unimportant boaters decide to deal with "the trust" now will be a direct consequence of CRT's own actions.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Starcoaster

[cotswoldsman]

 

Actually, we probably only lack a label. The social and meetings that Cotswoldman and Jenlyn has organised have been between us and CRT. But we are not 'official' even though we may represent a lot of people

 

Richard

Richard as I think you know that was the idea, to keep them informal where everyone was simply representing themselves and not having to follow any party line. They were always a good mixture of boaters all with their own views. It now seems our views do not matter a jot, well after all we only contribute 30% of the income, well those of us (and that is the majority) that pay taxes also should be included in the 10 million, but then we do not count so guess we are excluded from the 10 million.

I think it will take more than just a label to make CRT recognise it.

 

Amongst other things I think for example it would need

 

A constitution/Mission ie its reason for being and intended outcomes.

 

Elected representation

 

A form of governance

 

I think it will be too vague otherwise for CRT given John's OP. As it stands it could be said that those attending the meetings thus far are representing everyone and no one other than themselves. None of the above would be that difficult for a group of determined people and the internet.

We have a solicitor working on that at present just so that we understand the options at the end of the day it is up to boaters and gets away from the original idea that was simply to give boaters talking shop with CRT

[RLWP]

Can I remind people that we have a representative at the National Users Forum - me. There's a thread about that here: http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=58929&p=1123270

 

It is our only officially recognised method of communication as a group. How shall we use it?

 

Richard

[Jerra]

 

Actually, we probably only lack a label. The social and meetings that Cotswoldman and Jenlyn has organised have been between us and CRT. But we are not 'official' even though we may represent a lot of people

 

Richard

I was thinking along those lines too. Financed by not paying CRT money as friends because I don't see how any boater can possibly be a friend of CRT now.

[cotswoldsman]

Can I remind people that we have a representative at the National Users Forum - me. There's a thread about that here: http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=58929&p=1123270

 

It is our only officially recognised method of communication as a group. How shall we use it?

 

Richard

Ah we as the Unaligned Boaters also have a representative going until it is withdrawn I guess. Richard just remeber it is not a talking shop it is simply a place to listen to all the good work CRT are doing with the opportunity for a few to ask questions I went to the last one!!!

[luctor et emergo]

John, after all the hard work and dedication that you put into these meetings, I wouldn't dream of uttering the phrase 'I told you so'.

I believe that CRT deserve only the utmost disrespect after the way you and the others have been used so cynicaly by CRT. I believe that you have been strung along, under false pretences, in the hope that those against all the changes, would be mollycoddled into quiet acceptance. As soon as it became clear that that would not happen, CRT have shown their hand.

[cotswoldsman]

John, after all the hard work and dedication that you put into these meetings, I wouldn't dream of uttering the phrase 'I told you so'.

I believe that CRT deserve only the utmost disrespect after the way you and the others have been used so cynicaly by CRT. I believe that you have been strung along, under false pretences, in the hope that those against all the changes, would be mollycoddled into quiet acceptance. As soon as it became clear that that would not happen, CRT have shown their hand.

I am convinced you are correct and thank you for not saying "I told you so" but you were correct.

[bassplayer]

 

Possible next steps are to join one of the existing organisations they will talk to or form a new organisation and get CRT to recognise its existence.

I don't know. This forum gets far more viewers than contributors. I'm sure it's still an influence...In the end the media is a good tool and forums are good evidence if things go tits up. Anyone fancy organising a demonstration at CRT headquarters at MK? Or shall we wait until those who are less fortunate get chucked off the canals?