Association, a suggestion.

[mayalld]

The problem with forming yet another association is how CaRT will respond to it. They will almost certainly view it as a splinter group; they probably see it as difficult enough to engage with the existing groups - NABO, IWA RBOA. None of which represent the views of all boaters; surely a new group can only serve to confuse matters from CaRT's point of view even further? Divide and Conquer? The danger is that CaRT will get that without actually doing any dividing or conquering themselves.

 

This is getting almost Pythonesque

 

Judean Peoples Front...

Peoples Front of Judea...

Popular Judean Peoples Front...

 

Is that what we really want?

 

Chris

 

There is some degree of truth in what you say.

 

However, whilst there are a number of organisations that you identify, it is fair to say that these organisations don't have a shared constituency.

 

RBOA is a deliberately narrow constituency, and excludes most boater.

 

IWA is a constituency much wider than just boaters.

 

Which leaves NABO as the single national organisation that is nominally focussed on representing the interests of boaters to CRT.

 

Unfortunately, NABO is (in my humble opinion) not fit for purpose.

 

Now, I would accept that things move on, and that organisations like NABO change over time, so it may well be that the criticisms that I make of NABO are outdated, or that I'm talking about issues with particular individuals who aren't part of the committee any more, but I don't actually see much change, and it appears to me that the NABO committee isn't a beast that changes often.

 

NABO seems to see itself as a pastiche of a 1970s trade union.

 

Anything that the "management" does is to be treated with suspicion, and opposed as a dreadful attack upon the membership, even where whatever it is would actually be quite good for a good section of the membership.

 

Everything is a fight, with dues increasing to replenish the fighting fund.

 

Over time, only those who share the committee position will ever join the committee, the position becomes entrenched, and those members who aren't of that entrenched opinion up sticks and leave.

 

Unfortunately, NABO has been on this track for a LONG time, and too many people have given them up as a bad job for it to be recoverable.

 

If the NABO committee had the good of boaters at heart, they would vote themselves out of existence to leave the way clear for a new organisation to take up the mantle.

[Sir Nibble]

The point is that as boaters, or in this case licence holders we are stakeholders in the waterways and if the figures we have seen lately are anything to go by we are major, major stakeholders not just in terms of use but also in terms of contribution. Clearly there are tough times ahead and organisations such as angling clubs will do what they can to safeguard their use of the waterways. Good luck to them, anglers are responsible for fish stocks and look after their interests well. The waterways are much better for their involvement. As boaters we rely too much on a mindset of somehow taking it for granted that we can navigate. If anglers had just taken it for granted there would be good fishing then there wouldn't be. We need really to stop seeing navigation as a fait accompli and take ownership of our own needs and wants. I would not give money to CaRT, ever, because I don't want to waste cash on idiot art projects or cyclepaths or cleaning up after anti social arseholes who use the towpath as a dog toilet. If I could contribute knowing that my cash would buy the things I consider worth paying for rather than things that benefit the 100mph cyclist and canine sewage disposal then that is another matter.

[Tuscan]

There is some degree of truth in what you say.

 

However, whilst there are a number of organisations that you identify, it is fair to say that these organisations don't have a shared constituency.

 

RBOA is a deliberately narrow constituency, and excludes most boater.

 

IWA is a constituency much wider than just boaters.

 

Which leaves NABO as the single national organisation that is nominally focussed on representing the interests of boaters to CRT.

 

Unfortunately, NABO is (in my humble opinion) not fit for purpose.

 

Now, I would accept that things move on, and that organisations like NABO change over time, so it may well be that the criticisms that I make of NABO are outdated, or that I'm talking about issues with particular individuals who aren't part of the committee any more, but I don't actually see much change, and it appears to me that the NABO committee isn't a beast that changes often.

 

NABO seems to see itself as a pastiche of a 1970s trade union.

 

Anything that the "management" does is to be treated with suspicion, and opposed as a dreadful attack upon the membership, even where whatever it is would actually be quite good for a good section of the membership.

 

Everything is a fight, with dues increasing to replenish the fighting fund.

 

Over time, only those who share the committee position will ever join the committee, the position becomes entrenched, and those members who aren't of that entrenched opinion up sticks and leave.

 

Unfortunately, NABO has been on this track for a LONG time, and too many people have given them up as a bad job for it to be recoverable.

 

If the NABO committee had the good of boaters at heart, they would vote themselves out of existence to leave the way clear for a new organisation to take up the mantle.

 

Well as one of the three new council members who have arrived this year I don't recognise your view, but I guess that's hardly surprising. There will always be those that moan from the outside and those that come inside to try and make a difference in any organisation even in the new one I wish you every success in setting up.

[lexicon]

It would require a lot more than permission. CRT would require risk assessments, method statements, appropriate training and insurance in place to work on waterways. The Waterway Recovery Group (a subsidiary of IWA) works on restoration schemes round the country, while complying with the onerous health & safety requirements of CRT.

So red tape aside it is possible.

Are there's any published figures on the funding of WRG?

[howardang]

There is some degree of truth in what you say.

 

However, whilst there are a number of organisations that you identify, it is fair to say that these organisations don't have a shared constituency.

 

RBOA is a deliberately narrow constituency, and excludes most boater.

 

IWA is a constituency much wider than just boaters.

 

Which leaves NABO as the single national organisation that is nominally focussed on representing the interests of boaters to CRT.

 

Unfortunately, NABO is (in my humble opinion) not fit for purpose.

 

Now, I would accept that things move on, and that organisations like NABO change over time, so it may well be that the criticisms that I make of NABO are outdated, or that I'm talking about issues with particular individuals who aren't part of the committee any more, but I don't actually see much change, and it appears to me that the NABO committee isn't a beast that changes often.

 

NABO seems to see itself as a pastiche of a 1970s trade union.

 

Anything that the "management" does is to be treated with suspicion, and opposed as a dreadful attack upon the membership, even where whatever it is would actually be quite good for a good section of the membership.

 

Everything is a fight, with dues increasing to replenish the fighting fund.

 

Over time, only those who share the committee position will ever join the committee, the position becomes entrenched, and those members who aren't of that entrenched opinion up sticks and leave.

 

Unfortunately, NABO has been on this track for a LONG time, and too many people have given them up as a bad job for it to be recoverable.

 

If the NABO committee had the good of boaters at heart, they would vote themselves out of existence to leave the way clear for a new organisation to take up the mantle.

I have seen you express these views about NABO Council before so there is obviously some history that I don't know about, but it certainly doesn't sound like the people who were there when I was on Council as Vice Chairman. May I suggest that you attend one of the meetings in Oldbury; I am sure you would be made very welcome, and at least you would be able to put your thoughts to them.

 

Regards

 

Howard

[mayalld]

Well as one of the three new council members who have arrived this year I don't recognise your view, but I guess that's hardly surprising. There will always be those that moan from the outside and those that come inside to try and make a difference in any organisation even in the new one I wish you every success in setting up.

 

I was a member for some years, and found the committee hostile to any dissenting opinions, and the usual answer to anybody who didn't like the committe line was much as yours is here.

 

Effectively, the committee view was that all the members who didn't "make the effort" to become part of the committee had no right to criticise what those who did make the effort decided.

 

Immediately, you disenfrancise those members who aren't able to commit to being in a particular location for each committee meeting.

[mayalld]

I have seen you express these views about NABO Council before so there is obviously some history that I don't know about, but it certainly doesn't sound like the people who were there when I was on Council as Vice Chairman. May I suggest that you attend one of the meetings in Oldbury; I am sure you would be made very welcome, and at least you would be able to put your thoughts to them.

 

Regards

 

Howard

 

Let me share with you a quote from a previous chairman of NABO, who took exception to his words in the bulletin being shared on uk.rec.waterways

 

 

With this in mind I would very much appreciate being asked before

anything I write in the bulletin is passed on to a third party. NABO

has elected me as its spokesman and so it should be my job to decide

if the bulletin is more suitable for communicating with non-members

than using the usual channels e.g. the NABO website and press releases.

 

 

You can google the rest!

[davidc]

So lets start the ball rolling.

 

1. put together a steering committee to get a name , objective and finally a constitution of aims

2. nomination for steering committee.

3. ask Dhutch if we can have a section on CWDF so help gauge numbers who would join and for feed back on point 1 and assist in voting ref point 2

 

Lets stop talking and do

[johnthebridge]

 

....... hostile to any dissenting opinions, and the usual answer to anybody who didn't like the committe line was much as yours is here.

 

Effectively, the committee view was that all the members who didn't "make the effort" to become part of the committee had no right to criticise what those who did make the effort decided.

 

 

 

Much the same as a lot of the attitudes on here then.

[blodger]

So lets start the ball rolling.

 

1. put together a steering committee to get a name , objective and finally a constitution of aims

2. nomination for steering committee.

3. ask Dhutch if we can have a section on CWDF so help gauge numbers who would join and for feed back on point 1 and assist in voting ref point 2

 

Lets stop talking and do

 

I do not know if the Nabo structure is fit for purpose but I would suggest echoing as much as makes sense and is practical rather than inventing the wheel and so as to be attractive to those who have resorted to Nabo because there is nothing else.

I am worried about where CaRT is going and want to be represented within CaRT. I'll end up Naboing if nothing else takes off in consequence.

[howardang]

Let me share with you a quote from a previous e chairman of NABO, who took exception to his words in the bulletin being shared on uk.rec.waterways

 

 

 

You can google the rest![/

Thank you for that but I will leave history where it belongs, in the past. Why not give the present hard working Council a chance?

 

Howard

Edited August 19, 2013 by howardang

[GUMPY]

Oh a new organisation

I have three letters for you all

 

SOW

 

Hope you do better than they did, somehow I doubt it.

It takes a lot of effort to start a new waterways organisation/club I know been there done that and to the credit of the members its still there best part of 15 years later.

[howardang]

Oh a new organisation

I have three letters for you all

SOW

Hope you do better than they did, somehow I doubt it.

It takes a lot of effort to start a new waterways organisation/club I know been there done that and to the credit of the members its still there best part of 15 years later.

But didn't SOW lose its way because it ended up virtually a one man band? I was an early member of SOW but have heard nothing from them in years.

 

Howard

Edited August 19, 2013 by howardang

[GUMPY]

Internal wrangling and politics was its demise.

[Higgs]

The relationship is Boaters and CRT. At the moment, one is using the other and doesn't offer much in the way of conversation.

 

Even if 33,000 boaters went to CRT with one voice, it wouldn't guarantee getting attention or having any effect. I think most of us do not want to adversely effect the system, cutting our noses off to spite the face.

 

There is the no lesser problem of getting the attention of boaters. Money - gets the attention of most people, and CRT.

 

We have got to make money, a useful amount. We have to offer even the most apathetic boater a reason to get involved.

 

Somehow, the inertia has to be overcome.

 

As far it goes, so far:

 

Carrying on from the rather fanciful notion that it would be possible to collect an annual sum from 33,000 people. Given a couple of years to gather pace. Example - £25.00 x 33,000 = £825,000

 

Staff payment for Administration. Also Printing, electronic,

Legal aid

Expenses for regional reps.

Annual fund grant for CRT - poss £500,000 (this part can be put aside and built up, if not all needed every year)

A yearly/twice-yearly lottery.

Schools visits to encourage awareness and interest.

Sponsorship

The best bit - A badge.

 

Just a suggestion.

[blodger]

Internal wrangling and politics was its demise.

 

The same as BW eh