CRT statement Nick BrownvCRT

[Sir Nibble]

Well considering their recent concessions to ccers it would appear that they are moving closer to my definition than yours.

Not mine, like I said this is my reading of what they are saying not my opinion. On your real point I would agree insofar as the plans for the K&A currently under consultation amount to total capitulation to the "NCCC" in my opinion and my boat has done sufficient mileage in the last last month to qualify as a continuous cruiser under these proposals.

[Arducius]

Have you read the proposals for the Western K&A? You still have to move to the next area every two weeks, not just cover 20km per year. So you can't have done enough to qualify as a continuous cruiser as there are still several two week periods of this year that have yet to happen.

[NigelMoore]

The links are worth a read, especially nicks.

 

Can you clarify that? Both links relate to CART doc.s not Nick's, so far as I can see. So is there another link which has Nick's doc.s or are you referring to statements of Nick's which are referred to in the CART statement/response links?

[Sir Nibble]

Have you read the proposals for the Western K&A? You still have to move to the next area every two weeks, not just cover 20km per year. So you can't have done enough to qualify as a continuous cruiser as there are still several two week periods of this year that have yet to happen.

There is no minimum stay, you need not spend any longer in each area than it takes to pass through. It is entirely possible to do the whole of Devizes to bath in 2 days so that's just one overnight stop.

Bath14 days, Bradford on Avon 14 days Devizes 1 day, Hilperton 1 day Avoncliffe 14 days, Bath 14days Bradford on Avon 14 days Devizes 1 day, Hilperton 1 day etc etc.

[NigelMoore]

Regardless of what anyone thinks of the wisdom of seeking this Judicial Review [and I have my own reservations], there are some serious issues raised by the content of this Press Release.

 

Take the would-be belittling observation: “Nick Brown received permission at only the fourth attempt to take forward just one limited aspect of his claim, three previous judges having decided that he had no arguable case whatsoever.”

 

This overlooks the fact that appeals go up the ladder, not down or at peer level. The fact that it took a higher-level Lord Justice of Appeal to agree that a case existed for examining the interpretation of the core article of legislation, simply demonstrates that the lower-level High Court judges’ rulings were considered to be wrong by a more qualified and experienced judge, insofar as they agreed with Johnson that there was “no arguable case whatsoever”. That doesn’t belittle Nick’s argument; it acknowledges that his insight into the need for the meaning to be reviewed was in that aspect [even if in that aspect alone], greater than several High Court judges!

 

The other aspect of Johnson’s scathing characterisation in calling the whole thing “misconceived”, is that in doing so – in direct contradiction of Lord Justice Jackson’s ruling – he is acting in dangerous contempt of court, because he is, in effect, still placing his own evaluation of the merits, above the evaluation of the Lord Justice. He criticises thereby the judge's contrary opinion - and this, in the course of on-going litigation.

 

None of the above will altered by whatever the court finally decides [if they even make such a decision] is a meaningful/correct interpretation of the relevant section – at this stage, the question was whether the issued guidance could be called in question. The Lord Justice has agreed it could be, so the merit of that element is upheld to that extent.

 

I should note further, relative to Mr Parry’s coached contribution, that it is entirely disingenuous. I know for a fact that Nick sought to engage directly with him in order to arrive at a more consensually agreeable guidance outwith litigation. This press release came out within hours of that attempt. Mr Parry was on a litigious roll that day; by 9:40 that evening he had emailed me in the same vein, delivering his considered opinion that alternative dispute resolution held no merits for him.

 

It is not people like Nick and I who are compelling CART to “divert resources”, it is the refusal by the CART executive to consider any alternative to fighting boaters through the courts, backed by highly specialised teams of very expensive lawyers. In Nick’s case – why bother defending at all? Why not simply submit the guidance complained of, and leave it to the judge to come up with some formula? It needn’t have cost them a penny.

 

Those who fervently hoped for a fresh approach from a genial new CEO, need to be more wary in light of this very public declaration of the way he chooses to operate.

 

 

[dmr]

CaRT do this sort of thing far too often...using "loaded" words and phrases in official statements. CaRT are in charge of our waterways and hence our homes and so should behave accordingly with honest and impartial information. This sort of thing lowers them to the level of the Daily Mail.

However it's still early days so I don't think we should be too hard on Richard Parry just yet.

 

............Dave

[jenlyn]

It is not people like Nick and I who are compelling CART to divert resources, it is the refusal by the CART executive to consider any alternative to fighting boaters through the courts, backed by highly specialised teams of very expensive lawyers. In Nicks case why bother defending at all? Why not simply submit the guidance complained of, and leave it to the judge to come up with some formula? It neednt have cost them a penny.

 

Can't say I blame them. The absolute rubbish that is sometimes spouted by nick brown beggars belief. I can't be bothered to quote what he and panda were spouting at a meeting in Rickmansworth yesterday, but advising people to throw in FOI requests (because CRT hate it, and it costs them money), and moor your boat on a shallow stretch so it grounds and you can't move, more or less shows how silly and annoying it all gets. How can you take someone seriously when they come out with such rubbish?

Judging by the attendance though, I am thankfull that not too many take him seriously. Time perhaps to move on.

You had your moment as well nigel, no one can take that away from you, and I feel personally that you were justified, but now, you are allowing your victory to be used. To me, it is now becoming a bit of a sour apple.

[steve_timebeck]

Judging by the attendance though, I am thankfull that not too many take him seriously. Time perhaps to move on.

 

It's a pity you didn't attend the meeting Steve. The second half was very informative, as was the discussion afterwards.

[jenlyn]

It's a pity you didn't attend the meeting Steve. The second half was very informative, as was the discussion afterwards.

Others attended on my behalf and recorded it thanks. From listening to the recording, I am happy I did not go out of my way to get there.

Frankly, for the noise you and a very small minority have been making, I was expecting something groundbreaking and substantial, rather than the usual drivel.

However, each to their own, and whatever sparks your plug eh?

[carlt]

Frankly, for the noise you and a very small minority have been making, I was expecting something groundbreaking and substantial, rather than the usual drivel.

Funny, that's more or less what I was saying (in a less aggressive manner) about the ACC before you turned on the abuse.

 

<cue more abuse>.

[Rod a mod from Tod]

jenlyn, on 06 Oct 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

Can't say I blame them. The absolute rubbish that is sometimes spouted by nick brown beggars belief. I can't be bothered to quote what he and panda were spouting at a meeting in Rickmansworth yesterday, but advising people to throw in FOI requests (because CRT hate it, and it costs them money), and moor your boat on a shallow stretch so it grounds and you can't move, more or less shows how silly and annoying it all gets. How can you take someone seriously when they come out with such rubbish?

Judging by the attendance though, I am thankfull that not too many take him seriously. Time perhaps to move on.

You had your moment as well nigel, no one can take that away from you, and I feel personally that you were justified, but now, you are allowing your victory to be used. To me, it is now becoming a bit of a sour apple.

 

Which in turn costs us much more money.

[jenlyn]

 

<cue more abuse>.

Nah, only worthy of another "yawn" :-)

[Pluto]

They weren't built to and didn't necessarily benefit the *local* economy. They did, however, benefit the economy at each end of the link. The Trent and Mersey for example, was built through Cheshire by a consortium of pottery manufacturers and coal mine owners to (Via them making a profit, and spending it.) benefit the economy of Stoke-on-Trent and the Potteries. Most of the traffic was through traffic and didn't benefit the local economy at all, except for the landowners who had shares in the canal company and the wages of the staff, but that was incidental. Even the boaters spent as little as possible while travelling, saving spending for payday when they arrived at their (company's) home base after a trip.

The T&MC was financed by local businessmen in the Potteries, with others in Liverpool, in order to support their local economies. The majority of the traffic was between Liverpool and the Potteries so benefitting the local economies of those who invested in the canal. Successful canals were built by small groups of businessmen to help develop their local businesses, and thus the canal did not have to make a vast profit. Canal Mania canals, on the other hand, were promoted as profit-making businesses, usually unrelated to local business and financed nationally, which is why many failed.

[carlt]

Nah, only worthy of another "yawn" :-)

Yes it's a pity John left the forum.

 

At least he was attempting to address peoples' disappointment and concerns rather than just dismissing it.

It's funny how you can express similar sentiments but get abusive when others level them at you.

[jenlyn]

Yes it's a pity John left the forum.

 

At least he was attempting to address peoples' disappointment and concerns rather than just dismissing it.It's funny how you can express similar sentiments but get abusive when others level them at you.

Some of your posts just get boring carl (particularly when you deploy your I'm having the last word tactic), hence my "yawns".

[carlt]

Some of your posts just get boring carl (particularly when you deploy your I'm having the last word tactic), hence my "yawns".

and yet you level the same criticisms at someone else (albeit in a more aggressive manner) and don't expect to be picked up on the hypocrisy and irony.

 

Perhaps if I lowered myself to your level and insulted you then you wouldn't feel so tired.

 

Your "yawns", btw are the "last word tactic" of someone who doesn't have a last word to contribute.

[jenlyn]

and yet you level the same criticisms at someone else (albeit in a more aggressive manner) and don't expect to be picked up on the hypocrisy and irony.

 

Perhaps if I lowered myself to your level and insulted you then you wouldn't feel so tired.

 

Your "yawns", btw are the "last word tactic" of someone who doesn't have a last word to contribute.

Ok :-)

[pelicanafloat]

Others attended on my behalf and recorded it thanks. From listening to the recording, I am happy I did not go out of my way to get there.

Frankly, for the noise you and a very small minority have been making, I was expecting something groundbreaking and substantial, rather than the usual drivel.

However, each to their own, and whatever sparks your plug eh?

jenlyn, we haven't met, and I'm no doubt considered lightweight by people like yourself but in all honesty I find your contributions belittling and aggressive. I joined the ACC facebook group and quite frankly your attitude both here and on FBland more than anything else compels me to resist joining the ACC. This should upset you...... I am not a political animal and I hate conflict, but I hate your "narrowminded" approach, telling it as it isn't.

[jenlyn]

jenlyn, we haven't met, and I'm no doubt considered lightweight by people like yourself but in all honesty I find your contributions belittling and aggressive. I joined the ACC facebook group and quite frankly your attitude both here and on FBland more than anything else compels me to resist joining the ACC. This should upset you...... I am not a political animal and I hate conflict, but I hate your "narrowminded" approach, telling it as it isn't.

 

Standing up, shouting, making the effort to actually do something could I suppose be looked upon as "aggressive". However, your comment about me "telling it as it isn't" needs some sort of evidence from yourself, making such a sweeping statement at least deserves something to substantiate it :-)

[junior]

I sense some sunday afternoon entertainment brewing!!

[jenlyn]

I sense some sunday afternoon entertainment brewing!!

Nah, grand prix is on now...

[Dave_P]

Despite some encouraging early signs from Richard Parry, I find his comments here very concerning. It looks to me like he's hoping to garner support from 'average boaters' by blaming Nick Brown for diverting funds. This is a very divisive approach.

 

In this country, individuals, rightly, have access to the judiciary and, personally, that's a right and a freedom which underpins much of what I hold dear. For the head of a charity to criticize somebody for seeking valid legal recourse to defend their situation is wholly wrong. CaRT might not like what Nick Brown is doing (and I personally don't agree with Mr Browns argument) but he has every right to pursue it. Far from making me anti-Nick, it's just made me feel more sorry for him.

 

Quote: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall.

[carlt]

It looks to me like he's hoping to garner support from 'average boaters' by blaming Nick Brown for diverting funds. This is a very divisive approach.

Works though which is why they've been doing it for years.

 

Look at how the back room tactics, giving concessions to ccers, lead to the formation of an exclusive club, which is now defending CRT against other boaters on this very thread, rather than an active inclusive organisation.

 

They are masters of "divide and conquer" tactics and boaters fall for it every time.

[pelicanafloat]

Standing up, shouting, making the effort to actually do something could I suppose be looked upon as "aggressive". However, your comment about me "telling it as it isn't" needs some sort of evidence from yourself, making such a sweeping statement at least deserves something to substantiate it :-)

 

Truth of the matter, you have set yourself in a position to represent CC's via the ACC. I have never met you, and your profile says not a jot, so how else can I draw any conclusions if my only source is your written content? You seem very quick to rubbish another persons point of view. I just wonder what it is that makes someone in your position feel that a retort is always necessary. Silence is golden ....

 

As far as I'm concerned, I see both sides of the dispute, even the hidden muddied bits and all very confusing. I see them as part of a great muddle that maybe needs to be sorted out. As a relative newcomer to the cruising fraternity I will not take or join sides. I hope that CaRT will move along a path that is of a consequence of the natural order of things and not as a result of political meandering.

 

As for the "telling it as it isn't" ... its on the bottom of your posts and I thought it ironical that you suggested you were at a meeting but you wasn't!

[Dave_P]

Works though which is why they've been doing it for years.

 

Look at how the back room tactics, giving concessions to ccers, lead to the formation of an exclusive club, which is now defending CRT against other boaters on this very thread, rather than an active inclusive organisation.

 

They are masters of "divide and conquer" tactics and boaters fall for it every time.

 

Quite true. Ever the optimist, I was hoping for something different from Mr Parry. Seems not though. When are boaters gonna wake up and realise that there's a hell of a lot more that unites us than divides us? Surely it suits CaRT perfectly for us all to be arguing with each other all the time.

 

Another quote: "They're pointing out the enemy to keep you deaf and blind,they wanna sap your energy incarcerate your mind..." - Mark Knopfler