London "Blockade"

[Carrie]

 

the organisers have approached BW to seek permission for their actions

 

Thanks, Eugene

 

Mr Baston - We are not school children asking to play with the football, Sir. People will act in the way they feel driven to do, regardless of whether you give your permission or not.

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't BW sought independence from government subsidies ? - I understood from recent interviews, BW look forward to the day they can 'go it alone' as a viable business.

I haven't been following the whole story, due to intermittent internet access, but this all sounds a bit fishy to me. BW can wring their hands over the cuts, which I expect they knew about well in advance and share boater's dismay and blame the government.

Then they have the perfect (and by then, real) excuse to up licence fees, cut back on 'non-essential maintenance', focus money on money-spinning ventures such as fancy marinas, hotels and the like.

GPCruiserman (sorry - don't know your name) - I think that far from needing BW to support our campaign, we need to acknowledge that they are colluders in the problem.

[Eugene Baston]

Message loud and clear, I'll go away and won't bother trying to offer a different perspective or simply help with something in the future.

 

Good luck with your campaigning, boating or whatever makes you happy.

 

Eugene

[Bullfrog]

Message loud and clear, I'll go away and won't bother trying to offer a different perspective or simply help with something in the future.

 

Good luck with your campaigning, boating or whatever makes you happy.

 

Eugene

 

 

Eugene, please don't fall into the trap of thinking the loudest speak for the majority. I, for one, always value your input.

 

Regards

 

David Bridle

[Chris-B]

Message loud and clear, I'll go away and won't bother trying to offer a different perspective or simply help with something in the future.

 

Good luck with your campaigning, boating or whatever makes you happy.

 

Eugene

 

 

Eugene, please don't fall into the trap of thinking the loudest speak for the majority. I, for one, always value your input.

 

Regards

 

David Bridle

 

 

Totally agree David, at the end of the day any differences people have with BW etc are VERY secondary to the larger picture

I also appreciate the input Eugene puts in to this newsgroup if only for a perspective of "the other side of the fence"

Chris Bennett

[blackrose]

Hope there's no sudden lock ' breakdowns ' as you lot are trying to leave Brentford or Limehouse on your way to the London protest

 

On the contrary, it seems we have the support of BW.

 

I have not been involved in any way with this campaign, but if you interpret it as some form of general message of support for British Waterways, it's management or indeed yourself Eugene I think you may be mistaken.

Or at least we did have!

[anhar]

Eugene, please don't fall into the trap of thinking the loudest speak for the majority. I, for one, always value your input.

 

Regards

 

David Bridle

Quite. I agree with David on this.

 

Why the antipathy towards BW in the matter of the government grant cuts? They are clearly on the side of us, the boaters, and other canal users. It is the government via DEFRA that is causing the problem, not BW. BW would rather have had the level of grant maintained or raised. Why therefore attack Eugene or BW in this regard? BW may not be perfect but on this point they are with us.

 

And as for financial autonomy of BW from the government in future, that is welcome for the reasons we have been seeing, namely that government support is too fickle a source of income upon which to be relied. In my view it is ideal for BW to be self financing.

 

regards

Steve

Edited November 17, 2006 by anhar

[allybsc]

Message loud and clear, I'll go away and won't bother trying to offer a different perspective or simply help with something in the future.

 

Good luck with your campaigning, boating or whatever makes you happy.

 

Eugene

 

Please stay, it's not lost on me that BW staff are going to lose their jobs, that's terrible for the people concerned. I value your input. don't go

[Liam]

F-in great!

[Grasshopper]

Whooaaaaa!!!

 

How did BW suddenly get the blame for unbelievable incompetence on the part of DEFRA???? The budget cut is the result of DEFRA getting fined by the EU for not being able to manage a p*** up in a brewery. The injustice is that the money is then being taken from BW & therefore - US - who had nothing to do with it.

 

It certainly has nothing to do with BW's attempts to raise revenue from its own resources which is to our benefit since it helps to keep licence charges down & fund extra maintenance. There has been substantial investment and improvement in the waterways over recent history which is now all being put at risk for reasons totally out of BW's control.

 

People might argue with BW's priorities or way of working at times but that has nothing to do with this. The villain here is NOT BW.

 

I don't know about anyone else but I certainly see the protests as supporting BW on this issue and certainly the staff who are losing their jobs over this outrageous action by DEFRA.

 

As for not being able to follow the story because of inadequate internet connections, try the old fashioned printed papers and magazines! Or just talk to others on the cut........

 

Eugene - I don't know you as I haven't been around long but to me it seemed a positive aspect that I'd seen you on the forum and that you were prepared to engage in dialogue in such a way. Let's not lose that because of ill informed comments.

[fuzzyduck]

I have not been involved in any way with this campaign, but if you interpret it as some form of general message of support for British Waterways, it's management or indeed yourself Eugene I think you may be mistaken.

 

That has to be the single most callous sentence I've seen in a long time.

 

Eugene

 

When i wrote to my MP asking him to sign the EDM last session, and the letter I'm writing now asking him to sign the current 3, are in support of BW and it's employees such as yourself. John does not speak for me.

 

I don't like everything you (BW) do, but I support your aims. and in these times of possible job losses i support the individuals.

 

Fuzzy

 

besides, how could anyone kick such an inoffensive looking invividual.

 

 

 

 

N.b picture here for an hour or so, as it's not mine, and i'm not hosting it.

[Carrie]

In my view it is ideal for BW to be self financing.

 

regards

Steve

 

Yes. It worked so well for the railways didn't it. And let's do it for schools and hospitals too. After all, it's the same trend - sneaky privatisation. And who benefits every time ? - well it won't be us, that's for certain. It's always managers, fat cats at the top of the pile and shareholders.

Defra may have withdrawn funding - but BW have gone on record several times expressing a wish for independence! You can't have it both ways, I reckon.

 

As for the loudest voice, Bullfrog - I think you may notice it's a single voice, questioning the accepted view. I can't apologise for that, I'm afraid. I also said 'Correct me if I'm wrong', which invites informed comments. Finally - yes, I do have intermittent access to information as I live on the cut, not in a marina and don't drive to Tesco's to pick up a daily newspaper! No apolgies there either.

[Guest st170dw]

John does not speak for me either.

 

It is important that we support BW in their efforts to improve the waterways. It is true that there have been some daft decisions and actions from BW over the years but the same is true of any large organisation you could mention.

 

The cuts are not of BW's making and we should campaign on their behalf to have them re-instated.

 

The contributions from Eugene are always useful and on occasions discussion provoking! Please Stay

[fuzzyduck]

Not that i'm recommending everyone take this course of action, but I've emailed Eugene telling him to get his backside back here. I was going to ring him, but thought that might be going just a bit too far.

[GRPCruiserman]

Message loud and clear, I'll go away and won't bother trying to offer a different perspective or simply help with something in the future.

 

Good luck with your campaigning, boating or whatever makes you happy.

 

Eugene

 

Your input is always greatly valued by myself also, and I would appeal for you to stay in touch with these columns and not to abandon us.

 

In my opinion, it is NOT BW that are at fault here, but DEFRA whose fines have been passed on so to speak to BW.

 

It is grossly unfair to accuse BW of any wrong doing in this matter, and the very fact that their own jobs, livelihoods, and indeed way of life is threatened by the actions of other government departments needs to be brought to the attention of as many people as possible.

 

The fines are obviously meaningless for DEFRA and I would have thought that BW could take them to the European Courts for fine evasion or something, the promised funding was surely a contract of sorts and to simply stop it to pay fines that should have imposed penalties on Civil Servants is simply wrong. It is THOSE Civil Servants who should be loosing their jobs, and NOT BW staff.

 

We should also NOT be having a go at BW staff, especially Eugene who has been so informative within these columns and who has helped me personally on a number of occasions with a number of issues. If you've ever spoken to him, he is the type of individual who cannot do enough for you and he is a valuable asset both to BW and for us on these columns.

 

I apologise if anyone disagrees with me, but this is a forum for opinions, and these are mine.

 

It is good to hear that the blockades are to take place on busy towpaths, and it should be emphasised to passers by as to the reason for the funding cuts and why they may loose their towpath completely.

 

As I stated earlier, I have now sold my boat as a result of the threat of the costs increase and will only buy another for canal use once it is resolved, but I miss it like you would not believe, and I am hoping most sincerely that the battle is won.

 

Please, Eugene, do not dessert us in our most needy time as a result of a single comment.

 

[John Orentas]

As I am being portrayed as the bad guy again I suppose I should reply. I think I am correct in saying that Eugene Baston's title is Customer Relations Manager with British Waterways. As such his function is to at all times to represent and present the policies of his employers in the best possible light at all times and in all circumstances.

 

For myself I don't enjoy being seen to be a 'customer' of an organisation that in theory at least, as a citizen of this country I am a joint owner, equally I don't enjoy the thought that I should be 'managed' or manipulated by a customer relations manager or anyone else.

 

Eugene has chosen to dress himself and the organisation he represents in the clothes of a victim in this situation. British Waterways and their mangers are not the victims, it is you the boat owners who will carry the cost, indeed as the cuts in question were announced the chairman of BW chose that time almost as a gesture of defiance to award himself a very substantial pay increase.

 

It is perfectly true that this situation is not in any way the fault of BW though it must be said that if such a downturn, not uncommon in commercial life should hit other organisations the knee jerk reaction would not be to pass the entire cost on to their 'customers', few however are in the monopoly situation that BW enjoy. The ordinary boaters with very little outside suport have chosen to take some direct and indirect action in an attempt to halt or reverse this grotesque situation.

 

So next time Eugene or some other authority figure posts a gracious, patronising 'thank you' please don't instinctively fall to your knees, he is only doing his employers bidding and attempting to 'manage you'.

Edited November 17, 2006 by John Orentas

[Grasshopper]

Yes. It worked so well for the railways didn't it. And let's do it for schools and hospitals too. After all, it's the same trend - sneaky privatisation.

 

NO - it ISN'T.

 

I'm a life long socialist and no fan of privatisation but that ISN'T what we are talking about here.

 

BW have been trying to maximise thir income from sources other than the Government grant precisely because the grant is inadequate. In that respect it is like the railways when they were nationalised and governments consistently under invested in them.

 

BW have said they would like to be self sufficient and given that their investment plans are always at the mercy of the treasury, you can understand why. I have to say that I don't think that it is achievable and that the government will always have to pay a grant. And indeed should. But it does seem sensible to try to reduce dependency as far as possible.

 

Whilst in an ideal world the government should invest more in the waterways, it is unlikely to happen. And if there is a downturn in the economy, the exact opposite will happen.

 

But all of that is largely irrelevant because these particular cuts have come about because DEFRA has not being paying subsidies to farmers on time. As a result they have been hit with a fine bythe EU.

 

Unfortunately BW comes under DEFRA and in trying to make up the money DEFRA has raided all the budgets under its control. And doubtless BW looked like a soft option.

 

So we can blame DEFRA. Or the EU. Or even farmers and their insatiable need for subsidies. Or Gordon Brown for not bailing DEFRA out. But not BW in this instance.

 

Of course the Tories WERE playing with the idea of selling off the waterways before they were thrown out of office so if that nice Mr Cameron gets in next time, you might well see some real privatisation..........

[Carrie]

as the cuts in question were announced the chairman of BW chose that time almost as a gesture of defiance to award himself a very substantial pay increase.

 

 

Where have we heard this before? Oh yes - most large companies, just before the shit hits the fan. BW are like any other 'profit before people' company. Individuals may be pleasant enough people, but as John says, that's Mr Baston's job and he's clearly good at it.

 

Thank you Grasshopper, I understand the current difficulties and links to the EU. However, that " BW have been trying to maximise thier income from sources other than the Government " IS privatisation by stealth or the back door or whatever the expression is!

[fuzzyduck]

I'm with Carrie, it's backdoor privitisation. when BW are self sufficient there will be absolutely no need for them to remain under the Governments control.

 

100s of miles of now public land will be suddenly owned by private individuals, and very quickly afterwards will be a subsidiary of Crest Nicolson or similar. you think license, and mooring charges are high now, I'm willing to bet they will very quickly double.

 

Lets face it the Tories would sell it off like a shot. and ToryLab are just a bit sneakier about such things.

 

and here we have a catch 22 situation, as part of the government BW is prone to grant cuts, and political messing about, as a PLC BW would be some entirely different entity and legaly obliged to do one thing maximise it's performance for the shareholders, not provide the "Linear Leisure Park".

 

As much as I hate to say it, "either way we're in the cack" and so are BW's current employees. At the moment, at least we can get our voices heard, by lobbying our MPs and piling on the political pressure. BW PLC would label us "consumers" and then rape us, look how it's worked out for electricity and gas, prices are forever rising, and so are profits.

Edited November 17, 2006 by fuzzyduck

[Big John]

I'm so glad I'm not alone in thinking that the "enemy" (perhaps that's a bit harsh - rather we should say the people that have absolutely no idea how much pleasure our British waterways give to so many people) is DEFRA (De Entity For Reversing Advances), NOT British Waterways - not at the moment anyway

 

Unless we all speak with a united voice against the iniquitous cuts that DEFRA have suddenly imposed on OUR waterways' futures, we will look back on the good times as being at the end of the 20th century. The way that DEFRA has mismanaged their own budgets would be condemned by everyone, including the New Labour government, if they hadn't actually been an arm of the aforementioned government. Why the term "DEFRA" is used at all is beyond me. It is this government that is responsible for this reverse.

 

Whatever BW may lack is irrelevant if they are not funded properly by the people of this country who benefit from our waterways. Note how many TV backdrops are canals or rivers or sea; count how many people you see walking by water this weekend. Then get your as**s out of your chairs next weekend and express in whatever way you think will have any effect at all, how much you value OUR WATERWAYS.

 

Only when TB & GB realise how unpopular their antipathy to the canal funding cuts is, can we turn our attention to letting BW & EA how they should be using their funds.

[blackrose]

As I am being portrayed as the bad guy again I suppose I should reply. I think I am correct in saying that Eugene Baston's title is Customer Relations Manager with British Waterways. As such his function is to at all times to represent and present the policies of his employers in the best possible light at all times and in all circumstances.

 

For myself I don't enjoy being seen to be a 'customer' of an organisation that in theory at least, as a citizen of this country I am a joint owner, equally I don't enjoy the thought that I should be 'managed' or manipulated by a customer relations manager or anyone else.

I'm afraid the world has changed John. I can't think of any other such large organisation that hasn't been similarly corporatised. Perhaps you're venting previously built up frustrations with BW which have nothing to do with the current situation.

 

Eugene has chosen to dress himself and the organisation he represents in the clothes of a victim in this situation. British Waterways and their mangers are not the victims, it is you the boat owners who will carry the cost, indeed as the cuts in question were announced the chairman of BW chose that time almost as a gesture of defiance to award himself a very substantial pay increase.

I didn't know about the chairman's pay increase - I'd like to know more. But what about all the BW job losses? I think managers are going too.

 

It is perfectly true that this situation is not in any way the fault of BW though it must be said that if such a downturn, not uncommon in commercial life should hit other organisations the knee jerk reaction would not be to pass the entire cost on to their 'customers', few however are in the monopoly situation that BW enjoy.

Personally I find the current BW monopoly infinitely preferable to a plethora of hived off, privatised, or "deregulated" waterways authorities.

Edited November 18, 2006 by blackrose

[Grasshopper]

However, that " BW have been trying to maximise thier income from sources other than the Government " IS privatisation by stealth or the back door or whatever the expression is!

 

So if you were in charge of BW, you wouldn't do that. You'd forego any income from the assets that you hold and just complain that the government doesn't give you enough money to maintain the canals adequately. Better to watch a few canals close than do anything that smacks of 'privatisation'.........or common sense.

 

Obviously this conspiracy went right to the top. So let's imagine the scene..........

 

SCENE: The Prime Minister's office in Downing Street. Tony Blair sits behind a desk. There is a knock and Margaret Beckett enters.

 

TB: Ah Margaret, thanks for coming. I've got something I want you to do.

 

MB: OF course Prime Minister. Anything.

 

TB: I've decided that we need to privatise the waterways. All that money we're spending is just supporting the way of life of a bunch of middle class early retirees who have sold their houses to cruise around the canals like a bunch of gypsys. Probably all vote Tory as well. So we're going to wipe the smile off their faces.

 

MB: Yes Prime Minister?

 

TB: Yes. Of course we can't be seen to sell them off so I've come up with a cunning plan. I want you to speak to BW and tell them that we are going to keep them on a tight financial leash so they need to start getting some income off all those resources they are sitting on. I'd have thought by now they would have come up with that idea themselves but we can't wait any longer.

 

MB: Right Prime Minister.

 

TB: Then once they've started, we're going to engineer a crisis so that we can start cutting the money we pay. Then when they are in a complete mess, we can propose seling them off as the only solution.

 

MB: Good plan Prime Minister. What sort of crisis do you propose?

 

TB: I want you to start delaying payment of the subsidies to the farmers. That way the EU will be forced to impose a fine and we can use that as an excuse to have to start cutting BW's budget.

 

MB: Errrr. Won't that rather annoy the farmers?

 

TB: Exactly. Bunch of Tory supporters to a man. Look at the trouble that I had with them over that fox hunting business. Well now it's pay back time. (laughs maniacally)

 

MB: Errrr. But Prime Minister if my department can't pay the subsidies on time, I'm going to look totally incompetent!

 

TB: No worries Margaret. Jack Straw has upset the Americans. Before the manure hits the fan, I'll appoint you as Foreign Secretary in his place. No one will ever connect you with the fiasco.

 

MB (smiling broadly): Yes Prime Minister.

 

 

 

 

 

 

OK yes, I can see it all makes sense now............. What shall we do next? How Princess Diana was secretly murdered by MI6 on orders from Prince Phillip? Or how the Americans faked the moon landings?

Edited November 18, 2006 by Grasshopper

[fuzzyduck]

nice scenario you paint there. and very unlikely, but we have evidence of worse behavior from the current govt.

 

yeah we know how all this came about MB deliberately choose the most complex system for administering the farm payment, handed the whole lot over to Accenture, and the rest is history. What has been missed is the whole thing falls down to the effective privitisation of a bit of DEFRA, we are already suffering as boaters from the effects of privitisation. I don't blame people being wary.

 

we made a mistake taking the thread a bit off topic and the point is now being lost.

 

Everyone is potentially losing, us boaters, anglers, walkers, but also BW employees, the enemy (I think the word fits quite nicely) is DEFRA, and our elected morons. in the case of this issue the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

 

how things play out in the long run however....

 

P.S John I accept your feelings about BW, what I objected to is you implying you knew all our motives.

 

I admire your abiility to cut through the bull. Your Engineers approach to issues is great, and you remind me of my father.

 

DEFRA (De Entity For Reversing Advances)

 

I always thought DEFRA stood for Department for Elimination of Farming and Rural Affairs, maybe too much reading Private Eye on my part tho.

Edited November 18, 2006 by fuzzyduck