Thoroughly Depressing Open Meeting

[Guest]

 

Well perhaps I had the wrong end of the stick, but I thought it was meant to be more about us asking questions, and CRT replying, than having the audience just voice their opinions.

 

I'm slightly confused by the comment about a woman walking out, because although a woman protested strongly about what was being voiced, it was a man that also objected, and actually left - I thought the woman stayed. The sniggers of satisfaction from much of the baying audience when the chap did go, probably did little to make those who felt uncomfortable speak up.

 

As Tim rightly says, not everybody feels happy to speak out in large public meetings, and the hostility already exhibited would have deterred all but the bolder, I feel.

 

I personally didn't chip in in protest, (not that I'm not bold enough!), because I hoped that as they steered it forward to new "questions", we might get out of the groove it had got stuck in. My only question ultimately was about future intent with mooring auctions.

 

As has been said, they did close the "open session" earlier than the original billed timing for the end of meeting, but to be fair, there was then an opportunity to talk to CRT staff face to face, and I guess they had factored this in their overall timings.

I wasn't here, but from your description it sounds like many people were too intimidated to speak out. I have seen similar in other walks of life.

[Tony Dunkley]

I'm not certain but I'm pretty sure it was Jenlyn who put his hand up a lot but only got to ask one question. Let's just say Parry was very selective...I'll try to to be more assertive next time but not all of us are as confident in meetings as we are on an Internet forum...

 

Did you get the impression that the meeting, and particularly the most vocal of those attending, may have been to some extent 'stage managed' in order to set the tone the way Parry wanted it to be?

[jenlyn]

Maybe my glasses failed me but I'm pretty sure it was a woman...not that it's relevant unless you're doubting I was there of course...

It was a woman.

[by'eck]

I will risk mentioning that we ventured south of Buckby for the first time in 5 years last month, though only as far as Gayton. I did notice many more moored liveaboard boats moored in that section at pretty much every bridge, than 5 years ago. Is it a problem? Well not a major one but I suppose it does slightly spoil the rural feel. It is a bit like going for a drive in the country only to find yourself in a succession of ribbon villages. Not real country.

 

We also passed a small cruiser at 11am with 3 bodies in sleeping bags strewn across the rather narrow towpath, surrounded by a couple of dogs and numerous empty plastic bottles of cider and other debris. Folk walking the towpath would have to step over these sleeping drunkards which would not be a nice experience as they looked rougher than rough. So there are folk on the waterways who really do need to be "cleared up" although of course they are a very small minority.

 

Speaking of Gayton I was amused when I asked a moorer with a pile of wood and various personal items on the towpath adjacent to his boat (i.e. made his home fairly permanent) the status of his mooring, since it was clearly between the 48 hour visitor mooring signs. Oh its 48 hours only he cheerfully said

[alan_fincher]

It was a woman.

 

Must be me who needs the new glasses then! My apologies to her!

[b0atman]

In the future the statement will be yes CRT consulted with all the boaters.

These meetings are just a PR exercise with nothing valid coming from them at the Banbury meeting a lot was made about the state of the vegetation taking over the towpath edge .Has anything been done since not in my opinion it hasn't.

[jenlyn]

Did you get the impression that the meeting, and particularly the most vocal of those attending, may have been to some extent 'stage managed' in order to set the tone the way Parry wanted it to be?

Very much so. After the meeting, I noticed James griffin huddled with the noisy sods. Patting each others backs.

To be fair to Parry, I think he did attempt to get a view from individuals across the room, but the noisy ones did speak over the top of these at times.

I would say it was not stage managed, but Parry did tend to avoid those he knew may put him in a corner.

[alan_fincher]

 

Did you get the impression that the meeting, and particularly the most vocal of those attending, may have been to some extent 'stage managed' in order to set the tone the way Parry wanted it to be?

No.

 

To do that they would have needed to hand-pick the audience, and I don't think they had. I think the explanation that email invites had gone to those keeping boats in the area, or recorded as being in the area is probably the right one.

 

I suggest one inevitable consequence of the modern world is that those not making regular use of email are more likely to be excluded. The fact that they wanted you to print out your ticket, (though they were not checked), gives little thought to live-aboards who don't have a printer!

 

I certainly don't think there was anyone asking questions that CRT had asked them to ask.

[bassplayer]

Did you get the impression that the meeting, and particularly the most vocal of those attending, may have been to some extent 'stage managed' in order to set the tone the way Parry wanted it to be?

Yes, to the point the CRT customer service guy ( forgot his name) got very enthusiastic at one point and directed Mr Parry to a chap who had lovely things to say about CRT's customer service. It was clearly a PR exercise and a tick in the box...

[David Schweizer]

I attended a similar meeting in Devizes a few months ago, and got an invitation by email, probably because I signed up to recieve to receive information electronicly. I assume that they used my postal address rather than my mooring address as I have never reveived any invited to any meetings in the midlands.

 

The meeting I attended also contained it's fair share of people who were there to beat a drum about some complaint or other, but most of them seemed to come from the residential boaters groups, who clearly had a pre-organized plan of attack, and were distributing publicity leaflets. Richard Parry not only seemed to know most of the complainers , but was already familiar with their complaints, so they had obviously been aired via other channels as well., some were clearly being dealt with through CaRT but it didn't stop one particularly objectionable woman from occupying nearly half an hour of the meeting with her frequent interuptions and outbursts.

 

Obviously a very different meeting than the MK one, but both perhaps demostrating that you can over state your case to the point that the issue being raised can begin to be ignored.

Edited October 7, 2014 by David Schweizer

[Guest]

I'm not certain but I'm pretty sure it was Jenlyn who put his hand up a lot but only got to ask one question. Let's just say Parry was very selective...I'll try to to be more assertive next time but not all of us are as confident in meetings as we are on an Internet forum...

This is very true and to be clear I wasn't having a go, I just tagged the question onto the end of your post for convenience really. But I just found it surprising that nobody could get an angle into a question around something that gave an alternative view that seemed to have been so vociferously expressed.

 

However reading subsequent posts I can see how the meeting could have been managed in a way that avoided that.

 

Perhaps it suited CRT for it to appear that there is a big problem?? ie it fits some sort of agenda.

[b0atman]

maybe pre agendas would show it up as a stage managed event

[Athy]

I read the thread's title and assumed that the OP had attended the Lib Dems' conference.

[Alan de Enfield]

 

The fact that they wanted you to print out your ticket, (though they were not checked), gives little thought to live-aboards who don't have a printer!

 

 

Going off at a tangent - that will make it difficult when the 'print your own licence' comes in.

[bassplayer]

This is very true and to be clear I wasn't having a go, I just tagged the question onto the end of your post for convenience really. But I just found it surprising that nobody could get an angle into a question around something that gave an alternative view that seemed to have been so vociferously expressed.However reading subsequent posts I can see how the meeting could have been managed in a way that avoided that.Perhaps it suited CRT for it to appear that there is a big problem?? ie it fits some sort of agenda.

What agenda though? I'm still trying to work it out.

 

I've always said if it ain't broken don't fix it. There seem to be some very strong voices suggesting there is a big problem. I don't see it on the cut myself but accept there is an issue with the lack of affordable housing in London which has spilled over onto the canals. I do understand it's difficult for CRT to deal with that one.

[Guest]

I suggest one inevitable consequence of the modern world is that those not making regular use of email are more likely to be excluded. The fact that they wanted you to print out your ticket, (though they were not checked), gives little thought to live-aboards who don't have a printer!

:offtopic:

 

Given that it has come up in another thread that this is how in future you are going to be expected to receive and print off your licence at some point in the future this is not going to be the only problem faced by that category of boaters. They seem to have had second thoughts about going the same route as the DVLA and made it even harder it would seem for some people to display a valid licence.

[b0atman]

Imagine the incredulous looks you would get at an open meeting if you raised the point that you only had a mobile phone for emergencies and used very little internet on it.

[RLWP]

Imagine the incredulous looks you would get at an open meeting if you raised the point that you only had a mobile phone for emergencies and used very little internet on it.

 

Nonsense

 

Richard

[jenlyn]

There seem to be some very strong voices suggesting there is a big problem. I don't see it on the cut myself but accept there is an issue with the lack of affordable housing in London which has spilled over onto the canals. I do understand it's difficult for CRT to deal with that one.

And there lies the true problem.

Energy and effort should be put into addressing that. It's for CRT to sort the issue with the local council's and government.

[mayalld]

:offtopic:

 

Given that it has come up in another thread that this is how in future you are going to be expected to receive and print off your licence at some point in the future this is not going to be the only problem faced by that category of boaters. They seem to have had second thoughts about going the same route as the DVLA and made it even harder it would seem for some people to display a valid licence.

 

It rather depends.

 

At present, many CCers say that they can't display a licence, because of getting it in the post.

 

IF they were to go down the path of "print it or come into the office and we will print it for you", I can see it being much easier for CCers.

And there lies the true problem.

Energy and effort should be put into addressing that. It's for CRT to sort the issue with the local council's and government.

 

Enery and effort should indeed be put into addressing the lack of affordable housing, but it is for Councils and Government, not CRT.

[Alan de Enfield]

 

It rather depends.

 

At present, many CCers say that they can't display a licence, because of getting it in the post.

 

IF they were to go down the path of "print it or come into the office and we will print it for you", I can see it being much easier for CCers.

 

Enery and effort should indeed be put into addressing the lack of affordable housing, but it is for Councils and Government, not CRT.

 

Thats very true - as Cotswoldman has stated "most CCers do not have access to the postal service"

 

The answer is to make it unnecessary to display the licence - would that involve a repeal of the law ?

[Guest]

It rather depends.

 

At present, many CCers say that they can't display a licence, because of getting it in the post.

 

IF they were to go down the path of "print it or come into the office and we will print it for you", I can see it being much easier for CCers.

 

 

But the answer is to ditch the requirement to display a licence at all, their justification for keeping it and reinforcing the need to display it is to show you 'pay your way to be on the waterways' (I paraphrase) to other boaters..... Why should anybody be concerned about doing that, after all I don't do it with my car.

[jenlyn]

It rather depends.

 

At present, many CCers say that they can't display a licence, because of getting it in the post.

 

IF they were to go down the path of "print it or come into the office and we will print it for you", I can see it being much easier for CCers.

 

Enery and effort should indeed be put into addressing the lack of affordable housing, but it is for Councils and Government, not CRT.

Nonsense. If you have a problem, you assess and deal with the root cause. In this case, it boils down to housing. It's CRT's responsibility to address this because it's happening on their property.

[Higgs]

Nonsense. If you have a problem, you assess and deal with the root cause. In this case, it boils down to housing. It's CRT's responsibility to address this because it's happening on their property.

 

Seriously, what can CRT do to effect a big change in government policy in the house building department. CRT will have to make more rigid rules around issuing CC licenses, especially, by excluding their use to newcomers in certain areas. That, or, put a freeze on them for a while.

Edited October 7, 2014 by Higgs

[bassplayer]

 

Enery and effort should indeed be put into addressing the lack of affordable housing, but it is for Councils and Government, not CRT.

But it is a problem for CRT ...and I'm sure Mr Parry is feeding back the problem to those who count in Councils and Government....I hope!