A better management than CRT?

[Jerra]

NT has been mentioned a number of times and that to me shows one major fault in the constitution of CRT. NT has members who get regular magazines keeping them informed of the main information. To me being a friend does not have the same feel of "belonging" and makes people feel that it is yet another charity they are supporting rather than something they belong to.

[cotswoldsman]

Firstly I think the OP's boat name is reflected in their post.

Just because people express concerns does not make them anti CRT in my own case I have many concerns this I know is taken now by many within CRT and on here as me being anti CRT well as they say "so be it" they need to grow up and uderstand that trying to work with CRT does not mean having to agree with them on every point, what it shows is that they are an organisation that does not know how to listen.

As for a manifesto that is something one puts out when wishing to get elected. I will put out a suggestion as a starting point. CRT should be split into three seperate divisions 1. CRT Boating 2. CRT Leisure 3. CRT Maintance,each division should have its own Managing Director reporting to a CEO and more important it's own Budget. At present CRT is trying to be everything to everyone and it does not work.

The problem I have is I am not sure who is running the Waterways at present!! What we have is an organisation purporting to run the Waterways and then about 20 Quangos in the guise of Waterways Partnerships, Trustees, NAG, Council etc any organisation run by comitees is bound to fail.

Oh and the other thing I would do is close down all those Meeting Rooms in Milton Keynes and get the staff out actualy understanding what the problems are rather than sitting around in meetings inventing problems.

[gaggle]

 

 

 

 

Bluster? It's a question. Hopefully it may engender some meaningful discussion.

Would it be you that decides what is meaningful discussion and what is not ? it looks to me like you are huffin and puffin against any opinion that is opposite to your own despite what you say below.

And just to clarify my position. I am not against any individual holding any opinion at all. What I am against is pointless circular schoolboy argument along the lines of " ...you're wrong because I said so."

[Jerra]

Firstly I think the OP's boat name is reflected in their post.

Just because people express concerns does not make them anti CRT in my own case I have many concerns this I know is taken now by many within CRT and on here as me being anti CRT well as they say "so be it" they need to grow up and uderstand that trying to work with CRT does not mean having to agree with them on every point, what it shows is that they are an organisation that does not know how to listen.

As for a manifesto that is something one puts out when wishing to get elected. I will put out a suggestion as a starting point. CRT should be split into three seperate divisions 1. CRT Boating 2. CRT Leisure 3. CRT Maintance,each division should have its own Managing Director reporting to a CEO and more important it's own Budget. At present CRT is trying to be everything to everyone and it does not work.

The problem I have is I am not sure who is running the Waterways at present!! What we have is an organisation purporting to run the Waterways and then about 20 Quangos in the guise of Waterways Partnerships, Trustees, NAG, Council etc any organisation run by comitees is bound to fail.

Oh and the other thing I would do is close down all those Meeting Rooms in Milton Keynes and get the staff out actualy understanding what the problems are rather than sitting around in meetings inventing problems.

I have run out of greenies but that certainly deserves one.

[b0atman]

I think the biggest issue is some have no real knowledge, or interest in a subject that does not effect them, yet have strong views on it. Naughty Cal is a prime example of this. That's not aimed as an insult, it's a fact.

Having an opinion of course, is fine, but is pretty useless without background knowledge.

 

CRT has communication issues with its customer base (even the CEO has stated this). It often feels it is above having to explain anything, and can make changes as and when they see fit, without explanation. That's not criticism, it's a fact.

 

Until such time as CRT learn to listen and share, the position will continue as is.

I think that you have no real idea of people in the real world I would think that NC balances household budgets and runs a household in my mind that makes her very knowledgeable .

To my mind the biggest idiots are the last load of So called governments who sell off assets and borrow whilst giving our money away to countries like India yet you probably believe that they are more knowledgeable than those who you think have no background knowledge.

[jenlyn]

This may well be true, but it has to work both ways. With some of the rubbish I have heard mouthed off by some rude individuals in the audience who are not prepared to listen at user group meetings I'm not surprised if some CRT people wonder why they bother.

Yes, I know what you mean.

Having witnessed such a debacle at the Milton Keynes boaters meeting. On that occasion, several pronounced their affiliations to the IWA, and proceeded to speak with the most disgusting vitriol I have ever witnessed at such a meeting.

 

It concluded with one producing photos to Dean Davies, of two boats being moored in the same spot for two months. It went slightly awry when the owner of the two boats recognised them as hers, and stated the fact that she had only moved there 4 days before. I knew she was telling the truth, because she had been with us all summer, cruising from hemel Hempstead to Buckby.

The point is, such things are common place, and CRT indeed must struggle trying to figure out who is telling the truth.

I think that you have no real idea of people in the real world I would think that NC balances household budgets and runs a household in my mind that makes her very knowledgeable .

To my mind the biggest idiots are the last load of So called governments who sell off assets and borrow whilst giving our money away to countries like India yet you probably believe that they are more knowledgeable than those who you think have no background knowledge.

I think you have completely lost the plot with that post. :-)

[Alf Roberts]

I think that you have no real idea of people in the real world I would think that NC balances household budgets and runs a household in my mind that makes her very knowledgeable .

To my mind the biggest idiots are the last load of So called governments who sell off assets and borrow whilst giving our money away to countries like India yet you probably believe that they are more knowledgeable than those who you think have no background knowledge.

and do you think such ill tempered, irrelevant and pathetically ineffectual racist garbage adds anything whatsoever to a debate about the waterways?

[Hawkmoth]

Firstly I think the OP's boat name is reflected in their post.

Just because people express concerns does not make them anti CRT in my own case I have many concerns this I know is taken now by many within CRT and on here as me being anti CRT well as they say "so be it" they need to grow up and uderstand that trying to work with CRT does not mean having to agree with them on every point, what it shows is that they are an organisation that does not know how to listen.

As for a manifesto that is something one puts out when wishing to get elected. I will put out a suggestion as a starting point. CRT should be split into three seperate divisions 1. CRT Boating 2. CRT Leisure 3. CRT Maintance,each division should have its own Managing Director reporting to a CEO and more important it's own Budget. At present CRT is trying to be everything to everyone and it does not work.

The problem I have is I am not sure who is running the Waterways at present!! What we have is an organisation purporting to run the Waterways and then about 20 Quangos in the guise of Waterways Partnerships, Trustees, NAG, Council etc any organisation run by comitees is bound to fail.

Oh and the other thing I would do is close down all those Meeting Rooms in Milton Keynes and get the staff out actualy understanding what the problems are rather than sitting around in meetings inventing problems.

Have a greenie.

Thanks for the sane suggestions.

The only question I would ask is: Would these new managers cost us more?

Bob

[churchward]

Firstly I think the OP's boat name is reflected in their post.

Just because people express concerns does not make them anti CRT in my own case I have many concerns this I know is taken now by many within CRT and on here as me being anti CRT well as they say "so be it" they need to grow up and uderstand that trying to work with CRT does not mean having to agree with them on every point, what it shows is that they are an organisation that does not know how to listen.

As for a manifesto that is something one puts out when wishing to get elected. I will put out a suggestion as a starting point. CRT should be split into three seperate divisions 1. CRT Boating 2. CRT Leisure 3. CRT Maintance,each division should have its own Managing Director reporting to a CEO and more important it's own Budget. At present CRT is trying to be everything to everyone and it does not work.

The problem I have is I am not sure who is running the Waterways at present!! What we have is an organisation purporting to run the Waterways and then about 20 Quangos in the guise of Waterways Partnerships, Trustees, NAG, Council etc any organisation run by comitees is bound to fail.

Oh and the other thing I would do is close down all those Meeting Rooms in Milton Keynes and get the staff out actualy understanding what the problems are rather than sitting around in meetings inventing problems.

I agree being supportive of CRT does not mean you must agree with everything they do or say.

 

I also agree that departmentalising disparate functions can be efficient but divisions can also do just that divide an organisation so that it is more difficult to function each one claiming it is the others responsibility to resolve an issue. I don't agree with a maintenance and a separate boating division I think it is fraught with risk to separate boating from the infrastructure that allows that to happen. It does of course depend on what one would include in the boating divisions definition and scope.

[Hawkmoth]

and do you think such ill tempered, irrelevant and pathetically ineffectual racist garbage adds anything whatsoever to a debate about the waterways?

I dislike racist garbage as much as the next man, but, India have a space programme and own major international business but still they come cap in hand for aid.

Bob

[b0atman]

and do you think such ill tempered, irrelevant and pathetically ineffectual racist garbage adds anything whatsoever to a debate about the waterways?

Get off your high horse I think you have just described your general attitude if this country and CRT where run along the lines of a well run household then we would be in a far better state .

Where the hell you think that there is racism in my comment then you must be so PC that you are unbelievable I stated India because it is a country that clearly does not need our money in fact they have called it peanuts

[cotswoldsman]

Have a greenie.

Thanks for the sane suggestions.

The only question I would ask is: Would these new managers cost us more?

Bob

No they would not cost more title does not mean pay but means accountability

[Naughty Cal]

No they would not cost more title does not mean pay but means accountability

And back in the real world!

[cotswoldsman]

I agree being supportive of CRT does not mean you must agree with everything they do or say.

 

I also agree that departmentalising disparate functions can be efficient but divisions can also do just that divide an organisation so that it is more difficult to function each one claiming it is the others responsibility to resolve an issue. I don't agree with a maintenance and a separate boating division I think it is fraught with risk to separate boating from the infrastructure that allows that to happen. It does of course depend on what one would include in the boating divisions definition and scope.

The idea of the separation between boating and what I call leisure is for policy. The maintenance is so much more than just canal infrastructure and needs to be able to stand outside the main parties and be held to accountable. Yes maybe a bit of infighting might not be a bad idea if all groups are set clear targets infighting might well mean a determination to deliver objectives

And back in the real world!

Are you planning to go there?? That would be good.

[Hawkmoth]

The idea of the separation between boating and what I call leisure is for policy. The maintenance is so much more than just canal infrastructure and needs to be able to stand outside the main parties and be held to accountable. Yes maybe a bit of infighting might not be a bad idea if all groups are set clear targets infighting might well mean a determination to deliver objectives

Are you planning to go there?? That would be good.

Do you have any idea if someone at CRT is actually listening, and in a position to, or the will to, act on any of the suggestions on here?

Bob

[Rich]

I would think that NC balances household budgets and runs a household in my mind that makes her very knowledgeable .

 

 

I don't see why the ability to balance a household budget and run said household should make anyone knowledgeable about matters concerning inland waterways. Could you explain it to me please.

[gaggle]

And back in the real world!

 

And back in the real world!

Are you planning to go there?? That would be good.

 

Would be bleedin miraculous .

[cotswoldsman]

Do you have any idea if someone at CRT is actually listening, and in a position to, or the will to, act on any of the suggestions on here?

Bob

That as they say "is the million dollar" question!! I would say they listen to what they want to hear and are fairly dismissive of what they do not want to hear.

I personally felt I had a fairly good relationship with CRT and Richard Parry and was happy to discuss issues and give opinions, not just mine but those that were being expressed by boater I met on my travels, opinions given on here and Facebook. I had many email exchanges with Parry and one to one meetings, plus group and open meetings. The last meeting I attended Richard Parry accused me of "misscheif making" and since then he has cut me off from all communication with the ultimate sanction he knocked me off his Christmas Greeting list.

I always made clear that I am a supporter of CRT but will also express my opinion in a clear way, well it seems that does not suit so I now have to shout from the outside.

[Hawkmoth]

That as they say "is the million dollar" question!! I would say they listen to what they want to hear and are fairly dismissive of what they do not want to hear.

I personally felt I had a fairly good relationship with CRT and Richard Parry and was happy to discuss issues and give opinions, not just mine but those that were being expressed by boater I met on my travels, opinions given on here and Facebook. I had many email exchanges with Parry and one to one meetings, plus group and open meetings. The last meeting I attended Richard Parry accused me of "misscheif making" and since then he has cut me off from all communication with the ultimate sanction he knocked me off his Christmas Greeting list.

I always made clear that I am a supporter of CRT but will also express my opinion in a clear way, well it seems that does not suit so I now have to shout from the outside.

Is this going to be the fate of all who try to show a different way?

Bob

[b0atman]

I don't see why the ability to balance a household budget and run said household should make anyone knowledgeable about matters concerning inland waterways. Could you explain it to me please.

It does not make them less knowledgeable as was inferred.

One does not need to be an expert on the waterways to run them well but being good at your job is a major criteria .

At the end of the day it is all down to monies in being equal to or larger than monies out.

[Alf Roberts]

I dislike racist garbage as much as the next man, but, India have a space programme and own major international business but still they come cap in hand for aid.

Bob

then explain exactly what Britain's aid budget has to do with managing the canals.

[Guest]

There seems to be alot of use made of at-arms-length mentality in management handling of the public. Losing touch with the users. Removing face to face contact and underestimating its importance.

Indeed. Ivory towers. When C&RT began it was going to be the "all listening" trust. Sad to say they appear to be slipping into the BW mould. Anybody in that sort of position is "damned if they do or don't," it goes with the territory. More consultation/communication is the way forward for me.

Edited to add that the CR&T ground troops have been superb in my experience.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Guest

[Alf Roberts]

It does not make them less knowledgeable as was inferred.

One does not need to be an expert on the waterways to run them well but being good at your job is a major criteria .

At the end of the day it is all down to monies in being equal to or larger than monies out.

simplistic nonsense.

 

unless CRT has a line of credit ( not as far as I know ) expenditure will always be less than or equal to income.

 

the real question is how the money they do have is spent.

 

as for

 

"One does not need to be an expert on the waterways to run them well"

 

such a stupid statement is breathtaking.

 

CRT are charged with looking after the waterways not turning a profit for shareholders. or perhaps you think they should sell the lot and get into financial services?

Edited December 29, 2014 by Alf Roberts

[NBDensie]

Firstly I think the OP's boat name is reflected in their post.

Just because people express concerns does not make them anti CRT in my own case I have many concerns this I know is taken now by many within CRT and on here as me being anti CRT well as they say "so be it" they need to grow up and uderstand that trying to work with CRT does not mean having to agree with them on every point, what it shows is that they are an organisation that does not know how to listen.

As for a manifesto that is something one puts out when wishing to get elected. I will put out a suggestion as a starting point. CRT should be split into three seperate divisions 1. CRT Boating 2. CRT Leisure 3. CRT Maintance,each division should have its own Managing Director reporting to a CEO and more important it's own Budget. At present CRT is trying to be everything to everyone and it does not work.

 

The problem I have is I am not sure who is running the Waterways at present!! What we have is an organisation purporting to run the Waterways and then about 20 Quangos in the guise of Waterways Partnerships, Trustees, NAG, Council etc any organisation run by comitees is bound to fail.

 

Working with CRT doesnt mean having to agree with then on every point surely it would be rather more constructive if you were to agree with them on some, or even the majority of points. Slanging C&RT off as incompentant and/or corrupt all the time as is done by some of the usual suspects on this thread is unlikely to achieve anything.

 

Why do you think CRT Boating should have such a high profile? Looking at the 2014 annual accounts I see that boaters' license fees and non BWML mooring income amounts to some £24M net after deduction of costs of collection, only slightly more than the equivalent figure for income from utilities and water sales and significantly less than that from property. That is out of a total net income of some £125M. How can you justify such an enormous subsidy for what is essentially a leisure activity enjoyed by a comparatively small number of people? The only answer is surely that we support C&RT in their aim of getting "ownership" of the canals accepted by many diverse groups across the country who will expect a significant say in how the waterways are run. Without this the future of the canals is pretty bleak. Boaters wont be prepared to pay for it.

 

Finally you want to get rid of all the committees. But it is only through such formatilities that consultation can take place. How would you propose that C&RT consult and bring interested organisations/groups into the decision making process? It cant sensibly be done on an individual basis.

[Alf Roberts]

How can you justify such an enormous subsidy for what is essentially a leisure activity enjoyed by a comparatively small number of people?

because that's what they do. doh. manage the waterways.