Poll: An alternative to C&RT what woulld you prefer?

[Laurence Hogg]

Given the current state of the waterways, turmoil over licencing and moorings could there be a better choice of governing body?

Edited September 8, 2015 by Laurence Hogg

[The Toad in the Hole]

think you've messed up the format, I'd vote for the first option, but I think you've set it as a heading

[Delta9]

none of the above.

[Nightwatch]

I am not experienced enough to make that decision. I do know something has to be done. Its not getting any better.

 

From the choices available, to me, not one of them seems a good alternative. Going back to BW would presumably mean the same guys in charge. Passed back to the government might give them somewhere to put all these refugees. Private sector. My initial thoughts are, no way jose. EA to run. Costs will escalate surely.

 

Stay as is. Restructured by whom?

 

I can't answer the poll.

[MtB]

Given the current state of the waterways, turmoil over licencing and moorings could there be a better choice of governing body?

 

 

I don't remember BW being held in any higher regard that CRT are now.

 

Same as NW, I can;t vote as there is not enough info about the terms that might govern any of the options given.

[Naughty Cal]

I would vote for remain as it is, however it isn't giving that option. The formatting is a bit wrong.

[Laurence Hogg]

think you've messed up the format, I'd vote for the first option, but I think you've set it as a heading

 

Have rectified the mistake, apologies, first one of these I have done.

[GreyLady]

I am new to Canal's and i dont know enough about Crt to devote them, but i defininitely would not want it to go under Private.

 

I would imagine who ever is running the canals their will always be issues and disagreements, changing it to a new organisation could be a whole lot worse and increase the costs of using a Boat on the Canals and pricing everyone off them.

 

None vote from me.

Edited September 8, 2015 by grumpy146

[Nightwatch]

Item No 7. Will this eliminate the license? How much would the tolls be. Would it be per foot,square foot.

 

I can't vote as I don't know if it's going to cost me more.

 

The present incumbent crown, do they have enough money coming in? Is that money being mismanaged? If they are short of funds, what needs to be done?

 

If the money is being mismanaged, who are the management responsible to.

[OldGoat]

Methinks we're stuck in a dark place - with no hope of enlightenment - or real options:-

 

• Remain as it is but restructured
• Perhaps
• Allowed to go back to Government for them to decide

  The gov't doesn't want them that's why they were 'transferred to CaRT

• A return to BW (1 votes [6.67%])

  Answered by what's immediately above

• Taken over by the private sector

  Horrors - could never be profitable

• Given to EA to run

  EA doesn't want its rivers let alone some ditches....

• Remain as it is, no changes
• Probably what will happen - but hopefully with some meeting of the minds...

• Have a toll based system, pay as you boat.

• That's completely potty and impracticable

 

[KenK]

I'd like to back to the BW format, lose the Waterways Partnerships, Council, etc.

More people on the ground who have a true understanding of the Waterways and pay for them by reducing the numbers of managers on very high salaries.

At the moment the triangle is upside down, the apex at the bottom, it needs turning the right way up, lots of people on the ground and far fewer in offices.

Then all we need is someone like Dave Fletcher in charge.

 

Ken

[Sir Nibble]

National trust like the Wey

[Laurence Hogg]

Methinks we're stuck in a dark place - with no hope of enlightenment - or real options:-

 

• Remain as it is but restructured
• Perhaps
• Allowed to go back to Government for them to decide

  The gov't doesn't want them that's why they were 'transferred to CaRT

• A return to BW (1 votes [6.67%])

  Answered by what's immediately above

• Taken over by the private sector

  Horrors - could never be profitable

• Given to EA to run

  EA doesn't want its rivers let alone some ditches....

• Remain as it is, no changes
• Probably what will happen - but hopefully with some meeting of the minds...

   

• Have a toll based system, pay as you boat.

• That's completely potty and impracticable

 

 

Interesting comments. but the last one intrigues me, the waterways system prior to nationalisation relied heavily on tolls and warehousing for funding.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Laurence Hogg

[Bee]

As long as we have a gov. that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing we will just have to sit back and suffer a decline in anything worthwhile whilst paying evermore for the privilege of retaining it. What we want is a Socialist government, even better a National Socialist government..... Oh damn, that's already been tried.

[Hawkmoth]

I would vote for remain as it is, however it isn't giving that option. The formatting is a bit wrong.

What's point 6 then?

[churchward]

National trust like the Wey

That may not be popular with some as the NT do not allow any residential boating/CCing with their licence on the Wey.

[billS]

National trust like the Wey

 

They have retained lengthsmen responsible for a section of the navigation, and I seem to recall that you are given their telephone numbers when you buy a licence so that you can report any problems.

 

I like that.

[adamboatman]

Hello I am Adam

[Paul C]

There is another option - I suppose it comes under restructuring - which is to decentralise the running of the canal network. In other words, regionalise it. Of course, there's many variations on how it could be split up but instead of simply using regions such as South East, Pennines etc they could deliberately regionalise perceived hotspot locations and have the more rural, less high profile areas as a larger (non hotspot, for want of a better word) region. This could lead to a variation of the rules or policies according to particular, specific, regional needs. If we're talking pie in the sky stuff, there's no reason not to postulate that the underlying laws could not be changed either.

Hello I am Adam

 

Hello Adam, I am Paul.

[Naughty Cal]

What's point 6 then?

An amendment of the original poll.

 

See post 7

Edited September 8, 2015 by Naughty Cal

[junior]

Hello I am Adam

Hello Adam.

[adamboatman]

Hello Adam.

Hello thank you. What is c&rt please?

[magnetman]

Hello thank you. What is c&rt please?

What kind of boatman are you Adam?

 

I am a boatman too

[Naughty Cal]

Hello thank you. What is c&rt please?

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/?gclid=Cj0KEQjwjrqvBRD6wf2fy-C61PIBEiQAUzKQTiP93aNcbPMJ7Sk79dULuhvqwPdw4gqToVU8JpAc8YkaAqR38P8HAQ#hotw-modal

[lexicon]

One option missing

 

Lawrence to run the waterways as that's the only way they will be run properly in some eyes.