Canal and River Trust Council Meeting March 2018

[StarUKKiwi]

Canal and River Trust Council Meeting March 2018

The following is my report - I have used some notes from Andy Tidy’s report (mostly the finances as he explains it better than I could) As these are my recollections from notes they are not designed as an exact record and are not minutes. Therefore , they should not be accepted as such.

We were invited to York this year. Owing to constraints of dialysis, I opted to do a long day - getting up at 4.45am, getting a train at 6am and arriving at York at 8.15am, where we were met by two young ladies from the Leeds Office with a sign and everything. Once everyone that was coming by train arrived, it was a short stroll to the bus taking us the 6 miles to Naburn Lock - a fascinating place - Kenny, the Lock keeper has been there over 30 years - his cottage is flooded on average 5 times a year and he remains remarkably sanguine about this fact.

It is a beautiful place and although the Trust operate the navigation of the River Ouse, the only land the Trust own is the island, stables and lock-keepers cottage, 6 miles outside York. There is a caravan park next door (a good catchment area) and the river cruises start and return here taking passengers into York - the challenge now for the Trust is to make the island at Naburn Locks a tourist destination and teaching place, to this end they are redeveloping the old wharf offices and making them flood resistant, this entails stripping plaster off walls and pitting drain holes in the floors. It was a lovely morning - sunny and the river had subsided enough for our cruise to happen. It is the only real chance you get to meet other council members and Trustees, much “networking”.

We arrived at the pier and a short walk to the Yorkshire Museum through the gardens ahead of the showers.

The Council meeting ran from 11.30am to 4.30pm with a short break for lunch. There is always a dinner in the evenings for the Trustees and local businessmen and councillors - a chance to drum up funding opportunities for both the local Waterway area and the Trust nationally.

The day is normally a series of presentations on what the Trust has been doing by senior managers and this was no different really - a slight emphasis on looking forward and as there are only two meetings a year - the other is in September and the morning is the Public Meeting., so this is the longest meeting. I could not get to Bath last year as I had dialysis that day; so this was the first meeting I had been to since the first meeting in Liverpool two years ago.

Allan Leighton opened the meeting and then we had Richard Parry’s report with him reporting the following:
towpath satisfaction at 91% although awareness that the Trust maintains the towpath is only at 36% (a lot of people believe are local government operated and maintained), the target was 40%, there are 23,500 Friends of the Trust. 
The Trust had a turnover of £200m and a small surplus of £800k. Income included a £2.7m grant from the Postcode Lottery ( most of which has been spent on the Marple Flight and Aqueduct). Income was higher than budgeted for.
 A recent High Court Judgement in the Trust’s favour in the Thames Water -v- CRT, which may mean additional income in the future. 
Planned 240 winter stoppages and 180 lock gates replaced, quadrants on the Eastern side of the Huddersfield had to be replaced due to subsidence. 
Eight open days (2 had to be cancelled due to the snow) and attracted 15,000 visitors. 
Safe guarding, especially in view of recent revelations in other charities, they have procedures and processes in place for visitors, volunteers and staff.
New regional structure, due to be in place on the 4 June, as 18 posts of the 60 posts (reduced from 78) still have to be filled, only 27 of these new managerial posts are Senior, with the Regional Directors in place in April. 
No gender pay gap exists within the Trust Main gender pay is -3.6% and Median pay Gap = -13.8%

Julie Sharman, the new Chief Operating Officer, reported on the following
River Lea Navigation at Pyms Brook - a tanker full of oil was illegally dumped in the brook and has been very difficult to clear up and has resulted in a 5 week stoppage; there is an ongoing police and EA investigation
the recent drowning in Manchester and the temporary barrier erected to prevent people crossing the lock across the lock gates rather than the bridge 30 feet away 
Middlewich Breach, which although not as big as Dutton in 2012 has challenges regarding access - fortunately, there was no damage to houses and they have set up a Just Giving Page. As with all unplanned stoppages this diverts contingencies and means planned works are put further back on the plan.

Business Plan 2018-19
Focus is on Caring For the Waterways, Sustaining Waterways and moving to becoming to a Waterway and Wellbeing Trust; to extend its aims to a wider audience.
The quality of contractors used is being closely scrutinised following well known issues with Carillion etc.
The EA transfer now appears unlikely.
BWML is seen as a non core operation and a buyer is being sought.
£8.4m to be spent on dredging, £20.6m on operational (culverts, aqueducts etc)

Dame Jenny Abramsky - appointments committee chair
Terms of Reference amended to reflect the new Regional Advisory Boards and recruitment of chairs is under-way in the 6 regions with definition of the minimum and maximum number of seats on regional committees.
Following the departure of some experienced trustees replacements are being sought

National Council Review
Group discussions took place and concluded that a Council Member handbook would be of benefit, defining what a council member does and more importantly doesn’t do, how its is done and how best to maximise the influence membership offers. 
The trust should look at a way of partial refreshment of members rather then everything en masse
Should clarify the roles of appointed and elected council members 
Maybe the use of smaller sub groups, such as the boaters reps meeting would be beneficial

Long Term Debt (these are Andy Tidy’s notes, as his explanation is brilliant) 
Stuart Mills (Chief Investment Officer and Sandra Kelly (Finance Director)
At its inception it was agreed that the Trust should carry some debt, initially via a £25m revolving credit line upped to £50m in 2016.
This debt was consolidated in a private bond placement of £150m at the end of 2017.
This debt is agreed over a 30 year term at less than 3% in offering stability.
The money is invested in the Trust's investment portfolio of which property is making 10.8% and non property 9%.
In effect the trust is borrowing cheaply based on its asset base and inherent strength, investing the money is assets which are earning a return which is higher than the financing costs and the difference (called arbitrage) is profit applied to the trusts wider operations.
(Andy comment 1. Don’t get blinded by this high finance stuff. In simple terms the trust owns investment assets of £800m which is an endowment providing income. They see an opportunity to make more money from this source and are borrowing some long term money to buy more commercial property. Its a bit like a glorified "buy to let" where you use the value of your home to support a cheap second mortgage to buy another property which you then let out.)
The private placement was to a number of well known North American and European institutions which, we were assured, do not carry reputational risks.
(Andy's comment - I am comfortable with this overall arrangement which appears prudent and well stress tested, however, as with personal debt, a bit is fine but one can overdo things. The Trustees assured us that they have no current intention of any further placements beyond £150m and in my view any further increase in long term debt should be discussed before it is entered into)

Licensing
John Horsfall (Interim Head of Boating)
32,000 leisure licenses and 1,000 business licenses covering 32,000 craft, generating £27m of income 
He did say boaters should be major advocates for the Trust 
The rules covering licensing are within the BW Act of 1995, and there has been a dramatic increase in the number of boats used as dwelling since the act was passed, particularly in the London and K&A. (My comment - the majority recently are boats without a home mooring - this is partly choice but also because of a general lack of permanent moorings in these areas)
John made mention of the choice that people make to live in these areas - London Mooring Strategy is still to be issued.
The recent review is about fairness, not income generation. With this goal in mind they have opted t give 2.5% discount to all those paying DD whether annually or monthly. 
Consultation elicited 11,000 responses and an overriding desire was to see area included in the calculation; however, they decided against area as there would have been those who ended up paying a greater fee. The announcement has so far generated 15 to 20 complaints. All changes are being phased in. 
Some areas such as discounts such as Electric, Historic and areas of high demand and are subject to further ongoing review to ensure that they deliver the desired outcomes.

Brand Update
Nicky Wakeford
Brand awareness has been growing and has risen from 30% in April 2016 to 36% today (the target was 40% for this year)
The cascade of engagement is : Beneficiary (say towpath user) to Follower (Social media) to Friend and then Volunteer.
The slower than expected growth in public awareness is a major issue as it is inextricably linked with the bid for further government grant funding when the existing package expires.
Focus groups were convened to identify the key message needed. Well Being emerged as the key message the Trust are not communicating - the benefits of being able to spend time beside water which has a proven link with people’s emotional and physical wellbeing.
The resulting strapline is "making life better by water".
This altered strapline will be accompanied by a change of logo, a circle shape in blue and green to give a better fit on towpath and digitally; they wouldn’t show us the new logo but it will be launched on 21 May with all web based screens changing that day, and everything else replaced as they roll out (I have subsequently discovered offices have not been ordering headed paper in preparation) and it will be on a 2 to 3 year roll out
The cost is from within the existing Marketing budget and we are assured that this exercise has not involved expensive consultancies; the main cost being a graphic designer for the new logo.
My comment - I have to say I had more messages concerning this than anything else - particularly as the breach and lock closure have closed both the Cheshire and Four Counties Ring in the North. So I asked on the behalf of boaters - why now? Why not tell us the cost?
Nicky responded that it was within the existing marketing budget with no extra funds going towards it, Time marches on and with the government grant coming to the end of its term the Trust needs to raise its profile - it is the 18th largest but the Woodland Trust is better know than them and without the government grant there would be a 25% income gap which cannot be filled with the existing other income strands. So in order that they can maintain the waterways into the future both online and towpath presence needs to be increased, so that the government can see the benefits of supporting the waterways as a health benefit for the wider land based communities in cleaning the air in urban areas and the transportation of both water and goods. 
I have to say I understand the need for increasing awareness but to announce into a vacuum was not the smartest move in my humble opinion. All we have is that it is modern and will influence people who are not influenced now.

The meeting then closed - the annual meeting is in Birmingham in September and there are Boaters’ Rep Meetings in the interim, so please get in touch with any comments, questions I can pass on.

[StarUKKiwi]

Link.to Andy's notes 

http://captainahabswaterytales.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/naburn-locks.html?m=1

[Alan de Enfield]

25 minutes ago, StarUKKiwi said:

Focus is on Caring For the Waterways, Sustaining Waterways and moving to becoming to a Waterway and Wellbeing Trust

Was there any idea or explanation of what moving to a "Waterway & Wellbeing Trust" meant, and, the implications for boaters

 

29 minutes ago, StarUKKiwi said:

The resulting strapline is "making life better by water".
This altered strapline will be accompanied by a change of logo, a circle shape in blue and green to give a better fit on towpath and digitally;..............

This would lead me to think that future focus of activities will be 'made better BY water' - could this mean ALONGSIDE water, rather than 'on water' ?

Particularly when the logo will be changed to 'give a better fit on towpath' - whatever that may mean.

[StarUKKiwi]

Hi Alan, (Andy made reference to this in his notes) the Trust is in a precarious position if they lose 25% of their income if the government stops that funding in 2027. Unfortunately, although boaters know (mostly) who the Trust are and what they are about, the average person on the towpath doesn't- that 36% is from people using towpaths. The Trust need to increase awareness of the importance that the waterways are in making people feel better. There are clinical studies underway that go to prove this. 

,This means that whilst boaters  are both customers and stakeholders, other 'stakeholders' need to be considered as to be honest the licence fees aren't going to cover the shortfall if the grant is not renewed. 

The latest buzzword everywhere is "wellbeing", companies use it, people are familiar with the term from the workplace, particularly in the service industry. So the Trust is positioning itself so that funding can be gained

[mrsmelly]

Heaven protect us from flippin " Buzzwords "

[LadyG]

31 minutes ago, StarUKKiwi said:

Hi Alan, (Andy made reference to this in his notes) the Trust is in a precarious position if they lose 25% of their income if the government stops that funding in 2027. Unfortunately, although boaters know (mostly) who the Trust are and what they are about, the average person on the towpath doesn't- that 36% is from people using towpaths. The Trust need to increase awareness of the importance that the waterways are in making people feel better. There are clinical studies underway that go to prove this. 

,This means that whilst boaters  are both customers and stakeholders, other 'stakeholders' need to be considered as to be honest the licence fees aren't going to cover the shortfall if the grant is not renewed. 

The latest buzzword everywhere is "wellbeing", companies use it, people are familiar with the term from the workplace, particularly in the service industry. So the Trust is positioning itself so that funding can be gained

Dear me, I've only been "on board" with inland waterways for twelve months,  it takes a while to understand the ins and outs of such a large and complex organisation

Canal and River Trust seems to me to sum up the ethos in three words, re-branding suggests a failure to convey a message, if this is so, that is the issue to be addressed. It costs a lot to rebrand, and I don't think that a new name will confer a new image, or a better understanding of the complexity. 

In other rebranding of charities I have seen the acronym is used frequently, and has to be fairly short, eg RSPB, WHW. I can't imagine something shorter than C&RT, other than CRT.

I assume the C&RT are not re-branding for any negative reason [cf Windscale [plutonium, fire, disaster, obfuscation, pollution]--> Sellafield [recycling plant]

I left mainstream large company employment some time ago, before wellbeing, wellness, and diversity, at the time it was sea change, movers and shakers, but these are now consigned to the the litter bin of the last century.

Edited April 1, 2018 by LadyG

[StarUKKiwi]

Unfortunately, we won't know until the launch on 21 May, but awareness is too low amongst regular users of the towpath and the swan and humpback bridge was felt to be old fashioned (I have to say it's only 5 years old, but digitally it is old fashioned)

[LadyG]

50 minutes ago, StarUKKiwi said:

Unfortunately, we won't know until the launch on 21 May, but awareness is too low amongst regular users of the towpath and the swan and humpback bridge was felt to be old fashioned (I have to say it's only 5 years old, but digitally it is old fashioned)

Digitally, and otherwise, the swan and bridge could have been revitalised by the use of colour, as it is not obviously a bridge and swan to the uninitiated.

What is it going to be: a Tim and Pru [Rosey and Jim] type family walking hand in hand along a scenic towpath, with a kayak and a bike in the foreground, a historic narrowboat in the background, and a digitally enhanced kingfisher in a cameo. Mixed messages.

It seems the CRT have no funding to replace important message boards like depth gauges, but have decided to spend money on new clothing and goodness knows what else, are all the B&W C&RT notices  to be replaced .......... it will cost a fortune.

If awareness is low among towpath users, that is a problem which can easily be addressed but I don't think that it will help with re financing, which seems to me to be the problem.

Were the stakeholders consulted ................ a virtual suggestion box might have come up with a few acronyms and straplines.

WET : Waterways & Environment Trust 

CRINGE : Canals, Rivers, Industrial Navigations and General Environment 

 WC : Wellbeing for Canalophiles,

WD-40 Wildlife Diversity for all

Moaty McMoatface

Edited April 1, 2018 by LadyG

[colmac]

I believe the re-branding will be a fairly costly exercise when you factor in the cost of replacing all employee and volunteer uniforms, change of logo on signage and vehicles. It is a pity there is no flexibility in the budget structure which could divert this money to the repair of the Middlewich arm. I know the amount of money saved on the branding would not cover the cost of the repair but it would help.

[LadyG]

3 minutes ago, colmac said:

I believe the re-branding will be a fairly costly exercise when you factor in the cost of replacing all employee and volunteer uniforms, change of logo on signage and vehicles. It is a pity there is no flexibility in the budget structure which could divert this money to the repair of the Middlewich arm. I know the amount of money saved on the branding would not cover the cost of the repair but it would help.

A sentiment which probably sums up boaters view of the CRT mangement failures to date. 

[mrsmelly]

14 minutes ago, LadyG said:

A sentiment which probably sums up boaters view of the CRT mangement failures to date. 

How many of the CART management "Team " own boats and how many own Push Bikes?

[LadyG]

23 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

How many of the CART management "Team " own boats and how many own Push Bikes?

aha, a tricky question, is there a link between boat/bike ownership and good management?

is there a demand for a book entitled "Zen Boating and the Art of Canal Management post 2027"?

Edited April 1, 2018 by LadyG

[StarUKKiwi]

1 hour ago, colmac said:

I believe the re-branding will be a fairly costly exercise when you factor in the cost of replacing all employee and volunteer uniforms, change of logo on signage and vehicles. It is a pity there is no flexibility in the budget structure which could divert this money to the repair of the Middlewich arm. I know the amount of money saved on the branding would not cover the cost of the repair but it would help.

I did say the timimg could not have been worse, to announce something and leave a vacuum for eight weeks is a long time 

50 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

How many of the CART management "Team " own boats and how many own Push Bikes?

I know a lot go boating, three trustees either own or have owned a boat and now we have two boaters reps on the Appointment committee, the influence of boating will increase as they have that as criteria now

Edited April 1, 2018 by StarUKKiwi
Spelling

[StarUKKiwi]

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

A sentiment which probably sums up boaters view of the CRT mangement failures to date. 

I have to say that the actions of the boating team after the recent breach was exemplary. An email to every licence holder, for which they had email addresses, to inform them, updates on all social media. It's like any large  organisation, it takes time for new cultures to permeate through

[Tanglewood]

50 minutes ago, colmac said:

I believe the re-branding will be a fairly costly exercise when you factor in the cost of replacing all employee and volunteer uniforms, change of logo on signage and vehicles. It is a pity there is no flexibility in the budget structure which could divert this money to the repair of the Middlewich arm. I know the amount of money saved on the branding would not cover the cost of the repair but it would help.

Is it the message or the messenger?  The brand is not the problem - why start again with a brand that no one recognises.  The other argument is that if not enough people recognise it, then the current branding will be 'new' to them.   

Seems to me that what the 'brand engineers' failed to understand is that most people understood what British Waterways was, as the clue was in the title. As soon as Canal and River trust gets shortened to CRT or 'the Trust' the meaning is lost. it was a mistake to change it, but if they needed to, Waterways Trust would have been better, snappier clearer brand.   The second thing is that these 'brand engineers' may themselves not understand what they are trying to convey, because honestly I'm not sure I would trust CRT management to give them a clear idea, apart from 'for God's sake get us some cash because we are going under'.  As an observer it seems that there is a desperation to dredge up ancillary benefits, which immediately creates conflict between what CRT are required to do, and what needs to be done to secure the funding.

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

Were the stakeholders consulted ................ a virtual suggestion box might have come up with a few acronyms and straplines.

Yes, it would, because the Stakeholders understand what is important about preserving.    Sadly it feels as if the waterways are destined to become a sanitised digitalised theme park, because tourism attracts income, with digitalised, virtual experiences that have little to do with real living - and I chose 'living' over 'life' deliberately to suggest an active engagement, rather than a passive one.

[StarUKKiwi]

In answer to the qyuestion ",Were boaters consulted" nicky told us that boaters were members of the focus groups. Where they came from, we werent told

[Jen-in-Wellies]

A branding consultant is unlikely to recommend not rebranding an organisation. No money in that. Must admit I have an instinctive aversion to this sort of thing, but I think that organisation and company names should tell you what they do and not get changed every five minutes. The Barnsley Gas Light and Coke Company versus Bargas Holdings (Holdings) PLC.

Second the thought that if not a lot of folk on thd towpath know who CaRT are, then even fewer are going to recognise the new name and logo. I have long had a suspicion that a rebranding exercise is done by senior management who are like rabbits caught in headlights. They are out of their depth and don't know what to do, but rebranding gives the impression of change and action. Or to put it more crudely. It is the same old p1ss in a different shaped bottle.

Jen

[Tumshie]

I'm not overly sure what the full spectrum of rural development grants are in England but I wonder if all the rebranding and the concentration on towpaths and the non boating public is CRT's way of tapping into government grant moneys by a different rout. I'm not really sure what body of the government the the money comes from at the moment - I assume DEFRA - but as the OP said that they went to York for the meeting that might suggest that it was with Natural England. 

I know that farms, forestry, and rural estates can apply for grants if they allow public access and those grant are often not to be sniffed at - so I wonder if this is what CRT are looking to do?   Of course I could be completely wrong cos thats not unheard of. 

[Tanglewood]

5 minutes ago, Tumshie said:

I'm not overly sure what the full spectrum of rural development grants are in England but I wonder if all the rebranding and the concentration on towpaths and the non boating public is CRT's way of tapping into government grant moneys by a different rout. I'm not really sure what body of the government the the money comes from at the moment - I assume DEFRA - but as the OP said that they went to York for the meeting that might suggest that it was with Natural England. 

I know that farms, forestry, and rural estates can apply for grants if they allow public access and those grant are often not to be sniffed at - so I wonder if this is what CRT are looking to do?   Of course I could be completely wrong cos thats not unheard of. 

Interesting thought. I do know that land-owners can claim grants for only cutting hedges every 3 - 5 years ........ 

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/countryside-hedgerows-regulation-and-management

Edited April 1, 2018 by Tanglewood
to add hyperlink to Natural England hedgerow regs

[Tumshie]

2 minutes ago, Tanglewood said:

Interesting thought. I do know that land-owners can claim grants for only cutting hedges every 3 - 5 years ........ 

There is a wide array of grants for land owners, the Stewardship scheme was one that encouraged better habitats for wild life and hedges laid where they might other wise be lost. 

http://www.hedgelaying.org.uk/

[Jen-in-Wellies]

A lot of the agricultural and environmental grants are going to be up in the air with leaving the EU and the Common Agricultural Policy over the next few years. Maybe CaRT are looking to tap in to whatever replacement happens. Must admit it is an area I know nothing about. Playing up the environmental and social benefits ot the waterways is a good idea. They are short of income. They can't soak boaters for much more without a rebellion. The current government doesn't have a reputation for giving money directly for things that make people happy, so the future of the direct grant is unsure once the funding agreement runs out. Their forays in to building development and ancillary businesses like pubs and marinas have not been a success for the most part.  Getting money direct from cyclists and towpath walkers directly isn't going to happen, so it has to be from other organisations to support these activities.

Jen

[cuthound]

Seems to me that  all CRT (or whoever they become after rebranding) need to do is put large brightly coloured notices on every bridge and periodically along the towpath saying who they are, what they do and explaining the benefits the canals provide to all users.

Probably cheaper than rebranding as well.

[Tanglewood]

1 hour ago, cuthound said:

Seems to me that  all CRT (or whoever they become after rebranding) need to do is put large brightly coloured notices on every bridge and periodically along the towpath saying who they are, what they do and explaining the benefits the canals provide to all users.

Probably cheaper than rebranding as well.

Anyone hazard a guess, or give an informed opinion of how much income will be generated if CRT manage to increase the awareness of tow-path users  from 36% to 40%?   Seems to me all you have to do is ban the 64% of towpath users who don't have an inkling and BINGO..... if the tow-paths were primarily for boaters then it would be a different story - I wonder how many lycra clad speed merchants were in that group, and how they enjoyed being asked whether they knew what CRT do.  I'd like to see the research.  Government should not be measuring CRT against targets that are not part of its statutory function -  and CRT should not be colluding with them.  If government wants the public to benefit from Waterways, then Government should expect the public to pay for it,through taxation.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, Tanglewood said:

  Government should not be measuring CRT against targets that are not part of its statutory function -  and CRT should not be colluding with them.  

It could be argued that it is within the statutory function :

From the articles of association :

The Trust’s objects are:
2.1 to preserve, protect, operate and manage Inland Waterways for public benefit:
2.1.1 for navigation;
2.1.2 for walking on towpaths; and
2.1.3 for recreation or other leisure-time pursuits of the public in the interest of their health and social welfare;

[Tanglewood]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

It could be argued that it is within the statutory function :

From the articles of association :

The Trust’s objects are:
2.1 to preserve, protect, operate and manage Inland Waterways for public benefit:
2.1.1 for navigation;
2.1.2 for walking on towpaths; and
2.1.3 for recreation or other leisure-time pursuits of the public in the interest of their health and social welfare;

Haven't managed to find anything more up to date, but these are the Key performance Indicators for a couple of years ago - what have they opted to spend money on 'Influence'.