CANAL CHARITY MAKES KEY APPOINTMENTS TO REALISE FULL POTENTIAL OF WEST MIDLANDS WATERWAYS

[Ray T]

press release

 

25th September 2018

CANAL CHARITY MAKES KEY APPOINTMENTS TO REALISE FULL POTENTIAL OF WEST MIDLANDS WATERWAYS

 

The charity that cares for the West Midlands’ famous network of canals has made two senior appointments as part of plans to boost the number of people using the region’s waterways as a place to keep fit, volunteer or just get away from the pressures of modern life.

 

The Canal & River Trust, which cares for 2,000 miles of the nation’s waterways, has appointed Adnan Saif as Regional Director for the West Midlands. Adnan will oversee the Trust’s waterways spanning Birmingham, the Black Country, Staffordshire, Shropshire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire.

 

With up to 80% of people in some parts of the West Midlands living within a kilometre of one of the Trust’s canals, a key aspect of the role will be maximising the potential of the waterways to make a real difference to the lives of people living and working alongside.

 

Adnan has worked in local government, regeneration and economic development for over 20 years. Until March 2012, Adnan was Chief Executive of Urban Living – which was one of ten national Housing Market Pathfinders. Adnan has also founded and led many non-governmental and voluntary organisations at local, European and international levels. In April 2012, he started a social enterprise initiative that seeks to improve leadership and service delivery in local government and civil society. In addition to this he was Chief Executive of the British Muslim Heritage Centre in Manchester, a national cultural initiative that was recently awarded the 2018 Queen’s Award for Voluntary Services.

 

Adnan’s appointment comes at a time when research shows that people are happier and healthier by being next to water yet only 30% of people who live near a waterway actually visit.

 

With ever increasing rates of obesity, diabetes, and other debilitating conditions the Midlands’ waterways can make a significant contribution to improving the wellbeing of the region, with millions of people living within easy reach of a towpath, canal or river.

 

Adnan commented; “This is such an exciting role. The West Midlands is Britain’s canal capital and, here more than anywhere, waterways have a really important role to play in enriching people’s daily lives.

 

“With waterways on the doorsteps of so many here in the West Midlands we are uniquely placed to make a really positive difference to people’s lives.”

 

In order to get more people engaged with their local waterways and feeling the benefits of spending time by water the Trust has made a second appointment by bringing in John Hudson OBE DL to chair its Regional Advisory Board in the West Midlands. The main purpose of the voluntary role, which has an initial term of three years, will be to connect people and communities with the local canals and rivers in the West Midlands. It will give local people a voice in developing and improving their waterways and enable them to help guide local decisions and strategies.

 

John has over 45 years’ experience in business in the West Midlands and was chair of Birmingham Airport for 20 years until 2017. He served as High Sheriff for the West Midlands between 2017 and 2018. He has also enjoyed a daily walk on his local towpath for the last 20 years.

 

John said; “It is a great honour to be appointed chair of the West Midlands regional advisory board for the Canal & River Trust, an organisation very dear to my heart, being both tremendously historic but also so useful and relevant today. I very much look forward to working with Adnan for the benefit of the Trust and local communities.”

 

For more information on the Canal & River Trust including how you can volunteer or donate money to support the work we do please visit www.canalrivertrust.org.uk

 

-ENDS-

 

For further media requests please contact:

Stephen Hardy, Communications Manager, on 07920 077190 or email stephen.hardy@canalrivertrust.org.uk

Edited September 25, 2018 by Ray T

[nicknorman]

Hmmmm, so no idea about canal infrastructure nor boating. Not too surprising really.

[LadyG]

As long as they improve funding, no  problem.

If they add to costs, then there is a problem.

Its cost/benefit analysis.

Edited September 25, 2018 by LadyG

[CV32]

Sounds like these two would not be able to direct traffic let alone anything else. Folks who have a vague idea of boating would be good, not walking the towpath once a day ... we have enough towpath experts already.

[Movin' on]

2 more bureaucrats to encourage more people to use our towpaths - just what we needed? - will CRT ever appoint a boater or at least someone who understands the frustrations of the only people who actually pay to use their/our free to access facilities???

[Mad Harold]

Not one mention of a boat!  I read it twice to make sure.

 

Does this Adnan bloke know that boats use the canals as well?

Perhaps one of our Mods ought to have a word in his conch pink ear.

[alan_fincher]

32 minutes ago, Halsey said:

2 more bureaucrats to encourage more people to use our towpaths - just what we needed? - will CRT ever appoint a boater or at least someone who understands the frustrations of the only people who actually pay to use their/our free to access facilities???

Whilst shsring most of the same frustrations as many of you, it is worth remembering that our use of the canals as boat owners is heavily subsidised by anybody who pays income tax.

 

Whilst we make some considerable contribution to the cost of running the canals through  our licence monies, it is nothing like enough to balance the books, and we only enjoy our hobby at current licence cost levels because money taken from all tax payers is making a major controibution.  If I had to pay my full share, I certainly couldn't afford it.

 

If we want the government to keep granting CRT those moinies, they must be able to demonstrate that the canals benefit more than just boatrowners..........
 

 

(Having said all that, I do agree that CRT seem to be increasingly hard to even admit that they are a navigation authority.)

Edited September 25, 2018 by alan_fincher

[dogless]

Meanwhile in the real world, our coal boat can't get from Long Itchington down to Warwick because he's fully laden, and the Long Itchington pound (Stockton locks to Bascote) is once again too low.

We've observed problems with water levels in this pound for at least two years, but nothing seems to happen.

If a working boat cannot travel it's own patch, what greater failure of management can there be?

Rog

[alan_fincher]

2 minutes ago, dogless said:

Meanwhile in the real world, our coal boat can't get from Long Itchington down to Warwick because he's fully laden, and the Long Itchington pound (Stockton locks to Bascote) is once again too low.

We've observed problems with water levels in this pound for at least two years, but nothing seems to happen.

If a working boat cannot travel it's own patch, what greater failure of management can there be?

Rog

Unfortunately it is a bit like the problems I face if my home broadband stops working,,,,,,

If only I can't access brodaband in my locality, the priority to fix it is treated as almost zero.
If everbody in my street can't access it, they start to give it some priority.

If the entire town I live in can't access it, it will probably be fixed quite quickly,

 

Those of us with very deep draughted booats, (or with historic narrow boats with a design width of rather more than 7 feet), are in a small minority, so CRT do not expend much resource on fixing problems that affect us, but will not seriosly affect a boat built to a draught of no more than 2' 6" or a beam of 6' 10".

They will respond to things where (say) 50% or moere of boaters are affected, but give very little priority if (say) well under 5% of boats are affected. Coal boats are dragging the bottom all over the system, and getting jammed in locks who's sides are moving inwards, but they are a very small proportion of all traffic.  CRT make far more revenue from bog standard modern boats, so far more emphasis is spent on problems that affect them as well.

[dogless]

I am raising the issue of people who's livelihood (food on the table etc) is based on boating.

Those of us who rely on the fuel boats in winter, REALLY don't want them to think it's not worth the effort, and buy a lorry.

If C&RT are not there to ensure these waterway heroes can go about their business, what are they there for?

People who choose to play with historic boats are a secondary issue in my opinion.

Rog

[alan_fincher]

4 minutes ago, dogless said:

I am raising the issue of people who's livelihood (food on the table etc) is based on boating.

Those of us who rely on the fuel boats in winter, REALLY don't want them to think it's not worth the effort, and buy a lorry.

If C&RT are not there to ensure these waterway heroes can go about their business, what are they there for?

People who choose to play with historic boats are a secondary issue in my opinion.

Rog

And on the whole I'm not disagreeing with you........

Of course most of those operating fuel boats are fairly vocal with CRT when there are problems, and it would undoubtedly help if everybody who chooses to comment on the difficulties they face here on CWDf, also made their own reportsd to CRT. Do you?

 

However, I believe you are  wrong about "people who choose to play with historic boats are a secondary issue in my opinion".  You fail to recognise that if I get grounded somewhere or jammed in a lock somewhere, and actually get something done about the problem I have encountered, then the next fuel boat along is far less likely to encounter a problem at the same location.
 

The coal boats, and those of us "playing" with these boats, make it far more likely that those people equally "playing" with 6' 10" beam boats on a 2' 6" draught will not face the same issues, because if we can get through somehow, then they should be able to easily.  If the coal boats weren't there, nor the historic boats being used as toys, (of which there are of course considerably more),  I suspect the rest of you would fairly quickly spot the difference.

[dogless]

I repeat, if C&RT are not there to permit our working boats to go about their business, what ARE they for?

The rest is just hobby boating isn't it?

Rog

[MtB]

11 hours ago, dogless said:

I repeat, if C&RT are not there to permit our working boats to go about their business, what ARE they for?

The rest is just hobby boating isn't it?

Rog

 

They are there to keep the linear leisure facility open for joggers, cyclists, walkers, dog walkers, anglers, birdwatchers and anyone else who doersn't require tens of millions of pounds spending on the waterways in order to enjoy them.

 

I wonder when boaters will ever get this into their thick heads. 

 

 

Edited September 26, 2018 by Mike the Boilerman
Minor amendment

[dogless]

Sad but true I'm afraid.

It's time for us all to let C&RT know that it's not good enough, individually and collectively.

Rog

[alan_fincher]

2 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

They are there to keep the linear leisure facility open for joggers, cyclists, walkers, dog draggers, anglers, birdwatchers and anyone else who doersn't require tens of millions of pounds spending on the waterways in order to enjoy them.

 

I wonder when boaters will ever get this into their thick heads. 

Which is why, despite the post before yours, you will not be able to find any CRT resource, be it web page, mission statement, annual report , or whatever, that sets the ability of the handful of trading fuel boats to move freely around the system as a priority even above any of the rest of us being able to move around the system.

To be honest CRT (and BW before them) probably see such boats as an inconvenience, as without them there could be at least 6" more silt in any length of canal before  it actually halted navigation.

[Arthur Marshall]

10 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

They are there to keep the linear leisure facility open for joggers, cyclists, walkers, dog draggers, anglers, birdwatchers and anyone else who doersn't require tens of millions of pounds spending on the waterways in order to enjoy them.

 

I wonder when boaters will ever get this into their thick heads. 

That's why the name had to change from "Waterways" to CRT. It just aint important to anyone but us. 

[peterboat]

You are right Rog,Mike and Arthur, Last weekend was the Sheffield canal festival, they moved boats of the visitors moorings to put ...............fishing lessons on them!! They wanted me to move as well, but when I pointed out that where they wanted me would cause difficulty for the trip boat, they decided to let me stay put. Clearly people wanted to see boats but when boats arnt really made welcome, it gets hard to make the effort to go up Tinsley flight, to be treated like third class citizens of the canal world 

[Movin' on]

9 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

Whilst shsring most of the same frustrations as many of you, it is worth remembering that our use of the canals as boat owners is heavily subsidised by anybody who pays income tax.

 

Which includes all of us - so we are already paying twice

8 hours ago, dogless said:

I am raising the issue of people who's livelihood (food on the table etc) is based on boating.

Those of us who rely on the fuel boats in winter, REALLY don't want them to think it's not worth the effort, and buy a lorry.

If C&RT are not there to ensure these waterway heroes can go about their business, what are they there for?

People who choose to play with historic boats are a secondary issue in my opinion.

Rog

Don't worry the railways are coming...…………………………..?

 

Seriously though I totally agree with you - and aren't working (and historic) boats also now part of the "attraction"?

[MtB]

1 hour ago, Halsey said:

Seriously though I totally agree with you - and aren't working (and historic) boats also now part of the "attraction"?

 

Yes people like to see boats, but few members of the Great British Public can tell the difference between a 'historic' and a modern narrow boat.  I know this from the number of people who, on peering in through the side doors at marvelling at one of my Kelvins (both in modern, welded construction shells), then ask when the boats were built and are disappointed to find it was only 20 years ago. 

 

Further, canals with no (or few) boats are just as popular with dog walkers, cyclists, anglers, joggers, duck feeders etc. All that is needed is a towpath. The Basingtoke is an excellent example. Few boats on the navigable bit and none at all on the far end, beyond the limit of navigation. The far end is just as popular.

[alan_fincher]

2 hours ago, Halsey said:

Which includes all of us - so we are already paying twice

 

Agreed.

 

However, if we make even small use of our boats, we are all costing CRT far more per individual than any other user of the waterways.  Thee combination of our licence fee with the small amount extra we pay via income tax still doesn't cover the costs assosciated with CRT keeping canals available for navigation.

 

The walkers, dog walkers, newt watchers etc are still subsidising our use of the canals, not the other way around.

[TheBiscuits]

Just now, alan_fincher said:

The walkers, dog walkers, newt watchers etc are still subsidising our use of the canals, not the other way around.

 

It's odd how many boaters won't accept this as fact.  CRT would need nearly another £2000 per year from each of the 35,000 boats for us to cover the government grant.

 

They also seem to despise the anglers, the only other group that directly contribute to CRT coffers.

[X Alan W]

The present day use of the canals has changed in almost all aspects post working at the beginning of the leisure boom the folk owning boats wanted to use them & go places on the system  hence the "vollie" groups restoring to use some of the lesser used routes & Nat rally's were  in places that required use ,then came the influx of a boats to live on & don't want to have to move from mooring at place X as work children's school require me to be near there good for BW & C&rt as less upkeep to aid navigation this as "Topsy" growed to the catch 22 situation the more none boaters for want of a better term the more the circle is squared Whilst I agree with other forms of leisure along the system the more detriment to navigation the back to derelict the system becomes I do wonder how many of the other users of offerings will be around as the waterways sink back to rubbish filled weed infested  ribbons of muddy water I suppose as the saying goes Time will tell

[ditchcrawler]

11 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

They are there to keep the linear leisure facility open for joggers, cyclists, walkers, dog walkers, anglers, birdwatchers and anyone else who doersn't require tens of millions of pounds spending on the waterways in order to enjoy them.

 

I wonder when boaters will ever get this into their thick heads. 

 

 

So true. They are not there for boater of improve boating or even attract moor boaters to the water. Its for 75% of the population in the area who never visit a canal.  Its the only way CRT is going to get funding and it will be an uphill struggle. As pointed out earlier cost benefit  

[Movin' on]

51 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

It's odd how many boaters won't accept this as fact.  CRT would need nearly another £2000 per year from each of the 35,000 boats for us to cover the government grant.

 

They also seem to despise the anglers, the only other group that directly contribute to CRT coffers.

I don't despise anglers in any way nor did I suggest that I did - after all they can legitimately obstruct towpaths and slow down/obstruct cyclists - they get my vote 

[Jerra]

14 hours ago, dogless said:

If a working boat cannot travel it's own patch, what greater failure of management can there be?

Rog

Failure to get any money at all from government leading to complete failure of the system.