|
Post by Allan on Feb 7, 2018 23:19:08 GMT
With regard to Steves suggestion that they will invest in canalside property, I would point out that the canalside restriction disappeared when BW became C&RT.
C&RT's GIP (group investment policy) is to dispose of its large number of small properties and invest in fewer large properties. They say that this reduces management overheads. They have also started to diversify by investing in (non-property) funds.
It is perhaps idle speculation but I think the £150m will be used to -
Buy high value property
Further invest in non-propery funds
Pay off existing loans as they fall due
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Feb 9, 2018 10:30:58 GMT
From responses to Allan’s FoI request for details of the application by CaRT -
“the draft proposal . . . focuses on the relative benefits and costs of the transfer and an outline of what the Trust would seek from Government.” That might well have been a stumbling block!
“the Trust’s duly appointed “qualified person” (Allan Leighton, the Chair of the Trust’s Board of Trustees) is of the opinion that the disclosure of this information would
i) Inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or exchange of views – it would have a “chilling effect” on the exploration of options and exchange of views and deliberation for the transfer between the Trust and Defra, ultimately leading to poorer decision making; and/or
ii) Otherwise prejudice the conduct of the public affairs – it would have a disruptive effect on the Trust and remove the “safe space” to develop ideas away from external interference and distraction on a “live” area of policy discussion”.
I rather incline to agreement that disclosure of the details would have a “chilling effect” – on concerned boaters anyway – but query whether decision making within CaRT’s executive could be any poorer than it presently is, and, moreover, whether their conduct of public affairs has always been prejudice free. If this really was all about the benfeicial effects a take-over would have for the system and its primary users, then I fail to see why either of the parties need to keep it all hidden from the public.
I suspect that CaRT have wanted government to cough up more public money, for an extended period, to help sop up operating losses - but the EA could surely have done that for themselves?
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Feb 9, 2018 11:44:33 GMT
It has always been about the money!
Defra wants a proposal from C&RT that says we can reduce your current costs.
C&RT wants lump sum funding to bring EA waterways up to scratch and a property dowry to produce maintenance income in perpetuity.
Has anyone noticed the way C&RT has moved from 'our proposal was rejected' to 'it was a draft proposal' ...
|
|