|
Post by kris on Mar 10, 2018 10:35:22 GMT
Maybe wide boat owners should chain themselves to the lock paddles like the suffragettes did. Off you go then, by the way you seem to have a fascination with chains.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2018 10:37:03 GMT
I cannot see blockades doing anything positive for what is a (relatively) minor issue.
I suspect as johnv pointed out, that there may be a strong element of 'piss on the fire Jack, my toasts done' by many narrow boat owners.
In reality I believe the only realistic protest is firing off communications in protest, to C&RT, and local MP's, as kris and jenlyn have suggested in the past.
I have to say that since the creation of C&RT as the waterway authority, my blind faith in BW has crumbled and by their constant 'own goals' C&RT have made me into a (what some will be happy to call) 'C&RT basher'.
I'm not, but some of their decisions and actions are worrying.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 10, 2018 10:51:03 GMT
I cannot see blockades doing anything positive for what is a (relatively) minor issue. I suspect as johnv pointed out, that there may be a strong element of 'piss on the fire Jack, my toasts done' by many narrow boat owners. In reality I believe the only realistic protest is firing off communications in protest, to C&RT, and local MP's, as kris and jenlyn have suggested in the past. I have to say that since the creation of C&RT as the waterway authority, my blind faith in BW has crumbled and by their constant 'own goals' C&RT have made me into a (what some will be happy to call) 'C&RT basher'. I'm not, but some of their decisions and actions are worrying. Rog I think most of us wish that it wasn't so, but the reality is cart are running the network into the ground. I know for my self I was happy when it changed from Bw, I thought naively that it might be a positive change. But unfortunately it hasn't turned out that way.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Mar 10, 2018 11:27:55 GMT
Yes Kris, like many people, I had high hopes of better days to come
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 10, 2018 11:35:34 GMT
Yes Kris, like many people, I had high hopes of better days to come I think everybody did John, something needed to change. Unfortunately it's been a change for the worse.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Mar 10, 2018 11:35:45 GMT
Maybe wide boat owners should chain themselves to the lock paddles like the suffragettes did. Maybe we should chain Narrowboat owners to the lock gates? In all seriousness I am going to see my MP with my gripes 1/ How come it was only fat boat owners that didnt get the consultation on our moorings and at Sheffield 2/ We all applied to go to the first consultation but didnt get places yet the meetings were half empty! 3/ The headline was revenue neutral and easier to administer and neither of these were achieved 4/ What is going to happen to the extra money raised? is it going into maintenance? or is it making up the pension deficit? 5/ When are they going to start the north to south wideboat link and remove the over 10 foot obstruction on the Ribble link, if they want us to pay more then we need greater access to the system as a whole it cant be all take, take, take! Anybody got anymore suggestions? We all need to do this with our MPs and we have to let them know if you didnt receive the 3rd consultation especially if you are a fatboat owner.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Mar 10, 2018 12:32:48 GMT
Yes Kris, like many people, I had high hopes of better days to come I think everybody did John, something needed to change. Unfortunately it's been a change for the worse. Not so. I, amongst a very few others, could see what would happen, and fruitlessly objected in giving evidence to Parliament while the Public Bodies Bill progressed. Only 2 other boaters put in objections individually, while the NBTA were the most vociferous and effective voice, prompting some amendments following a meeting with the then Waterways Minister, which I also attended. My contribution - publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/publicbod/memo/pb01.htmFrank Kelloway's - publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/publicbod/memo/pb13.htmDave DeVere's - publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/publicbod/memo/pb11.htmThe NBTA - publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/publicbod/memo/pb05.htmBoth the NBTA and I managed to get queries raised during the final House of Lords deliberations on the Transfer of Functions Order for BW to CaRT, but the Bill was bulldozed through with unseemly haste regardless - hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2012-06-25/debates/12062510000089/BritishWaterwaysBoard(TransferOfFunctions)Order2012However, it is fair to say that the success of the Bill in enabling the transfer to CaRT is very largely due to the misplaced optimism of the vast majority of boaters, so your comment is understandable.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 10, 2018 12:41:15 GMT
I think everybody did John, something needed to change. Unfortunately it's been a change for the worse. Not so. I, amongst a very few others, could see what would happen, and fruitlessly objected in giving evidence to Parliament while the Public Bodies Bill progressed. Only 2 other boaters put in objections individually, while the NBTA were the most vociferous and effective voice, prompting some amendments following a meeting with the then Waterways Minister, which I also attended. My contribution - publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/publicbod/memo/pb01.htmFrank Kelloway's - publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/publicbod/memo/pb13.htmDave DeVere's - publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/publicbod/memo/pb11.htmThe NBTA - publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/publicbod/memo/pb05.htmBoth the NBTA and I managed to get queries raised during the final House of Lords deliberations on the Transfer of Functions Order for BW to CaRT, but the Bill was bulldozed through with unseemly haste regardless - hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2012-06-25/debates/12062510000089/BritishWaterwaysBoard(TransferOfFunctions)Order2012However, it is fair to say that the success of the Bill in enabling the transfer to CaRT is very largely due to the misplaced optimism of the vast majority of boaters, so your comment is understandable. I did preface it with "I think" I also admit my naivety, it's since the trust has been formed that my eyes have been opened.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Mar 10, 2018 12:56:22 GMT
I did preface it with "I think" I also admit my naivety, it's since the trust has been formed that my eyes have been opened. Acknowledged, Kris. It is the perennial problem with all such legislation - witness the progress of the Middle Levels Bill, which most boaters and representative organisations considered would be of benefit as it stood, and only following revelations of the numerous pitfalls during the initial stages did they come to realise that - with the fortunate result that some have lodged petitions against it who were formerly uncritically in favour. Even the IWA admitted that the amendments and additions following the Commons Select Committee were an improvement! It does all highlight, as I [doubtlessly boringly] repeat - we all need to be alert and inform ourselves, so as to be in a position to involve ourselves when that has the best chance of success. Not that I am particularly exercised over the proposed changes to the fee structure, but the principle stands, for all those affected.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Mar 10, 2018 13:06:55 GMT
I did preface it with "I think" I also admit my naivety, it's since the trust has been formed that my eyes have been opened. that's me as well kris, I was fairly fresh back on inland waters after a 20 or so year gap on salt/brackish waters and most of my prior experience with the canal system had been under the aegis of the late and not very lamented BWB. and yes, I was also naive and also very disappointed.
|
|
|
Post by Allan on Mar 10, 2018 14:53:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Mar 10, 2018 15:34:56 GMT
Interesting reading, thanks Allan.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2018 18:28:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Mar 10, 2018 19:50:41 GMT
“Of course, there is no pledge as to how CRT intend to redistribute this windfall, unless of course it's to placate the unions who have pointed out previously that the general staff wages have been suffering, whilst the directors and CEO have done very well on increases thank you.” That brought to mind the words of the Monopolies and Mergers Committee Reports on BW. In 1987 they produced a report criticising [amongst a whole lot of other things] the horrendous inefficiencies and organisational costs arising from the bonus schemes for employees, recommending that these be abolished. The later Report of 1994 recalled that recommendation: “ BWB should, as it acknowledges, reconsider its position on bonus schemes.” The ‘update’, however, noted: “ Bonus schemes for the wages grades have been almost eliminated. Bonus schemes for Departmental Directors and Regional Managers have been introduced”!!! [my bold]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2018 19:59:23 GMT
The ‘update’, however, noted: “ Bonus schemes for the wages grades have been almost eliminated. Bonus schemes for Departmental Directors and Regional Managers have been introduced”!!! [my bold] Insert swear words of your choice on my behalf please.
|
|