boatone
Well-Known Member
Snap General Election, sadly, probably means more uncertainty, delays and frustration regarding future management of non tidal Thames and other EA managed waterways..
General Election = More uncertainty ?
- Thread starter boatone
- Start date
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
I look forward to asking everyone who canvasses me, what their party intends to do about it.
dash300
Well-Known Member
I have to say even as an ex Thames Riparian this is a very parochial post when the issue in question is about the Nations future!
sailorman
Well-Known Member
Uncertainty = lies as usual
we are in this mess due to cmd pandering to his party & thought he would romp home, its just as well he didnt use his family £s to play poker
boatone
Well-Known Member
We need to fight for the things that we care about if they are not to be consigned to the repository of inconsequential.
oldgit
Well-Known Member
General elections are two a penny and such transitory things,as are Referendums .No good reason merely if the country wishes to dabble with interesting and courageous temporary political experiments, to ignore a matter which could affect the navigation for the foreseeable future ?
dash300
Well-Known Member
Ok I'm off back to the lounge!
Richard10002
Well-Known Member
Which is exactly why a General Election is not an appropriate instrument to decide it ?
oldgit
Well-Known Member
boatone
Well-Known Member
Perhaps it would have been more appropriate to have titled this thread as "continued uncertainty" rather than "more uncertainty.
It is hardly possible for there to be greater uncertainty than there is currently - unless and until there is a clear alternative management route the EA will continue to manage the waterways with whatever resources can be garnered from registration fees and such largess as central government may continue to provide. Unless there is a significant change of heart re government funding this is likely to mean further financial constraints with consequent continuing reductions in services.
We are aware that the Canal and River Trust are gathering information that will enable them to decide whether or not to put a proposal to DEFRA which would enable a transfer of the waterways to their management. However, it is obvious that any such proposal would need to satisfy the CRT Trustees that it is financially viable and not likely to put the Trust at risk - ie there would need to be guarantees of government support.
As has been said before, the EA Waterways are between a rock and a hard place.
It is hardly possible for there to be greater uncertainty than there is currently - unless and until there is a clear alternative management route the EA will continue to manage the waterways with whatever resources can be garnered from registration fees and such largess as central government may continue to provide. Unless there is a significant change of heart re government funding this is likely to mean further financial constraints with consequent continuing reductions in services.
We are aware that the Canal and River Trust are gathering information that will enable them to decide whether or not to put a proposal to DEFRA which would enable a transfer of the waterways to their management. However, it is obvious that any such proposal would need to satisfy the CRT Trustees that it is financially viable and not likely to put the Trust at risk - ie there would need to be guarantees of government support.
As has been said before, the EA Waterways are between a rock and a hard place.
oldgit
Well-Known Member
"need to satisfy the CRT Trustees that it is financially viable and not likely to put the Trust at risk - ie there would need to be guarantees of government support."
Do wonder if there has been any indications at all that this subject is still "live" or has been firmly placed back on the shelf for the immediate future,It appears to have gone rather quiet apart from the odd bit of unofficial scuttlebutt. ?
Do wonder if there has been any indications at all that this subject is still "live" or has been firmly placed back on the shelf for the immediate future,It appears to have gone rather quiet apart from the odd bit of unofficial scuttlebutt. ?
boatone
Well-Known Member
Not so much on the back burner as waiting for someone to present a considered proposal to take over the management of the waterways. The only identifiable contender is CRT who we know have been working up just such a proposal for presentation to their Trustees. This process seems to be subject to continuing slippage. There are some (particularly the IWA) who are actively promoting the CRT option but nowt will happen until a proposal is tabled for DEFRA and HMG to respond to.
In a nutshell, the process will be reactive as far as HMG are concerned rather than proactive.
Chris_d
Well-Known Member
Guess at the moment as nobody is actually loosing money there is no incentive to hurry anything.
oldgit
Well-Known Member
Suspect the Thames is regarded over all as a distinct problem by the treasury and haemorrhaging money if looking at income over liabilities.
Even the Crown Estates are having to make all their assets work ie, lease the river bed and agree to joint ventures with private companies to provided income via moorings.
Wonder if the price of CaRT taking over will be allowing them to charge actual money for what appear to be certain sacrosanct events and activities at the moment. ?
boatone
Well-Known Member
As I expected - informed yesterday that agenda planning and next TNUF meeting deferred until after election.
Chris_d
Well-Known Member
Very disappointing, just an excuse to delay. Appreciate funding is potentially in doubt but that shouldn't stop the planning process and normal operating until any change is confirmed.
boatone
Well-Known Member
All civil service departments are placed in 'purdah' and receive strict guidance as to what they are permitted to do during this period, any meetings etc which may have political implications are no-go. We had same problem during run up to referendum.