Whats life like in the C&RT

boatone

boatone

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 Jul 2001
Messages
12,845
Location
Just a few cables from Boulters Lock
www.tmba.org.uk
While we wait for the powers that be to clarify the position regarding the proposed transfer of EA Navigations to the C&RT, I thought it might be interesting to solicit the views of canal users as to how the C&RT is viewed now it has been in charge for a while.

I have just posted the following on the CanalWorld Forum:
Now that the C&RT have been running the show for a while I would be interested to know how you guys think the changeover is going. I know its early days but do you perceive a change for the better ?

I've also seen recently that it is claimed officially that licence evasion has been reduced to around 4% but have heard from individual canal users that they are very sceptical about this. Any comment?

Why am I interested? Because the government is still intent on transferring management of the EA navigations to the C&RT in 2015 and, frankly, we know next to s*d all about how such a transfer of navigation responsibilities might take place. Not least, we still need to know what "navigation" in this context actually means and which current responsibilities might be retained by the EA.

Will it be out of the frying pan and into the fire? If nothing else, the creation of the C&RT seems to have given the trust long term confidence in the level of government funding and the opportunity to work with long term budgets as well as freedom to develop new income streams.
Click to expand...

I will report anything interesting back here.
 
byron said:
This should be interesting Tony.
Click to expand...
I think we river users need to take a damn sight more interest in this issue, Byron, as its not likely to go away.
Not a headliner in yesterdays statement but I see that English Heritage has been given £80m in the government's Spending Review as part of plans for the organisation to become a charity by 2015. There may actually be something about the EA Navigations hidden away in the detail somewhere but I have yet to find it!
As we have yet to be given any information at all as to how a transfer of the EA navigations might be managed - indeed, we do not even know exactly what comprises "the navigation" - its impossible to form a considered view as to whether we should support or oppose the move, so I reckon anything we can do to become more informed must be a good thing.
 
CJL said:
No details have been discussed with Defra yet I am led to believe
CJL
Click to expand...
You are correct in that Defra have not yet made any formal announcement. I have no doubt that there is behind the scenes activity between Defra and the EA but, if my information is correct, Defra have not yet enlightened the EA people as to their exact intentions. A project is currently in hand to identify all EA Navigations assets and responsibilities including, as I understand it, considering how the different operational aspects might be divided between "navigation" and others such as flood relief and water management. Until this is completed it is difficult to see how exact proposals can be presented. Surprisingly, in spite of the extensive use of the word "navigations" there appears to be no clear definition of what this means and which functions are included.
My comment re something being possibly hidden away was not that I expected to find any detail - just that there might be a reconfirmation of the intention to transfer EA navigations to the C&RT.
 
The IWA Newsletter received today considers ta some length the issues surrounding the possible transfer of EA NAvigations to the C&RT and seems that the IWA is strongly in favour of such a move.

It adds nothing more to the current position that Defra are still considering prior to further announcements but you can read the whole IWA statement in the July Bulletin here:
https://www.waterways.org.uk/news_campaigns/bulletins/iwa_bulletin_july_2013#ea

Probably the most significant paragraph is this one:
Where does this leave the Environment Agency's (EA) navigations? Although they remained outside the formation of CRT the government has made it clear that it wishes them to be transferred in 2015 subject to affordability and the agreement of CRT trustees. IWA strongly supports such a transfer. EA navigations are in a generally good condition resulting from investment over many years; this is particularly true of the Thames but less so in East Anglia. However, the long term sustainability is precarious as they are even more dependent upon government grants than BW was. 65% comes from the taxpayer and only 35% from boaters, even worse there are currently no other sources of significant income. If nothing changes then the inevitable fall off in government grant will have to be met by further cuts in running costs (and hence service standards) together with higher than inflation licence/registration charges. The EA knows that it has to find new sources of income but there are limits of what a government body can achieve. By joining the CRT EA navigations will benefit from economy of scale with a large marketing organisation geared towards raising money including that from the charitable sector. The Thames in particular is a very lucrative waterway corridor where the potential for charitable fundraising is huge. Inclusion of EA navigations in CRT will move much closer to full realisation of the Aickman vision.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
If it is of any use to you at all I think that CRT have made some huge steps forward from when BW were at the reins.

Certainly where we cruise they are making inroads into the back log of maintenance and are now starting dredging works on the Trent, something we complained long and hard for with BW to no avail, the money seemingly wasnt there to do the job.

It would be nice to see CRT tackle the issue of licence evasion more aggresively as there are a minority that are actively seeking to play the system and making no attempt to even comply with licence requirements. A handful of local boats in particular is taking the p*ss.
 
CX54WEK said:
It would be nice to see CRT tackle the issue of licence evasion more aggresively as there are a minority that are actively seeking to play the system and making no attempt to even comply with licence requirements. A handful of local boats in particular is taking the p*ss.
Click to expand...

But it was recently claimed that licence evasion had now been reduced to below 4%. Are you suggesting you are sceptical about that?
 
C&RT's first birthday today and at least they can rely on sustained government funding support for many years to come. The EA Thames Grant-in-Aid from central government continues to fall year on year with the budgetary constraints and a further 10% reduction was announced last week for the 2015/16 year.
Not only is government funding reducing but income from boating and other revenue sources has also fallen due to last years inclement weather which has virtually wiped out the gains made from increasing registration enforcement.
Something has to give.
 
apollo said:
Yep - Rowers, Sailors, Fishermen, Swimmers, yada yada
When everyone is paying their fair share then you can say things are desperate - while folks are paying diddly squat its not desperate yet.
Click to expand...
Same old boring response, Mike?
Rowers, sailors and fishermen do pay just like you and I do. They pay a fee that at some time was considered a reasonable contribution. However, times have changed and what was a fair contribution at some time in the past, and under different circumstances, may no longer appear either reasonable or fair. Problem is getting agreement from all these different factions to actually change a regime with everyone fighting for vested interests is about as likely as the Lib Dems winning an outright majority at the next election. The Lib Dems will likely be fighting for survival and thats exactly the position I now perceive the non-tidal Thames to be in.
The EA Thames have virtually no room for manoeuvre. Income from Government has been severely reduced and will be reducing further. Sources of additional revenue are virtually non existent.
The EA are constrained by strict Treasury rules as to what they can do to raise income. They cannot charge someone for swimming in the river. They cannot invite bequests like a charity can. They can't simply increase availability of EA moorings without that having a likely detrimental effect on commercial operators.
 
boatone said:
Same old boring response, Mike?.
Click to expand...
Absolutely just cos you dismiss it doesn't make it any less the answer, maybe it requires a little effort on their part but welcome to the real world.

boatone said:
However, times have changed and what was a fair contribution at some time in the past, and under different circumstances, may no longer appear either reasonable or fair.
Click to expand...
Understatement of the century!

boatone said:
Problem is getting agreement from all these different factions to actually change a regime with everyone fighting for vested interests is about as likely as the Lib Dems winning an outright majority at the next election.
Click to expand...
Who needs agreements - EA just charge them more money, if they don't like it, don't use the river.

boatone said:
The EA are constrained by strict Treasury rules as to what they can do to raise income. They cannot charge someone for swimming in the river.
Click to expand...
I am sure that a "Risk Assessment" is required for any such event, and could the EA not demand that they have a patrol boat on duty for "ELF and Safety" reasons and charge for the overtime.

I am bored with this too, there is always an answer but them just bleating there is no money makes me think they really should hand over to Cart sooner!

Sorry ATYC - but then again you never did ask your members what they think and you are not representing me!
 
There is no escaping the fact that CaRT and EA navigations are different animals -

The Trust owns the track, lock structures and other fixed assets.
Simplistically the can do what they like - the are not really answerable to anyone.

EA may own the locks and weirs, but they don't own the track - riparian owners do.
EA, being part of a Government department is answerable to Parliament and the electorate.

CaRT could quite easily dump the lock service and ignore (any) public backlash. That would ruin the River for the vast number of boaters and other users of the waterside.

Until both sides lay their cards on the table in public view, everything is guesswork and the issue will be rushed through.
 
TrueBlue said:
There is no escaping the fact that CaRT and EA navigations are different animals -

The Trust owns the track, lock structures and other fixed assets.
Simplistically the can do what they like - the are not really answerable to anyone.

EA may own the locks and weirs, but they don't own the track - riparian owners do.
EA, being part of a Government department is answerable to Parliament and the electorate.

CaRT could quite easily dump the lock service and ignore (any) public backlash. That would ruin the River for the vast number of boaters and other users of the waterside.

Until both sides lay their cards on the table in public view, everything is guesswork and the issue will be rushed through.
Click to expand...

CRT also manage some river navigations which have the same issues with riparian owners that the EA's waterways have.

Why should that make the EA any different?
 
boatone said:
While we wait for the powers that be to clarify the position regarding the proposed transfer of EA Navigations to the C&RT, I thought it might be interesting to solicit the views of canal users as to how the C&RT is viewed now it has been in charge for a while.
Click to expand...

Hi Tony

We have just received an email from CRT HQ. There is clarification for the immediate term. This is the quote

Following on from the news in May that the project to transfer the EA’s navigations was on hold until after the Government’s Spending Review, Defra has today announced that the project has been postponed until “Defra’s finances improve and there is a realistic prospect of the transfer being affordable.” The full statement is here

This is our response from Chairman, Tony Hales

“This is disappointing news and a missed opportunity. In less than a year, the transfer of British Waterways to the voluntary sector has begun to revolutionise the way that our canals and rivers are cared for, opening up improved engagement and new opportunities for volunteering and fundraising. There is no reason that we could not have seen the same benefits on the EA’s navigations.

“We have very much enjoyed working with the team at the EA and look forward to this continuing as we share best practice and knowledge in the future. We remain ready to look at these plans when the Government is next able to proceed.”


This is the full statement http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-vote-office/July_2013/03-07-13/3.DEFRA-Transfer-Environment-Agency-Navigations.pdf

Regards
Rob
 
BSSOffice said:
Hi Tony

We have just received an email from CRT HQ. There is clarification for the immediate term. This is the quote…….

Following on from the news in May that the project to transfer the EA’s navigations was on hold until after the Government’s Spending Review, Defra has today announced that the project has been postponed until “Defra’s finances improve and there is a realistic prospect of the transfer being affordable.”
This is the full statement http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-vote-office/July_2013/03-07-13/3.DEFRA-Transfer-Environment-Agency-Navigations.pdf

Thanks for letting us know so quickly, Rob. My immediate reaction is that this is really bad news and undoubtedly means that serious discussions need to take place within the EA to recognise the need for additional funding until this is resolved.
Click to expand...
 
CX54WEK said:
CRT also manage some river navigations which have the same issues with riparian owners that the EA's waterways have.

Why should that make the EA any different?
Click to expand...

I think it's a matter of scale.
Being nearer the Capital and most likely passing through many influential landowners properties (vide the storm that was mad over the proposed sale of lock cottages) their is more chance of a conflict. I also think that the Thames has a much wider use of it's water and environs than some of the other waterways.

What does bother me as an observer is that users need the level of services that are available today - not only attended locks but all the implied facilities that go with it - and for which there is no specific funding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top