Monday 21 November 2011

How the Boaters' Manifesto happened


Find something positive to say about the Canal and River Trust was the challenge thrown down by former canal magazine editor Kevin Blick– and I responded like a dog chasing a bone.
My trust in BW, at least at senior management level, had evaporated and - as much as I believe the waterways should be cared for properly by the taxpayer - I was reluctantly having to admit that the current bunch of right wing ideologues in government were unlikely to abandon their cost saving plan of tossing the waterways away to save a few quid.
That left the Canal and River Trust and I could see that boaters, and especially those who live on the system or spend much of their lives on the water did need to face the new reality of the Trust and tell those creating it what was needed.
So was born the Boaters’ Manifesto. I asked for contributions online, some of you may have seen my requests on a whole variety of Facebook pages, or on Twitter and then I put them all together.
Everyone looked at it again and we fine-tuned it before the manifesto, created by a group of boaters, was sent to the Transition Trustees, the IWA and the members of the parliamentary waterways group.
It is now being discussed by the IWA and members of the parliamentary group and a direct meeting is planned with the Transition Trustees of the proposed new Canal and River Trust.
I think the manifesto is a worthwhile document and gives a voice to real boaters – well I would, wouldn’t I?
Getting it together has been interesting, especially as the contributions have all been made online and opinions vary according to perspective, with everyone, including me, having their axes to grind. I am pleased that we have got agreement from such a disparate bunch on a simple set of demands.
If the Transition Trustees can move some way towards us there is a tremendous reward in sight for the new charity because experienced boaters who spend much if not all of their lives on the system have already got a great deal of personal and financial capital invested in it.
We need to see a successful organisation running our waterways and doing so in a way that allows our investment to remain worthwhile. If the Canal and River Trust can convince us they are the people to do that there is a great wealth of enthusiasm, commitment and knowledge amongst boaters that can be tapped in a way that BW could never manage.
My next task is to put together a team to present the Manifesto to the trustees from amongst boaters I have only met electronically, each speaking on a section of the manifesto and possibly doing so from a variety of BW regional offices on a video link.
Remind me again why I started this?

Thursday 10 November 2011

Boaters Manifesto




This manifesto was compiled as the result of responses to a request made on half a dozen boaters’ groups on Facebook (total membership around 2,500) and through various individual boaters’ Twitter networks and discussion groups.
Boaters were asked to let the transition trustees know what they actually need from them so that they can respond to the new charity with enthusiasm and commitment. A first draft was produced and offered to boaters for further amendments and additions and this is the final result.


Key Points


1. Waterways are about boats and boaters and the Canal and River Trust needs to listen to boaters more closely and have more representatives on the board.
2. Before the Canal and River Trust accepts the legal burden of running the waterways it must ensure proper funding to keep all waterways open, navigable and properly maintained, otherwise it should refuse to do so.
3. Boaters have lost faith in the most senior management of British Waterways and believe that the government should accept the cost of making them redundant to give the Canal and River Trust a fresh start.
4. The Canal and River Trust must develop a system of working that values full time paid staff and their skills above the expediency of using cheap contractors in order to maintain the skilled workforce the waterways require.
5. The Canal and River Trust must enforce a simplified set of mooring rules across the entire waterways system without fear or favour.
6. The Trust must make it a priority to ensure non-boating users of the system make a financial contribution to its upkeep and that their use of the system does not impinge on its primary purpose of navigation.
7. The Canal and River Trust must ensure it is open to Freedom of Information Act requests and operate in a totally transparent fashion if it is to earn and retain confidence.
8. Those for whom the waterways are a home have a special interest in and value to the Canal and River Trust and should be clearly represented at board level and consulted on all navigational issues.

Why the Canal and River Trust should listen to boaters

Navigable waterways were not only created for boats, they are only still with us today because boats and boaters found a new use for them as commercial traffic came to an end.
It has been boaters – not cyclists or walkers or fishermen – who have fought to reopen neglected canals in the face of official opposition; with British Waterways only jumping on the bandwagon in recent years.
Canals without boats don’t last very long for other users as there is no longer a reason to keep the unique industrial heritage in working order, the structures crumble, the water silts up and little is left. Waterways need boats as much as boats need waterways.
Boaters are the only group that has already made a substantial financial and personal commitment to the waterways as well as the only collection of individuals that pays substantial annual fees for their upkeep.
Boaters, especially those with many years of experience and those who live on their craft and travel widely on the system have a wealth of expertise that has been largely ignored by British Waterways and those who helped to compile this manifesto fear that the Canal and River Trust may continue this policy.
Most of all we would like to see many more experienced boaters, proper users of the system, taking a role at national and regional level than the current proposals suggest. Just five out of 35 (7 if you include boating business representatives) at a national level is simply inadequate. It is vital that many more than the proposed 50 per cent are elected by people concerned with the function of the waterways, primarily boaters.

Navigation

Boaters need to be assured that all existing navigations are sufficiently well maintained to enable the vessels designed to use them to travel the whole length of those waterways at all times of the year and operate locks and other equipment with relative ease and safety.
Waterways must not be allowed to deteriorate through lack of maintenance and the Canal and River Trust must have sufficient contingency funds to deal with a major breach – on the scale of those on the Shropshire Union Canal the Monmouth and Breconshire Canal in recent years - without delay.
This means that sufficient government funding is a prerequisite for the Canal and River Trust and if the levels of funding do not fill the massive gap identified by the IWA, and the specialist waterways MPs group, the trustees should refuse to sanction the creation of the charity. It will not be enough to depend on optimistic projections of future charitable income and would be dangerous to do so.
We believe some of the financial projections offered by British Waterways and Defra are simply wrong as they do not model the true cost of creating a well maintained system and accept the projections of a ‘steady state’ with a massive maintenance backlog and need to be tested far more critically than seems the case at present.
If the funding is not adequate to keep all waterways open, navigable and well maintained the Canal and River Trust should refuse to accept the task of running the waterways.

Management

Executive management
Boaters and many others have completely lost faith in the most senior levels of British Waterways’ management in recent years and almost all those who contributed to this manifesto want to see the current directors removed before the Canal and River Trust begins to run the system. It is our belief that government should bear the cost of making these people redundant as the new charitable role is essentially different. Our concern centres on the enormously expensive pay, pension and perks packages of the most senior directors and their willingness to grab bonus payments when staff are being penalised by pay rise well under the rate of inflation and we believe that their continued presence will make it extremely difficult to create any trust among boaters in the Canal and River Trust. That is especially the case as many of the commercial ventures in which they are supposed to be experts have failed to produce promised results.
Boaters do not believe the Canal and River Trust should be willing and will not be able to pay such large scale remuneration and feel that the removal of a group of directors who have little understanding of waterways or boats would do more to give the Trust a fresh start than any new logo.

Middle management
British Waterways’ workforce has become disconnected from the system it looks after. This is due to attempts to farm out much of the bankside and construction work to the cheapest available contractors, along with a policy that obliges the workforce to work in teams covering large areas.
Boaters would like to see visible individuals responsible for a particular stretch of waterway, with clear responsibilities and accountability in the event of failures.
We believe the skills of the workforce should be valued, encouraged and passed on, especially as caring for a 200 year old artefact requires special expertise. We would like to see work brought back in house and apprenticeships encouraged along the lines of those provided by the National Trust.

Mooring

Whatever else the Canal and River Trust does it will achieve most with most boaters if it applies the same rules on mooring to all parts of the waterways system and enforces them without fear or favour.
This does not exclude setting up special rules in hot-spot areas; but they should then be available for all hot-spots in the country that want to adopt them. We do not believe there is anything wrong with the current mooring guidelines but feel they must be applied equally and effectively across the country. Don’t make rules the Canal and River Trust can’t enforce.

Towpath issues.

Boaters do not mind sharing the towpaths with fishermen, walkers, cyclists and dogs – although we draw the line at motorised vehicles and horses, other than those used to tow boats.
We do believe it is essential the Canal and River Trust finds ways of ensuring all those users contribute to the costs of upkeep and abide by a national set of rules.
Once again enforcement will be the key to stopping dog fouling, rubbish and speeding cyclists putting lives at risk.
We would encourage the new Trust to get into schools, angling clubs, cycling, ramblers etc and educate them about the policies on the towpath, and about canals and waterways in general so we can all enjoy them


An open society?

The Canal and River Trust needs to be completely open with boaters and other supporters and we would urge Trustees to stop avoiding the inclusion of the charity in Freedom of Information legislation.
Given the sensitive existing issues over directors pay, commercial operations such as BWML, pub chains and property development it is essential that the Canal and River Trust’s supporters are able to assure themselves that the murky goings on under British Waterways are brought out into the open and that complete transparency is the rule as soon as the charity begins business.
The Canal and River Trust is vitally important to boaters. Other users can always find what they're looking for somewhere else, if the new trust is not up to scratch, their stake is minimal. If the canal system crumbles then where are all the boat users going to go?


Liveaboard boaters

The Canal and River Trust should endeavour to help those who live on their boats by the provision of more residential moorings where needed and perhaps usable postal addresses (BFPO can do it for the forces), recycling facilities, more potable water and sewage disposal points.
Those who live on the waterways system, several thousand people, should have specific representation on the board of the Trust.

Transition Trustee responds to Manifesto's first draft


People may be interested to know that one of the eight transition trustees, John Dodwell has written a commentary on the first draft of the Boaters’ Manifesto and defended many of the actions the manifesto complains about.
I find it somewhat condescending in parts but this needs to be an open discussion so I have decided to post it here.
John seems to feel that the existence of the manifesto means that boaters support the Canal and River Trust and the only point I would make is that most serious boaters feel the charity has been foisted on them by a government that is refusing to take financial responsibility for a great national asset. We are trying to mitigate what we fear will be a disaster.
It is also worth noting that his response has already drawn criticism from those who feel he should be more aware of the funding gap and from those who feel his defence of retaining the current BW directors is misguided.

Here is what John Dodwell said...

Your draft Boaters’ Manifesto interests me as I am one of the eight Canal & River Trust trustees. I also have a longstanding interest in the waterways (e.g. IWA General Secretary in the 70s) and 10 years ago finally bought a boat – a 51ft long 3 ft draft BCN historic tug. I’m not the only boat owning trustee – so is Lynne Berry (recently retired from running the WRVS – 65,000 volunteers).
I agree with you that waterways need boats as much as boats need waterways. The role of boat owners and others in saving the waterways is undisputed. I am sure the Trustees will want to read the final version of the Manifesto but I thought it might help if I made a few comments so the Manifesto can’t be faulted on its facts.
And as I want to do justice to your draft, I want to respond in detail.
THE COUNCIL
The Trust’s Council – the top level in the Trust’s governance - needs a good representation of passionate and knowledgeable boat owners. Boat licence holders will have the biggest user representation (elected by licence holders). With two from boating businesses, boating representation on the Council will be seven – 20% of the 35 members. Another 13 will be the chairs of the Waterways Partnerships from around the country – and if you look at the people on the first Partnerships, you’ll detect about half have links to boats. The remaining 15 places include people from the Waterway Recovery Group, the Railway and Canal Historical Society and four in aggregate from walkers, anglers, cyclists etc. The composition of the Council will be reviewed after 3 years and there is a commitment to move to 50% being elected.
In addition, there will be a Navigation Committee to help the Trustees and the executive staff. And I encourage boat owners to get involved with the Waterway Managers and let them know – nicely! – when they find things are not right.
And I wonder if you are aware of the meetings between BW Executives (and non-executive directors) and the British Waterways Advisory Forum, made up of various national waterways groups; or of the Waterway Users Special Interest Groups meetings and meetings with the boat trade where views are exchanged?
MONEY
The Trustees are currently negotiating hard to get the right financial deal with Defra; this means increasing the £39m p.a. on offer. But Defra isn’t the only source of money. About £100m p.a. comes from other sources – split roughly equally between property rents; income from cables running under the towpath and water sales; and boats. Personally, I can’t see that the Government will fill the gap to the extent that everything is perfect and there is then no need to seek donations etc. Donations also need to be seen in context. If we were lucky enough to get to £7.5m p.a., that’s about 5% of the current £150m p.a. spent on the waterways. I know people say users who don’t pay should contribute – I see generating donations from the wider public as a way of spreading the load to some of the other 13m or so people who enjoy visiting the waterways.
You say you believe some of the financial projections are wrong. Can you help me by saying which ones you thinking of?
MANAGEMENT
Sorry but getting rid of the current directors now – in the midst of much change – doesn’t make business sense to me. Let’s get the handover to CRT completed first!
As CRT is taking over all the obligations and duties of BW, it will take over the existing pay contracts of all staff (and anyway TUPE applies). Although you suggest tearing up existing contracts, I wonder how you’d feel if you were transferred to a new employer who changed your pay terms? So getting to the desired level from the existing level will need careful thought.
You know the background of the new trustees – one from Oxfam, one from the WRVS, one from the Ramblers; another from English Heritage. They know what is paid in those organisations and in other major charities.
I began looking around and came across “Charity Finance” magazine whose September 2011 issue carried a survey of CEO pay levels (including bonuses) of the top 100 charities (by income). These ranged from £710k at Nuffield Health via £400k (Welcome Trust) to under £50k (Salvation Army). Many were in the £100k-200k range.
I think the start point on pay levels has to be to consider what level does CRT have to think of offering when it next needs to recruit?
Having got the other CEO information I mention above, I tried to compare these charities with CRT – and hit a problem. With what do I compare CRT? National Trust (CEO £160-170K) has historic buildings but nothing like the same engineering problems – nor the question of keeping potentially dangerous water in the right place. Network Rail? Not a charity; larger than CRT; also has an old infrastructure and a big network – but again no “nasty” water; their CEO is on £560k. Oxfam (CEO £110-120k) has no similar infrastructure or commercial assets to manage. Unlike many charities, CRT will have very substantial non-donation income – see above. CRT needs to employ the right people to maintain that income.
You can, I hope, see the problem. So you won’t be surprised to hear that outside consultants have been brought in. Their report is being considered by the Trustees – Tony Hales (Chair) said at the Birmingham annual meeting last month that performance related pay in the charitable sector is awarded more by exception and then at lower levels than those currently applying in British Waterways. Tony Hales has also said that the Trustees will make public the advice they receive from the specialist consultants and will make a clear statement of future policy on executive pay before CRT starts in April. You might like to bear in mind that in pushing for the charity idea, BW directors knew it would mean pay changes.
You mention middle management. Please do talk to the Waterway Managers. Invite them on your boats. Email them with problems you find – if you don’t, will they know? Bear in mind that central contracts mean using bulk buying power to reduce costs. They provide flexibility. For example, this winter there will be a large tree cutting programme. Instead of diverting staff from stoppages etc or taking on more staff for a short life project and then laying them off, tree cutting contractors will be brought in The reality is that efficiencies have bought around proportionately more maintenance for the reduced money available. That’s certainly not to say that the waterways don’t need considerably more maintenance – see my point about striking the right deal with government.
MOORING
I understand BW’s enforcement team has been concentrating on driving down licence evasion – with quite some success. I agree that the Trust must also tackle mooring abuse and I understand that it is next on the enforcement team’s agenda. And you know from the Trustees’ October announcement that moorings and residential boating are on the list of policy matters to be reviewed.
TOWPATHS
Boat users already share the towpath. Like others, I’ve suffered from noisy motorbikes, etc. But how to control them – and dog fouling? I’d welcome ideas. We can’t afford towpath rangers all over the place. Barriers don’t seem to work. I’d welcome people taking up your suggestion of going into schools etc etc and helping us to talk to angling clubs, cyclists and walkers about the etiquette of the towpath.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
Defra have just closed their consultation of whether this Act should apply to the Trust – and I hope you all sent in your views. At one level, the charity world is worried that if the Act applies to this Trust, then it will affect other charities; not being Government agencies, charities are not generally covered by the Act. At another level, the Trust would anyway follow closely the spirit of the Act. Defra’s 12 September consultation paper set out how this might be done. Let’s wait and see the outcome of the consultation. BTW, it’s already been decided that the Ombudsman scheme should continue.
LIVEABOARD BOATERS
Yes, they are part of the waterways scene – as are continuous cruisers and unrestricted travelling. I’d just ask that people obey the rules and don’t overstay in wrong places. More residential moorings are on the cards - subject to the planners’ views. Some people already have arrangements with the post office. As to more boating facilities, please help me and let me know where you’d like them – there’s quite a lot already available for the general boat user. Not sure whether liveaboards should be singled out from other boat owners when it comes to Council representation but give me the arguments – or put someone up for election! Bear in mind RBOA have an open line to BW/CRT.
It’s good that you want to make the Trust a success – we need all the support we can get. I’d welcome the opportunity to meet you and others and discuss this further. And do make sure you finish the Manifesto and send it to the Trustees.

John Dodwell
john.dodwell@rolandon.com
07802-961485