[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> I am concerned that all the attention is on BW grant cuts, EA have had their
>> grant cut as well. As EA hasn't the resources BW has this is going to have
>> more of an impact especially in the long term.
>>
>The main difference is that so far the EA has not announced any reductions in
>the navigation budget. As it has all sorts of other things within its remit -
>flood prevention, pollution control, environmental protection etc - it can
>choose which areas to cut. So far, navigation has been pretty much unscathed,
>while a lot of flood prevention work appears to have been chopped.
>
>The flip-side of this is of course that they can do the opposite and target
>navigation more than other areas in the future. We are worried that this is
>what might happen next year or the year after.
>
>So while we can lobby EA to continue to concentrate its cuts in areas other
>than navigation, it';s not as easy to lobby Defra concerning cuts in the EA
>budget when so far they haven't affected us and there is no immediate sign
>that they are about to.
>
>Martin L
The EA squeeze is actually equivalent to the BW one, but is revealing
itself through different symptoms.
In EA's case, it has recently "discovered" that it has a major
structural maintenance backlog on its waterways, which requires it to
increase its annual spending on them substantially.
However, DEFRA has said "Yes, you do. But you are going to have to
get the boaters to pay for a large chunk of it".
OTOH, BW already knew about, and was dealing with, its backlog. Here,
DEFRA said "We are going to reduce our financial support to you, which
previously covered all the backlog stuff".
It comes to the same thing.
However, EA is indeed much less able to deal with it than BW, as its
status as part of a department precludes it from securing other key
offsetting sources of income (such as from investment property or
entreneurial ventures).
My conclusion is that now is the time to revive the proposal to
transfer the EA navigations (and the current funding of them, and
their in-the-field staff) to BW.
This transfer will produce savings from eliminating EA Navigation's
head office, and economies of scale from unified procurement and
expertise. More important, BW will be able to start entrepreneurial
schemes on the former-EA waterways to enhance its income. Also, if a
real estate endowment for BW can be arranged, it can sensibly be sized
to take into account the maintenance of those waterways as well as
BW's current ones.
Finally, it will let BW apply its navigation charges to these
navigations right away, producing uniform charges nationally and
removing the need for the expensive Transport & Works Act inquiry EA
is now facing to take its Harmonisation project forward.
I think this has to be part of the strategy for dealing with the
funding cuts.
Adrian
Adrian Stott
07956-299966
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canals-list/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canals-list/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
