Adrian Stott wrote:
> In the end, EA triumphed by suggesting that having BW managing its
> navigations would cause flooding problems, conveniently ignoring that
> BW already runs navigation on the Severn, Trent, Lea, etc. without
> such problems.
Not my reading of the events at the time. I would say "In the end EA
triumphed because the Government accepted the need for the change but didn't
think it important enough to give it any parliamentary time".
> Who is going to oppose eliminating duplication of
> authorities?
I know some very contented EA boaters who fear BW would mess up "their"
waterways.
> On the contrary, I believe we have to propose a better way to run the
> waterways *in order to* win the campaign. Just shouting "cancel the
> cuts" is not going to persuade the chancellor IMHO. We have to show
> other savings are available.
Not the point. We need to convince the Chancellor that the bills shouldn'y
be paid by raiding budgets that are irrelevant to the problem.
BTW I have my own personal view on the future long-term financing of the
waterways. In involves abolishing BW and creating a National Inland
Navigation Authority (embracing BW, EA and any other publicly-owned
waterways such as the Basingstoke) and a totally separate Inland Waterways
Property Board. But that's for later debate after we've persuaded
Government to pay its bills out of the correct pocket.
--
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk
Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk
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/
