Mike Stevens wrote:
> Adrian Stott wrote:
>
>
>> 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.
>
That's a fair point Mike but it smacks of a turn-around because the
question has already been asked why these losses weren't covered
from the contingency reserve in the first place (Chris Hue Liberal
shadow chancellor's argument).
> 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.
>
Agreed in principle but I'm not sure about the timing.
Cheers
--
Will Chapman
Save Our Waterways
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/
