"Nigel Stanley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 22/10/06, Nick Atty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><lots of snipped questions)
>These are all well put and worthy of debate.
>
>But now is not the time to put a lot of energy into such a discussion.
>The cuts in BW funding are too urgent, and some of these would be
>quite divisive, among people who should be working together to reverse
>the cuts.
Nigel, I am worried that a number of people seem to have your
attitude. Focus can be good, but "worried" because I think it is
potentially fatal here.
IMHO, the reason the waterways are being squeezed financially now is
precisely that the way they have been funded is goofy. If I'm right,
then simply trying to "reverse the cuts" is merely attacking the
symptoms. This will allow the actual disease to continue to
debilitate.
In fact, if we had to choose only one of (a) fixing the system and (b)
figthing the current cuts, I would choose (a).
However, I'm convinced we actually have to do both, and do them now. I
believe only if we can show the Treasury that there is a better way to
fund the waterways will it give more than lip service to any protests
SOW et al. raise.
I think Nick is asking the right questions. I've given my answers in
another posting.
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/
