"Mike Stevens"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Adrian Stott wrote:
>> I'm sure NINA would/will be built on BW. At its last restructuring,
>> BW was redesigned specifically as a navigation authority.
>
>But the majority of its Board (I believe) were apponted for their business
>expertise (especially in the propert business) rather than their
>navigational expertise.
I believe it is normal for a business to appoint non-executive
directors who have specific expertise the business needs, especially
that outside its core competence. As BW already depends a good deal
on real estate for its income, I think having some non-execs with real
estate background (and contacts) is actually a good thing.
The executive directors are, I believe, mostly BW senior management,
who have (or are supposed to have!) waterways expertise.
However, even if you are right, and the balance is out, changing it is
simply a matter of altering the emphasis of future appointments, as
the board rotates. No need to alter the structure of BW to deal with
this.
>> I also want it out of DEFRA, although I'm not sure how best it should
>> report to its shareholder.
>
>If my model were adopted, with separation of NINA from a Waterways Property
>Board, then NINA should sit alongside the Highways Agencay and the Maritime
>and Coastguard Agency (assuming they are both in the same governmental
>niche, which I bet they're not), Anyway either TRansport (my preference) or
>the DTI (or whatever that's called nowadays). The WPB (apt acronym) should
>sit alongside the (former?) Property Services Agency, probably under the
>Treasury. That's the real arm'slength that we need, IMO.
Baby and bathwater.
My priority is to give BW (NINA) a secure source of income, as much
within its control as possible. Your WPB would be exactly the
opposite - completely outside BW and under the whimsical thumb of the
Treasury. No thanks! That would be just a capital (as opposed to
revenue) version of the failed annual grant.
Also, I did a lot of work (as a consultant) on the windup of the PSA.
The Agency was a disaster. Under the Treasury, bound by civil service
rules and annuality, no entrepreneurial spirit (essential for getting
a good return from real estate). I'm sure the WPB would evolve into
just the same.
I think it is essential that BW (NINA) have its property portfolio
within its own balance sheet.
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/
