38degrees
is a campaigning group with hundreds of thousands of members and
supporters. I count myself amongst the supporters. 38degrees
are looking to improve the way that our country is run and to ensure
that businesses and charities are ethical in their dealing with the
public and employees. I am from time to time very supportive of some but
not all of their campaigning. However, I do contribute to their running
costs on selective campaigns.
There
is a campaign that is gaining momentum which involves the Canal and
River Trust. The cause behind the campaign and its supporting petition
is:-
Canal and River Trust: Stop evicting disabled, elderly and vulnerable boat dwellers, put an end to the threats of homelessness and meet your Equality Act obligations not to discriminate against people on the grounds of disability, age, pregnancy and responsibility for children.
There is also a long document associated with the petition that highlights a few of the major concerns embedded within the issues. The Canal and River Trust have also issued a rebuttal of sorts. I don't know the facts in any great detail. But being a boater I have followed the issues at a distance with some interest.
First
of all, it would be difficult not to be supportive of the paragraph
that is reproduced above. This is after all, what the petition is based
upon. You are expected to read the paragraph and decide whether to
support or not the assertion. The rest of the document is just
supporting information by way of representative examples. Intended to
help you make up your mind on the issue. The factual accuracy of the
supporting information I do not know. I expect that it will be leaked
and revealed in dribs and drabs. At some point the petition will close
and the document will be presented to the Canal and River Trust.
It
will be at that point where the Trust will be able to defend its
position with regard to the paragraph upon which the petition has been
laid. I would imagine that the trust will agree with the paragraph. That
what the petitioner is wanting to highlight is also what the trust
would also want to uphold and be seen to be upholding.
As to the veracity of the supporting documentation, I do not claim to know any more than any other
boater. I find this issues portrayed of some concern. Because in the
main it refers to a section of the public (whether boater or not) which
are amongst most vulnerable of all. In dealings with our local moorings
team I have heard them express the opinion 'we are not social workers'
However, when it comes to vulnerable groups on the CaRT managed
waterways. There should be an expectation that such issues should not be
swept under the carpet by a trite and dismissive mantra. Imagine a
child at school being bullied and the teacher said - nothing we can do,
were not social workers.
Is this to be yet another public relations disaster for the Canal and River Trust. I think it could actually be a positive step as long as the Trust actually deal with the issues in a measured way. One would be to accept the petition gracefully, prepare a detailed response. Include in the response lessons learned and changes being implemented. Turn it into a PR triumph not a PR disaster.
The
waterways and their management is not an easy task. The current
management team are still of the quango mindset and have not learned the
finer points of diplomacy and other flavours of public relations. The
change from issuing orders and commands to asking is both subtle and
demanding.
My plea to the trust would be. Please, Please, Please. Do not go down the road of m'learned friends and expect that the fickle public will later remember the fine details of the debated issues. The public will remember the first paragraph and will vote with their pocket change in the usual way.
CaRT
needs to take on board that people do live on the waterways either part
time or full time. Therefore CaRT must have much more than a light
touch responsibility. Especially whenever those people are amongst
the most vulnerable in our society. There should be a dedicated member of staff who can liaise
with the appropriate authorities. The trust has to be prepared and able
to step in and be proactive in their support whenever appropriate, if help is
unavailable or not forth coming.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please put your name to your comment. Comments without a name may automatically be treated as spam and might not be included.
If you do not wish your comment to be published say so in your comment. If you have a tip or sensitive information you’d prefer to share anonymously, you may do so. I will delete the comment after reading.