"Mike Stevens"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It may
>be that The Waterways Trust might become the basis of the property/funding
>body.
Wot, the outfit that's made such a mess of running the waterways
museums?
Careful with your terminology, Mike!
Or perhaps that's what BW should become if NINA (the National Inland
>Navigation Authority) should come into being.
That's my view. Why create a whole new body, when BW was designed for
just that role?
> But, for reasons of my general view of what Government ought to be about, I'd
> still want to see a
>substantial contribution to the costs from the oublic purse.
It will have to, as the waterways cannot support themselves on the
revenue they can earn directly. In effect, that's why the canal
companies went bust.
The real question is thus how to make that public contribution. I am
arguing that it should be through a one-time capital endowment,
instead of a (demonstrably undependable) annual grant.
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/
