Nigel Stanley wrote: >> I almost agree with you so far. The only point of difference is the phrase >> "arms-length". I'd prefer to see more direct public control. See below for >> my reason.
> The cynical who think that there is a fait accompli hidden away may be > right, but I'm a bit more optimistic. > After our meeting with Gardiner (on the occasion of delivering the SOW petition) I too am inclined to be rather more optimistic than pessimistic. > My take would be that government has been taken aback by the campaign > against the cuts, and that waterways issues, which had rather gone on > the backburner a bit after the higher profile of a few years ago. > There is no doubt in my mind that this is true. Gardiner intimated as much in our meeting when he asked us why there was such a fuss made when previous budget cuts went through almost without comment. My impression was the he directed this question to Tony Baldry (Conservative, Banbury) who was Waterways Minister in the previous Government and I read that as being a genuine attempt at trying to understand why they read us wrongly. > This kind of review is a standard way of government signalling that > something needs to change but we want some external validation so it > doesn't look like a U-turn. > That makes sense to me. It fits in with Gardiner's attempts to place the blame on BW by implying they made the cuts without knowing the full financial picture. My guess is that the 'blame' will eventually be shifted somewhat from BW to the civil servant (Sabine Mosner) who had daily contact with BW and is now conveniently no longer in the service (I believe she is in Canada taking a higher degree). Cheers Will -- Will Chapman Save Our Waterways www.SaveOurWaterways.org.uk
