On Friday, May 25, 2007 3:47 PM [GMT+1=CET], Adrian Stott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Mike Stevens" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Whereas a commercial funding mechanism is >> not answerable to anybody except the markets and, for all Adrian has >> tried to persuade me in the past, I still think that in the long >> term these are no more predictable the Government grant. > > However, the markets *are* all of us. And they seem to react a lot > more quickly to public sentiment than politicans do. I know which I > would rather trust. So do I. And my answer'snot the same as yours. >>> Of course, there should be only one national inland navigation >>> authority, and BW should take over the navigations now being run by >>> EA. >> >> And any other that are in public ownership, like the Broads and the >> Basingstoke. > > With suitable dowries, of course. Not necessary if NINA is a publicly-funded non-commercial organisation. >> And they should get rid of their bit of London Docklands(if >> anyone would have it!), which is by no stretch of the imagination a >> navigation. > > Er, the WI docks started out as the Isle of Dogs canal. So by analogy, BW should run the railway line from New Cross to West Croydon because it used to be the Croydon Canal, I suppose. >> But even better if all this was run by a publicly-funded navigation & >> regulatory body with no commercial interest. > > No no! Don't *ever* mix management with regulation! A navigation authority is, by definition a regulatory body. > BW will always be partly publicly-funded, so no problem there. > > But "No commercial interest" usually means incoherent and financially > inept management, I'm afraid. There's plenty of inept management in the commercial sector! Mike Stevens narrowboat Felis Catus III web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk Defend the waterways. Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk
