Is it me, or has CaRT unilaterally declared war upon one section of its clientèle?
The Upton upon Severn moorings issue is a case in question. A long stretch of river with few places for boats on passage to safely moor. One might have expected that additional mooring might be introduced as an added safety measure - In mitigation of what has been for some time an obvious risk. The CaRT operational edict is issued - for that's what it was - with no question of any meaningful consultation from the Trust.
Now this begs the question was there any additional safety audit carried out before the edict was issued? If not, then why not? If there was a safety audit made in connection with the major changes - on what grounds were the obviously compromised safety issues reconciled?
Various email exchanges between boaters and CaRT certainly call into question the whole process. With people being concerned about CaRT being less than forthright with the content of their communication. The emails certainly suggest erroneously that CaRT had been in close consultation with Upton Council. The reason for the edict being issued was given as Upton Council doing a reorganisation of its local road layouts. Information from other sources seem to suggest that the last time any significant road improvement orders were made was over a decade ago. Add to this the benevolence of CaRT in giving up boaters safety to increase alleged visitor numbers to the town. If it looks like its wrong and it smells like its wrong then usually it is wrong.
Now this begs the question was the information provided by CaRT a true reflection of events? Or was someone within CaRT doing an Alan Clark and being "economical with the actualité"?
Another case in question is that CaRT apparently does not have the specific powers to introduce the much vaunted "no return mooring" rules. After concern was raised by boaters again over a non consultation - consultation. (A consultation intended to seek approval for an already decided outcome) The silence surrounding various freedom of information requests is very worrying. But it becomes even more understandable when its noted that the former British Waterways was actually refused such powers.
Now this also begs the question, was someone within CaRT meddling in areas that they don't understand? Does CaRT even have a copy of the relevant act? If so did anyone even bother to consult the act? Or was someone within CaRT being somewhat 'economical with the actuality'?Not only is there now some lingering evidence of someone's smouldering pantaloons. But a very large dose of porcine avionics begins to comes to mind. I am sure that if someone in ivory towers was to look at their feet. They would see an increasing amount of pork pie crumbs. mmmm I smell bacon!