£105m or £130m?

AT A Press Briefing on 8th November, three directors of Canal & River Trust (CaRT) failed to give an explanation as to why one of their number had stated that the cost of maintaining its waterways was £105m yet another director (not present at the briefing) had given the same figure as £130m.

Despite the question being asked twice, it remains unanswered, writes Allan Richards.

Two Press releases

The waterways Press had been invited to attend a briefing in Hatton to coincide with two Press releases. The first was entitled 'New chief executive seeks wider engagement with boaters' (Plans for the year ahead) and can be found on the Trust's website. The second dealt with £2 millions extra funding to be spent on CaRT's waterways this winter and, again, can be found on CaRT's website.

To complicate matters still further, attendees were given the first of what will become bi-monthly reports on Towpath Mooring Management from Head of Boating, Sally Ash.

Wider engagement

The Press heard Chief Executive, Richard Parry (flanked by Operations Director Vince Moran and Marketing & Fundraising Director Simon Salem) speak of seeking wider engagement with boaters, it became apparent that this did not mean just boating organisations but also those 50% (CaRT's figure) of boaters not represented by an organisation. This appears to be a complete turnaround from the situation just a couple of months ago where non-aligned boaters were being told that the Trust no longer wished to meet with them.

The £2m extra

Then it was Vince Moran's turn. In a nutshell the Press were told that the Trust would be spending an extra £2m on maintenance this winter which would bring its maintenance spend for the 2013/14 year to just over £80m rather than just under. Put another way, the Trust has now reversed the situation where it would be spending less this year than last. However, no explanation was given to what has happened to the promised £1m spend on the Lapworth Flight which has now become £9,000 (£1m Lapworth project decimated) or why the Trust is still spending less on dredging this year than last (Scraping the bottom).

The Operations Director suggested that the maintenance backlog figure might be as high as £300,000 (about 10% under my estimate of a third of a million) but argued that it was irrelevant because the Trust would not be in a position to reduce it! He also conveniently forgot to mention that British Waterways had stated that it would largely eliminate maintenance backlog by 2012 whilst simultaneously reducing dependence on government grant.

He suggested that the Trust really need to spend £105m on maintenance this year rather than just over £80m.

Nigel Johnson

Amongst the questions from the Press was one from me querying Vince Moran's £105m 'steady state' figure. (Steady state is the amount that needs to be spent on the waterways in a year to hold them in a condition that is neither improving nor declining. The other buzzword is 'funding gap' which is the difference between what is actually spent and the 'steady state' figure.)

So what we had just been told, in effect, was that CaRT would now be spending just over £80m on maintenance this year against a 'steady state' figure of £105m giving a funding gap of £25m

However, CaRT's Legal Director, Nigel Johnson has provided a witness statement to a court which gives this year's steady state figure as £130m.

Witness statement

In asking a question, part of Nigel Johnson's witness statement was read out to the directors:

'The Court will also observe that in terms of securing financial sustainability for the inland waterways under the Trust'’s control, operational revenues from boating activities are of significant importance. It is anticipated total incoming resources for the full 12 months 2013/14 will be £158m of which £31m will come from boat licences and from charges for mooring on the network. The cost to the Trust of maintaining the inland waterways is approximately £130m per annum'.

It was also pointed out that the Nigel Johnson's 'steady state' figure was very much in line with that given by Richard Parry's predecessor, Robin Evans to MP's. Robin Evans told them that in 2010/11 the steady state figure was £120m which allowing for the 3% inflation over three years (CaRT's Trustee figure) gives £130m today.

The directors were invited to state which figure was correct.

Fudge & flannel

That is when the fudging and flannelling started! Although, mouths could be seen opening and closing nothing that came out actually answered the question. The question was asked a second time but still not answered. The most that could be gleaned was a view that Nigel Johnson's figure was not important.

CaRT cannot give a straight answer and tell the public if the current 'funding gap' is £25m (as per Vince Moran) or £50m (as per Robin Evans/Nigel Johnson).

Not important or just plain embarrassing?