StewartC
MBM Assistant Editor
Reged: 14/12/2005
Posts: 123
Loc: London
|
|
Very little has agitated this forum quite as much as the EA's disposal of lock properties, so it's here this month's Great Debate poll belongs.
For those not familiar with MBM, or its Great Debate, each month we ask a question and invite two protagonists to take a side, either 'yes', or 'no'. This month's question is 'Will the sale of lock houses harm the Thames?'
So cast your vote below, and if you've got any comments left in you on this issue, let's hear them. The results of the poll will be printed in an upcoming issue of the magazine.
|
Andrew_Fanner
regular
Reged: 13/03/2002
Posts: 5600
Loc: ked into poverty by children
|
|
Comparisons with the Medway or canal system are not entirely fair. The Medway has far less traffic and the canals are relatively shallow and do not really flow.
--------------------
Two beers please, my friend is paying.
|
DogsBody
regular
Reged: 19/02/2003
Posts: 394
Loc: Thames
|
|
Undoubtedly yes. While the sale of the houses will raise some money, it is a drop in the ocean compared to what the EA needs and a short term fix at best.
With the loss of their houses the lock keepers will expect a lot higher salary but the EA has no money to pay them, so we end up with fewer lock keepers.
Without lock keepers certain locks will be chaotic on busy days, lock keepers generally try to fill the lock (with boats) before working it, I have seen so called "experienced" boaters shut other boats out when there is clearly plenty of room left inside. Queues will be long and tempers will rise.
The keepers also spend (their own) time tending the lovely lockside gardens that are a feature of the waterway, a "9 to 5" bod who turns up for the day then goes home isn't going to care about the gardens, so we will end up with tarmac everywhere on "health and safety grounds".
Not to mention the various safety issues that have already been raised on this forum and as mentioned above, I do not believe it is appropriate to compare the Thames with the canal system or Medway.
We are having to face large license increases year upon year, yet the EA give little in return.
Darren.
--------------------
www.braycruiserclub.co.uk
Help save your local lock keeper www.saveourservice.org
|
TrueBlue
regular
Reged: 30/04/2004
Posts: 1251
Loc: Sussex
|
|
I am more concerned on three main points:-
Once the lockside houses have been sold, they cannot be replaced (in situ), indeed they could even be remodelled to suit the new owner's taste.
On a safety basis if there is no resident lock-keeper serious injury, death or damage to property may ensue as a result of delayed response, indeed there is even the possibility of malicious damage.
From the public point of view that locks will become less of an attraction if they are not cared for by a resident (gardens and other "attractions"). The public are encouraged to stop, or even walk to a lock to partake in gongoozling, teas and ice-creams on sale and so on. There is precious little feel good in this country today, and even less to encourage the masses to get away from tv / computer games.
|
boatone
regular
Reged: 29/07/2001
Posts: 6862
Loc: Surrey uk
|
|
Quote:
We are having to face large license increases year upon year, yet the EA give little in return.
Council Tax seems to rise year on year with a decreasing level of service so whats different?
How do you propose to resolve the problem?
(Serious question and not being flippant.)
--------------------
"Don't tell me why not, tell me how..."
|
flashheart
regular
Reged: 10/01/2008
Posts: 161
|
|
Well like has been posted before, its not just the Thames that is suffering. British Waterways are cutting back projects on the Canal Network at a worrying rate because of lack of funds. Unless the Git at number ten that none of us got the chance to vote for, gets of his self glorifying fat arse and starts injecting money back into this county rather than others, then I can't see any other way out of the mess thats occurring. Especially whilst the EA is running around like headless chickens knocking the "Family Silver" off the shelf!
--------------------
Birchwood Owners Association
http://birchwoodboats.aceboard.com
|
Geoffs
regular
Reged: 15/06/2001
Posts: 1774
Loc: Wantage,Oxfordshire
|
|
Got to say that, from what I have seen, that the sale of lock side houses will harm the river, for all sorts of reasons, including those detailed here.
However, according to the statement from the EA, they are not proposing to sell lock side houses, only their properties away from the river. How much substance that has, I don't know, and if true, is it the thin end of the wedge?
The other thing that strikes me. Who is going to buy a lock side residence. I know water side properties are in demand, but would anyone really want a succession of boats going through their 'front garden'. It would detract from privacy, even though most are first class types like us 
--------------------
Old Chinese proverb 'Man who sail boat into rice field, soon get into paddy'
|
TrueBlue
regular
Reged: 30/04/2004
Posts: 1251
Loc: Sussex
|
|
Quote:
Got to say that, from what I have seen, that the sale of lock side houses will harm the river, for all sorts of reasons, including those detailed here.
However, according to the statement from the EA, they are not proposing to sell lock side houses, only their properties away from the river. How much substance that has, I don't know, and if true, is it the thin end of the wedge?
The other thing that strikes me. Who is going to buy a lock side residence. I know water side properties are in demand, but would anyone really want a succession of boats going through their 'front garden'. It would detract from privacy, even though most are first class types like us
It depends on what you mean by "lockside houses", managements (not limited to EA) are well versed by cooking the facts to suit their purposes. For example:-
Penton Hook
Quite a nice large house opposite the upper third of the lock, but separated by a footpath so not "lockside"......
Old Windsor
One of a pair, bang in the middle of the lockside, and with no road access. Presently occupied by a permanent relief so "not operational".
The problem with this one is that to protect any non EA purchaser, they'll have to erect fences and childproof netting (!). That will cause operational difficulties for all.
Bell Weir
right by the lock, large house separated by a footpath....
Sunbury No:2
OK this one's a bit more valid, 75yds upstream, again separated by a footpath, but near enough to run to help..
Those are the ones that come immediately to mind.
Quite apart from the more relevant issues, these buildings, even though a mix of architecture are still distinctive and form part of the landscape. Perhaps they should be Listed - and Grade II at least. A helluva lot of people enjoy trekking miles and miles just to view buildings and structures. However, that doesn't put cash into kitties - and that's the problem. Because these Quango jobs are filled on a rotation basis, no-one has to live with these awful decisions.
|
boatone
regular
Reged: 29/07/2001
Posts: 6862
Loc: Surrey uk
|
|
OK, I've slept on it so heres a few observations.
1. Your question is far too simplistic. How the hell can we KNOW if selling off the lock cottages will harm the Thames? Ok, pedantic if you will but I would have preferred "Do you BELIEVE selling off the lock cottages will harm the Thames" To that I would immediately answer YES, not because of purely financial/safety/welfare issues but because I truly believe the Thames is a national asset and the lock properties are part of its fundamental infrastructure.
2.Have you examined /read the various documents on the EA website re the 2020 vision plan etc? Lots of apparently conflicting and difficult to support assumptions but also statements that they have consulted widely (See the appendices)
3. It would appear that the amount of additional funding needed to bring the Thames up to full standard service is only around £12-15 million per annum. In national expenditure terms that is PETTY CASH !!!!
When I first heard the proposals to dispose of/ rent out the lock cottages all my instincts screamed 'Don't do it' and they still do. On the other hand the EA appear to be acting under central government instructions to dispose of property not justified by operational need. How do we know what the truth is? How do we know if every avenue has been explored? How do we know how much EA are, and are able to, think outside the box in exploring new ways to increase revenue? How do we know that whatever income the EA derive from sales will actually increase the funds available as opposed to comensurate reductions being made in grant funding?
Too many questions and nowhere near enough answers.
Here's an interesting question......how much would each local authority on the non tidal Thames need to contribute to solve the problem and remove the funding issue from central government altogether, whilst at the same time placing a responsibility on the communities most involved with the river?
--------------------
"Don't tell me why not, tell me how..."
|
Andrew_Fanner
regular
Reged: 13/03/2002
Posts: 5600
Loc: ked into poverty by children
|
|
>>>
On the other hand the EA appear to be acting under central government instructions to dispose of property not justified by operational need
>>>
Having had to review this sort of thing once there can be an element of constant tightening of the "operational need" criteria in order to get the imposed savings. Such tightening can end up going way beyond prudence, or even, the nightmare scenario, become a p1ssing contest between uninteretsed and uninvolved bean counters trying to score brownie points.
--------------------
Two beers please, my friend is paying.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
