A Personal View of Last BW AGM

BW will become a charity early in 2012 so recently held their final AGM.  One of our fellow continuous cruisers, Peter MacDonald, was able to attend and kept many of us updated throughout the meeting via Twitter.  I invited Peter to write a guest post for this Blog giving us his personal thoughts on the proceedings.  Our thanks to Peter for the following article:

British Waterways is scheduled to become a Charitable Trust in April 2012, and, as such, this year's AGM was the last for British Waterways in its current form.

Living on a boat that continuously cruises the waterways, I have my reservations about whether the move from a government-controlled body to a charity is the right one for an organisation that impacts on so many people's lives, and whose decisions will be so widely felt. Quite by accident I found out that I could attend the AGM, and applied for a invitation, which, a few days before the meeting, I received.

I was unsure what to expect at the AGM – but given the furore over bonus payments paid to executives who have healthy 6-figure incomes already, I did expect something akin to a meeting in a posh boardroom with everyone wearing expensive suits and gold cuff links. For the first time in many months, I put on a tie before leaving the boat on the morning of the meeting!

Outside the meeting, members of the UNITE union were handing out letters of protest over the decision to award bonuses of £15K to BW Directors while their members had had a pay freeze – or even a pay cut in real terms – in the same financial year.

The group that attended the meeting was more mixed than I expected. There were plenty of expensive suits – particularly at the head table, but also people in the audience of over 100 who 'looked like me' - ordinary folk passionate about their waterway. I found this reassuring.

The issue of bonuses – sorry - 'Performance Related Pay' - was raised a few times, but was, I felt, addressed in a way that did not really reflect the strength of feeling about the issue. The chair of the Remuneration Committee offered various technical and procedural explanations about why the bonuses had been made but it was clear that many in the meeting thought that it was inappropriate for there to have been bonuses made. The chair of the Remuneration Committee did note that paying bonuses when BW becomes a charity will be more difficult – perhaps an unspoken reason why bonuses were offered this year?

The bonus debate (or lack of it) and the, what I felt was underwhelming summary of the year and the future delivered by the Chair of the Board, were certainly the low points of the meeting – but there were some glimmers of hope.

BW's Technical Director explained 'Steady State' - the name of the process by which BW decides what infrastructure to repair and maintain – a sort of 'ranking system' of what work gets prioritised from BW's limited budget. Of all the BW staff who spoke, he seemed to be the most straightforward - despite speaking about quite a complicated subject. He was also quite blunt, saying what we all know – that there's not enough money to maintain the waterways. Unlike others at the top table, he didn't try to 'spin' a difficult situation, and called a spade a spade!

As part of the change from government body to charity, 'Transition Trustees' have been appointed – and Lynne Berry, one of the Trustees, spoke with conviction and passion about her vision for the waterways. While I remain unconvinced that our waterways- a public amenity – should be handed over to a charity, I did at least feel that if the other trustees shared Ms. Berry's commitment, there may be a slim chance of success.

The afternoon's sessions were devoted to speakers addressing such as volunteers and their role – (sorry – but it still sounded to me like 'free labour') - and fund raising for the new charity. This left me feeling a bit uneasy as it further confirms my belief that much of the drive to make BW a charity is really about money – the government not wanting to pay for the waterways, so hiving the cost off to the private/charitable sector. A focus of the fund raising strategy will be to encourage 'individual giving' - i.e. convincing people to give to the charity by standing order in much the same way people give to other charities. If people on the tow path are happy to do this, fine – but as I give quite a lot to BW every year through my licence fee, I wouldn't feel obligated to contribute further.

I'm glad I went to the AGM. I went into the meeting thinking “the waterways are going to go to hell in a hand basket”. I left thinking “the waterways MIGHT go to hell in a hand basket”. I spoke to Lynne Berry after the meeting, as I had raised a question about Freedom of Information during the Question and Answer session in the morning. The new charity is asking not to be subject to the Freedom of Information Act – one of the reasons given being that other charities are not (i.e. The National Trust, the Kennet and Avon Trust, etc.) and so they feel that it is unfair that some of their commercial or other information might be available. Ms Berry said, essentially, that she understood why people were concerned about the new trust not being subject to Freedom of Information Act requests – and she understood that some people were nervous about the future – but that she was certain that the move to charitable status presented great opportunities for the waterways. She also said that she knew that the new Trustees were having to ask people to 'trust them' - and that that trust had not yet been earned.

On leaving the meeting, my feeling was that Ms. Berry was right. The new charity, the Canal and River Trust, is asking for our trust. The past performance of British Waterways certainly doesn't inspire my confidence or trust – nor, after hearing from members of the Board of British Waterways, am I moved to trust them further. Some of the new Trustees? Maybe. In a nutshell – I left thinking “the move to a charity is going to happen, like it or not. Too much money has been invested in making it happen, and plans are too advanced. So, as a boater, the best I can do is to keep on top of the new Trustees to make sure they do what they've promised to do.” My hope now? That the new Trustees will have the courage and conviction to push aside the old 'Top Brass' at BW. If the new charity is really going to win over those of us disillusioned with BW, they will have to establish a new culture at the Canal and River Trust. If they call themselves a charity, but, in their decision making and engagement with their stakeholders, continue to behave as a Quango or, worse still, a corporation, this experiment will not work. A positive move to changing this culture would be to hire a new executive team. Tony Hales, current BW Chairman, has been appointed the chair of the Transition Trustees. I'll believe that real change is happening when he stands aside – or is pushed aside – for a new Chair, and when Robin Evans is no longer CEO. If 'we're a charity now' there is no point in having an Executive team or Board with no skills running Third Sector organisations.

By Peter MacDonald

(For the Inland Waterways Association report on the AGM and their meetings with MPs click here.)