Announcement Announcement Module
No announcement yet.
Conversation Detail Module
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    No not all or nothing ... just all I think !!!!


    • #17
      here’s the petition presented to canoe wales (signed by i’ve no idea how many), the accompanying letter and canoe wales reply.

      Canoe Wales Open Access
      To the board of Canoe Wales
      • We support Open Access in Wales: You have supported this and must continue to do so.
      • We expect you to represent us on access matters appropriately. We are prepared to support you when you do.
      • We expect you to adhere to your polices on access visibly and act in the interests of paddlesport. We will
        support you when you do.
      • We all want NWWC to be a success and it will be. We will support you to do this.
      • There is a facility at the Tryweryn: the Tryweryn is not the facility.
      • We will pay for use of facilities to include car parks in good faith: We expect you to set a fair price in the interest of sport development and to ensure fees are paid to generate revenue to keep the centre going.
      • We will simply pay for car parking if not using facilities: We expect you to recognise that if we are not using your facilities or car parks we will simply enjoy the river in a responsible and civil manner.
      We will support you visibly when you do this.
      You started this campaign and it is leading towards success: We want you to enjoy the success you deserve.
      We intend to present this to the interim chair Emma Aldridge by email on the 12th February.

      Dear board members
      After more than 15 years of campaigning on behalf of WCA/Canoe Wales, it feels surreal and
      very sad to be presenting a petition to the board. The petition (attached) and the comments
      (viewable online) speak for themselves.
      In my letter of 3 February I urged the board to follow one of the options set out by Ashley in
      an open letter released on the same day. Since then the situation has escalated, with only
      confusing messages from Canoe Wales.
      On 7 February, Canoe Wales, through Canolfan Tryweryn, publicly announced a conflict of
      interest (see below), but has failed to address it. I have to put to you that the situation is now
      untenable, and Canoe Wales is being brought into disrepute by the actions of its own board.
      The Sports Minister and the Minister responsible for taking forward the Green Paper are one
      and the same person. It would be catastrophic for Canoe Wales to be held in disrepute with
      regard to both of these areas, and with other strategic partners.
      My concern is to protect the access campaign from further damage at what is a critical time.
      Most other representative bodies now have 2 paid officers and volunteer committees of 8
      advising. Can Canoe Wales match this at this time? There is a clear and simple way forward:
      for the Canoe Wales board to make a statement to the effect that, in view of the importance of
      the access campaign and the need for the commercial operation to be a success, Canoe Wales
      is happy to endorse an independent campaign that ensures the required expertise and
      relationships are preserved to give the campaign its best chance.
      If Canoe Wales does this, myself and Ashley will work independently on a voluntary basis to
      see the campaign through to the conclusion of the current Welsh Government process.
      Ashley and/or I would be happy to meet with Emma and/or Alan at a mutually convenient
      time and place to bring this to a speedy conclusion.
      Yours in paddlesport

      [IMG]file:///C:\Users\jim\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\cl ip_image002.gif[/IMG] Originally Posted by Canoe Wales
      Hi ********.
      Canoe Wales board would like to thank those who wrote and signed the petition for their views.
      We will be publishing a date shortly for the first meeting of the access forum. All enquiries please to'
      Best Emma


      • #18
        It would seem, subsequent to the recent DEFRA announcement regarding the legal position of riparian owners and their current difficulties with canoeists , that there is no compunction whatsoever for riparian owners to enter into any agreements with canoeists in any way shape or form. What price "voluntary agreements" now.


        • Geoff Maynard's Avatar
          Geoff Maynard commented
          Editing a comment
          In theory yes but in practice... until a govt body admits that it is the party responsible for upholding and enforcing the laws, a (strict) VAA is still the only viable option allowing the owner any chance to control traffic numbers.

        • stealth_fox's Avatar
          stealth_fox commented
          Editing a comment
          I can't see how it can be enforced until all canoes and canoeists hold a licence

          It seems that WUF have been given more funding to sort it after failing to sort it with the last lot of funding.

      • #19
        "Partly responsible", what about plain responsible? Surely the police{Home Office?} are responsible for upholding the law. If nobody is responsible for upholding the law then no matter how "strict" a VAA is it will not be policed.


        • #20
          It can be. The Canoe-pal idea recently mooted describes how. The police don't wan't to know - but to complain... who polices the police?