Alan de Enfield

You confirm and reinforce my point. You should not have to hunt around to find an examiner that does the job properly. But, that would be almost the same thing- you don't pay up so you don't get the certificate until every 'demand' has been met, irrespective of the need for it. But this time he has 'wasted' his time and travelling expenses if you don't pay. You then need to find and book another examiner. No doubt there is a BSS examiners 'whatsapp group' and your name would be circulated as a 'non-payer / time waster' and youd find it difficult to find another examiner. The BSS is just a 'job for the old boys'.

But it currently is - there is no guarantee that either the examiner actually did a thorough examination of the boat, or, correctly assessed its compliance.

I agree - but to do that the BSS must be accountable and the consistent application of the rules must be adhered to. Currently the examiners appear to be able to adapt, bend, or ignore the rules and there appears to be no sanctions on the examiner., the boater is just left pick up the unnecessary costs.

I had exactly the same discussion some years ago and he stuck to his guns and said "You paid in advance so I really dont care - I'll just give you a fail, or you can install one (about £5 from screwfix) send me a picture and I'll give you a 'pass' " I made a formal, in writing, complaint to the BSS who replied to me : "We will investigate if this examiner requires further training" That was it. No - yes you are correct, or that he was correct, no apology and despite requests - no 'follow up' as to the result of their investigationas as that would infringe his 'rights'. I always had little respect for the BSS but that was the final nail in the coffin. You can only view the BSS as an additional cost of obtaining a licence, otherwise it is totally meaningless.

Do you really mean 24 feet long ? I'd have thought that was sufficient to make two shafts if the hydraulics don't work.

Compared to other boaters or to other options (rather than a boat) ?

Is that possible - it appears that almost all of C&RTs maintenance spend is going on 'reactive work'

The local chicken factory is almost 100% manned by Poles (and other nationalities with lots of Cs,Ss and Zs in their name)

Well - I never knew that ! Most sinkholes are relatively small or are in upland, rural locations, with many caused by natural geological processes. One of the most common reasons for them to appear is when rocks such as limestone or chalk break down. Carbon dioxide in the air dissolves in rainwater to form carbonic acid, which then percolates through the rock and reacts with it, causing it to dissolve. Obviously too many people running their engines and causing emissions in the locality are to blame !

Don't boats on non-connected canals get a discount ? Many boats on rivers far exceed the stated maximum dimensions of the canals so in effect they are using 'unconnected waterways' - I'm sure there would be arguments that the 'unconnected discount' should be applied to boats with (say) 5 foot draft. 12 foot air draft, etc.

Why would the Government want to contribute (increase funding) - the breech and associated costs and damages will not be bourne by them.

There are many canals and rivers that receive sewage works output. C&RT charge for the discharge into their waterways, and, their income for water extraction (farmers etc) and discharge (sewage works etc) is almost the same as the income from all boaters.