Chris Pink

I am asking you what legislation you think is being breached in your comment.

Gosh, David, not only rattled but positively foaming now. Do i understand you right? That my short membership of this forum does not entitle me to an opinion, strong or otherwise. I have not attacked BW within this topic, simply canvassed opinion, and your assumption of my lack of familiarity with the various Waterways Acts is amusing. There is life outside this forum you know. I completely agree BW should not have an 'opinion' or a personality but you of all people should know that if this particular quango is left to its own devices then the very nice 50-odd feet of water you bob about on would probably be a car park by now if not for you and me and others like us putting pressure on them to manage the canals how we want them managed. I raised this topic because a search through the forum revealed no recent threads and I feel the issue to be relevant and current and whether or not i raise it is, quite frankly, up to me. I am grateful for all opinions expressed so far, including yours, and very interested to see broadly how people feel. As to the substance of your post, i find it interesting and would ask you for more detail, you say 'breaching the legislation', to what legislation do you refer? 'Many cases'? can you provide me with some more information on this please, i would like to speak to people with experience of this? Criminal prosecution? What precisely do you mean by this. And can you point me to written reports of the NABO correspondence with BW (why do you assume i not a member of NABO?) I would be interested to talk to anyone who has direct experience of BW prosecutions for this or any other mooring related matter. For the record, and apparently yet again contrary to your assumptions, i am personally in favour of visitor moorings. What i do find dubious is the arbitrary designation of such places without consultation. I have asked BW what consultations they have made regarding the designation of these and more permanent moorings in my area, they have yet to have reply but I shall publish it once received. There is one particular spot that i have been in the habit of mooring in for many years recently subject to 24 hour restriction for reasons that, i believe, show ignorance of the patterns of use at that location. Hence my questions to BW. I ask questions because that is the way to understanding.

Well i certainly rattled your cage. I take issue with ridiculed, i think it fair to ask someone who has made fairly harsh criticism whether they could come up with a solution, I would be interested to know whether John feels 'ridiculed', somehow i doubt it. A touch off-post for this thread which is only a grumble in your eyes, it was simply a question to BW (should i not ask questions, sir?) and an answer pertaining to an issue on which i was, am, interested in the wider opinion. And number 4, well spotted there, our David, is a less a grumble about British Waterways than a statement of my rights and expectations about a system of which i own 1/56,000,000th (ish) of. I will try and find something nice to say about you though when i've read some of your 1,822 posts. I think this follows if the visitor mooring is seen as a 'service' or 'facility'. That is the first thing to establish.

Hi John I can quite appreciate your turn of phrase but i reiterate, if you think you can do better, get in there, join the WCBS, transform it into your vision of a dynamic and successful operation. The serious point behind this discussion is what you believe should be done with these boats and others like them. I assume you don't want them. Should they be destroyed? I was at Gloucester Archive recently and the boats in the museum there are beginning to look sorry for themselves because of lack of funding. Should these be destroyed also? These boats are in one place because that is the only place they can be left or stored. They will either be restored, one by one, by someone with a lot of motivation and energy (read young) or they will become un-sustainable. It is also important to note that young people with not much money who aspire to boating life in one of its many forms cannot buy a Liverpool boat and paint it shiny red and that a run down old wooden boat that no-one else wants maybe the only in for them. Some will succeed, some will fail, only a brave or foolish man would predict which. I think either way they deserve our support or, at the very least, our tolerance.

British Waterways is a body appointed by a government elected by us to manage our canals for us. As a corollary to this, the way we decide to use our canals, provided it is within the law as stated in the various acts, is entirely up to us. British Waterways have absolutely no right to have an opinion on the way we use the canals. It is unfortunate that it seems necessary to remind them so often of these, to me, simple facts. Rant over.

I have recently asked BW what laws they base the provision of visitor moorings on and the charging of people overstaying and received the following reply; BW’s powers to manage the waterways arise from primary legislation (eg 1962 &1968 Transport Acts and various subsequent Waterways Acts) and from general property rights that we acquired from the original canal company owners of the canals. Other powers derive from simple contract law (e.g. boat licensing terms and conditions, mooring permit contracts). “1. Under what law are you entitled to arbitrarily designate areas as visitor moorings.” Transport Act 1962 S10(1) “It shall be the duty of the British Waterways Board in the exercise of their powers under this Act to provide to such extent as they may think expedient – (a) services and facilities on the inland waterways owned or managed by them “ … “2. Under what portion of that law are you allowed to charge for overstaying on such moorings. “ Under Section 43 of the Transport Act 1962 the Board has power “to demand take waive and recover such charges for its services and facilities and to make the use of those services and facilities subject to such terms and conditions as the Board shall think fit.” I would be interested in anyone's opinion as to whether a visitor mooring is a 'service' or 'facility' or whether it is a restriction. It is also unclear to me whether BW have successfully recovered any charges for overstaying other than by intimidation. What is your experience of this?

Well then maybe if you can match your opinion with skills you should have gone and helped them. We would not be using the canal system at all at all if 'bunches of clowns' didn't put passion and enthusiasm into the saving and restoration of the canals and the boats that used them. The fact that not all of it succeeds is no reason not to try. I am not quite sure why you feel the need to be so offensive about people. I would be interested to know whether you could refloat an historic boat or restore a derelict lock without getting filthy in the process.