Cosmic

I had a look at the Charity Commission's website and found this: Charitable objects THE OBJECT OF THE CIO IS: TO ADVANCE EDUCATION IN THE ARTS FOR THE PUBLIC BENEFIT IN PARTICULAR BUT NOT EXCLUSIVELY BY PROVIDING AND ASSISTING IN THE PROVISION OF REGULAR CLASSICAL MUSIC CONCERTS, TALKS AND MASTERCLASSES ON AND AROUND ENGLAND’S CANAL NETWORK USING A CANAL BOAT AS THE VENUE. https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search/-/charity-details/5146744 I could be wrong, but this does seem to me to be reminiscent of a former U-boat museum

I did have an idea that boat-specific cookers would be pricey, and I am a bit of a tightwad, so any suggestions for standard ones that will do the job would be appreciated

I recall that the oven I used to have at home wouldn't come on unless the timer was set, so I suspect there could be quite a few silly little niggles, in addition to the serious concerns Mike raised. That's part of the reason I think it'll be best to get something designedto work on a boat.

Thanks, LadyG. I don't have transport, though, so I need something I can collect from reasonably near the canal.

Thanks, Mike. It sounds as if it could lead to too many complications, so I'll have to think about getting one specifically designed for boat use.

I was just about to pop to B&Q to get myself a gas cooker when I decided to check online to make sure it was compatible with bottled gas. What I found in the manual was a very blunt statement that it is not sutable for installation in any kind of boat, anywhere, including on inland waterways, although it can be used in a static caravan. It did occur to me that, because it needs a 240V mains supply, some features won't work. That probably means the clock, timer, electric igniter etc., but I can live without things like that. But does that mean that the oven and hob won't work too? In short, what I'm asking is whether a standard household gas cooker (assuming it can use bottled gas) can be used on a boat or whether ther is something fundamental that makes them completely incompatible with use on a boat.

Seems this was a win for the NBTA linky

That's really helpful, thanks!! Are there any rules for connecting the new one, then? Such as only connecting it at night, or connecting the display before the panel?

I checked the connection. The two LEDs flashed brightly and brielfy as I reconnected the cable. Neither LED stayed on. Normally the green LED stays on.

I have a Tracer 2210 MPPT controller with an MT-5 remote display. I unplugged the MT-5 to reroute the cable, and reconnected it shortly after. Ever since, the display has been kaput. Every icon on the screen is visible, and none of the buttons does anything. The battery voltage is around 13.7V (depending where I measure it there are some silly voltage drops), which suggests the controller itself is still doing its stuff. Beyond that, I'm at a bit of a loss regarding fault finding. It could be the MT-5, the cable or the controller interface gone. Any ideas?

FWIW, my view is that when CRT was created, the government should have given somebody, and CRT would have been the obvious body, the responsibility to ensure that people living on boats could do so in decent conditions. They should also have ensured that the funding was available to enable them to do that. But as it was a cost saving exercise from their point of view, that was never going to happen. So it's not reasonable for the government to make no provision for the living conditions of thousands of people living on the water. But it's also not reasonable to expect CRT to do it for nothing

I suppose the question I was asking was whether CRT had actively requested the exemption or whether the judge had arrived at an interpretation by analogy with a social landlord.

http://www.gcnchambers.co.uk/news/ca_to_rule_on_whether_canal_and_river_trust_entitled_to_have_same_approach_applied_to_article_8_defences_as_landlords_of_social_housing I'm not familiar with this case but it sounds as if CRT have preiously successfully claimed that they should be given the rights of a social landlord. Given their (and BW's) insistence that they do not have the responsibilities of a social landlord, that strikes me as a tad unfair. Or have I got that wrong? (I might well have...)

Ta very much - I'll make sure I'm gone by Wednesday or Thursday

I'm moored there atm but I'll need to move away to make way for the festival. Does anyone know how long I've got before the paid-for moorings start?

Not really PC, more newspeak. I know of one example where families need a household income of less than £60kpa to be able to apply for the "affordable" housing but must be earning at least £58,800 to afford the mortgage repayments. That allow developers and councils to claim that there is no point in providing affordable housing because there is no demand.

I was the Treasurer. Part of the reason I resigned was because I wasn't prepared to be used to legitimate their apparently deliberately confused finances. Although the numbers involved were not large, the complete lack of any record keeping meant it was open to abuse. When I pointed out an apparent case of abuse, I was told that perhaps I had misunderstood something. When I mentioned personal agendas and ambitions, I was referring to two things. First the NBTA used to be the name used by a very small group of people. A couple of years ago, they decided to invite people to join and last year they started setting themselves up as a formally constituted organisation. But I think that those people have struggled to accept that they now have a responsibility to the membership and have continued to act as if they are free agents. The second reason relates specifically to the London group. The practicalities of running a grassroots organisation mean that NBTA London is bigger and more active than the national organisation. Despite the superficially consensus-based nature of the group, it is actually organised in a way that allows some of the more forceful members of the group to impose themselves on it. I didn't have the energy to keep fighting against the egos so I left. The NBTA seems to be the only group promoting the idea that CRT has to act strictly within the law, so I support their aims. There are a lot of good people involved in it. But it is a deeply and fundamentally dysfunctional organisation, and that may be its downfall.