Not looking good for us

[Bee]

So...... Boaters are going to be in for a torrid time by the look of it yet here we are, on this thread, much of which is trying to see it from CRT's point of view hoping that the hammer falls on CCers, wide boat owners, splitting hairs over who uses the system more or less or who doesn't appear to have a licence - in fact we are all boaters using the system, we are all facing the same problems, we all depend on it remaining open or navigable and we should all be holding CRT's feet to the fire and  writing to MP's (although that makes sod all difference ) and should all be making a general nuisance of ourselves and making life uncomfortable for those who decide the fate of the canals - and it;s not the fault of some scruffy individual with a pile of logs on the roof of his elderly boat.

[MtB]

17 minutes ago, Jon57 said:

Looking like the local housing authorities will be very business.

 

 

Let's hope so, the canal system is not a housing authority. People fallen on hard times should not have to resort to living in knackered old boats. 

[Alan de Enfield]

5 minutes ago, Bee said:

and it;s not the fault of some scruffy individual with a pile of logs on the roof of his elderly boat.

 

I'm guessing that that should be in the 'boaters with wood burners to be banned from London' thread

 

😥

[Allan(nb Albert)]

3 hours ago, Midnight said:

Is the consultation  a done deal?

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/national-consultations/consultation-on-future-boat-licence-pricing-faqs

 

Tough or even "unfair", especially for genuine continuous cruisers?

Above inflation licence fee increases are unfair to all boaters.

It is the inevitable consequence of moving waterways to the third sector to remove financial burden from the tax payer.

[peterboat]

3 hours ago, Midnight said:

Is the consultation  a done deal?

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/national-consultations/consultation-on-future-boat-licence-pricing-faqs

 

Tough or even "unfair", especially for genuine continuous cruisers?

I suspect so reading it, just like the widebeam consultation 

38 minutes ago, Bee said:

So...... Boaters are going to be in for a torrid time by the look of it yet here we are, on this thread, much of which is trying to see it from CRT's point of view hoping that the hammer falls on CCers, wide boat owners, splitting hairs over who uses the system more or less or who doesn't appear to have a licence - in fact we are all boaters using the system, we are all facing the same problems, we all depend on it remaining open or navigable and we should all be holding CRT's feet to the fire and  writing to MP's (although that makes sod all difference ) and should all be making a general nuisance of ourselves and making life uncomfortable for those who decide the fate of the canals - and it;s not the fault of some scruffy individual with a pile of logs on the roof of his elderly boat.

On here some are doing CRTs job for them! CRT have already divided and conquered with their actions, unfortunately at some point it will come back and bite them hard.

Your comments are right of course

Edited February 19, 2023 by peterboat

[MtB]

Looks like the "Prompt payment discount" (a misnomer, its actually an 'early payment' or pre-payment discount) might be going too.

 

If it goes this will be a mistake in my view. No-one will see much point in stumping up the cash in a timely manner. When I had a Jan-to-Dec licence on the Thames, we often didn't renew it until we wanted to go out cruising in March as the EA didn't seem bothered and gave no incentive. Nor were there any penalties for late payment.

 

I suspect a lot of marina boats on CRT waters might do this too without the cash incentive to renew on time, thus badly damaging CRT's cashflow management.

 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2023 by MtB
Fiddle with it

[Higgs]

 

There can't be many people in marinas that would wait until a penalty payment kicks in. How many people pay by Direct Debit. The early payment was becoming a way to force people into an account system of payment. I pay by cheque, and it affected the early payment discount. I think it is already down to 2%. Whatever extra money they do make, there will be some way it won't be spent on anything boaters might appreciate. 

 

 

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

This consultation was supposed to run from 7 February. Has anyone seen it yet? I know the FAQs are out and it runs till 6 April but it seems odd that nobody appears to have seen the actual questionnaire yet.

[peterboat]

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

This consultation was supposed to run from 7 February. Has anyone seen it yet? I know the FAQs are out and it runs till 6 April but it seems odd that nobody appears to have seen the actual questionnaire yet.

My licence is paid until next year, I have paid monthly as in reality money in the bank is earning interest. I also plan not to be on CRT waters by mid year. I will do the consultation if one is ever sent, I do have an interest in the outcome as it will effect friends, but like the widebeam consultation it will be the result they want

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Bee said:

So...... Boaters are going to be in for a torrid time by the look of it yet here we are, on this thread, much of which is trying to see it from CRT's point of view hoping that the hammer falls on CCers, wide boat owners, splitting hairs over who uses the system more or less or who doesn't appear to have a licence - in fact we are all boaters using the system, we are all facing the same problems, we all depend on it remaining open or navigable and we should all be holding CRT's feet to the fire and  writing to MP's (although that makes sod all difference ) and should all be making a general nuisance of ourselves and making life uncomfortable for those who decide the fate of the canals - and it;s not the fault of some scruffy individual with a pile of logs on the roof of his elderly boat.

It's a discussion, not a war. Nobody's "hoping" the hammer falls on anyone, but we know it's going to fall somewhere and it's no good just complaining in general - you need to know what you're whinging about and maybe even have a positive suggestion or two - and these may not always be pleasant. Not that anyone's going to take any notice.

Holding CRTs feet anywhere won't do much good except convince them boaters are a pain in the backside and it's less hassle catering for fishermen, cyclists and walkers. Write to your MP by all means, but they won't read it. Vote for a party that wants to raise taxes considerably and the system might stand a chance of a grant, but unfortunately there isn't one that stands any chance of power.

In the end,  you get what you pay for. It was fun while it lasted.

[MtB]

9 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

This consultation was supposed to run from 7 February. Has anyone seen it yet? I know the FAQs are out and it runs till 6 April but it seems odd that nobody appears to have seen the actual questionnaire yet.

 

 

I expect they are still finessing the set of questions to elicit the largest number of supportive responses and minimise opportunities to be miserable and negative.

 

Oh! 

[Rob-M]

I'd be interested to know how much is spent on supporting volunteers through expenses and provision of clothing and equipment.  As a volunteer I can claim traveling expenses and get provided with blue shirts, waterproofs, sweatshirts, fleece jacket and I know some volunteers have steel toecap boots.  Plus I have to have a medical every few years which CRT pay for.

 

I understand funding needs to increase, and some of this can come through increasing boater contributions, but it would soften the blow if I knew income from boaters was ring fenced for things like dredging and lock maintenance rather than blue signs and volunteers.

[Orwellian]

26 minutes ago, Rob-M said:

it would soften the blow if I knew income from boaters was ring fenced for things like dredging and lock maintenance rather than blue signs and volunteers.

As the the total income from boating covers only a small proportion of the costs of providing for it this is utterly pointless.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

33 minutes ago, Orwellian said:

As the the total income from boating covers only a small proportion of the costs of providing for it this is utterly pointless.

I have to agree with Rob-M

 

Knowing our license fees were going directly to maintenance and improvements would indeed soften the blow. 
I’d like to see all boating contributions ring fenced, such as CRT moorings and the 9% they take from the marinas.

 

I thought the total boater contribution was well above 40%M?

I’ll have to check. 
 

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Yes the last figures were £44.5M

up from £40.8M. 
 

It looks like the income from boaters has risen more than other incomes.  
 And some other incomes have declined. 

[IanD]

3 hours ago, MtB said:

 

 

I expect they are still finessing the set of questions to elicit the largest number of supportive responses and minimise opportunities to be miserable and negative.

 

Oh! 

 

I guess we'll see when the questionnaire is sent out, no-one seems to have had one yet.

 

From the website and the FAQs I think it's a done deal that the overall (average) license fee will go up significantly, due to record inflation and the shortfall in CART funding. The inflation part is just as fair as any other price rise, point the finger of blame at the causes of inflation, a large part of which is down to government mistakes -- and the funding shortfall is essentially their fault too. Blaming CART for all this is pointless as well as unfair... 😉

 

The question is how this increase will be distributed across boaters, and the FAQs strongly suggest that the increases will be larger on those who have either had a historical advantage in costs (e.g. area-based charging for widebeams) or boaters who are effectively abusing the system and the rules (e.g. surcharge for CCers) -- for which the blame falls on the increasing number who have been bending/ignoring the CC rules (the CMers) not the "real CCers" for who the rule was introduced many years ago, but who will also suffer as a consequence of CMers behaviour.

 

Inappropriate use/mooring of widebeams on canals where they're simply not suitable may also be another reason for these to be hit -- and yet again those who *are* on suitable canals like Peter will suffer as a consequence.

 

In both these cases the boaters who have been selfishly abusing the system are largely to blame, and ire should be directed at them not CART -- whose basic problem is not blue signs or executive bonuses but having too much to do and not enough money to do it with... 😞

Edited February 19, 2023 by IanD

[Allan(nb Albert)]

2 hours ago, Goliath said:

Yes the last figures were £44.5M

up from £40.8M. 
 

It looks like the income from boaters has risen more than other incomes.  
 And some other incomes have declined. 

The figures you give are gross income. However, CRT have to spend money to get that income (a trivial example would be management and chugger costs needed to get Friends making regular donations). After deducting these costs you are left with a net amount that is used to contribute to CRT's charitable objects including maintaining its waterways.

 

Ten years ago projections were produced for each year up to 2027.

 

Comparing the 2021/22 annual report against the projection -

 

The utility and boating streams are contributing above projection.

BWML is contributing nothing because it was sold off.

Joint Ventures and Charitable Income are below projection.

Investment Income is well below projection.

 

The combined streams produced a contribution about £19m below projection.

 

[matty40s]

2 hours ago, IanD said:

 

 

In both these cases the boaters who have been selfishly abusing the system are largely to blame, and ire should be directed at them not CART -- whose basic problem is not blue signs or executive bonuses but having too much to do and not enough money to do it with... 😞

You really should post on Narrowminded World , classic, throw money at blue signs and director bonuses but blame boaters for most of the cash shortage.

🥳

Edited February 19, 2023 by matty40s

[MtB]

18 minutes ago, matty40s said:

You really should post on Narrowminded World , classic, throw money at blue signs and director bonuses but blame boaters for most of the blame.

🥳

 

Yes its CRT, or rather BW's fault. When I came on to the canals and read the legislation, I could barely manage to reconcile the massive gulf between what the law says and what BW were willing to tolerate from CMers. Same applies now. 

 

 

Can't really blame boaters for taking a mile when given not just an inch, but a whole authorised by BW mile. 

[Higgs]

I'm sure no one will mind if CRT play by the rules of fair play in future, and only accept licence fee money from people that actually make use of the canal. 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2023 by Higgs

[Orwellian]

What an ironic typo!

[Grahamnewman]

6 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

This consultation was supposed to run from 7 February. Has anyone seen it yet? I know the FAQs are out and it runs till 6 April but it seems odd that nobody appears to have seen the actual questionnaire yet.

I have had the 'survey' and responded to it.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

1 hour ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

The figures you give are gross income. However, CRT have to spend money to get that income (a trivial example would be management and chugger costs needed to get Friends making regular donations). After deducting these costs you are left with a net amount that is used to contribute to CRT's charitable objects including maintaining its waterways.

 

Ten years ago projections were produced for each year up to 2027.

 

Comparing the 2021/22 annual report against the projection -

 

The utility and boating streams are contributing above projection.

BWML is contributing nothing because it was sold off.

Joint Ventures and Charitable Income are below projection.

Investment Income is well below projection.

 

The combined streams produced a contribution about £19m below projection.

 

 because this has always been a bone of contention for boaters including myself, when I chugged I was assured that the cost of chugging did not came from boat licenses or other boating income but income generated from elsewhere. 

And I should mention any money coming into the coffers via chuggers was/is ring fenced for maintenance. And donators sign an agreement with CRT on that understanding. I believe that holds true. 
 

I do share the view to ring fence as much money from boaters’ income as is possible for maintenance would go a long way to soften the blow of the license fee increases. 

 

 

 

 

 

[IanD]

1 hour ago, matty40s said:

You really should post on Narrowminded World , classic, throw money at blue signs and director bonuses but blame boaters for most of the cash shortage.

🥳

You're almost as bad as TWC for misinterpreting what people say... 😉

 

I clearly said that the real reason for the cash shortage is lack of government funding, but when it comes to how to share out any license fee increases the sections of the boating community which suffer most will be partly due to the selfish and rule-breaking behaviour of some -- not all! -- boaters (CMers and widebeam owners), and that other innocent boaters will probably suffer as a result. Exactly what part of that statement are you arguing with?

 

We've had the argument about blue signs and director bonuses before, and if you want to carry on ignoring the fact that the amount of money spent on these is negligible compared to other things -- and the funding shortfall -- then go ahead. Even if it lets you vent your anger, it won't make your argument any more convincing though... 😉

Edited February 19, 2023 by IanD

[Arthur Marshall]

I'm not sure how widebeam owners are intrinsically selfish, and even their rulebreaking appears an inconvenience rather than a serious irritation. Perhaps I just don't haunt the areas where they cause trouble.

CMers have, as someone pointed out above, been around since BW days, when there were so few they didn't matter, and have rather proliferated since for a number of reasons, uncontrolled by CRT, who probably can't afford to chase them all.

It's a bit like the government penalising people in two bed houses for their spare rooms when there aren't any one bedroom ones. The solution to both problems is obvious - in one case build more small houses and in the other provide affordable moorings. Both take a bit of investment (not much, for moorings) and action. Increasing mooring fees both unilaterally and via auctions isn't going to sort the problem, more likely to increase it. Increasing the number of residential moorings massively might.