C&RT License Survey

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, Private Fraser said:

First they came for the widebeams and I did not speak out—
     Because I don’t have a widebeam,

Then they came for the ccr’s and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a ccr,

Then they came for the weekend warriors I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a weekend warrior,

Then they came for what was left and there wasn’t anything left.

 

Very funny. Except the decisions here are being made by your fellow boaters, not CART or the Nazis... 😉

 

Are you saying that it's all wrong and unfair and divisive if a large majority of boaters -- say, 80% -- say that a small minority of boaters in widebeams or CCing -- say, 20% -- should pay more, instead of sharing out the cost equally?

 

And if so, please explain how is it somehow *not* unfair and divisive if a tiny majority of people -- say, 52% -- decide that an almost-equal number of people -- say, 48% -- should be forced to do something against their will?

 

Isn't the truth for you and Peter and fellow posters that you only like democracy when you're on the winning side, and suddenly go right off it when you're on the losing side?

[IanD]

23 minutes ago, Tuscan said:

The whole point of the consultation is to tell boaters that the cost of the license is about to rise dramatically. CRT will already have decided the mechanics and probably by how much. Inflation is projected to fall back to sensible levels by the end of the year so by establishing the principle with high inflation now they can ensure boaters vote for high increases for the next 10 years. 

CART have made that absolutely clear in both the FAQs and the video, the license fee *is* going to go up by more than inflation for the next 10 years, and explained why -- voting whether this happens or not isn't on the table.

 

The consultation is about *how* these increases should be spread out across different types of boater, equally or unequally.

 

Self-interest among boaters pretty much guarantees that the answer will be "unequally, please" -- and that may be unfortunate for the likely losers (widebeam owners and CCers) but if it's what the majority of boaters want that's what will happen.

 

Claims of being a persecuted minority forced to do something against their will (in this case, pay more money) ignore the fact that this is how democracy works -- many of the "losers" on here were "winners" on Brexit, where they still insist "we won, suck it up, stop whining" to the 48% who lost that particular vote.

 

Perhaps if the fees increase goes against them they should heed their own advice? 😉

Edited February 23, 2023 by IanD

[Arthur Marshall]

37 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Very funny. Except the decisions here are being made by your fellow boaters, not CART or the Nazis... 😉

 

Are you saying that it's all wrong and unfair and divisive if a large majority of boaters -- say, 80% -- say that a small minority of boaters in widebeams or CCing -- say, 20% -- should pay more, instead of sharing out the cost equally?

 

And if so, please explain how is it somehow *not* unfair and divisive if a tiny majority of people -- say, 52% -- decide that an almost-equal number of people -- say, 48% -- should be forced to do something against their will?

 

Isn't the truth for you and Peter and fellow posters that you only like democracy when you're on the winning side, and suddenly go right off it when you're on the losing side?

Nobody in their right mind believes that democracy works, it's just less bad than other systems, in a vague kind of way. It doesn't mean that the majority is always right (thank gods - a sum of zeros still equals nowt) because most people don't know what they're talking about, same as on here. If anything, the UK is a representative democracy, and businesses aren't even that. You don't vote for your boss at work, and you have no say in the pricing at Tesco. Those running a business only need to pay attention to their customers in certain circumstances, and those with a monopoly, never.

It doesn't matter much what we think or say, CRT have a business to run. If there are enough widebeams now on the system (there didn't used to be), electric boats or CCers to make a significant boost to the coffers if they get charged more, then that'll happen. If there aren't, and CRT will get more with an all round massive increase, that will.

Thirty years back there weren't enough fatboats or CCers to matter. It's not divisive to admit things have changed. And "unfair", "right" or "wrong" are value judgements and vary from where you stand. This is about money, nothing else. No morality in finance.

Brexit belongs in the politics forum, but that vote was run under specific rules and won accordingly. Implementing it was politics with a government also elected, so no valid complaints there either. That's democracy. Businesses aren't the same, they can go bust, governments can't (usually).
 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Arthur Marshall

[Barneyp]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

Well you're being included this time, aren't you?

 

Why not say what you really think, which is that boaters as a whole are likely to vote for a big fee increase for wideboats because most boaters have narrowboats?

 

And if they do this, why is it CART's fault?

 

I thought you were in favour of majority decisions, even 52:48 ones? 😉

It's not a vote, certainly not a yes no, or choose option A or B vote.

Various different options are given in different questions and you choose which of those you prefer/have least objection to, and there are boxes for comments.

So the results of the consultation do not have to be conclusive unless everyone answers the same way which they won't, and not everyone will reply from self interest eg some narrowboat owners don't think widebeams should pay more and the option to maintain the status quo is included in every question.

They do say fees will rise above the rate of inflation for the next 10 years, so that major decision is not up for consultation, and from the questions in the consultation it seems likely CCers and widebeams will have a bigger increase.

So in my opinion the consultation is only likely to have a limited effect on how much extra the CCers and widebeams will pay, and how the widebeam rate will be calculated.

[peterboat]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

Well you're being included this time, aren't you?

 

Why not say what you really think, which is that boaters as a whole are likely to vote for a big fee increase for wideboats because most boaters have narrowboats?

 

And if they do this, why is it CART's fault?

 

I thought you were in favour of majority decisions, even 52:48 ones? 😉

Wont affect me Ian it will you 

[IanD]

12 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Nobody in their right mind believes that democracy works, it's just less bad than other systems, in a vague kind of way. It doesn't mean that the majority is always right (thank gods - a sum of zeros still equals nowt) because most people don't know the detail of what they're talking about, same as on here. If anything, the UK is a representative democracy, and businesses aren't even that. You don't vote for your boss at work, and you have no say in the pricing at Tesco. Those running a business only need to pay attention to their customers in certain circumstances, and those with a monopoly, never.

It doesn't matter much what we think or say, CRT have a business to run. If there are enough widebeams now on the system (there didn't used to be), electric boats or CCers to make a significant boost to the coffers if they get charged more, then that'll happen. If there aren't, and CRT will get more with an all round massive increase, that will.

Thirty years back there weren't enough fatboats or CCers to matter. It's not divisive to admit things have changed. And "unfair", "right" or "wrong" are value judgement and vary from where you stand. This is about money, nothing else. No morality in finance.

 

Whether democracy works or not is an entirely different can of worms -- as has been said, it's the worst possible system of government, apart from all the other ones that have been tried... 😉

 

Of course it's all about the money, that's the entire point -- and regardless of how the increases are spread, *everyone* is likely to pay more to bring in the amount of money that CART needs.

 

The question is, should everyone pay (for example) 20% more, or should widebeams pay (for example) 50% more and CCers (for example) 100% more so that everyone else can pay (for example) 10% more?

 

And anyone protesting "this is unfair and divisive" who voted for Brexit and is still happy that they "won" is a hypocrite, pure and simple. That's not name-calling, it's a fact.

 

1 minute ago, peterboat said:

Wont affect me Ian it will you 

 

You didn't answer any of the questions I asked. See my post above... 😉

Edited February 23, 2023 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

1 hour ago, Midnight said:

 

Not in the case of CCers unfortunately. I have sympathy with the genuine boater who navigates bona fide around the system, I suspect most of us think CMers should feel the pain. Afterall the increases in enforcement (if exists) need to be funded. They are taking the p*ss and enjoying a free mooring whilst the rest of us pay or adhere to the rules. Regrettably there's no difference in the license. CMers just ignore the rules but still have the same license i'e 'boat without a home mooring'. 

Then I think the issue of continuous mooring needs to be addressed properly through enforcement. 
I wouldn’t have thought a license increase would stop them over staying. Might even make them dig their heels in more and stay longer. 
 

But like you say though it’ll cost money to enforce and it’s got to come from somewhere 

 

I am wondering thoough whether the increase in fees and costs in general will see more boats giving up marina moorings and coming out on the cut. If that happens then I reckon there’ll be more CMers and dumpers. 

 

 

 

[peterboat]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Whether democracy works or not is an entirely different can of worms -- as has been said, it's the worst possible system of government, apart from all the other ones that have been tried... 😉

 

Of course it's all about the money, that's the entire point -- and regardless of how the increases are spread, *everyone* is likely to pay more to bring in the amount of money that CART needs.

 

The question is, should everyone pay (for example) 20% more, or should widebeams pay (for example) 50% more and CCers (for example) 100% more so that everyone else can pay (for example) 10% more?

 

And anyone protesting "this is unfair and divisive" who voted for Brexit and is still happy that they "won" is a hypocrite, pure and simple. That's not name-calling, it's a fact.

 

 

You didn't answer any of the questions I asked. See my post above... 😉

Why bother? You can afford to pay extra most cant or dont want to your attitude will result in the system closed down and linear housing built where it was. A few boaters won't be able to pay for the costs of maintenance of system miss managed to ruin! Well done 

[IanD]

8 minutes ago, peterboat said:

Why bother? You can afford to pay extra most cant or dont want to your attitude will result in the system closed down and linear housing built where it was. A few boaters won't be able to pay for the costs of maintenance of system miss managed to ruin! Well done 

Total BS Peter. How is making some boaters pay more so that others can pay less going to "close the system down"? How is this somehow "my fault"? Stop playing the victim and get real... 😞

 

Maybe some of the minority of boaters hit heavily (like you) will leave the canals, but equally the majority of boaters who pay less as a result are more likely to stay than if their costs went up by more.

 

Increasing overall license fees is going to happen, and that might well push some boaters off the canals -- but what alternative do CART have if the government refuses to increase the grant?

 

Come on, how else do *you* think this can be solved?

 

P.S. You're right it's not a problem for me -- which is why "my attitude" is to suggest ways that better-off boaters should pay more so that less well-off ones can pay less, to try and stop the canals becoming the preserve of the rich... 😉

Edited February 23, 2023 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, IanD said:

Total BS Peter. How is making some boaters pay more so that others can pay less going to "close the system down"?

 

Nobody is going to pay less - everyone will pay an minimum increase of RPI+ (as per the current formula)

Some groups will pay RPI+++ (Wideboats) and others (CCers) wil pay RPI+++++++++++++

Other groups may also have their 'discounted fees' reduced in addition to the RPI+ increases.

 

The only 'discount' that is legally enforcable is that the Rivers registration MUST be no more than 60% of the fee for a Canal & River LIcence for the equivalent boat.

All other discounts are discretionary and down to the 'will' of C&RT

 

Another possibility is that the 'base' licence is made at a cost of £4000, and those with an acceptable home mooring' get £3000 reduction on proof of having a mooring.

 

The possibilities are (almost) endless - I can think of several ways that C&RT's aspirations can be met - all within the law.

[IanD]

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Nobody is going to pay less - everyone will pay an minimum increase of RPI+ (as per the current formula)

Some groups will pay RPI+++ (Wideboats) and others (CCers) wil pay RPI+++++++++++++

Other groups may also have their 'discounted fees' reduced in addition to the RPI+ increases.

 

The only 'discount' that is legally enforcable is that the Rivers registration MUST be no more than 60% of the fee for a Canal & River LIcence for the equivalent boat.

All other discounts are discretionary and down to the 'will' of C&RT

 

Another possibility is that the 'base' licence is made at a cost of £4000, and those with an acceptable home mooring' get £3000 reduction on proof of having a mooring.

 

The possibilities are (almost) endless - I can think of several ways that C&RT's aspirations can be met - all within the law.

 

I thought what I wrote was clear, and I think you're agreeing -- though I'm not entirely sure... 😉

 

The total license fee take will go up by RPI+ (or whatever the number is), but splitting the increase across groups means that the boaters not in the hard-hit groups (wideboats, CCers) will see a smaller increase than they would with an equal fee rise for everybody -- meaning, less than they would otherwise. I even gave some example numbers... 😉

 

How CART crunch the numbers and keep it legal is up to them, I'm sure they'll find a way...

 

P.S. I suspect wideboat CCers are going to be *very* unhappy, and the NBTA is probably going to self-combust...

Edited February 23, 2023 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

I thought what I wrote was clear, and I think you're agreeing -- though I'm not entirely sure... 😉

 

You wrote that some people would PAY less (than currently) and some would Pay more (than currently)

 

Did you mean that some would have a smaller increases than others, not that they would actually pay less ?

 

26 minutes ago, IanD said:

How is making some boaters pay more so that others can pay less going to "close the system down"

 

[magnetman]

I have been paying the CRT over ten grand a year for 11 years and I am still not a "Friend". People who donate a tenner a week are friends.

 

How does that work then?
 

Christ I'm in the wrong place.

[IanD]

44 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

You wrote that some people would PAY less (than currently) and some would Pay more (than currently)

 

Did you mean that some would have a smaller increases than others, not that they would actually pay less ?

 

 

The numbers made it clear that your second line was what I meant -- and (than currently) is not what I said, it's what you assumed I said... 😉

 

(I meant "compared to if the increase was equally spread, and I thought that was clear but obviously not...)

 

P.S. Not surprised you got a thumbs-up from Peter, he's steadfastly avoiding answering all the awkward questions I keep asking him... 🙂

Edited February 23, 2023 by IanD

[Mike Todd]

16 hours ago, Goliath said:

I have a little more faith in people.

 

for instance, I have no interest in widebeams and am generally not a fan unless they are historic barges, but I’m still not convinced they should cost more to license,

and I said so in one of them boxes where we were allowed to air our view

 

In am not sure on what basis you reach that conclusion ('cos you did not say) but others often resort to a fairness argument - or even affordabilty.

 

Imagine that the existing system, inherited from days when most boats were built to the standard gauge for each canal, was a flat fee regardless of length or width. I suspect that an area scheme would then seem the best option for differentials.

 

Originally, boats were primarily charged on a tonnage basis (NB not quite the same as displacement although that is how it was measured).

 

Apart from CC boaters, I suspect that any variation on the present will have fairness arguments o both sides.

 

If CaRT want to charge more for a 'no home mooring' licence to achieve behavioural objectives (which might well be reasonable) then they ought at least to come out and say so!

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

18 minutes ago, IanD said:

P.S. Not surprised you got a thumbs-up from Peter, he's steadfastly avoiding answering all the awkward questions I keep asking him... 🙂

And you’re steadfastly ignoring that this ain’t a vote

and continue to make comparisons with Brexit 

yet you’ve had it pointed out several times it ain’t a vote

so here again: it ain’t a vote. 

 

I’m on his ignore list,

will someone please ask him why he continues to hammer on about a vote. 

 

 

 

 

 

[IanD]

15 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

 

[snip]

 

Apart from CC boaters, I suspect that any variation on the present will have fairness arguments o both sides.

 

If CaRT want to charge more for a 'no home mooring' licence to achieve behavioural objectives (which might well be reasonable) then they ought at least to come out and say so!

 

I agree, and I'm sure they do actually think this -- but what they say in the FAQ is that the extra CC charge is being considered because of the increased strain they place on the infrastructure and the added enforcement/checking costs.

 

I suspect this is because there are direct monetary justifications for this so it's easy to explain and hard to deny -- surcharging because of behaviour will undoubtedly lead to CART getting pilloried and the kind of comparisons with a certain 20th century regime in Germany that have already appeared on CWDF threads on this subject... 😉

 

A similar argument applies to widebeams -- I'm sure CART don't like the rash of them that's been appearing in recent years in inappropriate or overcrowded places, but it's easier to use the "living space/utility" argument (which they're doing) to justify the surcharge than bad behaviour, and this will attract less flak for CART.

 

In both cases innocent boaters who are genuine CCers or have widebeams where there's plenty of space will suffer as a consequence of the bad behaviour of CMers and widebeam idiots -- as so often, those who selfishly abuse the system screw it up for everyone else... 😞

Edited February 23, 2023 by IanD

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Goliath said:

And you’re steadfastly ignoring that this ain’t a vote

and continue to make comparisons with Brexit 

yet you’ve had it pointed out several times it ain’t a vote

so here again: it ain’t a vote. 

 

I’m on his ignore list,

will someone please ask him why he continues to hammer on about a vote. 

 

Well I would - but I'm on his ever growing ignore list too....🤣

 

If somebody else quotes me or you though (or if he has his usual sneaky peak) he might see and answer it.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

4 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

In am not sure on what basis you reach that conclusion ('cos you did not say) but others often resort to a fairness argument - or even affordabilty.

 

Imagine that the existing system, inherited from days when most boats were built to the standard gauge for each canal, was a flat fee regardless of length or width. I suspect that an area scheme would then seem the best option for differentials.

 

Originally, boats were primarily charged on a tonnage basis (NB not quite the same as displacement although that is how it was measured).

Yes, I understand what you’re saying but they were days of trade with tolls/fees based on the quantity of goods and profit made. 
 

Today one buys a CRT license under the notion you’ve 2000 miles to navigate. 
Yet a wide beam does’nt have access to that 2000 miles. 
So on that simple term I’m not so sure wider boats should pay excessively more. 
 

They are paying more for a current license as it is. 
 

Yes, I know it’s their choice to exclude themselves from narrow canals 

and folk might argue about 72 footers having less to navigate too. 
 

I’m not stuck in mud mind, I’m open to ideas and would change my mind if there was a more than reasonable justification for hitting them harder. 

[magnetman]

21 minutes ago, Goliath said:

And you’re steadfastly ignoring that this ain’t a vote

and continue to make comparisons with Brexit 

yet you’ve had it pointed out several times it ain’t a vote

so here again: it ain’t a vote. 

 

I’m on his ignore list,

will someone please ask him why he continues to hammer on about a vote.

 

It isn't a vote it is a survey/consultation.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

29 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Apart from CC boaters, I suspect that any variation on the present will have fairness arguments o both sides.

 

If CaRT want to charge more for a 'no home mooring' licence to achieve behavioural objectives (which might well be reasonable) then they ought at least to come out and say so!

with regards CC boaters

 

there are a portion of them that will not be using the system much compared to a boater with a mooring in a marina that comes out for the summer and understandably make up for lost time and travels a vast area clocking up miles and locks

 

there’s no wrong with either of these patterns. 
a CCer like myself has time to explore slowly

there’s lots of boaters with a home mooring who cover much more of the system in one summer than I will over a couple of years. 
 

It’d be true to say I use the facilities more, water, bins, Elsan etc. 

 

I think in many ways it evens out. 
Apart from London, which is an anomaly all to itself. 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Goliath

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, magnetman said:

It isn't a vote it is a survey/consultation.

And the difference is...?

 

If CART count up the responses from boaters and choose the most popular options, it's a vote -- just like Brexit was... 😉

 

noun

noun: vote; plural noun: votes

a formal indication of a choice between two or more candidates or courses of action, expressed typically through a ballot or a show of hands.

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by IanD

[magnetman]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

And the difference is...?

 

If CART count up the responses from boaters and choose the most popular options, it's a vote:

 

noun

noun: vote; plural noun: votes

1. a formal indication of a choice between two or more candidates or courses of action, expressed typically through a ballot or a show of hands.

 

It would be IF they did that but I don't think they do that.

 

Do you think they do that?

[IanD]

6 minutes ago, magnetman said:

It would be IF they did that but I don't think they do that.

 

Do you think they do that?

 

Well it's what the FAQ pretty much says they're going to do -- and as I keep asking, why would they do anything else which is pretty much guaranteed to be worse for them, especially in PR terms?

 

If the consultation results (which they've said they'll publish) say one thing and they ignore them and do something else, they'll rightfully get shot down in flames.

 

They might well tweak the numbers, but I predict they'll do whatever the survey says to raise the overall fee by as much as they need -- and any objections can simply be fended off with "it's what boaters said they wanted".

 

Or voted for, according to the dictionary definition... 😉

Edited February 23, 2023 by IanD

[magnetman]

I didn't read the FAQ. I wonder how many people know it is a plebiscite on the future of canal boat licensing.