Licences

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, Unicorn Stampede said:

Also no idea what you mean @Alan de Enfield about me not wanting to discuss boating

 

 

Was it not you that said 

 

 

2 hours ago, Unicorn Stampede said:

I absolutely don't want to see a thread about common law/freemen of the land/maritime law,

 

[Unicorn Stampede]

12 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Was it not you that said 

 

 

 

Maritime law, in the respect of free men, is what they use/justify not paying.

 

I know it makes no sense - it's an unfortunate part of me having had to deal with their members in a past life 

 

Your standard maritime law? Crack on, no issue with that.

[TheBiscuits]

1 hour ago, Unicorn Stampede said:

Maritime law, in the respect of free men, is what they use/justify not paying.

 

I know it makes no sense

 

It could if they took their narrow boats beyond the 12 mile limit 😁

[Arthur Marshall]

 

 

4 hours ago, magnetman said:

My phone won't open the .pdf on the website but it could be interesting to compare 2003 with 2023 for Canal licence costs. 

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/the-publication-scheme/governance/legal-documents/historic-licensing-documents

 

Then have a look at the cost of some other luxuries like bread. 

 

According to the ONS the bread was 56p in 2003 and is now 138p. 

 

Obviously nobody particularly needs to eat. 

 

 

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/timeseries/czoh/mm23

Canal licence cost for 55ft is about £1200 now I think. So what was it in 2003? 

I can't help with 2003, but my first licence for a 40 foot boat in 1989 was £174. No EOG mooring fee then.

Edited to add: according to the Nat Stats Office calculator, that would be equivalent to £533 today, when I pay £934 plus £748 in  EOG mooring fee.

Increase slightly above inflation, it seems.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Arthur Marshall

[MtB]

7 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I can't help with 2003, but my first licence for a 40 foot boat in 1989 was £174. No EOG mooring fee then, and I think £200 a year for the farm mooring.

So now the licence is about 5 times as much. I'm not sure that's disproportionate?

 

Value of 1989 British Pounds today

Share this page:

    

£174 in 1989

 

£444.45 in 2023

 

The inflation rate in the United Kingdom between 1989 and today has been 155.43%, which translates into a total increase of £270.45. This means that 174 pounds in 1989 are equivalent to 444.45 pounds in 2023. In other words, the purchasing power of £174 in 1989 equals £444.45 today. The average annual inflation rate between these periods has been 2.8%.

 

 

 

https://www.inflationtool.com/british-pound/1989-to-present-value?amount=174&year2=2023&frequency=yearly

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

2 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Value of 1989 British Pounds today

Share this page:

    

£174 in 1989

 

£444.45 in 2023

 

The inflation rate in the United Kingdom between 1989 and today has been 155.43%, which translates into a total increase of £270.45. This means that 174 pounds in 1989 are equivalent to 444.45 pounds in 2023. In other words, the purchasing power of £174 in 1989 equals £444.45 today. The average annual inflation rate between these periods has been 2.8%.

 

 

 

https://www.inflationtool.com/british-pound/1989-to-present-value?amount=174&year2=2023&frequency=yearly

 

 

I did the calculation from Nat Office of Stats, I think, as above "my first licence for a 40 foot boat in 1989 was £174. No EOG mooring fee then. According to the Nat Stats Office calculator, that would be equivalent to £533 today, when I pay £934 plus £748 in  EOG mooring fee."

Crossed with yours. Either way, slightly above inflation!

[MtB]

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I did the calculation from Nat Office of Stats, I think, as above "my first licence for a 40 foot boat in 1989 was £174. No EOG mooring fee then. According to the Nat Stats Office calculator, that would be equivalent to £533 today, when I pay £934 plus £748 in  EOG mooring fee."

Crossed with yours. Either way, slightly above inflation!

 

Gotta pay somehow for all those extra canals restored in the interim! 

 

How many cruising miles did we have in 1989? Less than the 2,000 we have today I would imagine. But yes its hard to see where all the extra money is going. On the other hand maybe it isn't. H&S 'method statements', risk analyses and all that cost a mint, which simply wasn't required back then to the degree it is required now. Similarly disposal of the arisings from dredging nowadays has to be handsomely paid for. Back then it was just spread on a field. Bound to be many more such examples of costs running away out of control due to ever more red tape. 

 

 

[adam1uk]

27 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Gotta pay somehow for all those extra canals restored in the interim! 

 

How many cruising miles did we have in 1989? Less than the 2,000 we have today I would imagine. But yes its hard to see where all the extra money is going. On the other hand maybe it isn't. H&S 'method statements', risk analyses and all that cost a mint, which simply wasn't required back then to the degree it is required now. Similarly disposal of the arisings from dredging nowadays has to be handsomely paid for. Back then it was just spread on a field. Bound to be many more such examples of costs running away out of control due to ever more red tape. 

 

 

 

The earliest BW annual report I could find was 2001/02 -- and the government grant in 2001 was £62.1 million.  Using the website you posted above, that would be be £108.2 million today -- whereas the actual grant for 2022/23 is £52.6 million.  That's probably a bigger difference than any of the increased costs you mentioned.

 

[Arthur Marshall]

1 minute ago, adam1uk said:

 

The earliest BW annual report I could find was 2001/02 -- and the government grant in 2001 was £62.1 million.  Using the website you posted above, that would be be £108.2 million today -- whereas the actual grant for 2022/23 is £52.6 million.  That's probably a bigger difference than any of the increased costs you mentioned.

 

I think that's the key point. While boaters have been paying more and more over the years, the actual national support for the system has halved, and is reducing. The evidence is everywhere, as some of us have been saying for years.

It's a decaying system that serves no real navigational function any more except as a playground for the better off. The general public doesn't give a toss about it - a relative few walkers and fishermen might, but even they chuck their rubbish into it or litter it with bags of dog muck. The dossers who live in crap boats are like the tent dwellers in shop doorways, irrelevant, really. Over half of the supposedly permanent users break the rules whenever it suits them. Most of the UK doesn't even know it exists. I didn't until I was 40, and I grew up by one.

It can't possibly carry on for much longer like this. Lock failures are being reported weekly, reservoirs are failing, breaches are becoming endemic. Climate change will mess up the water supply and I really don't see CRT digging new reservoirs when the water companies can't even guarantee to supply drinking water from theirs.

The licence increases, with luck, will keep it limping along another five years, after which I can't see myself caring that much, even assuming I'm still on the planet. Shame though, it was lovely while it lasted.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

7 hours ago, adam1uk said:

 

The earliest BW annual report I could find was 2001/02 -- and the government grant in 2001 was £62.1 million.  Using the website you posted above, that would be be £108.2 million today -- whereas the actual grant for 2022/23 is £52.6 million.  That's probably a bigger difference than any of the increased costs you mentioned.

 

The 2001 figure given includes both Defra and Scottish government grant. It is also inflated because Defra were providing additional income to reduce a backlog of safety related arrears.

 

The waterways minister states correctly that grant has increased since 2012. 

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

The 2001 figure given includes both Defra and Scottish government grant. It is also inflated because Defra were providing additional income to reduce a backlog of safety related arrears.

 

The waterways minister states correctly that grant has increased since 2012. 

If it was to increase by the rate licences have (if you include mooring fees, which, after all, were just a way if increasing the licence cost while pretending not to), the grant would have to be ten times what it was back in '89. Be interesting to know if it is.

[magnetman]

Also interesting that part of the bill for the CRT in terms of maintenance will be material costs. Wood, stone, steel etc. How much have these gone up compared with inflation? Steel and lumber went crazy not so long ago but have settled down a bit lately. 

 

Actual costs of maintaining a canal in a useable condition could be interesting. 

 

 

 

[peterboat]

10 hours ago, MtB said:

 

Gotta pay somehow for all those extra canals restored in the interim! 

 

How many cruising miles did we have in 1989? Less than the 2,000 we have today I would imagine. But yes its hard to see where all the extra money is going. On the other hand maybe it isn't. H&S 'method statements', risk analyses and all that cost a mint, which simply wasn't required back then to the degree it is required now. Similarly disposal of the arisings from dredging nowadays has to be handsomely paid for. Back then it was just spread on a field. Bound to be many more such examples of costs running away out of control due to ever more red tape. 

 

 

Or just BWs and CRTs bad management?

[GUMPY]

16 hours ago, magnetman said:

Canal licence cost for 55ft is about £1200 now I think. So what was it in 2003? 

£556

[magnetman]

Roughly doubled in 20 yars then. 

 

Thanks for checking it out. 

 

So how does this compare to other non essentials or indeed essentials? 

 

 

Are canal licences statistically too cheap? 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

38 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Roughly doubled in 20 yars then. 

 

Thanks for checking it out. 

 

So how does this compare to other non essentials or indeed essentials? 

 

 

Are canal licences statistically too cheap? 

 

It's actually more than that. Wherever you moor, part of your mooring costs go to CRT and for most people this is an invisible part of the contribution to CRT. I imagine the only way to get an accurate estimate of this part of the cost, and how much the total has therefore risen, is to factor in the local EOG charge for an equivalent sized boat.

[magnetman]

Not if you have a cc licence.

 

Where I moor the London boat all of the mooring costs go to the CRT but my reference to licence cost was specifically about the fact one can buy a licence without needing a mooring.

 

That is the whole point. 

 

 

[Mad Harold]

12 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I think that's the key point. While boaters have been paying more and more over the years, the actual national support for the system has halved, and is reducing. The evidence is everywhere, as some of us have been saying for years.

It's a decaying system that serves no real navigational function any more except as a playground for the better off. The general public doesn't give a toss about it - a relative few walkers and fishermen might, but even they chuck their rubbish into it or litter it with bags of dog muck. The dossers who live in crap boats are like the tent dwellers in shop doorways, irrelevant, really. Over half of the supposedly permanent users break the rules whenever it suits them. Most of the UK doesn't even know it exists. I didn't until I was 40, and I grew up by one.

It can't possibly carry on for much longer like this. Lock failures are being reported weekly, reservoirs are failing, breaches are becoming endemic. Climate change will mess up the water supply and I really don't see CRT digging new reservoirs when the water companies can't even guarantee to supply drinking water from theirs.

The licence increases, with luck, will keep it limping along another five years, after which I can't see myself caring that much, even assuming I'm still on the planet. Shame though, it was lovely while it lasted.

Thanks Arthur.

Got up this morning feeling gloomy with the news; Israel/Hamas/Ukrain, political crap speeches.(Are they all ex Royal Artillery? they are gunna do this and gunna do that) With Arthur's summation of the future of the canals (which I can't help agreeing with) I'm now feeling quite suicidal. 😭

[Arthur Marshall]

57 minutes ago, Mad Harold said:

Thanks Arthur.

Got up this morning feeling gloomy with the news; Israel/Hamas/Ukrain, political crap speeches.(Are they all ex Royal Artillery? they are gunna do this and gunna do that) With Arthur's summation of the future of the canals (which I can't help agreeing with) I'm now feeling quite suicidal. 😭

I donate my favourite quote of all time, which I saw credited to an Arthur Waller of whom I know nothing :

"Cheer up, the worst is yet to come."

[magnetman]

Start each day with a smile and get it over with. 

[Hudds Lad]

[magnetman]

Understanding is the booby prize (Werner Erhard)

Edited October 10, 2023 by magnetman
typo

[Cheshire cat]

I'll start worrying when Arthur swaps his Trombone for a Violin!

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Cheshire cat said:

I'll start worrying when Arthur swaps his Trombone for a Violin!

Too late...

[Mad Harold]

Had a thought.

Some years ago I was a member of an amateur orchestra (The Slaithwaite Philharmonic) which promoted itself as The Symphony Orchestra of the Colne Valley.

It was a registered charity, and as such standard tax paying members could covenant their subscriptions, making them worth 20% more.

Could CRT do this with their licence fees?

Anybody know?