Roving boaters

[blackrose]

https://www.northwichguardian.co.uk/news/23940522.canal-river-trust-surcharge-roving-boaters-sparks-protest/

 

Roving boaters, constant cruisers? Why can't they get the terminology right?

[Alan de Enfield]

Should we assume that the "Baton Twirlers" are distorting the facts somewhat when they say :

 

“Their own consultation survey showed most licence holders don’t agree with the planned surcharge", but they’ve chosen to ignore their own data.

 

Maybe they missed out a bit and meant to say "The response to the consultation,by Continuous Cruisers, was unanimously against the surcharge, however, the other 80% of boaters who paid for their moorings were all in favour"

[frangar]

I love the fact they are organising buses to get to a protest….obviously don’t want to move their boats in case they lose the prime bit of towpath they have been bolted to for the past few months. 

[blackrose]

Yes I dare say you're right about that Alan. My understanding is that the surcharge for CCers is 5% on top of the licence fee. Since they are using the system more than anyone else (or meant to be), it doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. In any case I really don't think it amounts to "an attack" by CRT on the CCing community - assuming such a community actually exists outside of some people's imagination.

Edited November 24, 2023 by blackrose

[robtheplod]

13 minutes ago, blackrose said:

Yes I dare say you're right about that Alan. My understanding is that the surcharge for CCers is 5% on top of the licence fee. Since they are using the system more than anyone else (or meant to be), it doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. In any case I really don't think it amounts to "an attack" by CRT on the CCing community - assuming such a community actually exists outside of some people's imagination.

Surely you can't have a CC community unless they all follow each other?

[doratheexplorer]

5 hours ago, blackrose said:

https://www.northwichguardian.co.uk/news/23940522.canal-river-trust-surcharge-roving-boaters-sparks-protest/

 

Roving boaters, constant cruisers? Why can't they get the terminology right?

I think it's a typo and is meant to say Raving Boaters.

 

 

I found another typo.  Presumably: "NBTA member Gerry Coleman, a constant cruisier who moors at Middlewich" should read "NBTA member Gerry Coleman, a constant cruisier who sometimes moors at Middlewich". 😉

Edited November 24, 2023 by doratheexplorer

[MtB]

10 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

I think it's a typo and is meant to say Raving Boaters.

 

 

I found another typo.  Presumably: "NBTA member Gerry Coleman, a constant cruisier who moors at Middlewich" should read "NBTA member Gerry Coleman, a constant cruisier who sometimes moors at Middlewich". 😉

 

I quite like the other typo too. "Cruisier". Sounds faintly exotic and 'international'!

 

 

[Number 9]

19 minutes ago, blackrose said:

Yes I dare say you're right about that Alan. My understanding is that the surcharge for CCers is 5% on top of the licence fee. Since they are using the system more than anyone else (or meant to be), it doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. In any case I really don't think it amounts to "an attack" by CRT on the CCing community - assuming such a community actually exists outside of some people's imagination.

Though the increase is only 5% this year (on top of the 13% rise last year plus the yet to be announced annual rise for next year) the cc surcharge will increase to 25% in the coming years, some of the worry may be that the precedent will be set so further increases in the surcharge level may continue.

Whilst many cc boaters will use the facilities more, this is not always the case. For example, if boater A travels 10 miles each week, using 10 locks that is only 500 miles and 500 locks a year, many summer boaters do much more than that every year Also most are probably, out of necessity, more frugal with water and rubbish. The other main point raised is that by charging a small percentage of boaters (who often are the least able to pay) a large increase raises less money than charging everyone a small increase. The licence dodgers and continuous moorers are my biggest bugbear, mainly because they often hog the best spots.

Removing non payers would make people feel better but not raise any money and I have to admit I have no solution as to how this could be done easily.

[Clanky]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Should we assume that the "Baton Twirlers" are distorting the facts somewhat when they say :

 

“Their own consultation survey showed most licence holders don’t agree with the planned surcharge", but they’ve chosen to ignore their own data.

 

Maybe they missed out a bit and meant to say "The response to the consultation,by Continuous Cruisers, was unanimously against the surcharge, however, the other 80% of boaters who paid for their moorings were all in favour"

I have a mooring which I pay for and I’m certainly not in favour. To me, it is a typical divide and conquer tactic and sets people fighting amongst themselves, which is typical of how society is these days, up yours Jack, I’m alright.

[Lady M]

I, too, wasn't in favour, partly due to the potential administrative complexities.   

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, Lady M said:

I, too, wasn't in favour, partly due to the potential administrative complexities.   

 

What additional complexities are there ?

 

You already declare, either 'a home mooring' or a 'no home mooring'

 

The fees are listed by length for each 'type' (declaration).

 

"It's not rocket science" !

 

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Should we assume that the "Baton Twirlers" are distorting the facts somewhat when they say :

 

“Their own consultation survey showed most licence holders don’t agree with the planned surcharge", but they’ve chosen to ignore their own data.

 

Maybe they missed out a bit and meant to say "The response to the consultation,by Continuous Cruisers, was unanimously against the surcharge, however, the other 80% of boaters who paid for their moorings were all in favour"

all rather similar to your distorting of numbers/stats/figures in your personal crusade to bring down the CRT,

 

 

 

[IanD]

2 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

I think it's a typo and is meant to say Raving Boaters.

 

 

I found another typo.  Presumably: "NBTA member Gerry Coleman, a constant cruisier who moors at Middlewich" should read "NBTA member Gerry Coleman, a constant cruisier who sometimes moors at Middlewich". 😉

Or perhaps more accurately "NBTA member Gerry Coleman, a constant moorer who moors at Middlewich"...

 

Oh dear I forgot, there's no such thing as a CM is there? Maybe "constant moaner" then?

[Lady M]

23 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

What additional complexities are there ?

 

You already declare, either 'a home mooring' or a 'no home mooring'

 

The fees are listed by length for each 'type' (declaration).

 

"It's not rocket science" !

 

 

 

Gold licences, ghost moorings, temporary including winter moorings and possibly having or moving to/from a mooring off CRT waters are the main issues that I considered.  Also, the more complex price list will tend to cause extra admin work.

 

[MtB]

1 minute ago, Lady M said:

 

Gold licences, ghost moorings, temporary including winter moorings and possibly having or moving to/from a mooring off CRT waters are the main issues that I considered.  Also, the more complex price list will tend to cause extra admin work.

 

 

A small price to pay for the extra £100m a year of income CRT needs.

 

Or will this 5% surcharge still fall slightly short?

 

 

[Lady M]

My point is 'how much of the 5% will be left after the extra admin costs?'

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, Lady M said:

 

Gold licences, ghost moorings, temporary including winter moorings and possibly having or moving to/from a mooring off CRT waters are the main issues that I considered.  Also, the more complex price list will tend to cause extra admin work.

 

What extra admin work? Right now you tell CART how long your boat is and they tell you what your mooring fee is depending on this. Then there are surcharges for things like width and discounts for things like historic/electric boats and buttys. Since you already tell CART whether you have a home mooring or not, what extra admin is there?

 

4 minutes ago, Lady M said:

My point is 'how much of the 5% will be left after the extra admin costs?'

What costs? (see above)

 

You already enter all the information about your boat (or CART do) when you apply for or renew a license, and the software (or the person on the phone running the software) says what your license fee is. Since it already knows whether you're a CCer or a home moorer, as far as I can see there is zero "extra admin costs".

 

There are other valid reasons for objecting to the CC surcharge, but this isn't one of them.

Edited November 24, 2023 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

3 minutes ago, Lady M said:

My point is 'how much of the 5% will be left after the extra admin costs?'

I’m not so sure there will be any extra admin costs of any note,

until a proportion realise they can no longer afford a boat license or simply take umbrage and stop paying,

and then CRT will need to cover the costs of chasing them up, 

there has been talk of protest by refusing to buy a license until the surcharge is removed,

[magnetman]

22 minutes ago, IanD said:

 Since you already tell CART whether you have a home mooring or not, what extra admin is there?

 

 

 

Surely if there is a financial incentive to have a mooring then moorings will be invented by some people as there will always be people looking for loopholes. I have a mooring in a creek for £300 per annum. I can provide a receipt for it. 

 

How can the CRT keep on top of that? Just take the word of the person declaring where their mooring is ? Check things randomly? 

Have a list of CRT approved moorings? 

 

Has this been thought through? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The definition of what having a mooring means is going to need to be published. 

 

Of course on the other hand it is entirely likely this is the initial stage and will prove not to work and things will change fairly quickly to make having a legitimate and provable mooring where the boat is kept obligatory. 

 

 

 

Edited November 24, 2023 by magnetman
edit to remove mild sex references

[Lady M]

This is one of the points I was trying to make.  Another relates to temporary including winter moorings.  When a boatowner takes a mooring for one or more months, surely they should not have to pay the CC surcharge during this time.  As regards boat measurements, in my experience most people do not know for sure what their boat's dimensions are.  Also, it is not unknown for boat dimensions to be deliberately under-declared.

[Machpoint005]

There seem to be quite a few Kevin the Teenagers around.

 

"It's so unfair!"

 

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

12 minutes ago, Lady M said:

Another relates to temporary including winter moorings.  When a boatowner takes a mooring for one or more months, surely they should not have to pay the CC surcharge during this time

 

By that (weird) way of thinking, having paid for a 12 month mooring, I should have had a rebate on my licence fees for the 6-7 months per annum when it was on its mooring and not using any of C&RTs facilities.

 

Can I backdate it for the 40 years I have been on BW/C&RT waters ?

Edited November 24, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[Lady M]

This would have been a more workable approach.

[Captain Pegg]

18 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

By that (weird) way of thinking, having paid for a 12 month mooring, I should have had a rebate on my licence fees for the 6-7 months per annum when it was on its mooring and not using any of C&RTs facilities.

 

Can I backdate it for the 40 years I have been on BW/C&RT waters ?

I don’t think it’s a weird way of thinking at all. I believe it’s the way the system will work for folk like me that do not have a home mooring as such but make regular use of paid moorings that are either CRT controlled (such as a winter mooring) or in non-CRT controlled marinas.

 

The logic being that your ‘rebate’ for being tied up in a marina has already been applied at source.

Edited November 24, 2023 by Captain Pegg

[Tracy D'arth]

1 hour ago, Lady M said:

My point is 'how much of the 5% will be left after the extra admin costs?'

But the admin and cost of policing  are totally due to CC boaters who potentially break the rules and overstay. If there were no CC boaters they would not need checkers!