Roving boaters

[Arthur Marshall]

15 minutes ago, Peanut said:

 

.

 

As Tacit mentioned above, the licence fee paid to CRT to navigate is the same for all. The fee paid to CRT by the marina is for their business being connected to the system. This is a cost to the marina, from which you benefit. It is not an additional contribution paid by you to CRT.

 

Those with a Home Mooring, and those without, have been paying the same for their licence. Now due to the distribution of boaters, where those with a Home Mooring outnumber those without, CRT are asking those without a mooring to pay more than those with one. This seems unfair. If the licence fee is too low for one, it is too low for all, and the licence fee should be put up for all. Those with a Home Mooring appear to be seeking an advantage over those without, and CRT are obliging.

 

On this basis, a 25% surcharge is very unfair.

The error in the first para is in assuming we all moor in marinas. Many don't. We moor against the edge of the cut, just like continuous cruisers, the only difference being we stay in the same place (rather like a lot of continuous cruisers). Like a marina moorer, we pay a wodge to our landlord. Unlike the marina moorer, who pays to CRT an amount included in his rent, we pay direct to CRT. This IS an additional contribution to CRT. I really can't believe that some still don't accept this. But both types of moorers pay more than what their landlord would charge because CRT want a slice.

But the effect on the canal of an online moorer, whichever side they glue themselves to, is exactly the same (except that only the offside lot pays to CRT). And, judging by the number of CCers who rabbit on about moving as much as ten miles a fortnight (except in winter) , there really isn't much difference between them. I probably do more than that.

However, you are quite right that the licence fee is too low. It should be doubled and the EOG and charge to marinas scrapped. That would be fair on everyone, and we'd all pay the same to CRT, just like we did when I started this lark. If we wanted a mooring, we'd pay the landlord, same as now.

[IanD]

29 minutes ago, Mrs Bearwood Boster said:

Trying to be funny or clever...? Not funny,not clever.

I've only got one thing to say. Panini's... 😉

Edited November 24, 2023 by IanD

[Mrs Bearwood Boster]

24 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Meant for me 😳

 

 

Nope 😁

[TheBiscuits]

1 hour ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

my grammar is shit

 

Don't say that, she's lovely! 🤣

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

4 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

You are focussing on CCers, but what about 'wide-boats' they ( I ) have been paying C&RT premium prices for both licences and moorings for several years, I don't recall any CCers or NBers saying that was / is unfair.

No one makes a fuss until they are affected.

fictitious,

many CCers and NBers have said it was unfair to charge fat boats more,

don’t forget some CCers have fat boats 

I’ve always said it’s unfair and many more have. 
 

again, 

you make it up ,

 

dream on

[magnetman]

Charging money for mooring anywhere on CRT property is the obvious solution to the funding problem. 

 

Everybodies got to moor somewhere. 

 

Song?

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

here’s a classic,

 

great song,

odd but great video

[Captain Pegg]

51 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

I'd be interested in your interpretation of the following (extract of the 1983 Act) of the Act  :

 

...Notwithstanding anything in the Act of 1971 or the Act
of 1974 or in any other enactment relating to the Board or their
inland waterways, the Board may register pleasure boats and
houseboats under the Act of 1971 for such periods and on payment
of such charges as they may from time to time determine:

 

Can you see anything in it that doesn't say BW (now C&RT) can impose whatever registration (licence)

charges they wish, and vary them from time to time and, they do not have to refer to Parliament for approval.

 

You are focussing on CCers, but what about 'wide-boats' they ( I ) have been paying C&RT premium prices for both licences and moorings for several years, I don't recall any CCers or NBers saying that was / is unfair.

No one makes a fuss until they are affected.

 

Do you really think that Parliament will put time aside for discussions on a non-governmental (supposedly independent) Charity, or that any of todays Politicians are going to worry about 5000 boaters paying 5% or 6% more for their licence than 25,000 other boaters. Their jobs are at stake and there will be a General Election next year. Getting votes from 5000 (across the whole of the country) Itinerant boaters is not worth the trouble, they are looking for actions and policies that will give each MP 10,000's (or more votes) lower taxes, promises of better health, better Policing, less potholes, these are things that the electorate want so will be what the MPs offer.

 

 

I'm sure that with your position within Quangos you are aware that laws remain in force until they are repealed or replaced, (with specific text saying that the new Act replaces the previous Act) Neither actions have occured with regards to the 1983 Act.

Laws 100s of years old are still being referred to and used to make rulings on todays court cases.

 

An example wich is oft quoted in relation to C&RTs powers is

 

Attorney-General v. Great Eastern Railway Co. (1880) 5 App.Cas. 473, Lord Blackburn said, at p. 481: 'where there is an Act of Parliament creating a corporation for a particular purpose, and giving it powers for that particular purpose, what it does not expressly or impliedly authorise is to be taken to be prohibited; ...'

 

 

This was cited with approval by the same House in the 1991 judgment in McCarthy & Stone v Richmond LBC, with all 5 Law Lords in unanimous agreement on the point.

 

 

 

 

The application of law always requires an understanding of the context and purpose of the legislation. That's why it is administered by qualified professionals and not just by people that can read.

 

CRT's powers are enshrined in statute and it is their role to determine the charges due by parties that wish to use the waterways. That is what is set out in law but it doesn't mean that it applies entirely in isolation and they have carte blanche to do as they choose. The quoted passage doesn't preclude that they have to justify their decisions to 'Government' but that doesn't mean Parliament. It will be a bunch of civil servants whose role it is to regulate CRT.

 

Edited November 24, 2023 by Captain Pegg

[frangar]

Just charge all those without a home mooring between £2k & £8k to moor on the towpath depending on the region they would like to stay in as many so called CC’er don’t seem to want to actually move….CRT would get the funds they need and the the CM brigade would be happy they didn’t have to move. 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

2 minutes ago, frangar said:

Just charge all those without a home mooring between £2k & £8k to moor on the towpath depending on the region they would like to stay in as many so called CC’er don’t seem to want to actually move….CRT would get the funds they need and the the CM brigade would be happy they didn’t have to move. 

I’ll save you the trouble and get me own plane to Rwanda 

you Twat 

[Alan de Enfield]

7 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:

The quoted passage doesn't preclude that they have to justify their decisions to 'Government' but that doesn't mean Parliament. It will be a bunch of civil servants whose role it is to regulate CRT.

 

But, since the Government 'sold off' C&RT what civil servants are there responsible for regulating C&RT ?

 

The only department with any contact with C&RT is DEFRA who administer the grant and ensure that C&RTs KPIs are achieved.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

 

 

[frangar]

7 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

I’ll save you the trouble and get me own plane to Rwanda 

you Twat 

I’ll wave you goodbye….you won’t be missed….care to actually say why you don’t like my idea? 
 

I’m more than happy to keep trading personal insults if you want….just let me know. 

[Captain Pegg]

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

But, since the Government 'sold off' C&RT what civil servants are there responsible for regulating C&RT ?

 

The only department with any contact with C&RT is DEFRA who administer the grant and ensure that C&RTs KPIs are achieved.

 

Who do you think 'owns' CRT?

 

Doesn't your second sentence likely answer the question as to who regulates CRT?

 

They may have a (supposedly) independent regualator as happens in the rail industry although I don't who that would be should it be the case.

Edited November 24, 2023 by Captain Pegg

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

1 minute ago, frangar said:

I’ll wave you goodbye….you won’t be missed….care to actually say why you don’t like my idea? 
 

I’m more than happy to keep trading personal insults if you want….just let me know. 

does it need stating why I don’t like your idea?

your idea is to charge me up to £8000 to tie to a towpath I already pay a licence to moor to?

ciao 

[frangar]

4 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

does it need stating why I don’t like your idea?

your idea is to charge me up to £8000 to tie to a towpath I already pay a licence to moor to?

ciao 

Why shouldn’t you pay extra? It would allow you to remain bolted to one place. It’s what most CM types seem to want especially in places like London.
 

I’m guessing you just want a boat as you think it’s a cheap way of living then? 
 

Oh and just to clear up any confusion I’ve been a liveaboard boater for over 30 years now…and I’ve paid for a mooring when I need to be in one place…it’s really not tricky 

Edited November 24, 2023 by frangar

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, frangar said:

I’ll wave you goodbye….you won’t be missed….care to actually say why you don’t like my idea? 
 

I’m more than happy to keep trading personal insults if you want….just let me know. 

 

He would be missed a lot more than if you bogged off to Africa.

 

All you seem to do these days is jump into threads to insult people. Oh and act out the usual 'big man' routine.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Just now, frangar said:

Why shouldn’t you pay extra? It would allow you to remain bolted to one place. It’s what most CM types seem to want especially in places like London.
 

I’m guessing you just want a boat as you think it’s a cheap way of living then? 

Why would I want to be bolted in one place?

 

guess all you like,

im getting really fked off with the guessing and assumptions,

 

What is a CM type?

 

what Type are you?

Here’s a deal frangar,

when we pass, as I’m sure we will,

introduce yourself, call me over,

then we can have a talk about your views on Rwanda,

me boat name is clearly visible

[Alan de Enfield]

25 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:

They may have a (supposedly) independent regualator as happens in the rail industry although I don't who that would be should it be the case.

 

C&RT are a limited company and all the assets of the Government owned BW were transferred to the limited company. The over seeing authority for the C&RT Board are the Charity Trustees, (Nothing to do the Parliament or the Civil Service)

 

If you have a look on the C&RT website all of the 2012 documents regarding the formation of C&RT, the Transfer of assets and the role of the Trustees are available.

 

The Board of Trustees :

 

Board of Trustees | Canal & River Trust (canalrivertrust.org.uk)

 

Beneath the Trustees is the Council who are the legal company.

 

 

The Council is made up of up to 50 members and includes a mix of elected and independently nominated individuals together with the six Regional Advisory Board chairs, who are ex officio members.

Council members are the legal company members of the Canal & River Trust. They have responsibilities granted them by the Articles. Council members reflect the wide appeal of the waterways - from boating and angling through to walking and conservation. The Council is chaired by the chair of the Trust Board, David Orr CBE.

The Council is responsible for the appointment of trustees. It debates important points of principle to provide guidance and perspective from different stakeholders, suggesting issues of concern for the Trustees to pursue, and acts as a sounding board for the Trustees in relation to the development of proposals and strategy.

                                                   

Edited November 24, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[frangar]

13 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 

He would be missed a lot more than if you bogged off to Africa.

 

All you seem to do these days is jump into threads to insult people. Oh and act out the usual 'big man' routine.

So the fact I was called a twat by someone is Ok then?? One isn’t allowed to reply to being insulted? 
 

14 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Why would I want to be bolted in one place?

 

guess all you like,

im getting really fked off with the guessing and assumptions,

 

What is a CM type?

 

what Type are you?

Here’s a deal frangar,

when we pass, as I’m sure we will,

introduce yourself, call me over,

then we can have a talk about your views on Rwanda,

me boat name is clearly visible

I shall look forward to a face to face discussion any time you like. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, frangar said:

So the fact I was called a twat by someone is Ok then?? One isn’t allowed to reply to being insulted? 

 

Well you see the problem here is the fact that you deserve it. It's a single word, made in response to a massive assumption that you made.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

21 minutes ago, frangar said:

 

Oh and just to clear up any confusion I’ve been a liveaboard boater for over 30 years now…and I’ve paid for a mooring when I need to be in one place…it’s really not tricky 

30 yrs means nothing,

if you ain’t learnt anything,

If you can’t side with a live aboard, 

 

and as it happens I pay for moorings when I need, 

turns out I’ll have to be using them more than I want,

but makes no odds,

I see the colour of your flag,

 

 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, frangar said:

I shall look forward to a face to face discussion any time you like. 

 

 In order to facilitate that you might want to let him know the name of your boat which some of us on here can remember but for some reason vanished from your profile a while ago.

 

I won't post it here as there was probably a good reason for that.

[Peanut]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The error in the first para is in assuming we all moor in marinas. Many don't. We moor against the edge of the cut, just like continuous cruisers, the only difference being we stay in the same place (rather like a lot of continuous cruisers). Like a marina moorer, we pay a wodge to our landlord. Unlike the marina moorer, who pays to CRT an amount included in his rent, we pay direct to CRT. This IS an additional contribution to CRT. I really can't believe that some still don't accept this. But both types of moorers pay more than what their landlord would charge because CRT want a slice.

But the effect on the canal of an online moorer, whichever side they glue themselves to, is exactly the same (except that only the offside lot pays to CRT). And, judging by the number of CCers who rabbit on about moving as much as ten miles a fortnight (except in winter) , there really isn't much difference between them. I probably do more than that.

However, you are quite right that the licence fee is too low. It should be doubled and the EOG and charge to marinas scrapped. That would be fair on everyone, and we'd all pay the same to CRT, just like we did when I started this lark. If we wanted a mooring, we'd pay the landlord, same as now.

Arthur, the error in your first paragraph is that you believe that what I said doesn't apply to those who chose to more on the canal side.

I live on my boat and pay round £4,000 per annum for the privilege. I know that it is far easier for me to do so than to navigate the canals, having to move at least every two weeks.  It may be tipping with rain, or the towpath is icy, or I can't find anywhere where I would like to moor. The list goes on, every inconvenience, the cassette is full, I need food, or fuel, whatever, I have got to move, and to go out when it is most inconvenient.

 You pay for the privilege to moor up and not move, the payment you make is for that, not for navigation. Your boat licence is to permit you to put your boat on the canal and to navigate.

CRT, are perfectly entitled to make a charge for this convenience, which is what you pay for. You are entitled to complain about the amount you pay, or to suggest an alternative that might be fairer all round. I wouldn't disagree with that, or even that others seem to get away with it. But, you pay for what you get, convenience, I wouldn't swap to be a continuous cruiser because of that.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

2 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 

 In order to facilitate that you might want to let him know the name of your boat which some of us on here can remember but for some reason vanished from your profile a while ago.

 

I won't post it here as there was probably a good reason for that.

Chances are we’ve passed and he’s said nowt,

some folk are like that,