More C&RT Dishonesty?

[Arthur Marshall]

56 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

I’m still waiting for someone to explain how charging anyone more for a license will discourage those who  continuously moor from staying in the same spot. 
Or why it’s thought those who continuously moor have bought on the surcharge for those without a home mooring. 
🤷‍♀️

or have I misunderstood?

It won't. I think CRT just realised that the vast majority of those registered as CC were taking the mick and decided to penalise them, and that those that were being unfairly treated were so few they couldn't raise much of a fuss.

All other justifications were just made up to make it look better and avoid the accusations that CRT wasn't really addressing the root problem.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

1 minute ago, Momac said:

Its not for the boater to spot whether other boats are licensed or not.

C&RT say they  don't want boaters to act as  spotters as they have rangers who perform that task.

 

no, I know,

it was really a remark to IanD to find how he identifies them,

 

 

 

 

[IanD]

6 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

It won't. I think CRT just realised that the vast majority of those registered as CC were taking the mick and decided to penalise them, and that those that were being unfairly treated were so few they couldn't raise much of a fuss.

All other justifications were just made up to make it look better and avoid the accusations that CRT wasn't really addressing the root problem.

Which is...?

 

5 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

no, I know,

it was really a remark to IanD to find how he identifies them,

 

By seeing them regularly on the towpaths and moorings round here, obviously... 😉 

 

And the fact that whenever I'm out on the system boating, lots of visitor moorings nowadays seem to be chock-full of boats-- often with no sign of life -- in a way that they weren't before the rise in CMers over the last few years.

 

This could be either coincidence or for some other exotic reason, but Ockham's Razor suggests otherwise... 😉 

Edited April 17 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

Which is...?

 

By seeing them regularly on the towpaths round here, obviously... 😉 

it’s really a London thing then?

[IanD]

2 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

it’s really a London thing then?

No -- it *is* a London thing, but not *only* a London thing -- from my observations (and those of other people) it happens all over the system in "honeypot" locations.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

No -- it *is* a London thing, but not *only* a London thing -- from my observations (and those of other people) it happens all over the system in "honeypot" locations.

primarily a London thing then?

 

I tend to take the observations of other boaters, such as yourself,

with a pinch of salt,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[alias]

On 12/04/2024 at 10:31, Alan de Enfield said:

I only see these 'big' insurance increases on house insurance, (increased by about 33% over last year), even the car insurance has changed very little.

 

My car insurance renewal quote for May went up 36% over last year's.

[IanD]

18 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

primarily a London thing then?

 

I tend to take the observations of other boaters, such as yourself,

with a pinch of salt,

 

 

Definitely a London thing, but by no means only a London thing -- which is exactly what I said, so please don't try and twist my words 🙂 

 

But not your own, then?

 

Sounds to me like a case of "I don't believe things which disagree with my opinions" -- you seem to be trying pretty hard to defend CMers, and attack those who dislike the negative effects they're having on the canal system.

 

For the sake of disclosure of vested interests, are you by any chance an NBTA member/supporter? 😉 

Edited April 17 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Now then, you are the master of twisting words!

Always have been always will be 

 

what I am trying to say is I like to discover for myself rather than rely on here-say and the generally negative comments we get here,
hasd I listened to that I would never have ventured down here,

 

as it happens yes it is chocker block with boats but we could still fit a few more in,

 

You don’t need to ask me about the NBTA because I have made my opinions about them quite clear. 
And don’t bring every discussion down to an NBTA argument. As if that’s proof that your view is better than mine. 
 

I could give quite an accurate list of the few boats that don’t move in some of the Staffordshire area, and that’s a big area. 
It’s an insignificant number compared to the mass of non movers in London. 
So I would say yes it is primarily a London thing, and very much so. 
 

It’s London and London behaviour that needs addressing. 

 

I bet you had no trouble mooring around the Trent and Mersey or the Rochdale. 
Have you ever tried mooring in London? You might find it easier than you think. 

 

 

 

[Private Fraser]

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Did you read what I suggested ?

 

 

 

 

 

Not really I tend to skip through most of your crap 😂

[Alan de Enfield]

5 minutes ago, Private Fraser said:

Not really I tend to skip through most of your crap 😂

 

 

I'm very sorry if I use words beyond your comprehension level, maybe you could ask an adult to assist you ?

[IanD]

25 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Now then, you are the master of twisting words!

Always have been always will be 

 

what I am trying to say is I like to discover for myself rather than rely on here-say and the generally negative comments we get here,
hasd I listened to that I would never have ventured down here,

 

as it happens yes it is chocker block with boats but we could still fit a few more in,

 

You don’t need to ask me about the NBTA because I have made my opinions about them quite clear. 
And don’t bring every discussion down to an NBTA argument. As if that’s proof that your view is better than mine. 
 

I could give quite an accurate list of the few boats that don’t move in some of the Staffordshire area, and that’s a big area. 
It’s an insignificant number compared to the mass of non movers in London. 
So I would say yes it is primarily a London thing, and very much so. 
 

It’s London and London behaviour that needs addressing. 

 

I bet you had no trouble mooring around the Trent and Mersey or the Rochdale. 
Have you ever tried mooring in London? You might find it easier than you think. 

 

 

Thank you for telling me that I was just imagining there being few or no mooring spaces in the "honeypot" spots I've visited in the past few years (none in London!), I'm obviously incapable of seeing them -- must look harder in future... 😉 

 

P.S. Disclosure of interest -- are you a member/supporter of the NBTA? You may have said before, if so saying it again shouldn't be difficult 🙂 

Edited April 17 by IanD

[MtB]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

By seeing them regularly on the towpaths and moorings round here, obviously... 😉 

 

 

 

Same here. 

 

I live 100 yards from the canal and drive over the same canal bridge every day. The the 48hr VM visible from the bridge have been occupied by the same two widebeams for almost as long as I can remember. Certainly many months. The third space on the 48hr VM is also usually occupied by one boat or another and I'd say the average stay on that third space is typically about a month.

 

People who have the opportunity to observe the same bit of canal day in, day out for long periods are far better placed to spot CMing than boaters on a cruise. 

 

Edited April 17 by MtB
Spelling

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Same here. 

 

I live 100 yards from the canal and drive over the same canal bridge every day. The the 48hr VM visible from the bridge have been occupied by the same two widebeams for almost as long as I can remember. Certainly many months. The third space on the 48hr VM is also usually occupied by one boat or another and I'd say the average stay on that third space is typically about a month.

 

People who have the opportunity to observe the same bit of canal day in, day out for long periods are far better placed to spot CMing than boaters on a cruise. 

 

 

But according to a certain poster you and I (and others) can't possibly be right about this, it's only a problem in that there Lunnon... 😉 

 

(and anyway CMers and the NBTA are not to blame for any of this...)

Edited April 17 by IanD

[MtB]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

 

No, according to a certain poster you and I (and others) can't possibly be right about this, it's only a problem in that there Lunnon... 😉 

 

A CCer who never stays in one place for more than two weeks is by definition ill-equipped to observe and comment on the problem of long term VM-hogging. 

 

Unless of course they are actually CMing.

 

 

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

6 minutes ago, MtB said:

People who have the opportunity to observe the same bit of canal day in, day out for long periods are far better placed to spot CMing than boaters on a cruise. 

 But observing the same bit of canal every day is not a fair representation of the system as a whole. 
 

7 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

But according to a certain poster you and I (and others) can't possibly be right about this, it's only a problem in that there Lunnon... 😉 

 

(and anyway CMers and the NBTA are not to blame for any of this...)

I would also say, perhaps now you are able to boat outside of silly season you might get a different outlook again,

🤷‍♀️

 

[Mike Todd]

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Did you read what I suggested ?

 

 

If attempt to remove it was made  it would be destroyed - a bit like the security seals, and if it was destroyed then ............

 

 

 

The important test to apply to any such ideas is to consider the costs of issuing, enforcement and tracking. Midt will gobble up a large part if any realistic increased charges. 

 

[IanD]

1 minute ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

 But observing the same bit of canal every day is not a fair representation of the system as a whole. 

I would also say, perhaps now you are able to boat outside of silly season you might get a different outlook again,
🤷‍♀️

 

I doubt it -- depending how far outside the silly season you mean, of course, because CMers tend to be there all the year round. Towards the end of last October popular spots were still rammed with boats who didn't look like they were only there for a day or two, in a way that they weren't (say) ten years ago before the rise of the CMers.

 

P.S. Disclosure of interest -- are you a member/supporter of the NBTA? You may have said before, if so saying it again shouldn't be difficult -- unless you don't want to admit it on CWDF... 🙂 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

9 minutes ago, IanD said:

I doubt it -- depending how far outside the silly season you mean, of course, because CMers tend to be there all the year round. Towards the end of last October popular spots were still rammed with boats who didn't look like they were only there for a day or two, in a way that they weren't (say) ten years ago before the rise of the CMers.

 

P.S. Disclosure of interest -- are you a member/supporter of the NBTA? You may have said before, if so saying it again shouldn't be difficult -- unless you don't want to admit it on CWDF... 🙂 

If it has anything to do with anything;

I always admitted to supporting NBTA and making a monetary donation. 
And I also made it clear when I stopped supporting them. 
I may support them again, who knows. 

What you make of that then? It was obviously a loaded question to shoot me down with a smart answer. 
 

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

If it has anything to do with anything;

I always admitted to supporting NBTA and making a monetary donation. 
And I also made it clear when I stopped supporting them. 
I may support them again, who knows. 

What you make of that then? It was obviously a loaded question to shoot me down with a smart answer. 
 

 

No it wasn't. You repeatedly put forward views which appear to try and divert blame away from CMers and deny that they're a problem (or only in Lunnon) and attack those who say this is not true, and also attack posters who agree with CART that they should pay a license fee supplement -- or even a bigger one than the relatively small 25% (after 5 years) that CART have proposed.

 

These are exactly the views of the NBTA, and in any debate it's only fair that people disclose if they have any skin in the game, especially if they're appearing to put forward impartial views as "a concerned boater" (or whatever). Then at least anyone reading what they post can make an informed decision on whether to take what they say seriously or not... 😉 

 

It's like MPs voting against the tobacco ban bill without disclosing that they have received major benefits from the tobacco industry... 😞 

Edited April 17 by IanD

[Paul C]

I am surprised you would choose to dismiss others’ observations along their path, because it’s one of those things that’s impossible for one person alone to gather a wide view of.

 

You’d either have to accept their views or concede you don’t have an overall picture.

 

As I said before, what exactly is “the problem”?

Edited April 17 by Paul C

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

3 minutes ago, Paul C said:

I am surprised you would choose to dismiss others’ observations along their path, because it’s one of those things that’s impossible for one person alone to gather a wide view of.

 

You’d either have to accept their views or change needed you don’t have an overall picture.

 

As I said before, what exactly is “the problem”?

I agree, and I’m trying to grab an overall view, it’s all very difficult. 
And I do accept other views, I really do,

It’s simply hard work for me when the other views are so so negative..and sometimes damn right hateful and prejudiced. 

 

 

23 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

No it wasn't. You repeatedly put forward views which appear to try and divert blame away from CMers and deny that they're a problem (or only in Lunnon) and attack those who say this is not true, and also attack posters who agree with CART that they should pay a license fee supplement -- or even a bigger one than the relatively small 25% (after 5 years) that CART have proposed.

 

These are exactly the views of the NBTA, and in any debate it's only fair that people disclose if they have any skin in the game, especially if they're appearing to put forward impartial views as "a concerned boater" (or whatever). Then at least anyone reading what they post can make an informed decision on whether to take what they say seriously or not... 😉 

 

It's like MPs voting against the tobacco ban bill without disclosing that they have received major benefits from the tobacco industry... 😞 

you have not said anything constructive in that post,

 

of course I’m not going to support a surcharge on my license 😂😂 are you mad ?

..also you’re not addressing the argument anymore and have gone on the attack,

so I’ll leave you to it 

[IanD]

20 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

I agree, and I’m trying to grab an overall view, it’s all very difficult. 
And I do accept other views, I really do,

It’s simply hard work for me when the other views are so so negative..and sometimes damn right hateful and prejudiced. 

 

 

 

By that I assume you mean the views of boaters who think that CMers are bending/breaking the rules for their own benefit, regardless of the detrimental effect on others, and want to carry on paying as little as possible instead of a surcharge, and that the NBTA represents their views not the majority of boaters, and that they don't like this behaviour?

 

That's not hate or prejudice, it's facing up to the facts and logically resenting yet another selfish minority screwing things up for the majority 😞 

Edited April 17 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

8 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

By that I assume you mean the views of boaters who think that CMers are bending/breaking the rules for their own benefit, regardless of the detrimental effect on others, and want to carry on paying as little as possible instead of a surcharge, and that the NBTA represents their views not the majority of boaters, and that they don't like this behaviour?

 

That's not hate or prejudice, it's facing up to the facts and logically resenting yet another selfish minority screwing things up for the majority 😞 

no words like ‘parasitic’ aint hate speech are they,

just chuck them around at folk you know nowt about,

anyway it’s pointless now IanD, we’re not getting anywhere with this and I’m very likely to end up telling you to go forth,

 

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

12 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

By that I assume you mean the views of boaters who think that CMers are bending/breaking the rules for their own benefit, regardless of the detrimental effect on others, and want to carry on paying as little as possible instead of a surcharge, and that the NBTA represents their views not the majority of boaters, and that they don't like this behaviour?

 

That's not hate or prejudice, it's facing up to the facts and logically resenting yet another selfish minority screwing things up for the majority 😞 

My personal view of the NBTA is that I'm pretty sure they have a fair proportion of members who genuinely need their help and are trying to boat within the law. No doubt there are plenty of the alternatives, but that's true of any association. 

All the grief to do with non moving CCers, and most of the arguments, are due to the fact that CRT and the NBTA are trying to deal with symptoms, not causes, which are out of their control. And so there simply are no solutions, because nobody is looking at the root cause of the problems, nor does anyone have any intention of doing so. 

People need somewhere to live, and want to do it where they have work, family or friends. Until someone decides to sort that out, our little waterways problems aren't going to get solved. A few quid in CRTs coffers is possibly the best they can hope for.