Cavalcade and the NBTA

[haggis]

I have just read on FB that the NBTA are having a stand at Cavalcade and they are looking for people to hand out their leaflets.

I am extremely disappointed that the IWA  have allowed NBTA to have a stand. Especially as the aim of this years event it to publicise the fact that C&RT need more money.

Why, oh why, are they allowing people who actually campaign to deprive C &RT of money to have a stand and publicise their aims? 

[Arthur Marshall]

I suppose if someone wants to pay for a stand, they can do what they like with it. Part of being a vaguely free country.

[nbfiresprite]

They may shut up shop early, if enough people tell them what they think of their freeloading extremism and their dream of a Socialist Utopia where everything is provide free by the state. 

[Allan(nb Albert)]

1 hour ago, haggis said:

I have just read on FB that the NBTA are having a stand at Cavalcade and they are looking for people to hand out their leaflets.

I am extremely disappointed that the IWA  have allowed NBTA to have a stand. Especially as the aim of this years event it to publicise the fact that C&RT need more money.

Why, oh why, are they allowing people who actually campaign to deprive C &RT of money to have a stand and publicise their aims? 

The IWA position is very similar to NBTA.
 

Quote

We do not support the proposal to raise licence fees for continuous cruisers above those with home moorings. Firstly, as set out in The British Waterways Act 1995 there is only one Pleasure Boat Licence. Added to this, it is not possible to define continuous cruisers, which is the term used in the consultation. Some boaters never have what might be called a home mooring so continuously cruise all the time, others continuously cruise much of the year then tie up in a marina for the winter, some boaters have home moorings that are not on the CRT system and many other possible combinations.

The proposal to charge more for continuous cruisers would be an administrative nightmare, open to abuse and highly divisive within the boating community. Dividing the community like this is especially detrimental at this critical moment, when the whole waterways community needs to come together to show Government how our canals and rivers are valued and need to be adequately funded.

 

[anchored]

Why don't crt just raise fees for  cc's, and (just to keep the canals moving) offer a discount for any cc's who travel? Like, if we do +50 miles get a gold star for bona fide journeys?

[blackrose]

4 hours ago, haggis said:

Why, oh why, are they allowing people who actually campaign to deprive C &RT of money to have a stand and publicise their aims? 

 

Isn't it called freedom of expression? If CRT didn't allow them to have a stand someone else would be complaining about censorship, so CRT can't really win. 

 

Anyway why does it bother you so much? If NBTA can publish a coherent leaflet which makes a sound argument then they might gain some support, but if as you obviously believe their aims are nonsense, then people will be able to see that and dismiss them as an organisation. So having a stand and publicising their aims could just as easily work against them if those aims really are unreasonable.

[Midnight]

4 hours ago, anchored said:

Why don't crt just raise fees for  cc's, and (just to keep the canals moving) offer a discount for any cc's who travel? Like, if we do +50 miles get a gold star for bona fide journeys?

Why don't crt just raise fees for all

[Arthur Marshall]

8 hours ago, anchored said:

Why don't crt just raise fees for  cc's, and (just to keep the canals moving) offer a discount for any cc's who travel? Like, if we do +50 miles get a gold star for bona fide journeys?

You'd just get the same arguments. Like, you've done just over 50 miles. Is that to be taken seriously as being on a continuous cruise for an entire year? The obvious example of a genuine continuous cruise is a bloke on a hire boat for a fortnight. That's the average mileage CRT should expect... except it's self evidently nonsense.

The main flaw in your argument appears to be the acceptance that most CCers don't travel.  You're possibly right, but that's the problem.

3 hours ago, Midnight said:

Why don't crt just raise fees for all

They've tried that. Too many people still extracting the urine.

[haggis]

7 hours ago, blackrose said:

 

Isn't it called freedom of expression? If CRT didn't allow them to have a stand someone else would be complaining about censorship, so CRT can't really win. 

Cavalcade has nothing to do with C&RT. It is run by the IWA

 

Anyway why does it bother you so much?

It bothers me as I am a member of the IWA, an organisation which plays a major part in the campaign for C&RT to be given more money. NBTA , if all their notices calling folk to arms are to be believed, wants no price increases and better facilities. 

If NBTA can publish a coherent leaflet which makes a sound argument then they might gain some support, but if as you obviously believe their aims are nonsense, then people will be able to see that and dismiss them as an organisation. So having a stand and publicising their aims could just as easily work against them if those aims really are unreasonable.

Bearing in mind that their target audience will be folk who come to see the boats (as opposed to boaters) do you think it is helping the overcrowding boat situation in London for them to encourage others to buy boats ? I wouldn't normally see an increase in boat owners a problem but it is a different situation in London with all these folk who signed up to continuously cruise only moving to access services. 

 

[mrsmelly]

10 hours ago, anchored said:

Why don't crt just raise fees for  cc's, and (just to keep the canals moving) offer a discount for any cc's who travel? Like, if we do +50 miles get a gold star for bona fide journeys?

That doesn't fit with your username does it 🤪

[Tacet]

10 hours ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

The IWA position is very similar to NBTA.
 

 

Just because each group does not hold a diametrically opposed view on every possible issue doesn't support a generalised claim that their overall position is very similar.

[Alan de Enfield]

59 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

That doesn't fit with your username does it 🤪

 

It doesn't exactly fit with usage on the canals either !

 

Maybe PM'd (Permanently Moored) would fit the bill, or, if they were breasted up, they could be suffering from PMT (Permanently Moored Together)

[David Mack]

Can you imagine the hoohah NBTA would make if they were 'banned' from having a stall at Cavalcade? Better to have them inside the tent p*ssing out, than outside p*ssing in.

[IanD]

Just now, David Mack said:

Can you imagine the hoohah NBTA would make if they were 'banned' from having a stall at Cavalcade? Better to have them inside the tent p*ssing out, than outside p*ssing in.

Like Farridge in Belgium -- I'm sure he *wanted* to be banned, because he got *far* more publicity that way...

[frangar]

The baton twirlers seem to only post on one fb page now….they and one fanboy are so easy to

rile….its a pity I’m otherwise busy for cavalcade or id go to see what they have to say!!!

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

..such a shame you’re busy,

you could have stamped your little feet and waved your little fists and spluttered with spittle,

…damn shame,

[frangar]

7 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

..such a shame you’re busy,

you could have stamped your little feet and waved your little fists and spluttered with spittle,

…damn shame,

I could ask why they felt so self entitled….id be interested to hear their reasons….

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

go on their website and find out,

but I’d hazard a guess they oppose a surcharge for those without a home mooring,

and they have always said they don’t want the license to rise more than inflation,

it’s all pretty simple,

and surprisingly they have always accepted the 14 day rule, 

…but have raised objections to it too for particular reasons,

having kids in school on the K&A is an obvious one,

the BIG argument has long been about the distance to travel, place to place or whatever,

a distance that CRT can’t really put a number on, for whatever reason, 

 

[frangar]

2 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

go on their website and find out,

but I’d hazard a guess they oppose a surcharge for those without a home mooring,

and they have always said they don’t want the license to rise more than inflation,

it’s all pretty simple,

and surprisingly they have always accepted the 14 day rule, 

…but have raised objections to it too for particular reasons,

having kids in school on the K&A is an obvious one,

the BIG argument has long been about the distance to travel, place to place or whatever,

a distance that CRT can’t really put a number on, for whatever reason, 

 

So if you have kids in school you need a permanent mooring…it’s really quite simple. The Baton twirlers seem to think the world owes them. 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Well yeah, seems simple,

but what if there’s no residential moorings available?

 

 

[Paul C]

4 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Well yeah, seems simple,

but what if there’s no residential moorings available?

 

 

They can’t break the law just because of a lack of moorings in their particular chosen area.

[Alan de Enfield]

7 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Well yeah, seems simple,

but what if there’s no residential moorings available?

 

 

 

Then the 'twirlers' complain to an MP that parents are being discriminated against, so, 'long story short', MP tells C&RT to change the guidelines, C&RT change the 'rules' for movement of boaters with school age children.

 

Now, boaters without children are being disciminated against.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Paul C said:

They can’t break the law just because of a lack of moorings in their particular chosen area.

 

 

Then change the law !

(as above)

Edited April 17 by Alan de Enfield

[frangar]

5 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Well yeah, seems simple,

but what if there’s no residential moorings available?

 

 

How about they pay say £8-10k for a towpath mooring in london. CRT get the cash they need. They get a mooring. After all they are all for the love of the cut…not trying to have others subside their lifestyle or anything 

[Peanut]

9 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Well yeah, seems simple,

but what if there’s no residential moorings available?

 

 

Sorry, I have every sympathy with your plight, but like everyone else, you have to make other arrangements, not just break the rules.

Beaten to it.

Edited April 17 by Peanut

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Just now, frangar said:

How about they pay say £8-10k for a towpath mooring in london. CRT get the cash they need. They get a mooring. After all they are all for the love of the cut…not trying to have others subside their lifestyle or anything 

if it were an option I think there’d be plenty of takers,

2 minutes ago, Peanut said:

Sorry, I have every sympathy with your plight, but like everyone else, you have to make other arrangements, not just break the rules. (;

Not my plight matey,

I don’t want no kids