Boaters rights Bill to get second reading.

[Alan de Enfield]

so many unanswered questions ......................

 

 

But the Conservative frontbencher said while his party backed Lady Bakewell's objective, he feared the Bill would hamper mooring operators' efforts to deal with boaters who break the rules.

'Where boaters fail to comply with licence conditions or mooring anchorage regulations, the relevant authorities must be able to take appropriate enforcement action,' he said.

'However, many of the provisions in this Bill would impede their ability to do so.

'The Bill also seeks to elevate a boat dweller's right to a secure home above many existing statutory responsibilities relating to the management of the waterways – in doing so, it risks creating considerable legal uncertainty.'

Lord Jamieson, who said his brother-in-law lived on a boat, added: 'If authorities are deprived of the ability to manage that resource effectively, there's a risk of congestion, tension between different users and unintended consequences for the very communities this Bill seeks to assist.'

 

The Bill also does not make changes to council or second home tax rules.

Lord Jamieson said: 'If, in effect, all boats have a right of residence, would they all be subject to council tax or second home tax? I don't have the answer but I think it's a question that needs answering.'

 

Housing minister Baroness Taylor of Stevenage said ministers were 'tackling insecurities across all housing sectors', including on the water.

She told peers: 'The Government does not consider that the proposed legislation would achieve its intended outcome.'

Lady Taylor also said, 'there is no regulatory requirement to prove identity, address or an NHS number' to access a GP appointment, with advice on the NHS website for patients who are turned away from surgeries.

She added the Government's opposition to the draft law was not based on a 'lack of respect' for Lady Bakewell's views but instead 'a lack of clarity on what this Bill is intending to achieve'.

She said 'with a fair wind, to use a boating expression', she would continue to discuss with Lady Bakewell how 'to make things better for boat dwellers'.

The Rights of Boat Dwellers Bill was one of four private members' bills which peers agreed to scrutinise further.

[Peanut]

It may be a contentious topic here, but here is an update to where it is at, a House of Lords briefing note, 9 July 26.

 

The bill will probably get nowhere as it is, be completely mangled, and run out of parliamentary time, but no doubt it will raise the visibility of boat dwellers in the corridors of power, and the problems they face.

 

Though it may fail, some changes may creep in, such as the way boaters addresses are treated by the authorities who insist of a registered address, a topic which keeps coming up on here.

 

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/LLN-2026-0040/LLN-2026-0040.pdf

 

Mods, feel free to merge with Allen's post, 20 min ago.

 

Edited July 18 by Peanut
merge post

[Peanut]

Sorry Allen, you beat me by 20 minutes. I was still reading it.

 

Mods, please feel free to merge my start with Allen's.

[mrsmelly]

What is it that some boaters find hard about living on a boat?? There are very few rules and they are a doddle to follow. Its got much easier over recent years anyway. The great beauty of living aboard has always been the easy, low profile way of life attainable. 

[MtB]

1 minute ago, mrsmelly said:

What is it that some boaters find hard about living on a boat?? There are very few rules and they are a doddle to follow. Its got much easier over recent years anyway. The great beauty of living aboard has always been the easy, low profile way of life attainable. 

 

It's "going boating" that a certain subsection of boaters are strenuously resisting.

 

I see from this new documentation its the baton twirlers who have been winding up Lady Wossname over all this so that's no great surprise legal CMing goes up from two weeks to six months. If the bill gets passed they will be entitled to remain stationary for 180 days at a stretch, and for any amount of time no matter how long "if reasonable under the circumstances". "My kid goes to that school over there for the next 12 years", anyone?

 

Also I notice the authors of the new document seem to assume all 35,000 CRT registered boats are liveaboards. Odd, that. 

 

 

 

 

 

[LadyG]

Some of the wording seemed strange.

I dont want six month moorings, the cmoors will take all the best moorings, and i will be left with the crumbs, unless of course I decide to moor up in the best places first! 

Edited July 18 by LadyG

[MtB]

Just now, LadyG said:

Some of the wording seemed strange.

I dont want six month moorings, the cmoors will take all the best moorings, and i will be left with the crumbs, unless of course I decide to moor up I the best places first!

 

One of the "unintended consequences" predicted will be an increase in canal pollution as the six-month CMers refuse to go to the pump-out for fear of LadyG nicking their space. So some of them will be tempted to pump out into the canal at night to avoid losing their prime mooring. 

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, LadyG said:

I dont want six month moorings,

 

It will be optional not compulsory.

 

 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

One of the "unintended consequences" predicted will be an increase in canal pollution as the six-month CMers refuse to go to the pump-out for fear of LadyG nicking their space. So some of them will be tempted to pump out into the canal at night to avoid losing their prime mooring. 

 

Maybe it will become one of the licence requirements that all boaters must have their DNA taken for future comparisons with excement samples.

Edited July 18 by Alan de Enfield

[MtB]

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It will be optional not compulsory.

 

But six month moorings for free will attract LOADS more liver boards onto the cut, I predict. 

 

Me included. I'll give up my CRT mooring and stay there anyway, registering it as my home in order to save the £3k a year on mooring fees. Ok I'll have to pay £1200 council tax but I'll still be up on the deal. 

 

Nobody else will copy me I don't suppose.....

 

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, MtB said:

 

But six month moorings for free will attract LOADS more liver boards onto the cut, I predict. 

 

Me included. I'll give up my CRT mooring and stay there anyway, registering it as my home in order to save the £3k a year on mooring fees. Ok I'll have to pay £1200 council tax but I'll still be up on the deal. 

 

Nobody else will copy me I don't suppose.....

 

 

 

 

Move a mile for the next 6 months.

[MtB]

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Move a mile for the next 6 months.

 

Nah, just through the lock should so it. 

 

Also, just the two week limit gets stretched to three months before CRT make the piss takers move on, the six month limit will take a year for CRT to even notice they should have moved. And they'll get six more months from that time onwards. 

 

(That nice Mr Ward must be kicking himself for peaking too soon!)

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, MtB said:

(That nice Mr Ward must be kicking himself for peaking too soon!)

 

Well he didn't do too badly for himself - dragging 2 weeks out to 10 years !

[MtB]

The kick in the nuts contained in all this, for all the live-aboards currently living quietly under the radar is Council Tax.

 

Council Tax keeps being mentioned in these papers and I think the net result of this bill is it will become generally recognised these boaters who live aboard an cruise around or live on leisure moorings are not being billed for Council Tax. And there will be calls for something to be done about it. 

[MtB]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Well he didn't do too badly for himself - dragging 2 weeks out to 10 years !

 

Well yes. Imagine what he could have done with six month permissible mooring periods!! 

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, MtB said:

The kick in the nuts contained in all this, for all the live-aboards currently living quietly under the radar is Council Tax.

 

Council Tax keeps being mentioned in these papers and I think the net result of this bill is it will become generally recognised these boaters who live aboard an cruise around or live on leisure moorings are not being billed for Council Tax. And there will be calls for something to be done about it. 

 

 

Quite rightly, and its all down to the Baton-Twirlers pushing too hard and 'rocking the boat' Now (probably) every boater will be £1500 worse off.

[MtB]

8 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Quite rightly, and its all down to the Baton-Twirlers pushing too hard and 'rocking the boat' Now (probably) every boater will be £1500 worse off.

 

 

Thinking about it for ten seconds more, its gonna present the piss takers with a dreadful conundrum:

 

Claim the new 180 days moor-for-free rights and instantly become liable for CT. 

 

Insist you don't live aboard to swerve the CT liability and you revert to 14 days then move on. I think I can guess which everyone will chose. 

 

So quite possibly this bill isn't going to do what they all think it will, after all. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mike Todd]

1 hour ago, MtB said:

The kick in the nuts contained in all this, for all the live-aboards currently living quietly under the radar is Council Tax.

 

Council Tax keeps being mentioned in these papers and I think the net result of this bill is it will become generally recognised these boaters who live aboard an cruise around or live on leisure moorings are not being billed for Council Tax. And there will be calls for something to be done about it. 

But they are being billed just not directly. 

[LadyG]

26 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

But they are being billed just not directly. 

Not clear what you mean?

I dont pay CT, but my c.c. licence does contribute to utilities I use viz. Water, rubbish, sewage. I am now also paying more for my licence, than those who have a home Mooring contract, even if I am on a marina berth. 

It was previously a simple system, and making it complex is not going to improve natters. I suspect those who currently game the system will continue to do so.... Those who find it unaffordable will give up.

Council Tax is levied according to house valuation, its far from perfect, but it pays for local services including education, environmental health etc. Much of the Local Authority income comes from Government, ie. paid for by the taxpayer.

Edited July 18 by LadyG

[MtB]

53 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

But they are being billed just not directly. 

 

Of course they are not. 

 

 

How much of my £3k a year mooring fee to CRT gets passed on to the local council? 

 

None I bet. 

 

 

[Peanut]

Of course, if someone were on a low income, they might be able to get help with their mooring cost, which could negate the increase cost of paying Council tax.

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

2 hours ago, MtB said:

The kick in the nuts contained in all this, for all the live-aboards currently living quietly under the radar is Council Tax.

 

Council Tax keeps being mentioned in these papers and I think the net result of this bill is it will become generally recognised these boaters who live aboard an cruise around or live on leisure moorings are not being billed for Council Tax. And there will be calls for something to be done about it. 

The only thing that could be done about it would be the equivalent of the poll tax, ie a charge on the person, not the property. And that didn't work out well.

So much simpler to have a home moorer licence and a liveaboard licence, none of this CC nonsense. Then the liveaboard licence would have an additional charge, equivalent to the average lowest band council tax rate, paid to the government and shared out among councils. Liveaboards would obviously have to follow the current CC rules.

That would also make sense for the CCers who dump boats for weeks on end and move them occasionally, as it would be the equivalent of CT on second homes.

Sorted.

[Jen-in-Wellies]

I've merged the two topics running on this subject.

Jen

[Bacchus]

9 hours ago, Peanut said:

Of course, if someone were on a low income, they might be able to get help with their mooring cost, which could negate the increase cost of paying Council tax.

 

 

It is my understanding that UC will cover the cost of a residential mooring and the licence in the same way that they cover rent, which is why I find it odd that so many people find the need to "squat". Perhaps the provision of suitable residential moorings is better direction. An acre of land would provide, what, 20 houses? but dig it down six feet and connect it to a water-way and it would provide moorings for so many boats? Surely cheaper to dig holes than build houses?

[Tony Brooks]

5 minutes ago, Bacchus said:

It is my understanding that UC will cover the cost of a residential mooring and the licence in the same way that they cover rent, which is why I find it odd that so many people find the need to "squat". Perhaps the provision of suitable residential moorings is better direction. An acre of land would provide, what, 20 houses? but dig it down six feet and connect it to a water-way and it would provide moorings for so many boats? Surely cheaper to dig holes than build houses?

 

Especially if the law was changed so provided residential moorings counted towards the house building targets councils are supposed to meet. Win-win, helps meet housing targets and produces a council tax and possibly business rates income stream.

[Tonka]

9 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The only thing that could be done about it would be the equivalent of the poll tax, ie a charge on the person, not the property. And that didn't work out well.

So much simpler to have a home moorer licence and a liveaboard licence, none of this CC nonsense. Then the liveaboard licence would have an additional charge, equivalent to the average lowest band council tax rate, paid to the government and shared out among councils. Liveaboards would obviously have to follow the current CC rules.

That would also make sense for the CCers who dump boats for weeks on end and move them occasionally, as it would be the equivalent of CT on second homes.

Sorted.

Well it is people that use council services and not the property or boat so poll tax is a fairer system