BW vs Davies

[Grace and Favour]

Precisely put request, Dave - excellent stuff

[RichardN]

"London Boaters" have published the results of the their survey. If I remember right 57% have had one patrol notice or more. I followed a link to here but if you go here you get to an index of all their research, some of which is worth looking at and you can click throug to the same document. I seem to recall that Paul Davies made a similar FOI request about patrol notices ....

[sueb]

And this whole important discussion has been derailed and demolished! I shouldn't keep posting about this but I'm bloody annoyed that a really important subject has been rendered unnapproachable by incessant trolling.

I object to your comments which are libellous. I have only made a very few comments on this thread.

Sue

[Josher]

If anyone feels motivated to reply to EJ Vine, the link to the Telegraph letters page is Here

 

Calling the guardians of our canals to account

 

6:59AM BST 02 Jun 2011

 

SIR – Public outcry forced the Government to rethink proposals to remove the Forestry Commission from public accountability through Parliament. It is surprising there has not been a similar reaction to the proposals removing the whole inland waterway system, currently managed by British Waterways, from public accountability and putting it into the arms of a small group of trustees only accountable to the Charity Commission and Companies House.

 

The inland waterway system is a national treasure, brought back to life through the work of many volunteers. However, if the consultations which have taken place so far are anything to go by, there is cause for public concern.

 

One of the first areas on the system receiving attention is along the Lee and Stort valleys, from London to Hertford. Consultation with boat owners and those who live on the waterway has been totally inadequate. Owners were not notified until the proposals were beyond the stage when any meaningful input could be made.

 

It is becoming impossible for any cruising licence holder to afford to stay in the area: over-stay charges are as much as £44 a day. This forces them to cruise virtually continuously. The effect is to remove people who are sympathetic to the wildlife and the ecology of the system.

 

Fundamental questions of accountability need examination before this great national asset passes into the hands of a less accountable board of charitable trustees.

 

E.J. Vine

Church Langley, Essex

[Allan(nb Albert)]

It is public here

 

All FOIA requests are dependent on the way in which the requested information is held by the body that holds it, and all requests are subject to costs limits in terms of the effort required to redact the information provided.

 

IF BW hasn't actually joined the two datasets, the cost of doing so may allow them not to do so.

 

Well done!

 

However, you seem to be making excuses for BW not providing the information requested.

[Sir Nibble]

 

 

It is becoming impossible for any cruising licence holder to afford to stay in the area: over-stay charges are as much as £44 a day. This forces them to cruise virtually continuously.

Indeed. And?

[Gibbo]

Indeed. And?

 

I had the same thought. I wonder if there might be a connection with the term "Continuous cruiser"?

[mayalld]

Well done!

 

However, you seem to be making excuses for BW not providing the information requested.

 

No, I simply look at the issue, in terms of the fact that FOI is a limited tool that can only force an organisation to do certain things, and that it cannot always achieve what people want. In some cases, there may be something untoward, but in others, it simply reflects the fact that supplying the information requested imposes an unreasonable burden on an organisation.

 

It remains to be seen whether BW will supply the information requested or not, and if they don't what they will say about it.

[paulmorgan]

@Allan

 

hi Allan, finally managed to grab some quick time with the lawyer involved in the case and they are happy with the wording in the press release. It sets a precedent at that court level and within that level there are also different levels of judge: circuit and then district AIUI.

 

In future cases, judges in higher courts are not obligated to adopt the ruling, but if they disagree they will need to set where those points of difference occur and why. AIUI, there are few other cases that will come up shortly and so there is a possibility that some of the greyer areas may or may not get defined more precisely. Time will tell I suppose.

 

Anyway, I just wanted to follow up as I said I would.

 

Thanks for you patience.

 

paul

[Dominic M]

It is becoming impossible for any cruising licence holder to afford to stay in the area: over-stay charges are as much as £44 a day. This forces them to cruise virtually continuously. The effect is to remove people who are sympathetic to the wildlife and the ecology of the system.

Or they could pay for a mooring, of course.

[paddy r]

Or they could pay for a mooring, of course.

 

and pay like the rest of us,surely not

 

 

 

POPCORN