Wiltshire Voices: Live-aboard boaters.

[Caprifool]

Found a video that you might find interesting.

 

Edited January 31, 2013 by Caprifool

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Found a video that you might find interesting.

 

Found an email from Sally Ash that is also interesting.

 

I can't really understand why CaRT attempted to interfere.

Edited January 31, 2013 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Chris Pink]

Found an email from Sally Ash that is also interesting.

 

I can't really understand why CaRT attempted to interfere.

 

Outrageous.

[Wanted]

if the content of a film expressing personal beliefs causes Sally Ash so much concern why doesn't she make her own bloody film?

I can only surmise that she either wants to cause factions or she is so blind to reality that she can't see a golden opportunity to effect change when it's sat right in front of her.

 

Shame

[jenlyn]

if the content of a film expressing personal beliefs causes Sally Ash so much concern why doesn't she make her own bloody film?

I can only surmise that she either wants to cause factions or she is so blind to reality that she can't see a golden opportunity to effect change when it's sat right in front of her.

 

Shame

Absolutely, 100%.

[Jo_]

Or we could do what Ms Ash doesn't want done - namely to publicise/share it as widely as possible.

[nicknorman]

Regardless of the content of the film (and its about squatters of course) if I were a Wilts council tax payer, I would be pretty peed off seeing my money squandered in this way. What about the low income land-based residents who struggle to pay their council tax?

[jenlyn]

Regardless of the content of the film (and its about squatters of course) if I were a Wilts council tax payer, I would be pretty peed off seeing my money squandered in this way. What about the low income land-based residents who struggle to pay their council tax?

You obviously don't know the background information that brought the film about. So your judge and jury stance is irrelevant.

[RLWP]

You obviously don't know the background information that brought the film about. So your judge and jury stance is irrelevant.

 

Could you explain the background please?

 

Richard

[Wanted]

Regardless of how the law is upheld or ignored the bottom line is a solution needs to be found that takes into account human beings. Fighting with those human beings will only ever make that solution harder to find.

 

I think the boaters have clearly taken the first step towards that solution and I hope that CRT can try and match it without being so risk averse that they don't choke on their own red tape.

[Chris Pink]

if the content of a film expressing personal beliefs causes Sally Ash so much concern why doesn't she make her own bloody film?

I can only surmise that she either wants to cause factions or she is so blind to reality that she can't see a golden opportunity to effect change when it's sat right in front of her.

 

Shame

 

One of the interesting things I noticed this time around is that all the statistics were from surveys performed by the community.

 

These were undertaken when BW started wading in with their 'these people are a problem' propaganda. To ascertain the real statistics of liveaboards.

 

So, if BW identify a problem why do they not have the research to back up their assertions? They just make unsubstantiated statements, much like the ill-informed of this forum, and expect it to be so.

[jenlyn]

Could you explain the background please?

 

Richard

No, I am presently busy with other things. The information regarding the film is on the Internet for anyone to look at.

[Chris Pink]

Regardless of the content of the film (and its about squatters of course) if I were a Wilts council tax payer, I would be pretty peed off seeing my money squandered in this way. What about the low income land-based residents who struggle to pay their council tax?

 

I would suggest you examine your own services use 'footprint' before making unsubstantiated (again) statements about people of whom you know nothing.

[nicknorman]

You obviously don't know the background information that brought the film about. So your judge and jury stance is irrelevant.

Correct, the same as many other people lacking a vested interest or a penchant for anarchism who will view it. Nothing wrong with producing a video to make your case (albeit a 1-sided one), but not at the expense of the struggling general public.

[RLWP]

No, I am presently busy with other things. The information regarding the film is on the Internet for anyone to look at.

 

Fair enough. As I can't be arsed to work out what the story is about, and don't want to watch the videos, I'll give this thread a miss

 

Richard

[nicknorman]

I would suggest you examine your own services use 'footprint' before making unsubstantiated (again) statements about people of whom you know nothing.

See my previous post. It will not only be me forming that conclusion - pretty much everyone else without a vested interest. They want to go public, they can expect views from a public not totally familiar with their take on the context.

 

Or are you saying "all hail the CMers - they who must not be questioned. Lets bow down to worship their braveness!" etc. you get the gist!

 

And by the way, as a band g council tax payer with no kids to educate, I think I make more than my fair share of contribution compared to services use.

Edited January 31, 2013 by nicknorman

[jenlyn]

Correct, the same as many other people lacking a vested interest or a penchant for anarchism who will view it. Nothing wrong with producing a video to make your case (albeit a 1-sided one), but not at the expense of the struggling general public.

The council (elected by the public) backed the film.

 

Fair enough. As I can't be arsed to work out what the story is about, and don't want to watch the videos, I'll give this thread a miss

 

Richard

It's actually a good little vid Richard. Ok, it's obviously one sided, but it's worth a watch.

[nicknorman]

The council (elected by the public) backed the film.

 

 

Obviously, but that is my point, another example of misuse of public money - though of course that is just the tip of the iceberg.

[jenlyn]

Obviously, but that is my point, another example of misuse of public money - though of course that is just the tip of the iceberg.

All the icebergs are melting, that's worrying.

[nicknorman]

All the icebergs are melting, that's worrying.

I thought you were too busy to give even a brief explanation of the context?

[alan_fincher]

Regardless of the content of the film (and its about squatters of course) if I were a Wilts council tax payer, I would be pretty peed off seeing my money squandered in this way. What about the low income land-based residents who struggle to pay their council tax?

My take on the film was that it was largely about the type of boat owners that have been discussed on countless threads on here in recent months, (and which will no doubt continue to be!)

 

They are probably nearly all "legal" in terms of being fully paid up with a CRT licence, but many of them are almost certainly on CRT's radar for non compliance on their interpretation of the rules for boats with no home mooring,("non compliant continuous cruisers", as CRT now choose to label them).

 

Without reopening the possible right and wrongs of what they are doing, do you consider all people in this situation to be "squatters"? It seems to me an odd use of the term, giving that these people are living in something they own, and paying for a licence to float it in the canal. The fact that they might not in CRT's view be changing often enough which bit of canal it is in, hardly makes them "squatters" in any normally understood use of the word, does it?

 

As an aside though, for a bit of balance, (and no doubt to place myself also firmly in the firing line!...)

 

I know Panda Smith, (in the film), has at least one strong supporter on here, but I do genuinely believe that the actions that have been taken in court by Nick Brown and Panda Smith under the banner of the NBTA are doing nothing at all to further the case of live-aboard boaters in that area, and will ultimately probably be doing more harm than good. OK its a personal view, and I know people will tell me I don't know the situation on the ground on the Western K&A, but I actually feel very strongly that the way that the NBTA have been going about things, however strongly they personally believe it, is not "a good thing", except perhaps for CRT, who I suspect could hardly believe their good fortune when that last court case was brought.

 

Incoming!......

Edited January 31, 2013 by alan_fincher

[jenlyn]

I thought you were too busy to give even a brief explanation of the context?

You've worried me about the icebergs, I lost my train of thought, sorry.

[Chris Pink]

See my previous post. It will not only be me forming that conclusion - pretty much everyone else without a vested interest. They want to go public, they can expect views from a public not totally familiar with their take on the context.

 

Or are you saying "all hail the CMers - they who must not be questioned. Lets bow down to worship their braveness!" etc. you get the gist!

 

And by the way, as a band g council tax payer with no kids to educate, I think I make more than my fair share of contribution compared to services use.

 

You, like dear sweet Sally, make statements with absolutely nothing to back them up except your own prejudice.

 

You have no idea of the nett services footprint of the people in the film compared to yours.

 

People with low impact lifestyles tend to make very small demands of your begrudged community(clue) charge - just my unsubstantiated view - though I have done a lot more information gathering than you.

 

 

 

They are probably nearly all "legal" in terms of being fully paid up with a CRT licence, but many of them are almost certainly on CRT's radar for non compliance on their interpretation of the rules for boats with no home mooring,("non compliant continuous cruisers", as CRT now choose to label them).

 

As happens, only one of the boaters in the film wears the pink triangle of the NCCC unless of course you subscribe to Vaughn Welsh's figures.

[nicknorman]

You, like dear sweet Sally, make statements with absolutely nothing to back them up except your own prejudice.

 

You have no idea of the nett services footprint of the people in the film compared to yours.

 

People with low impact lifestyles tend to make very small demands of your begrudged community(clue) charge - just my unsubstantiated view - though I have done a lot more information gathering than you.

You can bet they are quite happy to visit the local GP / hospital when they are feeling a bit crook, and the NHS is the highest fund-consuming public body we have. Anyway, my point was that they are putting this video out to the general public, they can expect a response based on the same lack of familiarity, or more so, than I have.

[Chris Pink]

Fair enough. As I can't be arsed to work out what the story is about, and don't want to watch the videos, I'll give this thread a miss

 

Richard

 

There's none happier than a closed mind.