Moorings at 3 locks

[bigcol]

We're their now, and have Spoken to the manger Matt.

 

He remembered me from previous night, Mentioned that tomorrow we wont be staying for Sunday lunch

Because of the 2 day rule now.

 

He's told me boaters will be okay if they use the pub, before wyvern boats couldn't stop because of overstayers.

He's also told me their policing it on behalf of cart.

 

I also stated that some boats may want to stay for a few days, he said to come and see him, if they use the pub, he's more than happy if you stay longer.

 

Col and Wife sampling a doom bar

 

Col x hicup!!

 

And we're okay for Sunday lunch!

Edited September 6, 2014 by bigcol

[jenlyn]

We're their now, and have Spoken to the manger Matt.

He remembered me from previous night, Mentioned that tomorrow we wont be staying for Sunday lunch

Because of the 2 day rule now.

He's told me boaters will be okay if they use the pub, before wyvern boats couldn't stop because of overstayers.

He's also told me their policing it on behalf of cart.

I also stated that some boats may want to stay for a few days, he said to come and see him, if they use the pub, he's more than happy if you stay longer.

Col and Wife sampling a doom bar

Col x hicup!!

And we're okay for Sunday lunch!

Says it all really. Hope your reading this above Richard :-)

 

 

This link takes you to the minutes of a meeting with CRT and the associations in march this year.

As you will see, Richard Parry did make a statement at the meeting, which he has seemingly gone back on, or possibly may not know of the recent changes?

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ue019a1z5bddj34/2014-03-31%20Final%20Minutes%20-%20CRT%20Meeting%20with%20Assocs%20-%20re%20VMs.pdf?dl=0

Edited September 6, 2014 by jenlyn

[cotswoldsman]

We're their now, and have Spoken to the manger Matt.

 

He remembered me from previous night, Mentioned that tomorrow we wont be staying for Sunday lunch

Because of the 2 day rule now.

 

He's told me boaters will be okay if they use the pub, before wyvern boats couldn't stop because of overstayers.

He's also told me their policing it on behalf of cart.

 

I also stated that some boats may want to stay for a few days, he said to come and see him, if they use the pub, he's more than happy if you stay longer.

 

Col and Wife sampling a doom bar

 

Col x hicup!!

 

And we're okay for Sunday lunch!

I wonder when CRT are going to get to grips with what goes on. Seems every week I read somewhere that things are changed not because it is better for boaters but because deals are done with people of influence that now run our canals.

Maybe the Associations need to stop talking to CRT and tour the country speaking to the idiots that CRT appointed via the waterways partnerships to run the canals. I guess the enforcement officers pops into the pup to find out from Matt who to ticket and who not to ticket while he/she has a drinky poo

Edited September 6, 2014 by cotswoldsman

[matty40s]

 

He's told me boaters will be okay if they use the pub, before wyvern boats couldn't stop because of overstayers.

He's also told me their policing it on behalf of cart.

 

I also stated that some boats may want to stay for a few days, he said to come and see him, if they use the pub, he's more than happy if you stay longer.

 

 

 

They are policing it on behalf of CRT???????

So overstay notices on beermats, do they have the handheld data logging machines behind the bar??

So it's 48 hours unless the landlord of a pub says you are ok......

 

bloody hell, Tony Dunkerly hasn't got anything to worry about if this is the future of the Moorings guidelines and enforcement methods..

[Tonka]

Can we build more pubs in Milton Keynes and London. Then we get some visitor moorings

[jenlyn]

They are policing it on behalf of CRT???????

So overstay notices on beermats, do they have the handheld data logging machines behind the bar??

So it's 48 hours unless the landlord of a pub says you are ok......

 

bloody hell, Tony Dunkerly hasn't got anything to worry about if this is the future of the Moorings guidelines and enforcement methods..

The whole thing is becoming a nonsense. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

I think the associations need to actually meet Dan Rogerson and ask what the h#ll is going on.

Can we build more pubs in Milton Keynes and London. Then we get some visitor moorings

Best question if you cannot justify a statement?

[matty40s]

The whole thing is becoming a nonsense. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

I think the associations need to actually meet Dan Rogerson and ask what the h#ll is going on.

 

 

Dan Rogerson being the landlord of which pub..........??

[cotswoldsman]

 

They are policing it on behalf of CRT???????

So overstay notices on beermats, do they have the handheld data logging machines behind the bar??

So it's 48 hours unless the landlord of a pub says you are ok......

 

bloody hell, Tony Dunkerly hasn't got anything to worry about if this is the future of the Moorings guidelines and enforcement methods..

Maybe have enforcement officers running pubs and pub managers doing enforcement, hang on second part all ready happening

[jenlyn]

Dan Rogerson being the landlord of which pub..........??

Probably the "Dog and Duck".

[bigcol]

They are policing it on behalf of CRT???????

So overstay notices on beermats, do they have the handheld data logging machines behind the bar??

So it's 48 hours unless the landlord of a pub says you are ok......

 

bloody hell, Tony Dunkerly hasn't got anything to worry about if this is the future of the Moorings guidelines and enforcement methods..

We're back on the boat

 

Re the above that's what Matt the manager said exactly that! ( not the beer mat thing) but yes, also in front of the wife.

 

What I can't understand is don't think I've ever seen a wyvern boat staying here ?

Certainly not last or this time.

 

Col

Edited September 6, 2014 by bigcol

[jenlyn]

We're back on the boat

 

Re the above that's what Matt the manager said exactly that! ( not the beer mat thing) but yes, also in front of the wife.

 

What I can't understand is don't think I've ever seen a wyvern boat staying here ?

Certainly not last or this time.

 

Col

I've yet to see a wyvern boat stop there. I have an email though where James states wyvern boats account for 80% of the traffic of boats through Milton keynes.

[bigcol]

Stupid question, if I carry further south, is there stipulation of 2 days at the THE GLOBE

 

Thanks in advance

 

Col

Edited September 6, 2014 by bigcol

[cotswoldsman]

I am moored close to canal side pub and restaurant near Wigan I will pop in and tell them about the new deal available from CRT that can be arranged in conjunction with local waterways partnership.

[jenlyn]

Stupid question, if I carry further south, is there stipulatistating 2 days at the THE GLOBE

 

Thanks in advance

 

Col

James griffin has asked for 150 metres outside the globe to be made 48hrs. Hopefully, Alan will inform us if this is likely to go ahead.

 

One other thing, if you stay longer than the 48hrs, the only punishment CRT can dish out, is a letter stating you must move within 14 days.

Edited September 6, 2014 by jenlyn

[Stephen Sugg]

I hired a Wyvern in 1999 and we did stop there. I will be on another two weeks today, I won't be stopping there, it doesn't suit my plans.

[matty40s]

James griffin has asked for 150 metres outside the globe to be made 48hrs. Hopefully, Alan will inform us if this is likely to go ahead.

 

One other thing, if you stay longer than the 48hrs, the only punishment CRT can dish out, is a letter stating you must move within 14 days.

Perhaps the landlord will be issuing special "longer than 48hrs" window stickers which he gives to special customers..........and Wyvern boats.

[bigcol]

 

 

One other thing, if you stay longer than the 48hrs, the only punishment CRT can dish out, is a letter stating you must move within 14 days.

 

Used to be 14 days?

 

The signs says. ( 2 days free mooring )

 

As per photo, on main gallery

So looks like folks will be charged, doesn't say Restriction time limit.

 

So agree with other folks, who do you pay then?

And how much a day?

Or can't they force folks to pay?

 

Col

[matty40s]

Col, I have already told you, send me the cash and I will make sure it is well spent.

[alan_fincher]

The point is, (as far as I'm concerned anyway) that if we had known about this beforehand, a fight could have been put up to stop it. As it happens, you and the subgroup chose to keep it to yourselves. The fact that the chair and whoever else has decided that this should all be kept in house, does not stop you from being open. That's your choice.

 

 

I agree that had it been known about in advance, we could have tried to fight it.

 

Whether we would have been successful, I'm less sure, as a deal seems to have already been struck elsewhere, and then presented as going ahead.

 

I'm in the car at the moment, waiting for family,and need to go back through stuff to see exactly what happened, but my memory is currently this.....

 

1) It turned up out of the blue at the last subgroup meeting - never having been one of Jeff Whyatt's so called 22 priority sites.

 

2) It had not been proposed as going to happen in any previous meeting.

 

3) I registered my opposition, but nobody else supported me on this.

 

4) Hence it went ahead.

 

There was no possibility to seek outside views on it, because the proposal and the "going ahead" all happened at the same time.

 

As I say, that is all just from memory - if I check later, and find there was any advance notification, be assured I'll issue a full correction.

 

OK, I have now checked my facts, and I'm fully correct in my memory of what happened.

 

There was no notification before the SEWP Boaters Subgroup meeting on 14th July that they intended to introduce short stay moorings at Three Locks.

 

Checking further, even the agenda sent out just three days before didn't mention this site......

 

6. Visitor Mooring

- Update on Foxton, Stoke Bruerne & Thrupp

- Report on boat sightings from Berkhamsted, Batchworth, Marsworth, Banbury and Oxford, discussion and recommendations on next steps

- Report on boat sightings from Berkhamsted, Batchworth, Marsworth, Banbury and Oxford, discussion and recommendations on next steps

 

 

So there was nothing I could have forewarned anybody of, because I knew nothing of it before the start of the meeting, and by the end of the meeting it had appeared from the blue, and not been opposed by anybody but me. I don't believe it was a decision taken by the sub-group - it certainly came across as a done deal.

 

The only thing I accept I could have done was to publicise more widely what they intended to do, after I had failed to gain support to stop it, but had the meeting notes actually been correct, that should not have been necessary anyway, as the outcome should be recorded in them, and available for public consumption.

 

I had actually decided that I was likely to see Richard Parry a few days later, and I would raise it directly with him - which I did. If what I'm hearing about it since is correct, I'm disappointed Richard didn't come clean and tell me he had directly authorised it with no data that validated the need to do it.

 

James griffin has asked for 150 metres outside the globe to be made 48hrs. Hopefully, Alan will inform us if this is likely to go ahead.

 

If someone in CRT decides to go and strike further dodgy deals with landlords who have canal-side pubs, outside of any "due process", I am as unlikely to know it is happening until it is too late as you are, unfortunately.

 

I can only tell you things in advance of a decision, if someone actually thinks it is a good idea to tell us before the decision is already taken. In the case of Three Locks it seems the decision was already taken.

[cotswoldsman]

I am lost for words I can only come to 2 conclusions here based on what you have said

1. When Richard Parry said he was suspending changes to visitor mooring he only meant for the length of the meeting with the associations

2 The Boaters sub group is a waste of time

 

I am rapidly loosing faith in CRT they speak with forked tongue and it is back to the old days.

Edited September 6, 2014 by cotswoldsman

[jenlyn]

 

 

 

OK, I have now checked my facts, and I'm fully correct in my memory of what happened.

 

There was no notification before the SEWP Boaters Subgroup meeting on 14th July that they intended to introduce short stay moorings at Three Locks.

 

Checking further, even the agenda sent out just three days before didn't mention this site......

 

 

So there was nothing I could have forewarned anybody of, because I knew nothing of it before the start of the meeting, and by the end of the meeting it had appeared from the blue, and not been opposed by anybody but me. I don't believe it was a decision taken by the sub-group - it certainly came across as a done deal.

 

The only thing I accept I could have done was to publicise more widely what they intended to do, after I had failed to gain support to stop it, but had the meeting notes actually been correct, that should not have been necessary anyway, as the outcome should be recorded in them, and available for public consumption.

 

I had actually decided that I was likely to see Richard Parry a few days later, and I would raise it directly with him - which I did. If what I'm hearing about it since is correct, I'm disappointed Richard didn't come clean and tell me he had directly authorised it with no data that validated the need to do it.

 

 

If someone in CRT decides to go and strike further dodgy deals with landlords who have canal-side pubs, outside of any "due process", I am as unlikely to know it is happening until it is too late as you are, unfortunately.

 

I can only tell you things in advance of a decision, if someone actually thinks it is a good idea to tell us before the decision is already taken. In the case of Three Locks it seems the decision was already taken.

The question begs to be asked then, what role do you and the south east sub boating group actually have?

Especially as decisions are being made prior to discussion with the group.

Basically, in my mind, it's nothing more than a puppetry class.

 

I still find it bad form that even when you knew, you chose not to advise others. This leads me to question your position on the group as a boater representative.

[cotswoldsman]

CRT seem to be hell bent on upsetting boaters and making the boating experience as unpleasant as possible. I wonder why?

Edited September 6, 2014 by cotswoldsman

[alan_fincher]

Can I say that I am in favour of the new rules. When I was last at the Three locks 2 years ago at the bottom of the locks I could not find a vacant mooring and some of the boats were the same boats that were there 2 years before.

 

And this of course gives an idea of the problems we face when we let any boaters have a say in how such decisions are taken, even before you get to the points that John regularly raises about accountability, and how a "representative" engages boat owners as a whole.

 

People often say you can get nearly as many opinions as people you ask, so if someone involved in the decisions asks several people like you broadly in favour, and several people who are strongly against, how should then then decide to advise on the decision ?

 

I believe, for example, that surveys done about VMs have shown a lot of people are actually in favour of the £25 charge per day for overstaying, so it could be argued that if it can be proved that more boaters support this charge than oppose it, then all "boater representatives" (in whatever forum) should back it, because it is what the majority want.

 

But to do that, you would need to survey all boaters on every such issue, and have some confidence you have truly captured the overall mood from those who can be bothered to respond - clearly totally impractical to do on everything you might wish to know boater attitudes about.

 

So I would argue that it is often possible only to rely on the many discussions and debates you have already had on a topic, and try and take a balanced view as to what is reasonable. I have had lots of experience, (maybe far too much!) in the visitor mooring debate, and, (rightly or wrongly!), feel that the line I take in opposing anything not actually evidence based is a reasonable one. It will not please everybody, of course, nor can I expect it to.

 

A question though, already asked by others: If you genuinely believe that people are still moored in the same places after 2 years, when the rule is 14 days, why do you believe just changing 14 days to 2 days will change their behaviours?

[jenlyn]

At the first of Richard Parry's boater meetings held in birmingham, I was handed a leaflet with a heading "don't trust the trust". I laughed at it then. Wish I hadn't.

[Tuscan]

On 19 May this proposal was mentioned in an email I received from Richard Parry that it had been requested by the Landlord. In August within a wider document from CRT given at a meeting running through changes to Visitor Moorings (I cant cut and paste from the PDF) but the summary is that this was originally proposed to the SE Boaters sub group by one of the hire fleet members and subsequently the landlord had also made the request when Richard Parry had visited Stoke Hammond. The facts given were that 256 boats were spotted at Stoke Hammond between April - Oct 2013 and only 3 were reported as overstaying and there was not a significant problem but "anecdotally" the landlord said boaters were finding difficult to stop for a quick drink. "The South East Boaters group gave general support to the proposal" "We do not propose to monitor these arrangements with volunteer mooring rangers" but the Landlord has volunteered to monitor and contact the trust if necessary so that the trust can contact the boaters.

 

So this raises several issues I believe of governance not least

Why are visitor moorings being decided by the CEO presumeably over a drink when factual as opposed to anecdotal evidence suggests no change is needed.

Why is only the partnership and its sub group appointed by CRT being used to rubber stamp these decisions which effect all boaters

Why is a landlord based on the comments above being allowed to decided who should stay on a visitor mooring and for how long