Canal and River Trust changes in Licence Terms and conditions

[jenlyn]

.I know you are unhappy about "independent" people representing boaters rights, for example through NAG or boating sub-groups.

I think you could have saved yourself several paragraphs there by simply sticking to the point you wanted to make in the first place, as above.

 

Which then gives me the opportunity to point out the rather "rough shod" way in which these groups are mustered together.

I don't really wish to go into detail at the moment, even though the weather is horrid outside, but anyone wishing to take an interest in for instance your own group "south east boating sub group", would I suspect question the strange attendees listed, and in some cases, their value as to the group title.

 

Then perhaps some would question how those groups were formed, how were the attendees chosen, and who by?

Then of course it gets rather murky, especially when the group is informed by Roger Hanbury that the discussions are to be secret, whilst John Best accosts another attendee about discussing the groups discussion with someone else outside of the group.

 

Hmmmmmm

Edited January 31, 2015 by jenlyn

[Tuscan]

However one thing that has now occurred, of course, is that such issues are once again largely discussed in meetings led by "the associations".I can of course see why CRT prefers this, as on the face of it those they are dealing with then represent a "constituency", so if CRT agree something in this way, they get a comfort feel that a sizable number of boat owners are being spoken for.But must of the associations are specialist to an individual small subset, (residential boaters or CC-ers), or not really specifically a "boating" organisation (IWA). Realistically the average non residential "leisure boater" with a home mooring, (the vast majority of us, of course), has only the option of one "general boater" focussed organisation, (NABO).I know you are unhappy about "independent" people representing boaters rights, for example through NAG or boating sub-groups.So if you are going to suggest that people get of their backsides, and engage CRT, rather than just posting on the Internet, how would you suggest that anybody who doesn't feel they naturally fit into any of the associations goes about having such involvement?

To be honest the answer is to engage at a level you feel comfortable with whether just on a forum , CRT read this and many Facebook pages, a local boating group or national organisation. National or local it's hard to divert them once their minds are set I was the one that asked that the T&C's be delayed so that the implications could be reviewed but was told in no uncertain terms that they had already been reviewed by NAG and they needed to launch immediately. NABO only agreed to the release of these notes if this was recorded.

[Higgs]

so your thesis is only the well off should be allowed to use the canal system?

 

well that's ok....for you....mind you're going to need very deep pockets when your licence fee has to cover 4,000 court cases.

 

 

I'm not well off, but I do try and plan the best way around that. Of those "4,000" cases, how many are relevant to hardship and how many are just pushing their luck and can't be bothered to follow 'reasonable' principles of consideration to all users; making up their own rules of convenience.

[frangar]

so your thesis is only the well off should be allowed to use the canal system?

well that's ok....for you....mind you're going to need very deep pockets when your licence fee has to cover 4,000 court cases.

If you abide by the rules then you will be fine...wether you are wealthy or not....the canals are not and never have been cheap housing or is that what you are proposing them becoming?

 

Cheers

 

Gareth

[Loafer]

Right. Everybody just obey the rules. They've been there a long time. The only big one that ever changed was the one ALLOWING you to CC.

 

What's so difficult? What does it matter how much money you have?

[alan_fincher]

 

I think you could have saved yourself several paragraphs there by simply sticking to the point you wanted to make in the first place.

No, actually that was not the main point I was trying to address, so apologies if the extra paragraphs have given the wrong impression.

 

What actually interests me more is that you gave this answer....

 

I can fully understand your comment though, given you were not in attendance, and can therefore only make assumptions.

Still, the main thing is of course, some make an effort to attend such things, and actively get involved, rather than sit at a keyboard and generally sound off.

Can you please explain exactly what you are suggesting Paul should be doing instead of "sitting on a keyboard and sounding off"?

Have there been any meetings which he,(or I) as an individual could have been aware of, and which he (or I) could have attended to discuss this stuff first hand with CRT. Is there an open consulation, that doesn't assume an outcome, to whih he (or I) can respond.

 

I'm not aware of any such opportunities - if I had of been, I would probably have taken them.

 

I'm also getting less and less clear about what rules CRT sets itself on any topic, where they seem to have a number of options around....

 

1) Have a consultation, (which is often loaded by already assuming the outcome)

2) Discuss it with a mix of some, (but generally not all), the associations

3) Go ahead and do it anyway.

 

This one gives the impression that there intention was largely (3) with a little bit of a sop to(2) just to make it a bit more palatable to some.

[jenlyn]

No, actually that was not the main point I was trying to address, so apologies if the extra paragraphs have given the wrong impression.What actually interests me more is that you gave this answer....Can you please explain exactly what you are suggesting Paul should be doing instead of "sitting on a keyboard and sounding off"?Have there been any meetings which he,(or I) as an individual could have been aware of, and which he (or I) could have attended to discuss this stuff first hand with CRT. Is there an open consulation, that doesn't assume an outcome, to whih he (or I) can respond.I'm not aware of any such opportunities - if I had of been, I would probably have taken them.I'm also getting less and less clear about what rules CRT sets itself on any topic, where they seem to have a number of options around....1) Have a consultation, (which is often loaded by already assuming the outcome)2) Discuss it with a mix of some, (but generally not all), the associations3) Go ahead and do it anyway.This one gives the impression that there intention was largely (3) with a little bit of a sop to(2) just to make it a bit more palatable to some.

Paul "could" join an association, or form one.

 

I can understand your concerns about CRT being confused, and I'll go with option three.

[casper ghost]

I can't see it causing me too much hassle, I have a mooring but chug about away from it sometimes, until they decide a "place" is quite a long way apart so I have to move too much..

Casp'

[alan_fincher]

Paul "could" join an association, or form one.

Yes, assuming we don't all start our own association, that generally will only mean he can have influence by persuading those within the association that actually get a seat at table with CRT.

 

Fine if he can find a suitable association, and get his voice heard, but, as I have already said, for many of us we haven't actually got a choice about which one, because we largely don't qualify for any of the others.

 

I'm not association bashing here, by the way - I remain a member of NABO, and generally think they do a good job. But if even those in NABO that do the representing only get to hear about things at near zero notice, then I think we are all justified in having concerns.

 

My other concern is the large number of people saying "I'm fully sticking to the rules, so why should I give a toss about this?". They do not seem to have picked up on the fact that without them changing any current behaviour, CRT could change the rules to the point they start to ecome "non compliant". This stuff is potentially important to many of us, people - if you don't think so, try studying it again, rather than just keeping repeating "it doesn't affect me..... it doesn't affect me.....".

[jenlyn]

Yes, assuming we don't all start our own association, that generally will only mean he can have influence by persuading those within the association that actually get a seat at table with CRT.Fine if he can find a suitable association, and get his voice heard, but, as I have already said, for many of us we haven't actually got a choice about which one, because we largely don't qualify for any of the others.I'm not association bashing here, by the way - I remain a member of NABO, and generally think they do a good job. But if even those in NABO that do the representing only get to hear about things at near zero notice, then I think we are all justified in having concerns.My other concern is the large number of people saying "I'm fully sticking to the rules, so why should I give a toss about this?". They do not seem to have picked up on the fact that without them changing any current behaviour, CRT could change the rules to the point they start to ecome "non compliant". This stuff is potentially important to many of us, people - if you don't think so, try studying it again, rather than just keeping repeating "it doesn't affect me..... it doesn't affect me.....".

Totally agree with your last paragraph.

[casper ghost]

. They do not seem to have picked up on the fact that without them changing any current behaviour, CRT could change the rules to the point they start to become "non compliant". This stuff is potentially important to many of us, people - if you don't think so, try studying it again, rather than just keeping repeating "it doesn't affect me..... it doesn't affect me.....".

But, what can anyone do about it? apart from sell their boat and buy a motorhome...

Casp'

[kris88]

[quote name="alan_fincher" post=

 

My other concern is the large number of people saying "I'm fully sticking to the rules, so why should I give a toss about this?". They do not seem to have picked up on the fact that without them changing any current behaviour, CRT could change the rules to the point they start to ecome "non compliant". This stuff is potentially important to many of us, people - if you don't think so, try studying it again, rather than just keeping repeating "it doesn't affect me..... it doesn't affect me....."..

 

Very we'll put Alan it's this ostrich behaviour by a lot of boaters that is a worry to me.

These changes of tc's combined with a resurrection of the places map that disappeared so quickly last year. Would put a lot of boaters cruising patterns in danger of coming under enforcement.

Incidentally when the places map was available to view, I showed it to the two local data collectors. They where both up in arms, and couldn't believe it. Expressing concerns that it was un workable and the increased workload would be un manageble. That was the view from the coal face as it where.

Regards kris

 

We'll I messed up the quote but you get the idea

Edited January 31, 2015 by kris88

[casper ghost]

.

 

Very we'll put Alan it's this ostrich behaviour by a lot of boaters that is a worry to me.

But, again, what can anyone do?

Casp'

[kris88]

Anything is better than just sitting there going it doesn't effect me. I would say you are already doing something by making yourself aware of the changes.

Regards kris

Edited January 31, 2015 by kris88

[Loafer]

.

 

Very we'll put Alan it's this ostrich behaviour by a lot of boaters that is a worry to me.

These changes of tc's combined with a resurrection of the places map that disappeared so quickly last year. Would put a lot of boaters cruising patterns in danger of coming under enforcement.

Incidentally when the places map was available to view, I showed it to the two local data collectors. They where both up in arms, and couldn't believe it. Expressing concerns that it was un workable and the increased workload would be un manageble. That was the view from the coal face as it where.

Regards kris

 

We'll I messed up the quote but you get the idea

 

I'm struggling to see what's changed. Can anyone post a picture of this 'places' map? What happened to 'neighbourhoods'? I've also heard 'parishes' mentioned, but never seen it in the T&Cs.

 

It doesn't affect me, because I move to another neighbourhood every 14 days. Well, I certainly do most of the year and haven't appeared on the radar. I don't have a home mooring because I don't need one, because I move a lot. If I couldn't move, I'd have to get a mooring, wouldn't I.

 

What is CRT going to do to make MY cruising unreasonable? I just don't see the same problems that others do.

 

Who is affected by these so-called changes?

Edited January 31, 2015 by Loafer

[casper ghost]

Anything is better than just sitting there going it doesn't effect me. I would say you are already doing something by making yourself aware of the changes.

Regards kris

I don't see being aware of the changes helps, so we know, but can do nothing about it, other than accept them or fall fowl of them.. So we all moan but seems no one has any clout to stop the Trust doing what they want, expect the odd few who risk a lot going to court.

Casp'

 

I'm struggling to see what's changed. Can anyone post a picture of this 'places' map? What happened to 'neighbourhoods'? I've also heard 'parishes' mentioned, but never seen it in the T&Cs.

 

It doesn't affect me, because I move to another neighbourhood every 14 days. Well, I certainly do most of the year and haven't appeared on the radar. I don't have a home mooring because I don't need one, because I move a lot. If I couldn't move, I'd have to get a mooring, wouldn't I.

 

What is CRT going to do to make MY cruising unreasonable? I just don't see the same problems that others do.

 

Who is affected by these so-called changes?

Imagine if the rules were enforced by a private security firm, who obviously want money, so your not being on the radar will soon become costly..

Casp'

[kris88]

The first step is to educate yourself about a situation, then take action. The action you take is up to you. But as you say if it doesn't affect you, then don't worry. Personally I have concerns over the direction that CRT are taking the waterways.

Regards kris

[Loafer]

I don't see being aware of the changes helps, so we know, but can do nothing about it, other than accept them or fall fowl of them.. So we all moan but seems no one has any clout to stop the Trust doing what they want, expect the odd few who risk a lot going to court.

Casp'

Imagine if the rules were enforced by a private security firm, who obviously want money, so your not being on the radar will soon become costly..

Casp'

 

No it won't. I'd just comply, because I signed saying I would. (I'm an extremely 'lightweight' offender, during my average 700 miles a year cruising)

The first step is to educate yourself about a situation, then take action. The action you take is up to you. But as you say if it doesn't affect you, then don't worry. Personally I have concerns over the direction that CRT are taking the waterways.

Regards kris

 

Kris, I just HAVE to ask again. What's changed? In what direction are CRT taking the waterways?

[casper ghost]

 

No it won't. I'd just comply, because I signed saying I would. (I'm an extremely 'lightweight' offender, during my average 700 miles a year cruising)

Fine, so you would change your current behaviour to comply with any new rules. I guess we all would, whether we wanted to.

Casp'

[kris88]

Personally I'd prefere it if the extra money that is going to be spent on enforcement. Was spent on extra maintenance instead.

But as you say it doesn't affect you, so don't worry.

Regards kris

[Mike Todd]

I cannot see what is required in the circumstance that a licenced boat(er) changes home mooring other that at the precise moment of buying a new licence at, say, the year end. Taken literally, it seems that one has to surrender the existing licence and then apply for a new one.

 

Also, BWML (like other marinas) offer mooring permits for less than twelve months. Are these on strictly legit if associated with similar period licences?

[Alan de Enfield]

First they came for the CMers, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a CMer

Then they came for the low mileage CCers and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a low mileage CCer.

Then they came for the CCers, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a CCer

Then they came for me (a home-moorer) —and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

Apologies to Pastor Niemoler

[Peter Cruiser]

Paul "could" join an association, or form one.

I can understand your concerns about CRT being confused, and I'll go with option three.

Could Paul also run it without an elected committee and debatable membership. It could be a one man band association and CRT would be none the wiser, Paul could just say he chairs an association representing boaters. As CRT seem not to take much notice of the associations bar NABO, l can why some boater prefer to represent theirselves entirely.

[Loafer]

First they came for the CMers, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a CMer

Then they came for the low mileage CCers and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a low mileage CCer.

Then they came for the CCers, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a CCer

Then they came for me (a home-moorer) —and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

Apologies to Pastor Niemoler

 

What did 'they' actually do Alan, in order to 'come for' the above list? I can only see a more vigorous application of existing conditions.

 

Indeed, I also saw a very honourable intent, by BW in '95, to be much more accommodating than previously. Towards those who previously didn't comply, by not having a home mooring, that is. That was nice of them, wasn't it?

[Alf Roberts]

no. they weren't. they asked for a set of laws, Parliament said no and forced then to change them. everything they have done since, and these terms are the latest thing, is to try and subvert the will of parliament. they get away with it simply because people invest authority in their behaviour.

 

there was no requirement, before 1995, to have a home mooring.