The Vine Prog Today, Friday

[Bee]

Just out of interest. is there an official position on actually living on your boat?, We used to just get a mooring - any old towpath mooring and then that was home. the worry was of course that the boat was then legit but we were not because we were living on. if that is still the case then people who think that they can buy a boat and just start living on it need to be told. I have to say that if having a CC licence allows you to live on your boat then moving the thing from time to time is really not too onerous.

[Midnight]

So 14 days was chosen so the boater "would be clear in their mind as to the point at which he would begin not to be regarded by British Waterways as using the boat bona fide for navigation.”

 

Its unfortunate in the extreme that the frequency of these 14 day stops seems not to have been even considered.

 

Or perhaps the interval between them might be a better way of putting it.

 

I'm sure from the interlude quoted that Mr Dodd imagined a cruise might be punctuated occasionally by the odd 14 day stop, not consist of a string of 14 day stops punctuated by an hour of cruising once a fortnight.

 

Which suggests to me that CRT are on the right lines in their approach to enforcement. Good post MTB greenie from me.

[thebfg]

Why was he "made to look a fool" when there is no stipulation in any legislation that specifies this, as you well know?

 

Everyone here might know, but how many radio 2 listeners do, they were all sat at home thinking that

 

"this bloke wants them to move a certain distance but wont tell them what the distance is, how is that fair. its like the police saying they will throw you in prison for speeding but then not tell you what the definition of speeding is"

 

they will not know about acts and stuff.

[Arthur Marshall]

Just out of interest. is there an official position on actually living on your boat?, We used to just get a mooring - any old towpath mooring and then that was home. the worry was of course that the boat was then legit but we were not because we were living on. if that is still the case then people who think that they can buy a boat and just start living on it need to be told. I have to say that if having a CC licence allows you to live on your boat then moving the thing from time to time is really not too onerous.

No problem with living on if you're moving about - that's why you don't have to have a home mooring. I think it's trickier on a towpath mooring, which is where I used to be. The council may want tax off you if it's a registered residential, but as far as I know none of the people living on at my last farm mooring either paid it or had any problems with CRT,nor did we back on the Shroppie. If the mooring owner doesn't mind, why is it any business of CRT? Youvve got a licence and permit, and as far as I'm aware there's nothing in the t&cs to say you can't sleep on the thing.

[Athy]

Like they used to before they where chased up about being licenced so then they thought hey where legit now lets move into civilization.Of course not all of them had no licence .

I wasn't suggesting that they were unlicensed, no.

 

Everyone here might know, but how many radio 2 listeners do, they were all sat at home thinking that

 

"this bloke wants them to move a certain distance but wont tell them what the distance is, how is that fair. its like the police saying they will throw you in prison for speeding but then not tell you what the definition of speeding is"

 

they will not know about acts and stuff.

Yes, that's absolutely what I meant. The poor sod was thrust forward as a spokesman but wasn't properly briefed on what he should say, apart from "Er, I don't know", so he was made to look foolish.

[RLWP]

I wasn't suggesting that they were unlicensed, no.

Yes, that's absolutely what I meant. The poor sod was thrust forward as a spokesman but wasn't properly briefed on what he should say, apart from "Er, I don't know", so he was made to look foolish.

Except that isn't what he said

 

Richard

[Athy]

Except that isn't what he said

 

Richard

Not in as many words, no, I did not record the programme so I can't quote verbatim, but that was the sense of his remarks.

[Richard10002]

Not in as many words, no, I did not record the programme so I can't quote verbatim, but that was the sense of his remarks.

Unfortunately the law makes it almost impossible to answer the question,other than in the negative. If he had given an answer he would have been on a hiding to nothing, because it would have opened another door for the protesters to cry foul.

[RLWP]

Not in as many words, no, I did not record the programme so I can't quote verbatim, but that was the sense of his remarks.

 

Did we hear the same item? Matthew Symonds (yes, the Git man) is the strategy and engagement manager for boating. He wasn't hug out to dry, he was very careful in what he said. In addition, he seemed to know exactly who the boater on the other line was and what he was likely to be asked

 

Richard

Edited May 3, 2016 by RLWP

[Athy]

 

Did we hear the same item?

Yes.

 

he was very careful in what he said.

That does tend to happen when one doesn't know the answer.

[RLWP]

Yes.

That does tend to happen when one doesn't know the answer.

 

I'm sorry - he knows exactly what the answer is and gave it. He said 'you know I can't answer that question' when asked 'what distance?'. That is the correct, legal answer - if he had said any number the NBTA would have run off wavign it in the air shouting he was making up law

 

That apparently simple piece on the BBC has an entirely different complexion if you know who was taking part and what their agendas are

 

Richard

[Athy]

 

I'm sorry - he knows exactly what the answer is and gave it. He said 'you know I can't answer that question' when asked 'what distance?'.

Thus, as I mentioned earlier, making himself look a fool in the eyes of the listeners (now there's a mixed metaphor for you).

Quod erat demonstrandum.

[RLWP]

Thus, as I mentioned earlier, making himself look a fool in the eyes of the listeners (now there's a mixed metaphor for you).

Quod erat demonstrandum.

 

I'll leave you to it Mike, as I cannot know what impression he made to an uniformed listener - I am not one and won't presume to know what they may think

 

Richard

[Athy]

 

I'll leave you to it Mike, as I cannot know what impression he made to an uniformed listener - I am not one

 

Richard

Nor me - I was wearing civvies at the time.

[Tam & Di]

So 14 days was chosen so the boater "would be clear in their mind as to the point at which he would begin not to be regarded by British Waterways as using the boat bona fide for navigation.”

 

Its unfortunate in the extreme that the frequency of these 14 day stops seems not to have been even considered.

 

Or perhaps the interval between them might be a better way of putting it.

 

I'm sure from the interlude quoted that Mr Dodd imagined a cruise might be punctuated occasionally by the odd 14 day stop, not consist of a string of 14 day stops punctuated by an hour of cruising once a fortnight.

 

I think this is spot on. It is difficult to understand how this pattern of movement can be regarded as a boat being used in good faith for navigation purposes. It is being used "in good faith" as somewhere to live - the navigation is not done in good faith, and is only to make the minimal attempt of seeming to comply with requirements. I'm sure that if there were no pressure then few of the people concerned would move at all, and it would be interesting to know how many decide after having been moored for just a couple of days at one spot to move on just for the joy of cruising rather than sticking it out for the full 14 days.

 

Edit to satisfy BMC's semantic problems - but the comment and question still holds good.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Tam & Di

[Graham Davis]

Thus, as I mentioned earlier, making himself look a fool in the eyes of the listeners (now there's a mixed metaphor for you).

Quod erat demonstrandum.

 

He gave the only correct answer that is available, as has now been pointed out by several of us here. Any other answer would have been foolish.

You cannot answer for what other people might have thought about it.

[BMC problems]

I'm sure that if there were no pressure then few of the people concerned would move at all, and it would be interesting to know how many decide after having been moored for just a couple of days at one spot to move on just for the joy of cruising rather than sticking it out for the full 14 days.

It seems a little strange to first answer the question and then ask it. Some may seem this as a reflection of prejudice.

[Athy]

 

He gave the only correct answer that is available,

Yes, and that made him look foolish, as I have already explained. CART did not emerge from that interview in a good light, and they have only themselves to blame.

 

Mind you, the bint who thought that the world owed her a mooring near her child(ren)'s school failed to cover herself in glory either.

[thebfg]

Having listened propery, He did seem to have his answers ready and knew what she would ask, She started off very well and then lost it completely .He came across as the rules do not let me tell you, whos rules, Their rules, that is unfair. Is what a lot of listeners would think.

 

Instead of saying the rules wont let me tell you, he should of used a different tem like the Act or legislation, If he had he would of come across as very good and she would of been totally stuffed, I thought the subsequent callers explained it better.

 

She said she followed the rules to the letter of the law, so why was she asking what that letter is?

 

His looking foolish is very relative to what the listener knew about the circumstances. I thought Jeremy failed at educating the audience I mean Why use London as an example when he could of at least found some prices for the relevant area, or would that of shown Jessie right up.

[Tam & Di]

It seems a little strange to first answer the question and then ask it. Some may seem this as a reflection of prejudice.

 

If you are telling me that my supposition is incorrect, and that many of the people concerned do move much more frequently than the 14 days I would be happy to hear it, though as they do keep on about distance I still cannot reconcile that with using their craft for bona fide navigation as it does smack of wishing to know the minimum they can get away with.

[Dave_P]

Finally got round to listening to this on iplayer. I really do feel for the boater with kids in school in B-o-A. She's set up a lifestyle which was 'unlawful' under the 1995 act but was previously tolerated. It's now no longer tolerated and she's stuck. She either jeopardizes her childrens' education or she gives up her home. It's not a choice I'd like to face. No wonder she's unhappy. I was annoyed by her repeatedly pointing her finger at the new 'new guidlines'. What new guidelines are these? Perhaps the ones we have which are softer than the old ones in that they no longer require covering a significant part of the network.

 

On the other hand, Mr Symmonds is just trying to apply the rules fairly. I imagine what he'd like to say is that if you're moving in a pattern in order to get your kids to school, then by definition, you're not bona fide navigating. Asking how far is enough is irrelevant.

 

As I said on another thread, communities of families with kids on boat who are cc'ing are a real rarity around the country. The K&A is an exception but is being treated as typical.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Dave_P

[MtB]

Mind you, the bint who thought that the world owed her a mooring near her child(ren)'s school failed to cover herself in glory either.

 

 

Yes its strange how people these days aeem to think having children is an automatic passport to favourable or special treatment.

 

I get calls from people with broken boilers suggesting I should give them priority over my other customers because they "have young children". Well no, I give priority to people who are ill or elderly. Young children are actually amongst the most hardy of the humans out there and can wait...!

[Dyertribe]

 

I'm sorry - he knows exactly what the answer is and gave it. He said 'you know I can't answer that question' when asked 'what distance?'. That is the correct, legal answer - if he had said any number the NBTA would have run off wavign it in the air shouting he was making up law

 

That apparently simple piece on the BBC has an entirely different complexion if you know who was taking part and what their agendas are

 

Richard

That's how I heard it too.

[Athy]

That's how I heard it too.

Yes, it's an utterly ludicrous situation.

 

CART bloke: "We require all CCers to move an acceptable distance".

Boater: "O.K., and what is that distance?"

CART bloke: "Oh ho ho ho, we can't tell you that because we don't know. But we'll let you know what isn't, later".

 

 

Imagine if it had been, for example, a government spokesman on Kylevine's programme, and he was being asked about unemployment.

Gov. Bod: "We have too many unemployed people in Britain".

KV: "Oh yes? How many are there?"

Gov. Bod: "Dunno. Even if I did know, I wouldn't tell you".

 

This would not be likely to win the respect of listeners or to show the spokesman in a good light. Rather, it would suggest that he hadn't a clue.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Athy

[Dyertribe]

She either jeopardizes her childrens' education or she gives up her home.

Oh, come off it!

Moving to another area and changing your children's school happens frequently to families for all sorts of reasons.

If this was the only competent school in the country I'm sure it would have made headlines by now!

Many people who work in Bath cannot afford to live there but Bath is a stone's throw from Bristol where accommodation to suit all levels of income is available.

If living on a boat is not compatible with family needs then, unfortunately that has to be faced by the family.

It is a fact of life that we can't all have what we want, we have to make choices, society does not and should not be made to fit in with every individuals whims and fancies.

 

edited to make sense!

Edited May 3, 2016 by Dyertribe