Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2018 19:55:42 GMT
It seems that his "issues" with itinerant boat dwellers comes from living near Walton on Thames. His letters sparking the DEFRA initiative were prompted by complaints from residents nearby Hurst Park, but the remit of the resultant ‘group’ extends nationally, and is focussed on moorings alongside public waterside available to all boaters. That there IS a tension between those wanting temporary visitor moorings and those who wish to appropriate public moorings for quasi-permanent residential use is undeniable. The fact that all relevant authorities seem intent only on working out avenues of control absent appropriate legislation is disturbing. Even those adopting the correct route to legitimate control of their moorings have gone way over the top in making even genuine visits impractical (e.g. Richmond’s one hour limits). I’m guessing you have a nice warm place to be?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2018 20:12:21 GMT
were prompted by complaints from residents nearby Hurst Park, Ah. I did wonder if it was Alastair who had pissed him off Eta I wonder if the LBRUT 1 hour time limits are practical really. I noticed boats have started to use the mooring just up from Teddington upper lock cut. Ham lands I think its called. I know this area as I lived near there as a teenager and used to come down in my dinghy to teddington regularly. It was available as a visitor mooring until sometime arounf 2000 then became a boat village then LBRUT eventually got a new byelaw and the boats moved away. I do wonder if they would take action against someone stopping there overnight. The point is its a handy way to be near the lock but avoid the Teddington lock cut mooring fee. Not that the lock keepers actually come and collect it...
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Nov 15, 2018 20:49:14 GMT
were prompted by complaints from residents nearby Hurst Park, Ah. I did wonder if it was Alastair who had pissed him off Eta I wonder if the LBRUT 1 hour time limits are practical really. I noticed boats have started to use the mooring just up from Teddington upper lock cut. Ham lands I think its called. I know this area as I lived near there as a teenager and used to come down in my dinghy to teddington regularly. It was available as a visitor mooring until sometime arounf 2000 then became a boat village then LBRUT eventually got a new byelaw and the boats moved away. I do wonder if they would take action against someone stopping there overnight. The point is its a handy way to be near the lock but avoid the Teddington lock cut mooring fee. Not that the lock keepers actually come and collect it... You guessed correctly. One hour limits do not give time to pop into town for lunch or a bit of shopping, and (if I recall correctly) the byelaws permit prosecution for a renewed offence each hour of overstay! They certainly took a swathe of actions to first clear the area once they had the new byelaws affirmed. I would not care to test their tolerance of overnight stays without written agreement beforehand. Be aware that the EA are - in reaction to the same irritant - enforcing for the first time byelaws regulating mooring in lock cuts, in very formal criminal prosecution proceedings.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Nov 15, 2018 20:50:41 GMT
His letters sparking the DEFRA initiative were prompted by complaints from residents nearby Hurst Park, but the remit of the resultant ‘group’ extends nationally, and is focussed on moorings alongside public waterside available to all boaters. That there IS a tension between those wanting temporary visitor moorings and those who wish to appropriate public moorings for quasi-permanent residential use is undeniable. The fact that all relevant authorities seem intent only on working out avenues of control absent appropriate legislation is disturbing. Even those adopting the correct route to legitimate control of their moorings have gone way over the top in making even genuine visits impractical (e.g. Richmond’s one hour limits). I’m guessing you have a nice warm place to be? ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2018 21:08:34 GMT
That's interesting about the lock cut thing. I have once or twice (thinking about it it was definitely only once and for one night only !) moored on the upper teddington lock moorings and noticed that there were some boats "who did not look like they were subject to mooring fees" so I'm not too surprised if EA are acting.
They (EA) seem to have been doing something further up river above Porthampton island where there has been a fairly rough mooring developing over the last few years with quite a few sunk boats.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2018 21:11:53 GMT
I’m guessing you have a nice warm place to be? ? I got the impression he was stirring and making comments about the future changes to boat dwelling which may occur if the young Raab gets the keys to no.10. Obviously a lot of people on boats also have houses so they do no need to be too worried. Other people have moorings. Etc etc. Or possibly it was some sort of comment about the unusually mild weather conditions.
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Nov 15, 2018 21:26:08 GMT
Bearing in mind the Brexiteer demographics, I don't think this proposed temporary deal will lead to rioting on the streets should it go through. Millions of the young voted out as well, and middle aged ex forces make good rioters! I have seen them on the streets of NI
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2018 22:06:22 GMT
I’m guessing you have a nice warm place to be? ? Yes, or no?
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Nov 15, 2018 22:15:18 GMT
I have lots of nice warm places to be; almost always have had, whether sleeping in the open, under streets or on boats, in this country and others, at all times of the year. I was confused as to the relevance of the question to my comments.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2018 23:22:41 GMT
I have lots of nice warm places to be; almost always have had, whether sleeping in the open, under streets or on boats, in this country and others, at all times of the year. I was confused as to the relevance of the question to my comments. As I am by the relevance of yours...
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Nov 16, 2018 0:08:21 GMT
I have lots of nice warm places to be; almost always have had, whether sleeping in the open, under streets or on boats, in this country and others, at all times of the year. I was confused as to the relevance of the question to my comments. As I am by the relevance of yours... Perhaps the fault is mine. To attempt clarification: my comments confirmed the origin of the MP’s concerns in the correspondence that helped initiate the assembly of authorities to address his concerns. I acknowledged the situation as was described in Coffey’s explanation of the group’s remit, but criticised what seems to be the approach hitherto taken by some of those authorities to a solution of the perceived problem. I concluded with the observation that even when authorities chose the correct legal path to attaining control, they tended to over-kill. You have not assisted me in understanding why that should prompt your query as to whether I had a nice warm place to stay. If your present admission of confusion is over the relevance of your question to my comments, then we are of one mind; if the confusion is over the relevance of my affirmative answer to the burden of your question, then I cannot help you. I have a feeling that you are being cryptic for your own amusement, and that the amusement would lose its savour for you if the basis of it was shared. The question came across as an attempt to put me in the position of somebody from a comfortable position criticising those in a more vulnerable one, and yet I could not & cannot see such a criticism in either my comments or magnetman’s (that evidently provoked the same question for the same reason). Evidently I shall have to remain in my condition of curious perplexity. A pity; I do like to seek for an understanding of alternative thought processes. The elucidation of alien paradigms is very helpful in modifying one’s own, where that is shown to be necessary.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 5:36:58 GMT
As I am by the relevance of yours... Perhaps the fault is mine. To attempt clarification: my comments confirmed the origin of the MP’s concerns in the correspondence that helped initiate the assembly of authorities to address his concerns. I acknowledged the situation as was described in Coffey’s explanation of the group’s remit, but criticised what seems to be the approach hitherto taken by some of those authorities to a solution of the perceived problem. I concluded with the observation that even when authorities chose the correct legal path to attaining control, they tended to over-kill. You have not assisted me in understanding why that should prompt your query as to whether I had a nice warm place to stay. If your present admission of confusion is over the relevance of your question to my comments, then we are of one mind; if the confusion is over the relevance of my affirmative answer to the burden of your question, then I cannot help you. I have a feeling that you are being cryptic for your own amusement, and that the amusement would lose its savour for you if the basis of it was shared. The question came across as an attempt to put me in the position of somebody from a comfortable position criticising those in a more vulnerable one, and yet I could not & cannot see such a criticism in either my comments or magnetman’s (that evidently provoked the same question for the same reason). Evidently I shall have to remain in my condition of curious perplexity. A pity; I do like to seek for an understanding of alternative thought processes. The elucidation of alien paradigms is very helpful in modifying one’s own, where that is shown to be necessary. Let’s just say I detect an element of smugness and gloating from the interchange between you and MM. Forgive me if I am wrong, I do sometimes read too much into things. As for me being cryptic and asking the question for amusement...really Nigel? I’m simply pointing out that it’s easy to judge and make assertions about people from upon high (e.g high intellect). I’m sure many of those who complain about itinerant boaters in London do the same. If people are inventive enough to find cheap ways to live in London, then fair play to them. Personally, I think it’s a shit hole although worth the odd day trip for amusement . :-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 6:09:13 GMT
You are wrong and forgiven.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 16, 2018 7:15:54 GMT
Ooops indeed when are the leave marches going to start do you think? This is what happens when you let a remainer negotiate Brexit, you end up with possible civil disobedience when the majority have been sold down the river I think you'll find its now the minority who have been sold down the river, things have moved on in 2.5 years. Of course the only way to prove it is with another referendum, this time on the facts as we know them. So everyone has a choice - May's deal. hard crash or remain.
|
|
|
Post by patty on Nov 16, 2018 7:34:54 GMT
Parts of london maybe a 's.......' but not all of it..I love wandering in the parks and Epping Forest is close so you can find places that are ok. Im returning in a week or so for few more days as I feel family need to see me...well maybe! Post Christmas possible Ill be down every couple of weeks so I will be rediscovering the nicer bits.
|
|