|
Post by peterboat on May 8, 2016 15:25:39 GMT
So you say but I have heard the same song from to many failed forces lads about how well they were going to do when they left..... Oh give it up. Your posts are so flippin naive it's pathetic. Your institutionalized, and obviously proud of it. Yawn
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 15:26:05 GMT
So you say but I have heard the same song from to many failed forces lads about how well they were going to do when they left..... Oh give it up. Your posts are so flippin naive it's pathetic. Your institutionalized, and obviously proud of it. Come on now...he's just 'normal'....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 15:31:49 GMT
Oh give it up. Your posts are so flippin naive it's pathetic. Your institutionalized, and obviously proud of it. Come on now...he's just 'normal'.... Is he? I've just had enough of people pissing down mine, and others backs, and attempting to convince us it's raining. If they want to play, then they Will be treated accordingly. He's an eejit (i do like that word).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 15:35:45 GMT
So you say but I have heard the same song from to many failed forces lads about how well they were going to do when they left..... Oh give it up. Your posts are so flippin naive it's pathetic. Your institutionalized, and obviously proud of it. I will say it again. Thier thoughts were in the right place but their masters didn't give a shit about them other than thier own welfare. Lots of songs about this BTW. In the end, why not lead from the front? Ah, yes, one might get hurt...best leave that to someone else then.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 8, 2016 16:01:27 GMT
He's an eejit (i do like that word). Just as well ..... it describes you to a T
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 16:04:17 GMT
He's an eejit (i do like that word). Just as well ..... it describes you to a T Get back by your bed, who told you to move!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 16:22:12 GMT
He's an eejit (i do like that word). Just as well ..... it describes you to a T Bye bye..do come back when normal service is resumed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 16:32:21 GMT
Put the Brasso down John, and think through what your saying. The CC licenced boater uses the same CRT rescources whether they move every day or never, they have to moor in A place, and use the same amount of water, and produce the same amount of waste. In the latter case they save wear and tear on the infrastructure, pollution, Fuel ect so require and consume marginally less rescources. The trust has the power to deal with these boats, as they rightly should ,so your anger should be directed at them rather than other boaters. I can see your argument and I would agree if it wasn't for the large numbers involved in quite restricted areas. If the numbers involved were spread evenly across the system then I would be sympathetic to the argument (although probably not agreeing). It is because the numbers are so high in certain restricted areas that the pressure on the system is so high...... sorry got visitors must go Where are these large numbers John,they are moving in London,they are moving on the K&A,where is this crisis of people not moving John? Sure people can maybe quote an incident,there is no linear STATIC HOUSING ESTATES on our canals John,end of argument.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 8, 2016 16:33:42 GMT
Put the Brasso down John, and think through what your saying. The CC licenced boater uses the same CRT rescources whether they move every day or never, they have to moor in A place, and use the same amount of water, and produce the same amount of waste. In the latter case they save wear and tear on the infrastructure, pollution, Fuel ect so require and consume marginally less rescources. The trust has the power to deal with these boats, as they rightly should ,so your anger should be directed at them rather than other boaters. I can see your argument and I would agree if it wasn't for the large numbers involved in quite restricted areas. If the numbers involved were spread evenly across the system then I would be sympathetic to the argument (although probably not agreeing). It is because the numbers are so high in certain restricted areas that the pressure on the system is so high...... sorry got visitors must go Ok continuing. The fact that the numbers are so high in such limited areas is due to the housing situation (or lack of affordable rather) I suspect a large number would disappear from the boat world if there was affordable shore accommodation. To expect a navigation authority to correct or attempt to correct a failing that is not of their making and beyond their control is silly. Housing is a separate issue that no-one (including government) is prepared to tackle. To expect CRT with it's limited budget and restricted mandate plus it's convoluted and unclear legal framework to step in is, to my mind totally ridiculous. You may as well say "The National Trust should supply apartments for the hard up" it's about as sensible. The only way (in my view anyway) that there is a long term future for true continuous cruiser is if the fake ones are strictly controlled. Leisure boaters with marina moorings are a much better financial deal for CRT, remember that all of us are only part of the "users" that are covered by CRT's remit. Boaters are possibly the most costly group in terms of our requirements, after all if there were just a few sponsored boats steered by colourfully dressed individuals at the honeypot sites, that would probably be enough for the majority of "canal world theme park visitors" and cyclists , walkers, fishermen and tree huggers would either not notice or would approve an absence of boats. I believe that Jenlyn and his friends and the NBTA and other protest groups will be ignored and will continue to rant on about "rights" while the real world progresses in a totally different direction ...... A bit like the ghostly remains of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament added to answer your post .....I don't think you can describe it as movement in London ....it's more a shuffle
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 16:37:23 GMT
I can see your argument and I would agree if it wasn't for the large numbers involved in quite restricted areas. If the numbers involved were spread evenly across the system then I would be sympathetic to the argument (although probably not agreeing). It is because the numbers are so high in certain restricted areas that the pressure on the system is so high...... sorry got visitors must go Ok continuing. The fact that the numbers are so high in such limited areas is due to the housing situation (or lack of affordable rather) I suspect a large number would disappear from the boat world if there was affordable shore accommodation. To expect a navigation authority to correct or attempt to correct a failing that is not of their making and beyond their control is silly. Housing is a separate issue that no-one (including government) is prepared to tackle. To expect CRT with it's limited budget and restricted mandate plus it's convoluted and unclear legal framework to step in is, to my mind totally ridiculous. You may as well say "The National Trust should supply apartments for the hard up" it's about as sensible. The only way (in my view anyway) that there is a long term future for true continuous cruiser is if the fake ones are strictly controlled. Leisure boaters with marina moorings are a much better financial deal for CRT, remember that all of us are only part of the "users" that are covered by CRT's remit. Boaters are possibly the most costly group in terms of our requirements, after all if there were just a few sponsored boats steered by colourfully dressed individuals at the honeypot sites, that would probably be enough for the majority of "canal world theme park visitors" and cyclists , walkers, fishermen and tree huggers would either not notice or would approve an absence of boats. I believe that Jenlyn and his friends and the NBTA and other protest groups will be ignored and will continue to rant on about "rights" while the real world progresses in a totally different direction ...... A bit like the ghostly remains of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Yes, exactly that...under the guise of defence...do carry on old chap...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 16:47:06 GMT
I can see your argument and I would agree if it wasn't for the large numbers involved in quite restricted areas. If the numbers involved were spread evenly across the system then I would be sympathetic to the argument (although probably not agreeing). It is because the numbers are so high in certain restricted areas that the pressure on the system is so high...... sorry got visitors must go Ok continuing. The fact that the numbers are so high in such limited areas is due to the housing situation (or lack of affordable rather) I suspect a large number would disappear from the boat world if there was affordable shore accommodation. To expect a navigation authority to correct or attempt to correct a failing that is not of their making and beyond their control is silly. Housing is a separate issue that no-one (including government) is prepared to tackle. To expect CRT with it's limited budget and restricted mandate plus it's convoluted and unclear legal framework to step in is, to my mind totally ridiculous. You may as well say "The National Trust should supply apartments for the hard up" it's about as sensible. The only way (in my view anyway) that there is a long term future for true continuous cruiser is if the fake ones are strictly controlled. Leisure boaters with marina moorings are a much better financial deal for CRT, remember that all of us are only part of the "users" that are covered by CRT's remit. Boaters are possibly the most costly group in terms of our requirements, after all if there were just a few sponsored boats steered by colourfully dressed individuals at the honeypot sites, that would probably be enough for the majority of "canal world theme park visitors" and cyclists , walkers, fishermen and tree huggers would either not notice or would approve an absence of boats. I believe that Jenlyn and his friends and the NBTA and other protest groups will be ignored and will continue to rant on about "rights" while the real world progresses in a totally different direction ...... A bit like the ghostly remains of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament added to answer your post .....I don't think you can describe it as movement in London ....it's more a shuffle I'm going to ask one favour of you, please, never donate your sperm.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 8, 2016 16:53:02 GMT
I have had my stint of ccing when numbers were low and enforcement almost non-existant. The future was obvious even then. I now have a home base and travel far and wide during my "cruising season" and either return to home base or put it on hard standing until the weather improves. Living on my proper "home" boat the rest of the year. What happens to the canal system effects me directly less and less each year, I would like to think it will continue for the benefit of those who stick to the rules. You can shout and scream and throw insults as much as you like but the writing is on the wall. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 8, 2016 16:56:11 GMT
Jenlyn The second you start your insults it becomes patently obvious that you don't have an argument
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2016 16:57:50 GMT
There are none so blind as those who will not see. Well, low and behold I find I must agree with you. May I suggest (with no malice intended whatsoever) you try an optician..... ?
|
|
|
Post by PaulG2 on May 8, 2016 17:00:40 GMT
There's no need to go into detail about one's medical condition. Show evidence of appointments with the GP or hospital. If you're ill, you have every reason to stay put. The EO and CRT are not qualified in medical matters. So, if CRT think you're swinging lead, give them your GP's number and let them argue the point with the medics. Not saying boaters should take the mickey, but how much medical information do you think CRT should have.
Wouldn't it be a whole lot simpler for CRT to just devise a form that boaters could print and take to their doctor for the doctor to sign? From a disinterested third party perspective, this sounds like a problem that doesn't need to be. Boaters should be able to simply advise CRT that they will be overstaying because of medical reasons. Although this is their express right, CRT needs to be notified so that local EO can be notified so that everyone can live in harmony. Preliminarily, CRT should accept the word of the boater and require no proof. If it starts to appear to CRT that there may be abuse, they could supply a simple form for a doctor to sign, with the boater still given the benefit of the doubt. If it appears that someone is taking the piss, further proof could be required. I'm just guessing that the number of "users" in a well-run system would be numbers far less than hundreds annually, with abusers a small percentage of that. This just seems like a problem that need not exist, and a problem where a solution could encompass all points of view. JMHO
|
|