|
|
Post by peterboat on Apr 11, 2018 10:14:27 GMT
Where can I sign this petition? I have spoken to my MP about my issues with this unwarranted rise in license fees on waterways designed for proper boats, He agrees that this is nothing more than a license hike by the back door but says it needs lots of us to complain to stop it. This looks a suitable vehicle to use to make CRT more accountable to us the waterways users
|
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Apr 11, 2018 10:36:07 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2018 10:40:50 GMT
Signed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2018 10:57:37 GMT
Signed
Rog
|
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 11, 2018 11:22:00 GMT
Signed. It's the adverse effect that this increase is going to have on historic wide boats that is disgusting. The way the whole process was run was dubious.
|
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Apr 11, 2018 11:28:32 GMT
Just a caveat - nothing in law prevents CaRT hiking the licence and registration fees as they please, nor to create different categories/sizes for charging purposes. Complaints about the 'consultation' process being rigged to justify it, whether valid or not, do not affect that painful reality.
Petition by all means, if you object, because a consultation process that is seen by sufficient numbers of the general public to be flawed, may give rise to second thoughts on the basis of appeasement, but you cannot otherwise force a re-think, on legal grounds anyway. Given the widespread use of area rather than only length, in other jurisdictions, can only help CaRT's case for change. The length only basis for BW charges was set within the terms of the 1971 Act, and that is the template that has been followed ever since - but s.4(1) of the 1983 Act repealed the fixed charge regime of the 1971 Act, and simply tied registration charges to 60% of the equivalent charge for a boat licence. Since 1983 "The Board may register pleasure boats and houseboats under the Act of 1971 for such periods and on payment of such charges as they may from time to time determine.” For the 60% tariff to work, the same classifications must exist.
|
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Apr 11, 2018 11:34:53 GMT
It might be helpful to leave a comment in the petition suggesting that CaRT take account of their ability to waive charges in certain cases, and to create – for example – a discount for historic barges. That would encourage restoration and use of existing wide beams while perhaps discouraging new builds [if that is what they wished to do].
Giving positive feedback as to what should be done, in your opinion, will count for a great deal more than just signing on to the petition's wording. The comments as to the feedback on a 'consultation' embracing mostly narrowboats, for example, is a useful criticism of the consultation methodology.
|
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 11, 2018 11:41:17 GMT
It might be helpful to leave a comment in the petition suggesting that CaRT take account of their ability to waive charges in certain cases, and to create – for example – a discount for historic barges. That would encourage restoration and use of existing wide beams while perhaps discouraging new builds [if that is what they wished to do]. Giving positive feedback as to what should be done, in your opinion, will count for a great deal more than just signing on to the petition's wording. The comments as to the feedback on a 'consultation' embracing mostly narrowboats, for example, is a useful criticism of the consultation methodology. Personally the discount for historic barges is what I think they should have done. It would seem to be within their remit to encourage the restoration and preservation of historic boats. It would also fit with their claim of the whole thing being revenue neutral. As for there being no legal claim against the increases I'm aware of this. But it doesn't stop the widespread unease at the way the whole process was conducted, among the wider boating community. |
|
|
|
Post by cygnus on Apr 11, 2018 11:48:11 GMT
Thank you Nigel Moore for doing the link thingy, I am almost illiterate concerning computer use.
The guy I quoted has had his old barge since Noah was a lad. He has also done loads of voluntary stuff on the CRT network, and as he says has been acknowledged for his good work. Now he feels that he, along with other ex commercial barge owners instead of being encouraged to cherish these vessels, are now classed as a nuisance on the waterways. I would say more but he might not approve.
My own opinion? I just feel that CRT has just taken a first step on a journey to a destination a lot of us may not like. Will the next target be "boats without a home mooring" as frequently mentioned, or will it be liveaboards?
|
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Apr 11, 2018 11:48:21 GMT
As for there being no legal claim against the increases I'm aware of this. But it doesn't stop the widespread unease at the way the whole process was conducted, among the wider boating community. Indeed. That is why I said the relevant comment to that effect was useful - far more so than just ticking agreement with the petition. The more comment re: historic barge discounts the better also. |
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 11, 2018 11:56:06 GMT
Thank you Nigel Moore for doing the link thingy, I am almost illiterate concerning computer use. The guy I quoted has had his old barge since Noah was a lad. He has also done loads of voluntary stuff on the CRT network, and as he says has been acknowledged for his good work. Now he feels that he, along with other ex commercial barge owners instead of being encouraged to cherish these vessels, are now classed as a nuisance on the waterways. I would say more but he might not approve. My own opinion? I just feel that CRT has just taken a first step on a journey to a destination a lot of us may not like. Will the next target be "boats without a home mooring" as frequently mentioned, or will it be liveaboards? This is exactly what I said in my email to Richard parry. I was just fobbed off with Mathew "git" symonds, we all know his opinions of livaboard boaters. Jon horsfel though I would have expected better of as a lot of the historic wide boats are in,what used to be his area. So he should be aware of the historic craft. They just don't care about historic boat owners, that is the conclusion that I've drawn from it. |
|
