Sue Burchett wrote:
>> What exercises me is that there appears to be no consistency in applying
>> the 'rules'. On one hand we have the bloke I met (and a perfectly nice
>> chap he is too) is able to buck the system because he 'knows' someone
>> and on the same stretch of the canal a local resident was fined for
>> leaving his boat in the visitors area for a couple of weeks (he has
>> a permanent mooring at a local marina) in the spring. Meanwhile, here is
>> my chap with a friend who is taking up honey-pot mooring space on a wink
>> in the high-point of the season.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
> Consistent rules! This is canal boating not the army. Lets have the minimum
> of rules then we won't have to break them too often.
>
I like your sense of humour Sue ;>).
But in case anyone takes that comment seriously, I would just like to
point out that in circumstances where people have made what is probably
their single or second largest investment and are often spending several
thousand pounds per annum just to maintain and enjoy that investment, a
few rules are appropriate.
Would you be happy to invest the value of your boat in a bank that paid
your neighbour more interest than they paid you. Or, conversely, charged
you more for borrowing the same value?
Of course I agree that we don't want rules for the sake of them. In fact
I never advocated more rules; just that those that exist are applied
consistently and fairly?
So I take it that your liberal point of view finds it acceptable that
one boater can be fined for overstaying a week and another can stay in
the same place for over a year? And one lives in the community and pays
his community tax as well as for a full year mooring whilst the other
pays neither?
Will Chapman
nb Quidditch
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canals-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
