--- In [email protected], Adrian Stott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "John Slee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Are they to be > >forced to stay moored where they are for the rest of their lives > >because they can't afford to move to a new mooring because of the > >auction-inflated mooring costs? > > Auctions will not / do not inflate prices. They are simply more > effective at revealing the actual market prices. Oh baloney AS! Has God suddenly said that market prices are right? I know TB and GB think that MT was God (work out who I am referring to for yourselves), but "market prices" only favour the wealthy. Have a look at coastal mooring prices to see I am right. Think about the difficulty that young people have when they try to buy a house - the prices of housing are affected by "market forces" - and then check up to see when politicians last awarded themselves a pay rise - and see how much their expenses can be. Measure that against the RPI!
Is there anyone here from IWA, AWCC, RBOA who was at the meeting with BW? If so, what points did you challenge BW on, and what was their response? Is BW really listening to us? Or just listening and doing what they think is best for BW? What about what is good long-term for the canals? Would it really be a good thing to have only rich boaters using the canals at their convenience with no interest in doing their part to maintain the waterways? BW - remember this important word: VOLUNTEERS, and this one: ENTHUSIAST. Lots of people have said, "This has to be challenged. But so far no one seems to have come up with a viable challenge. Would it be worth someone affected going to the Waterways Ombudsman, and if so, on what basis? What hope does a canal-enthusiast pensioner have? If they have to rebid every 3 years and they can't continuous cruise, but want to use the canals to cruise from their base regularly, they may be forced off the cut onto .....? (can't bring myself to say it). What strategy do we use to fight this?
