"bty465680" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >A good proportion of GRP cruisers on the Lancaster will have to pay >this too as even modest Freeman 22s are 7foot 2in wide, and most >cruisers are wider than this once 22foot or so is reached. > >Another extortion racket for no apparent reason by BW.
Yes. The marginal cost to BW of a boat navigating a km along a waterway is negligible, according to BW. So even if that cost did vary with beam, there would be no justification for charging wider boats more, because that greater cost would still be negligible. But it doesn't -- none of BW's costs increases significantly with beam. This is a textbook example of tyranny by the majority. e.g. "Short people are a minority of the population. Let's force them to pay more, so the rest of us will pay less. But, to be fair, we will take a vote on it". Why is BW playing populism anyway? That is highly inappropriate for a monopoly public provider. This proposal has not been thought through properly, and should never have been proposed by BW. But then, that's been the case for a long time for almost all changes made to BW's charges. A zero-based rethink of the whole system is long overdue. This persistent tinkering simply builds mistake on mistake. But one thing's for sure. Sizism has no place on the waterways. Adrian Adrian Stott 07956-299966
