Steve Heaven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 13:35 +0100, Adrian Stott wrote: > >> There is no such rationale for charging wider craft more. > >There is no such rationale for charging longer craft more either, but we >haven't heard you complaining about that in the past.
That must be because you've been listening in the wrong places. I have made this exact point to BW on several occasions. My cure for it, as for the proposed over-charging of wider craft, is to replace the current charges completely with one which varies with the length (in km) of the cruising range of the boat from its home mooring (and the length of the period for which the ticket is valid). For a full-length nb, this range would clearly not include quite a few waterways, so its charge would be less than that for a craft short enough to use e.g. the S&SYN to Sheffield.. The principle seems clear to me. It is already nonsense to charge a broad boat based in (e.g.) Nottingham for the right to use either the Oxford Canal or the K&A. It is clearly even worse to charge it *more* for that right than a nb pays. As I've said, this is simply sizism, an example of discrimination based unjustly on an irrelevant characteristic, an approach which society has found to be unacceptable in other fields. Adrian . Adrian Stott 07956-299966
