Strudwick.Family wrote: > I don't think there is an answer to this debate that will not > disadvantage one group or another. The choices we have are, we all > suffer or we all suffer with some suffering more than others. Talk of > radical new ways of calculating the licence fee ain't going to happen > because they need large investments by BW or boaters or both. > > What we need to do is try continue to do is make government > understand that a waterway without boats is dead and they need to pay > more to keep the waterways alive. What we as boaters need to do is > agree on a proposal and push BW and government to adopt it. All that > is happening is that we are divided by self interest and BW and the > government can do what they like. > > At the moment we have two choices the existing system or the revised > system being offered by BW. The revised system is flawed as BW don't > understand their own waterways but that could be corrected. Unless > someone comes up with a new system which is farer to all and is cheep > for BW to implement and run, I suggest that's it. The choice I suggest > is ours. > > > Paul
Well put Paul. The last bit is now patently true, it is about time BW got someone dedicated (in more ways than one) in customer care to deal with the users groups that has some knowledge of the waterways and of the boaters mind set. Ther nearest that came to this was when Eugene was there. It does appear that the upper management at BW have as good as given up. -- Neil Arlidge - NB Earnest Follow the travels of TNC, now in Ireland http://www.tuesdaynightclub.co.uk/tour.html
