[canals-list] Re: Working narrowboats to pay the £50 "broad" beam surcharge?! (XP)

[rb999sb]

--- In canals-list@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Stott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "rb999sb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> 
> >Bw could just adopt EA's system.
> >Sue
> 
> Let's look at the logic of that suggestion.
> 
> 1. Charges that increase with boat size are unfair, because no
> navigation authority costs increase with boat size
> 
> 2. Charges that increase with boat length unfairly charge larger 
boats
> more
> 
> 3. Charges that increase with boat length X beam charge larger boats
> even more than those that increase with boat length, and so are even
> more unfair.
> 
> 4. Therefore we should have charges that increase with boat length X
> beam
> 
> Er, I think there is a flaw in there somewhere.  It seems to be in
> point 4.
> 
> The suggested alternative is a charge that varies with the craft's
> cruising range, i.e you pay for the amount of waterway you are 
getting
> access to.  This charge would cover use of the waterways of *all*
> navigation authorities (the revenue would be divided among them), 
thus
> removing the difference between charging approaches on EA and BW
> waters in particular.  And also being fair.
> 
> Adrian
> 
> .
> 
> Adrian Stott
> 07956-299966
>
How about charging for the length of time one spends on their boat?
I believe that BW should stick with the system they have got because 
when people bnought their boat they made decisions at the time based 
on the rules at that time. It is unfair to change the rules now.
Sue