--- In [email protected], colin wareing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >  > At the risk of starting over again I've today sent the following into Simon Salem at B.W. > Any comments? >  > "Response to British Waterways Licence fees consultation 2008. >  >  > Whilst understanding the need for B.W. to increase the revenue income I feel that the proposed increases are excessive in the light of inflation running at present at around 5%, however, if any of the four options have to be implemented then option one, no change. >  > I support the option one for change on 2009 licence fee as the fairest option to all boat owners, i.e. No change to the way that all private owners are charged. >  > My reason for supporting this option is that when someone decides to become a boat owner they/we/I accept that the licence fee is a licence to navigate. They/we/I should also be aware of the limitations they/we/I put upon themselves by choosing the type, size, and amount of use they/we/I are going to make of their/ours/my chosen vessel. They/we/I were happy to accept these self imposed limitations when they/we/I bought the licence from British Waterways, and so to retain this fairness to navigate when and where a boat owner wants within their/ours/my  own self imposed imitations should be retained without any extra charge. >  > Anything else is going to be unfair to some one. We all knew what we where getting into, or If you didnât why didnât you do your research? >  > Listening and reading the arguments a number of points jump out at me. >  > The perceived problem of âcontinuous moorersâ from the evidence I havenât seen seems to be just that, a perceived problem. Indeed I cannot find any actual facts and figures to prove there is a problem, it all seems to be âfeelingsâ and anecdotal evidence. Indeed with B.W. stating that overstaying on moorings âenforcement effort is not financially productiveâ I assume that they have no solid evidence of this problem. >  > The only way to get this evidence would seem to be enforcement, which if carried out would provide this evidence and perhaps help to discourage continuous mooring within itâs self. >  > As part of enforcement B.W. have got to work towards every boat displaying a licence to navigate and a mooring permit that displays the boats home mooring. >  > If B.W. are not going to enforce the already existing mooring limits I hope theyâll not spend any more money on replacing, maintaining or installing any more signage. >  > Surely the âwillingness to payâ, (3.1 in the B.W. consultation document) argument falls down when everyone that pays for a mooring shows more âwillingness to payâ than some one who donât, and those that choose to pay a higher amount for their mooring are âwilling to payâ a higher amount, as they already do. >  > I feel that if the extra £150 charge was introduced for boats that donât declare a mooring it would bring in to question the right to navigate that the present licence is valid for. I would agree with point 9.15 of the BWAF report that people may pay the extra £150 in place of a mooring fee, and knowing B.W are not going to enforce overstaying on moorings may well encourage more âcontinuous moorersâ who would feel that they have paid the £150 extra for the right to moor where they feel like for as long as they feel like. >  > As a possible other suggestion if it is a fact (BWAF report (9.12) that B.W.âs incomes from the licence fee plus at least 9% of any mooring fee then what about looking at this situation. I propose that the two be separated completely and we pay a fee to moor and we pay a fee to navigate. So at some given date the licence fee goes up by inflation plus 9% and the mooring fees reduce by 9%. We would all know what we are paying for then. May be that would also go some way to encouraging the perceived continuers moorers to take a mooring as well, if mooring prices fall and maybe the boaters that feel continual cruisers are pay less into B.W.s funds would be partly placated as the charge for navigation licence would be raised." >  > That was my considered thoughts for B.W, and the extra bi for the news group.... >  > As some one said when this kicked off, it is getting towards a âdivideâ and rule situation when all boat owners should be sticking together, Is now the time and situation to be doing the lobbying etc? for a increased grant or other funding that reflects the use that non-licence fee make of our waterways and if we all have to accept a 11% licence fee increase it may galvanize more people into action. >  > Btw our narrowboat is 7ft wide by 50 foot long so would just about go anywhereâ¦.no vested interest in asking anybody to pay more than me then, and we have a on line B W mooring that we have been lucky enough to be away from for the last 6 months.... >  > Colin > nb Patty Ann on the Middlewich branch heading home to Lancashire for't winter. > Â
Totally agreed with everything you have said, now all we need is everyone to say the samething too BW.
