We are extremely disappointed with the proposed increase in licence fees announced recently by the Canal & River Trust (CRT).
This is already causing upset among the Continuous Cruisers (CCers), who feel that they are being unfairly targeted by the extra charges being levied. CCers are, as shown by the recently published CRT census, very much a minority group among boaters and therefore, surely, cannot represent a significant enough income source for CRT to warrant the increased levies. As we know, this is at a time when the Trust really needs increased ‘boater satisfaction’ levels. This announcement is certainly NOT going to achieve that upturn!
Many CCers, including disabled boaters, have chosen/been forced to adopt the Continuous Cruiser lifestyle simply because of their financial situations. This increase is only going to serve to rub salt into those wounds of poverty. It will surely lead to ever more licence evasion and, therefore, greater costs to the Trust in striving to recover those fees. It will also lead to more boaters having to abandon their boats because they simply cannot afford the extra fees. This will, inevitably, leave the Trust open to bad press about driving people into homelessness etc.
There is also unhappiness among the Roving Canal Traders community, because again, by their nature of the lifestyle, very many are CCers.
Many among these groups strongly refute the argument that CCers use the facilities more than others. Indeed, as a general trend, those that only cruise for limited spells will likely clock up far more miles and, therefore use far more locks, taps, Elsan points etc than will most who are moving around the system at the more sedate pace. Many will only move once a fortnight (to comply with licence terms) and only a relatively short distance. CCers are not hammering around the system trying to cover as much distance as possible within a couple of weeks. Rising numbers of CCers are swapping to composting toilet systems and are, therefore, not using the Elsan/pump-out facilities, and are all adept at being frugal with on-board water supplies too, and so won’t use the water taps as much as the short-time boaters.
In contrast, there are many boaters with a private home mooring who do regularly use the water, toilet, Elsan and rubbish facilities on a very regular basis because they are not provided on-site for them.
The Accessible Waterways Association feel that further discussion is needed on behalf of these groups, and a reconsideration should be made of the decision to ‘target’ the minority group of boaters who are CCers – whether by choice or by necessity. It seems a very unfair way of attempting to raise relatively insignificant extra sums. Surely it would be much fairer to raise the fees for everyone equally.
Although CRT have not announced what the fee rises will be, we can make some estimates based on CRT’s quoted boat numbers:
For them to raise say £10m, shared fairly across all boaters, it would average out at a mere £307.98 per boat. Place the entire burden on boats without a home mooring, this rises to a whopping £1,370.61! *
If split by increasing the licence fee to raise £5m, then this would raise it by an average of £153.99. If the other £5m was then raised by “surcharging” Continuous Cruisers, then their licence cost would increase by a total of £839.30 (including the licence fee increase). *
This is neither fair nor equitable, especially as we know that many in this minority group of boaters are classed as disabled or vulnerable and least able to afford a massive hike in their licence. As we would expect this increase to be levied as a percentage increase based on boat size, for some this would therefore be considerably more.
CRT have also not explained how this will affect boaters without a home mooring who take a winter mooring.
CRT are also targeting widebeam owners with an addition surcharge too. They base this on the EA model, where boat licences are charged by area. We think this is incredibly unfair. Wide boats on EA waters can navigate the same amount of their waterways as narrowboats. On CRT waters, they are limited to less than half the system, unless they pay extra for a low loader to move from one part to another. Even then, much of the system is not available to them. Note also that any widebeam boat owner who Continuously Cruises will appear to be hit twice under the current plans!
Boat licences and mooring status are two completely different things and must not be confused. A licence entitles any boat to cruise CRT waters at any time for as much or as little as they wish. This is much the same as road vehicle tax. You pay the same, regardless of whether you drive thousands of miles a week, or your car stays in your garage apart from a short trip to the shops once a week. If a boater chooses to have a home mooring, this then gives them benefits which those without home moorings do not enjoy. Things like having a postal address, security, somewhere they can leave their boat for longer than the maximum two weeks otherwise allowed. (Some of these benefits may not apply to those who choose a towpath mooring).
Would the Trust discount boaters who temporarily cruise other waterways (say the Thames for a month)? Would they offer a discount to boaters who live aboard their boat alone, as they would clearly use facilities less?
We sincerely hope that CRT will listen to our concerns and come to the right conclusion.
* Based on CRT’s quoted figures of a total of 32,470 boats licenced on CRT waters, of which 7,296 are without a home mooring. Our calculations do not take into account extra money which may be levied on widebeam boats and are for illustrative purposes only.
Click here to see the consultation document upon which this proposal is based. Contact the Canal & River Trust if you require an accessible version.
There are other impoverished boaters with home moorings that are paying up to £4000 per annum out of their pensions and benefits for their mooring. They also pay for the facilities.
CC’rs live on the canals for the cost of their licence only. They are using the CRT facilities all year round.
If you want to balance this argument then you must take us all into account.
Lesley.
The key issue here is that the boat licence is purely for the right to have your boat on CRT waters. Mooring status is irrelevant. Everyone with a licenced boat has the same right and choice to move around the system. Boaters with a home mooring have additional benefits – including the right to stay in a fixed location, access to benefits and better access to healthcare, etc.
The idea that CCers “use the facilities” more than those with a home mooring is a blunt tool that is fundamentally flawed. Whilst there is no doubt that some will use the system more, there are probably more boats with home mooring that cruise more during the summer months than CCers do in the whole year. Similarly, of course, there will be boats with home moorings that don’t cruise at all. Many CCers take up the option of a winter mooring. This doesn’t seem to have come into the equation at all.
Maybe an option to offer a licence discount to boats that don’t move might be more equitable.
To add to the argument, in 2006 and 2008, BW had to admit this to Defra: In a consultation in 2006 BW were trying to charge shared owners and those without a home mooring at a higher rate. One of the arguments put forward was that these types of owners generated more “wear & tear” on the system. When challenged, BW admitted that the majority of of its costs were fixed rather than being dependent on usage. To quote from a later 2008 consultation –
“If we were to use a pure marginal cost approach, BW would recover very little income
from licence fees since the great majority of expenditure is fixed – i.e. it is needed to
keep the whole system usable and safe and does not depend on the number of boats
using it. By contrast, the variable costs of providing for the additional boat are small.”
CRT will argue that there are more boats on the water since 2008 but recent CRT lock usage reports show that boat locking numbers have dropped, ie boat movements have decreased.
I’m a cc for two yrs but crt says I have a home mooring I have never had a home mooring so now I can’t have the energy grant of £600 they can see where I have travelled in there own sightings record the whole set is a joke now I’m being charged twice for cc
I have to agree with Anne Husar’s comments on this. It was established more than a decade ago that most of the costs are fixed and not dependent on usage.
I find it all very upsetting since losing our mooring on The River Great Ouse and bringing our 70ft narrowboat onto the canals all year round instead of just winter 2 years ago our search for a mooring has come up with zilch this is for a 70ft boat that we need for wheelchair access The mooring has also got to be wheelchair accessible as well. We are leisure boat cc`ers so have to call CRT up every time we need an overstay for medical reasons and that is with a CRT medical disability concession we are on benefits but are privileged to have managed to have our boat and house paid in full before my wife fell ill. I cant imagine what others my be going through however if you live on your boat I believe your licence and mooring can be paid for through DWP this is an option we do not have.
i was thinking of buying a boat, but nit now i can see im being ripped off on costs etc.suits me save my money and dont bother buying a boat with these increases etc.Dave.