Hoping they had learnt a lesson but unfortunately not

I'VE NOTICED that the bargees have been fairly quiet since they cocked up their protesting and lumbered us all with a large rise in our licence fees including those of who are proper continuous cruisers, Writes John Coxon.

I was hoping they'd learned a lesson or two from it? Unfortunately it appears not!

No priority in Whitehall

I now see they're at it again, lobbying the new parliament for a change in the rules and reduction in the licence fees. Well, after what we've seen of this parliament so far, and especially the budget, I wouldn't hold out much hope of any success with it! The live aboard boater demographic does not have any priority in Whitehall.

Whilst I agree in general with a lot of what they're saying I do not agree with some of their ultimate aims. One of which is to be able to purchase a continuous cruiser licence and then be allowed to moor anywhere they choose without having to move.

If they want facilities such as work, schools, doctors, family etc. in one area then they should get a proper long term mooring, preferably in a local marina, where they can sit without causing anyone else any problems? But No. They want to freeload off the rest of society, they want it all without having to work at it or pay for it.

Getting themselves a bad name

What they are ultimately doing is getting themselves a bad name and dragging the rest of us down with them! If they just want to pay for a continuous cruiser licence then they should obey the continuous cruiser rules, I do! If they want to stay in one place, then they should get a proper recognised long term mooring.

There should be a rule that states a continuous cruiser licence holder must do a minimum of 100 statute miles per year with a distance of at least 50 statute miles between two points. This, I feel, is playing the game as intended. Just moving a short distance from one spot to another and back again, and in the dead of night as many do, just shows that they know the rules but deliberately flout them.

I'm all for CaRT charging them £25-35 per night to moor on the popular spots. If they don't like it, or don't want to pay it, then get a proper long term mooring, it'll be cheaper for them in the end!

The need to travel to get access

As far as facilities are concerned, I am getting on now, I'm over 70 and now require access to various heath facilities. I sometimes need to travel via two or more buses to get to a doctors, dentist or hospital appointment. Sometimes it means a train journey. I don't mind doing this. The journey can be planned in advance on the internet. I have one coming up—a bus and two trains each way. I don't mind, I've planned it out.

I have yet to fail to meet an appointment as requested. Only once did I need to change an appointment that was given to me as it was far too early in the day and that meant I just could not get to it in time on public transport. A quick phone call sorted it out.

The excuse that these people put forward about not being able to move because of schools, work etc. is so lame to the point of being untenable. Did they not take their work or school needs into consideration before choosing to move onto a boat? I would bet none of the these people were forced to live on a boat. I'd say they have all chosen the life freely. If they did not know what they were getting into then that's their look out.

Research would have shown the cost and rules

A little bit of research would have told them all they needed to know about the costs, rules and laws of living on the waterways. If they didn't bother to do any of this research, and many don't, then it's their own fault if they've got it wrong.

Too many of them appear to have bought a boat purely because of the financial advantage over buying a house, flat etc. without looking into the rules and costs of living on a boat. The canal towpaths and boaters facilities are a finite resource and cannot accommodate the ever growing numbers of boaters who want to just tie up willy nilly at any convenient place to set up a permanent home.

I travel the network and see the many marinas that have empty spaces. These are not temporary as the spaces are empty both summer and winter. This means that most of the live aboard who want to stay in one place have the opportunity to do so as the vacancies are there if they would just take the trouble to look. But again, No, they don't want to because it would cost them more than just flouting the rules and causing mayhem to others!

As for not being able to afford a mooring I find that totally unbelievable. If there are two people living on a boat and both earning the present minimum wage of £11.44 per hour then that means they are bringing home circa £650 per week after deductions or £33,800 p/a. In April this will rise to circa £35,600. If they're on the living wage then this is £13.85 per hour in London or just over £40,000 take home per year between them. This is more than enough to pay for a long term mooring and the ancillary charges that go with it.

Welcome to the real world

So they might have to make savings, like having a cheaper phone, or television deal, or reduced amount of takeaways each week or pack up smoking weed or drinking so much. They might not have the latest designer clothes or accessories or the top of the range 4x4 to drive around in, but I would say, welcome to the real world.

I just have a state pension and I cope with that because I'm realistic and prudent. It will be harder now I have no winter fuel allowance but I'll just have to manage. I wish I had around £35-40,000 per year then I would be able to afford the luxury of a permanent mooring. Instead, I am being lumbered with a vindictive increase to my licence fee because some boaters just can't play the game by the rules and have to spoil it for everybody!