The only fair way is by displacement. BW have already wasted our money, and CRT are inventing the wheel again with a unfair result.
M
M
8 years ago
I have a narrowboat. And am against wide beams paying extra. Just like many others in Narrowboats. Makes you wonder if CaRT had already decided the result of the consultation before hand. What’s more. Not everyone got to a consultation or a questionnaire. So how could they have asked all boaters
D
Deborah Green
8 years ago
Grossly unfair. I own a 7'6" craft and resent having to pay extra. My boat is only 22' long so is probably one of the smaller craft on the waterways.
P
Patricia Taggart
8 years ago
Unfair decision
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
Agree that we will pay more for less. Wider boats cannot use all of the waterways.
M
M whitfield
8 years ago
Why? We can’t us most of the waterways! In general pay more for a licence already! This is so wrong
M
Michael Moscrop
8 years ago
I agree further discussion with all affected by this decision needs to happen before this is implemented by CRT.
L
Les dunham
8 years ago
Paying more to access only half of the system is grossly unfair, there seems to be a growing anti widebeam feel g growing on the waterways and CRT should be stamping that out not encouraging it. How about upping the off side vegetation management and dredging more moorings so there is plenty of space fir wider craft ?
J
James Pursey
8 years ago
Can't believe that people not affected by the result get to have a say in the outcome
C
Chris Ebsworth
8 years ago
Why should we pay more when we can only access one third of the network.
M
Maggie Murray
8 years ago
Why would you have to pay more when you don't have full access to all the waterways
C
Charlie
8 years ago
I don’t agree ... consultation was loaded at the start. Why penalise?
W
Wayne Holling
8 years ago
Total wrong there are more narrow boat voters than there could ever be widebeam voters totally unfair..
S
Steve jay
8 years ago
Why do wideboats get charged more for less?
S
Steve Bates
8 years ago
Hits all boats over 6-10 and is totally unreasonable for normal boating use.
P
Paul
8 years ago
Absolutely flawed consultation..questions asked were pointing to only one conclusion
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
As a future widebeam owner. This increase makes it a lot harder for me to afford what is all ready a high premium to use a small amount of the canal system
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
Unfair tax and will have a huge effect on our boat club
D
Danny Williamson
8 years ago
Obviously if this proposal were to go ahead, it sets a serious president for future CRT policy and importantly for owners of marina's and of moorings. Its a complete deviation from what has always been BW policy it does nothing for the Codialle Entente with narrowboat owners. Since when did CRT "own" the water which falls for free?
G
George Loydall
8 years ago
We already pay a lot to be able to use only a small percentage of the waterways
The only fair way is by displacement. BW have already wasted our money, and CRT are inventing the wheel again with a unfair result.
I have a narrowboat. And am against wide beams paying extra. Just like many others in Narrowboats. Makes you wonder if CaRT had already decided the result of the consultation before hand. What’s more. Not everyone got to a consultation or a questionnaire. So how could they have asked all boaters
Grossly unfair. I own a 7'6" craft and resent having to pay extra. My boat is only 22' long so is probably one of the smaller craft on the waterways.
Unfair decision
Agree that we will pay more for less. Wider boats cannot use all of the waterways.
Why? We can’t us most of the waterways! In general pay more for a licence already! This is so wrong
I agree further discussion with all affected by this decision needs to happen before this is implemented by CRT.
Paying more to access only half of the system is grossly unfair, there seems to be a growing anti widebeam feel g growing on the waterways and CRT should be stamping that out not encouraging it. How about upping the off side vegetation management and dredging more moorings so there is plenty of space fir wider craft ?
Can't believe that people not affected by the result get to have a say in the outcome
Why should we pay more when we can only access one third of the network.
Why would you have to pay more when you don't have full access to all the waterways
I don’t agree ... consultation was loaded at the start. Why penalise?
Total wrong there are more narrow boat voters than there could ever be widebeam voters totally unfair..
Why do wideboats get charged more for less?
Hits all boats over 6-10 and is totally unreasonable for normal boating use.
Absolutely flawed consultation..questions asked were pointing to only one conclusion
As a future widebeam owner. This increase makes it a lot harder for me to afford what is all ready a high premium to use a small amount of the canal system
Unfair tax and will have a huge effect on our boat club
Obviously if this proposal were to go ahead, it sets a serious president for future CRT policy and importantly for owners of marina's and of moorings. Its a complete deviation from what has always been BW policy it does nothing for the Codialle Entente with narrowboat owners. Since when did CRT "own" the water which falls for free?
We already pay a lot to be able to use only a small percentage of the waterways