At the risk of being the most unpopular person....

Chris I'm with you.
I dont like the radio fee size. A few years ago it was £22. the fact that it has reduced suggests that some of the money at least was and probably still is being wasted. I do not see how without a beauracracy (sic) we can have dedicated VHF channels etc. The same licence also deals with EPIRB identity etc. You might need that sometime.
Light dues - I'm often very glad to see a navigation aid for confirmation and my GPS etc. has gone down on occasion. A friend of mine had a pretty complete electrical failure because a deck leak round a fitting installed ten years before had run several feet along the deck head lining and dribbled down the back of his switch panels. Again it might happen to you.
In most of Europe we pay full road price for diesel. It does seem to be much better quality and less smelly. I get something between 15 and 18 mpg out of my engine. Even with the tax on thats not bad. The cost is trivial compared with UK mooring prices. I use my motor a lot and it is an incentive to get sailing.
Its even more difficult to justify the exemption for the larger motor boats. Just say 2 gallons per mile to yourself. (MBM test result)

<hr width=100% size=1>Roger
 
Quote

"1 Radio license.

We do not actually get any service. We pay the Government £22 for a piece of paper. They do nothing, absolutely nothing in return other than issue more pieces of paper. We buy radio. We pay to be trained. The air is free."

You obviously haven't had a licence (or a radio i would expect) for a few years and have therefore missed out on all the information sent to licensees about the service.
Have a look here for some information that will adjust things

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/licensing_numbering/radiocomms/maritime_licensing/?a=87101

The RA Archive is where the newsletters reside.

Mike


<hr width=100% size=1>No fixed JOB Title, something or other in Ofcom
 
Re: Not fair

First of all (most) pleasure boats are used for 5 months of the year only and then only weekends and holidays. We are very dedicated sailors and yet probably only manage 90 days actually on board (not necessarily at sea), just 25% of the year, most peoples figures will be less. Actually only 60 of our days will be in UK waters so 16% of the year.

The fact that a light, buoy or beacon is there doesn't mean I used it either. Lighthouses are of use only at night, many many yachts do not go out at night.
Differential beacons are used by very few, our dGPS is now WAAS/EGNOS (not funded by Trinity House)
The Central Channel buoys are a nuisance rather than help, especially in fog
The buoys that ARE useful are 98% laid by Harbour Authorities and funded by harbour dues which we all pay already.
Radar beacons are no use to boats without radar, we have it but I wouldn't miss radar beacons.
There are a couple of buoys in the West Solent that are used as race marks (easily replaced), otherwise from Poole we use North Channel and most times don't need to follow the channel around N Head buoy.

The lights that ARE useful to our normal cruise routes are all in France (especially the directional lights in Chenal De Four). From Poole to France there is no buoy or light or beacon I would miss having. From Poole to the West Country we pass Anvil light, Portland Bill light, Berry Head light and Start Point light. All of these headlands are quite clear on our radar and GPS/Chart plotters, so what if they were turned off?

I think if you took away ALL the Trinity House aids, we would miss them little, BIG SHIPS by contrast would find life very difficult so either they pay or it comes like elsewhere in Europe from general taxation.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
With respect to light dues I haven't got into the details of what is being proposed but the questions which come to mind are :

Who will pay?
Is there a minimum size of boat concerned?
Will this mean compulsory registration of all boats - not just those which go abroad?
What will the annual registration fee be in this case?
Once all boats are registered, what other taxes can/will then be levied?
What would happen if you registered your boat say in Belgium?

John

It's not hard to meet expenses . . . they're everywhere.


<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Obviously I'm still talking to you or this post wouldn't exist!

VHF licence. Not bothered, someone has to administer it for Call signs, MMSI, EPIRBs etc and £20 is OK.

Light Dues - see my reply to Twisterken. Big ships have 24/7 x 52wk usage, the Nav Aids are placed for their convenience not ours, they would miss them we would not. Bear in mind the harbour stuff we do use is laid by the harbours and paid for by our harbour dues.

Red Diesel. The extra cost would have little effect on me but I suspect it would have a huge effect on the powerboat market both new and used. I doubt we will win this argument though as it will 'seem' acceptable to Joe Public and anyway the push is apparently from the EU. I might well swap an occasional Cherbourg weekend for one to Alderney or St Peter Port though. Trouble is our fuel taxes (and all the others) are too high in general, French tax paid diesel is a lot less than ours for example. I imagine those with farms or oil fired central heating will be OK...

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Jeez, from reading this post it seems that we have an excess of Victor Meldrew types on this website.

It amazes me how righteous you're all getting. Since when was any tax in this country fair?

Get some perspective, twenty odd pounds for a radio licence, potentially a hundred quid for lights and some more on diesel (though sailing boats don't tend to use too much of this in my experience).

I don't think that's a huge amount given what a great sport we all enjoy. If you want to start bitching, how about marina dues?

Just my two cents.....

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I'll try to answer your questions. Please be gentle with me if I make any mistakes.

All boats over 8 Metres will pay.

How else would you administer the system without compulsory registration?

T.H. Have suggested there should be Licensing for boats at the same time. (I take this to mean Operator Licencing)

The initial fee suggested is £100 per annum.

This would only apply to English registered vessels.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: So whats

your point?. You've obviously got loads of cash & enjoy paying for crap you don't want or need. You can pay mine for me, if you like.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
weird strapline

Mike, you know we all love your willingness to put your head above the parapet...
however, I went and looked at that website. I quote - serving citizen-consumers in the digital age. That's post modernist irony, isn't it? If what was once the Radio Agency could stop reorganising, reformulating, relaunching itself and leaking money into stupid redesigns I reckon we could get that radio fee down to £10.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You can't have it both ways Chris.

Either you think that the costs of supporting leisure sailing should be supported directly by taxes on sailing - e.g. Light Dues and Radio Licence, or you think they should be funded out of general taxation - e.g. through duty on fuel. But you can't logically claim both that we should pay more in general taxation and pay again for specific items.

Don't forget we do already pay VAT on Red Diesel, the element we are excused is that part that is supposed to be used to maintain the roads. Since I am very careful to avoid sailing Bedouin on the public highways there is no justification for charging us that element (any more than you should charge people who use Diesel to heat their homes).

My real concern about the current Radio Licence - which would probably also apply to any form of Light Dues, is that they are very inefficient. Firstly I imagine the cost of collecting the fees is a much higher proportion of the revenue generated than it is for most taxes, and secondly there is no realistic enforcement. So in effect it becomes an honestly tax.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Why pick on me?

As your profile is hidden, are you really Gordon Brown or Trinity House in disguise? Do you own a boat or just crew? Why hide behind anonymity?

Will you also accept the reasonable premise of a doubling of taxes on alcahol in the interests of dissuading you from binge drinking?

And you are right, go for a drop in marina and yard fees. That way the government will lose the VAT from that. Have you ever thought how much we already contribute to Gordon's waste tank via VAT on the boat and everything we buy for it?

Trinity House is not a tax it is a fee, with strings attached like compulsory registration, maybe licensing and for something we use very very little in reality any more.




<hr width=100% size=1>
 
<< All boats over 8 Metres will pay.>>

I see a great market in 7m99 straight-stemmed boats.
Will length take account of pulpits, bathing ladders or other add-on bits?

<< How else would you administer the system without compulsory registration?
T.H. Have suggested there should be Licensing for boats at the same time. (I take this to mean Operator Licencing) >>

No. I mean annual boat tax such as exists in France. If there is no existing compulsory registry as in UK, there is no data base on which to tax boats. Once the registry exists, you are a sitting target.

<< The initial fee suggested is £100 per annum.>>

This is the initial fee. Then the small boats will complain that they have to pay as much as the mega yachts and so, in the future, somebody will agree that there should be a differential. Do you think that this will mean a reduction for the small boats...?

<< This would only apply to English registered vessels. >>

Under EU legislation (freedom of movement of people and goods) you can register your boat anywhere. So if you register in Belgium (as many French people are now actually doing to get round the stringent safety requirements imposed by the French 'Affaires Maritimes') you are not theoretically taxable. As this would lead to tax inequity, then they will have to introduce residency / mooring period criteria. This implies that the log book will become an official and obligatory document and that it will require significant policing.

I would resist this as far as possible because it seems to me that it is very much the thin edge of the wedge.

John

It is easier to get older than it is to get wiser.



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Being a smartass

my boat is 7.9 metres so should I really care.

It just seems to me that, once they've got you the prices will rise & rise & rise.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: weird strapline

As mentioned elsewhere, I no longer work for the UK Radio Administration (lovingly known as the Radiocommunications Agency) I know work for the UK Communication Regulator. Ofcom was formed from RA, Oftel, Radio Authority, ITC and Broadcasting Standards Commision, spectrum management is a small part of its function.

I quote

"Ofcom is the regulator for the UK communications industries, with responsibilities across television, radio, telecommunications and wireless communications services."

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>No fixed JOB Title, something or other in Ofcom
 
So if Ofcom is a regulator

What does it regulate in terms of what the small boat VHF user gets? There seems to be no regulation of misuse of Ch16 in busy areas like the Solent, unless the CG gets shirty. We are only 'allowed' to use 4 channels out of how many? for intership traffic, yet many of the other channels remain silent for very long periods of time.

I think the problem people have is that it appears they are paying for a tax disc and getting nothing else.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
 
A reply

Notwithstanding the slightly inflammatory tone of my original post for which I apologise, I'd like to add to the first posting.

Personally, I'm happy to pay for services provided and accept that whilst, in an ideal world, these things would be provided for free, someone has to pay for them and I'd rather that me, as a user paid, rather than putting the burden on other non-users.

We can argue about operational efficiencies and I, like us all, would like the money to be well spent but IMO we as a body do ourselves no favours by asking for others to pay for our recreational facilities.

And BTW, the bit about being unpopular was supposed to be a bit tongue in cheek. I'll judge how much of a smell I carry when we meet up at Weymouth and mine's a pint of Fortyniner, seeings as you asked.

Chris

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: A reply

We can argue about operational efficiencies and I, like us all, would like the money to be well spent but IMO we as a body do ourselves no favours by asking for others to pay for our recreational facilities.

Let us see, The RA or Ofcom whatever already exists in order to regulate airwaves, the spectrum is a little larger than the marine band. I do not having a problem paying this as long as I am sure it is efficient, I wonder how many other Govn. depts have delved into the pot when needed.

The Lights, don't use them, already pay for the ones I do.

MCA yes good service, but would still exist if leisure boats didn't, they are not here just for us. Should people walking along coastal paths be made to pay a fee?

Fuel, yes I should pay extra, in fact lets make it £6.00 a gallon, hell we are rich enough, how dare we not spend all our money on scratch cards and ale.

I pay as much as most in these parts pay in council tax to tether my boat up. I already pay VAT on fuel. I pay for the marks I use. I pay my radio tax.

Do you think the likes of climbers should pay extra taxes for the upkeep of national parks, hand gliders pay for aerial tax, speedway should pay double fuel as it is wasteful, they should use fuel for essential journeys only.

Boating has been self regulated for years, isn't it a little strange that all this is due to change post Blairs Govn.


<hr width=100% size=1>Julian

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.topcatsail.co.uk>Top Cat Homepage</A>
 
Light Dues!

Great idea - I then become a customer of Trinity House, so on a dark windy night when I miss that cardinal...

I should be able to sue them as it's obviously too small, not bright enough etc.







<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

Quint
What’s the point?
Replies
4
Views
240
oldgit
O

Share this page

Top