August YM - Pilots wants the yachtsman to pay for the pensions hole!

[chanelyacht]

The issue is complex, but the root of the matter is less pilotage is needed - ships have grown larger so fewer port movements, and that freight has been concentrated into ports fa beyond the size of some years ago. Ports have also been issuing more PECs, exempting ships from carrying pilots if they ply the waters regularly.

There are many things the leisure sector are lucky to get away without paying for, but pilotage isn't one of them.

A one off charge of around 40p per tonne imported for a year would sort the problem. Perhaps the ports should get on with doing that?

Trinity House by the way never employed port pilots, TH deal with the deep sea pilots who bring vessels to the port limits. Port pilots then take over, either self employed or employed by the port operator.

 

[Daedelus]

Whilst I have limited sympathy I think the argument was that it went to court to see who should be responsible for the shortfall and the ports didn't act quickly enough or well enough and the case went against them.

The ports now have to find the money and as the commercial mob have left (lack of investment etc etc) the ports only have a limited number of sources of income.

However, the author of the article (in YM) did come across as smug, with an I'm alright attitude.

 

[MoodySabre]

If you have a mooring, or use the marina's in Poole Harbour, as a yottie, have to pay harbour dues anyway.

If he is saying there should be a lights/bouys charge, isn't that Trinity House?

My reading of it (went it came up previously) was that the Harbour Authorities must pay. It follows that they in turn must raise funds from those who use the harbours i.e. boat owners in harbour authority areas. Does this mean that those of us who do not pay harbour dues will not have to pay - if so then I see a migration of boats to non-HA areas. Round here that might mean boats moving from the Crouch to the Blackwater. I hope that doesn't put up our costs through demand exceeding supply.

 

[prv]

My reading of it (went it came up previously) was that the Harbour Authorities must pay. It follows that they in turn must raise funds from those who use the harbours i.e. boat owners in harbour authority areas.

That was my understanding too, though I haven't done any more than casually read the threads on here. Fortunately I sail out of a booming shipping port, so hopefully they ought to be able to cover any demands from commercial dues without resorting to hassling yachtsmen.

Pete