Mr Osborne wants to cut another 25% or 40%

Re: OK........All you Thames boaters....Its time to make up your mind. :)

apollo said:
make all other river users pay, swimmers, rowers, canoes, royal regattas yada yada. If they dont pay, they dont play!
Click to expand...

Exactly! If ALL river users paid a fair amount, the EA would have more than enough to fund the running of the river, not that it'll ever happen...
 
Alan ashore said:
In practice my gut feel is that EA may decide to lobby for a transfer ASAP to CRT, and will find some support for this in Gov. From boaters' perspective might not an underfunded, rushed transfer, followed by some years of relative chaos, but with the prospect of a more robust operating model emerging at the end, be preferable to a continued attempt to operate under the status quo with ever diminishing means?

As for legislative change, it would be sad if the next major change were wholesale repeal of the TCA and everything else which affords rights of navigation, after the river ceases to be in practice navigable through lack of spend.
Click to expand...
The EA cannot actually "lobby" and are on record as stating that will continue to manage the waterway as long as it is Governments' wish that they do so. However, it is of course possible that Government itself may recognise that they should proceed with the transfer and endeavour to keep the cost as low as possible with the prospect of ultimately not having to continue both funding the navigation and administering it - which itself has a cost.

I think it mot unlikely that there will be any attempt to repeal the TCA in its entirety. Much more likely that any transfer of administration to the CRT will carry with it requirements to continue exercising the function and responsibilities of the Thames Conservators (which is what the EA do now). It is also difficult to envisage the CRT taking over Flood and Coastal Risk management which I would expect to stay with the EA - but who knows?
 
Last edited:
As nobody appears to want to put their head above the parapit and suggest what they are prepared go without to help out Mr Osbourne,perhaps could make suggestion.
Why not privatise the entire operation.There must be loads of offshore hedge companies and sovereign funds just waiting to invest in a sure fire investment.
In past people have seemed quite keen to privatise our public power/water/phone companies,building societies etc and trouser a bit of cash.
The Thames would fetch pretty penny and go a fair way to help a government voted in to reduce public debt ?
Can see the banner now across the river at Teddington

Welcome to THAMESLAND..Plc.]
Step back into ye merrie olde Englande.
OAP.Discounts available and special deals at our McDonalds Marine riverside diners.
See and talk to actual genuine nautical type people and hear them whinge.
Attend a sunset ceremony set to the cacophoney of our orchestra of massed bowtrusters:)
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that ultimately there will be a new model in which, one way or another, there is more direct funding by ("all") who directly enjoy the river and want to see it kept up - whether the "ownership" is Private, Charity, or still within Government.

But I wouldn't like to make a prediction as to whether the transition happens relatively smoothly, or whether we have to expect the river as we know it to die, and then a generation later to be reborn - much as happened to significant chunks of the canal system.
 
Alan ashore said:
It seems to me that ultimately there will be a new model in which, one way or another, there is more direct funding by ("all") who directly enjoy the river and want to see it kept up - whether the "ownership" is Private, Charity, or still within Government.

But I wouldn't like to make a prediction as to whether the transition happens relatively smoothly, or whether we have to expect the river as we know it to die, and then a generation later to be reborn - much as happened to significant chunks of the canal system.
Click to expand...

Think the concensus is that things are going to change.Its the uncertainty thats the problem ?
 
oldgit said:
Think the concensus is that things are going to change.Its the uncertainty thats the problem ?
Click to expand...
Absolutely
The way that CaRT - who own 'all' the assets of their system is totally different from the way that EA operates the Thames and don't own the principal asset is an insurmountable opportunity (IMO)
 
2084.

"Perhaps the logical thing is to charge per lock, based on the cost of running them".

Many years ago ,down here, you would either pay for an individual lock or buy multiple lock ticket. Mind you that was when a lockie would accompany a group of boats going up the river working each lock as they reached it.
Why not have simple swipe card system which powers up the lock.This would also have the advantage of easy data mining,you could tell who what were and when .
Swipe card only issued to peeps who have paid their registration fees and data easily disabled after 12 months .Would give extremely good idea of just how far people are going and indication of peak periods in which section of river.Possibly even a Pay per Transit system...you use it you pay..
Could also help to stop unlicenced traffic moving around after hours.
Visitors would also get card only for period of visit,card could be "topped " up on each subsequent visit.
You could also add details of stuff such as EA fishing license.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2084.

oldgit said:
"Perhaps the logical thing is to charge per lock, based on the cost of running them".

Many years ago ,down here, you would either pay for an individual lock or buy multiple lock ticket. Mind you that was when a lockie would accompany a group of boats going up the river working each lock as they reached it.
Why not have simple swipe card system which powers up the lock.This would also have the advantage of easy data mining,you could tell who what were and when .
Swipe card only issued to peeps who have paid their registration fees and data easily disabled after 12 months .Would give extremely good idea of just how far people are going and indication of peak periods in which section of river.Possibly even a Pay per Transit system...you use it you pay..
Could also help to stop unlicenced traffic moving around after hours.
Visitors would also get card only for period of visit,card could be "topped " up on each subsequent visit.
You could also add details of stuff such as EA fishing license.
Click to expand...

Not sure that would work very well in practice, if locks were like turnstiles on the tube maybe but if first boat arrives and powers the lock up how many follow in and get through for free. How long does the lock power on for until the gates are closed on exit, boats coming the other way will want them left open etc.. Can see lots of scenarios of it causing havoc, lost cards, cloned cards, stolen cards, cards broken off in the machine, boats trapped in locks, arguments with non card holders....

Just playing devils advocate :)
 
Re: 2084.

Chris_d said:
Not sure that would work very well in practice, if locks were like turnstiles on the tube maybe but if first boat arrives and powers the lock up how many follow in and get through for free. How long does the lock power on for until the gates are closed on exit, boats coming the other way will want them left open etc.. Can see lots of scenarios of it causing havoc, lost cards, cloned cards, stolen cards, cards broken off in the machine, boats trapped in locks, arguments with non card holders....

Just playing devils advocate :)
Click to expand...
All very good points but suspect answer to out of hours lock use probably exists somewhere out there in the card carrying universe. ?
 
For many , many moons, the river has been managed on the lines set by the Thames Conservancy Act of 1932 which provided for income from a small number of clearly defined sources - registration fees, lock tolls, local authority levies, water extraction fees etc. These sources of income have been eroded by successive legislation and changes in current practice. Additionally, government funding by way of assigned budgetary support and, in more recent years (since Thatcher) the concept of "Grant in Aid" provided the additional funds needed to provide levels of maintenance and service that we all came to recognise as "the norm". Note this does not mean that we were legally entitled to these services, just that it was considered reasonable to provide them and it was relatively easy to do so with funding reasonably easy to access.
This has all changed - BIG TIME !

Government have embarked on a massive reduction in public spending on services which they believe should not be funded by the public purse. Not only this, they are also, and rightly in my view, intent on reducing the cost to the taxpayer of providing essential services such as education, health, welfare, defence etc.
The Environment Agency are therefore no longer able to obtain the levels of funding needed to provide our much loved services - particularly assisted passage by resident lock keepers at every lock during the working day 7 days a week come rain or shine. Crazy though it may seem, they do not have sufficient funding to ensure adequate resources to collect the monies they are due from those reluctant to pay registration fees or to exercise their responsibility for enforcing bye-laws such as speeding.

River users, and particularly powered craft boaters who pay by far the greatest share of registration income, have been strenuously resisting further rises in such charges - hardly surprising.
As I have said before ( some would say ad nauseum) the EA do not have any remit, nor do they consider it part of their responsibility, to promote the river as a recreational or commercial facility. Legal and fiscal policy severely restrict their ability to explore and bring in new income streams to replace the funds lost by reductions in public purse funding. Their job is simply to manage the waterway as best they can with the resources available year by year.
Make no mistake, there will be further reductions in government contribution and the situation will get worse.

So, what can be done?
1. Government could have a change of heart, recognise the importance of the river as a national asset and resource, and return to making a realistic contribution. Pigs, wings, fly etc but even if that were to be what would be considered realistic?
2. Users could accept that if they want to enjoy specific services than they will need to pay a realistic contribution to the cost of providing those services. Pigs, wings, fly etc as in 1 above.
3. Government could proceed with transferring the management of the waterway to the Canal and River Trust, the EA (and DEFRA) could heave a sigh of relief and it would be for C&RT to take up the struggle to make the river a viable and vibrant recreational waterway. Government would need to reach agreement with C&RT regarding the level of government funding to be made available over the next ten or fifteen years
which would likely not be as much as we would like but would at least be guaranteed rather than subject to the vagaries of government spending reviews and annual budgets as it is now.
4. Something else ......

As usual, I offer no ideas for quick fix solutions. What we do need, whatever the forward path may be, is clarity of expectations and intent. What do river users want? What are they prepared to pay? If that income is insufficient how else can it be raised? If it cannot be raised will river users recognise that they must revise their expectations?

However, it is not really that simple. The sheer complexity of river ownership, the myriad of user groups (each with their own agenda), the fact that Government itself is up to its *rs* in alligators and has little time to concentrate on a small matter like draining the swamp, all conspire to ensure that there cannot and will not be any "quick" fix. Arguments and discussions - government call it "consultation" will go on for ever while things continue to decline.
 
On that cheerful note B1 I will forget it all and enjoy the next two weeks relaxing on the river while there is still some water in there :)
 
Chris_d said:
On that cheerful note B1 I will forget it all and enjoy the next two weeks relaxing on the river while there is still some water in there :)
Click to expand...
keep-calm-and-carry-on-boating-5.png
 
DogsBody said:
Exactly! If ALL river users paid a fair amount, the EA would have more than enough to fund the running of the river, not that it'll ever happen...
Click to expand...

Would a "fair amount" reflect the costs involved? In which case I would expect a fair charge for those boats which use locks to be a LOT more than a fair charge for those users - swimmers, rowers, canoeists - who just float around the wet bits and require practically no expenditure.
 
What folks don't understand / appreciate is that because there's a special and unfettered right of navigation on the Thames - you can't be charged for the USE of the River or passage through its locks.
The amount you pay is for a REGISTRATION. Because EA is a government body (or possibly for some other reason), you don't pay VAT on it either.

So bumping up the fees for high usage isn't an option.
If the management of the Thames was transferred to CaRT or ano, then I suggest ('cos I don't really know for certain) that you would be charged VAT.
I also believe that if CaRT took over that the locks would become unmanned.
I don't think CaRT or anyone in government really understands the legal issues and seeing how long it took to get the last TWO changes through (and its costs) it could take a long time and be a fudge.

Think on't
 
jon wilmot said:
Please can we start by getting rid of all the mega expensive blue hulled launches and their maintenance costs coupled with the Sunday jolly brigade out on the river at the taxpayers expense.
Click to expand...

Suspect most of those launches have their capital costs spread over a couple of decades and the annual costs probably amount to a scrub off and a service.Not sure if you get rid of them wether a couple of bikes with very large baskets would be able to carry all the junk sometimes required to do various watery type jobs on the navigation.?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top