RYA on TV

[Wiggo]

Anyone catch the article on South Today (or whatever the local TV thing is called these days) about Red Diesel last night?

Interesting article on how the hikes in crude oil prices are hitting the farmers, followed by a piece on leisure boating and the threat of removal of red. Then an interview with an RYA spokesman...

He made the point about 50% of boaters saying they would quit or go abroad, and then the reporter pointed out that it only affected a tiny minority of the population anyway. Cue the bit about the number of people in the marine industry? spin off tourism jobs? Nope. Mr RYA pointed out that Road Fuel duty was there to discourage private motorists, and encourage the use of public transport, and it was unfair to expect leisure boaters to subsidise motorists???? End of interview!

If this is how the RYA represents us, we may as well give up now!

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://homepage.ntlworld.com/graham.wignall/boats/eulimene600x800.jpg>The old and the new</A>

 

[Gludy]

Thats it - I am now leaving the RYA who do not only not represent my interests but actually damage them.

They cleary just want to represent raggies and from now on I shall do all I can to oppose them claiming to represent motor boaters.

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[steverow]

Ditto.

I haven't renewed my membership simply because of the apalling way they are handling the red diesel issue.
They need to get their act together big time.

Steve.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

The threads on these forums should be mandatory reading for RYA spokespeople. The arguements have been hammered out in some detail, and would give their spokespeople some ideas of responses to simple questions?

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[Gludy]

I agree but the RYA seem to have a policy of freeing the seas of mobo's - that dream seems to be shared by a great deal of raggies .... they know what they are doing and the government sees them as our representative - that is what will cause the damage.

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[BrendanS]

Can't see your point of view. Should have seen how many RYA flagged motor boats were out marshalling for powerboat race last weekend. Even though cancelled. They are motor boat friendly, and have always been that way in my view when ever I've needed to talk to them from a club point of view.

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[Gludy]

Brendan
On a number of threads folk have reported raggies actually being keen to see the imposition of highly taxed fuel in order to clear the seas of us MoBo's.

The RYA response to the governement and that on the TV show as reported above show that the body the government thinks is representing us is actually inviting in higher tax on boat fuel. This is just a fact.

So when it comes to the acid test - the fuel tax issue the RYA are doing us a great deal of damage - fact.

I am sure that there is a lot of cooperation at club level etc just as you say but that is not the issue - the issue is that they are putting themselves forward as our spokepeople and giving damaging advice that will harm power boating.



<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Jinks]

So who is going to represent us? It appears to me that the only National body that has credibility in the Governments eyes would be the RYA but, as demonstrated in the above mentioned interview, their point of view is biased toward diesel engines in yachts which are not the main method of propulsion and have, generally, far less power and far greater range.

We know that there is an active and effective power boat section within the RYA and surely there are members of that who understand and can project the real issues that face us and the industry. Rather than abandoning our membership, wouldn't we be better off lobbying the RYA for effective representation by people who are affected by and care about the impact discontinuing red diesel for leisure boaters will have?

I intend to express my displeasure at the comments made in the interview and ask for a response regarding how they will change this approach in the future. We, as single voices, are never going to be loud enough to be heard. We must have a co-ordinated, competent representation which puts the issues forward logically and rationally if we are going to have any chance of preventing this change.

<hr width=100% size=1>Of all the things I've lost - I miss my mind the most!

 

[BrendanS]

It is not a fact at all. Only in your mind. Their view is represented on their website, where they outline the 3 possible scenarios, and state clearly that they wish to maintain things in their current state:

http://www.cycc.org.uk/news/reddies2.htm

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[moodycruiser]

Has anybody got a comparison chart of the average prices of waterside diesel per litre for EU countries (that we are supposed to be getting in line with, Hmmmph)??

<hr width=100% size=1>Tony

 

[Gludy]

Its a fact that they said what they did on TV.

Its a fac that many raggies seem to be delighted with the proposed fuel price hike.

Would you agree that the RYA spokeman on TV should be taken to task for what he said?




<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Gludy]

Jinks
What you say makes sense - we really have no alternative at this stage.


<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[TomIsitt]

Without wishing to kick off another bout of hostilities, it's quite possible that the RYA man said a lot more to camera than actually appeared on TV. The editing process is often pretty vicious, and a lot of material ends up on the cutting room floor (particularly if the programme-makers have an "agenda").

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gludy]

I agree that editing can change the flavour of what was said but taking all the evidence together, over a period of time, it does appear that the RYA are very weak on this issue - certainly they should be challanged and issue a clear statement of what their strategy is - why not ask them pubically through a amagzine - a no frills question expecting a no frills answer.

I know of other who are not reneweing their RYA membership so there is an issue for them to deal with. They should also be asked for an explanation of what was said on the programme.

Will you do that?

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[Jinks]

Paul

If I'd known you were going to be nice to me I'd have introduced myself when we were rafted together coming in last night. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>Of all the things I've lost - I miss my mind the most!

 

[Gludy]

Any chance of an answer Tom?

<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[TomIsitt]

Yep, we're in constant touch with the RYA on this issue, and we are putting together a piece that will examine all the arguments from all corners of the marine industry.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gludy]

Tom
I am now puzzled. Mty question was:-

"They should also be asked for an explanation of what was said on the programme.
Will you do that? "

To whcih you replied "yep" followed by a general statement.

In particular are you seeking an answer from the RYA about what what said in that TV interview?

I am not trying to find conflict - I am genuinely trying to get it clear.




<hr width=100% size=1>Paul

 

[TomIsitt]

Sorry...misread your post. Will ask the question next time I'm talking to the RYA (at SIBS, no doubt).

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gludy]

Ok, thank you.
Sorry to push but just asking the question at Sibs is not really enough is it?

Surely its best to ask it now and publish the result - some RYA members are not renewing because of it, its a matter of concern to many motor boaters - in your magazine representing our interests, these would best be served by a proper bit of investigation of the RYA and the publication of the answers.

To me it seems too little cosy a world ... all I am seeking is that the RYA be interviewed about the what was said on programme and the results published.

Publish it on this forum if you like - you as an editor have more power tham the individual - I am asking that you use it.

Your own point is that the programme could have been mis-edited ... I accept that ... so now clear it all up for us.

I bet you are sorry you got involved with this thread now Tom



<hr width=100% size=1>Paul