i have had some involvement with our local harbour authority, and it happenend that this was when they (along with all other trust ports) were recently having their bye laws re-written and approved by the minister. these bye laws are based on a model set common to all ports, so what is in our local laws is likely to apply in other ports.
in our harbour, the harbour authority (any anyone authorised by the harbour authority) has the right to board any craft within the harbour, and it is an offence to obstruct them punishable by a fine on scale 3.
could be, in this case, that they have the right to seize boats written into their byelaws. i dont know - ask them for a copy of their laws
these quangoes have much more power than people realise - and the territory they cover is often much larger than you think.
a Cares
b Understands what you are lobbying about
c Will have the mental capacity to put your case forward
d Wasn't involved in doing that which you are complaining about.
In my experience the probability of these conditions being met is on a par with being struck by lightening on the day you win the lottery.
MPs are simply voting fodder with ambitions way beyond their capability.
There are only two ways to dent them (short of simply bribery)
One is through the courts
The second is to take action on the streets.
Strathclyde's finest tried to apprehend C&E officers 'cos their (C&E) Landrover had no tax disc - only a Govt exemption disc. And this while the C&E guys were involved in the final crucial stage of the UK's biggest drug smuggling bust at that time. Apparently the police found themselves being arrested and reported to the procurator fiscal (i.e. prosecutor) for interfering with HMC&E officers in the course of, etc., etc. (My old man was a C&E officer at the time.)
The SAS, the Army and the Police decide to go on a survival weekend together to see who comes out top. After some basic exercises, the trainer tells them their next objective is to go down into the woods and come back with a rabbit for tea.
First up are the SAS. They don their infra red goggles, drop to the ground and crawl into the woods in formation. Absolute silence for 5 minutes, followed by a single muffled shot. they emerge with a rabbit, shot cleanly through the forehead. "Excellent" says the trainer.
Next up are the Army. They finish their cans of lager, cover themselves in
camouflage cream, fix bayonets and charge down into the woods, screaming at
the top of their lungs. For the next hour the woods ring with the sound of machine gun fire, mortar bombs, hand grenades and blood-curdling war cries.
Eventually, they emerge, carrying the charred remains of a rabbit. "A bit messy, but you got a result. Well done" says the trainer.
Lastly, in go the Police, walking slowly, hands behind backs, whistling Dixon of Dock Green. For the next few hours, the silence is only broken by the occasional crackle of a walkie talkie: "sierra oscar lima one, suspect headed straight for you" etc. After what seems an eternity, they emerge, escorting a squirrel in hand cuffs. "What the hell do you think you're doing?" asks the incredulous trainer. "Take this squirrel back and get me a rabbit, like I asked you 5 hours ago!" So back they go. Minutes pass, minutes turn to hours, day turns to night. The next morning the trainer and the rest of the crew are awakened by the police, holding the squirrel, now covered in bruises. "Are you taking the piss?" asks the seriously irate trainer. The police team leader shoots a glance at the squirrel, who then squeaks: "Alright, alright, I'm a f*cking rabbit!"
I think that overstates the capability of the police.
I see their role as enforcing the law, which is created by Parliament.
In so much as those laws are "social control" then yes you are right.
My concern is that the police have a disturbing habit of "assuming" powers that they do not have, as this matter appears to demonstrate.
This, combined with the way that they seek to cloak so much of their activities in totally unnecessary secrecy and the unaccountability of the spending of public money leave me with a complete lack of trust and confidence.
Bye the Bye some time ago I rang them to report a suspicious car cruising the area (I live in the sticks).
They said they would send a car.
About 15 mins later I received a call from them asking for directions, as they couldn't find the village.
They do spend £2000 per hour on a helicopter but not apparently on having maps in their cars.
I hope that the water at Keyhaven is a of a special quality: after all, it costs 5 quid a night, so I'd expect it.
What facilities did he use? None. Did he cost anybody anything? No. Did he wear out someone's tarmac? No. Did he wear out someone's water: apparently he did, seeing as they're charging for just being there. What do they do, add anti-fouling so your boat gets a layer while you're there?
This sort of thing would be unthinkable where I live (Denmark - and all the way up the Baltic) - and frankly, it shocks me. Here, you can sling yer 'ook anywhere you like (after checking the chart!) and as long as you're not actually in someone's marina, nobody gives a hoot.
Oh, there's no tide either, mooring fees are cheap (less than £10 per night) and the wind is great.
And if the police ever tried to board my boat, they'd need a search warrant. The constitution says so...
john t
the system is that the harbour trust drafts its bye laws, puts them out to public consultation, finalises them, and then puts them to the minister who has the power delegated by parliament to put them into effect. maybe you could challenge the way they have implemeted the procedure, or challenge under human rights, but there is no doubt that the basic process is legal ie the quango is not just giving themselves powers.
Simon, I always found the Soviet traffic police to be very polite and courteous. They always saluted and introduced themselves by name before explaining the offence I had committed. I was stopped once for having a dirty car, right outside Lubyanka. I always pretended I didn't understand them and never received a ticket. Seems that "democracy" has changed their behaviour.
Hello, Arthur. Yes they've changed a lot since Soviet times. It's not that they're rude - they still salute and call you 'sir', but they are insatiably greedy. They are in the business of stopping cars to take bribes whether or not you have breached any traffic regulations.
Having a dirty car is a favourite if they can't find anything else wrong - I seems to remember one Times journalist grumbled when she was fined for having a dirty car when driving it home from the showroom!
One policeman did apologise to us that he couldn't take a bribe since his inspector was with him. Another one couldn't be bothered to look for something wrong and just stopped the car, held out his hand and said "give me something".
One can understand their point of view, though: to become a traffic policeman in the first place they have to pay a large bribe, so they have to see a return on their investment!