Well done Alister Trotman

Old Crusty said:
There is no difference, one was the next in the queue for the job, the other was parachuted in or get turned over. Both were appointed by the regional director to maintain the status quo because its easier than implementing constructive change that benefits all river users. And both have cloth ears.
Click to expand...

Oh Come come, Crusty i mean Andrew, take a bow, that is after you on the right isnt it?
 
You won't convince me that we need to pay more for the privilege of operating a lock, when so many unlicensed liveabords use them unhindered. If everyone who benefits from the asset had to pay, then that includes pubs, restaurants with a river view and anyone with the river at the end of their garden. As usual, it's squeeze the legitimate boater and turn a blind eye to the rest.
This whole 'charging the public to use our own country' stinks of the Torys. If they could get away with it, they'd charge people to walk their dogs in the park and a fiver to feed the ducks.
 
Last edited:
wrecktangle said:
Oh Come come, Crusty i mean Andrew, take a bow, that is after you on the right isnt it?
Click to expand...

Indeed it is Andrew, now retired and twitching in North Dorset, not giving a tinkers for the river, the lock staff or the boaters just like when he was waterways manager. Methinks you mistake me for him and you would be quite wrong bordering on the offensive!
 
Actionmat said:
Surely you're not suggesting that the solution to the Trotman problem is for Kingston or Richmond to give him a residential mooring for his Slumboats?
As has been mentioned many times, he's not homeless(he doesn't even live on his boats), he's a business, a fire risk and a polluter.
What's needed is affordable hostel accommodation for his residents and the removal of his death traps.

He could have been scrapped, but the EA towed him back onto the non tidal and I still don't understand why? Now he doesn't need the EA anymore as he has his own tug and he's laughing at all of us.
Click to expand...

That's a local council responsibility, not the EA. If the council house those living on the so called slum boats, local council taxes will rise to pay for it. if the council environmental health teams had any gumption, Trotman's boats would be closed down immediately as a health hazard then the EA could tow them away and scrap.
 
Despite the amount of energy and spleen venting on here discussing him, Trotman and his business boats are a minor matter. The big deal must be that the EA collects every penny due from boats on the river and the only way to do that is to check that every boat has a current registration licence.
 
Old Crusty said:
The big deal must be that the EA collects every penny due from boats on the river and the only way to do that is to check that every boat has a current registration licence.
Click to expand...

Not much bloody point if they dont collect the money, still not taken my direct debit after 5months. Every time i call i am told there is a 10day charter to respond. Fine, its your money guys I have my license!
 
wrecktangle said:
But aren't you supposed to represent our views? Maybe that's why few join your Assoc.
Click to expand...

For the record, I work hard to represent the views of my TMBA members (yes, all of them, even though we don't all agree about everything)

I doubt that you are one of them. However, as we say clearly on our website:
"We aim to provide a dialogue between ourselves, as users, and the Environment Agency who manage the non tidal Thames river from Lechlade to Teddington. Our interest is primarily in matters which affect the use of the river by power driven vessels – e.g. navigation, moorings, lock services etc. although we hope we take a responsible and considerate view of the needs of all those who use and enjoy the river."

I actually think I do this very well - probably better than many that claim to represent you.

This forum, regrettably, is not representative of the views of many boaters or river users and the few who post regularly seem to do so because they want a scrap rather than make a responsible contribution to the future of the river.

Oh, and for those that don't realise it, government continues to fund some 50% or so of the money needed to run the river, even in its currently reduced circumstances - and that, believe it or not, comes from general taxation i.e. the general public so please don't tell me they don't contribute.

Do you really want the EA spending some of its much needed and limited funds on the slum boat issue when local authorities and landowners need to take ownership of the problem ? I certainly don't.
 
boatone said:
Do you really want the EA spending some of its much needed and limited funds on the slum boat issue when local authorities and landowners need to take ownership of the problem ? I certainly don't.
Click to expand...

If that is what your members want, thats what you need to challenge!

Your tone indicates you wont cos its doesnt suit you?
 
Parabordi said:
If that is what your members want, thats what you need to challenge!

Your tone indicates you wont cos its doesnt suit you?
Click to expand...

I vigorously challenge the EA re slum boat issues involving registration and mooring on EA land as I do on unregistered craft wherever they may be on the river. . It is up to local authorities and landowners to pursue matters re mooring on their land but they would rather lay the blame at the EA's door.

I note that you do not comment on the facts re river funding?
 
boatone said:
I vigorously challenge the EA re slum boat issues involving registration and mooring on EA land as I do on unregistered craft wherever they may be on the river. . It is up to local authorities and landowners to pursue matters re mooring on their land but they would rather lay the blame at the EA's door.

I note that you do not comment on the facts re river funding?
Click to expand...

Lots of comments have been made here on funding, including the most sensible from Dogsbody, sadly always ignored by you and your sidekick Crust
 
Parabordi said:
Lots of comments have been made here on funding, including the most sensible from Dogsbody, sadly always ignored by you and your sidekick Crust
Click to expand...

Not sure which specific comment from DogsBody you refer to. There are many well intentioned and sensible suggestions (I've even made a few myself) as to how funding could be improved but, regrettably, the EA need to be legally empowered to pursue them.
I, and others, are constantly urging them to seek new legislative powers as well as ensuring they follow every opportunity to use existing powers to maximise current income.

In case you haven't noticed, Government has a few other issues to sort out including Brexit, the NHS, schools, immigration etc etc Sadly, waterways is not very high up on their agenda.

The fact is that government (taxpayers - that includes you and me) presently pays half the cost of the river and is intent on reducing its contribution. River users ARE going to face increased charges so get used to it - lockies' continued employment may well depend on it.

Disclaimers - it is not my personal responsibility to maintain and support the non tidal Thames. I am just one of many who give time energy and expertise to trying to make sure its a better place for boaters than it might otherwise be. Shooting messengers (or anyone else for that matter) is a criminal offence.
 
It is always brought up that the EA need more legislative powers.Why did the EA not ask for these pre 2010 when the IWO was being drafted ?
In the cull of front line staff due to budget restraints,how many layers of management have been dispensed with?

Remember the 30%? increases in the 80’s to fund the sorting of the ‘bottleneck’ locks.....that didn’t get sorted did it....instead they built some shiny new offices.......same organisation different letters in the title.....was always thus....pay more and get less!
 
err, sometimes, Para, people choose to join an organisation because it contains expertise and contacts far higher than that of an inexperienced individual.

In any form of democracy one has to hand over a certain amount of responsibility to those at the top.
 
Last edited:
+2
Why don't the people who moan the most step forward and pick up the mantle themselves rather than criticise people like Boatone who is doing a lot of work for the majority willingly and unpaid.
I think he puts forward a balanced view that has proven to get results by what he has already achieved
 
Have you never complained about your local council or politicians? Are you a politician - so you are not allowed to have an opinion then?
They are supposed to represent you!
3 people dont make an association (2 of which are Windsor Yacht club members)
So you think we should all pay £5 membership and then walk away and leave him to it.
He said yesterday that he wished we would all stop talking about Trottman as its not he important issue.
Its not a major issue for me but its important to a lot of people. If he is not going to represent members views, whats the point?
 
I'm glad to be a member, but I'm against any increase in the river licence fee above inflation.. I'm sure I'm not the only member who feels that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top