Toll Restructure For Broads

[JanetAnne]

Thought it was going to be £30 for a single and £45 for return? 

 

[JennyMorgan]

Whoops, yes, £45 not £75.00, at the moment. There have been hints of £90.00 each way by JP. My gut feeling is that Lock usage will drop big time thus the apportioned cost per transit will rise. 

£45.00 is for a day return thus £60.00 over a weekend if a GP goes to Southwold for the night.

At the moment it's 12 or 13 quid day return.

[JanetAnne]

I think there were figures out there that suggested the true cost of operation was over £90 per usage.

It's nice to think that, now senator has chosen to no longer contribute to the tolls account, it will be left to those of us that do to subsidise his actual exit from the network. 

Typed with tongue very firmly in cheek... 

[Baitrunner]

A year of the lock not being working or unreliable and Somerleyton bridge getting stuck is the biggest nail followed by the cost hike. People have got used to using GY  

Having been through GY many times this year after thinking it was "too scary" means it's cheaper and easier from brundall to get to sea. The 10 mins down the coast flat out is actually a lot of fun and the fuel cost will be well cheaper than using the lock. And GY is fine once you know the ropes and can get your timings right. Saying they are anti GP doesn't seem right now. The bridge guys even radioed me after the trip out with Griff and the navy to confirm my bridge lift! I think it's all a question of following protocol and respect from all sides. Oh and keep out the way of the big boys!!!

[senator]

GY was always fine as a way out from my experience, have missed the bridge coming back on a couple of occasions, due to sea conditions when coming up from Ipswich way, or south of it. Problem to me was the lack of bridge lifts in a day so if you did miss one you couldn't get the next.

As for the cost per transit through Mutford, think you might find that the costs are based around providing staff when it isn't actually working for months and the cost of bodging up gates with no boat usage to offset it. Why would Mutford cost any more than any other lock in the country?

 

[JennyMorgan]

Not only that, Senator, but Authority overheads and costs will be apportioned to the Lock.  

[quackers]

I hope you will all be pleasantly surprised by the article about Mutford Lock in today's EDP.

"To cover maintenance costs, the Broads Authority's Navigation Committee had considered raising the current £13 passage fee as much as sevenfold - but have now decided the cash should instead be reclaimed to encourage greater usage.

Trudi Wakelin, director of operations, said the body was hoping to work with nearby groups including the Royal Norfolk and Suffolk Yacht Club (RNSYC), which is based near the lock, to better market the passage."

No doubt somebody cleverer at such things than I can provide the link to the full article which contains many cheering words of wisdom from the splendid Mrs.Wakelin.

Bill Saunders

[JennyMorgan]

Hi Bill, that is excellent news. The splendid Mrs Wakelin, agreed, Trudi is a voice of sanity at Yare House and a good friend of the Broads. Heaven knows where we would be without her. 

Using Google I haven't been able to locate the article.

Without a sense of reason I could well see the Lock becoming increasingly redundant so welcome this development. What has to be remembered is that the Lock is a crucial and historical part of the navigation, just as is the New Cut & Oulton Dyke, it would actually take an Act of Parliament to close it. Perhaps wisdom has reminded the Authority of previous legal challenges when excessive charges have been levied. 

[BuffaloBill]

Mutford Lock linky thing 

[JennyMorgan]

Thanks, Bill. So much for Google! An interesting if not exhaustive article. The picture of Fred Newson passing through the Lock is interesting in that it was the occasion of a well attended protest by local businessmen, my father included, as well as local boaters who felt that the future of the Lock was seriously threatened.

The picture of Fred Newson has been replaced, pity, it was significant.

[senator]

" She added that increasing fuel prices and changing holiday patterns could be behind the falling figures. "

Maybe more traffic would pass through it if it worked? Getting to it in one direction or another means passing through Lowestoft Road Bridge which once through you will have to wait till the next opening to get out, or passing through the unreliable Somerleyton Bridge. It is also a long way from Breydon and Great Yarmouth as most that use the lock cant get under St. Olives bridge so will have to trawl all the way back up the new cut and back to Breydon to get to GY.

If they want boats to use it they have to make it work reliably or people won't take the risk.

On the face of it good news though, maybe they are starting to panic (finally) about the exodus of the cash cow.

 

[JennyMorgan]

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/river_toll_changes_blamed_for_closure_of_thorpe_st_andrew_ferry_service_1_4766498

Apparently Mr Wakelin's toll is going to drop so perhaps his argument is flawed nevertheless I cannot accept that the £600 toll he does pay can be seen as remotely fair.

[kfurbank]

Not flawed Peter, have you seen the size of the ferry? The equivalent sized hire boat will see a big drop in toll. Even the very biggest hire boats only see a very modest increase. To quote Mark directly "Under the new changes, Mr Wakelin claimed that while his toll would remain the same, hire boats of the same size will pay significantly less – despite making more money."

Mark has got it very slightly wrong, I believe he might see a £10 drop in his toll. Not as much as the same size hire boat, but still better than a £68 increase that the BA would like to see from me. Stuff them, The Thames beckons. At least there are plenty of open pubs by the side of the river!!!, oh and rubbish facilities and moorings!!!

[JennyMorgan]

Hireboats have the run of the Broads, ferries, by their very nature, have a very limited cruising ground. 

[Vaughan]

I have just had an e-mail letter from the River Cruiser Class. Their boats are going up by 20% with several as high as 30 or even 50, in the case of boats like Maidie.

They say that the NSBA has put forward alternative proposals which would still raise the money without such drastic increases, but the BA are sticking to their plan as they say that they "have had very few letters expressing dis-satisfaction".

They therefore recommend as many as possible to write in and complain, to www.John.Packman@broads-authority.gov.uk

[Oddfellow]

I believe that this whole issue has been orchestrated by JP. 

The facts are laid bare in the BA's own documentation: hire boat numbers are dropping; that means that the goose that lays the golden egg is unwell. Revenues from hire are unlikely to increase unless you increase the tolls, but that is likely to have a more negative effect in the longer term. 

The Broads is still the cheapest navigation in the UK to house a boat. The BA knows this. So, by squeezing the income from private boats, the revenue generated can remain acceptable for the BA whilst doing something to discourage hire boat numbers from dwindling further. If some private boats go, that is acceptable to the BA; others will come. 

The clever bit is deflecting the argument; this is now about private VS hire when it should be all about Tolls Payers (stakeholders) against the BA. 

There is no argument that the BA needs funds and that users should pay their way. The arguments are how the BA wastes money; how it treats people; how it deflects arguments; gets involved in things that it should not and conversely fails to get involved in things that it should (refuse locations being a prime example). 

Yes, complain. Complain directly to Packman and, I would urge everyone to also also copy the letters to the EDP and BBC so that there can be no argument that there is disquiet out there. 

[JennyMorgan]

There is even more dubious goings on going on, if I believe what I'm told by a very reliable source. I have always regarded JP as the ultimate control freak, to use modern parlance. I have permission from the originator of the following information to go public. Since I know, from personal experience, that it goes on I have no hesitation in relaying this information.

Apparently and reportedly there are certain BA members,  such as Gail Harris, Bill Dickson, Michael Whitaker and Nav Com member Linda Aspland who, who on receiving correspondence regarding the tolls review, are forwarding said correspondence on to JP for him "... to coordinate our replies and provide consistent and accurate information."

Some of the members obviously do not have their own opinions!

 

If anyone wishes to post this elsewhere then please do. I find the whole grubby saga absolutely distasteful although it's what I have come to expect from that quango.

 

 

 

 

 

 Bill Dickson, Michael Whitaker and Linda Aspland (navcom member only) to that list.

[Oddfellow]

16 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

There is even more dubious goings on going on, if I believe what I'm told by a very reliable source. I have always regarded JP as the ultimate control freak, to use modern parlance. I have permission from the originator of the following information to go public. Since I know, from personal experience, that it goes on I have no hesitation in relaying this information.

Apparently and reportedly there are certain BA members,  such as Gail Harris, Bill Dickson, Michael Whitaker and Nav Com member Linda Aspland who, who on receiving correspondence regarding the tolls review, are forwarding said correspondence on to JP for him "... to coordinate our replies and provide consistent and accurate information."

Some of the members obviously do not have their own opinions!

 

If anyone wishes to post this elsewhere then please do. I find the whole grubby saga absolutely distasteful although it's what I have come to expect from that quango.

 

 

 

 

 

 Bill Dickson, Michael Whitaker and Linda Aspland (navcom member only) to that list.

This is so that members toe the Collective Responsibility line. This is basically a total gag on members. Whilst they are free to have their own opinions, they are also completely free to keep such opinions to themselves. In fact, if they do not, they are ejected from the BA. 

This makes a total mockery of membership of the BA. The quango is answerable to nobody yet runs under the thinly veiled premise that it is answerable to the members. However, as the members are all gagged, they are mere puppets. The pretence is wearing thin yet the teflon-coated puppeteers remain in post serving whatever ends they see as beneficial.

 

[JawsOrca]

Interesting reading.. I'm on the fence (assuming I understand correctly)..

Smaller boats are charged less, big boats are charged more (Yes boats with bowsprits get it tough, but marinas charge at overall lenght so you guys are surely used to it?).. it's kinda encouraging smaller boats which in turn will give more moorings.. you get alot more fun in smaller boats too.. You really don't need a Broom 50 on the broads! 

I'm sorry to advise too boating isn't cheap, if we have or own boat, I'm sorry but we are loaded, I don't expect anyone to make our lives cheaper, it really a case of if you can't afford it then sadly you can't afford it. We do get a lot back for our tolls compared to other systems, yes it would be nice to get more value for money but it's the way of the world now.

I also understand the basics of making figures balance.. if you take from one you have to balance elsewhere.... I'm sorry but I see that it see it makes sense to balance as has been done (Ok yup it's a bit extreme and valid points about the BA's costs etc)..  I think it's also encouraging to see a reduction in the hireboat fleet tolls, the broads needs the hireboats to keep it affordable and stop it from going snobby like the thames! Everyone will soon be moaning when you have to pay £25 a night for a mooring in a crap marina! That's what it's like outside of the broads!

Yes there's room to make it a bit fairer but a rise of £20 for Orca (and a £30 reduction for Jaws).. I'm really not bothered. (We do need bins though).

The broads are still very very good value for money and the times we spend up there are amazing.. well worth it..

[Oddfellow]

I have just read some very unfavourable comments on another forum and there is a general consensus of organising a protest at Yare House to coincide with the next Navigation Committee meeting on the 18th November 2016. 

I rather support the idea of direct protest; it creates something that becomes instantly newsworthy and getting the dissatisfaction known to a wider audience is THE ONLY way that people who answer to nobody begin to feel just a little heat. 

I agree with JawsOcra's comment above. The Broads are good value and there can be nobody who feels that boat ownership is cheap. But I also agree that the changes aren't necessarily fair. For instance, they fail to  take into account the value of a boat.The value of a 40ft 30year old bathtub is much lower than a 2 year old 40ft gin palace yet both are set to pay the same or similar amounts; perhaps value is the wrong terminology; conceived ability to pay would be better (it would be fair to assume that a £300,000 boat's owner would be more able to pay an increased toll than the owner of a £30k boat). 

So, now I have set private against private too. The BA is attempting to divide and conquer; don't let it. 

From my perspective, I really haven't worked out what, if any, saving my small business will make. It can't be more than the value of a night or two at the theatre. It really isn't important to me. The saving will be so low as to be insignificant in the grand scheme of things that I really don't care.

Are the tolls fairer? They may be/may not be. The answer will depend on what kind of tolls payer (stakeholder) you are. Some will save a little, others will pay more. That's the way the cookie crumbles in financial things. The BA needs money so that it can waste it as it sees fit. That money is in the pockets of tolls payers. If you don't like it; vote with your feet (and placards) - email David who is trying to set up a protest are Yare House. davidw_947@hotmail.com 

 

 

[MauriceMynah]

I find myself wondering if the issue Peter has highlighted is in the least bit surprising, or even unacceptable.

Surely it has to be that when a group of people within an organisation are being written to by the general public on one subject, that group should respond with the 'company line' on the matter. it is known as "singing from the same hymn sheet.

 To generate that company line, I would expect no other than the boss to supply it. John Packman is the CEO. He says what the company line is to be. How he comes to that 'line' and what that 'line' might be, can be the subject of complaint, but certainly not the fact that he insists that his troops follow it, or even that he disciplines any who do not.

On that forum I allude to (as has Andy), I too notice that they are up in arms about all this and have within their thread given names and addresses of relevant people to write to. I still read that forum as I have many friends who didn't move across when I did, but this issue is far more important than any differences I have with it's team,

I might even suggest that this issue is more important than either forum is individually and that unity not only between hirers and owners, boaters and anglers etc. but unity between forums would be advisable.

I would happily shake the hands of each and every one of NBF's team if it could help us all to confront JP as a united group.

And, No! I can't believe I've just said that! but I have, and I would.

[JennyMorgan]

Unlike a company the Broads Authority is supposedly made up of members from representative various shareholder groups. The Broads is a very wide cathedral, naturally those groups will represent a wide, if not vast range of opinions, not just that one opinion from above. As things are I firmly believe that there are members who are toeing the party line and in doing so are  betraying the very people that they are there to represent. What can we do about that? Nothing.

[Timbo]

andrea.leadsom.mp@parliament.uk Don't forget to copy in The Boss.

[Matt]

If the BA really wanted to help hirefleet then they should be setting tolls several years in advance, not several months.

 

The hirefleet must have made assumptions on next years tolls and built that into their pricing structure before printing brochures etc

 

I wonder what they assumed.......!

[JennyMorgan]

I wonder, Matt, into whose pocket will any benefit be paid? Will it be the hirer's? I doubt it!