Bill on Harbour Authorities Power

[Hightower]

Makes an interesting read, if you haven't already!

RYA calls for (recreational) boaters' views... | News | News & Events | RYA

[starnetman2001]

Madness!

[Ribochet]

Good post

Bloody hell - the inmates would be running the asylum - can you image the "laws" they would make up to ban leisure activity.

Good on the RYA - they need our support - register your view

VOICE YOUR*VIEW ON GOVERNMENT PROPOSAL TO GIVE UNRESTRICTED POWER TO HARBOUR AUTHORITIES Survey

[mister p]

Chaps, open the link and go to register your post, then choose, the third (last) option is of most interest but I believe that to be your own choice fellas.

[kerny]

Done it

[CJL]

Done it as well!!!

[mick]

Done it

[paddlers]

Done.

[Anchorhandler]

Bit of a "storm in a tea cup" if you ask me......

Im quite familliar with the bill as the pilotage ammendment generally apply to us (unless im missing something which i dont think i am)

The bill states that Harbour Authorities will have the power to "make directions" meaning that they can set rules concerning the use of the harbour/port.

The Following is Copy/Pasted from the bill

40A Directions
(1) A designated harbour authority may give directions (“harbour directions”) in respect of ships—
(a) within their harbour, or
(b) entering or leaving their harbour.

(2) A harbour direction may relate to—
(a) the movement of ships;
(b) mooring or unmooring;

(c) equipment (including nature and use);

(d) the manning of ships.

A set proceedure must be followed before any harbour direction can be introduced:

(1) Harbour directions must be in writing.
(2) Before giving harbour directions a harbour authority must consult such
representatives of users of the harbour as the authority think
appropriate.
(3) A harbour authority must make such arrangements as they think
appropriate for publicising a proposed harbour direction for at least 28
days before it is given.
(4) A harbour authority must—
(a) make harbour directions available for inspection, and
(b) supply a copy to anyone who requests it.
(5) A harbour authority may charge for the supply of copies.
(6) As soon as is reasonably practicable after giving a harbour direction the harbour authority must publish a notice in a newspaper specialising in
shipping news—
(a) stating that a harbour direction has been given, and
(b) giving details of the arrangements for the inspection and supply
of copies of harbour directions.

I personally feel the RYA are scaremongering as i really dont see that this bill will have any dramatic effect on boating life as we know it.

Simon

[mister p]

I think the issue is related to Harbour Authorities being able to criminalise misdemeanour and behaviour that they deem to be misdemeanour without any recourse to the law as it stands.
Essentially they allow themselves to call the law where it doesn't exist and as a result there is no defence to that calling.
I'd stand against that.
Trivial or not.

[CJL]

Well personally I already feel the power wielded is a bit much.

Very little accountability or oversight isn't a good thing.

1. Setting charges and then applying them to strangers but not regulars.
2. Setting speed limits in areas then exempting the large wash creating vessels
3. Only providing for commercial operations and regarding leisure users as second class
4. Requiring boats to display lights contrary to Colregs,

are just some of the things I've come across.

I mean anybody who can force criminal sanctions on you should work to very clear and transparent rules and with oversight - Everybody else does RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) or has policies on how and who they prosecution

Giving independent, small and unaccountable bodies more power is a bad idea!

Chris

[mister p]

Originally Posted by CJL

Well personally I already feel the power wielded is a bit much.

Very little accountability or oversight isn't a good thing.

1. Setting charges and then applying them to strangers but not regulars.
2. Setting speed limits in areas then exempting the large wash creating vessels
3. Only providing for commercial operations and regarding leisure users as second class
4. Requiring boats to display lights contrary to Colregs,

are just some of the things I've come across.

I mean anybody who can force criminal sanctions on you should work to very clear and transparent rules and with oversight - Everybody else does RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) or has policies on how and who they prosecution

Giving independent, small and unaccountable bodies more power is a bad idea!

Chris

There you are,

Good call CJL

[Cookee]

Originally Posted by CJL

1. Setting charges and then applying them to strangers but not regulars.
2. Setting speed limits in areas then exempting the large wash creating vessels
3. Only providing for commercial operations and regarding leisure users as second class
4. Requiring boats to display lights contrary to Colregs,

Chris

I assume the above is a Thames thing - I certainly haven't encountered anything of the sort - How can a harbour authority have the power to make you display different lights?

Having said that I have signed the petition or whatever it is!

[Tim M]

Chris is referring to some of the regulations on the Thames. The PLA is a total nightmare; they make rules up to suit their mood, with huge detriment to the wider boating community. The new speed limit is a prime example: they claim that leisure users can apply for an exemption permit, but they've made the requirements to get this permit virtually impossible.

They are clearly trying to protect the out dated traditions of the river. This doesn't include supporting the likes of London Duck Tours, London RIB Voyages, Thames RIB experience, and Solent RIB charter, largely because they are run by people who aren't traditional river folk. As a consequence, these companies have had to spend a small fortune jumping through the new hoops which came in July, have lost staff who don't meet the new (irrelevant) requirements, and are now finding it hard to find new staff who are suitable qualified. It just does't make sense.

Here's a nice example of a PLA launch obeying their own regulations with regards wash (we had requested a pass with caution prior to this). One rule for us, another for them....

[Cookee]

I see - I suspected that was the case - Would I be correct in thinking that the Thames situation is unique or are there some megalomaniac harbour masters out there in the rest of the country?

[NSS]

Done, and thanks for bringing it to our attention.

[Pikey Dave]

Ahem, if one clears ones cookies, one could vote multiple times...in theory................

[Tim M]

Originally Posted by Cookee

I see - I suspected that was the case - Would I be correct in thinking that the Thames situation is unique or are there some megalomaniac harbour masters out there in the rest of the country?

Unique. Where else are Maydays and panpans handled on channel 14! (Another thing to confuse the non locals)

[lakelandterrier]

Done

I toally agree with CJL, some harbour authorities already "over police" recreational users whilst allowing local commercial and public sector users a lot of leeway.

Classic example i have witnessesed is one HA patrol chastising a rib for creating too much wash at 5kts under the 6kt limit, whilst the Royal Navy was tearing up the river 400m away doing donuts at full speed creating massive washes. it's not as if the sea was more than 1 mile away.

Heaven knows what might become a criminal offence if left to some harbour authorities....failure to display harbour dues sticker "clearly"?

[ian parkes]

Ahh bill put forward by Sheryl Murray our hard working local MP.
she does work so hard for us all