No powers to enforce 'no return'

IT HAS been discovered that Canal & River Trust (CaRT) does not have the specific powers to introduce the 'no return' mooring rules, and that the former British Waterways was refused such powers.

A complaint has been made to the Information Commissioner due to CaRT not responding to an information request to determine if an assertion made by the National Association of Boat Owners (NABO) concerning such powers is correct, writes Allan Richards.

Commenting on the outcome of the South East Visitor Mooring consultation which imposes new mooring restrictions, NABO has stated: 'There is no specific power for the introduction of the right of "no return" and we know that British Waterways was refused these powers in the build-up to the 1995 Act'.

No response

Following NABO's denial of CaRT's powers to impose moorings restrictions which include a 'no return rule' at some of its visitor moorings, a request was made under the Freedom of Information Act for a copy of BW's private Bill which eventually became the British Waterways 1995 Act.

However, despite two reminders, CaRT have not responded to the request within the timescale required by law.

Rationale

Bearing in mind that the 1995 Act makes almost no mention of mooring restrictions, the rationale behind the request was to determine if British Waterways had asked parliament, via its private Bill (which eventually became the 1995 Act), for the power to restrict a boats return to a place where it had previously moored.

Such wording in the Bill would be a strong indicator that CaRT's powers to impose such a mooring restriction required an Act of Parliament and that at least some of its claimed powers simply do not exist.

The Bill

CaRT's choice to ignore the law despite being reminded twice of its responsibilities has resulted in a complaint to the Information Commissioner. However, CaRT is well aware that it might take the Information Commissioner several months to order it to comply with the law.

Bad luck then that a copy of the Bill has been obtained from another source!

It can now be stated that NABO is entirely correct in saying that parliament denied BW the power to introduce a 'no return rule'.

Indeed, it can categorically be stated that parliament denied British Waterways the power to to regulate mooring by imposing restrictions!

Claimed it has powers

CaRT (and before it British Waterways) have always claimed that it has powers granted by Act of parliament (specifically section 43 of the 1962 British Waterways Act) that enable it to do just about anything it wishes to including imposing terms and conditions relating to licencing.

However, if this were true then a need would not have existed for British Waterways to introduce a Bill that specifically gave it power to prohibit or control mooring. Section 18 of the Bill states:-

No person shall moor or leave a vessel in contravention of a notice prominently displayed by the board in or beside any inland waterway

• (a) prohibiting the mooring of all vessels, or of vessels other than the kind of vessel or vessels specified in the notice, on any part of the inland waterway so specified; or
• (b) making requirements as to the manner in which vessels are to be moored in the part of the inland waterway so specified and (without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing) the means by which vessels are to be fastened or secured; or
• (c) specifying the maximum period, hours of the day or night, or days of the week, during which mooring (whether of all vessels, or of vessels of a kind or kinds specified in the notice) is permitted or prohibited, as the case may be.

Section removed

Quite simply, the 1995 Act did not give British Waterways the powers that they asked for in Section 18. The section was removed in its entirety.

So, unless CaRT can provide a plausible explanation as to why it requested powers to regulate mooring and why these powers were refused then we must assume that it is attempting to mislead the public with regard to its powers.

CaRT might argue that its Bill simply clarifies powers it already has. However, if this were the case then why did parliament refuse it?

The consultation

What boaters call the South East Visitor Mooring Consultation, CaRT actually called 'Refreshing signage and rules for South East visitor mooring sites'.

However, as British Waterways specifically asked for, and were refused, powers to make such rules it would appear that the consultation process was a complete sham.
.... but then it always was!