Jump to content

Something To Cause A Bit Of Debate?


alan_fincher

Featured Posts

For anybody tired of the detail of how the new forum software is working, (or isn't), here's a possible diversion, which I am sure will draw views from just about one end of the spectrum to the other.

What to the team think?

Panda Smith's latest petition.

(O.K. There is a degree of "Light blue touch paper, and retire immediatly" about this post :lol:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't difficult to get permission to teach your own children. A couple of people did it here and their children are as bright as a button.

One of the children was born on the boat too.

Edited by bizzard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather than get into the nitty gritty of what constitutes use of a boat "bona fide for navigation throughout the period", I'll just make the pragmatic point that I always struggle to see why people find it so difficult and/or undesirable to comply with CRT's guidelines. I mean, CCers don't actually have to "travel 20 miles before turning round", as the petition author says, do they? They just have to move to a new place every 14 days and have a cruising range of more than 20 miles a year. So they could happily pootle up and down a 5-mile stretch during term time and do at least one longer cruise during the school holidays, which would be jolly good fun, an enriching experience for the kids, and cheaper than any other sort of holiday. Personally I think I'd be trying to do a week or two's cruising during the Easter and summer holidays plus a few days during half terms and the odd (bank holiday?) weekend, which would surely meet any criteria for "genuine" CCing CRT are ever likely to dream up.

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/02/2017 at 12:32, magictime said:

Rather than get into the nitty gritty of what constitutes use of a boat "bona fide for navigation throughout the period", I'll just make the pragmatic point that I always struggle to see why people find it so difficult and/or undesirable to comply with CRT's guidelines. I mean, CCers don't actually have to "travel 20 miles before turning round", as the petition author says, do they? They just have to move to a new place every 14 days and have a cruising range of more than 20 miles a year. So they could happily pootle up and down a 5-mile stretch during term time and do at least one longer cruise during the school holidays, which would be jolly good fun, an enriching experience for the kids, and cheaper than any other sort of holiday. Personally I think I'd be trying to do a week or two's cruising during the Easter and summer holidays plus a few days during half terms and the odd (bank holiday?) weekend, which would surely meet any criteria for "genuine" CCing CRT are ever likely to dream up.

I suspect anyone with only a 5 mile range for most of the year would start getting CC1 "non compliance" letters fairly soon, particularly if they were in an area like London or the western K and A where there is lots of focus on enforcement and lots of pressure on moorings.

I find myself torn between two opposing ideas on this. On one hand, if you have something like children needing education in one place, then you're not truly CCing in the original meaning, and ought to get a mooring.

But, on the other hand, it's easy to say that but harder to do; there are no affordable or available moorings in many areas, and it's all very well saying to someone "get one" but if they can't afford to, they can't. Benefits may be in theory available, but are often very hard to get, particularly without a postcode, and an attitude of the bureaucrats of "computer says no".

I'm not sure what the solution is. I don't think there is one that would be applicable to all. Perhaps a roving mooring permit for an area, available monthly; so the hypothetical family could pay an affordable amount to stay in one smaller area during term time, but cruise more widely afield in the holidays. 

I suppose the problem that CRT would point put would be their status and not being able to offer moorings very much less costly than others in the area due to the competition regulations, hence a roving mooring permit to allow a smaller cruising range, rather than a mooring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, FadeToScarlet said:

I suspect anyone with only a 5 mile range for most of the year would start getting CC1 "non compliance" letters fairly soon, particularly if they were in an area like London or the western K and A where there is lots of focus on enforcement and lots of pressure on moorings.

Yeah, you might well be right - although I can imagine a court taking a pretty dim view of CRT talking in their guidelines about the sort of annual cruising range they'd be likely to have an issue with (less than 15-20 miles), and then taking action against someone on the basis that although their annual range is, say, 200 miles, their monthly range is only 5. In any case, I still question whether a bit of regular weekend-and-holiday cruising from spring to autumn, putting you well outside your "home" stretch for a few days here and a week there, could fail to qualify as "compliant" CCing on any interpretation of the rules CRT are ever likely to try to make stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One wonders how the quoted Primary School head would react if a family of travelers set up in the playground and said, " “I feel very strongly that this is an issue concerning Human Rights. I do believe that the law is clear that children should be in education, and attending very regularly. Our children's attendance is carefully monitored and by law children are only allowed to be absent for exceptional circumstances. I don't think that any of the laws that refer to boating Travellers were intended to make it impossible for the children of parents who continuously cruise travel [ie. live on a boat in a caravan without a permanent mooring site] to attend a local school."  

I came across this while looking for something else. Had me worried for a bit, until I realised that you can't believe everything on the internet! (Leaving aside the obvious typos!)

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Iain_S said:

One wonders how the quoted Primary School head would react if a family of travelers set up in the playground and said, " “I feel very strongly that this is an issue concerning Human Rights. I do believe that the law is clear that children should be in education, and attending very regularly. Our children's attendance is carefully monitored and by law children are only allowed to be absent for exceptional circumstances. I don't think that any of the laws that refer to boating Travellers were intended to make it impossible for the children of parents who continuously cruise travel [ie. live on a boat in a caravan without a permanent mooring site] to attend a local school."  

I came across this while looking for something else. Had me worried for a bit, until I realised that you can't believe everything on the internet! (Leaving aside the obvious typos!)

Gyosy and IrishTravellers used to be able to send their children to a local school, carrying a 'log book' that showed what education they had received and the school would be able to provide some continuity of education. Children can be home educated without too much difficulty, it is not difficult to register as a home educator. Difficulties arise with the GCSE years which are the 2 years preceding taking exams as there is a set curriculum of work so continuity becomes impossible if a family moves regularly. However Gypsy/Irish travellers often take their children out of secondary education when they reach puberty, moving around makes it complicated for the local authority to keep track of them and indeed enforce attendance for education.

The Bath scenario is a little different as it would seem parents wish to maintain continuity of education and relationships in peer groups for their children. It cannot be easy if you are on a limited income to cruise and travel to and from school. Whether this makes this right or wrong is another matter, to which there is no easy solution as there are many variables at play such as income, access to work,  lack of suitable accommodation, family and local ties and so on. Also including what has been considered acceptable patterns of movement in the past by BW.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, matty40s said:

I know at least 3 sets of families quute well which move around a fair bit (more than 20 miles) whilst getting the kids to school everyday, and then in the holidays move away and enjoy boating like the rest o us can.

Panda and the K&A NBTA just don't want to move any further than the waterpoint and cite all sorts of Human Rights violations if  CRT worker asks them to do anything at all.

Of course kids need educating.

If you sign for the "no home mooring" licence conditions, you adapt your family to suit, not expect CRT to give up enforcement and have a bloody free for all on the nearest moorings to the local creche/bakery/school/nice pub/etc

mmmmmmmm I think we should be allowed to flout the legislation with regards the " Pub " though dont you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The petition doesn't even make sense really. The"rules" don't prevent children who live on boats going to school, only children of boaters who continuously cruise. It might as well petition for Continuous Cruisers to be allowed to stay in one place.

i am not saying that I agree or don't agree with the current rules for continuous cruising, just that the petition is daft. Plainly, if you have kids of school age, and you want them to go to school, you could never also meet the criterion "in spirit" of being a continuous cruiser.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t want to comment on the feasibility or desirability of continously cruising and educating children. But from a school's perspective there are two sets of problems. - one soluble, the other more complicated.

The legislation is clear.  Schools must not discriminate against children whose parents are on the move.  There are various ways to make this lifestyle possible.  For example, children may be registered at more than one school with a “base school” identified where the child spends most of the time.  Schools are allowed to increase the class size to accommodate travelling children.  There is a special code in the attendance register to record the absences of such children so that they are not regarded as “unauthorised absences”.  The rules are quite complicated and I bet not all governing bodies are aware of them.  However, there should be absolutely no discrimination and schools must be made aware of their obligations.

More problematical is the question of admission and this is especially difficult when schools are oversubscribed.  All schools have to have a legally binding admissions policy which sets out how children are admitted.  There is usually a pecking order - children in the care of the local authority are placed at the top of the list, followed by children with acute social or medical problems.  Next often comes siblings and various other criteria are applied (e.g. church attendance for faith schools).  Then there is the criterion of distance from the school to the home address. I honestly don’t know how the school where I’m a governor would respond to a boater with no fixed home address.  There is nothing in our admissions policy which mentions itinerant boat families. However, I did ensure that our catchment area included a boat dwelling community on the Thames.


I would be very interested to know what difficulties, if any, continuous cruising families encountered when applying to the school of their choice. I know this may be a contentious matter, so PM me if you prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AndyV said:

The petition doesn't even make sense really. The"rules" don't prevent children who live on boats going to school, only children of boaters who continuously cruise. It might as well petition for Continuous Cruisers to be allowed to stay in one place.

i am not saying that I agree or don't agree with the current rules for continuous cruising, just that the petition is daft. Plainly, if you have kids of school age, and you want them to go to school, you could never also meet the criterion "in spirit" of being a continuous cruiser.

Yes quite. More commonly known as pee taking if you need to be in one place and take kids to school then you need a mooring its extremely simple but a small portion of boaters will always choose to find the very easy rules easy to understand. Of course no one forces people to live an " alternative " lifestyle its a lifestyle choice.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, pearley said:

It's a pity that these petitions don't have a 'disagree' button.

Totally agree.  CRT must come down hard on those who want to take up residence in one small area so as to be near schools, work or anything else, or large areas of the system will become like London. If people want children then it is their responsibility to live a lifestyle which allows their kids to attend school..

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, bizzard said:

It isn't difficult to get permission to teach your own children. A couple of people did it here and their children are as bright as a button.

One of the children was born on the boat too.

I agree - home schooling is pretty common here, not just for those kids on stations a few hundred miles from the nearest school but in the urban areas as well.  Last time I looked (in the days when I was employed in the education sector) it was about 2% of the school population.

You can home school on the boat and therefore there is no issue with moving.  Not I suspect, a solution that is indended by the petitioner(s)

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have lived on my yachts for a large part of my life. Many yachting families have children and cruise the world happily educating their own small children or using correspondence courses when their children get older. This seems to work very well. Lets face it these people are just using their kids as an excuse not to move.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, sailor0500 said:

I have lived on my yachts for a large part of my life. Many yachting families have children and cruise the world happily educating their own small children or using correspondence courses when their children get older. This seems to work very well. Lets face it these people are just using their kids as an excuse not to move.

I read a book many years ago, think it was called just cruising by liza copeland. They did exactly this, and I think the kinds turned out ok.

Edited by rusty69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh dear, what a shame:

The policy means that children who live on boats can end up having to travel up to 20 miles to school which is not always possible. If the parents are unable to travel that far, they risk losing their home.

I can think of plenty of areas around here where children may travel that distance, and sometimes more, to get to school. Perhaps Panda would like to get all the rural village schools reopened.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Graham Davis said:

Oh dear, what a shame:

The policy means that children who live on boats can end up having to travel up to 20 miles to school which is not always possible. If the parents are unable to travel that far, they risk losing their home.

I can think of plenty of areas around here where children may travel that distance, and sometimes more, to get to school. Perhaps Panda would like to get all the rural village schools reopened.

I agree up here the local secondary schools have the second largest catchment area  in England with the travel distances to match.  There is even an LA boarding house at one Lake District School.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is possible to arrange a bus pass for school children to cut down the travelling. We did for my stepson when he was at secondary school, my other half would drop him off at a regular bus stop and collect him from there, thus cutting down the distance from the boat, even though our position varied. You can apply to the local authority school education transport dept to arrange this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.