Section 6: Other licence-related issues

155. There are several other licence-related issues which have come up in the course of our work.

Houseboat Certificates55

156. We noted earlier the existence of Houseboat Certificates. These certificates are available for boats moored on sites for which residential planning permission has been given. They are issued under section 6 of the British Waterways Act 1971. Contrary to general understanding of the term, the Act does not require a boat to be lived on to be a houseboat. Whether they live on them or not, holders of Houseboat Certificates are able to use their boats to navigate the waterways in the same way as holders of standard licences, even though the essential criterion defining a houseboat under the Act appears to be that it is not used bona fide for navigation.
157. There are currently only 43 certificates in existence. Holders now pay the same licence fees as other boaters with home moorings. As we understand it, the only additional benefits they provide over a standard licence are that:

• i. The holder has an associated right to moor at a Trust mooring site where one is specified on the certificate throughout the period of the validity of the certificate, which can be up to three years. When selling a boat with a Houseboat Certificate the holder is able to assign that right with the certificate to a person approved by the Trust. However, the right to assign only applies for the remaining time left on the certificate and so is of limited value. Moreover, if right to assign was regarded as important, it would be possible to achieve the same result through a contractual term in a Trust mooring agreement.
• ii. Holders of certificates on Trust-owned mooring sites may have the right to another residential mooring if the existing one is removed. These rights appear, however, to be the result of undertakings which are separate to the certificate and would not therefore be affected by a switch from a certificate to a standard licence. They are also personal to the individual and not transferable.

158. Houseboat Certificates seem to us to be a historical anomaly. As far as we can see, they do not cause any significant issues demanding immediate action. If, however, the Trust is seeking legislation for other reasons, it would seem sensible to use the opportunity to simplify the licence fee structure in a minor way. Existing holders should be allowed to continue to hold them until they expire, which at a maximum would take only three years and, in most cases, less. We recommend that Houseboat Certificates should be abolished and replaced by standard licences.

Definition of historic boats

159. At present a boat qualifies for a licence fee discount of 10 per cent if it is more than 50 years old. An increasing number of Springer56 and other boats that would not usually be regarded as historic in any meaningful sense of the term are coming within the scope of this definition. The Historic Narrowboat Club has suggested changing the definition of “historic” for discount purposes from “over 50 years” to “predating 1965”. This seems sensible to us, provided canal historians can confirm that 1965 is a significant milestone. For other craft and for rivers or coastal waters the significant dates may be different. Providing a licence fee discount for boats which are not genuinely historic seems unnecessary and likely to bring the arrangement into disrepute. The assessment criteria should be publicly available. One possibility might be to link the discount to the National Register of Historic Vessels (NRHV), so that decisions about eligibility for the discount are taken independently of the Trust. We recommend that the Trust should initiate a discussion with stakeholders about the historic boat assessment criteria and process with a view to ensuring the associated licence fee discount is serving its intended purpose and, if it does, consider whether a larger discount would be appropriate.

Discounts and surcharges

160. A variety of other discounts and surcharges on the basic licence fee are available for certain types of vessels. Electric boats, for example, enjoy a discount. Wide-beam boats and boats without a home mooring pay surcharges. We have not examined these arrangements in detail. As a general point, however, it is clear to us that any discount or surcharge should be determined according to basic principles related to the Trust’s corporate objectives and charitable objects, should be capable of being explained in a clear and transparent way and should be reviewed periodically to ensure it remains relevant and aligned with current circumstances. We recommend that all fee discounts and surcharges applied by the Trust should be determined by general principles related to its corporate objectives and charitable objects, should be capable of clear and transparent explanation, and should be reviewed periodically to ensure they remain appropriate.

Accounting for licence fees

161. A number of respondents to our survey expressed the view that they receive poor value for money in return for their licence fees. We suggested earlier that in part that may reflect a reaction to recent increases above the rate of inflation. It is also related to concerns about maintenance of locks and other structures and the condition and number of sanitation and other services provided by the Trust.
162. 162. As mentioned earlier the Trust is already attempting to mitigate some of these concerns, within financial constraints, through its Better Boating Plan. An additional way of mitigating perceptions of poor value for money would be a clear exposition of the uses to which licence fee income is put in terms which are relevant and intelligible to licence fee payers. The Trust already does this to some extent in the analysis in its Boater Reports. This analysis references the costs of maintaining and repairing reservoirs as well as expenditure on things like waste disposal or lock gate maintenance. However, the Trust does not know how many licence holders look at that section of the Report; and while parts of the analysis will appear relevant to users, others may not. Keeping canals in water is clearly a very important part of what the Trust does. But some licence holders, whether reasonably or not, appear to regard it as a basic function that should be funded by the Government grant rather than by their licence fees. It might also be helpful to make clear how much of any expenditure which is visible to boaters but not immediately relevant to navigation, like expenditure on towpaths, is funded by third parties, not out of licence fee income. As part of improving relations with boaters in the context of the Better Boating Plan, we recommend that the Trust should produce a clearer exposition of the uses to which licence fee income is put and from which licence holders benefit in terms which make sense to licence holders, building on the existing analysis in its Boater Report. It should make that analysis widely available.

Work boats

163. Work boats, of which there are a number owned by commercial operators and not by the Trust, are currently required to have a home mooring. It is not immediately obvious to us why this is necessary. Abolishing the requirement might in a small way have the effect of encouraging more people to offer work boat services.

Boats under shared ownership

164. We understand that some boats are owned by more than one person, either through a formal agreement between different parties about sharing use and cost of upkeep or under more informal arrangements. This is often referred to as shared ownership. Shared ownership can be a cheaper way of accessing boat ownership for those who do not have the means to own a boat outright but who want more than can be provided by occasional use of hire boats. The Trust is unable to tell us how many boats are in this category because applicants for licences are not required to provide detail about ownership.
165. Licence fees for shared ownership boats cost the same as any other boat of the same length, beam and mooring status. Other things being equal, we would expect shared ownership boats to be in use more often than average and therefore to make greater demands on Trust resources. It could be argued that would justify a higher licence fee. Our view, however, is that that would be a mistake. Extent of use is not a criterion applied to licence fees for other leisure boaters; and we believe that the Trust should be encouraging access to boating for those for whom it would not otherwise be affordable or cost effective, not creating a disincentive.
166. The Trust has told us that it is involved in several ongoing disputes with organisations which it believes are operating sham shared ownership models by applying for private boat licences in the name of boat owners who are paying these companies to rent their boats to others for profit. In the Trust’s view these arrangements should be subject to a business licence.

Tenders

167. Tenders, defined as small boats not more than three metres long that are carried on, or towed by, a licensed boat, do not require separate licences. Butties (i.e. unpowered boats towed by another boat as part of a pair) and tenders more than three metres long do require their own licences. If tenders are to continue to have the advantage of free inclusion with a main licence, it is important that they are used considerately, for example not occupying bankside mooring that could be used by other boats or as access points for paddlers and anglers. They should also not be moored alongside their parent boat in a way which prevents double mooring or causes navigation difficulties for others.

55 One member of the Commission is a holder of a Houseboat Certificate and has therefore declared an interest which has not affected the recommendation in paragraph 158.

56 Springers are a popular range of relatively cheap and reliable boats. They are no longer in production.