The National Bargee Travellers Association (NBTA) has formally submitted a proposal to the Canal & River Trust (CRT) Board of Trustees, urging them to rescind the “Surcharge for boats without a home mooring”. We are publishing this document to share our case for removing a policy that places a disproportionate financial burden on itinerant boaters while delivering negligible revenue gains for the Trust.
Our proposal highlights that the surcharge was already rejected by 60% of respondents in the 2023 Boat Licence Consultation, faces united opposition across major waterway organisations, and has inadvertently driven up licence evasion and enforcement costs. We believe that dropping this policy is a vital step toward restoring goodwill and establishing a fair, constructive foundation for upcoming licensing consultations. Read the full proposal below.
Proposal to Rescind the Surcharge for Boats Without Home Mooring
Prepared by: National Bargee Travellers Association (NBTA)
Submitted to: Canal & River Trust (CRT) Chief Executive and Board of Trustees
Executive Summary
The NBTA formally requests that the CRT Board of Trustees immediately rescinds the “Surcharge for boats without a home mooring”. This policy introduces disproportionate socio-economic harm for a negligible financial gain, drives an increase in unlicensed boats, and lacks the support of the boating community and major national waterway organisations. Current financial and environmental challenges should not be an excuse for inequitable policies that disproportionately harm a minority. Rescinding this policy now will streamline upcoming licensing consultations, reduce enforcement costs, and restore vital goodwill between CRT and the boating community.
1. The Mandate Against the Surcharge has Already Been Established
Further consultation on this policy is redundant and an unnecessary expenditure of Trust resources. The 2023 Boat Licence Consultation provided a clear, definitive mandate: 60% of respondents rejected an itinerant boater surcharge.
Survey results:
Option ‘A’: 14% – no surcharge
Option ‘C’- 22% – no surcharge
Option ‘D’ – 24% – no surcharge
Option ‘B’ – 40% – surcharge included
Total: 60% favoured options that do not include a surcharge for boats without home mooring. The original wording of the published report did not make this clear.
This 60% rejection indicates broad opposition, particularly given the demographic weighting of the survey. With 76% of responses originating from boaters with a home mooring, the respondent pool was heavily biased toward the demographic most likely to benefit from a ‘Surcharge for boats without home mooring’. Despite this – 60% of respondents favoured options that did not include a surcharge for boats with a home mooring. Even with this intrinsic weighting, the policy failed to secure majority support.
2. Universal Opposition from Major Waterway Stakeholders
Almost all relevant major boating organisations have issued public statements rejecting the two-tier licensing system:
• Inland Waterways Association (IWA): “We do not support the proposal to raise licence fees for continuous cruisers above those with home moorings”.
• National Association of Boat Owners (NABO): “NABO’s stance has always been and continues to be that there should be one licence and one charge based on length of boat, not on use”.
• Accessible Waterways Association (AWA): “We are extremely disappointed with the proposed increase in licence fees… CCers are, as shown by the recently published CRT census, very much a minority group… and therefore, surely, cannot represent a significant enough income source for CRT to warrant the increased levies”.
• Kennet and Avon Boating Community: “We oppose this discriminatory and unfair move, which is the biggest attack on the community of liveaboard boaters without a home mooring since CRT’s 2015 enforcement policy”.
• National Bargee Travellers Association (NBTA): “We view this as a discriminatory policy that threatens to price a marginal community off the waterways they call home, representing a life-changing burden for an inconsequential gain in CRT income.”
3. Disproportionate Socio-Economic Harm versus Negligible Revenue Gain
CRT’s own 2023 Boat Licence Consultation demonstrates that boaters without home moorings are significantly more likely to have low incomes. Boaters without a home mooring were almost twice as likely to report household incomes below £20,000 (44% compared with 23%), and more than three times as likely to report incomes below £10,000 (20% compared with 6%). The consultation also shows an increased likelihood of boaters without home moorings being unemployed or disabled indicating further financial disadvantage.The latest Boater Census also found that itinerant boaters are more than three times as likely to face employment challenges than liveaboards with permanent moorings.
The surcharge effectively taxes the most socio-economically disadvantaged demographic on the waterways to offset a general funding shortfall. CRT’s official financial disclosures indicate that this surcharge will only raise the Trust’s total national income by an estimated 0.6%. Imposing disproportionate financial pressure on a disadvantaged minority for such a minor gain in operational revenue represents a highly inefficient and ethically questionable financial strategy.
4. Lack of Empirical Evidence Regarding Maintenance Costs
The premise that individually boaters without home moorings inherently cost more in maintenance is unsupported by operational realities.
As evidenced in the latest boater census, some boaters with home moorings utilise their moorings so infrequently that they effectively operate as itinerant boaters. Many home moorings lack facilities: less than half have private toilet and refuse disposal, and one third lack private water facilities. This means the majority of boats with home moorings will also have to use public CRT facilities in the same way as boats without home moorings, often moving their boats to do so. Conversely, many itinerant boaters now utilise off-grid solutions (e.g., water filtration systems and private compost waste collections) that drastically reduce their reliance on CRT infrastructure. Circular Revolution, a compost-toilet waste disposal service based in east London with a customer base consisting predominantly of boats without home moorings is operating at capacity, while major off grid water system providers estimate that around 1 in 8 boats without home moorings now have off grid water systems.
Furthermore, regular use of locks by itinerant boaters throughout the winter period actively mitigates the significant lock dredging and maintenance backlog that would otherwise accumulate prior to the summer boating season. There is no empirical justification for applying a blanket surcharge based on whether or not boaters have a home mooring.
5. Operational Risk: Driving Unlicensed Boats and Enforcement Costs
The perceived unfairness of this policy – which was enacted directly against popular opinion and survey results – is actively damaging Trust revenues. While NBTA maintains that all boats should be licensed, the reality is that the surcharge is viewed by many as a mechanism to incrementally price itinerant boaters off the waterways. Consequently, some boaters are being forced, or are actively choosing, to no longer pay into a system they perceive as fundamentally discriminatory.
This policy is driving a direct increase in unlicensed boats, which inversely drives up CRT’s enforcement costs and results in lost revenue. In London and the South East licence evasion has increased from 14% to 23% following the introduction of a surcharge for boats without home moorings. Rescinding the surcharge is a necessary first step to reversing this costly trend.
Conclusion and Call to Action
The CRT is preparing to undertake significant consultations on a wide range of complex licensing issues. Entering this period with the Surcharge for Boats Without a Home Mooring still active will unnecessarily complicate these discussions, drain administrative resources, and foster continued hostility.
Given that the policy was definitively rejected by the community, criticised by major stakeholders, imposes unfair socio-economic burdens, lacks empirical justification, and actively drives up enforcement costs – for minimal financial gain, we strongly recommend that the Board of Trustees cancel this policy immediately, without further redundant consultation.
National Bargee Travellers Association
August 2026
Matthew Symonds of CRT responded on 10th September 2026 saying CRT will not consider this until the forthcoming consultation has finished – which will be in March 2027:
Thank you for the email of 27 August to Canal & River Trust Executive and Board of Trustees re the NBTA
Proposal to Rescind the Surcharge for Boats Without Home Mooring. Campbell has asked me to confirm
receipt of your proposal and explain how the Trust will consider your request.
As you know, we’re currently working with boating organisations and stakeholders through a co-design
process to help shape the wider consultation on the Boating Commission Recommendations. We value the
contribution that the NBTA is making to these discussions, and appreciate the time and insight being
provided.
The Commission’s recommendations cover a broad range of topics, including the potential for licence price
differentiation and how discounts may be structured in the future. Given the breadth of these
recommendations, we feel it is important to consider the NBTA proposal alongside the feedback and
evidence gathered through the wider consultation process. We therefore expect to review it in full once the
consultation on the Commission’s recommendations has concluded in spring 2027. We will approach the
review of the NBTA proposal with an open mind, with no assumption of the result.
We remain very conscious of the pressures that many boaters continue to face as a result of the cost of
living. This will be an important consideration as we review annual licence increases later this year. We are
also continuing to strengthen the welfare support available to vulnerable boaters, working with partner
organisations to ensure help is available to those who need it most.