Seil Chat

Anyone got any spare change to buy a radio license for the Easdale ferry.

I believe the cost is £15 for a portable set or £20 for a fixed set.

I'll pledge a £1.00 on top of the council tax I already pay for this service.

Anyone else?

This post has been deleted by the Moderator following a complaint. The post contained allegations of a serious nature which may indeed be libellous.

What I was alluding too is that the council that take our money every year to fund this service and keep well paid idiots in the job of managing it , have recently been inspected by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency.

The Easdale ferry has failed to pass on no less than 11 counts. Some of these being more serious than others and in no way the fault of the ferrymen as these issues have been raised with the council on several occaisons prior to this. From what I believe they ranged from liferaft deployment, radio communication issues, manning and radio licensing, and a few others.

Whats interesting is the failure of the council to spend £15 on a radio licence effectively voided the public liability insurance on the boat.

In the meantime, we the taxpayer are picking up the tab for a costly and totally inappropriate vessel to carry out the relief service whilst the faults to the ferry are being dealt with.

What are we paying these idiots on the council for???

Bring on the bridge!

[quote

The Easdale ferry has failed to pass on no less than 11 counts. From what I believe they ranged from liferaft deployment, radio communication issues, manning and radio licensing, and a few others.

Whats interesting is the failure of the council to spend £15 on a radio licence effectively voided the public liability insurance on the boat.
What are we paying these idiots on the council for??

"innefficiency,incompetence and because we let them do it Not stood for the council ourselves"

Serious point that all the above faults failings etc pale into insignificance if the public liability insurance is invalid
however which member of above council is to be prosecuted
If not Why Not

maybe Nick and his fellow boatnicks can tell us the reality of the reported situation

TEDDY

.
Teddy, Eric knows more than me. I believe there were known issues which meant the boat was bound to fail its annual MCA inspection if they weren't addressed. These issues were allegedly raised repeatedly by the ferrymen but ignored. I believe one of the issues was that the liferaft was beyond its compulsory service date, but this is only hearsay.

Suffice it to say that the end result is no proper ferry for a week and SeaFari taking the public shilling for providing a damp and somewhat irregular service.

Maybe it is time for a bridge - the council could probably manage to run that. Anyone from Easdale care to comment?


(On another matter, Teddy, to quote part of a post just highlight the words in your post that are part of the quote and click the quote button - much easier and clearer if you want to quote someone.)

I don't find the Sea.fari crossing any more damp or irregular than the ferry service.

.
We went down there with visitors on Monday and there was no 12.30 or 12.45 ferry. There was a notice up explaining that due to other committments the ferry would be running irregularly.

It would appear that it has been running at the times you wanted to use it, but the regular timetable has not always been adhered to, nor would one realistically expect SeaFari to be able to do so at short notice.

The SeaFari boat is hardly an ideal ferry. One of our visitors (a novice to boat travel) would not go on the SeaFari boat because it was not what they were expecting, and so the Puffer lost four lunches.

All this is beside the point anyway - the point under discussion, I thought, was the incompetence of the council in allowing the regular ferry to fail its MCA exam and having to withdraw it from service while the spare boat was also u/s. It's pretty fortunate for them (and Easdale Island) that SeaFari were around to offer their services.

NickB wrote:.
It's pretty fortunate for them (and Easdale Island) that SeaFari were around to offer their services.

Yeah; a snip at £1,000 a day!
Nice work if you can get it.
(Note: Manifesto promise....buy twenty rowing boats and leave them for free use at the ferry slips, save thousands on even just one weeks' ferry hire from SeaFart)

Shankers (skulling by choice)

Are you for or against a bridge - Shankers?

Are you for or against a bridge - Shankers?

I've put a poll in the Open Polls section. It will run for two weeks.

It ain't obvious how to access your new poll, Nick.

.
Poll is HERE

Eric the Viking wrote:Are you for or against a bridge - Shankers?

Well, bearing in mind the elections to the CC (sometime in the next four years maybe) I have to tread fairly carefully as I have my prospective contsituents to think about.
It seems, according to the MacB poll, that the causeway is receiving overwhelming support so I may lean that way. However that may upset my yachtie ( ) voters and they may need a quid pro quo so, if I go for the causeway I may also provide free moorings at Port nam Feoleann, below Dun Macaig. That should please the anti-yachties too.
Reset assured, Derek, that I will do whatever it takes to help hard working Easdale families in these difficult times, which are affecting every island in the world and, we must remember, started in America, not Easdale.

Gordon Shanks (Not aplogising by choice)

(On another matter, Teddy, to quote part of a post just highlight the words in your post that are part of the quote and click the quote button - much easier and clearer if you want to quote someone.)[/quote]
ta.
teddy

Pleased to see that the second posting has been removed. There appears to be some unpleasant commentators in this neck of the woods, making wild accusations about folk simply trying to get on with their job, in what may already be difficult enough circumstances.

Would a new bridge into Seal Island from the mainland not be better? The old bridge looks great, but is just not up to modern standards, particularly for those with caravans. Given that more visitors = more money spent = more jobs in the tourist industry = greater prosperity for all = better facilities = more visitors etc, I am sure that a better bridge would be a real Virtuous Cycle for the local economy.

You could still keep the old bridge for its scenic value, and perhaps build a new one somewhere else.

Nice attempt at a wind-up scair...why not knock it down instead???

You could still keep the old bridge for its scenic value, and perhaps build a new one somewhere else.[/quote]

Dunoon Perhaps

Teddy

Latest Council report out for Easdale - no new bridges then; not even a fixed link of any kind - what a surprise!

Mind you, the community led ferry service could be entertaining! I can see the cost of ferry fares spiralling as I write.

http://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/moderngov ... x?ID=40860

Option 3.2 below fills me with enormous hope that those responsible will end up making the best decision on behalf of the community.

3.2 The Part 1 Draft Report was made available in December 2007 following detailed
consultations with key stakeholders in May 2007. It identified four options which
included the following:-
1. A replacement ferry
2. A hovercraft, although knowledge gaps were identified which needed to be
filled prior to a decision to develop the option to STAG 2
3. A solid causeway
4. A bridge

Why on earth wasn't this option included in the recent poll on here?