<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Regulating Punting in Cambridge in Summer 2009</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/regulating-punting-in-cambridge-in-summer-2009.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/regulating-punting-in-cambridge-in-summer-2009.html</link>
	<description>Cambridge, United Kingdom.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:15:46 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/regulating-punting-in-cambridge-in-summer-2009.html#comment-6652</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 04:41:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/?p=810#comment-6652</guid>
		<description>A &lt;a href="http://www.cambridge.gov.uk/public/councillors/agenda/2009/0312cs/09.pdf" rel="nofollow"&gt;report to today's Cambridge City Council Environment Scrutiny committee&lt;/a&gt; reveals the council is also setting its sights on Riverside:

&lt;blockquote&gt;The River Manager has also advised that her investigation into ownership of the retaining wall at Riverside has resulted in uncertainty, and thus requires further investigation. 
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A <a href="http://www.cambridge.gov.uk/public/councillors/agenda/2009/0312cs/09.pdf" rel="nofollow">report to today&#8217;s Cambridge City Council Environment Scrutiny committee</a> reveals the council is also setting its sights on Riverside:</p>
<blockquote><p>The River Manager has also advised that her investigation into ownership of the retaining wall at Riverside has resulted in uncertainty, and thus requires further investigation.
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/regulating-punting-in-cambridge-in-summer-2009.html#comment-6606</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:43:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/?p=810#comment-6606</guid>
		<description>I have spoken to a couple of independent punters this morning who were concerned that by promoting competition and commenting on the council's apparent intentions to heavily regulate punting in the city I was suggesting an unregulated free-for all. 

I am not, I had already written in the above article that I think keeping punting on the river safe clearly has to be a role of regulation. The Cam Conservators require commercial punters to have public liability insurance and have a code of practice. 

What the Cam Conservators can't currently do is limit the number of commercial punts registration or decide who they allow to register punts. 

If the numbers of punters are to be limited then there has to be a way to select fairly who gets to work on the river. The most likely method of regulation appears to be through the city council trying to control access points to the river.  There has not been transparency surrounding how the places on the La Mimosa punting station were allocated, some individuals were initially denied places but made a fuss and got them.  We cannot have a system which gives spaces to those who have been operating on the river for the longest, that isn't an open and fair system, it is also by its nature ageist.  

Interviews for prospective independent punt operators are being suggested by the council; there would have to be a clear set of criteria and guidelines and an independent panel making decisions. We can't have people not allowed to operate punts just because their face doesn't fit, or they are not liked by their competitors. Equally we need to ensure that criminal individuals, and those who are reckless with respect to safety are not able to operate. Allowing them to work may bring all independent punt operators into disrepute, and customers may stick with the well known brands. 

The public impression of independent punters is crucial to their success, various reputable independents are working on promoting themselves and their offerings, for example there is the &lt;a href="http://www.cambridgerivertour.co.uk/aboutus.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Cambridge River Tour&lt;/a&gt; website and suggestions of independent punters using a market stall from which to promote themselves in the summer. 

The discussions on how to approach this are currently underway within the city council; the reason for my freedom of information request, the response to which is given in the above article, was to open up these discussions and ensure they do not occur entirely in secret. 

The City of Cambridge needs good quality, reasonably priced, diverse offering of punt trips, punt hire etc..  This is critical for many of the City's businesses, particularly those in tourist industry, as it helps make Cambridge an attractive destination for all sorts of people including shoppers and academics as well as tourists. Customers of Cambridge's chauffeur punts have an expectation of safety and a certain quality and it is entirely right that residents of Cambridge, through the City Council try and ensure those expectations are met.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have spoken to a couple of independent punters this morning who were concerned that by promoting competition and commenting on the council&#8217;s apparent intentions to heavily regulate punting in the city I was suggesting an unregulated free-for all. </p>
<p>I am not, I had already written in the above article that I think keeping punting on the river safe clearly has to be a role of regulation. The Cam Conservators require commercial punters to have public liability insurance and have a code of practice. </p>
<p>What the Cam Conservators can&#8217;t currently do is limit the number of commercial punts registration or decide who they allow to register punts. </p>
<p>If the numbers of punters are to be limited then there has to be a way to select fairly who gets to work on the river. The most likely method of regulation appears to be through the city council trying to control access points to the river.  There has not been transparency surrounding how the places on the La Mimosa punting station were allocated, some individuals were initially denied places but made a fuss and got them.  We cannot have a system which gives spaces to those who have been operating on the river for the longest, that isn&#8217;t an open and fair system, it is also by its nature ageist.  </p>
<p>Interviews for prospective independent punt operators are being suggested by the council; there would have to be a clear set of criteria and guidelines and an independent panel making decisions. We can&#8217;t have people not allowed to operate punts just because their face doesn&#8217;t fit, or they are not liked by their competitors. Equally we need to ensure that criminal individuals, and those who are reckless with respect to safety are not able to operate. Allowing them to work may bring all independent punt operators into disrepute, and customers may stick with the well known brands. </p>
<p>The public impression of independent punters is crucial to their success, various reputable independents are working on promoting themselves and their offerings, for example there is the <a href="http://www.cambridgerivertour.co.uk/aboutus.html" rel="nofollow">Cambridge River Tour</a> website and suggestions of independent punters using a market stall from which to promote themselves in the summer. </p>
<p>The discussions on how to approach this are currently underway within the city council; the reason for my freedom of information request, the response to which is given in the above article, was to open up these discussions and ensure they do not occur entirely in secret. </p>
<p>The City of Cambridge needs good quality, reasonably priced, diverse offering of punt trips, punt hire etc..  This is critical for many of the City&#8217;s businesses, particularly those in tourist industry, as it helps make Cambridge an attractive destination for all sorts of people including shoppers and academics as well as tourists. Customers of Cambridge&#8217;s chauffeur punts have an expectation of safety and a certain quality and it is entirely right that residents of Cambridge, through the City Council try and ensure those expectations are met.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ferg</title>
		<link>http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/regulating-punting-in-cambridge-in-summer-2009.html#comment-6355</link>
		<dc:creator>ferg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:07:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/?p=810#comment-6355</guid>
		<description>Whereas being constantly bothered by touters during summer is annoying to the extent I avoid Quayside (The independents seem to be the best behaved). I'm sure a punt monopoly is not desirable for Cambridge. (I live in Cam).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whereas being constantly bothered by touters during summer is annoying to the extent I avoid Quayside (The independents seem to be the best behaved). I&#8217;m sure a punt monopoly is not desirable for Cambridge. (I live in Cam).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

