CalMac motorhome drivers face 70 per cent fare hike as loophole closed

SpeedyDux said:
Bear in mind that us Sassenachs are subsidising Scotland to the tune of £15.5 Bn annually under the Barnett Formula. That Calmac subsidy is basically our tax money they are withdrawing from mainly English motorhomers. Ingrates.

From here it looks like a Tourism hokey-cokey: not that long ago, they were desperate to attract us (NC500 massive publicity). Now they are trying to put some of us off visiting Scotland; or, at least the most scenic highlands and islands. Improving the roads and creating overnight aires would be better for everyone.
Click to expand...
That is factually incorrect. Engalnd does not subsidise Scotland, rather the reverse. Scotland and Wales between them generate tax revenues that cover some 125% of England's deficit. All of Scotland's tax revenues are sent to HM Treasury and some 60-65% are returned by what you describe as a subsidy. That is patently untrue. The Barnett Formula is merely a mechanism by which the return of Scotland'a tax revenues are calculated.

As I have stated in another post elsewhere, this Post is purely related to the economics and the processes involved in dealing with the tax revenues. Nothing more

Steve
 
marchie said:
That is factually incorrect. Engalnd does not subsidise Scotland, rather the reverse. Scotland and Wales between them generate tax revenues that cover some 125% of England's deficit. All of Scotland's tax revenues are sent to HM Treasury and some 60-65% are returned by what you describe as a subsidy. That is patently untrue. The Barnett Formula is merely a mechanism by which the return of Scotland'a tax revenues are calculated.
Click to expand...

Perhaps this is the real reason BJ is so against Independence.
 
MR. FUSION said:
I wonder what "demands from angry locals" actually means & who they are !! Some locals on islands & nearby mainland towns have motorhomes, so I doubt it was them.
Click to expand...
A common media misconception. I search highlands and lowlands last year and never came across any.
 
EuroTrotters said:
If you look to Norway and their island fleet, Calmac looks antiquated
Click to expand...
Have a look at the standard of living that Norway enjoys, it's amongst the best anywhere, thanks to their oil wealth, I'm certain that CalMac ferries would be of a similar standard if Scotland enjoyed the same wealth. A country with a similar population and geography
 
They were offered the old Pentland Ferries catamaran, did successful trials with it yet the still rejected it. !!
Likewise the new ferries Calmac changed the design specifications so many times and made no payments Ferguson Marine went bust !
To partly built ships are now 2 1/2 years overdue !
Latest bulshit from Calmac is tge are going to buy a secondhand catamaran from the Koreans.
They are a disgrace, a total failure that in everything they touch that why when we go north only use Pentland Ferries as they are reliable!

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Well I could give some rational comment but won't.
However I will say - for the benefit of those still interested in using the ferries despite the prices going up almost to the cost of a meal out - Uig Ferryport will be closed from September 2022 to February 2023.
www.motorhomefun.co.uk

Uig Ferryport Temporary Closure 2022/23 (Skye to Outer Hebrides)

If you or anyone you know is planning a trip to the Outer Hebrides next year, please be aware of the following, which will impact direct travel from Skye and also probably have a knock-on effect on capacity on other routes...
www.motorhomefun.co.uk www.motorhomefun.co.uk
 
The Wino said:
Maybe a better thread title would be motorhome fares rise to a realistic rate and lucky discount ends.
Click to expand...

I refer you to this earlier observation:

bigtwin said:
The spin being put on this (in the article) is very interesting.

Apparently, it’s unfair that a large private vehicle is not charged on a pro-rata basis with commercial vehicle rates.

Currently/previously large private vehicles have been charged on a pro-rata rate basis with small private vehicles (i.e. motorhomes are charged by length on a pro-rata basis with cars). Consequently, it cannot be argued that MHs are taking up a disproportionate amount of space when compared with private cars.

It’s interesting that there is no cry of disparity between rates paid by cars and those paid by commercial vehicles.

The argument doesn’t stand scrutiny.

Ian
Click to expand...

Ian
 
bigtwin said:
I refer you to this earlier observation:



Ian
Click to expand...
I think we're saying the same thing. In my case wish we'd gone when it was cheap must get around to the Sweden bridge while less than 6m counts as a car!

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
bigtwin said:
I refer you to this earlier observation:
Click to expand...
However the significant part as far as islanders are concerned is numbers of people. A small car may have 4 or 5 passengers; a large motorhome only 2. In the economics of island communities, that doesn't work. Some islanders were unable to get a space on ferries for 4 or 5 weeks this summer - and those spaces were needed for visiting family, hospital etc.
And trust me, there's been plenty of outcry about car subsidies and commercial vehicle lack of subsidy (consider who ultimately pays the commercial vehicles' costs).
The Wino said:
wish we'd gone when it was cheap
Click to expand...
It's still going to be cheap! It used to be RIDICULOUSY cheap.
 
Local said:
No they don't run 24/7. It's not just deck space! It's road space when large campers turn up on our single track roads. That's the issue.
Click to expand...
I think it's perfectly reasonable for local councils to limit the number of motorhomes and vehicles of other types that visit. That could be done by charging but it would be nice if there was a system of a draw for places so everyone has an equal chance despite their income
 
The Wino said:
I think we're saying the same thing. In my case wish we'd gone when it was cheap must get around to the Sweden bridge while less than 6m counts as a car!
Click to expand...

My dear departed Dad used to run a haulage business in the North Isles and he used to run a mildly modified Mercedes lorry that snuck under the 6m limit; it made all the difference to the viability/profitability of the business.

Ian
 
The Wino said:
I think it's perfectly reasonable for local councils to limit the number of motorhomes and vehicles of other types that visit. That could be done by charging but it would be nice if there was a system of a draw for places so everyone has an equal chance despite their income
Click to expand...
bigtwin said:
My dear departed Dad used to run a haulage business in the North Isles and he used to run a mildly modified Mercedes lorry that snuck under the 6m limit; it made all the difference to the viability/profitability of the business.
Click to expand...
Have to say I'd like to see a limit of 6m for leisure vehicles. I know that would rule out larger family motorhomes but no matter as my thoughts aren't going to change anything anyway :xrofl:

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
CWH said:
However the significant part as far as islanders are concerned is numbers of people. A small car may have 4 or 5 passengers; a large motorhome only 2. In the economics of island communities, that doesn't work. Some islanders were unable to get a space on ferries for 4 or 5 weeks this summer - and those spaces were needed for visiting family, hospital etc.
And trust me, there's been plenty of outcry about car subsidies and commercial vehicle lack of subsidy (consider who ultimately pays the commercial vehicles' costs).
Click to expand...

Not sure that you’re argument about (vehicle) passenger numbers would hold scrutiny but agree that the number of visitors matters to the local community.

I’m also not sure that the ferry company are acting to assist the local community but rather simply to increase their revenue; for the reasons outlined in my earlier post, I think the ferry company are being somewhat disingenuous.

Providing increased capacity would address the issues that you outline.

I’d agree on the point about the extent of the application of the RET though particularly given that there is no RET granted to Orkney; now that’s disparity.

Ian
 
My mate lives on Mull and is sick to death of CalMacs ineptitude.
He's had combined rail and ferry tickets before where the train was running slightly late, but the ferry still left on time, leaving him and some fellow travellers on the dockside.
He's had prebooked return tickets for a specific sailing, only to be turned away as there wasn't room, so had to sleep overnight in his car. He now has 3 kids under five years old (nowt else to do on Mull !) and can't risk that happening again.
He also told me of a time a few years ago, where the island's petrol stations were running out of fuel. A tanker was waiting to board at Oban, but a couple of coach loads of tourists turned up and boarded the ferry for a sightseeing tour (no plans to disembark) and the tanker wasn't allowed to travel.
 
bigtwin said:
Not sure that you’re argument about (vehicle) passenger numbers would hold scrutiny but agree that the number of visitors matters to the local community.
Click to expand...
I'm not referring to visitor (tourist) numbers in the way you mean Ian; I'm talking about island residents, their families and friends being prevented from travelling by smaller numbers of tourists taking up a greater proportion of deck space.
Or, as jockaneezer comments above.
bigtwin said:
I’m also not sure that the ferry company are acting to assist the local community but rather simply to increase their revenue; for the reasons outlined in my earlier post, I think the ferry company are being somewhat disingenuous.
Click to expand...
The ferries were set up as a 'lifeline service' for island communities. The subsidy was designed to assist this 'lifeline service'.
The subsidy is set/ removed by the Scottish government. The RET subsidy is about £25m p.a.; total ferry subsidy about £150m p.a.
bigtwin said:
Providing increased capacity would address the issues that you outline.
Click to expand...
Yes it would - but they've failed miserably in all their recent attempts to do that! (at great expense).
bigtwin said:
I’d agree on the point about the extent of the application of the RET though particularly given that there is no RET granted to Orkney; now that’s disparity.
Click to expand...
Ah - now we're getting into the realms of political fantasy! The vessels and ports are owned by CMAL which is wholly owned by Scottish ministers. The ferry operations company CFL is also wholly owned by Scottish ministers. Northern Isles ferry services are operated by Serco NorthLink. Draw your own conclusions.
 
The Wino said:
I think it's perfectly reasonable for local councils to limit the number of motorhomes and vehicles of other types that visit. That could be done by charging but it would be nice if there was a system of a draw for places so everyone has an equal chance despite their income
Click to expand...
If someone is going there with very limited income exactly how much are they going to spend in the local economy ? It’s always being said how much motorhome spend local and how they are doing so much good for the local economy. If they cannot afford the ferry they ain’t going to be spending much.
 
I think it comes down to equity. It should be a fair system for everybody.

Vehicles are split into commercial and non commercial rates. Non commercial are basically charged on length. Motorhomes are non commercial and charged at same pro rata rates as cars. CalMac are now going to change this and increase rates based on type of vehicle. Whether you see this as fair depends on your personal viewpoint.

It seems pretty much to be a revenue raising issue.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Stoosal said:
I think it comes down to equity. It should be a fair system for everybody.

Vehicles are split into commercial and non commercial rates. Non commercial are basically charged on length. Motorhomes are non commercial and charged at same pro rata rates as cars. CalMac are now going to change this and increase rates based on type of vehicle. Whether you see this as fair depends on your personal viewpoint.

It seems pretty much to be a revenue raising issue.
Click to expand...
When ever has there been a fair system for everyone on anything
 
Fair point.....! I should have learnt by this time in my life!
 
May be they could use a small coaster and deliver more commercial stuff in containers instead of trucks going on and off ?
 
Funny the pvt ferry ⛴ company’s like the crossing from Scotland to Belfast. Seem to charge motorhomes on the same pricing structure as cars. All be it the longer the more it costs. And they are more generous with the basic length before higher charges. Scotland ferries 6 mtr same as cars Pvt ferry fees under 7 Mtrs then more charges ?
 
Ivory55 said:
May be they could use a small coaster and deliver more commercial stuff in containers instead of trucks going on and off ?
Click to expand...
That would require more infrastructure to store/manage/move/load etc containers.. whereas at moment lorry turns up and drives onto ferry.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Ivory55 said:
What’s cheaper, cranes or special built ferry ?
Click to expand...
But it's not just cranes that would be required.
Container ships (of appropriate draft) + dedicated port infrastructure (how many of the islands?) + breakbulk warehousing + inventory financing + etc + etc + etc.
 

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Join us

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Back
Top