Since my article in the last Bulletin on the proposed EC Directive on Recreational Craft, I can report as follows:

1. I let our RYA representative on the Class Associations Committee know of our uneasiness as there was a meeting imminent. This was at the beginning of June: so far I have not received any acknowledgement in return. From other sources I get the impression that the RYA seem unconcerned about the matter. Consultation with interested parties has been somewhat lacking and prominent boat builders have been as unaware of this impending legislation as we have.

However, recently the RYA has issued a statement to say that that they are worried about the possible effect on the user if the current draft of the Directive remains in its present form.

2. After my piece in the last Bulletin appeared, DCA member Bill Bailey rang me to say that he had been involved with this matter for some time. Representing MOCRA — Multihull Offshore Racing and Cruising Association — he had been instrumental, together with the Old Gaffers Association and the Cruising Association, in bringing their concerns to the attention of the UK representative. Through the information he supplied I was able to get us on the consultation list of the DTI for the proposed Directive. The Recreational Craft Directive must eventually go through, although its wording has not been finalised. Certain matters with the inclusion or not of existing craft, obviously of vital importance to the OGA, have not been settled and are being disputed.

3. The original idea behind the directive cannot be criticised, in that it seeks to integrate the standards to which new boats are built, thus easing trade in new boats between member states. The problem arises because certain authorities can be seen to — and national governments might — use it as an instrument to control our use of pleasure craft. The British Waterways Board, a commercial company, have managed to place a representative on our negotiating team in Brussels, though no user group is so represented. It is quite likely, for example, that they could see themselves as a ready made instrument for small craft registration, giving them useful extra income and ultimate control over craft using their waters.

4. Our UK Minister for Trade, Richard Needham, and the EC Vice President Martin Bangemann, also John Gummer, have conceded that: ‘HM Government have no intention of allowing the Directive to be used to regulate the actual use of recreational craft on the high seas’ and that ‘The Directive will not cover existing craft’.

We should hope that these statements can remove some of our anxiety, but registration of small craft and regulation of use still remains a threat beyond the present matters. This is the concern of every boat user group including the CA, RYA, OGA and MOCRA which have followed these issues.

5. It would appear, then, that our best hope of retaining our freedom is to express our concern to our MEP and our MP — our MEP because it is an EC matter, but our MP because eventually it is our national legislation that will control us if we allow.

To assist those about to put pen to paper —

a) The piece of legislation is ‘Proposed EC Directive on Recreational Craft’. b) Our concern is that we should be allowed our traditional freedom to sail anywhere on the sea in our own choice of craft and that neither the above directive nor any other legislation should curtail it. Please use your own wording however. c) Express yourself quietly but firmly; wild OTT letters do no good at all.

For interest, I append new suggestions for Boat Design Categories that have been put forward at the recent meeting for the proposed Directive. More logical perhaps?

Category Suitable for Beaufort Wind Force Wave Height (metres)

Ocean >8 >4 Offshore <8 >4 Inshore <7 <2 Sheltered <6 <0.5