Liverpool City Council propose charging for Park use

[muttley9050]

I think it's necessary to  only charge a rate that is commensurate with the business share of the cost of using the publicly funded area, any more would be a tax purely to benefit the councils' coffers. In a public park there are costs associated with grass cutting, leaf collection, path maintenance, litter picking car parking etc. What costs are involved in running a beach?

I think it's rather naive to think that there are no costs in running a beach. A lot of beaches have flora to maintain, lifeguards to pay, a small fortune in erosion management. Path maintenance to beech, possibly steep and dangerous if not maintained. Car parking as you mention for parks but this should be self funding in both cases. Litter picking needs doing on beaches too.
I would say there are potentially more costs in beaches than parks, depending on the beach.

[openspaceman]

1 minute ago, muttley9050 said:

I think it's rather naive to think that there are no costs in running a beach. A lot of beaches have flora to maintain, lifeguards to pay, a small fortune in erosion management. Path maintenance to beech, possibly steep and dangerous if not maintained. Car parking as you mention for parks but this should be self funding in both cases. Litter picking needs doing on beaches too.
I would say there are potentially more costs in beaches than parks, depending on the beach.

Why call me naive when I posed a question? I have no knowledge of the costs involved in managing a beach.

 

The principal remains the same, if a commercial undertaking makes used of a facitlity maintained by public funds for public use then they should pay that portion of the costs attributed to their activity. Asking them to pay more is  a tax on the commercial activity.

 

How it can be done equitably and without incurring unnecessary addition costs or bureaucracy is the problem.

 

WRT professional dog walking I suspect much of this is cash in hand and outwith the economy or control

[muttley9050]

Why call me naive when I posed a question? I have no knowledge of the costs involved in managing a beach.
 
The principal remains the same, if a commercial undertaking makes used of a facitlity maintained by public funds for public use then they should pay that portion of the costs attributed to their activity. Asking them to pay more is  a tax on the commercial activity.
 
How it can be done equitably and without incurring unnecessary addition costs or bureaucracy is the problem.
 
WRT professional dog walking I suspect much of this is cash in hand and outwith the economy or control

I agree with your sentiment exactly. And apologies for making it look like I was calling you naive. I too have little understanding of costs of running beaches and I'm sure there are many more. Any busy public space is going to suffer running costs. I assume beaches will be higher as they are generally more dangerous places. (Gangs, muggings, rapes etc excluded)
Charging cash in hand businesses to use parks might make them have to pay tax, although I too doubt a profit will ever be the outcome.

[eggsarascal]

Off topic!

 

I might take up dog walking for a living, there is a woman in town who charges £10/1 hour walk. Four dogs at a time gets £120 for three hours a day strolling in the countryside. I could live with that!

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

15 minutes ago, eggsarascal said:

Off topic!

 

I might take up dog walking for a living, there is a woman in town who charges £10/1 hour walk. Four dogs at a time gets £120 for three hours a day strolling in the countryside. I could live with that!

? but if she’s got big kit to cover, insurance, training to cover should she charge more???  ??

[agrimog]

an interesting discussion on an interesting subject, now a few home truths.... a councill is the elected officials that are supposed to oversea the running of the area, they are supported in this task by a local authourity (authourity comes from the elected officials, they do not have any of there own) and are not allowed to own property, they can only hold it in trust for the people, so in fact they are proposing to charge the people to use the property they already own.

this is becoming a bigger and bigger con, as the population are fed more lies and cons, they actually start and believe what the conmen are telling them, im afraid this country for too many years has steadily gone down hill with more and more politicians, both local and national, lining there own pockets at the expense of the common man, and now, with media support, the lies are getting bgger. and the populus dumber, if the people of liverpool allow this to happen, its the start of them paying for everything they already own, and the idea being spread to the sheeple across the rest of the country.......................nd if you dont believe this, look up  the councills act.

[agrimog]

and if you want further proof............check up on your own area, how many schools, public buildings, LA's etc are registred as non public ltd companies with the heads of the LA depts listed as directors