Harbours Advisory Committee

29 June 2026

Coastline Cruises Berthing Fee Waiver Request Report

For Recommendation to Cabinet Member

Cabinet Member: Click or tap to enter a date.

Cllr J Andrews, Place Services

Local Councillor(s): All Councillors

Senior Leadership Team:

J Britton - Executive Director, Regeneration, Infrastructure and Growth

Report author and job title: Ed Carter – Dorset Council Harbours Manager & Weymouth Harbour Master

Email: ed.carter@dorsetcouncil.gov.uk

Statutory Authority: Weymouth Harbour Revision Order 2021 and the Lyme Regis, Bridport (West Bay), and Weymouth Harbour Revision Order 2026

Report status: Public Choose an item.

Executive summary

1.1	This paper has been prepared to allow members of the Harbours Advisory Committee to consider a request from Coastline Cruises/Weymouth Maritime Heritage Community Interest Company (CIC). The request relates to the potential introduction and application of a discretionary harbour fee waiver for two historic vessels currently operating from Weymouth Harbour: My Girl and Enchantress.

This document sets out the factual background to the request, recent changes to charging arrangements, and relevant operational and policy considerations.

Recommendation

2.1	That the members of the Harbours Advisory Committee recommend to the Cabinet Member for Place Services to either:

deny the request for a discretionary harbour fee waiver

or

grant the request for a discretionary harbour fee waiver

Reason for the recommendation

3.1	Coastline Cruises, operating through Weymouth Maritime Heritage Community Interest Company (CIC), is requesting that Dorset Council consider granting a discretionary waiver of harbour charges for two vessels, My Girl and Enchantress, currently based and operating from Weymouth Harbour.

Specifically, the request seeks:

The full or partial waiver of harbour berthing and associated operating charges, over and above:

The reductions already applied following the recent Operating Berth Licence review; and

The discretionary 20% berthing fee discount currently applied to charity‑owned vessels, and recently extended to Community Interest Companies.

4.	The report

4.1	The vessels

My Girl and Enchantress are described by the applicant as the only surviving historic vessels currently operating from Weymouth Harbour. Both vessels continue to trade, offering passenger trips within the harbour and local coastal waters.

The vessels are now held within a Community Interest Company, established to secure their long‑term preservation and operation for community benefit rather than private profit.

4.2	Historic and heritage context

The applicant states that both vessels have historic associations with maritime activity supporting the operation and protection of Portland Harbour during the Second World War, when the harbour functioned as a strategically important naval base. It is argued that few vessels connected with this period remain operational and that the continued presence of these boats provides a living link to Weymouth and Portland’s wartime maritime history.

The request also highlights the contribution the vessels make to the traditional character and appearance of Weymouth Harbour and their role as working examples of historic fishing, harbour‑working, and coastal craft.

4.3	Public benefit and current use

The vessels operate regular trips for residents and visitors, offering access to Weymouth Harbour from what is described as an authentic historic working craft. The applicant considers this to provide an educational and heritage benefit alongside a contribution to the local tourism economy.

The continued operational use of the vessels is presented as a means of keeping maritime heritage active and visible, rather than confined to static display.

4.4	Financial position and operating costs

Harbour charges are identified by the applicant as the principal fixed operating cost affecting the vessels. Recent correspondence includes historic accounts from the vessels’ previous operating company, Coastline Cruises Ltd, showing a cumulative loss.

The applicant states that, as heritage vessels operated for community benefit, income is variable and does not consistently offset fixed costs. It is suggested that without relief from harbour charges, the long‑term maintenance and operation of the vessels within Weymouth Harbour may not be viable, and that removal from the harbour could result.

4.5	Operating Berth Licence review and recent fee changes

Weymouth Harbour has recently completed a review of Operating Berth Licences, of which Coastline Cruises is a licensee. The review identified inconsistencies in how fees were applied across operators, with some paying proportionally higher charges than others.

As part of that process, fees were realigned to improve fairness and consistency. As a result, Coastline Cruises’ operating berth charges have reduced compared with previous years.

In addition, it has been agreed that, as a registered Community Interest Company, Coastline Cruises is eligible for the same discretionary 20% discount on berthing fees as charity‑owned vessels. This discount is applied in addition to the reductions resulting from the Operating Berth Licence review.

The combined effect of these changes is a reduction in harbour charges when compared with those previously paid.

4.6	Charging framework, fairness, and precedent

The management of Weymouth Harbour is based on the principles of consistency, transparency, and fairness for all harbour users. Harbour charges are formally set, published, and reviewed annually through an established benchmarking process, with oversight and participation from the Harbours Advisory Committee. This framework is intended to ensure charges are proportionate, defensible, and applied equitably across comparable classes of operator.

A consistent charging structure provides a level playing field for commercial operators, enabling businesses to operate according to their own models within a shared framework of rules, regulations, and fees. Harbour charges are not generally open to individual negotiation, as differential arrangements risk undermining both fairness and confidence in the system.

This approach aligns with the principles set out in the recent statement issued to commercial marine operators, which clarifies the Council’s statutory responsibilities as Harbour Authority. As set out in that statement, Dorset Council’s role is to ensure harbours are managed safely, lawfully, and efficiently. The Council is not authorised to control commercial competition between operators, nor to guarantee the viability of individual business models.

While officers recognise that different operators face different financial pressures, making bespoke arrangements based on individual circumstances introduces inherent inequity. If exceptions are made for one operator, fairness would require that similar consideration be given to others, each of whom may be able to advance their own justification for special treatment. Managing the harbour on this basis would not be sustainable and would undermine the consistency required to operate a busy commercial harbour effectively.

Members should also note that Coastline Cruises’ charges have already been reviewed and reduced through formal mechanisms designed to address proportionality and fairness, and that the CIC discount has been applied in line with existing discretionary practice rather than through case‑specific negotiation.

While the historic and cultural value of My Girl and Enchantress is acknowledged, members are invited to consider whether moving beyond established and published charging frameworks risks setting a precedent that could encourage further representations from other operators seeking individual adjustments to suit their own circumstances.

Members should note that wider proposals relating to potential heritage development or infrastructure investment (see Point 4.8) would be subject to separate consideration and do not in themselves provide a basis for altering established charging arrangements.

4.7	Supporting representations

Following the original request, the vessel owner has submitted further correspondence, copying in Lloyd Hatton MP. This correspondence includes letters of support from:

National Historic Ships

Weymouth Museum

Weymouth Civic Society

The office of Lloyd Hatton MP

These letters outline the organisations and representative’s views on the heritage significance of My Girl and Enchantress and the value of retaining historic working vessels within Weymouth Harbour. Copies are provided as annexes to this paper.

4.8	Emerging proposals for heritage development and infrastructure

Following submission of the original request, the applicant has provided further correspondence outlining a broader concept for the potential development of Weymouth Harbour’s maritime heritage offer.

This includes exploring:

The potential for Weymouth Harbour to seek recognition as a registered Historic Harbour through the Maritime Heritage Trust and National Historic Ships UK;

The possible development of infrastructure to support the care, preservation, and restoration of historic vessels, including opportunities linked to traditional skills, apprenticeships, and community initiatives;

The potential for additional historic vessels, including the National Historic Ship Golden Vanity, to operate from the harbour;

Improvements to existing mooring arrangements within the Coastline Cruises area, including the possible installation of short finger jetties to enhance accessibility and operational flexibility.

The correspondence also indicates that the applicant would be willing to investigate external funding opportunities to support such infrastructure and has expressed support in principle for the use of a lease arrangement for the relevant pontoon area as a potential delivery mechanism.

These proposals are currently conceptual and exploratory in nature, with further feasibility work, design development, and funding considerations yet to be undertaken. No formal application or detailed scheme has been submitted to the Harbour Authority at this stage.

Members are advised that these emerging proposals are separate from, and do not directly form part of, the current request for a discretionary harbour fee waiver, which relates specifically to the application of existing charging arrangements to the two vessels currently in operation.

Alternative options considered

5.1	None.

Legal considerations

6.1	Dorset Council acts as the Statutory Harbour Authority for Weymouth Harbour under the Weymouth Harbour Revision Order 2021 and related harbour legislation. In that role, the Council is legally responsible for ensuring that the harbour is managed safely, efficiently, and in compliance with applicable statutory duties, including the principles set out in the Port Marine Safety Code and wider public law.

6.2	The Council’s powers as Harbour Authority extend to the regulation of navigation, safety, and the effective management of harbour space and infrastructure. They do not extend to regulating commercial competition between operators or guaranteeing the financial viability of individual businesses. The viability of commercial marine operations remains the responsibility of the operator.

6.3	Harbour charges are set, published, and reviewed through established governance arrangements, including annual benchmarking and oversight by the Harbours Advisory Committee. These charges must be applied in a manner that is fair, transparent, and non‑discriminatory. While the Council retains discretion in the setting and application of harbour charges, any departure from published charging frameworks must be objectively justified, legally robust, and compatible with public law principles of fairness, consistency, and reasonableness.

6.4	Selective concessions or bespoke charging arrangements for individual operators may give rise to legal and governance risks, particularly where comparable operators are subject to different treatment. Such arrangements may also risk setting precedents that could undermine the Council’s ability to demonstrate consistent and equitable management of the harbour.

6.5	Members should also have regard to the Council’s duties under competition and administrative law, which require that decisions do not distort competition or confer an unfair advantage in the absence of a clear and defensible legal basis. Decisions that appear arbitrary, inconsistent, or not grounded in established policy may be susceptible to challenge.

6.6	In considering the request for a discretionary berthing fee waiver, members must therefore ensure that any decision taken is within the Council’s statutory powers, aligned with its published charging framework, and capable of being applied consistently across the harbour user community.

7.	Financial implications

7.1	Harbour charges contribute to the funding required to operate, maintain, and manage Weymouth Harbour in a safe and efficient manner. Income from berth licences and harbour dues supports core harbour functions, including staffing, infrastructure maintenance, statutory compliance, and safety management.

7.2	Coastline Cruises’ harbour charges have already been reduced following the recent Operating Berth Licence review, which realigned fees to improve proportionality and consistency across operators. In addition, the vessels now benefit from a discretionary 20% berthing fee discount applied to Community Interest Companies, consistent with the approach taken for charity‑owned vessels.

7.3	Granting any further discretionary waiver or reduction in harbour charges would result in a loss of harbour income beyond that already taken into account within current budgets. While the financial impact of a single waiver may be limited in isolation, members should consider the potential cumulative impact should similar requests be made by other operators and granted on a comparable basis.

7.4	There is no budget provision specifically allocated for supporting individual commercial or community‑based marine operations through fee waivers. Any reduction in income would therefore need to be absorbed within existing harbour budgets or offset through increased charges elsewhere, which may have implications for other harbour users.

7.5	Members may wish to consider the longer‑term financial sustainability of the harbour when assessing the request, including the importance of maintaining a consistent and predictable income stream to support statutory harbour authority functions.

8.	Natural environment, climate & ecology implications

8.1	The request relates solely to the level of harbour charges applied to two existing vessels currently operating from Weymouth Harbour. It does not seek any change to vessel operations, permitted activities, berthing locations, or operating patterns.

8.2	As such, there are no direct natural environment, climate, or ecological implications arising from the consideration of this request. The operation of the vessels remains subject to existing regulatory frameworks, including vessel certification, harbour byelaws, environmental protection legislation, and pollution prevention requirements.

8.3	Any decision made in relation to harbour charges would not alter the Council’s ability to regulate environmental matters within the harbour, nor would it affect compliance with existing environmental management practices or statutory duties relating to the marine and coastal environment.

8.4	The harbour authority’s responsibilities in respect of environmental protection, climate resilience, and ecological safeguards remain unchanged regardless of the outcome of this request.

9.	Well-being and health implications

9.1	The request relates to harbour charging arrangements only and does not propose any change to vessel operations, access arrangements, or the use of harbour space.

9.2	As such, there are no direct health or well‑being implications arising from the consideration of this request. The operation of the vessels remains subject to existing safety standards, licensing requirements, and regulatory oversight to ensure the safety of passengers, crew, harbour users, and the public.

9.3	While the applicant highlights the cultural and heritage value of the vessels and their role in contributing to the local visitor experience, any broader community well‑being considerations are indirect and must be balanced against the Council’s responsibility to manage the harbour consistently and fairly for all users.

9.4	The Council’s role in safeguarding health and well‑being within the harbour environment remains focused on ensuring safe navigation, compliance with safety regulations, and equitable access to harbour facilities, all of which are unaffected by the outcome of this request.

10.

Other implications

10.1	None.

11.

Risk implications

11.1	HAVING CONSIDERED: the risks associated with this decision; the level of risk has been identified as:

Current Risk: Medium

Residual Risk: Low

In overall terms, the level of risk associated with this matter is influenced by whether any decision would depart from the Council’s established and published charging framework.

Decisions that maintain the application of charges in line with existing policy, governance arrangements, and agreed discretionary mechanisms carry a lower risk profile, as they align with established practice and are readily defensible.

By contrast, decisions that introduce additional case‑specific concessions or bespoke arrangements increase exposure to governance, precedent, and reputational risks, particularly where comparable operators may seek similar consideration.

Members are therefore invited to have regard not only to the individual circumstances of this request, but also to the broader implications for consistency, transparency, and long‑term harbour management.

12.

Equalities

12.1	There are no equalities impact issues resulting from the subject of this report.

13.

Appendices

13.1	Appendix One – NHS Letter of Support
Appendix Two – Weymouth Museum Letter of Support
Appendix Three – Weymouth Civic Society Letter of Support
Appendix Four – Lloyd Hatton MP Letter of Support

14.

Background papers

14.1	None.

15.	Report sign-off

15.1	This report has been through the internal report clearance process and has been signed off by the Director for Legal and Democratic (Monitoring Officer), the Executive Director for Corporate Development (Section 151 Officer) and the appropriate Portfolio Holder(s).