Thank you very much. I appreciate that very much.
Also, when I was elected to Islands Trust Council, a local government in British Columbia, whenever I said “derelict vessels”, it triggered live-aboards. People got very concerned. This is more of a west coast phenomenon than east coast. I've started saying “abandoned vessels”, and every time I could, I have tried to reassure people who are living on board their vessels that my legislative solution would not negatively affect them, would not limit them. When I read in clause 30(1) that:
It is prohibited for an owner of a dilapidated vessel to leave it stranded, grounded, including on the shore, anchored or moored in the same location...for a period of 60 consecutive days...
without
the express consent to leave the vessel from...the owner, manager or lessee of the location
that worries me.
Does your legislation restrict or limit live-aboards in any way?