News From The BA

[JennyMorgan]

https://us16.campaign-archive.com/?e=259d8798cf&u=b957c2a429d58a35f9137b9c7&id=cc801ccf41

[grendel]

vote for them in national park of the year - well I can imagine your reaction to that one JM. have you cleaned the tea out of the keyboard yet?

[JennyMorgan]

I shall be voting for Snowdonia, may I suggest that others do too.

[batrabill]

Why? Just to be difficult?

[imtamping2]

I expect its because.........

                                                           

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, batrabill said:

Why? Just to be difficult?

I doubt it but just as I do Peter highly likely realises that Snowdonia is an official national park and the broads aren't , why the broads are even included I've not idea as they are only to bet referred to as a national park for marketing by BA and nothing else , they have not national park status officially and hence should not be included no matter how beautiful they are .

[batrabill]

This is absurd. The Broads are listed in the National Parks website as one of the National Parks. 

Draw your own conclusions. Or parrot what the school bully says. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, batrabill said:

This is absurd. The Broads are listed in the National Parks website as one of the National Parks. 

Draw your own conclusions. 

Why is it absurd is it LEGALLY a national park ? Has it got FULL national park status ? , I can call worm a snake but it doesn't mean that it is ! 

[batrabill]

Ah, fullness....

[Vaughan]

14 minutes ago, batrabill said:

This is absurd. The Broads are listed in the National Parks website as one of the National Parks. 

Draw your own conclusions. Or parrot what the school bully says. 

I can give you detailed and historical reasons why I am against NP status, which go back to well before the Broads Authority was ever created.

In view of your obvious intent to provoke dispute however, I will not bother to do so here.

[JennyMorgan]

 Bill, I was not going to be drawn into answering your predictably provocative comments but since you seem intent on arguing with the decision of our democratically elected Parliament then answer I will. 

Parliament is elected, it answers to the electorate, unlike the unaccountable, unelected quango that is the Broads Authority. At no point in its history has the Authority consulted on whether the Broads should be a national park or not, effectively that decision was taken away from the very people that the BA purports to serve. That aside, Parliament had the wisdom to turn down the Broads National Park bill because it was decided that the Broads Act as is offers suitable and adequate protection for the Broads whilst the National Parks Act does not. That is because the Broads is a harbour, a navigation and a tidal water, factors that must be protected. Like many I wish to see our rights of access and navigation protected, and that really is it in a nutshell. If you wish to put those rights at risk then that is your right, but personally I would rather safeguard them hence my stance against the Broads being a national park, one that would be managed by an unaccountable, unelected quango. The powers that come with being a national park must not to be entrusted to a quango such as the present incumbents of Yare House. Obviously my own personal opinion.  Over to you, Bill. 

[JennyMorgan]

I read this elsewhere, I think it worth repeating within the context of this thread:

First it (the Broads) is not, by statute, a national park. The Broads were specifically excluded from the 1949 Act creating the true NPs with their two purposes. The Broads Act created a separate entity that had three purposes: the true NP ones plus navigation and its protection. Later legislation imposed the Sanford Principle on the true NPs but not the Broads because primacy of conservation could not overrule the established navigation rights. The BA CEO tried to rename the Broads in a Bill but was quickly told by Defra to desist: his first draft of the eventual Broads Act 2009 was changed. The CEO hasn’t given up: under the guise of “branding“ the BNP lie is being promoted, his hope being that in time people will assume that the Broads should be a true NP including Sandford from which point closure of the navigation becomes easier according to conservationists. If you value the right of navigation you cannot accept the lie that the area is, or may legally become, a true national park.

[JennyMorgan]

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/broads-in-bbc-countryfile-s-national-park-of-the-year-awards-1-5361331

Don't forget, Snowdonia 

[Guest]

All this begs another question how can a senior member of one of the biggest hire company's on the Broads be pushing for something ie national park status that could easily see the end of navigation and hire company's ? .

As for country file I did have faith in that the BBC's flagship nature and countryside programme would know that the Broads DO NOT have national park status hence should not even be in the running for the award in the first place , just goes to show the British broadcasting company don't even know their own country 

[JawsOrca]

 

40 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/broads-in-bbc-countryfile-s-national-park-of-the-year-awards-1-5361331

Don't forget, Snowdonia 

Sorry Peter,  I voted new forest.. It's as cool as Britains magical waterway ;)

[JennyMorgan]

6 minutes ago, JawsOrca said:

 

Sorry Peter,  I voted new forest.. It's as cool as Britains magical waterway ;)

Apology accepted.

It is genuinely nice down there!

A few hundred extra tactical votes for Snowdonia might just swing it though.

[JohnK]

All this begs another question how can a senior member of one of the biggest hire company's on the Broads be pushing for something ie national park status that could easily see the end of navigation and hire company's ? .

Perhaps they believe calling it the Broads National Park without it being a full National Park is a good thing for the Broads (including the hire companies and boaters)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[batrabill]

10 hours ago, Vaughan said:

I can give you detailed and historical reasons why I am against NP status, which go back to well before the Broads Authority was ever created.

In view of your obvious intent to provoke dispute however, I will not bother to do so here.

Not dispute - just not a blind acceptance of the spin that the most vocal members put on this subject. I am not alone in this view. 

[MauriceMynah]

For me Bill, it was not "blind acceptance" I asked some years ago and in the different place, what was wrong with the broads becoming a National Park. I was answered by several people as to why it shouldn't, but not a single soul came up with any argument as to why it should.

I still await any discussion offering the "pros" as well as the "cons" with interest and if any argument can offer reasonable points in favour of NP status I could be swayed.

Many have said here that there are some who "bang on interminably" against the National Parks issue, as indeed some do, but to call anyone here "the school bully" is somewhat unjustified.

[JennyMorgan]

4 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:

For me Bill, it was not "blind acceptance" I asked some years ago and in the different place, what was wrong with the broads becoming a National Park. I was answered by several people as to why it shouldn't, but not a single soul came up with any argument as to why it should.

I still await any discussion offering the "pros" as well as the "cons" with interest and if any argument can offer reasonable points in favour of NP status I could be swayed.

Many have said here that there are some who "bang on interminably" against the National Parks issue, as indeed some do, but to call anyone here "the school bully" is somewhat unjustified.

The one person who should be promoting the advantages of National Park membership is the Chair Lady of the Broads Authority, or at least the Chief Executive. I am not aware that either has done so or even attempted to. I was a member of the navigation committee when the draft of the Broads National Park Bill was put on the desk before me. I was very clearly told that as a member I was expected to support the Authority Officers. At no point was the matter discussed, it seemingly being regarded as a fait accompli by the CEO. 

Inspection of the Broads Bill, as well as BA history, clearly indicates that it is all a question of excess control.  It would be nice to live and play in a national park, a spot of kudos I suppose. The whole idea of national parks was, as I understand it, to provide access and enjoyment of the countryside to the population, a principle that I wholly endorse, but to-date it has been more a case of conservation by exclusion, witness the attempted closure of Horsey Mere as being one example.

Like many I am not opposed to the idea of living in a national park but I am opposed to the planning and development blights that an unwise authority might inflict on the Broads. The Authority that seeks control does itself need controlling. 

However, to-date the pros and cons have not been presented to the very people who live and work here, where their children grow up, no consultation, no explanation. 

[Baggywrinkle]

I have just complained to the BBC on the grounds that including the Broads as a finalist is unfair on the others as they are governed by the NP legislation whilst the Broads are not.

[Baggywrinkle]

Still not displaying. I'll try attaching as a pdf.

Hope it works this time!

Reply.pdf

[Guest]

Are the broads really governed by national park legislation ???? 

[JennyMorgan]

No, they are governed by the Broads Act legislation.

Are they similar? Yes, but only in part, e.g. planning. 

[JennyMorgan]

26 minutes ago, Baggywrinkle said:

Still not displaying. I'll try attaching as a pdf.

Hope it works this time!

Reply.pdf

It does work and in part the editor is wrong, for one thing the Broads is only branded as a national park and then only for marketing purposes, no other reason.

 

Thank you for your email. We have had many complaints such as yours and we have looked into this matter in some depth. We have spoken at length to National Parks UK (www.nationalparks.gov.uk) who state categorically that The Broads is a National Park and that it is governed by National Park legislation. I include their statement below. “The Broads is a National Park, albeit designated slightly differently. The Environment Act 1995 revised original National Park legislation from 1949 and set out two statutory purposes for National Parks in England and Wales: - Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage - Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of National Parks by the public. The Broads is designated under the Norfolk and Suffolk Broads Act 1988 due to an additional purpose giving priority to waterway access for boat users. The Broads National Park is funded in the same way as England’s other Parks, by government National Park grant – it collects additional revenue through its waterway tolls. The Scottish National Parks are also designated differently, to accommodate additional purposes for economic development and renewable energy, but are part of the UK’s National Park system. The Broads and our Scottish parks are very much accepted by the other National Parks across England and Wales.” With this in mind, I am completely happy to include The Broads in our annual awards in this category. Please feel free to contact me should you require any further information about this. Kind regards Fergus Collins Editor, BBC Countryfile Magazine

Does Fergus have an e-mail address?