Countryfile Awards. Did The Broads Win?

[JennyMorgan]

FANYs http://www.fany.org.uk/history

 

[Bound2Please]

14 hours ago, JohnK said:

But if people would rather not have the accepted opinion challenged here that’s fair enough. Is that the case?

Every member has a right to express their opinions, as does every member have the right to challenge others opinions. Just so long as they stay within the TOS

[JohnK]

Every member has a right to express their opinions, as does every member have the right to challenge others opinions. Just so long as they stay within the TOS

 

I understand I have a right to express my opinion.

It’s just starting to feel like people here don’t want to hear it.

I don’t want to p**s everyone off so I think it’s probably better if I say nothing.

[Maxwellian]

Some people might not want to hear it, but lots of others do. The forum is all the more interesting because of discussion and airing of different views. Where it tends to go wrong is the repeated stating of the opposing views without any discussion. This often then degenerates into name calling, abuse or the old fashioned dummy tossing.

Members then tend to get very bored with the repetitive posting. It is very often predictable as to where the thread will go. This IMHO does the forum no good and is not really a very good representation of what the NBN stands for.

When met with someone that is entrenched in their believes and is not open for discussion remember you made you views known in your early posts on the thread that you have posted. It is there for all of us to read. There is really no need to push any further as we all know dummy tossing will follow.

Todays fact can be yesterday’s fiction.

Plea to all forum users ... Make sure your posts don’t get personal or insulting please.

 

[smellyloo]

It is unlikely that a consensus will be achieved on this subject.

Contributors on both sides seem entrenched in their views and are unlikely to be swayed one way or the other.

However it is important that people's views are respected whether you agree or not.

I haven't noticed any posts that have challenged the tos unless I have missed a deleted post.

Whilst some may view lively dialogue  as confrontational, many believe that it is an essential aspect for a successful forum. 

 

[JennyMorgan]

John K, now't wrong with an alternative opinion!

[Paul]

16 hours ago, Maxwellian said:

This often then degenerates into name calling, abuse or the old fashioned dummy tossing

Are we allowed to say "tossing" on the forum, and who is the dummy in question?

 

[marshman]

John - don't ever give up or let them grind you down!!

You have to remember that this relatively small but vocal pressure group are not necessarily in the majority even here in Broadland. And I certainly don't agree with Vaughans comments that just because PW WAS in the BA ,he necessarily has an inside track!

So keep on saying what you think - its no good being a shrinking violet and bowing the knee if you feel otherwise!!!

[Vaughan]

I did not suggest that Peter has an inside track : I said he knew the persons concerned personally.

And for that matter I know another 5 ex members of the BA personally and funnily enough, they all seem to be of the same opinion as Peter!

And I do not consider myself part of a small pressure group, thank you.

[JennyMorgan]

Thank you, Vaughan, good to know that I am not a lone voice.

Marsh, has it escaped your notice that the governance of the Authority has been criticised by the members of the recent Peer Review? Did it also escape your notice that the CEO of the Campaign for National Parks has confirmed that the Broads is NOT legally a national park? Perhaps you failed to notice that Lana Hampsall has been reinstated to the planning committee whilst the chairman behind her sacking has himself 'resigned' and indeed two additional, elected members have become members of the planning committee? No opinions, just relevant and recent facts.

[vanessan]

9 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

 

Marsh, has it escaped your notice that the governance of the Authority has been criticised by the members of the recent Peer Review? Did it also escape your notice that the CEO of the Campaign for National Parks has confirmed that the Broads is NOT legally a national park? Perhaps you failed to notice that Lana Hampsall has been reinstated to the planning committee whilst the chairman behind her sacking has himself 'resigned' and indeed two additional, elected members have become members of the planning committee? 

Could all this possibly mean that things are at last taking a step in the right direction?

[Vaughan]

On 3/19/2018 at 17:09, Vaughan said:

I think we should remember that Peter has been himself a member of the BA and knows the people concerned personally. So he has a lot more right to his suspicions than we have.

 

I don't see that the above implies an inside track, or any inside influence.

I would like to remind the "usual suspects" if they care to look back over my posts that I only comment on what I know historically that the BA have - or have not - done. I try not to mention officers by name unless I am commenting on something they have said or done in public. This does not make me part of a pressure group : rather a member of the forum with his own opinion and his own love of the Norfolk Broads.

[JennyMorgan]

12 minutes ago, vanessan said:

Could all this possibly mean that things are at last taking a step in the right direction?

I'm quite sure that it is. In fact I'm cautiously optimistic. The Peer Review, although a bit wishy-washy in its wording, is clearly having an effect. Bringing in three extra, elected members onto the planning committee is an important step and hopefully more than just lip service.

[scaniaman]

Peter, perhaps you need to reproduce the "peer review" in this thread so that members will see what recommendations were made and, more importantly, who made them.Sorry I can't do it myself yet i'm still only using one finger.

paul

[JennyMorgan]

Paul, left click on this:

http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/1064506/Broads-Authority-report-12.12.17.pdf

[scaniaman]

Oops,sorry Peter ive already downloaded it from the other thread just thought it might help others. Its certainly a good report though.The people  writing the report are interesting,including representatives from the secretary of state and the Local government association.The recommendations summary looks tame,however given that its done in civil service speak, the last five items get to the points that you been raising, policy and actions being pushed through,members sidelined,local authorities left out of decision making and entire committees overridden. as you said "good stuff innit"

The best was left for last though under the heading next steps  it says Immediate next steps. That says to me take onboard the recommendations or else collect early retirement.Late nights in BA towers methinks.

paul

[JennyMorgan]

Paul, let me put it this way, I don't think that you are wrong.

 

[ExMemberBobdog]

On 21/03/2018 at 09:09, JennyMorgan said:

chairman behind her sacking has himself 'resigned'

Some people seem obsessed with trying to prove a conspiracy.  He has stood down from the BA, and his role in the Planning Committee, purely and simply because he has served the 8 years in office that he is limited to.

[JennyMorgan]

Just a sheer coincidence then that within days/hours of him going Lana was back. What with the peer review that was rather convenient. By the way, I went over my allocated time by over a year and it would have been more if I hadn't resigned on a principle.

[unclemike]

little bonus for peter

google maps do not show the broads as a national park although they show the others, its shown as the broads

[ExMemberBobdog]

Hmm

[batrabill]

On 23/03/2018 at 19:24, Bobdog said:

Some people seem obsessed with trying to prove a conspiracy.  He has stood down from the BA, and his role in the Planning Committee, purely and simply because he has served the 8 years in office that he is limited to.

My sources, confirm what you say Bobdog. We all know that some people will spin anything to make the BA look bad.

Someone, I am told, had to apologise......

And I am assured, someone left entirely normally. 

 

But make 2 and 2 make 22 if it serves your own agenda. 

[ExMemberBobdog]

6 hours ago, batrabill said:

My sources, confirm what you say Bobdog. We all know that some people will spin anything to make the BA look bad.

Someone, I am told, had to apologise......

And I am assured, someone left entirely normally. 

 

But make 2 and 2 make 22 if it serves your own agenda. 

That’s my understanding too.

[JennyMorgan]

11 hours ago, batrabill said:

My sources, confirm what you say Bobdog. We all know that some people will spin anything to make the BA look bad.

Someone, I am told, had to apologise......

And I am assured, someone left entirely normally. 

 

But make 2 and 2 make 22 if it serves your own agenda. 

The absolute master of spin is the  'Doctor of Spin' himself so you must excuse us mere plebs from the same!

As for appologies, Lana is a lady so I don't suppose that was too much of a problem, and anyway we must allow the Doctor a little bit of a face saver!

Leaving normally, yes, don't doubt it, must all be pure coincidence then !!!

Regretfully I wasn't born yesterday!

[batrabill]

It is always possible I am wrong, but my information is from someone who works for the BA, your’s is just invention based on your well-known predjudice against. John Packman.