JennyMorgan

The above will surely have to pass through Parliament? Whatever happens the Broads Authority, especially if it gains Sandford, has to become wholly accountable and truly democratic.

To a degree I also agreed but whether duty or purpose it still boils down to priority and with Sandford in place that priority becomes biased rather than balanced and navigation ceases to be sacrosanct.

Food for thought! Yes, JP could be putting himself forward for some kind of top job, that had crossed my mind too.

The Broads is unlike other NP's, the requirements and conditions are largely unique to the Broads. There is also the CEO factor to consider! It's how Sandford could be invoked, not how it has.

Nor have I and why would they, they need our money! The issue has long been the threat of excess control and the subsequent inability to navigate freely as and where we are accustomed.

Equally, of course, there no binding evidence whatsoever to suggest that they wouldn't seek to apply the Sandford Principle, despite current protestations. Indeed, if we take the clear evidence that the Authority attempted to close large swaths of Hickling over the issue of a particular weed and Horsey during the winter, then I reckon it's safe to assume that Sandford would be applied. Some folk will promise the earth if it's the means of achieving their agenda, yes, the thorny issue of trust. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/rare-plants-explosive-growth-chokes-the-jewel-of-the-broads-1100118.html

The ability to close the navigation was a control issue, an unnecessary reaction to the speedboat racing that has taken place, quite safely, for several generations. Beyond that it was thought that as the Broad offered good spectator access it would be good for suitable activities, as yet to be decided on but rowing and swimming were mentioned. Part of our objection was that Whitlingham Lakes already fulfilled that purpose. At that point in the Broads Bill's progress there was a clear demand by the BA that broads and rivers could be closed without good reason. It had also become quite clear that by giving an inch we were in danger of losing a mile. In the past the argument that so and so was agreed on at wherever thus we should also agree that the same should apply elsewhere had clearly become a JP tactic, if you get my drift. As for the closure of the Broad, we have to remember that it is a part of the Lowestoft-Norwich Navigation, it provides access to the sea for the seagoing boats that are moored at Brundall. It is also a fact that Beccles is a port and that the Waveney is basically a natural river. We saw our rights as being gradually nibbled away. Several hundred boat owners offered their active support should the closure clause not be dropped. A watered down Bill did go to Parliament so a number of us petitioned both Houses of Parliament and the remaining threats to our reasonable rights of navigation were rejected. This might help explain the rejection by so many to the BNP title. The ONLY way that the control that was sought by the original Broads Bill can now be achieved is with the Sandford Principle that, despite protestations and denials, would come with NP designation under present legislation. Hope that that helps.

There are regretfully very few places around the Broads that provide safe, convenient access and walking provision for the elderly and infirm. As one who is approaching total uselessness my perspectives are changing. Oulton Broad has, thankfully, good provision for those who want to sit or stroll/hobble along besides the Broad. Trip hazards can be a major problem, as a friend of mine found out recently, and it doesn't take much to capsize the unwary. Oulton Broad's Everitt Park is a wonderful facility, for all ages and abilities. There are handrails and a wheelchair accessible ramp besides the water, excellent! Both observation and personal experience suggests that Acle could provide a popular wander & place to sit and watch the world pass by. The Cafe is there, as is the toilet and nearby road access, a lot going for it. Granted that a tarmac path would cost money, but I would suggest that it would be money much better spent than on pointless, faux BNP signs. A 'blue badge' car park besides the river would be a supremely positive asset, one that might well attract grants or sponsorship.

I know what I think, we have gone way outside and beyond the original question. No harm in going off tangent or in sidelining but there are extremes!

PS. The threatened blockade of Oulton Broad was in response to a clause in the Broads Bill that would have allowed the Authority to close the entire Broad as they, the Authority, deemed fit. The clause was subsequently dropped. PPS, in response to Marshman's comment I note that I didn't actually say 'some' although I could have done!

I very much doubt that those involved in civil disobedience ever are in a majority, hence the term, 'quiet majority' and why I wrote 'some'. French farmers seem to have perfected the art of civil disobedience, heaven forbid that our local worthies resort to emptying their muck spreaders and honey carts over the front door of Yare House but there is no doubt that such actions do reduce the understandable frustrations caused by implacable quangos. Back in time, as a part of the run up to the Broads Bill, the Little People threatened a blockade of Oulton Broad. It was no small threat either, it was supported by many members of the Brundall big boat community and local sailing clubs. Okay, we won't put our pump out toilets into express emptying, we are too English to resort to such tactics but I do quietly admire the French farmers, on occasion!

Being polite and telling Dr Packman that his BNP obsession is misplaced has not worked and I doubt that it ever will. Parliament and a succession of Secretaries of State have all told him that the Broads is not a NP. He hasn't and apparently won't take 'No' for an answer. The Acle BNP signs, and their defacement, have certainly brought the matter to a head. I'd suggest that the Doctor was unwise to escalate his personal project in this manner, as were those who have subsequently resorted to vandalism. Did JP really expect that people would, without exception, applaud and unanimously sit back and endorse the BNP lie? People are reacting as they see fit, that is how it is.

Local forecast (Lowestoft) max 45.3601 m.p.h., a mere draft. Might stir the fish up!

It'll all be over by then! Isn't she nice and comfy in her boatshed then?

Okay, Force 8! A bit of a Michael Fish forecast so far.

Went down to the mooring just to check, everything was nice and snug, don't suppose that the wind has topped force three all evening.

Local forecast is for a gale force six, not exactly extraordinary. Great for sail-boarding though!

I don't use a wheelchair, maybe one day, but I have in the past dragged toddlers in buggies over that stuff, not easy. I am glad of one stick, sometimes two, but even without trying it a frame would probably be an impossibility, even one with wheels. A few more tarmacked footpaths away from the water's edge would be appreciated, as would a few seats. I applaud any efforts to provide access for the disabled but on the other hand us less than able folk have to bow to our limitations. Mind you, I won't easily give in but I would sometimes appreciate it being easier.

There are solid paving slabs outside the cafe. The problem with slabs can be that the filling behind the piling may not be stable thus the slabs themselves might become a trip hazard. The mud or whatever either settles or even washes out behind the piling thus problems can develop. In my view decking provides the best answer, second to poured concrete behind steel shuttering, horribly expensive though.

That's a whole new ball game! I'm not the most mobile of boaters and I often have to access the land from my boat on my hands and knees. Undignified I agree, but needs must, that blessed grit is no more kind to my knees than it is to a varnished deck. Problem partially solved though, a pair of knee pads but, as a person with mobility issues, I don't find the ubiquitous crushed concrete to be the obvious answer. One thing that I'm sure that we'll both agree to is that access to the Broads as a whole, by the less able among us, could be a whole lot better than it is.

Got the regulation Marigolds, got to tend to those demanding menfolk!

The 'new' moorings? Perhaps we are awaiting the dreaded crushed concrete walkways?

Confusion reigns!

The work so far at Acle Bridge, as of today, the power supply has been laid on in readiness for the moorings. Just a thought, when is Easter this year?

Banter & sarcasm, not the same thing, at least not in my books.