JennyMorgan

I believe that the expression is cherry picking!

The required letter has emerged, thank you to the good folk at the BA!! Letter from Barry Gardiner MP 2 September 2006.pdf

The proposed name change came about by ministerial decree. The Broads National Park Bill was deemed incompatible with the existing National Parks Act 1949, e.g. three core duties versus the BA's four. English NP's all share the same legislation thus the Broads was the odd one out. The Authority was told that the BNP Bill would not pass through Parliament so the only option was to drop the NP designation. a case of either or and no half measures. Effectively this is all in Hansard.

Regretfully.

Paul, I hope that you have responded to the EDP by suggesting that they investigate the Authority, its BNP obsession or even indeed these blessed road signs.

The plot thickens! This comment has been posted elsewhere: The letter was from the then Environment Secretary (DEFRA) to the then Chairman of the BA, Prof. Kerry Turner. The purpose of the letter was to address the BA CEO's demand to be allowed to call the BA a national park authority and to use the national park title in the name of The Broads. DEFRA refused to support the demand pointing out that The Broads is prevented by law from becoming a national park. It was reported that the BA CEO concealed the letter while forging ahead with his pet Private Bill in Parliament - The Norfolk and Suffolk Broads National Park Bill. Packman and Turner were eventually obliged to change the name of the Bill to remove the false national park definition. Curiouser and curiouser!

I have neither denied nor opposed the Broads being a member of the National Parks family. Family membership is not the issue.

A great deal of the North bank of Oulton Broad is well above the floodplain. There has to be a boundary and some of it, in Horning as well as Oulton Broad, is not entirely logical although it is inevitable that there will be oddities and exceptions. Luck of the draw for homeowners!

Thanks for the suggestion. I have contacted Barry Gardiner's office.

I have also asked DEFRA but am still awaiting a response.

Re my FOI request, I have just been reminded that there are many other DEFRA letters subsequent to 2006, the most recent from Andrea Leadsom, all refuting the NP status claim. All in all I hope that the EDP can be persuaded to investigate the workings of the upper echelons of power at Yare House.

The executive of the BA is keen to claim that the Broads has been granted the same status as a national park and has quoted a letter of the 2 September 2006, from the Minister for Biodiversity, Landscape & Rural Affairs, Barry Gardiner MP as containing the evidence of that claim. Past experience suggests to me that ministerial letters are subject to interpretation so with that in mind I recently submitted a Freedom of Information Request asking for a copy of that letter. I received a response today, from the Authority, stating that the Authority no longer has a copy of that letter! Am I surprised? No, not really, but it would have been good if I could have confirmed the granting, or not, of N.P. status to the Broads. I would have thought that if that letter is pivotal to the executive claim that the Broads is actually a national park then it would be available in order to prove the point. Very fishy!

Our local newspaper is asking for suggestions into what they can investigate in 2020. May I suggest, even ask, that you suggest to the EDP that they investigate either the Broads Authority or the bogus Broads National Park. https://www.edp24.co.uk/business/archant-investigations-unit-story-idea-1-6464820?fbclid=IwAR0rn9jI4B1cjBbu7vVUEPa0v4yZL_1Ujuvk8HqO5yc-N7fp-8xoprxffE0

There has to be a boundary to an executive area, unlike the BNP, and unfortunately, or inevitably, Oulton Broad falls within that boundary, which really should make sense! The downside being that as far as planning is concerned we have people making decisions for Oulton Broad who have never visited the place, or in some instances don't even know where it is. Still, hey ho, they can take their leads from the Officer's Reports!

Strangely enough we never have complaints from the liveaboard community that moorings are being hogged at weekends by people staying on their boats!

How on earth can the BA justify 'Conservation of Cultural Heritage' in relation to the bogus BNP for heaven's sakes? Does the Broads really have such a culture to conserve? Why don't Authority members question this guff and the sheare waste of public money by the executive? Surely it's a gross misappropriation of funds? This is a serious matter, BA Tom, any comments?

The petitions route might work, but I doubt it. Problem is that it would be open to all and that includes those without a clue as to the detail. If a petition could be limited to stakeholder groups then it probably would have value, trouble is I doubt that there would be 100k responses let alone a 100k one way or the other. In government terms the Broads is unfortunately too small to bother with, especially with Brexit on its plate. The call really has to be for democracy and a rethink in the manner in which the Authority is led.

Old Wossie mentions mission creep and that does raise concerns. If we take Acle as an example, it is largely and clearly outside the Broads Authority's area of control. A quick peep at BA spin shows that the Authority claims that it takes care of the BNP, thus we have to presume that since Acle is now a declared part of the BNP it has now acquiesced its decision making to Yare House. Well, if it hasn't then the BA is not looking after the entire NP, despite its claim that it does. A national park with no boundaries, a national park with inconsistent planning policies from a multitude of different local planning authorities. Extreme thought, maybe, but potentially possible, sheds must be green in South Norfolk and yellow in East Suffolk, laughable situation. Mission creep, or underhand boundary creep?

We've got white horses at the end of the garden right now, maybe a precursor of a belated winter?

Not yet. I do know that Oulton Broad PC is opposed to the idea, unless it has recently been 'indoctrinated' into changing its mind!

Anyone wishing to witness excessive, and repetitive, sign clutter should pay a visit to the Dutch Tea Gardens in Oulton Dyke. Classic example of over indulgent and thoughtless sign clutter. Perhaps a sign audit is long overdue.

It's all down to the distortion inherent in cheap end mobile phone lenses & yours truly couldn't be bothered to correct it! Also who's to say that the overlay wasn't stuck on on the soss, hardly drawing office conditions and no set-square handy, this is Norfolk yer know!

Definitely not photoshop!

Arghhh, foiled, thought that I was going to catch someone out with that one!! Met Ruth in Norwich some years ago, she was in panto with Paul Daniels where I was taking pictures. I didn't take to Paul but Ruth was a real sweety, a genuinely likable person, from Norfolk!

Thank you, Rum Punch. Inevitable I am afraid. Good arguments have been made & for some the jury is still out so other than taking the issue up with Authorities and MPs I am not sure what can be done. In the meantime the vandals are at work!