JennyMorgan

More to the point, where can I buy matches, paraffin and mantles, you know, really important stuff?

Mark, you may well be right. As you might remember I had four years on the Navigation Committee. In my time informal meetings took place in the car park and the little room where us fellows all hang out. We would all reach a broad agreement but come the time to speak out and vote much of what had been agreed would be forgotten, perhaps it was a case of platitudes and smooth talking winning the day. On another occasion myself and most of the Nav Com attended a formal Peer Review and, to put it bluntly, we ALL went for Dr Packman's jugular. However, by the time our submission had reached the report stage you would think that we were enthusiastically supportive, such is the way the truth is massaged and manipulated.

Even as an angler I have never moored to a fishing platform, mainly because they are not man enough for the job, not what they were designed for.

Time to react? We have read both James's blog and subsequent postings, Andy has posted the 'official' response, presumably sanctioned by those in charge. We have had argument, debate and perhaps justification. Personally I cannot now see how anyone can possibly doubt that there is something fundamentally wrong at the sharp end. However, that is for you to decide. May I now ask you all a favour? Please support James's recommendations and write to those that he has suggested In the meantime things are happening locally but you can also do your bit. Please re-read what James has written and then write to those whom he suggests that you write to:

Vaughan, what you have just written quite simply reminds me of the targeted ambition that haunts Yare House. There is no time limit, whatever it takes, so long as it gets there eventually, witness the BNP obsession. In the case of Thorpe island it had long been decided that the marina/lagoon would be a nature reserve, that is on public record, and a nature reserve it is becoming. As I say, whatever it takes, even if it destroys other folk's perfectly reasonable ambition.

In all honesty, John, such people do post here and do get, I think, a fair hearing. I've said it before, those who post on any forum need to have a thick skin in reserve. I don't think it unreasonable to suggest that, even when no one else agrees, that opposing opinions are at least accepted and generally in good spirit. Both of us sometimes put our heads above the parapet, hardly put off by the prospect of rejection, we are both still alive! One real plus about NBN is that lively debate is alive and well, and so is tolerance.

Hi Bill, thank you for your input, pretty much word for word my thoughts too. Re the Broads National Pike, hardly 'quite recently'! Re mentioning other members by name, Bill has responded, he just needed a nudge! That aside he's a big boy, can look after himself and obviously taken my goading in the spirit in which it was intended. As for Marsh, he's never been afraid of going against the flow, don't think anything that I write will ever alter that!

Not only 'Marshy', where is the indomitable 'Batra Bill' on this one? Perhaps people will believe me now, there really is a foul stench over Yare House. Like Griff I too talk to people along the bank, same feedback, same conclusion.

JP is either incredibly arrogant or unsurprisingly confidant that he can cover his back-side. The only acceptable outcome that I can see would be an independent judicial review.

That was in 1978

I well remember a friend at college, Harrison by name, who had bought a pair of Levi's that could only be described as already being a snug fit. However not as snug as Harrison wished so he too resorted to the bath treatment, very effective it was, but with complications. Once shrunk they were so tight that he was unable to get them off! He could turn them down enough to perform a 'number two' but they had shrunk remarkably well to his calves and thighs. After four or five weeks even Harrison had to admit that the growing aroma outweighed the perceived attraction of having the tightest trousers in Lincoln! He eventually cut the stitching and once they were off, and washed, one of the girls in the fashion department set colourful gussets into the legs thus creating a pair of 'ahead of their time', outlandish 'loon pants'.

Change Lowestoft Town to Ipswich Town or Doncaster Rovers & you'll really be on the money!

If nothing else it would only be fair to offer a right of reply, not that I would expect him to take advantage of that simple courtesy. However, I would welcome his participation.

John, Mr Mynah, I cannot agree that it is our Achilles heel that Dr Packman is held in such low regard. I do think that we, if indeed we do, need to ask ourselves why he is held in low regard. Is it our fault, or his? That it's seemingly all coming to a head due to the Acle Debacle and now Knight-Gate is neither our fault nor our Achilles Heel, it is simply the reality of a situation resulting from the actions of the Authority & its CEO.

Perhaps we should now invite Dr Packman to respond?

I am over the moon to see James posting here. The 'horse's mouth' is so much stronger. I am now looking forward to Marshman's response ! This topic is relevant, even if only indirectly, to every one of us. By the way, James, welcome.

James's business and family connections are such that I am quite convinced that he would not leave himself open to any form of court action. There are those at Yare House who I would class as vindictive, especially in relation to planning matters, I don't see James as lightly making his stand and admire him greatly for standing by his principles and the truth.

EDP24 features much of the story including a further comment from James, it's worth googling and also looking at the public comments. The Authority has dug itself a huge hole and this time, apart from bluff, I don't see a way out, not that I want to.

I know nothing of that but I don't doubt it. I can only suggest that it might have been a means of compensating for the loss of angling facilities perhaps when a 24hr mooring was created. It might also have been confusion between the BA & the EA. I can only guess on this one.

Two barristers were actually involved! But were they? James Knight.txt

I very much doubt it. In the past fishing platforms have been financed by clubs, fishing licence income or such as the Environment Agency via the Broads Flood Alleviation Program.

James has responded elsewhere and given me his consent to share with you all, you will need to scroll across the page: James Knight.txt James's response underlines exactly how the BA's upper echelons operate.

Thank you, Andy, that's a very quick response indeed. Of course there are always two sides to any story. I do know that James wrote his blog several days ago, presumably so he could gain advice and have time to consider what he'd written. Having known James for several years now I will confirm that he is squeaky clean, nothing underhand or dishonest, a more principled person you'll be hard pushed to find. I have absolutely no reason to doubt the honesty of what James has written. Marsh, re The Acle Debacle, apparently this has been discussed and decided behind closed doors. Let's just say that the outcome was nothing less than what was expected.

JP would probably say that as a 'team' its members would all sing from the same hymn sheet. When I was on the Navigation Committee I was told that as a member I was 'expected' to support decisions made by the officers. Surely it is for the officers to support decisions made by the members but that is not how it is.

John, not so long ago Lana Hempsal also failed to toe the Packman line, James is not the first to be reprimanded. There is also no question that prospective members are vetted before being appointed to the Authority. The control exercised by the CEO defies the democratic process.