JennyMorgan

I quite agree. I wonder if other sensitive areas in Broadland will adopt similar powers?

http://www.lowestoftjournal.co.uk/news/suffolk_wildlife_trust_in_canine_asbo_move_to_protect_wildlife_on_broads_nature_reserve_1_4955239

The green & white 'bath-tub' is looking really smart, hats off the Clive's lads for doing a good job!

A CEO better suited to the Broads is number one on my wish list, his salary level is almost immaterial.

You are joking of course! Don't forget that we will also be funding his correspondly large pension after he retires.

Just phone Yare House and ask for Dr Packman.

Head of communications, sometimes propaganda kommissar, also has the duty to inform, both the public and Authority members.The Authority has long been criticised for it's hard to navigate website, hopefully the new post holder will be able to sort that one out. Information is paramount and I don't begrudge the Authority its communications department. What I do resent though is the misuse of the media to mislead, for example the outgoing head of communications titling herself as 'Broads National Park' on both Twitter and Facebook. Also take a look at the BA's 'Broad Sheet' where Packman tells us that the Broads Authority has the same powers as a National Park, wrong,if it had then it would be a national park. The Authority does not have Sandford nor does it have the legislation to be an N.P. We have the 'information superhighway' and traditional media, plus a mountain of internal bumf and useful leaflets thus a communication officer, albeit not necessarily a large department, is surely par for the course.

No, perhaps not! Firstly, re pay, some are not exceptionally well paid but, for example, the CEO is paid well above grade, much to the annoyance of some of his underlings. Back to bad or not, a difficult question because in many respects they are very good. When it come to profligacy they are good, very good. Now that planning has been reduced to ticking boxes then why the duplication of planning services locally? Why the dabbling with tourism, leave that to the industry that benefits, surely? I could go on but it's all been said before.

Agreed, Marsh, just my view, but there is a clear argument that such research should be left to the universities and institutes. Take for example, prymnesium parvum, who came up with the answer to that one, was it the Cranfield Institute or the Broads Authority? The Broads Authority is insignificant within the big, wide, world, especially the real one. The three core responsibilities are quite clear, do them and do them well, even conservation (!), no need to dabble in research that is already being covered by the academic halls of learning. I can only imagine that the would be great man is hoping to gain international recognition. Sorry to be so scathing but I find it incredibly frustrating to see the Authority, even after more than a quarter of a century, still seeking out a role for itself rather than knuckling down and getting on with the job in hand. These people are public servants entrusted to do what the Broads Act requires of them, nothing more, nothing less. The Broads is a very wide cathedral but one thing it should not be is an ego trip for one frustrated individual.

How on earth did Dartmoor manage to cut 38.3 or whatever jobs? Thank goodness the BA withdrew from the climate change fiasco, like what the UEA is involved in, and a huge waste of money that has been! Why on earth did the BA become involved in the first place though? What possible influence could it have had on the research, let alone on the impact? On top of that much of the research must surely have been duplicated with the UEA? Madness, muddled thinking and self aggrandisement gone haywire.

Grants and subsidies being offered by double glazing and heating companies at the moment are also a very real scam, be cautious.

It does seem to me that Yare House regards itself as a Hall of Learning rather than a muddy hands-on, get the job done organisation.

Page 20 looks impressive! Also an impressive list of non-jobs. As Jaws has said an audit is needed, to that I would add a cull of the aforementioned jobs.

Would have thought having the ability to lie to order would have been of greater importance.

Another job here: http://broadsdev.nationalparks.gov.uk/jobs/current-vacancies/hr-and-payroll-co-ordinator 140 staff, to manage & maintain 120 miles of waterway. The government's austerity drive and cut back on quangos hasn't had much effect on the BA then!

Carol wears her age incredibly well!

http://broadsdev.nationalparks.gov.uk/jobs/current-vacancies/head-of-communications Bye bye Lorna? Another head honcho leaving the Broads Authority? Has she seen the light? Nice little earner for somebody. Makes me wonder what really important Authority people earn? Timbo,one for you?

Marsh, you could well be right, we shall have to wait & see! Unless Dr P is both transparent and even handed in regards to further research then he might regret delving into this one hence my suggestion that this project is a plus point.

Perhaps a comment from a disgruntled insider?

Surely, in regard to public staithes, this should be covered by our tolls.

Bill, whilst I view absolutely every utterance from Packman Towers with a degree of cynicism I do see this one as a positive. As I understand it the BA has enlisted help to complete Roy Kemp's list. Granted that it could be used against us but equally it could be a positive and, unusually perhaps, I see this one having more plusses than it does minuses. It's what is done with the information that matters though, there lies the rub. We have to trust that all the information gained is released to us rhond rodents and is not manipulated/doctored for use against us. I can understand anyone having concerns when it comes to BA surveys and consultations but fingers crossed with this one. No doubt that the BA will charge where it can but equally it may not be able to charge where presently it does, possibly

Re public staiths the BA has wisely employed a gentleman to research this issue.

Sounds like you have already been wise! Herbert Woods ought to know best.

Hi Hak, welcome back. I note that you intend to remove a cabin. Be careful, I have seen boats structurally ruined by people taking a wall out thus destroying the integrity of the structure. For example, in one case when the boat was hauled out the propellor shaft went out of alignment by several inches. Sensible advice time, have a chat with the people who built your boat.

Colin, I'm not convinced that the Council are the ones that need to make the first move. You make it clear that you would talk to the council but ONLY as an individual. From thirty miles away I see that as a huge part of the problem. In this instance you ALL need to work as a collective but I fear that that is now too late. As far as Roger is concerned I firmly believe that he has accepted some appalling and aggressive advice and I agree with you about him burying his head in the sand. Roger is also probably well overdue in approaching the Council but sitting on hands by both Roger & the boat owners has helped no one, in my opinion of course.