grendel

well my surgery are keeping to it, second Pfizer jab done this evening, 5 weeks after the first. and the majority of those attending were 2nd jab, just the one youngster having her first jab

I always fancied An old British rail crew van, with the workshop in the back, I settled for a transit parcel van conversion by dormobile, 6'6" wide, and plenty of height in the back and sliding front doors, ah those were the days, bombing down the motorway at 60mph with both doors wide open.

And once again - and here i must congratulate you as you have brought the existence of the straw man argument to my attention, most interesting reading I found that when researching it on the internet, here once again you use the straw man with great effect, my comment that i saw no problem was of course in relation to my imagined scenario, whereas your strawman counter to that was to widen the scope of the 'problem to that of all of the other issues, a perfect example of the type. Once again I thank you for bringing this argument form to my attention. I will now know what to look for in future discourse.

Since we are talking straw men, I never made any claim that I knew what was going on, I just said I imagine that, i made no claim to be aware that it might have happened. this makes your initial argument a straw man too. as my imagining what may have happened was not an allegation either.

for an update you need new information, if no new information was available there is no need for an update, I am sure you realise that legal land transactions can take some time, I have know several that spanned over several years none other than good working practices. do you have any proof that due diligence was not carried out? from what I saw the closure was an emergency measure and notice was sent out the same day. as I say I dont see a problem here, many saw a problem, that was not in fact a problem, a lot of hot air was expelled over the fact the Authority should have been doing something about this perceived problem, when the reality as we see is that they had been quietly working away on the problem for several years. it appears to me that the two issues although related are in fact separate issues, the closure of the moorings was a safety issue, the negotiations were ongoing and only later did the two issues become coincident when the condition of the quay heading became unsafe.

I would imagine that someone setting up the meeting may have contacted the legal team for an update, found things were still in progress, so no need to add it to the numerous topics for discussion when there was nothing to report, after all these meetings do have other matters of import to discuss, so why waste everyones time with nothing to report, and the possibility of getting sidetracked into a discussion on the topic. I cant see a problem there.

and why should they be, we only hear from our legal team when the legals are completed or when there is something that needs amending, and I would imagine thats the case in most companies, while things are 'in progress' - a process that can take some time while deeds are transmitted to the land registry etc, if things are just at a stage of passing information between legal teams there can be quite lengthy periods where nothing apparently happens, where there is no information to update other than 'in progress'.

link to other topic, where we can discuss, Tom Has posted this same information there.

I have received guidance that we will be sticking with the official government and broads authority guidelines here. while some may argue that the new legislation says different we will not entertain this discussion as it may be seen as disseminating false information, for which the forum can be held responsible, so this is a warning that any such deviations from the official guidance will be removed by the moderation team. so if you wish to argue that this is not what the legislation says, thats your right, but do it elsewhere. As and when official guidance changes we will continue to monitor this situation.

thanks i just need to read the new legislation and assimilate it

OBB, the updated BA guidance (as updated yesterday) is still showing no overnight stays until the 12th April, and the official government guidance is still 12th April, so I dont know where you have heard that.

No, just one concerning the right of access to st Benets abbey.

I did not obtain the deeds to the river section, so am unable to answer that at present.

This is a good point, at that time though the structure was the flood defence, so the responsibility of the EA, not the Authority, so would not have required being in the lease, The EA have replaced the structure with a bank behind as the flood defence, thus the responsibility has been transferred to the land owner to maintain the moorings, thus the discussions regarding responsibilities. the Broads Authority is no doubt in discussion with the EA and Landowner with regards to taking over the responsibility for the upkeep of the mooring, but needs a bit more security over the lease renewal to be able to justify to their members and critics the expenditure. I would imagine that on a mooring where they held a responsibility to maintain the mooring that arrangements would be put in place and costed for replacement during that 20 year period, but as we see here the EA have decided a bank as a flood barrier is a easier solution, thus negating their responsibility to maintain the structure.

I have looked at it and it is quite valid, as would any lease made with the queen and crown estate commissioners be, unfortunately for us no mention is made of maintaining the mooring structure..

in the interests of accuracy, i have looked at the land registry. (for anyone who wants to know the current owners name (since 2016 according to the register), you can pay your own search fee (Title NK132901)). I do note of interest that the whole of the area under hundred dyke from the ant to the thurne falls in this title (except for the abbey site) plus a smaller area above hundred dyke up to Hall road is included (this would include the thurne mouth moorings I surmise). I also note that the last 20m of the mooring at the abbey end is not on the lease of the Broads Authority (from the footpath to the abbey to the end of the mooring) and is in the title of the Abbey grounds. the broads Authority lease runs from 2008 to september 2027 the information is out there, for those willing to pay to do their own research

I am not sure, at least 3, but I have been told that up to 7 government revisions a day are being issued to various consultation bodies as loopholes are weeded out.

I see the Broads Authorities stance on day boats has been revised-

we can let the fishermen fish off the end with damaged moorings where boats cannot currently moor, and the remaining space can be used by the boaters, solution for everyone.

thanks for relaying the facts from the meeting BytheRiver, that at least blows some of the above theories out of the water (particularly my moon crashing down one) so we see there are some years left to run on the lease, so no leaving it to the last minute there then, the problem is that some of the moorings require repair, but, understandably the BA dont want to waste money bringing the moorings up to scratch just for the landowner to decide not to renew the lease.(sounds sensible to me, and the Authority being careful with our toll money).

yes it is a good read, I always liked the passage when AR was sailing in a storm and they had 2 flasks of hot tea, and decided not to bother saving one for later as they might have sunk by then. that always struck me as a rather fatalistic view of matters.

camping is not allowed until 12th April, so your groan will have to wait

I see an awful lot of supposition based on very few facts, so I will add , what if the moon crashed down on the broads and sank all the boats, what would the BA possible do, and would it be their fault. in some quarters I am sure the view would be they should have anticipated it would happen. :-)

I have several different versions of each of the books, including the old green cloth covered hardbacks of Coot Club and Big Six that generally come with me when I am on the boat. (plus I have them all on audio books too.

actually I dont think even parliament could alter this one as it is regulated by offgen, under its powers to govern the electrical supply industry.