MauriceMynah

Do we know what that agenda is? if so, it hardly needs publishing but if we don't know, how do we know it hasn't been published? We all cherry pick, it's human nature. We tend "not to hear" that which we have no wish to hear, concentrating our efforts and attentions on those things that help our cause. Peter, You do it, I do it (Oh and OK then,,,, educated fleas do it ) I think I can honestly say I've not to my knowledge come across anybody who doesn't. I know I always seem to be crossing swords with you on the "Packman debate" Peter, I think it's because even though I agree with much of what you say, I'm not sure I agree with the frequency you say it.... and anyway, I miss Strow.

Thanks Q, that makes sense. Sorry Poppy, I should have said "If" not "Where".

One wonders what happens where one of our laws and one of the EU laws are mutually exclusive.

Interesting shop behind you, where is it?

Perhaps Polly's making two covers Thinks... Actually sewing with duplicate threads is a pretty neat idea... unthinks.

Visions, goals, mission statements and 'bullet point decisions'. These are all "business speak" terms, and it doesn't matter from which decade your pick your phrases, we are all getting at the same thing. When it comes to John Packman, he's the boss, the CEO, the big cheese. Is he accountable to anyone? Yes of course he is! Granted I don't know to whom but he is accountable to someone. Many here say he should be sacked . Fine! As soon as you've found out who can sack him you will know to whom he is accountable. I hear people say (Ok, I read people write) that he should do what the stakeholders require. Who are the stakeholders? Or, if you prefer, Who are not stakeholders? Are the stakeholders a definable group? if not, how can he listen to them? Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of the man, but nor do I see him as the number one villain in this. That accolade I give to the RSPB, who can only really be described as "A major stakeholder".

Who was it who said "A camel is just a horse designed by a committee."? If the authority is going to work at all, it has to be one man's vision. We just need someone who has the RIGHT vision.

That then would become someone else's vision. Packman's vision differs from your vision Peter, but they are all visions. The one I fear most is the RSPB's vision, and that's the one I honestly believe we should all fear as that's an organisation with cash and clout. There are several things where I feel this thread and others of a similar type have lost their way. The tendency for them to become Packman bashing at all costs, weaken the real arguments we have against the man. He is not in any way responsible for the fiasco regarding waste from boats. That is councils saving money, not the BA. I have absolutely no wish to see the broads turn into a National Park, but I have to say I have no great objection to any other aspects of his work. If he can prove that this change in the tolls is purely a redistribution of the charges, then I'd just have to take it on the chin. Only if it proves to be a stealth rise in the overall monies collected will I object. His wages are in line with other civil servants of that rank. It is not 'obscene' it is not 'outrageous' and most importantly it is not his decision. It's what it is. It's the wages of a quango's CEO. If I were offered the job tomorrow, I'd not be demanding a pay cut!

That's a tad harsh Poppy, people get over things in differing ways. Some talk, others don't.

Poorly written humbug! “The Broads is an important landscape, it’s a farmed landscape and therefore anything that happens in terms of payments to farms - because obviously they do have payments from Europe - we don’t know what’s going to happen with that in the future,” she said. (Andrea Long) She might have said it, but what the hell did she mean by it?... Or by this... “Everybody can be involved and have their say. The message that we would say is that if you’ve got any views and you’re not sure, we want to hear them.” Did anyone involved with this article ever go to school? The piece goes on... ... "The masterplan hopes to see the development of so-called ‘climate smart’ communities. It warns that over the next 50 years, global warming is likely to see “hotter, drier summers, slightly wetter and warmer winters” in the Broads, as well as increased water levels, possible heatwaves and drought and “more extremes in the intensity and frequency of rainfall and storms”. Yes, I've long understood that hotter drier weather with possible heatwaves and droughts inevitably leads to higher water levels. On Speedtriple's point, one of our biggest problems has been the cherry picking of EU directives and UK legislation to suit the purposes of the relevant party. When we leave the EU, that will no longer be possible.

No no no! I'm sorry but I now think this thread has just fallen through the rabbit hole and gone to Lala land. The RSPB might like the idea of 'no boats' but that certainly wouldn't suit Packman's agenda. The broads is full of small businesses that rely on boating for their trade. Take those away and Packman is left with muddy fields and bugger all else. This will not get him his gong (and I'm sure that the gong is what is driving him, or at least the potential; 'Lady Packman' is) There are certain figures I'd like to see. How much money did the BA receive from tolls in 2016-17 and if as we suspect this move goes through, how much money would the BA receive in tolls if the boating population remained much as it is now? If the overall increase is not too far out from inflation, we don't really have much of a leg to stand on, and his rhetoric of wanting a fairer distribution of costs amongst boaters will be vindicated. If it can be proven that the overall figure is hugely greater than inflation then we have a fightable case. We can all come up with ideas for the fairer tolls system, but I'll bet anything from a pound to a pinch of **** that not one of the ideas will have 50% or more support. How about.. All boats on the broads have to be fully insured (to replacement value), and that the toll is based on a percentage of the premium before any NCB is applied? That's fair!!! Now, how much would a brand new 45ft Broom cost, and how much would Broad Ambition cost to replace?... Hmmm, that doesn't work does it? You see my point!

Oh come along Mat, Don't cloud the issue with irrelevant facts, they deflect from the point that JP is a very naughty boy. . . Just checked this post before posting it and luckily noticed that I'd made a typo. Have just changed JM to JP !!! Freudian slip?

I find myself wondering if the issue Peter has highlighted is in the least bit surprising, or even unacceptable. Surely it has to be that when a group of people within an organisation are being written to by the general public on one subject, that group should respond with the 'company line' on the matter. it is known as "singing from the same hymn sheet. To generate that company line, I would expect no other than the boss to supply it. John Packman is the CEO. He says what the company line is to be. How he comes to that 'line' and what that 'line' might be, can be the subject of complaint, but certainly not the fact that he insists that his troops follow it, or even that he disciplines any who do not. On that forum I allude to (as has Andy), I too notice that they are up in arms about all this and have within their thread given names and addresses of relevant people to write to. I still read that forum as I have many friends who didn't move across when I did, but this issue is far more important than any differences I have with it's team, I might even suggest that this issue is more important than either forum is individually and that unity not only between hirers and owners, boaters and anglers etc. but unity between forums would be advisable. I would happily shake the hands of each and every one of NBF's team if it could help us all to confront JP as a united group. And, No! I can't believe I've just said that! but I have, and I would.

I think quite often it's a case of not noticing that it's 11 o'clock, though seeing others holding their minutes silence should remind them. I have to admit that it was about quarter past 11 when I remembered to look at my watch and I'd been away from other people at the time so missed it this year. Oddly enough thinking back, I have no recollection of holding two minutes silence at school apart from various occasions at assembly, and even those were not necessarily remembrance of our war dead, more often than not they were for things like Aberfan.

That I do look forwards to. Make sure you get one that'll get under Potter, then we can REALLY chew the fat in the Pleasure Boat.

Lead shot is a bit dangerous, have you seen the speed it leaves the barrel?

No, pulling it at an angle through mud is a far greater hold. In my far from humble opinion, a mudweight over the bow at a stern on mooring on the southern (tidal) waters is as much use as a chocolate teapot, and not much more use up north.

It would go a lot further if you filled the bottles before throwing it.

Sorry Mr Q Sir, The site may mention that it tells of the depths, but I'm damned if I can find them !!

Do we have any form of tangible evidence of that?

Am I right in saying that if the dam were to be removed, the water level would go up in Cockshoot broad? If so would that increase be significant? Who is responsible for having the broad dammed? Who would be responsible for getting the dam removed? Surely it would be in the interests of the hire companies to increase the scope of the area, to encourage those who have "been there seen it done it" to return as there was somewhere new to go to?

I don't see how they possibly can "act for the benefit of everyone"! given that twitchers requirements are different from anglers whos requirements are different from boaters. How can they please all?

You almost certainly already know this but just to highlight... Don't worry about the depths of the rivers, You are not allowed to mudweight/anchor in them. You may only mudweight in the broads themselves. I look forwards to meeting you, as given that I'm moored at the Pleasure boat on Hickling broad, I will be passing your "old shack" quite often. Which side of the bridge are you?

The ideal length of rope on an anchor is three times the depth of water you're anchored in. That's unlikely to be more than say 10 feet so ten meters of line is perfect. A little more if you wish, say 15 to be on the safe side. I think the deepest broad to mudweight in is likely to be Wroxham Broad, unless someone says different. I'm moored in Hickling by the pub, but if I go into the broad and mudweight outside the channel, I always go 4 times the depth, which sometimes means my letting out nearly 6 feet of rope!!