batrabill

What “the” Nigel Spearing? The MP for Newham South? That was in East London. Don’t think it exists now I’m sure he was a very wise man, but I’m not sure that a comment in the house a long time ago by a former MP carries much weight in 2018. But each to his own.

rightsaidfred Don’t want to distract you from digging around in my “public profile” but what exactly do you understand by the words above?

Blimey. Promoting opportunities ... for the enjoyment..... Clear as day. The by is utterly irrelevant. Unless you are scrabbling around to make an utterly spurious case. Bot of a fail this one.

Still don’t really understand that - your saying I should understand marketing but what I think about it is wrong?

The Broads act doesn’t spell out everything the BA should do as you well know. You seemed happier with Britain’s Magical Waterland as I recall.

Who says? You? Not good enough.

What? What about my profile? What do you mean commercial interest? Like a job or a business? I wasn’t aware there were employment criteria for posting. Frankly this just comes across as a sort of veiled threat. Explain.

Every area like the Broads promotes itself. Why wouldn’t they?

What is a “marketing authority”? You use it like it has some specific meaning, but I’ve searched the Internet to find some reference. The BA does have a duty to promote all the blah blahs to the general public. Now to those not implacably turned against the BA promoting sounds very much like marketing. And according to an academic description I found from a U.K. university, Promotion is in fact a subset of Marketing. That is all promotion is marketing but not all marketing is promotion But perhaps I’ve missed something and a marketing authority is a real thing?

That's a bit rich! This whole debate is based on a hypothetical - that there is some nefarious purpose in rebranding as a National Park! So perhaps its you that aren't adding to the debate?

Paladin, be realistic. For some people on here, if John Packman started blowing £10 notes through their letterbox with a leaf blower they would have him arrested for littering. Night everyone. The Norfolk and Suffolk Broads are one of the many things that make this a great part of the known universe. I know we all care about them and I am confident in a very short time these spats will be forgotten by all of us. Good luck all.

Yes, changing primary legislation is hard. Much like making the Broads a full NP. Particularly when the Broads Authority say they don’t want that. How on earth could that come about then?

You’re quite right. Poor eyesight and tiny phone.

I didn’t realise the CNP was in charge? I’ve read the response and it says nothing new. But there’s nothing new to say is there? im with JohnK, by removing the link to the NPs you are likely to lead a cash strapped post Brexit government to conclude that the boaters should pay. Is that what you want ?

Paladine, after proving that Marketing and Promotion are not related even though they are, you are now proving that The Broads National Park Grant isn’t a National Park Grant? Next prove that the Minister responsible for the 1988 legislation didn’t say in the house The Broads had equivalent status to the other NPs when he commended the legislation to the house.

But the Broads does share a great deal, like the first 2 primary purposes. It’s almost like the Government of the time felt it had equivalent status. Just like a National Park. So if it isn’t the same, then surely the boaters can pay! This idea has exactly equivalent status to the nonsense that is posted here about NP=Sandford=boats removed from the Broads.

Any answers?

Surely a whip- round at the Summer gathering should do it

John, John, john please don’t bring facts into this argument!

That’s “The sky MIGHT fall in “ argument. Always impossible to disprove. The fight goes on!

So JM, you are arguing about what happened in the past, yet, here now, in the present, the BA have publicly said “no full NP” and “no Sandford”. Lets recap then: The BA have said repeatedly they will not seek full NP status There is no pathway to Full NP status - requires act of Parliament - so it is literally inconceivable that The Norfolk and Suffolk Broads could become a Full National Park Most people think National Parks are a marvellous thing. The BA think using the NP tag in marketing (note: according to people who teach Marketing, Promotion is a subset of Marketing) Promoting the Broads is a function of the remit You are fighting a battle you’ve already won The only way you can continue the fight is by ignoring the real evidence in front of you and concentrating on what happened in the past. But as others have pointed out - you pick over every word said in the past as if it is holy writ, and then say “you can’t believe a word he says “ about what is said now Odd

I will regret this, but WHY does Dr Packman want to ???

I notice this comment has appeared under the article. Great marketing initiative, also a great opportunity for promoting an unwelcome agenda by the Authority in one unelected man's quest to gain the Sandord Principle in order to restrict access by boaters, anglers and walkers across Broadland. Is that statement true?

You'll miss him when he's gone - have to appoint a new Great Satan.

Right back at ya!