Broads Authority Footing Bill For New Railway Signs?

[Timbo]

There are fiscal reasons for the Broads Authority wanting to extend the geographical boundaries of it's control. Because the administrative tool through which it is paid government funding, it does not receive a National Park Grant, is dependent upon the area they administer and the number of visitors it attracts the Authority will naturally wish to control a larger area.

Over the last year with the dramatic changes to the global economic and political landscape I've been contrasting the management of The Broads with the management of other landscapes, both in the UK and abroad. Despite the year on year increase in government funding of 1.72% to UK National Parks and the Broads Authority those bodies are facing some serious economic problems. All of them, with one notable exception, are keeping a tight rein on spending. All of them, with one notable exception, are playing to their strengths. All of them, with one notable exception, are using every tool at their disposal to protect and if possible increase their income and all of them, again with one notable exception, are employing precise marketing strategies. Of course we all know who that notable exception is. 

Don't for one minute let the 'Part of the National Parks Family' guff fool you. There's more family squabbles and bickering going on than you realise. Most of the family members are looking at the latest member of the family the South Downs in annoyance at their, seen by some,'overly large' share of the christening buffet. Yet all of the family are shaking their head and having a laugh at their profligate distant cousin Norfolk. While the rest of the family are living within their means, The Broads Authority seem to be living in a bubble of isolation filled with a fantasy of their own creation... keeping up appearances. We all know that Onslo and Rose will muddle through just as we all know Hyacinth Bucket will come a cropper while poor old Richard ends up footing the bill for Hyacinth's fantasy. To be honest...as long as Mr Packman is set on playing Hyacinth then in the long run I feel he's treating all stake holders like a set of 'Richards'...in every sense.

 

 

[JennyMorgan]

I am afraid that the 'awards' system has long encouraged profligacy at Packman Towers and probably elsewhere too.

The vanity factor and financial rewards associated with uncontrolled empire building, especially within public services, has a lot to answer for in this country.  

At one time there were over 150 people employed at the Authority to deal with 120 miles of waterway! 

[Vaughan]

43 minutes ago, Timbo said:

I feel he's treating all stake holders like a set of 'Richards'...in every sense.

Perhaps we should keep the "Royal Tudors" out of this for the moment!  

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, Vaughan said:

Perhaps we should keep the "Royal Tudors" out of this for the moment!  

On the other hand, as usual, a lot of sense from Tudor times. I have to agree, with some conviction, that we are treated as 'Richards'. I firmly believe that we, and the system, have and are being quite callously used, when it's helpful to do so. Thankfully though there are many, not all, but many who now realise this. I suggest that this is exemplified by the enlightening attacks from ex committee members, both members and chairmen, on the Authority's leadership. It actually doesn't make for good reading but when people who have sat on the various committees smell the coffee and react as they have then it is hardly surprising that the level of trust is now so low along the rhond.

[NorfolkNog]

Oh dear....

[smellyloo]

Looks like a really warm welcome to me ......... I like it.

[JennyMorgan]

I don't dislike it BUT it's a twofold lie. The second is that the BA has a logo very similar to its own very clearly emblazoned on the sign, possibly implying that it is the Authority for the BNP, e.g. The Broads National Park Authority. DEFRA has repeatedly made it abundantly clear that the Authority can not call itself the BNPA. Typical half truths, well, might not even be 50-50 although I doubt that many people will realize it, subtle stuff!

[Vaughan]

I know that some say we "run on" about this but I agree with Peter - that sign is a bit "naughty" and stretches the letter of the law to its limit, in my opinion.

Thank you Howard, for the photo. At least we now know what the thing looks like!

[JennyMorgan]

26 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

I know that some say we "run on" about this but I agree with Peter - that sign is a bit "naughty" and stretches the letter of the law to its limit, in my opinion.

Thank you Howard, for the photo. At least we now know what the thing looks like!

Thanks for your support on this one Vaughan. Stretching the limits. as you have suggested, has long been the way. Another recent example of half truths concerns the other Broads forum (NBF) who wisely, its owner Richard thought, had an Ask J.P. thread. Come decision time for the tolls revision JP had the sheer gall to state to the final decision makers, the committee that is actually The Broads Authority, that he'd consulted with boating interests over the matter of the revision. Not a consultation with the NSBA that does represent boaters in Norfolk but with a forum on the internet. A typical example of half truths that has become the norm. Amongst others both Richard (NBF) and myself were there, in the pub afterwards we had a natter, clearly both of us were amazed at the use of half truths but it what we have come to expect. 

[NonTecky]

The BBC seem to have picked up on this... (scan down to a post at 11.38)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-suffolk-38975012

[JennyMorgan]

Thanks for the lead, Steve, I copied what I think is a very reasonable comment by the BBC:

The Broads - a National Park or not?

Posted at11:38

AT sign to welcome visitors to the "Broads National Park" was unveiled at Beccles railway station earlier, by Defra minister Lord Gardiner.

But is Britain's largest protected wetland an actual National Park? Well, not quite...

• To protect the interests of navigation, the Broads was given an "equivalent status" to that of other National Parks in the UK, although it's covered by separate legislation because the Broads Authority has different powers relating to its waterways
• In January 2015, Broads Authority members voted to brand the waterways of Norfolk and Suffolk as a "National Park" to bring in more visitors.

The Broads cover an area of 303 sq km, and is home to more than a quarter of the UK's rarest wildlife.

The lakes are man-made, dug out for peat to provide fuel during medieval times. Over the centuries, these filled in to become the Broads that we recognise today.

 

One question though, who actually coined the expression the expression 'the Broads was given an "equivalent status" to that of other National Parks in the UK? Another half truth because the legislation varies so effectively The Broads is NOT legally a national park. Pedantic, perhaps, but history has shown that under the present stewardship inches have tended to become yards and sometimes miles.

By the way, the Broads are Broads, not sodding lakes and at least one and a half of the so called lakes originated as meres.

 

[JennyMorgan]

http://www.becclesandbungayjournal.co.uk/news/first_sign_for_the_broads_national_park_is_installed_in_beccles_1_4956891

[Vaughan]

27 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

http://www.becclesandbungayjournal.co.uk/news/first_sign_for_the_broads_national_park_is_installed_in_beccles_1_4956891

That's quite a photo isn't it? You would think they were unveiling a War memorial!

"Oh happy band of pilgrims, look upward to the skies : where such a small affliction shall win so great a prize".

[ExMemberBobdog]

18 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

DEFRA has repeatedly made it abundantly clear that the Authority can not call itself the BNPA. 

Interesting then, that a DEFRA minister was at the unveiling of the sign.

[JennyMorgan]

3 hours ago, Bobdog said:

Interesting then, that a DEFRA minister was at the unveiling of the sign.

Yes, it is. He was also in the area for several other occasions, much too good an opportunity for the artful man. Letters have gone to both DEFRA & Keith Simpson MP.

[smellyloo]

I believe it has been agreed that the Broads can market itself under the National Parks banner.

It makes perfect sense to me to advertise the area under this banner, it is a short, meaningful message avoiding the ridiculous wordy alternative of "welcome to not quite a National Park".

If it helps to promote the area and increase tourism then surely it is a good thing.

That said I feel those that campaigned to have it registered that the Broads cannot be a full NP member due to the Sandford principal have done a very worthwhile service BUT let's enjoy the benefits of marketing under the National Parks banner.

[JennyMorgan]

Loo, in an ideal world I might agree with you. However I have no doubt whatsoever that having worked with the man, talked to the man and listened to the man that his ultimate aim is to gain Stanford, to be able to exclude boats for 'conservation purposes'. The man is nothing other than entirely transparent, for those of us prepared to look through the actually quite flimsy veil. 

[smellyloo]

Just now, JennyMorgan said:

Loo, in an ideal world I might agree with you. However I have no doubt whatsoever that having worked with the man, talked to the man and listened to the man that his ultimate aim is to gain Stanford, to be able to exclude boats for 'conservation purposes'. The man is nothing other than entirely transparent, for those of us prepared to look through the actually quite flimsy veil. 

I have never met or spoken to Mr Packman so my musings are based on the comments that have been posted and a desire to see the area in which I live marketed in the best way possible.

If your understanding of his intentions are correct then I fully understand why you adopt your stance. But I also have never met you so it would be unwise of me to take your opinion as Gospel either.

However I do applaud your persistance on this subject and I'm sure you & other like minded individuals have made more than a ripple in Mr Packman's pond.

[Vaughan]

16 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

I have never met or spoken to Mr Packman so my musings are based on the comments that have been posted and a desire to see the area in which I live marketed in the best way possible.

If your understanding of his intentions are correct then I fully understand why you adopt your stance. But I also have never met you so it would be unwise of me to take your opinion as Gospel either.

However I do applaud your persistance on this subject and I'm sure you & other like minded individuals have made more than a ripple in Mr Packman's pond.

I think that is a most reasonable and well thought out post.  

[riyadhcrew]

Loo,

That is a cracking post!!!!!!!!

[JanetAnne]

 How do we find out whether all this branding and promotion has been a success? At which point is it justified? 

Would a 5% increase in hire boats over the next two years due to demand be considered appropriate?

Would Broads Tours laying on an extra cruise a week be deemed a success?

Are we already seeing the effect of the new branding by the increase of new members currently joining this forum?

What I see in the banner at Beccles Station is a typical generic view of the Broads but, yet again, lacking in one key element.... there ain't a boat on it!

Best we take that as an oversight and not a mission statement eh?

[Timbo]

3 hours ago, Bobdog said:

Interesting then, that a DEFRA minister was at the unveiling of the sign.

Interesting indeed! I nearly wet my pants laughing when I saw John Gardiner was there. Former Deputy Chief Executive of the Countryside Alliance, interested in all aspects of the countryside...particularly those bits that can be hunted, shot, stuffed and mounted. Of course Gardiner's portfolio at DEFRA encompasses 'Commercial Projects' which the rebranding to the BNP  claims to be.

In the current economic and political climate other landscape, historical and conservancy agencies are scrabbling for funding. A bit of an understatement there. The general public has no idea of the absolute panic ripping through these organisations, some of which will lose their entire funding in the next two years. The current guidance from Westminster advises spending limited resources on infrastructure, public access, recognising and utilising appeal to the public at large and marketing to a wider spectrum of interest. And that's what we are doing. We are improving physical access, looking towards house keeping...emptying the bins, working with landowners to increase public access, increasing accommodation, improving amenities, increasing local business opportunities. By increasing both day and long stay visitors means more money in everyone's pockets. Our key phrase is 'we are more than a...'.

The BNP project over the years has cost millions in parliamentary time and litigation alone. And what for? A paper excercise. There's no worth, no value, no significant benefit to the landscape, community or business in the debacle. After I had stopped laughing, the little bit of digging I did yesterday afternoon reveals that the 'BNP as a marketing excercise' is being scrutinised on a ministerial level. Take a good look at the photograph of the unveiling of that ridiculous sign that in reality has cost millions. You have the faculty of the Unseen Polytechnic and Mr Packman...now don't they look nervous! And so they should. Can you imagine the conversation?

'So you've spent millions and you have a sign. Is it a sign that will attract thousands of new visitors to the Broads upon which your income is dependant? Is it a sign that informs visitors of the local attractions and amenities? Is it a sign that informs visitors of the services provided by local business? Is it a sign directing us to convenient public transport, or the nearest litter bin? Is it a sign directing to the increased mooring facilities for the extra visitors you are supposed to be attracting? Does it perhaps tell us the way to the nearest nature reserve? Perhaps it is a sign directing the visitor to the nearest toilet where you seem to have flushed a lot of money?"
"It says National Park on it Minister."

 I'm very pleased to see John Gardiner paying attention. Those visitor figures are going to have to more than quadruple year on year in the next two given the amount spent in total on the concept of the BNP. And I'm sure everyone has noticed that the Broads are not geared to cope with that kind of increase. Its 'put up or shut up' time for the 'would be knight' and his retainers.