A Plea From Dr Packman Of The Broads Authority

[JennyMorgan]

http://www.edp24.co.uk/business/broads-authority-says-many-advtanges-to-winning-national-park-of-the-year-award-1-5377750

Personally I see this as approaching desperation, but then I would say that. Just as would Dr Packman say what he has! 

In my opinion a very valid comment following the article by a Chris Talbot

Well done, Andrew Stone. You appear to be getting the message - "The 
Broads was first identified as one of 12 potential UK national parks in 
1947. Although it satisfied requirements, it was considered too 
expensive to maintain the waterways so was not included in the first 
round of designations in the 1950’s."

It is a fact that the Broads has 
never been designated as a national park under ANY legislation, simply 
because the existence of the navigation, and the responsibility of the 
Broads Authority to maintain it, makes it legally impossible.The 
decision to use the name, Broads National Park, is a marketing ploy, 
nothing more.

In 2014, when the decision to 'rebrand' the Broads was 
being pushed through by the Chief Executive, Defra's support was sought.
It was NOT forthcoming.The reply from the Minister, Lord De Mauley, was, and I quote from his 
letter to the BA, "In terms of government policy, the Broads is treated 
as a member of the national parks family although its statutory basis is
quite separate and it is not legally a national park. We do not propose
to change this position."
I would have thought that the first criterion for eligibility to enter a competition for national parks would be that the entrant was a national park.

[JohnK]

I wouldn’t expect either of you to say anything different
Isn’t who can enter a competition simply down to whoever runs the competition?
I could hold a horse race and choose to allow donkeys to race couldn’t I?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cockatoo]

But if a donkey won would you say it was a horse? 

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, JohnK said:

I wouldn’t expect either of you to say anything different
Isn’t who can enter a competition simply down to whoever runs the competition?
I could hold a horse race and choose to allow donkeys to race couldn’t I?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You could but don't be too surprised if folk question the credibility of it!! Bit unfair on the donkeys.

[ranworthbreeze]

The thing that I find interesting in the article is that all the pictures used relate to the day visitor rather than people that visit the Broads for a week or weeks at a time, no real pictures of boating holidays, it all seems to be about the flora and fauna.

We all like to see the wildlife on our visits, but lets face it most of us come to the Broads for the tranquility of being on the water, watching the world go by.

Regards

Alan 

[JohnK]

But if a donkey won would you say it was a horse? 

Nope. I just allowed it to call itself a horse for a while, it’s still a donkey.
If we take this analogy further is the BA an ass?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[BuffaloBill]

20 minutes ago, ranworthbreeze said:

but lets face it most of us come to the Broads for the tranquility of being on the water, watching the world go by.

If The Broads are marketed too highly then when the hordes of visitors arrive you will lose that special feature. Just saying 

 

[MauriceMynah]

I was pleasantly surprised to read the extract below 

 

"The complex nature of the Broads means that it is managed under different legislation to that of the other UK National Parks.

In addition to the usual National Park responsibilities the Broads Authority has to maintain the navigation of the waterways. When the interests of conservation or heritage have the potential to conflict with recreation, the Broads Authority has to give appropriate consideration to all factors."

 

 

[marshman]

Do you think that in Scotland they have this never ending discussion about what they call their "National Parks" - which are not?

Lets hope they have had the sense to move on?

We all know that both they, and the Broads and the remaining Parks , for whatever reason, are lumped together within a broad generic term - and thats what it is!  Individually we know what these reasons why this has happened, and until that changes, I am more than happy to vote for this area within that scope.

I am not sure whether Defra's support was sought but what was said was true - equally what was said in the High Court was true - that there was nothing wrong in calling "it" that!

I voted for the Broads and would again simply because I like the Broads and can see through all the semantics!!

[marshman]

Alan - how do you know those people are not staying in a holiday cottage within the Park?

[smellyloo]

There are a lot of things in this life that I find strange and people are frequently top of my list.

So let's say you have chosen the Broads as your preferred play ground, in preference to other equally exciting parks .............. why would you deliberatly vote against it because somebody (suposed broads people) keep banging on loudly that it's not fair!!????

Just makes us all look like complete numpties  ...... a view comonaly held by those who can't quite fathom out why anybody would want to live in the flat.wetlands in the ****-end of England.

[JennyMorgan]

Some of those supposed Broads people are the real thing!

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

There are a lot of things in this life that I find strange and people are frequently top of my list.

So let's say you have chosen the Broads as your preferred play ground, in preference to other equally exciting parks .............. why would you deliberatly vote against it because somebody (suposed broads people) keep banging on loudly that it's not fair!!????

Just makes us all look like complete numpties  ...... a view comonaly held by those who can't quite fathom out why anybody would want to live in the flat.wetlands in the ****-end of England.

I dont think anyone has said don't vote for the broads to do any damage at all , the thing is as much as it is a member of the national parks family and that is all it is , it is not a national park by law and its as simple as that ,.

Imagine voting for the best bacon butty in England , and someone pops in a sausage roll claiming it to be the same because its wrapped in bread ! Would you vote for it to be the best bacon butty if is clearly not .

OK silly comparison , 

But is it ?? 

[smellyloo]

OK

Fact: The Broads is a member of the National Park family and as such it is entitled to use the term National Park in promotional literature.

So it's NOT a sausage or a Fiat car.

As I see it the Broads is perfectly entitled to be included in the vote for top National Park and i'm sure a win would benefit us all.

Sometimes you have to carefully choose your battles in order to retain credability.

In my opinion this shouldn't even be considered as part of the battle, it undermines the case of the  anti NP watchdogs who, on the whole, do a very important job. 

 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

I dont think anyone has said don't vote for the broads to do any damage at all , the thing is as much as it is a member of the national parks family and that is all it is , it is not a national park by law and its as simple as that ,.

Imagine voting for the best bacon butty in England , and someone pops in a sausage roll claiming it to be the same because its wrapped in bread ! Would you vote for it to be the best bacon butty if is clearly not .

OK silly comparison , 

But is it ?? 

Strange you should mention a butty. I believe the accolade of "best bacon butty in England" was recently awarded to Burger Dan on the Wroxham Road

[JennyMorgan]

Desperation is clearly setting in! Self aggrandisement is aa strong driving force.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/business/the-broads-has-been-nominated-in-bbc-counrtyfile-s-national-park-of-the-year-awards-1-5379278

Lou, I mean you no disrespect but there really is no need for me to comment on what you have just written!

[batrabill]

2 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Desperation is clearly setting in! Self aggrandisement is aa strong driving force.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/business/the-broads-has-been-nominated-in-bbc-counrtyfile-s-national-park-of-the-year-awards-1-5379278

Lou, I mean you no disrespect but there really is no need for me to comment on what you have just written!

Desperation? You do live in a parallel universe don't you? This piece is "publicity" or "marketing".

And, frankly it does sound terribly like you do mean disrespect, if that was aimed at Smellyloo (the "Lou" is confusing).

I completely agree with Smellyloo, as do many others. To simply dismiss his point is a tacit admission you have lost the argument.

[Paladin]

2 hours ago, marshman said:

Do you think that in Scotland they have this never ending discussion about what they call their "National Parks" - which are not?

Lets hope they have had the sense to move on?

 

marshman, your comment has confused me. There are only two national parks in Scotland, both of which were legally designation under the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000. They are administered by National Park Authorities, which were established by the same Act.

While there are several other areas in Scotland that are trying to gain national park status, I am not aware that any of them has adopted the title without parliamentary approval.

[JennyMorgan]

 Unfortunately the NP title does not appear to be protected in any way, hence the Court decision in regard to the BNP.   Regretfully it does appear that any Tom, Dick, John or Harry can award themselves the coveted title. Lack of Parliamentary approval or designation no longer appears to be a barrier to a determined, unprincipled CEO.

[Paladin]

JM, I think that everyone understands that by now, but marshman appeared to be suggesting that areas in Scotland that were NOT national parks were using the title spuriously, in the same way as is the Broads Authority. I am just seeking clarification of that suggestion, as I can find no confirmation of it.

[JennyMorgan]

5 minutes ago, Paladin said:

JM, I think that everyone understands that by now, but marshman appeared to be suggesting that areas in Scotland that were NOT national parks were using the title spuriously, in the same way as is the Broads Authority. I am just seeking clarification of that suggestion, as I can find no confirmation of it.

I suspect that you might be right, at least in regard to folk with more than a passing interest. i had long assumed that somewhere or another there was a governing body that controlled the use of the NP title world-wide but it does now appear that this is, regretfully, not the case. In Marsh's case I suspect that he had in mind the published response/justification from The Countyfile Magazine's editor regarding the case of the Scottish National Parks, perhaps you have seen it on that magazine's FaceBook page? At the moment I can't find it, regretfully, so no link, sorry.

[Paul]

19 hours ago, SteveDuk said:

But if a donkey won would you say it was a horse? 

I'm not sure you could call a donkey a horse but I've backed a few horses down the years I would like to call donkeys

 

[Cockatoo]

The fact is that we need to keep the argument up or before we know it the Broads will become a National Park in fact not just in name because "its always been one" 

 

It will then be too late to argue the boaters case. "Why didn't you say something before now?" 

[batrabill]

Just not true. 

Will need legislation. 

[Polly]

Legislation with no organised opposition if the grass grows over the issue Bill