Guest Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 Still don’t really understand that - your saying I should understand marketing but what I think about it is wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 57 minutes ago, batrabill said: The BA does have a duty to promote all the blah blahs to the general public. From the 1988 Act: " (1)It shall be the general duty of the Authority to manage the Broads for the purposes of— (a)conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the Broads; (b)promoting opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the Broads by the public; and (c)protecting the interests of navigation." That is a very specific duty. It says by the public, not to the public 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshman Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 John - I am glad to see you are being told you are wrong because you do not listen - I too "listen" but just don't believe this squit put about by the vociferous minority under the guise that they are the only ones who are right!! I will withdraw for a bit and let you bicker amongst yourselves, as its all getting a little silly and in some cases personal, and that is not the role of a Forum. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawsOrca Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 What was that about members not arguing between themselves... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rightsaidfred Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 21 minutes ago, batrabill said: Still don’t really understand that - your saying I should understand marketing but what I think about it is wrong? The issue is that you cant or wont accept the difference between the BAs remit to provide an environment conducive to and for public enjoyment as against a tourist boards remit to promote or market said area to the public, two entirely different entities one of administration and one of promotion. Fred 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 31 minutes ago, Paladin said: b)promoting opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the Broads by the public; rightsaidfred Don’t want to distract you from digging around in my “public profile” but what exactly do you understand by the words above? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 "I am a little suspicious about the words "promoting the enjoyment of the Broads by the public". We want the public to enjoy themselves, but I hope that those words will not result in the Broads Authority being turned into a publicity agency for an already very well-known area. " (Nigel Spearing MP - 1987 Commons debate on Norfolk & Suffolk Broads Bill) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 14 minutes ago, Paladin said: "I am a little suspicious about the words "promoting the enjoyment of the Broads by the public". We want the public to enjoy themselves, but I hope that those words will not result in the Broads Authority being turned into a publicity agency for an already very well-known area. " (Nigel Spearing MP - 1987 Commons debate on Norfolk & Suffolk Broads Bill) 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 3 minutes ago, batrabill said: 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. At least it did once, unlike the Broads National Park. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyndham Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 6 minutes ago, batrabill said: That was in East London. Don’t think it exists now Oi... behave yourself, unrecognisable, yes, but it still exists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 Ah... the constituency, not the charming area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rightsaidfred Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 Bill I am sorry if I have offended you by trying to understand where you are coming from, its quite simple really, everyone who objects has come up with solid reasons and facts as to why the BA should not brand itself a National Park you intern have just tried to ridicule every post without justifying your argument as to why it should be allowed, therefore rightly or wrongly I can only conclude that you have a vested interest, if I am wrong then I apologise. Fred 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted February 22, 2018 Author Share Posted February 22, 2018 2 hours ago, batrabill said: 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. You weren't involved with that bit of nonsense, were you, Bill? If you really thought that I was in favour then I can only assume that you didn't search as deeply as you might. I vaguely remember being threatened with legal action because of my objections and comments. Anyway, that tagline appears to have died a death. The Broads Act is entirely clear on the legislative duties of the Authority. That aside why would the Authority wish to be involved in marketing, an area in which it has no obvious expertise and only questionable success? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 15 hours ago, marshman said: John - I am glad to see you are being told you are wrong because you do not listen - I too "listen" but just don't believe this squit put about by the vociferous minority under the guise that they are the only ones who are right!! I will withdraw for a bit and let you bicker amongst yourselves, as its all getting a little silly and in some cases personal, and that is not the role of a Forum. It's tricky isn't it? If you challenge the beliefs held by several very busy posters here it usually ends in acrimony. Whose fault is that? The group who are very negative about the BA would blame people like me. But there is also another group who do not agree with the orthodoxy reigning here but cant tolerate the 'group response' if you disagree. So, I see something I think is wrong, I post, everyone knocks it back and forwards a bit, I'm told my problem is I'm not listening/not understanding/head in sand. People get angry. Tell me to go away. So yes, its my fault. But the alternative is a place where the holy writ (JP wants NP status to use Sandford to eliminate boating) can never be challenged. Its very peaceful that place but you have to drink the cool-aid to be happy. All the best all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted February 23, 2018 Author Share Posted February 23, 2018 Bill, this is becoming tedious in the extreme. Unlike the Authority such as myself don't have the facilities to promote an agenda that is alternative to that of the senior Authority members and executive. We don't have a budget, we don't have access to the paid for media or p.r. companies & the like. Another thing is that we rarely, if ever, make the first move, my comments, at least, come in response to Authority spin or comment by others. Challenge the likes of me by all means, but please justify your comments, don't just sound off in anger. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Labrador Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 20 hours ago, Paladin said: From the 1988 Act: " (1)It shall be the general duty of the Authority to manage the Broads for the purposes of— (a)conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the Broads; (b)promoting opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the Broads by the public; and (c)protecting the interests of navigation." That is a very specific duty. It says by the public, not to the public You have to promote it TO the general public for it to be understood BY the general public Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 1 hour ago, JennyMorgan said: Bill, this is becoming tedious in the extreme. I think I'll leave it there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnK Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 Has Bill done something wrong other than disagree?I know I said I’d leave this debate but I feel quite guilty now because Bill stepped in to defend me, I walk away and he seems to be getting quite a hard time. Do Bill and I need to check the forum approved list of opinions? (Joke!)Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 Very kind John. I actually just assumed Ms Morgan was just playing “I want the last word” Tedious repetition? Hmmm. What does that make me think of? Ms Pot calling Mr Kettle black? On another note since it’s tediously been brought up. Does anyone really believe the distinction between “to” and “by” is meaningful? Clutching tediously at tedious straws springs to mind Have a lovely weekend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rightsaidfred Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 1 hour ago, JohnK said: Has Bill done something wrong other than disagree? I know I said I’d leave this debate but I feel quite guilty now because Bill stepped in to defend me, I walk away and he seems to be getting quite a hard time. Do Bill and I need to check the forum approved list of opinions? (Joke!) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk It is nothing to do with opinion that's something we are all entitled to, its simply that if you are going to counter an argument that's based on reason and fact then you need to justify your own standpoint with reason and fact not just ridicule and poo poo your perceived opponents some of whom are well experienced in the topic in question. Fred 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnK Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 It is nothing to do with opinion that's something we are all entitled to, its simply that if you are going to counter an argument that's based on reason and fact then you need to justify your own standpoint with reason and fact not just ridicule and poo poo your perceived opponents some of whom are well experienced in the topic in question. FredI’d say that’s quite unfair in this thread. There’s been a lot of “you’ll have to take my word for it” on both sides. I can’t comment on anything said elsewhere. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 Reason and fact? Oh bless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 1 hour ago, rightsaidfred said: It is nothing to do with opinion that's something we are all entitled to, its simply that if you are going to counter an argument that's based on reason and fact then you need to justify your own standpoint with reason and fact not just ridicule and poo poo your perceived opponents some of whom are well experienced in the topic in question. 1 hour ago, JohnK said: I’d say that’s quite unfair in this thread. There’s been a lot of “you’ll have to take my word for it” on both sides. I can’t comment on anything said elsewhere. 3 minutes ago, batrabill said: Reason and fact? Oh bless. JohnK, I think batrabill has just proved rightsaidfred's point. There have been numerous facts provided by one side, answered by sarcastic comments from the other. No contest. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.