The Problem With Democracy Is...

[MauriceMynah]

There is much said about the BA being an unelected body, and that makes it "undemocratic". The problem is then defining "democracy".

Take our own political system for example, (and try to keep this thread free of party politics as per the Ts & Cs). 

We have a number of parties in the House of Commons. This results in occasionally having a government with fewer than 50% of the members, and it is very common for the number of seats in Parliament not representing the number of votes cast for the partied standing in the various constituencies. This causes the Lib-Dems and the Referendum parties to stamp their feet and shout "Not fair". but, it's the system we have and we call it "Democratic" Those who tend to call it "Undemocratic" tend to be those who didn't get it "their way", but that's life.

Local councils however, are a little different, and are perhaps a more accurate example of a democratically elected body, but that's because, to use modern speak, the council is elected by the stakeholders. and for the BA to use local councils as role models, it would have to decide who the stakeholders were in their case, and to say that this would be difficult would be the understatement to end all understatements. I don't think it would be unreasonable to define a "stakeholder" to be any person effected by any decisions made by that body that allegedly represents them.

To list Just some of the BA's stakeholders we shall include twitchers who in tern (ouch, sorry about that) are represented by the RSPB. We will include the National Parks authorities, as some money is given to the broads by them. and so on and so forth. Towards the bottom of the list (ordered by numbers) will be people who live in the area, and even lower, the boaters.

So, in theory, if we want a democratically elected navigation committee, it will be filled with members of the RSPB. (that example is for illustration purposes only)., Is that what is wanted?

No, it is essential that the BA is NOT an elected body as such, but equally it is essential that the organisation should be governed by the elected bodies that control the area covered by the BA. This it cannot be unless the local councils (elected bodies) have a direct say in what happens, and that the CEO and Chair of the BA not just listen, but to a great extent obey.

"What about the boaters?" I hear you cry out. Well, those boaters who live in the area have a vote when they have their local elections. Those boaters who do not live there have no say. This is right and proper. They do however get represented  by the local councils in as much as the local councils support the local tradespeople, who in turn value the boaters, all of them. The BA should have no say whatsoever in planning applications or any other local council operations. It's not their job, their remit or their responsibility. Their job is to uphold the broads act, and not to re-word or redefine it. They don't need to be democratically elected, the don't need to extend their duties. They just need to do their job.

Rant over. 

[Victoryv]

Thats not a rant, very balanced and to the point!

[vanessan]

20 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

To list Just some of the BA's stakeholders we shall include twitchers who in tern (ouch, sorry about that) are represented by the RSPB. We will include the National Parks authorities, as some money is given to the broads by them. and so on and so forth. Towards the bottom of the list (ordered by numbers) will be people who live in the area, and even lower, the boaters.

MM, would you not include in that list the NSBA who represent boaters both local and far afield? I would have thought they would be reasonably high on the list together with hire boat yards bearing in mind their involvement is solely with the Broads. 

Just to add, I do thoroughly agree with your ‘rant’ however, very well put.

[batrabill]

I agree MM

I have never seen a coherent plan which can deliver accountability fairly, yet the cry is (nearly) always "We want democracy!"

If anyone does want democracy it is simply not enough to say "We want a democratictly elected Broads Authority" that is EXACTLY the same as saying "We want to leave the EU" when you haven't the foggiest idea how to do it.

I notice another thread is promoting that idea right now.

So those who have endorsed the idea of a democratic BA, please state here clearly the way that it will be voted for, who exactly will vote, (note you cannot say "Boaters", that is not an identifiable constituency, or "boat owners" or, "mooring renters" none of these can work) and how will you reflect interested parties like hire boats, fishermen, walkers, bird watchers? 

I live on the water so I'll be OK, it may be just us few voting. Should be good for me. 

If you cant do that, then politely, or not so politely I'm afraid, stop asking for something that can't be delivered.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

1 hour ago, vanessan said:

MM, would you not include in that list the NSBA who represent boaters both local and far afield? I would have thought they would be reasonably high on the list together with hire boat yards bearing in mind their involvement is solely with the Broads. 

Just to add, I do thoroughly agree with your ‘rant’ however, very well put.

Maurice Mynah,

John, to a large extent, i agree with what you say, but will definitely agree with what Vanessan says above. I may not own a boat outright (being a share owner in the Lightning syndicate), but surely i should have a say, purely on the basis that i do own a boat, use it several times a year, and pay out considerable sums of money each time to a great many Broads based businesses and industries such as Brooms, other boatyards, local shops (independent ones where possible), pubs (allergic to alcahol, so for food) and the odd tourist attraction, albeit in a small way, but i`m still a regular contributor, so that surely makes me a "stakeholder" and should be represented.

I`ve agreed with you twice in one day now John, and in one day   

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

33 minutes ago, batrabill said:

 

If you cant do that, then politely, or not so politely I'm afraid, stop asking for something that can't be delivered.

Of course it can be delivered, just because some don`t know how to do it, it DOES`NT mean it can`t be done because someone else does, after all, we have general elections for government, county council elections, council elections etc etc. If nobody knew how to do what you claim and deliver a democratic system, we would be living in a state of complete anarchy

[batrabill]

2 minutes ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

Of course it can be delivered, just because some don`t know how to do it, it DOES`NT mean it can`t be done because someone else does, after all, we have general elections for government, county council elections, council elections etc etc. If nobody knew how to do what you claim and deliver a democratic system, we would be living in a state of complete anarchy

How then? That's all I'm asking. Explain how you as a syndicate owner can be given a vote, to take just one example.

[MauriceMynah]

All stakeholders are equal, but some stakeholders are more equal than others.

Where do you draw the line? People who own boats on the broads? People who part own a boat on the broads? People who own a boat and trailer it to the broads many times a year? right down to someone who once owned a dinghy which he used on the broads on one occasion.

Yes I know I might exaggerate, but the line has to be drawn. If I park my car in a public carpark, should that give me any rights as to voting how it should be run?

In a way, we all vote for the running of the BA when we vote in a general election as the civil service is answerable to the government! It's tenuous, but it is there.

Oddly enough, the bottom line of this post is the top one. 

[Victoryv]

I think you have hit the nail on the head there !

I live and work in the peak district, we seem to be the one's with the least influence or decision making ability, we are run and managed by people that do not even live in the park.

Is it true that you can only really understand the way a place works, if you are immersed in it most of your waking hours?

Or is the outsiders view more balanced ?

 

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

16 minutes ago, batrabill said:

How then? That's all I'm asking. Explain how you as a syndicate owner can be given a vote, to take just one example.

I have no idea how to do it, but then if you read my post again, where do i say i do?. No, i don`t know, like i don`t know how to fly a plane (despite building many of the worlds major airlines plane interiors), but many people do, i don`t know how to do successful heart surgery, but many do, as i said, just because YOU, or me for that matter, don`t and probably never will know how to do it does`nt mean to say others can`t.

There is a saying i often use in these sort of instances and that is "Never judge other people by your own lack of ability". 

And in saying that, please don`t take it in offence, as it`s not meant that way by any means.

[batrabill]

But, but, er.... then surely if we look back through the milllions of words written on this site and others ‘someone’ much cleverer than us will surely have come up with a workable solution. 

 

Since it it is you that are proposing this I think the onus is you to find it. 

 

Me, I’m saying it’s Unicorns. Again. 

[JennyMorgan]

If we take the BA's submission to the Glover Review as indicative of JP's thinking then elected council members are to be excluded from the BA. Thus the ONLY elected members are to lose their seats on the Broads Authority. The Broads Forum has become dormant. The Broads Authority is becoming, to an increasing degree, lead by a chairman's group, totally contrary to the Broads Act. Things are not right

[JennyMorgan]

By the way, syndicate owners, surely a simple solution, whoever pays the toll or perhaps for the syndicated to decide for whom they will cast their vote. I have a minor fleet of small boats thus should I have a similar number of votes? No, of course not, just one vote as an individual toll payer. I'm also a riparian owner so should I also have a vote as a toll payer and a landowner? No, of course not,  just one vote as an individual person. Rather than objecting we have to find a way forward. No perfect answer, just the best that we can come up with.

[vanessan]

 

MM said - ‘it is essential that the organisation should be governed by the elected bodies that control the area covered by the BA. This it cannot be unless the local councils (elected bodies) have a direct say in what happens, and that the CEO and Chair of the BA not just listen, but to a great extent obey.’

I think that hits the nail firmly on the head. As far as I can make out from the hundreds of posts, it is not totally the fact that the BA is not an elected body that upsets people. Rather it is because those that sit on the various committees to make decisions are ‘chosen people’ and it is one person (allegedly) who makes those choices and guides the decisions. JM, above, has outlined recent events that cannot be disputed. Something is definitely wrong.

 

[MauriceMynah]

34 minutes ago, vanessan said:

Something is definitely wrong.

46 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Things are not right

 

If something is definitely wrong, What can be done about it, and by whom?

 

It is the 'by whom' that's important.

If we know the 'by whom' how do we get him/her to do it?

And come to that, who is that 'we'?

[grendel]

its a bit like the old ducking stool, if you survived - you were a witch and were burnt, if you drowned - you were innocent. that really helped nobody as you ended up dead either way.

the current system would work fine - if (and only if) the person in charge has a genuine interest in the well being of the area

[quo vadis]

1 minute ago, grendel said:

its a bit like the old ducking stool, if you survived - you were a witch and were burnt, if you drowned - you were innocent. that really helped nobody as you ended up dead either way.

the current system would work fine - if (and only if) the person in charge has a genuine interest in the well being of the area

But not only bird watching, angling, cycle riding etc etc 

[grendel]

I believe its called the principle of enlightened self interest - where you do what is right because it not only benefits the area involved but benefits yourself as a by product.

[scaniaman]

Perhaps, it needs a benign dictator to ensure  good governance? 

[Ray]

Defining the electorate is not the only problem! Who will stand for election, will they run a campaign, have a manifesto etc etc. They will naturally group on some sort of party lines although not necessarily political but for example the Navigation Party may have a majority over the Conservation Party (or vice versa!) and it may swap every election. 

Voting for a "Body" will require the body to vote for things. How many of us have been completely satisfied with any government at all... ever? The waste that comes with enacting policy only to have the next administration overturn it.

Of course I have absolutely no idea what the answer is but I do know it is wise to be careful what you wish for!

[vanessan]

2 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:

 

If something is definitely wrong, What can be done about it, and by whom?

 

It is the 'by whom' that's important.

If we know the 'by whom' how do we get him/her to do it?

And come to that, who is that 'we'?

If we had the answers to those questions I think we might be halfway to solving the conundrum! ‘We’ - is probably anyone who takes any interest in the Broads area for whatever reason. Just my take on it of course.

 

[Malanka]

Anyone who has studied meeting dynamics will tell you it’s almost impossible to get more than six people to agree on virtually any singular response to a demonstrated issue. That’s human nature.

There was one word missing from this discussion so far, the word is representative, we do not have representative democracy. If we did we wouldn’t have the number of Welsh and Scottish constituencies that we do. We wouldn’t have one party political view requiring  tens of thousands more individual votes to elect an individual MP, yet this IS the case.

The country was offered representative democracy and those that voted turned it down. First past the post is not representative in any way, funnily enough two prime ministers that raise more ire than others actually had more votes and more MPs. Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher ( post Falklands)

If we agreed that all MPs should require similar numbers of votes to be elected would we then have democracy? What would happen is that one of the existing two major parties would be immediately eliminated as an electoral force. Is that democracy? Is that what we want? 

 

Personally my my opinion is the parliamentary bit is the issue.  One option is for the national government should be elected by total votes cast, under that devolved local government and elected officials ( Sound Familiar) This seems amazing but who has the courage to deliver this? 

None of the current PPE morons in Parliament that’s for sure. 

 

M

[Malanka]

Being elected doesn’t legitimize anyone but many forget this. In terms of the BA we need effective governance not vested interest governance. Hence I wouldn’t let the RSPB, the EA, or NE anywhere near money spending authority. 

Sometimes good governance is making a decision unpopular with everyone.

lets not forget that.

 

M

[ZimbiIV]

Democracy, when you vote for something I want.

Tyranny, when you vote for something I don't want.

paul

[JennyMorgan]

37 minutes ago, ZimbiIV said:

Democracy, when you vote for something I want.

Tyranny, when you vote for something I don't want.

paul

Dictatorship, when nobody votes.