Is The BA Prepared?

[rightsaidfred]

Just one small point the 4% applies to everyone hire as well as private, the broads are what they are and unique if other waterways are more attractive although more expensive then the answer is simple.

Fred

[floydraser]

12 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

Just one small point the 4% applies to everyone hire as well as private, the broads are what they are and unique if other waterways are more attractive although more expensive then the answer is simple.

Fred

Absolutely Fred, then those who are left can make up the shortfall, and wonder why pubs shut etc etc.

[YnysMon]

I wish a few more people had time in their busy lives to be able to read the reports that were submitted to the Nav Committee, as they do answer a lot of the questions/address many of the comments that have been raised here and on other threads.

There was a lot of comment a while ago on the forum demanding that the BA take concrete steps to address safety concerns, rather than just express concern about it. In reading the Nav C'ttee reports I got the impression that the BA are attempting to do so in the proposals to provide extra training for hire yard staff responsible for handovers and the additional rangers posts. Contrary to some comments here about the additional post for dealing with paperwork, the reports suggest this as a means of ensuring that other rangers' time is freed up from said paperwork so that they can spend more time on the rivers. It's not about following up cases that otherwise wouldn't be dealth with. The way I read the reports, it seemed that the rangers' launches were not being fully utilised due to staff having to do desk work, amongst other things.

None of these things are cost neutral, so I don't see how we can complain if the additional costs are passed on if we have demanded action in the first place. It also seems that the full costs are not being passed on to tolls, and that a compromise has been reached.

I'm only commenting here about this year's hike in tolls, not Griff's observations about % increase over a period of time. I think we can all agree that this year isn't your typical year.

[rightsaidfred]

6 minutes ago, floydraser said:

Absolutely Fred, then those who are left can make up the shortfall, and wonder why pubs shut etc etc.

You missed the point, private owners are not being penalised although they are the ones who call for better control hire yards who would probably not be so concerned also pay the increase.

If cost is the overriding factor why go somewhere more expensive, if it is about attraction each to their own but you cant compare the broads to any other waterway they are totally unique.

Fred

 

 

.

 

[rightsaidfred]

7 minutes ago, YnysMon said:

I wish a few more people had time in their busy lives to be able to read the reports that were submitted to the Nav Committee, as they do answer a lot of the questions/address many of the comments that have been raised here and on other threads.

There was a lot of comment a while ago on the forum demanding that the BA take concrete steps to address safety concerns, rather than just express concern about it. In reading the Nav C'ttee reports I got the impression that the BA are attempting to do so in the proposals to provide extra training for hire yard staff responsible for handovers and the additional rangers posts. Contrary to some comments here about the additional post for dealing with paperwork, the reports suggest this as a means of ensuring that other rangers' time is freed up from said paperwork so that they can spend more time on the rivers. It's not about following up cases that otherwise wouldn't be dealth with. The way I read the reports, it seemed that the rangers' launches were not being fully utilised due to staff having to do desk work, amongst other things.

None of these things are cost neutral, so I don't see how we can complain if the additional costs are passed on if we have demanded action in the first place. It also seems that the full costs are not being passed on to tolls, and that a compromise has been reached.

I'm only commenting here about this year's hike in tolls, not Griff's observations about % increase over a period of time. I think we can all agree that this year isn't your typical year.

Having taken time to watch the meeting in full I can confirm you are spot on.

Fred

[dnks34]

Its become clear to me over the last few years that most people (on this forum at least) seem quite happy for the Toll to keep going up at the levels it has year on year.  
 

Eventually the tipping point for them may be reached and they may come to the realisation a small number of us already have, we are being taken for a ride. 
 

The BA seem to find it very easy to make ends meet and im sure I would too if I was spending other peoples money at the rate set by themselves! 
 

[YnysMon]

4 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

 

The BA seem to find it very easy to make ends meet and im sure I would too if I was spending other peoples money at the rate set by themselves! 
 

That’s another thing I thought was addressed in the reports. There is a concern expressed about raising the toll and the hardship it will cause and the difficulty of balancing that concern with their spending obligations. I didn’t get the impression that the BA is awash with money.

[rightsaidfred]

Most on here will know that there are many aspects of the authority I am not enamored with and I will readily criticise when justified, I do however try to keep an open mind and treat things on their merit for the benefit of all and for me this is one such case.

Fred  

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, YnysMon said:

I didn’t get the impression that the BA is awash with money.

It has maintained a healthy reserve, to such an extent that the Nav Com complained & demanded that some of it was spent. Also, as I have said on numerous occasions, our toll pays out about 50% towards overheads thus releasing money elsewhere. Then, of course, we have the thorny topic of unnecessary BNP road signs, BNP station signs and BNP murals. There is also that laughable Acle vanity project, the much vaunted, oversized BNP visitor centre that was too big for the building site. Thankfully it came to nothing but with officer time and prize money must have cost well in excess of £100,000.00. The BA may not appear to be awash with money, but they certainly know how to waste it, when it suits the agenda.

[dnks34]

When there are 1000s upon 1000s of boat owners providing a very large part of their yearly cash flow they can carry on wasting as much as they like on whatever whim takes the fancy.

If i felt it was being spent wisely they might have my support.

[JennyMorgan]

12 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

When there are 1000s upon 1000s of boat owners providing a very large part of their yearly cash flow they can carry on wasting as much as they like on whatever whim takes the fancy.

In fairness a great deal of money is spent wisely and that deserves both respect and support. Agreed though, the whims are the problem. 

I might be wrong on this but as far as public bodies are concerned, is a CEO's remuneration, in part, based on the size of his workforce? In the private sector the reward often comes from controlling costs but in the public sector it appears to be the other way around. Just a thought.

[dnks34]

The figures show a steady increase for the Chief Exec over the last few years but I dont know how much they can be relied on. 
 

https://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0027/249561/Budget-Appendix-1-v2.pdf

[Vaughan]

21 hours ago, rightsaidfred said:

the BA are attempting to do so in the proposals to provide extra training for hire yard staff responsible for handovers

I am not sure I like the sound of this.  I wonder what the BA are going to teach, that the yards don't already teach their staff after more than 100 years experience in the business?  It is in their own best interests to make sure their customers are properly familiarised and they are most certainly not casual about training.  If this new "extra" training is just going to be a lot more bureaucratic "tick lists", then that is probably to appease litigation lawyers, rather than customers on holiday!

As to tolls, I am firmly in the camp of those who pay their tolls, on time and without dispute.  If my toll goes up next year, by whatever percentage, I will pay up and be glad to have the pleasure of cruising the Broads.

Having done that - and as a stakeholder - I may well speak out about matters of Broads management that I don't like, but I have no right whatever to complain about my toll if I have refused to pay the damned thing in the first place!

[rightsaidfred]

20 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

It has maintained a healthy reserve, to such an extent that the Nav Com complained & demanded that some of it was spent. Also, as I have said on numerous occasions, our toll pays out about 50% towards overheads thus releasing money elsewhere. Then, of course, we have the thorny topic of unnecessary BNP road signs, BNP station signs and BNP murals. There is also that laughable Acle vanity project, the much vaunted, oversized BNP visitor centre that was too big for the building site. Thankfully it came to nothing but with officer time and prize money must have cost well in excess of £100,000.00. The BA may not appear to be awash with money, but they certainly know how to waste it, when it suits the agenda.

JM you are correct with all of this and it is something many of us have riled against time and again, sadly that sort of waste is not just confined to the BA but common to public funded bodies in general, with regard to the reserves it was stated rightly or wrongly that they are required and need to be maintained for emergency  repairs/replacement including plant and machinery and water born craft and now to contribute towards the IT upgrade that is why it is proposed the NP reserves be used to mitigate some of the tolls increase.

Fred

[rightsaidfred]

Vaughan those are not the words I used mine were as below, the relevant factor was on site training at Great Yarmouth Yacht Station for yard staff unfamiliar with strong tides in lower reaches

"Firstly this is still just a proposal and subject to further discussion including a meeting with the hire boat federation next month regarding improved hand over and safety instruction including additional training for staff unfamiliar with the lower tidal conditions and pre visit instruction for hirers towards which the BA would include a grant of 20K towards the cost."

Fred

[JennyMorgan]

Fred, you too are quite right. The criticisms by the various Nav Com members was that the reserve was unreasonably large, without purpose and some of it should be released, which is now happening. Pushing did become shove though! 

[Vaughan]

1 hour ago, rightsaidfred said:

and safety instruction including additional training for staff unfamiliar with the lower tidal conditions

I certainly agree with you that it is rather ridiculous to have an instructor on a trial run, who has never done the cruise himself!  This is why, traditionally, staff are always welcome to take a boat out in the off season, and have a cruise with their family.

No matter how much time you spend checking and servicing on a Saturday morning, you never really "know" a boat until you have gone down the river, driven it, moored it, spent a couple of nights on it, slept on it, cooked on it and sheltered from the rain in it.

But I repeat my fear : no amount of official tick lists or classroom training(of the instructor or the customer), can give you that practical experience.

[JennyMorgan]

4 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

But I repeat my fear : no amount of official tick lists or classroom training, can give you that practical experience.

RYA dayboat certificates then?

[Vaughan]

2 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

RYA dayboat certificates then?

I have no idea what that is, or what it involves but the word dayboat suggests it may not be relevant to instructors for a weekly cruising holiday?

[rightsaidfred]

11 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

I certainly agree with you that it is rather ridiculous to have an instructor on a trial run, who has never done the cruise himself!  This is why, traditionally, staff are always welcome to take a boat out in the off season, and have a cruise with their family.

No matter how much time you spend checking and servicing on a Saturday morning, you never really "know" a boat until you have gone down the river, driven it, moored it, spent a couple of nights on it, slept on it, cooked on it and sheltered from the rain in it.

But I repeat my fear : no amount of official tick lists or classroom training(of the instructor or the customer), can give you that practical experience.

Agreed but surely anything is better than nothing and this is still subject to agreement in next months meeting.

Fred

[Vaughan]

Just now, rightsaidfred said:

Agreed but surely anything is better than nothing

But think a minute - if you say that, you are suggesting that all the experience, training and competence gained by boatyards since before World War One, amounts to nothing?  Until the BA suddenly decide we now need their training?

[rightsaidfred]

Just now, Vaughan said:

But think a minute - if you say that, you are suggesting that all the experience, training and competence gained by boatyards since before World War One, amounts to nothing?  Until the BA suddenly decide we now need their training?

Not at all but I am sure all yards take on new relatively inexperienced staff with limited training available at times and anything that enhances safety must be beneficial and worthy of consideration.

Fred

[Vaughan]

1 minute ago, rightsaidfred said:

new relatively inexperienced staff with limited training available at times

I am sorry but I can't agree with that.  Yards who invest hundreds of thousands in building new boats with all this kit on board to explain, are not going to risk them in the hands of some lad from the village, as you seem to infer.  This industry is not a cowboy outfit.

A new seasonal staff member will be taken out as an observer, on trial runs with an experienced hand, until he is considered fit.

Of course safety is vital.  If it weren't, we would have been driven out of business long ago.  We did not come down with the last shower of rain and should not have new, official and bureaucratic regulations imposed on us because there have been a couple of accidents on the lower Bure this year, the reasons for which have not yet been made officially clear.

Excuse me, but this may be a good moment for me to go out and buy the Sunday papers!

 

[Cheesey69]

You can’t get experience from a book. 
You can kill an industry by making too many regulations to enjoy 

the operative word here is experience and you can get that by doing 

sometimes mistakes get punished too harshly but that is life. 
I earn a living clearing up after people’s mistakes 

 

[rightsaidfred]

25 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

I am sorry but I can't agree with that.  Yards who invest hundreds of thousands in building new boats with all this kit on board to explain, are not going to risk them in the hands of some lad from the village, as you seem to infer.  This industry is not a cowboy outfit.

A new seasonal staff member will be taken out as an observer, on trial runs with an experienced hand, until he is considered fit.

Of course safety is vital.  If it weren't, we would have been driven out of business long ago.  We did not come down with the last shower of rain and should not have new, official and bureaucratic regulations imposed on us because there have been a couple of accidents on the lower Bure this year, the reasons for which have not yet been made officially clear.

Excuse me, but this may be a good moment for me to go out and buy the Sunday papers!

 

I think we are at cross purposes here we are not talking basic boat handling skills in Wroxham or Stalham but understanding the tidal conditions at GY and Breydon etc well enough to advise new hirers.

Fred