Tolls (that’s Not A Swear Word!) Amongst Other Things.

[Bikertov]

1 hour ago, BroadAmbition said:

Btw, you will have noticed in the BRAG letter that I have stuck my head above the parapet again 

Griff

I noticed that too, with the table of your toll charges. Maybe this is why they are going after you in particular on the MCN ?

[BroadAmbition]

They may be but I’m only stating facts

Truth hurts?

Griff

[OldBerkshireBoy]

I am staggered to see that 74% of income is spent on the costs of salaries and pensions!

[BroadAmbition]

I’m not, they have huge office staff numbers - too many

Griff

[OldBerkshireBoy]

25 minutes ago, BroadAmbition said:

I’m not, they have huge office staff numbers - too many

Griff

Its not just the office staff but how many people are employed at Yare house Griff?

[Bikertov]

1 hour ago, BroadAmbition said:

I’m not, they have huge office staff numbers - too many

Griff

Including the now obligatory large and highly paid Equality, Diversity and Inclusion teams no doubt ...

[ExSurveyor]

16 minutes ago, Bikertov said:

Including the now obligatory large and highly paid Equality, Diversity and Inclusion teams no doubt ...

Don't forget they need a head of planning. With only around 400 applications a year they should only need one assistant but any ideas how many planning staff they have.

[BroadAmbition]

The planning department should be handed back to the local councils - that would save a wedge

Grifg

 

[dom]

1 hour ago, ExSurveyor said:

Don't forget they need a head of planning. With only around 400 applications a year they should only need one assistant but any ideas how many planning staff they have.

The current job ad for the Head of Planning shows 6 direct reporting staff.

[OldBerkshireBoy]

1 hour ago, BroadAmbition said:

The planning department should be handed back to the local councils - that would save a wedge

Grifg

 

Hear what you are saying but councils up and down the country are cash strapped as it is.

[dnks34]

2 hours ago, ExSurveyor said:

Don't forget they need a head of planning. With only around 400 applications a year they should only need one assistant but any ideas how many planning staff they have.

According to a FB post there are 11 staff in the Planning Dept at the BA, another poster suggests 1 planning officer elsewhere may be expected to handle as many as 300 cases.  Reading on the same thread it appears the Planning Office at the BA is another unpopular department.  Who could have guessed that!!

[YnysMon]

Can people just leave off criticism of how many staff are employed in each department. How would you feel reading that if you were a BA employee? For most businesses (unless you are are one man band) staff costs make up the vast percentage of outgoings, so I don’t understand why anyone would be surprised. I retired from the OU on a scheme designed to shrink staff costs.  

[BroadAmbition]

 I retired from the OU on a scheme designed to shrink staff costs.  

Which is exactly what Yare House needs.  It could do with a commercial dose of laxative

Harsh? - Well another awkward truth is that when the Blessed Authority was formed, they took over from the port commissionaires at Gt Yarmouth - There were just six of them in their office

Griff

[Mouldy]

16 minutes ago, BroadAmbition said:

 I retired from the OU on a scheme designed to shrink staff costs.  

Which is exactly what Yare House needs.  It could do with a commercial dose of laxative

Harsh? - Well another awkward truth is that when the Blessed Authority was formed, they took over from the port commissionaires at Gt Yarmouth - There were just six of them in their office

Griff

If it were a profit making organisation, shrinking staffing levels would be the first area looked at to reduce costs - I know, because that was the reason for the department restructure that forced me into taking voluntary redundancy.

On a slightly different, but related subject, there is a post on a FB Broads Group today, showing an objection placed in the Public Notices of the EDP on 22nd November by the BHBF to the Secretary of State under the Harbours Act, regarding the increase in tolls imposed in April.

It seems that the good doctor has upset more than just a few from the boating community.

[RS2021]

In reading both the James Knight blog and the BRAG open letter there appear to be two issues at the heart of this debate. Firstly in a time of economic stress where many businesses are having to make difficult cost saving decisions why does the BA appear to consider itself above this and secondly the way the BA apportions these overheads between navigation and NP appropriate.

On the first issue I find it astonishing that the BA does not even consider reduction in overheads an option. It would be the first option most businesses would consider in such circumstances. It would be interesting to compare how other National Parks and Navigation Authorities are tackling the current economic climate.

On the apportionment of overheads I know from experience that these are as much an art as a science. But... accounts need to be independently audited. I don’t know if the accounts for last year have been prepared yet, but I would expect to see a statement of the accounting principles by which the BA apportions its overheads. I would then expect to see an opinion expressed buy the auditors as to the suitability/legality of this basis. James Knight states that the BHBF’s barrister is of the opinion that the shift of overheads from NP to navigation functions is illegal. In such circumstances I do not believe any independent auditor could sign off accounts prepared on the current basis without at least considering the apportionment methodology and providing a robust counter argument. I strongly suspect that the BA will not have told their auditors of the controversy surrounding this issue and will simply expect the auditors to take the BA’s word that everything is OK. Maybe someone should draw their attention to this issue. I’m sure they won’t want to risk the reputational hit of signing off potentially illegal accounts for such a high profile client.

Another issue which also jumps right out is the roll of BA Directors. Directors of any business have the obligation to act legally. The legality of their current actions is being challenged. As with the accounts I sincerely hope that the Directors are simply not being asked to rubber stamp this issue, but are asking critical questions and obtaining their own legal opinion (not just the opinion of the Chief Executive). For Directors there could be personal consequences and liabilities if they are found to have approved an illegal policy.

James Knight is right in his assessment that protecting BA jobs is not a statutory function of the BA. It’s a brutal assessment, and I wish job loss on no one, but the BA’s insistence on trying to protect a handful of jobs at head office may ultimately cost dozens of jobs across the Broadland economy.

[BroadAmbition]

[Mouldy]

Just seen on FB that the BA have approved an increase of 8.9%.  If this is true, it’s not as bad as it could have been, but more than recommended by the Nav Com.

[BroadAmbition]

Nice one. That’s exactly a 22% rise in just 12 months  

Griff

[Mouldy]

48 minutes ago, Mouldy said:

Just seen on FB that the BA have approved an increase of 8.9%.  If this is true, it’s not as bad as it could have been, but more than recommended by the Nav Com.

If the rate rise is correct, it will bring the annual toll on Norfolk Lady to just (and I mean just) shy of £519.  In 2020, we paid £391.44.

[ExSurveyor]

More than double the expected rate of inflation for the period covered by the proposed budget.

Local Authorities have been limited to a maximum 5% increase again this year, they are making cuts to balance their budgets, so it is possible.

[BroadAmbition]

Local Authorities have been limited to a maximum 5% increase again this year, they are making cuts to balance their budgets, so it is possible.

Not possible by our Blessed Authority it seems - Besides they aren't a 'Local Authority' and as we know are accountable to no one other than themselves

Griff

[dnks34]

Even JP himself cant be ignorant to the possibility that sooner or later there is going to be some kind of backlash to this in whatever form it takes which may well result in his dishonourable demise as CEO. 
 

Not wanting to sound ageist here but at 71/72 years of age he is well past retirement age so why hang on unless to be doing it out of belligerence.  It’s certainly not for his love of the broads boating community and local businesses thats for certain.  More likely he is trying to install his own agenda before being removed (hopefully at some point in the not too distant).

His leadership wont be tolerated forever the way its going.

[DaveRolaves]

The increase was expected but its not good. This year on the southern broads the number of boats has decreased. We now moor at locations devoid of boats where a few years ago it was difficult to get a mooring. The number of hired boats has also decreased - they will decrease even more now.

[gancanny]

19 hours ago, Mouldy said:

Just seen on FB that the BA have approved an increase of 8.9%.  If this is true, it’s not as bad as it could have been, but more than recommended by the Nav Com.

bear in mind this is just facebook,  is there any official notice yet ?

[MY littleboat]

On 23/11/2023 at 15:30, OldBerkshireBoy said:

I am staggered to see that 74% of income is spent on the costs of salaries and pensions!

And I wonder, in the future, who will have the largest pension of them all? (And then probably come back to work in an interim role!!!

Yes the middle option has been accepted so another massive hike.