BA Telephone Survey

[Polly]

Well! This was a very interesting experience! I was surveyed by phone on what, as a toll payer, I thought of the BA's performance. I made the point that our tolls should be used for the support of the Navigation and not for the support of politically motivated projects basically unconnected with that aim.

I made the point too that we are not a National Park, and that DEFRA and Parliament have told the BA to stop trying to say it is. So on we went with the scripted survey. Eventually, we came to the following question; ' Are you aware that the Broads is a National Park?' 'Noooooo,' I cried, 'that is just what I told you about the BA! ' who wrote this survey?

[MauriceMynah]

And who did write that survey? :)

[mbird]

I had the same phone call last night. Unfortunately it seems the survey is being carried out by a company not from the area as the young lady I was speaking to did not know how to pronounce Acle properly, so I suspect that only the easy to answer "score out of 5" type answers will actually get back to the BA.

[Polly]

Search me guv!

It was pretty lengthy though.

[Polly]

You are right, Mark, not a local survey, I had to spell 'wherry' a couple of times before she got it. However, she was careful to write down what I said, so I think they were capturing 'soft data' as well as scores on the doors.

[Timbo]

I made the point too that we are not a National Park, and that DEFRA and Parliament have told the BA to stop trying to say it is. 

 

When did this happen Polly? Is there a link anywhere? It must have caused a few red faces at the BA. 

[Paladin]

My survey lady (presumably reading from the same script as all the other surveyors) referred to the Broads having "the status of a National Park", not that the Broads was a National Park. That is a perfectly correct statement to make.

 

Perhaps there has been some misunderstanding or mishearing here.

[ExMemberBobdog]

Absolutely right Paladin.  The Broads are a national park in all but name, and are part of the 'national parks family'. The Broads are included on the National Parks own website, and not as some footnote, but as an integral part.

http://www.nationalparks.gov.uk/home

[MauriceMynah]

Now! We shall give Peter (JM) a few minutes to climb down off the ceiling, before he tells us that not only is the broads not a national park, but also that being a member of the National Parks family is very different from being one.

[Polly]

I will leave it to Peter to explain.

[JennyMorgan]

I will leave it to Peter to explain.

Right, here goes, but I will keep it short!

The Broads are quite unique within the National Parks family in that the Broads has its very own Acts of Parliament. The Broads, unlike the National Parks, has three core purposes rather than just two. Our extra purpose is navigation. Effectively if two of those purposes take precedence then the third could hold no relevance, although that rarely happens. The case of the National Parks is that if both of their two purposes hold equal weight then the Sandford Principle kicks in and conservation takes precedence. The Sandford Principle, if invoked on The Broads, could theoretically override navigation, arguably unlikely but entirely possible. Under the present leadership there are those of us who consider this to be a wholly justified fear. The Broads is The Broads, plain and simple. Our legislation is unique to us. We receive National Parks grants because, I suspect, there is no other convenient way for the government to allocate us money. It does appear that planning is about the only thing where we really are the same as a National Park, and many of us question whether that is entirely good for the Broads. The Broads can not be a National Park as the legislation stands, the Broads Authority is also our Navigation Authority. The Sandford Principle could, unwisely used, give conservation priority over navigation, e.g. the Upper Thurne could be threatened. We would have more than a small bridge to contend with! The Sandford Principle is the problem, why we can't be a National Park.

[MauriceMynah]

Thank you Peter, Nice to see you down from the ceiling. :)

[Guest]

Absolutely right Paladin.  The Broads are a national park in all but name, and are part of the 'national parks family'. The Broads are included on the National Parks own website, and not as some footnote, but as an integral part.

http://www.nationalparks.gov.uk/home

 

...and indeed all of the National Parks are now referred to as being "A Member of the National Parks Family".

 

Such a divisive subject, worse than religion or politics !!

[Paladin]

Ho, hum. My point was that the script that was being read to me referred to the Broads having 'the status of a National Park', not that it WAS a National Park.

 

My response to the surveyor did include an explanation of the Sandford Principle, in order to clarify my response. If anyone bothers to look through the National Parks web site, they will see, in the explanation of 'When were the National Parks designated', the following entry "1989 - The Broads given equivalent status to a National Park".

 

This means that the Broads are eligible for substantial Government funding. While the BA remains a harbour authority, and unless the primary legislation is amended, the Sandford Principle simply cannot be applied, a situation which prevents full National Park status being achieved, regardless of the ambitions of the CEO. Not worth knocking any paint off the ceiling, IMO.

[Guest]

Ho, hum. My point was that the script that was being read to me referred to the Broads having 'the status of a National Park', not that it WAS a National Park.

 

My response to the surveyor did include an explanation of the Sandford Principle, in order to clarify my response. If anyone bothers to look through the National Parks web site, they will see, in the explanation of 'When were the National Parks designated', the following entry "1989 - The Broads given equivalent status to a National Park".

 

This means that the Broads are eligible for substantial Government funding. While the BA remains a harbour authority, and unless the primary legislation is amended, the Sandford Principle simply cannot be applied, a situation which prevents full National Park status being achieved, regardless of the ambitions of the CEO. Not worth knocking any paint off the ceiling, IMO.

 

Entirely agree, apart from the "Ho hum" which I think is a bit dismissive of an important point. Yes, I know the issue has been debated on other forums to a point which makes one want to scream, but it remains important.

[10B]

I have just had a phone call on behalf of the BA, wanting to do an interview, not a survey.

But the criteria was 18 - 54, I was too old.

There will be a lot of boats for sale when the age limit is 54 to navigate the system, still will cut out a lot of the speeding and unsociable behaviour.

[fishtone]

I had the same phone call but when they said the survey would take 20 minutes I told them I would not participate. Until I now read other members posts I thought it was a scam call.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

I have just had a phone call on behalf of the BA, wanting to do an interview, not a survey.

But the criteria was 18 - 54, I was too old.

There will be a lot of boats for sale when the age limit is 54 to navigate the system, still will cut out a lot of the speeding and unsociable behaviour.

 

 

That is a genuine case of discrimination. I would have read them the riot act, demanded to know their name, and who directed them to take such discriminatory action. Then i would have asked for the details of their legal department and said i`l be persuing a case of discrimination through the courts.

 

That would have put the wind up their sails.

[JennyMorgan]

I had the same phone call but when they said the survey would take 20 minutes I told them I would not participate. Until I now read other members posts I thought it was a scam call.

That makes two of us.

 

Re the 54 year old age limit, age discrimination, objectionable. Worth pursuing.

[Matt]

Same with Saga......

[JennyMorgan]

The age limit, have referred the matter to the NSBA.

[Hockham Admiral]

The age limit, have referred the matter to the NSBA.

 

National Snaffle Bit Association, eh, Peter?        

[MauriceMynah]

Quote  "There will be a lot of boats for sale when the age limit is 54 to navigate the system,"

 

Can somebody please enlighten me here, I have no idea what this is all about!

[JennyMorgan]

John, apparently the opinions of those of us over 54 don't matter thus the suggestion that those of us of that age plus will no longer have a place on the Broads. 

[MauriceMynah]

Hmmm, That's a bit unfair!

If they want the views of a certain age group it could be for any one of a great number of reasons. The leap from only wanting the 18-54 opinions to "all others will be got rid of" is illogical in the extreme!

Perhaps the younger ones might be being prepared for age related toll rates with over 54s being exempt!