Broads Authority - Petition

[JennyMorgan]

 

It was NOT foisted on local residents - as one I was not asked and who knows, given that point, what local residents would like? 

 

 

Marsh, do you really and honestly believe that? It has been forced upon those of us lucky enough to live in this wonderful corner of Britain by an unelected, unaccountable quango after a wholly laughable and very limited consultation! The Authority has little or no meaningful mandate from those of us that live and work in Broadland. Democracy has had no input in this 're-branding', that can't be right. 

[Matt]

I would suggest that it is just a body set up by specific legislation and as such you might be surprised by how little power DEFRA has over them. I would have thought that DEFRA gives them a grant and as a result would have a service level agreement or memorandum of understanding in place with them to have some level of control/accountability over the GIA given. It is from either of these two documents that DEFRA will have input/control into/over the BA.

A wise man might to FOI for those documents.....

If I was a betting man I would put my money on the Minister being able to direct....

[Matt]

You might also want to ask DEFRA if the BA will be subject to a triennial review at any point-they might not but you never know your luck!

[donnygeoff]

Marshman ,

I beleive Clive was refering to this .......
 

Whilst it would be good to see wherries toll free I think it would be much appreciated if the upper echelons of the BA were to acknowledge the place of boats in both the history and future of the Broads.

 

[C.Ricko]

Yes Geoff, it was, I am unsure what Marshman was referring to..

Thanks..

[Guest]

I suppose it was predictable that some folk would object to the wording of this petition. Fair enough but surely something is better than nothing?.......

 

There seems to be a strong feeling (on the Internet),  that this BA bashing petition has queered the pitch for anything more focussed on the specific NP grievance, which may have got a more meaningful level of support.

 

So No, "something" is definitely not "better than nothing"....

[JennyMorgan]

BA bashing? No, Strowager, most definitely not. Far more to it than just 'bashing', I have absolutely no desire to pointscore or argue but this petition is a long overdue effort to get the best deal for the Broads and an Authority that is entirely fit for purpose. The CEO has clearly nailed his colours to the mast, this petition is a chance to do something about it. Sue has posted the petition, a thoroughly decent woman who deserves our enthusiastic support rather than criticism. The Broads is so much more important than any argument.

 

This anonymous Petition represents an opportunity for all Broads users to object and one that they really shouldn't pass up.

[Guest]

Sorry Peter, the only thing that deserves anyone's enthusiastic support is something that they themselves believe in, not what someone tells them they should believe in.

[JennyMorgan]

Sorry Peter, the only thing that deserves anyone's enthusiastic support is something that they themselves believe in, not what someone tells them they should believe in.

 

Spot on Strow, absolutely right. 

It's neither up to you nor I, it's up to the individual, on that I'm sure we are agreed.

Personally I do what I passionately believe is right for The Broads.

[JennyMorgan]

It struck me this morning that whilst supporting, or not, this petition it is a fact that by ignoring it people would effectively be supporting a flawed system and a corrupted Authority. Whilst I firmly believe that there is much that is good within the Authority I passionately believe that it is in need of an immediate review, Not for my sake but for the Broads as a whole. I respectfully ask that doubting Thomases review their thoughts on this one, do you really want to support an executive that rides rough shod over Parliament?

[Guest]

Spot on Strow, absolutely right. 

It's neither up to you nor I, it's up to the individual, on that I'm sure we are agreed.

Personally I do what I passionately believe is right for The Broads.

 

I think your post last night was more respectful of other people's opinions Peter.

 

To now call them "doubting Thomases" is a tad insulting.

[JennyMorgan]

 

To now call them "doubting Thomases" is a tad insulting.

 

 

You are having a laugh, surely!

 

Okay, so you're not but for heavens sakes what is wrong with that term?

 

I make no apologies for insulting folk because I do not believe that I have.

[ChrisB]

This rebrand, name change, thin end of the wedge, whatever you call it is not enshrined in any statute. So whilst I understand a number of correspondents getting hot under the collar I think that their timing is ill advised.

Surely the time to take up the subject is when we know who will still be MPs after the election. Before that they will only paylip service to the situation. After all the Lib Dems scotched many promised items last time. Think what a Green MP in the area could do! Yes I know they always come last. But I am old enough to remember when North Norfolk was for 25 years a safe Labour seat! Things do change.

A petition is a very personal subject an to give the impression that not to support it even if you have serious reservations is somehow treasonous is wholly wrong IMO.

[batrabill]

I think some here should take notice of this petition.

It is profoundly anti-BA in tone.

Only 161 people have signed it so far despite it being widely discussed on Broads forums and the Facebook page Protect the Broads they are not a National Park, which has nearly 400 members.

Democracy is a wonderful thing. I don't think this is apathy, it is the majority saying they do not agree with your BA bashing. Take note.

[Lucky]

Erm - 168 signatures in less than 20 hours since it was posted up Bill...

 

Not everyone sits on their computer 24 hours a day 

[Guest]

.......Democracy is a wonderful thing. I don't think this is apathy, it is the majority saying they do not agree with your BA bashing.....

 

Quite so.

 

The number of regular Broads Fora posters that don't even wish to get involved in the BA bashing threads has been clear to see for several years now.

 

General BA discussions get a much wider participation.

[batrabill]

There are 12000 toll payers and 73000 residents in the Broadland constituency.

This is a referendum on the proposition : we hate the BA.

I predict you will be losing your deposit.

[marshman]

Sorry Clive / DonnyGeoff  ---  missed that from PW must clean my glasses. Specsavers comes to mind!!

 

Wherries are not toll free but I suspect the multiplier does not apply either. Do you really think it should? Looking at WYC applying a multiplier on 4 wherries would probably take a large chunk of annual charter income.!!!

[Polly]

Wherries are an asset, I would be happy if my tolls subsidised them.

[C.Ricko]

That's Ok, I got a bit confused there,!

As for the multiplier I would say what is good for the goose is good for the gander, I think you may find that it is a fair chunk of my income too!

[C.Ricko]

are the other hire fleets not an asset?

[JennyMorgan]

I suspect that as most of the wherries help pay their way by chartering there might be an argument that they should be treated as hire craft and pay their full whack. Like Polly I see them as an attraction/asset but how far should a toll dispensation go? Broads boats over a hundred, the Hunter Fleet, where should it end?  A classic example of 'no easy answer'.

[JennyMorgan]

Clive, wouldn't you accept that wherries, like windmills and swallowtail butterflies, are part of the wonderful attraction that brings people to the Broads, that brings customers to your boats? 

[C.Ricko]

yes, so is my thatched house, can I have a few quid towards the upkeep?

[JennyMorgan]

Fair point, Clive, but I bet more photographs are taken of wherries than your house!