Broads Authority - Petition

[Guest]

So 307 people out of 64.1 million support the petition.

 

You beat me to it Bill ! 

 

...and even if it had been restricted to BA residents and toll payers, 500 signatories would be a very small percentage of them, in most people's opinion....

[batrabill]

What frustrates me about this forum and others, is that if you read them you would get the impression that everybody hates and distrusts the BA. In fact, many posters write as if this is a reasonable assumption.

I think we now have some evidence that that is not the case. The current petition is written as a clear vote of no confidence in the BA.

307 people, about 100 less than joined the Facebook group, Protect the broads, we are not a national park, from whence the petition originated, plainly do subscribe to this view.

This is, by every reasonable measure, a minority.

The majority, I believe, do not share this view but generally sit by and say nothing.

[Matt]

More people (399) want the Haslingden Baths to reopen......

[Guest]

505 people signed the "Internet Explorer 6 holding back UK economy" ePetition.

 

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/45

 

Now that really should have got more support. 

[Paladin]

What frustrates me about this forum and others, is that if you read them you would get the impression that everybody hates and distrusts the BA. In fact, many posters write as if this is a reasonable assumption.

I think we now have some evidence that that is not the case. The current petition is written as a clear vote of no confidence in the BA.

307 people, about 100 less than joined the Facebook group, Protect the broads, we are not a national park, from whence the petition originated, plainly do subscribe to this view.

This is, by every reasonable measure, a minority.

The majority, I believe, do not share this view but generally sit by and say nothing.

I have no intention of defending the wording of the petition, as I think is is too broadly drawn, but can there please be some sensible debate, if there has to be debate.

 

307 people out of 428 = over 71% agreeing with petition. Any politician would give his eye teeth for such support.

 

"The majority, I believe, do not share this view but generally sit by and say nothing."

 

Equally, it can be said (as there is no proof, either way)...The majority, I believe, share this view but generally sit by and say nothing.

 

Only 11 out of the 21 members of the Broads Authority voted for the Broads National Park motion, but this has been trumpeted as an overwhelming majority. Quoting bald statistics is a sure sign of the lack of any cogent argument (IMO).

[Guest]

...Equally, it can be said (as there is no proof, either way)...The majority, I believe, share this view but generally sit by and say nothing.....

 

 

No, that's incorrect too Paladin.

 

As you say, we just don't know, there is no proof of how many tollpayers, BA residents, or UK citizens feel either way on the subject.

 

We are each free to make our own judgement over what is quite true and what is quite false, and the huge grey area in between.

 

None of has the proof to say the other has the majority opinion, nor criticise them for exercising their individual right to support the petition or not.

[JennyMorgan]

Only 11 out of 21, amazing, a majority of just 1.

[Paladin]

Strowager, batrabill expressed an unsubstatiated opinion and I pointed out that the opposite unsubstantiated opinion could be expressed equally.

 

How can that be incorrect? Opinions cannot be incorrect, only the facts on which that opinion is based. In this case, there are no facts on which to base either opinion.

[Guest]

Sorry Paladin, if the basic point I was trying make is unclear to you, I've lost the will to explain it any further.

[Paladin]

Strowager, I was responding to your criticism of my earlier post. So you missed my point, as well.

 

As my grandson might say, 'Whatever'.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

There`s been a lot said about percentages of toll payers, BA area residents, even the 64.1 million population.  Take a step back and think a bit. How many toll payers are of more mature years, now think how many of them are actually on facebook, or any other form of social media. At our ages, it`s a better bet to say the vast majority of toll payers etc are NOT the slightest bit interrested in facebook etc, so have absolutely no idea about the petition. With that in mind. it`s no wonder there`s very little support for the petition, though i will say, with over 70% of the facebook sites membership signing, that is far more relevent than the close run vote by the BA being little more than 50%.

 

Also, before people mention the petition being mentioned on the forums, i can say when we`ve been on the broads, the vast majority of people we speak to have never even heard of the NBN or other forums, or understand the point of them.

 

It`s also easy to see that those who complain about some of the BA`s recent policies and actions always get ridiculed by the BA fan club, I wonder just how loyal the BA fan club would be if the BA DID start to bring in stringent controls on boating, as a precurser to being a full official member of the National Parks?.

[batrabill]

Paladin, I really think you are missing the point.

The Facebook page Protect the Broads, we are not a National Park, whose only reason to exist is to oppose the name change has 400-odd members.

Surely it would be reasonable to expect most of them to agree with a petition that makes that case?

Yet despite the petition being widely publicised on several Broads fora, only 300-odd people agree with it.

If I was a BA basher, to use a simplification, I would be gutted because this demonstrates I am in a minority, however loud a few people shout.

[JennyMorgan]

BA Bashers, or concerned members of the Broads community?  

[batrabill]

Paladin, do I have to point out in what manner this is totally wrong?

307 people out of 428 = over 71% agreeing with petition. Any politician would give his eye teeth for such support.

[batrabill]

BA Bashers, or concerned members of the Broads community?

I am a concerned member of the broads community.

Do you have some special power Mr Waller that makes you more concerned?

[Paladin]

batrabill, you can if you like. I can't say that I'm that bothered about trying to fathom your cryptic post.

 

As for the numbers game that some like to play, here's a snippet from the draft minutes of the last Broads Authority meeting:

 

"The Authority received a report on the outcome of the Acle Neighbourhood Plan referendum. Members noted that there was a majority yes vote of 85%, with 299 residents voting in favour of the plan and 53 against. This met the requirements of the Localism Act 2011.The electorate turnout was 16.29%."

 

Which means that fewer than 14% of those entitled to vote actually voted in favour, but, never mind, it meets the requirement of the Localism Act. That's how democracy works, I suppose.

 

Your ball, your rules.

 

Whoops, edited 'cos I've just seen what was wrong with that post of mine. I left out the 'the' between 'with' and 'petition'.

 

I'm mortified!

[JennyMorgan]

I've said it before, true story is this, but I have a public footpath that in part runs over my land. Over the winter I have been rebuilding my shed which has resulted in a large pile of gash timber. On Wednesday I had a pretty major bonfire in my garden. Was stood there watching it burn when an old boy, walking down the path, stopped and asked if I had permission, now that we are in a National Park? He went on to suggest that the good Doctor needed his 'nuts nipped', his expression, not mine. I didn't lead him on, no need to, there was an old bloke, Norfolk judging by the accent, who clearly saw wrong in what had happened. Somehow I don't think that he's a facebook user or member of a Broads forum so I doubt that he'll be signing up, but very clearly he was much less than happy with the National Park decision. Might only be 307 signatures to date, but how many folk has the petition missed? We shall never know but I suspect that it is quite a few. 

[JennyMorgan]

Batrabill, sorry and all that, but whilst I'm happy to debate, and even disagree, I'm not in the mood to pointlessly argue. 

[Guest]

Paladin, I really think you are missing the point.

The Facebook page Protect the Broads, we are not a National Park, whose only reason to exist is to oppose the name change has 400-odd members.

Surely it would be reasonable to expect most of them to agree with a petition that makes that case?

Yet despite the petition being widely publicised on several Broads fora, only 300-odd people agree with it.

If I was a BA basher, to use a simplification, I would be gutted because this demonstrates I am in a minority, however loud a few people shout.

 

I understand your point quite clearly Bill, and also (possibly) many other forum members that choose not to get caught up in this  wrangling.

 

The basic problem with all protest groups is that their perception of the support for their cause always appears large because that is the primary purpose of being a member of those groups.

 

People with opposing views do not join (naturally), so all discussions appear to be with everyone's assent and the overall view is lost.

 

As has been said many times, the real test of majority opinion on this subject will only become known in the months or years to come.

 

The Broads forums  do appear to be getting depressingly similar to the old Broads forum Speakers Corner, which was almost entirely taken up with postings about the BA, rather than the wider Broads subject matter, so it dwindled to just a few die hard members.

[JennyMorgan]

Either that, Strow, or the Speakers Corner regulars migrated en masse to FaceBook

[batrabill]

Paladin, I am genuinely confused that you don't understand my post.

I will explain.. You said

"307 people out of 428 = over 71% agreeing with petition. Any politician would give his eye teeth for such support."

But 307 people have voted out of NOT 428 people, but over 60 million people in the country who could vote.

Surely you understand the point that the TOTAL number for the whole country is 307, yet I would expect most of the PRESSURE GROUP to vote.

I'm a bit surprised that I am having to say this.

[batrabill]

Batrabill, sorry and all that, but whilst I'm happy to debate, and even disagree, I'm not in the mood to pointlessly argue.

Really disappointed with your response.

[Guest]

Either that, Strow, or the Speakers Corner regulars migrated en masse to FaceBook

 

...and possibly many via "The Broads Toll Payers Association", another web site apparently aimed at ousting the Broads Authority.

 

That rose from the forums, festered at around 200 members, then became riddled with Spammers when the admin appear to have lost interest, (and yet is still up).

 

http://broadstollpayersassociation.co.uk/News/?page_id=22

 

Interestingly, that one was restricted to registered toll payers. So even after two or three  years, it was a very indicative 200 out of 10,000.

[Paladin]

I think we now have some evidence that that is not the case. The current petition is written as a clear vote of no confidence in the BA.

307 people, about 100 less than joined the Facebook group, Protect the broads, we are not a national park, from whence the petition originated, plainly do subscribe to this view.

This is, by every reasonable measure, a minority.

The majority, I believe, do not share this view but generally sit by and say nothing.

 

 

I have no intention of defending the wording of the petition, as I think is is too broadly drawn, but can there please be some sensible debate, if there has to be debate.

 

307 people out of 428 = over 71% agreeing with petition. Any politician would give his eye teeth for such support.

 

"The majority, I believe, do not share this view but generally sit by and say nothing."

 

Equally, it can be said (as there is no proof, either way)...The majority, I believe, share this view but generally sit by and say nothing.

 

Only 11 out of the 21 members of the Broads Authority voted for the Broads National Park motion, but this has been trumpeted as an overwhelming majority. Quoting bald statistics is a sure sign of the lack of any cogent argument (IMO).

 

 

Paladin, I really think you are missing the point.

The Facebook page Protect the Broads, we are not a National Park, whose only reason to exist is to oppose the name change has 400-odd members.

Surely it would be reasonable to expect most of them to agree with a petition that makes that case?

Yet despite the petition being widely publicised on several Broads fora, only 300-odd people agree with it.

If I was a BA basher, to use a simplification, I would be gutted because this demonstrates I am in a minority, however loud a few people shout.

 

 

Paladin, do I have to point out in what manner this is totally wrong?

307 people out of 428 = over 71% agreeing with petition. Any politician would give his eye teeth for such support.

batrabill, as can be seen from the selection of quoted posts, I was replying to your post relating to the support, or lack of it, given by the members of the Facebook group. You have since changed the goalposts to include the voting population of the UK (which is nearer to 47 million than 60 million [source:ONS])

 

A fairly facile argument, IMO. Take a look at the draft minutes of the last BA meeting. The good people of Acle were given a referendum on "Making the Acle Neighbourhood Plan part of the Development Plan for the Broads Authority".

 

Now wouldn't you think that everyone in Acle knew about it and that it might be a serious issue for them, yet of 2160 people entitled to vote, only 352 did so and of those only 299 voted in favour, around 14% of the voting population. But that result has been accepted as a vote in favour of the proposal and Acle will now be included in the BA Development Plan.

 

Let's face it, 307 people out of the World population of 7,000,000,000 is pretty small beer.

[JennyMorgan]

Really disappointed with your response.

 

I really am bothered!

 

Batrabill, perhaps you could consider a less aggressive style, just a suggestion you'll understand.