Hi Roy, good to see you over on the wild side!
Re your question, yes I was a member of the Nav Com until I felt unable to support the administration under Dr Packman. I also distanced myself from the 'Little Men' comments of Dr Stapleton. In my time I thought it a sometimes weak committee and I regret not being stronger myself. At the end of the day I felt it wrong to be actively opposed to the Bill, and actively opposed to much that was going on whilst remaining a member.
As for my input, not sure that that was very much, you'll have to refer to the published minutes. Yes, I did support the May Gurney acquisition, and still do, albeit with reservations. Was also involved with advising the flood alleviation contractors regarding tree clearance on the Southern Rivers, and I believe that that has gone well. I was also involved with the Tolls Review of three years ago. I was an appointed member representing angling interests, hopefully I did that as well as circumstance allowed.
 |
|
Forum
Thread - Did I miss it? BA Public Meeting.
Return to: All forums, General Discussion
Reply to topic
Page: 1, 2, 3
You're not logged in - to log in, click here.
To register a forum account, click here.
View our Terms of Use Policy.
NEW You can now attach images to your posts. They will also be inserted into our gallery!
Posts are ordered from oldest to newest. Click here to change order.
| Author | Message |
|---|
|
peter waller
16th Nov '08 08:43 
|
|
|
Gruntfuttock
16th Nov '08 10:52 
|
You're just making a barrow out of a mole hill. The BA is perfectly well entitled to defend itself from public flack. Some would engage and return fire, others close ranks and dig in.
Given the choice, it's worth noting that the ostrich is a defensive species with a poor understanding of reality. Predators are rarely discouraged by a run-and-hide defence, particularly when the rump remains exposed. Still, it could always run and hide on the Lite Side. Concealment guaranteed. Ah, enough hilarious (?) cynicism. The meeting may just have been scheduled for diary convenience? No? Show me evidence of a more sinister reason and I'm with you, until then I can live with a Spring weekend meeting if it allows weekday absentees to attend. By then you could have a better idea of what new law you can look forward to and whether it's worth buying a toll sticker or not. GF |
|
Poppy
16th Nov '08 11:17 |
peter waller wrote: I wouldn't worry too much Peter. The 'Light Side ' became largely irrelevant to those with a serious interest in Broadland matters at least 2 years ago IMHO. They do seem to apply some odd moderation over there from time to time. Perhaps this is another example? |
|
peter waller
16th Nov '08 12:36
|
Hi Pops, annoyed more than worried. It wasn't such a bad place to pop into for a chat, made some good friends, and received good advice and support re the Bill. As for their moderation, yes, I agree.
Grunts, agree that weekends are preferable, but the reality is that they have managed to skip a year at a time when some awquad questions, tolls, dredging and the Bill, need answering. I don't know about laws but it seems that government 'advice' has been ignored. In normal circumstances - - - - - - - - - - Futtocks said: Still, it could always run and hide on the Lite Side. Concealment guaranteed. In this case you are probably much nearer the mark than you realise  . But then you might have put one and one together! |
|
middlin
17th Nov '08 15:42 |
but Peter over there they would make it three
|
|
Tree Hugger
17th Nov '08 16:21 
|
Sorry to hear about your disaffection with the Lightside Peter.
I am a trifie concerned that this forum can cope with the sheer quantity of your outpourings on its own, but rest assured - I have set aside a large proportion of my working day, so I may read them. |
|
Dannyboy
17th Nov '08 17:29 |
Hi Peter,
I am not going to wade into the debate on NBF - but I have sent you a p.m. there - if you care to drop by?! |
|
Navia Cliens
18th Nov '08 11:24 |
likewise Peter - a pm from me on the chintz side, hope you still drop by to read them.
Reference the issue at hand perhaps it is the case that the BA are genuinely scheduling this meeting so that more people could attend, although I agree with the comments about that being acheivable by bringing the meeting forward. The fact that there is great scepticism, and suspicion about the motives is an indication of the distrust that we little men have for the authority, and I believe with very good cause. |
|
peter waller
21st Nov '08 08:47
|
Have had an e-mail from Rob Holman of the BA to confirm that the meeting is to be in April or May.
|
|
GaryCantley
21st Nov '08 16:38 |
peter waller wrote: Well lets hope its towards the start of April then, otherwise it'll be cutting into sailing time. |
|
peter waller
21st Nov '08 17:16
|
or even varnishing time! Would have been better in the autumn, this year.
|
|
Arachnid
21st Nov '08 17:16 |
Did he confirm the year, or just the month?
|
|
peter waller
21st Nov '08 19:20
|
Hi Arachnid, I suspect that the intentions are there, but like you I have nagging doubts, something might just conveniently crop up at the last minute, like the Bill.
|
| Reply Page: 1, 2, 3 |
Change to:
© Copyright NorfolkBroads.com 2006 - 2009, The East of England's Business Directory.