John Packman statement to the press in May :- Petitioners are delaying the essential (for safety) licensing of hire boats.

Report to BA main committee for this Friday :- Members will note that licensing of hire boats (Clause 42) had been scheduled for consultation summer 2008. However, this has slipped as a result of the MCA consultation on a national Hire Boat Code which is currently ongoing.

Oh dear even more regulation but will it be the same as the Boat Safety Scheme or even the Broads BSS Byelaws which are now reported to be different.

My comment:- Why should I not now expect a public apology? After all this was the claimed justification for this Bill.
NNDC wanted to introduce their own measures well before the Broads National Park Bill saw the light of day.

The fated Breakaway V incident, the trigger for an unnecessary knee-jerk reaction that has cost us all dearly.

Richard, we won't get a public apology. I agree that Packman owes the petitioners, and the whole little people population, a heartfelt apology. But I suspect that he sees himself as entirely blameless, not that we should expect otherwise.

The Boat Safety Scheme and the Broads BSS Byelaws are reported to be different. But then the MCA is qualified . . . . . . . . . . . .

The blessed Bill is growing less and less necessary by the day.

Gruntfuttock wrote:

I don't suppose any other national organisation - Department for Transport perhaps - is running any consultations or designing any new Laws?

GF

Well the Department for Transport are consulting on a National Code for Hire Boat Safety. This is to be entitled the Code for the Design, Construction and Operation of Hire Boats. The BA are consultees and consultation ends on the 24th October.... the day before the next Navigation Committee Meeting.
So do you think the committee were consulted on this issue? Just like the Broads Bill and the Marine Navigation Bill they will get no chance to discuss it or have their comments included until after it is published.

At about 7 o'clock on Wednesday evening the Bishop of Norwich is due to present the Broads Authority Bill to the House of Lords. The Bishop will be well briefed and scripted for the purpose of uniting the House in support of the Bill's lubricated progress into law.

I don't run with the Bishop's spiritual flock and his credibility is no concern of mine. But I do hope that he will have committed meditation to the rights or wrongs of shepherding his Westminster colleagues in support of this massive waste of the wider congregation's contribution to the political silver platter.

For a Private Bill to be contentious at this advanced stage is extraordinary, an indication of its quality of conception and user consultation. As yet the Bill remains in draft form, it is incomplete and unfinished. But that's nit-picking, I'm sure the Bishop knows what the Democracy Bypass Authority wants included.

The Bill may receive its 'Second Reading' on a nod following the Bishop's presentation, or there may be counter argument from any Peer who might have identified something to contest. If we assume that the Bill will receive its second reading, then the petitioners will get to voice their objections in an Opposed Bill Committee at a later date.

The date for that committee has yet to be set and the volume of opposition does seem to indicate a requirement for at least a week hearing evidence - probably a fortnight. The earliest possible start date is October 27th, but it does depend on the availability of enough Peers to sit continuously for enough days and the diary still contains pencil marks but no ink.

If this whole saga drags on much longer, who knows? Maybe national law and/or a new safety code could overtake this local Bill and provide everything the Broads Authority needs for the introduction of ample boating safety measures while maintaining an even keel with other inland navigation authorities.

But then, that wouldn't be the stuff which makes an exclusive Notional Park.

GF

A quick Google has revealed no obvious compulsory safety codes for Loch ness nor Loch Lomond. Are they subject to BSS?
More Google required....