Jump to content

NBTA London Legal Rights Meeting


NBTA London

Featured Posts

As I have said before it's one thing to express an opinion as a member of an organisation and quite another to express it when you hold some sort of 'office' or position within an organisation. That is the issue. Not that he would but Richard Parry for example wouldn't be able to come on here and express a personal view without every body immediately assuming it was the official position of CRT, that is unless he made it expressly clear it wasn't.It's simply human nature.

Might be human nature for you, but thankfully most can respect a person's right to come on a public forum and express their own opinion without assuming that they are speaking on behalf of some association. As for trying to compare it to Richard Parry coming on here that is just ridiculous firstly Jenlyn was a member of this forum long before ACC was ever founded and he is an unpaid officer of ACC unlike Richard Parry who is the CEO of CRT. There are quite a few other members of this forum who hold office within associations and I never have a problem realising unless they say otherwise that they are simply expressing their opinion on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might be human nature for you, but thankfully most can respect a person's right to come on a public forum and express their own opinion without assuming that they are speaking on behalf of some association. As for trying to compare it to Richard Parry coming on here that is just ridiculous firstly Jenlyn was a member of this forum long before ACC was ever founded and he is an unpaid officer of ACC unlike Richard Parry who is the CEO of CRT. There are quite a few other members of this forum who hold office within associations and I never have a problem realising unless they say otherwise that they are simply expressing their opinion on here.

I think you will find it's not just me who has expressed similar in the past, so it's not just my human nature. I used the Parry example as an extreme example to make the point but it could be applied equally to others too.

 

The paid/unpaid aspect is irrelevant BTW.

 

I am merely telling you how I and others see it, if you (and Jenlyn) don't want to hear it that is fair enough feel free to disregard it as it doesn't really matter a jot to me either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you will find it's not just me who has expressed similar in the past, so it's not just my human nature. I used the Parry example as an extreme example to make the point but it could be applied equally to others too.The paid/unpaid aspect is irrelevant BTW.I am merely telling you how I and others see it, if you (and Jenlyn) don't want to hear it that is fair enough feel free to disregard it as it doesn't really matter a jot to me either way.

Well like most of your posts I will file under irrelevant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I read posts on here the NBTA couldn't represent any boater in dispute with the Trust, as in meaningfully represent them, has something suddenly changed?

No, nothing 'suddenly' changed. But a lot goes on that doesn't get talked about on the Internet and NBTA is more than Nick Brown.

They do, and are slowly learning, however, citing human rights and EU legislation when the alternative is moving a boat a couple of miles is rather a ridiculous stance,

One of the reasons Nick Brown was eventually cold shouldered by the London Boaters was his inability to countenance WORKING with the (then) BW authorities, his aim was to seek a judicial review, the eventual result was a far more satisfying withdrawal due to overwhelming evidence and London Boaters wanting ti work with BW/CRT to move forward

There was useful material in the judicial review, if you were to look beyond your hatred.

 

Tread on your foot did he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I have said before it's one thing to express an opinion as a member of an organisation and quite another to express it when you hold some sort of 'office' or position within an organisation. That is the issue. Not that he would but Richard Parry for example wouldn't be able to come on here and express a personal view without every body immediately assuming it was the official position of CRT, that is unless he made it expressly clear it wasn't.

.

Umm... 'Opinion'? You lot are too busy ranting ( and drinking?) to stop and think. The post is an announcement of an event. Not much opinion in there.

 

Why would they post their stances and opinions on this board when they attract the kinds of half-baked assumptions and attacks they have?

 

On the other hand; that's notice of the meeting under a few more eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you will find it's not just me who has expressed similar in the past, so it's not just my human nature. I used the Parry example as an extreme example to make the point but it could be applied equally to others too.The paid/unpaid aspect is irrelevant BTW.I am merely telling you how I and others see it, if you (and Jenlyn) don't want to hear it that is fair enough feel free to disregard it as it doesn't really matter a jot to me either way.

 

I found your comment on another thread advocating that we set off a nuclear bomb in Syria/Iraq to destroy ISIS and presumeably a huge number of innocent civilians of greater concern than a little spat about boating.

 

Back on topic there were some interesting comments that the judge made from the NBTA judicial review and I believe this has caused CRT to realise that they can be vulnerable to a challenge and it's one of the many pieces that has led them to want to try and get more of a consensus (among associations ) which might lead to greater clarity of what 'bona fide' navigation means from an enforcement perspective. In my personal opinion of course.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much venom on this thread!

And as I said before! things have really changed in London. NBTA really has not been cold shouldered by London Boaters, far from it - many of the boaters that fought the proposals are now active members and that is why we now have NBTA London. Because London Boaters is not a formal organisation with a membership is it?

As I said - no one is being advised to break the law, so please let's not assume.

And for whatever reason there are a lot of newcomers to Londons waterways, many are totally clueless about what it means to be a ccer. Some are frightened and threatened by the letters they receive, is it such a bad idea to get them together and explain the law or should it be kept secret? CRT are never gonna do a workshop are they?

Even if CRT don't recognise NBTA ( and I think they should! ) most of the other boater orgs have respect for them, From working with the boater orgs myself, know this for a fact.

Edited by Lady Muck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And let's not forget the 38 degrees petition, it is this, I think, that lit the touch paper that led to CRT employing a welfare officer. We sorely need this - there are some very vulnerable people afloat due to the housing crisis, this really needs looking at. And as someone who has just been chucked off her GP with no warning, I can empathise with the issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if CRT don't recognise NBTA ( and I think they should! ) most of the other boater orgs have respect for them, From working with the boater orgs myself, know this for a fact.

I think they do now, I read on NABO News about one consultation that had gone to NBTA as well as the other associations.

 

There's a great deal of support out there for boaters currently feeling bewildered by some of the stuff being thrown at them.

 

Even in the Internet age word of mouth is a much more powerful means of communication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found your comment on another thread advocating that we set off a nuclear bomb in Syria/Iraq to destroy ISIS and presumeably a huge number of innocent civilians of greater concern than a little spat about boating..

Why have you dragged that issue over to this thread, it's Irrelevant, you will also notice others made the same or similar comments but curiously you appear not to have seen them and felt worth commenting in the correct thread.

 

You obviously also missed the follow up post, but if you have an easy solution, please let's hear it (but do post it in the correct place please).

Edited by The Dog House
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they do now, I read on NABO News about one consultation that had gone to NBTA as well as the other associations.

There's a great deal of support out there for boaters currently feeling bewildered by some of the stuff being thrown at them.

Even in the Internet age word of mouth is a much more powerful means of communication.

Hmm not so sure they do after recent dealings. If you were writing a document for ccers in london and you were adding a list of boater orgs, you'd think NBTA would be included in that list, wouldn't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If there has been a change in the NBTA's basic stance (which appears to be that the cruising element of continuous cruising is unnecessary) then this would be a good forum to promote such a change or correct any misapprehensions. Instead what we get is a thread advertising an event to tell people what their rights are, with no mention within it of what people's responsibilities are. If I am labouring under a misapprehension, the NBTA have done nothing to clear it up with this thread.

1) it never was

2) no, this forum would be the worst possible place to use for publicising their ideas

3) rights always have responsibilities. To jump on them for not being explicit about this is pretty weak

4) you are, but it wasn't their intention to clear them up. Go along and find out.

 

Perhaps they just wanted to drop a grenade. Seems to have worked.

Hmm not so sure they do after recent dealings. If you were writing a document for ccers in london and you were adding a list of boater orgs, you'd think NBTA would be included in that list, wouldn't you?

Yes. I agree. I'll find the reference later because it surprised me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, like NBTA, CRT know better than to use this forum as a platform.

 

What's that quote about 'never argue with an idiot...'?

 

That's why I don't bother arguing with you ;)

 

Some on here have made their mind up, whether it's pro or anti NBTA or anything else, others are open minded, but open minds can't process wat they don't know, and to date no-one claiming to represent NBTA has come on and said what they actually stand for, nor have the NBTA's defenders.

 

This isn't actually a very good platform as CWDF is not a properly constituted organisation, it's more like a public house and can not really be claimed to have a consensus any more than the Royal Oak or the Red Lion can. That's one good reason for bodies not to use it unless they want a discussion which may not go the way they want it to.

 

Given the reported problems in London (I have no personal experience of boating or living there) I do wonder if there is rather a lot of closing the door after the horse has bolted. People who have got themselves in a pickle need help in that situation, getting people off boats and onto the streets is in no-one's interest, but keeping these people clear of the pitfalls in the first place would be helpful. If the NBTA advise people what they are letting themselves in for as well as what the law is that would be a good thing.

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this is what happens when you try to work with CRT, this is why people get disillusioned, this is why boaters get fed up and join NBTA! Plenty of us thought Mr Brown was overreacting before we started working with CRT ourselves. Well, now we understand.

Funny you should say that I was having a conversation recently with another long time ccer who is getting fed up with all these changes that are happening and we both agreed that maybe Nick Brown was not that wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this the group that are the subject of this thread ?

 

(NBTA) is a non-profit making organisation formed for the advancement of Baton Twirling and its associated activities. The aims of the NBTA are to provide all twirlers and their associates, teachers, judges, parents and corps directors with an active programe of events and to promote the common interest of said events at all levels within a competition structure. The National Baton Twirling Association is framed and held together by two great principles: FAIRNESS AND DEMOCRACY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In My understanding of the 95 Act, the "Board has to be Satisfied" by issuing guidelines as to what will satisfy the Board (C&RT) are trying to make thing much clearer for all, boaters and staff, alike.

 

Remember these are guidelines not laws, if you can show good reason for not following them, then fine. But you will have to convince a Judge that you had good reason.

 

As time and cases go by the Guidelines will change, to reflect, the situation.

 

When you apply for a waterways license, you agree to abide by that license terms. In all cases to "Satisfy the Board".

 

It would make sense for ALL boaters, to help C&RT to create these guidelines, as the present situation shows they are long long overdue.

 

 

 

Bod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact many on here miss, is that associations tend to do what their members ask (IWA excused).

Some of you need to get your heads around that.

 

Yes but equally it has regularly in the past been reported (rightly or wrongly) that the NBTA had almost no membership, and certainly very few outside of their origins on the K&A. (You have yourself told me this in the not so distant past).

 

It is kind of inevitable, given its history to date, that even if the NBTA now has a London offshoot and a growing following there, that for a while many people will still judge it by the very public personas of Nick Brown and Panda Smith, because outwardly that is all many of us will normally see.

 

I have absolutely no doubt about the total commitment and dedication of both, and I am very prepared to accept from people who have known them that they actually do huge amounts to support other vulnerable people.

 

However equally I have stood and had conversations with Panda at meetings where I am left feeling that even if her take on the laws surrounding our canals was spot on, (which I severely doubt it is), I am actually left hoping that it is not, because I think widespread support for much of what she is fighting for would be to the detriment of most of us who use those canals.

 

But at the end of the day, it is up to people to make up their own minds, I guess. Should the NBTA manage to attract hundreds or even thousands of members, then one has to accept that whatever your own views about what best serves the waterways, that there are actually significant numbers who have a very different agenda.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but equally it has regularly in the past been reported (rightly or wrongly) that the NBTA had almost no membership, and certainly very few outside of their origins on the K&A. (You have yourself told me this in the not so distant past).

 

It is kind of inevitable, given its history to date, that even if the NBTA now has a London offshoot and a growing following there, that for a while many people will still judge it by the very public personas of Nick Brown and Panda Smith, because outwardly that is all many of us will normally see.

 

I have absolutely no doubt about the total commitment and dedication of both, and I am very prepared to accept from people who have known them that they actually do huge amounts to support other vulnerable people.

 

However equally I have stood and had conversations with Panda at meetings where I am left feeling that even if her take on the laws surrounding our canals was spot on, (which I severely doubt it is), I am actually left hoping that it is not, because I think widespread support for much of what she is fighting for would be to the detriment of most of us who use those canals.

 

But at the end of the day, it is up to people to make up their own minds, I guess. Should the NBTA manage to attract hundreds or even thousands of members, then one has to accept that whatever your own views about what best serves the waterways, that there are actually significant numbers who have a very different agenda.

Reading some of that, I would suggest you have missed several posts in the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.