Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
#1
last night I watched the DDC Scrutiny meeting where various members of the public scrutinised the Chief Executive Of Dover Harbour Board.I did not see the recommendations of the Scrutiny Committee as the battery went on my IPad .Anyway over two hours was a long time to watch it.At least the members of the public who spoke were prepared to speak instead of complaining on a keyboard.
Captain Haddock
- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 8,397
#2
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/anglers-demand-reopening-of-pier-as-4k-sign-petition-251346/
Bottom line is as long as DHB say the magic words 'security issues' they can do what the Hell they like.
Meanwhile DHB who have spaffed £230 million actually filling in the docks and making a marina which is unusable are looking for millions of pounds of government grant funding to invest in improving the pier's ageing infrastructure!
Looks like WE through our taxes are about to pay for something which WE are not allowed to use?
You couldn't make it up.
John Buckley and The Gov like this
"The world is still a weird place, despite my efforts to make clear and perfect sense of it".
Dr. Hunter S Thompson
Guest 2547- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
#3
Captain Haddock wrote:https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/anglers-demand-reopening-of-pier-as-4k-sign-petition-251346/
Bottom line is as long as DHB say the magic words 'security issues' they can do what the Hell they like.
Meanwhile DHB who have spaffed £230 million actually filling in the docks and making a marina which is unusable are looking for millions of pounds of government grant funding to invest in improving the pier's ageing infrastructure!
Looks like WE through our taxes are about to pay for something which WE are not allowed to use?
You couldn't make it up.
All true. But, of course, our EU friends will no longer help us out.
https://www.doverport.co.uk/about/news/eu-pumps-millions-into-crucial-sea-route/13092/
In the words of Joni Mitchell, "Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone...."
The Gov likes this
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#4
Its a trend that many warned of for some time
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
#5
Hi Bob,
The Marina will come into use, design decisions made quite some time ago - between 2012 and 2016 - require additional remedial engineering solutions. The solutions come out of real world data and the first part of the remedial action has had the predicted and desired effect. The second part requires additional permissions which are in process.
The port is not looking for any government grants to improve a pier that we can't use. The Government definitely wouldn't give it for that purpose if the port were to ask.
The port is seeking a solution that would see angling continue from the Admiralty Pier whilst discharging its safety and security obligations and a trial fishing day is planned (I don't know the date yet) from which lessons can be learned and adjustments made to ensure that Angling from the pier can be continued in a way that is in keeping with what is today a very different safety and security environment that most of us grew up with.
The port is seeking funding from Government to re-arrange large sections of the Eastern Docks' approaches to the berths because the outbound controls will no longer work as they have done in the past because we left the EU and the whole approach to leaving the country needs to be changed. It could be said that the re-ordering of control points and increase in space available for passport controls is a Government responsibility anyway as the need for the project is brought about by decisions made by Government as to how we have left the EU. Other ports which handle less traffic in a year than Dover does in a week have been in receipt of millions and some 10s of millions to pay for new port infrastructure to support their businesses through Brexit changes. Dover seeks a reasonable and proportionate share of that funding.
Ross Miller and Button like this
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#6
You make it sound like DHB are such angels Neil lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
#7
Thank you Neil.I found That very impressive.Sometimes people need to let go of attitude and bias.Whats the old adage don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
Guest 2547- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
#8
#5. Thank you, Neil. Good to see some pragmatism and perhaps implied admission of past misjudgments on DHB's behalf. One quick question - would it be fair to assume that fishing will never resume on the Admiralty all the while there are cruise ships in dock?
Dover Pilot- Registered: 28 Jul 2018
- Posts: 350
#9
Neil, please don't spin this as something Dover seeks, you are not speaking for the good people that actually live in this town.
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 8,397
#10
Keith Sansum1 wrote:You make it sound like DHB are such angels Neil lol
See Stockholm Syndrome:-
A psychological response wherein a captive begins to identify closely with his or her captors, as well as with their agenda and demands.
"The world is still a weird place, despite my efforts to make clear and perfect sense of it".
Dr. Hunter S Thompson
SWWood- Location: Dover
- Registered: 30 May 2012
- Posts: 261
#11
Dover Pilot wrote:Neil, please don't spin this as something Dover seeks, you are not speaking for the good people that actually live in this town.
Sorry, are you suggesting that the people of Dover
don't want to see government funding to improve port infrastructure and assist the flow of traffic through the port, and by extension the town?
Jan Higgins, Brian Dixon, The Gov and
2 more like this
Jan Higgins, Brian Dixon, The Gov, Chris and Guest 2547 like this
Guest 3925- Registered: 28 Nov 2020
- Posts: 541
#12
I think that given the perceived reputation of DHB over the years, regardless of whether it is justified or not, having a member of the board to put their point of view across on a local public forum is always going to be open to challenge or suggestions otherwise, as well as support.
I suppose time will tell and the risk being run by reporting on a forum such as this is that it is very easy for DHB to dismiss any claims made here as "personal" and not the view of the board if things subsequently change.
Much of what post #5 states is on other social media and on official DHB comms anyway.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
#13
Ah Captain, that made me smile
. My job is to use my knowledge and expertise to try and deliver a better port for now and for the future and as a Board member I also speak on issues that arise for the community from decisions that are made in the Boardroom to the best of my ability.
I saw, and read, a misrepresentation of what was said by Doug Bannister at the scrutiny meeting and endeavoured to write the actual position as per the information that I have.
Keef, no, not angels. I find that like many legacy organisations the port doesn't always get it right and I think that the current regime is trying hard to do things better and to be more open than previous regimes have been in the previous couple of decades. They still won't always do what pleases everyone and sometimes they can't for reasons not always within their control.
Ray, no, i don't think that that is a fair assumption. My personal view is that whilst it may be necessary at times, and in order to meet ISPS requirements, to say that parts of the pier become temporarily off limits during some cruise calls, for a lot of the time, subject to some additional security checks, it should be possible to facilitate angling from the pier. As with many people, I'm hoping for a positive outcome from the process that the port's management has entered into with the DSAA.
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 8,397
#14
Let's just say that an organisation which changes its project manager more often than some people change their socks does not fill one with confidence - but at least DHB doesn't have any of those pesky shareholders, or indeed anyone else, able to ask 'difficult' questions?
"The world is still a weird place, despite my efforts to make clear and perfect sense of it".
Dr. Hunter S Thompson
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
#15
Hi Captain,
The Western Docks project has had the same project manager since April 2017 - some people must have awfully smelly socks. I'm dead certain that there are several people currently on the board who are more than able and who do do so.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#16
Neil
You spin it well
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Gary39- Registered: 7 Jul 2017
- Posts: 454
#17
Neil how about fighting for the small community of Aycliffe and getting the start of Dover TAP back along the A20.. or as usual an agency will say it is not their decision and pass the buck…
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
#18
Hi Gary, the issues that TAP causes for Aycliffe are raised at pretty much every board meeting. Personally, have wanted to have TAP pushed back to the Courtwood interchange since it was first brought in by Highways. I've probably received the same answer every time that you yourself have had.
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
#19
Yes Neil and I have been pushing for this.I did receive a reply from Highways England .You will Know this something to do with the lights at just passed Avos? tThis is their story .DHB can control these lights and depending on the capacity at the Eastern Dicks lorries are held here.Court wood being much further back it would take time to release more lorries to access Eastern Docks. I see it as one organisation blaming the other.Our MP waste of space .Meanwhile Aycliffe suffer.
I’m no longer a Councillor as you know .but I would Just love to be at a meeting and listen to the SPIN.
Gary39- Registered: 7 Jul 2017
- Posts: 454
#20
It only needs to be pushed back to the unused layby up the top of the hill. . They could build a small control building and have barriers to control the lorries and have booth like channel tunnel for the police etc. even have a place to park there cars.
But as you say it is a case of pass the buck . blame game and poor excuses..
I am sure a mile is not going to make the difference on releasing lorries. It is called control. Having worked on Euroscan at channel tunnel I know it can be done. We have 5 doing it.
Jan Higgins likes this