howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
doubt it richard a 1000 viewings in 8/9 hours, must be some sort of record.
Guest 705- Registered: 23 Sep 2010
- Posts: 661
Perhaps I expect too much!
Never give up...
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Two horse race now,and I am out in the lead and over the last fence,and the other horse is very lame and will be put down.
Guest 766- Registered: 7 Aug 2012
- Posts: 18
Now is the time to savour this decision and reflect on everyones hard work, but the time will quickly come when we need to move forward, remove goldfield and the board, and make sure that this port stays in the hands of the people of Dover in one way shape or other, because privatisation will be back unless we deal with it now
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Gary
You need to get yor head round privatisation
even the peoples port proposal is a form of privatisation
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 766- Registered: 7 Aug 2012
- Posts: 18
Slightly offended Keith, I understand privatisation and understand the PP other than trust port status the PP gives us the only solution to stopping the port being sold from pillar to post. If it were possible to have trust port status carved in stone, then great, can that happen, possibly, but I'm not starting to hold my breath yet. Within the ports industry we have been tackling ports package 1&2 there is now the threat of ports package 3 we defeated 1&2 in Europe but the big dogs come back with 3. This is not the same, but reflects privatisation and the threat of continually fighting off fat cats who wish to sell Dovers greatest jewel
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Mutualisation actually Keith. There is a clear difference.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
gary,
no reason to be offended geezer just my viewpoint, may not be what you wish to hear, but we are not all here just to agree would be quite boring if we did.
Without doubt I share your vision on the fat cats and how they can ruin Dover and it's future prospects.
i had a longish chat with john heron prior to the decision yesterday and we agreed the first step had to be to defeat the D.H.B. and most forumites have joined in this plight,
We agreed the next step would be the need to up the anti by the peoples port proposal which now has to convince all that this has both the expertese for such a big venture, but also can finance it and how.
plus other things, i look forward to all this and other info coming forward in future months.
of course its great news DHB lost
now the bigger fight begins.
and i apologise gary p if i offended i say it as it is
find that(most of the time)is the best way to be
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Charlie in the House yesterday: "Charlie Elphicke (Dover, Conservative)
I rise to celebrate Christmas. In particular, I want to celebrate Christmas in Dover, where we will have a new hospital built next year, after a decade in which our hospital services were decimated and progressively withdrawn. It is therefore great that health care will be moving forward.
I also rise to celebrate the fact that Dover has won the lottery. A £1 million grant has been awarded to Dover for the betterment of the community.
Most of all, however, I rise to celebrate the fact that today we have had news that the port of Dover will not be sold off to the French, or whoever, but will instead stay as it is and, I hope, become a community port and a landmark of the Prime Minister's vision for the big society.
It was a shock to everyone in my community when in 2009 the former Prime Minister put the port of Dover up for sale as part of his car boot sale. That dismayed my community, and it became a key issue. A key pledge of mine was that the port of Dover should not be sold off, but should remain for ever England.
In autumn 2010, therefore, we launched the alternative: Dover should become a people's port owned by the community. Our concern was that if it were to remain a trust port, every decade or so there would be a proposal to sell it off, and we do not want the port to be sold overseas. Rather than have to face that future threat ever again, we decided it would be better for the community to come together and buy the port.
The community bid was launched by none other than Dame Vera Lynn, to whom I and the community owe the deepest thanks and gratitude. Without her support, the port and the white cliffs above it would probably have been sold overseas, and we would be waving goodbye instead of celebrating a great Christmas present.
I thank Kent county council and Dover town council for their staunch support throughout this period. I also thank everyone at the Emmaus homeless charity, which is based at Archcliffe fort in Dover. Although they have no home themselves, they are concerned about our community and our port and the stake all of us hold in our society, and they agree that Dover should remain for ever England. They supplied the stewards for our rally back in 2010 when we launched the proposal for a people's port. I also wish to thank Unite the union—Alan Feeney and his colleagues. They are not natural bedfellows for a Conservative MP, but they came together to support us all in working together, across party, across area and across disciplines, to get the best for our community.
Together, we set up the People's Port Trust, which is chaired by Neil Wiggins. Its president is Sir Patrick Sheehy, who used to run British American Tobacco. That is a large company, so he is an experienced businessman who knows what he is doing. We also have Algy Cluff, who opened up the North sea to oil exploration, Pat Sherratt, Councillor Nigel Collor and many others. They all came together to set up the alternative. We got funding from the city—we raised the money that was needed—and we tabled a counter-offer to the Prime Minister in November 2010. That was really important because there is no point in just saying no to a proposal; we have to put forward an alternative. Our alternative was that we, the people—our community—should come together to buy the port.
We then held a referendum, because we thought that it could not be a people's port without the people endorsing the proposal. In March 2011, a referendum was held in the Dover parish asking:
"Do you oppose the private sale of the Port of Dover as proposed by the Dover Harbour Board and support its transfer to the community of Dover instead?"
Some 98% voted in favour, on a greater turnout than the previous district council elections. So I am pleased
that Ministers have listened to our community, held a proper consultation and decided that it would not be the right thing to sell off the port of Dover overseas.
The current situation is that the sell-off will not happen under the Ports Act 1991. The real issue is what happens next. I hope that Ministers will look at the position, at how the community can come to own the port and at how we can have the big society in Dover. That really matters because it is not just the community, the local authorities, my electors and the unions who want this; the ferry companies and businesses want it, too. So we have complete unity of purpose and unity of desire across all strands of our community that the port of Dover should become a community port. This is important because a community port could be an engine for the regeneration of Dover and returning Dover to being the jewel in the crown of the nation that it once was. This could be a template for Newcastle, for Belfast and for how we can have renewal and regeneration in our seafronts and coastal towns to ensure that they can achieve maximum employment, success and attractiveness once again. I thank the Government for their decision today to chart the way ahead, and I hope that in the new year we will get great progress towards delivering the Prime Minister's vision for a big society and the people's vision for a community port."
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
How can he lie about that in the house to, only 5000 turnout to vote.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Mr Vic, I think that you will find no lying is involved, what Mr Elphicke said about the vote and the turn out is absolutely correct.
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
It may be correct but certainly misleading, he makes no mention of the small amount of people that could actually vote.
Audere est facere.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Not misleading to Westminster (he was talking to other politicians at the time) as they are well aware that, when it was held, only councils with Parish powers could hold such a vote and that therefore the total number of people eligible to vote would have been quite restricted.
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
The figures are being used to advantage, it gives a false impression to those non politicians that read the various articles that quote the results of the ballot, playing with numbers.
Audere est facere.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
I am not sure how many people will have read the entire decision letter, but it is clear from what the Minister writes that the status quo (sorry Mr Vic) is not an option and that the port will undergo significant ownership, governance and structural changes which will enable the delivery of a meaningful regeneration agenda and give the port access to the capital that it will need for growth and development in the future free from any further threat of a sell off or future change to ownership.
However much the current incumbents may wish to stay in place to do their thing, they are defeated generals who should now be allowed to withdraw from the field of battle with honour, as worthy adversaries who have fought hard and well for what they thought was right, so that the people of Dover and its surrounding area can get on with the future.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
You have just written the next front page headline for the Dover Express Neil:
Neil Wiggins calls for Bob Goldfield's resignation.
In a very polite way of course!
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Not intentionally, I don't wish to kick a man when he's down. When the opposing army loses you allow them to withdraw with honour, you don't send them to the gas chambers. I'll not call for his resignation.
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Seems to me Neil, that the description of Modernisation & Privatisation are still the preferred option described [acknowledging Howard's point] and that he [Simon Burns] favoured giving a community based group/s an opportunity to participate in the process.That does not imply any preferment, just fair play in my view.
There is no doubt growth & regeneration should be the drivers & fit neatly across government policy.
The messages are clear enough but need fuller clarification from the Ports/Shipping Minister early in the New Year.
As I understand it the ball is still with DHB. Not sure whether a jt. venture would require another round of consultation, if not DHB would stay in place.
What is sure is that most other proposals could trigger theConsultation merry go round to start again & the same toxic, sterilising debate continues.
Watty
