howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
at the risk of continuing to repeat myself the full unexpurgated version is in the link on thread 5.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
I should have said that Howard, apologies for making you repeat yourself.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i think a lot of people leafed through it neil, it needs to be read a few times to take it all in. my conclusions were that d.h.b had to make a new offer and that whatever happened trust port status would end. i would congratulate the minister in making it clear that the local community has to get the best deal on offer.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Howard, DHB have not been asked to make a new privatisation bid.
Port privatisation is off the table, that's what the DfT have stated.
They are looking for alternatives.
DHB can offer alternative ideas for future finance of Port maintenance and expansion, but they cannot offer another privatisation bid again.
Unless stated otherwise, all other alternatives from relevant representations are on the table.
As stated previously, I've nought against DPPT campaigning for their proposals, as I campaign for mine, only hopefully MP Charlie doesn't claim in Parliament to be representing all the Dover Community with his DPPT offer.
As long as it remains fair, we can campaign for our own proposals, but the DHB privatisation bid is off the table once and for all. It has been rejected!
Yes I too received a letter from DfT, so we're all in this together, right!
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Read it properly Alex. It only said the DHB proposals were off the table.
Neil is spot on with a view that it will resurrect itself. Trust Ports appear to be a thing of the past.
And no, I'm not going to explain for you . Read it thoroughly.
Watty
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, isn't that the same as I wrote? "the DHB proposals were off the table".
Consequently, their privatisation bid cannot be put back on the table, as a Public Consultation by the Government ruled it out. I've read the letter from the DfT to DHB, it was on a link on this thread.
I've also asked the DfT to correct the wrong information they put regards to my proposal, which was NOT £50 for every vehicle in a Port Toll.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
good grief alex,talk about a dog and his bone.
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Wrong Alex, the existing proposals for privatisation can't but if they wanted to submit another bid, it is not out of the question.
I'm sure that they won't for some time or ever but they still have that option.
Watty
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I again think the port will stay as it is today,I will write a letter again to the dept and the Queen saying so.
Guest 688- Registered: 16 Jul 2009
- Posts: 268
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
would her majesty consent to a guest appearance though john?
very busy with waving engagements at the moment.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
so who will win?
Peoples port
or
alexander
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 732- Registered: 8 Nov 2011
- Posts: 128
The port will never be safe until Goldfield, Dodridge and all his creepy little underlings have been removed, I bet they are not laughing now as I am.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
all in the air still vince
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Keith, like Vic, I have never made an issue of asking for a substitution of DHB.
Whereas the DPPT intends to replace DHB.
We have Howard interpreting that there is no future for Trust ports according to Gov., and if he is right, then my point is, DPPT are a Trust. So that would imply they have no chance as a starter.
Personally I don't see in the response from the DfT any indication that the Trust status of DHB will be revoked, but I do find it hard to see the Government replacing one Trust status (DHB) for another (DPPT).
The full name: Dover People's Port Trust, might have backfired on DPPT, at least that is what I read between the lines, looking at Howard's opinion.
As stated many times in the past, my proposal has been that the Port should be transferred to the local Community by way of a passage from Central to local Government, with a condition that it can never be privatised. However DHB would remain the Port's administrating authority with its existing institutions, including the Port Police Force.
As for a Port Toll, even if the Government accepted a minimal toll for public revenue destined to the local councils, even if it was initially much smaller than I suggested, it would be by many, many times better than the 1 million pounds a year in dividends proposed by DPPT.
I am currently in communication with the DfT on this issue.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Alex, the battle is far from over, I suggest you immerse yourself in the Public Bodies Act as that is the enabling legislation covering what is likely to happen next.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
In fact, if the average number of vehicles passing through the Port of Dover is 20,000 a day, and only £1 per vehicle were charged as a toll for the District Council, that would equate to £20,000 a day. That's £7 million a year.
Compare that to £1 million a year in DPPT dividends!
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Hi Peter,
Must have posted simultaneously.
Peter, I think the Public are fed up comparing Public Bodies Acts and Ports Acts, and want to see results: regeneration for the Town and District. No more long ever-winding delays that never end and just go on and on.
As said, I'm in contact with the DfT.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
It doesn't matter whether the public is fed up or not. The governing legislation has to be followed to the letter, because if it isn't, decisions taken and actions made can be reversed by the courts at a later date. And I can't understand why you have this blind faith in local government. They are good at many things but running businesses is not one of them. And whether you like it or not, the port of Dover is a business, and the most important one in the district.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Peter, as said many times, in my representation it is not written anywhere that Local Government would be running the Port:
DHB would! Local Government would simply ensure the Port is being run fairly according to fair competition regulations and would, by way of its authority as being the elected representative of the Community, ensure the Port could never be sold off or privatised. I suggest you read the Localism Act, Peter!
