howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#2
Glad the Cliffs are safe..........
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#3
gratifying to know that charlie is on the case and that no evil foreigners can just walk in then waltz off with them.
just the simple matter of the hospital now.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#4
I've read that last piece too: as the White Cliffs of Dover sit outside the Port, they're not for sale. That was Act 1.
Apart from that, I am wondering IF DHB will make another submission. If they don't, the DPPT will dry out and fade away.
It seems Charlie knows this, and has finally lost patience, hence his discussion above. If he makes it to the next G.E. (whenever that be) and DHB are holding out, what then?
Finally, Mr. Penning took great care to praise the Bishop of Dover, who is on the opposite side to DPPT
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
#5
DHB have been put under utmost pressure to produce by DfT, they will do so very soon now. The Government is losing patience with DHB. Certainly Charlie did not proceed with yesterday evening's adjournment in a fit of impatience, just another part of the ongoing consultation process and keeping the spotlight on Dover in order to ensure that the final decision and settlement of ownership is the right one for our communities and for the nation.
DPPT is unlikely to fade away anytime soon, especially as the membership continues to grow.
Neither the DPPT or the Bishop view themselves or each other as being on opposite sides. Both are acting for and on behalf of the common community that they serve and have been set up to serve. When the DHB fails in its attempt to privatise the port and sell it to remote private equity, I am sure that the Bishop, the appointees to the PDCT and DPPT will be able to work together and pool our progress to date on regeneration matters to the great benefit of Dover and Dover District.
I suggest that you reread the transcript a bit more carefully leaving aside the wee joke at the end. There are some very important pointers there that will show how much the people of Dover have already changed government attitudes with regards to ownership of the port by the community.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#6
Neil, I thought PDCT was part of the DHB project. The Bishop sided with PDCT, so he seems to have made up his mind time back that Dover should receive a share from future port revenues, but he did choose to gravitate this position within the current board governing the Port of Dover.
Mr. Penning does seem on good terms with the present board, having recently accompanied Dr. Goldfield and at least one other DHB executive to Taiwan to meet with Taiwanese port officials for cooperation in maritime port operations.
Personally I don't see the Government having lost patience with DHB, especially with their own track of u-turns!
Incidentally, did you come across Bob Goldfield's opinion that he reckoned there would be a cabinet reshuffle in Spring of 2013, and that he didn't foresee any decision on Dover Port before Autumn of 2013?
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#7
Neil, how many members does DPPT have now? Just for the record, if it's not indiscrete to ask.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#8
I have looked at the title documents for much of the DHB estate. The plans of the Eastern docks complex show clearly that the boundary between DHB land and NT land follows the cliff-top edge, not its base. Thus while the top of the cliffs belongs to NT, the cliff face belongs to DHB .So yes, technically, the white cliffs (to the extent that they directly overlook the Eastern docks) could actually be sold, but the green bit on top could not.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#9
Well done with the link there Howard...most interesting. Charlie did tip me off beforehand by email that the debate was happening but alas didnt see his email until the next day. Would always be interested to see info coming through from Charlie where possible.
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
#10
As ever with Ministerial statements you can read whatever you want into them. There is something in them for everybody without giving away anything.
For the record this is not the Minister who will make the decision on DHB proposals & has had to remove himself from the process.
DHB submitted their revised proposals last evening.
Watty
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#11
Sorry Paul, I should have let you know in advance. I sat up and watched the debate live, it didn't start until well after 11pm by which time almost all other MPs had left the chamber, unfortunately. I have to say that the two preceding debates were excellent anti-insomnia material, however!
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 697- Registered: 13 Apr 2010
- Posts: 622
#12
The debate is not about the White Cliffs, and never has been. A clever PR tactic to get the media excited, nothing more. A distraction from the proper debate that should be taking place about the future of the port and town.
One quick observation. I notice the reference to the "now derelict harbour station." Is that the same station that opened in 1996 as Dover's first cruise terminal?
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#13
In order to leave the latest information on the locked post on the DHB submission fresh, I posted on this related thread to comment it. We will no doubt all be reading the new submission, and some of us working on our representation.
Dover Forum has given ample space to views on the Port of Dover over a long period of time, and so anyone with an opinion to share by way of representation can do so at the addresses supplied on the locked thread.
Best of luck.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#14
#12, no, the cruise terminal was previously known as Dover Western Docks, at least in my recollection. I ended up there a few times in my youth after dozing past Canterbury East.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#15
all so known as marine station,due to trains/cross channel ferrys stoping there.and i do beliuve that the orient express and the golden arrow stopped/passed through there at some point.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#16
Neither the old Marine station nor the old Harbour station is remotely derelict so it is hard to know what Charlie was referring to. Somebody ought to check his speeches for him before he puts his foot in it.
The Marine station, latterly Dover Western Docks, closed to passengers in 1994 following the construction of the Channel Tunnel. It was subsequently converted into Cruise Terminal 1 and is presently undergoing major restoration works.
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/d/dover_western_docks/index.shtml
The Harbour station closed to passengers in 1927 following a gradual rundown after the construction of the Marine station, which also replaced the old Dover Town station by the Lord Warden hotel. The platforms and overall roof were removed but the station buildings remained in existence and in recent years have been used by P&O as a Marine Evacuation System training centre and kept in immaculate condition. The photo below is of the entrance hall which can hardly be described as derelict.
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/d/dover_harbour/index.shtml
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#17
Yes Im afraid Charlie does put his foot in it with his descriptions..only recently we were talking about a TV appearance he made where he spoke of Dover's seafront in fairly abysmal terms which I found very disappointing as we are all trying to herald Dover in a good way..."Dover seafront has suffered years of neglect" etc etc...said Charlie. Not the case at all, nothing could be further from the truth. One thing we do have is a very pleasant seafront.
I know he is in a battle with DHB but lets not have any unnecessary collateral damage at the same time.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#18
Maybe his researchers are not researching well enough ?
Roger
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
#19
He is not up to the job judging by his lack of local knowledge, after 2 years he should be performing far better.
Audere est facere.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#20
LOL - Martin, its how you tell 'em....
But you would say that at any excuse regardless.
We all remember how totally out of his depth and hopeless our previous MP was after all.
Charlie very different, thankfully - the way he has out-manoeuvred DHB, how he has managed to block DHB's plans to give DPPT a chance to bid, these are signs of a very effective MP. Your so called 'lack of local knowledge' is no more than a matter of opinion, I actually agree totally with Charlie's views as a born and bred Dovorian and would have used the same terminology in the real context in which he meant it - a context that you choose to ignore in order to score political points.
