Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 59...all in good time Howard,there is another item that needs nipping in the bud first.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Alexander, I haven't spoken to Mr Farage (although I did hear in person what he had to say), but have presented the DPPT concept and background case to party activists and explained the real legal situation with regards to the Charter.
Of course DPPT are lobbying Government, as are other interested parties, there is no legal bar to this happening whatsoever. The fundamental questions, that the DHB themselves raised, about the Port's long term future and its ability to invest for growth as and when required remain unresolved by the rejection of the private equity sale last December and it is vital for the good of Dover (Town and Port) that they are resolved properly without undue delay.
The implication that you make with regard to my truthfulness Alexander is undeserving and the fulness of time will be sufficient to prove the honesty of what I have written. My time scales may be proved incorrect, everything on this project has taken longer than hoped for, but matters will progress at whatever pace officialdom finds itself able to move.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Do tell us Reg.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Its what I call jumping on the band wagon and that what UKIP leader is doing .I will stand next time if funds are there just to stop it happing I will carry over 1000votes and some where that will show up on the day,it has happen in the pass.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
when politicians visit a constituency they tell locals what they want to hear, they wouldn't get voted in otherwise.
my favourite was andrew lansley who just clicked his fingers and promised us a state of the art hospital if his party ever gained power.
i have been told that john prescott visited a long while back during a seafarers dispute and promised that if his party were elected they would get all sacked workers reinstated.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Neil, the public consultation is over and the Government (or Decision Minister) decided the Port remains DHB.
Any lobbying done outside of a public consultation could be risky if:
1) the person(s) lobbying make claims that a change of ownership of an asset is about to take place in their favor without any proof;
2) the Government was making such a transfer decision without informing the Public during the process of this decision-making/lobbying.
If I took your claim seriously, I'd long ago have contacted the DfT for clarification and made it public.
In fact there are laws on lobbying, transparency and the change of asset-ownership.
My guess is, after the Government in December 2012 made their decision, you lobbied UKIP.
Which is fine, but has nothing to do with lobbying the Government.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
howard mcsweeney1 wrote: When politicians visit a constituency they tell locals what they want to hear, they wouldn't get voted in otherwise. My favourite was andrew lansley who just clicked his fingers and promised us a state of the art hospital if his party ever gained power. I have been told that john prescott visited a long while back during a seafarers dispute and promised that if his party were elected they would get all sacked workers reinstated.
Most recently of course Charlie Elphicke, who stood on a platform of total opposition to privatisation of the Port of Dover, "not on my watch" were his very words, and then endorsed the fully fledged DPPT privatisation plan once he was elected.
My own personal all-time favourite was the egregious Tim Yeo who promised to flog off the Port of Dover and give all the proceeds - lock, stock, and barrel - to the people of Dover if the Conservatives were elected in 2005.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4367549.stmGuest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
In 2009, Charlie had leaflets plopping through letterboxes claiming the Port of Dover must remain a State asset, with an absolute NO to privatisation. It was one of his election tickets.
DPPT is indeed a private trust and its plan is a form of privatisation.
As a trust, it can receive donations.
Only the Department for Transport could be involved in any form of discussion on ownership change of the Port of Dover, and no other Department, lord or minister or civil servant.
The Department for Transport would have to have authority from the Government for this, and it would need to be made known to the Public. Under no circumstance could there be "secret meetings".
The DfT is NOT involved in any discussion on a change of ownership of the Port of Dover.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Alexander, you are wrong on all counts except the Minister's rejection of the DHB private equity sale.
I have spoken to UKIP people once.
I have spoken with Government many times, how else does change come about? I have said that I am confident that the port will transition to a new form of ownership and governance and that I hope to be able to speak about it at the DPPT AGM next Friday.
Just as DHB put their private equity sale to public consultation AFTER they had spoken with the Government of the day and agreed with the Government of the day what was acceptable to them, any changes in the port's ownership and governance occasioned by DPPT's work will be put out for consultation before they are put into effect.
Currently there are very few laws on lobbying and none of them have been contravened by DPPT
I suggest that you write to the DfT then Alexander and ask the correct questions because they will only answer the question that they think you have asked.
However, it is already public that DPPT has been and will continue to lobby Government to achieve the best outcome for Dover.
As I said before, the passage of time will prove the honesty of what I have said.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
But DPPT doesn't own or run the Port, Neil, so the DfT won't get involved with its managers.
There is nothing DPPT can do regards the Port of Dover.
I suppose we'll have to see if Nigel Farage will make the people's port part of his campaign.
But if he ever managed to reach Government, he'd first have to change a lot of standing regulations in order for the Port to be sold to a private entity.
The Government did not give the go-ahead for a transfer scheme because of the DHB Charter and its successive amendments.
Before 1606, the Port belonged to the Town, so any transfer scheme would have to be to the Town.
See: Ville et Portus Dover
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
This is why my representation was the only viable one:
that the Port be given to Town Council OR District Council ownership.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Alexander, the Government did not approve the DHB proposed private equity sale because the DHB plan did not meet the Government's revised criteria. If the DHB had met the criteria, the port would have been sold.
As with the rest of your posting above, your assessment of the reasons for the rejection of the DHB private equity sale are entirely incorrect.
When the new ownership and governance set up for the Port of Dover goes to public consultation, the DfT will again enjoy your submissions I am sure.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
not sure the town or district council are the best people to own the port alex, the seafront khasi proved too big a challenge for them
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
#71 Alexander, your submission did not answer the fundamental questions, I read it very carefully and it failed to address the issue of access to the capital markets, it failed to wed entrepenurial (sorry about the spelling) flair to stakeholder accountability, it failed to address the concerns about port pricing and tariffs raised by the haulage and ferry industry (in fact it increased their concerns), etc. etc. you did not provide an acceptable, viable and perpetual alternative except in your own mind.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Alexander;
are you for real? or a wind up?
just in case your not, I think Neil has patiently again answered all your questions, and you have got so much wrong on the present situation on the port/the govts findings/the next stages/lobbying.
I did chuckle when you wrote post
Alexander D wrote:This is why my representation was the only viable one:
that the Port be given to Town Council OR District Council ownership.
2 problems with this one
1' its not correct
2; I wouldn't let the councils any where near this project
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Neil, when will the new ownership and governance set up for the Port of Dover go to public consultation?
All this is new to me. Who said there will be a new Public Consultation on the Port?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
nothing about a new consultation alex all things are open to change and new interpretations.
things are rapidly changing with the port issue as indicated by the invitation only meeting a few days ago.
best to keep your ear to the ground as i do.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
In that case, Howard, where does Neil get his information from?
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,883
From those that are involved with the whole process and are 'in the know' unlike the rest of us.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
