Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Brian, for construction of phases 1 and 2 combined, the main contractor has set as an employment minimum 25% local people, recruitment is ongoing now. There was also an opportunity earlier this month for local suppliers to meet the main contractor and offer their services during the construction phase. I hope that there will be more opportunities such as this as the development progresses.
Mr Vic and I often differ over matters to do with the port and the way in which he describes matters is not necessarily the actual way it is, or was, or why things panned out as they have done. It is his opinion and his interpretation of events. I'm fine with that.
I like Mr Vic, he's a good guy with a unique perspective and we always exchange pleasantries when we bump into each other and have had some very good conversations.
It is possible to have a different view and come to different conclusions to someone else without impugning their integrity, no matter how wrong you think they are.
Opposition to the dredge is far from universal within the wider community, so supporting the Board in this area and highlighting that a license refusal will delay the project and adversely impact numbers of jobs created and the quantity and quality of the regeneration activity that I (and so many others) have spent so many years pressing for, is hardly ignoring what the wider community may want.
I have a job to do to protect port outcomes that will benefit Dover and the Port and given a choice between spending a significant additional amount of money (up to 3 times the £6.7m quoted by the Goodwin Sands Group, whilst having 5 times the carbon emissions and with no evidence to suggest major environmental harm from dredging the Goodwins or of any war graves within the area selected for dredging ) to line the pockets of aggregate businesses based in or near London and using that same money to deliver jobs and regeneration for Dover, I choose Dover every time.
All the evidence from this extended process is, or will be (once the additional requested survey is complete), with the MMO who will make a decision on the evidence based facts - environmental, social and compassionate. The sooner the MMO get on with it and announce a decision, the better.
Brian Dixon, Button, Captain Haddock and
1 more like this
Brian Dixon, Button, Captain Haddock and Paul M like this
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
There was agreement that local tradesmen would not be used if they were working because it would mean local company,s would not have the man power to keep going.so that is how it run ,but a lot of work was done by local company,s in their own workshops like we done and done some site work to I worked at times on the site and when it open we done repairs to.
Guest 1266- Registered: 8 May 2014
- Posts: 381
Neil.Wiggins wrote:Opposition to the dredge is far from universal within the wider community, so supporting the Board in this area and highlighting that a license refusal will delay the project and adversely impact numbers of jobs created and the quantity and quality of the regeneration activity that I (and so many others) have spent so many years pressing for, is hardly ignoring what the wider community may want.
Very worrying that a project on this scale can be so dramatically impacted on an assumption that the Goodwin Sands could be dredged. Usually contingency is equated within succesful project management.
If DHB get their own way it will be very interesting to see if Dover regeneration is impacted by other factors. I think the board have totally underestimated the significance of what they are proposing.
Guest 1831 likes this
Jack of Hearts
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I have no more say I do not agree with what Mr Wiggins is saying ,and that there is no need to use sands from the war graves of the Goodwin sands and Mr Wiggins or anyone does not know that remains of our dead from all wars and others that have died there, will not end up holding up the new build at the port.
Guest 1792 likes this
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
The effect on coastal erosion seems to have dropped out of the discussions, earlier in this long winded saga there were more than one scientists or all round egg heads banging on about the negative aspects of the proposed dredging.
Guest 1266- Registered: 8 May 2014
- Posts: 381
howard mcsweeney1 wrote:The effect on coastal erosion seems to have dropped out of the discussions, earlier in this long winded saga there were more than one scientists or all round egg heads banging on about the negative aspects of the proposed dredging.
Sandwich Council, Walmer Parish and Kingsdown Parish have opposed on grounds of coastal errosion and I suspect Thanet District have also. The first thing Ramsgate Heritage Zone did with their funding was send a survey ship out there.
howard mcsweeney1 likes this
Jack of Hearts
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
nearer 120 reg,spread over 3 canteen sites,.low paid jobs compared to tunnel workers pay.
ie,canteen staf 120£ take home compared to 680£ for tunnel workers.all figures are weekly pay
Reginald Barrington likes this
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
sorry niel,the job needs to take on local workers first then in fill vacancys on a ever increcing cirles outwards
Guest 1831- Registered: 1 Sep 2016
- Posts: 395
Guest 1792- Registered: 2 Jul 2016
- Posts: 111
If I was unsure last night about the Goodwin sands those 6 words last night on inside out confirmed that DHB are arrogant and totally disrespectful to the people of Dover and don't give a hoot who they trampled on in order to get their own way
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,500
Neil.Wiggins wrote:Brian, for construction of phases 1 and 2 combined, the main contractor has set as an employment minimum 25% local people, recruitment is ongoing now.
So how come I was told by the Harbour Board that most of the well paid jobs had already been taken by George Osborne?
Paul M, Guest 1694 and howard mcsweeney1 like this
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Cherry Blossom, I am checking (because I'm not sure), but I believe that a statement/comment was provided to the BBC, the BBC reporter appears to have declined to use the information provided.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
It does not matter what the B.B.C. REPORTED or not we all know the rights and wrong of the case,and in this case the D,H,B, are wrong, and got away with it the first time they took sand from the Goodwin, but that time they got away without the public getting on to it,so they said to them self we will get away with it again.But they have not ,the public were on to the case from day one ,they should now go along with the public and in the long run if they did that,it would go a long way and get more support for what they doing from them, but by the way they are going about it now all it is doing is costing them the support they did have from members of the public like my self.
Guest 1792 likes this
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
And Mr Wiggins I am told your roll on the board of the D.H.B. is the community member if that be the case then you should be putting over the views of the community not your own views, that is what you are getting paid for is it not.?And if the D,H,B. get their way you should give up your place on that board. Please tell us is your Roll a community member if not what is your roll which you are getting a good wage for.
I think you got that roll just to keep you from talking to the public about going against what the D,H,B, are doing because for some years they could not do anything right in your way of thinking, so to stop you talking like that ,they gave you the job.
Guest 1792 likes this
Paul M- Registered: 1 Feb 2016
- Posts: 393
I suspect and based on discussions I've had with friends that most Dovorians don't really care where the sand comes from. So it could be argued that Neil is representing the majority of the community.
My view is if it's going to cost nearly £20M to get it elsewhere and put the project at risk, then just go ahead and do it.
Button, Guest 1849 and Captain Haddock like this
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I do not agree with what post 176 as a Dovorian and born here in 1942 most of the public I have talked to some are not Dovorian but been here a very long time have said the sands should stay as they are ,you do not, nor do I know what most of the public are saying.but going on what is said on the form members they 99%saying they should not be used. And you are putting money above a war grave ,does not sound right to me.
Guest 1792 likes this
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,500
For God's sake Vic (and others) look again at post #103.
Half of Northern France could be designated by you and others a 'war grave'. Do get real.
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Thats true what you say but the remains of the fallen there, when found get put back in a war grave with Honour,not treated in the way the D.H.B. would have it done.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
My view is if it's going to cost nearly £20M to get it elsewhere and put the project at risk, then just go ahead and do it.[/QUOTE]
Nobody can go ahead and do anything until the MMO say they can, the issue of coastal erosion has not been clarified yet.
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,500
Perhaps we need to start doing away with consultations and authorisations?
You have only to look at the buildings in Dover.
Gorgeous Georgian and Victorian terraces ALL put up long before DDC's Planning Departtment was ever thought of and tomes of Building Regulations were written.
Post war I can't think of one building of note locally, yet all of the urban sprawl of Whitfield (for example) has supposedly had it's 'design' gone over with a fine tooth comb by council employees and councilors.
Guest 1831 likes this
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'