Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
15 September 2010
10:0570812There is a lot of detail missing from DHB's submission. Whether that is because there is still some uncertainty in what they propose or or because they are being economical with the facts will only become clear later. Goldfield's angry denouncing of Charlie over the 'cash for the boys' issue perhaps points to one of the grey areas. Methinks Dr G doth protest too much.
Admittedly there is also much missing from Charlie's representation. This is because he has come from a standing start in early May whereas DHB have been putting this together for a year and a half. But the whole town should come together behind Charlie. In my opinion it's the best option and the only one which will enable the town to develop.
PG.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
15 September 2010
10:1170814Sorry Peter, I don't agree.
DHB must be instructed tyo go back to the drawing board and to come up with a plan they can afford without recourse to selling the port.
Charlie's plan may be the best currently on offer, but that doesn't make it the only gme in town, yet.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 September 2010
10:5070825i think there is a time frame here, not enough time to enable anymore ideas to come forward.
15 September 2010
12:5170866So who sets the timeframe? What is the rush?
15 September 2010
12:5170867Better to get it right than get it quick!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 September 2010
15:0970892the government has, i believe that november is the cut off date.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
15 September 2010
15:1570894I am with Mr Perkins 100% on this one,and with our MP PLAN it would not work I can only put cash up if I can get a return in my life time and that would not happen there would not be anyturn of funding for a 100years just like the tunnell was and even then it was not very good.