The post you are reporting:
My reference is to the Port and Dover's unemployment rate, Keith, in particular among the youth.
I campaigned for local regeneration through Port incomes, so that our Community could receive a constant revenue from the Port based on its influx of activity (port traffic). It would imply a law for all British ports equally, for local revenue from port traffic.
It would have been a bases for Localism on a financial scale, to finance local economic regeneration.
Both the Government and UKIP have a declared agenda of localism, but neither the Government nor UKIP supported my efforts. But at least Gov. mentioned my proposals in its Decision Letter.
For which reason, Keith old chum, I could not bring myself round to putting UKIP above the Government, as Gov. did more than UKIP for my cause, albeit in a Platonic fashion, but stopping short of actually implementing it.
So I decided to abandon the County election campaign and leave Gov. and UKIP to slog it out in a manly and fair fashion, without putting my weight in.
After all, Keith, I believe in a fair fight, and also weighed up my own chances of success by not campaigning door to door against either of the contending parties.
I was involved in confidential talks with UKIP towards the end of last year after being contacted, but these broke off.
But then I had also contacted Gov. in the same period, and the results were inconclusive.
Nothing to date became of my Port proposals.
As it stands now, Dover's youth are in a very poor situation regarding employment opportunities, and everything I strived for was for Dover's youth to have a fair future within the economy.
It was a standing part of my representations to the DfT.
I will continue to uphold the cause and will never give in.
And I'm unaware of any political parties campaigning for Dover's youth.
The candidates campaign for themselves, or for personalised causes, or for their own success and prestige, not for the youth who are our future and Kent's posterity.
