Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Vince, you old wag
BG only has about 11 years experience in the ports sector and hasn't designed diddly, he paid external consultants to do the Masterplan, T2 and pretty much everything else that he is saying he has expertise in to do with port development. I was in conversation yesterday with a major infrastructure funder who had a good laugh at the idea of BG selling port consultancy services
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
Guest 732- Registered: 8 Nov 2011
- Posts: 128
Oh well it was worth a try
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
Some very interesting observations from Neil which may come as a bit of a surprise to the Dover Chamber of Commerce who, from post #197, are under the impression that "DPPTL has set itself the target of ensuring that more of the passengers passing through Dover should become customers of East Kent companies and aims to reverse the decline in traffic which, with the exception of road haulage vehicles, has fallen steadily since 1997 as the following data shows."
Far from looking to increase passenger traffic, all the plans that Neil has outlined above are quite rightly focused on the cargo, unaccompanied freight, and energy sectors.
I suspect that any significant expansion of the passenger traffic would be a lost cause given the competition from Eurostar, Eurotunnel passenger shuttles, and the low cost airlines. In fact, things look far from rosy on the ferry front in every respect.
Eurotunnel holds all the cards. Fossil fuel costs for the ferries are set to rise dramatically but the tunnel is completely supplied from the French nuclear power grid. Furthermore, the tunnel cost £10bn to construct but they managed to persuade the reluctant private investors to sacrifice £7bn and are making a modest profit with the remnant £3bn debt.
In the context of this leviathan, the Dover ferry operation is very small beer and Eurotunnel recently started buying up the competition by purchasing the remnants of SeaFrance for what amounts to small change for them. As far as level playing fields go, this one is clinging to the North Face of the Eiger. Hard as it is to imagine, the future of Dover as preeminently a ferry port may be numbered.
Had to look up Blue Energy which transpires to be defined as: "Blue energy is the renewable clean energy that can be gained by mixing of two streams with different salt concentrations (e.g. sea water and river water), without carbon dioxide or any other pollutant emissions." On this basis, perhaps we can look forward to the Wellington Dock one day becoming a giant battery supplying all our needs, although it does sound like something Alex might have dreamed up!
With regard to the mention of efficient Vessel Traffic Management, I had the pleasure of visiting Port Control and Terminal Control last sunday and can vouch for the fact that they are running an impressively efficient operation. Let us hope that BG and his henchmen are not planning to outsource this along with everything else!
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Hi, still around at the moment.
Ed, the Blue Energy Sector covers the recovery of energy from the sea, tidal and wave energy mostly, technologies in this sector are maturing rapidly and there is an enormous potential there for predictable and reliable renewable energy recovery. Sadly not planning to turn the Wellington into a giant battery - although now that you mention it.....
.
Vessel traffic management at Dover is pretty much a world leader. Unfortunately, outside the dock gates, landside traffic management often leaves much to be desired.
Whilst passenger numbers have been decreasing, we do hope to encourage a greater proportion of the remaining ones to visit for a bit, doing so is a multi-agency effort, so not entirely in our court. We do aim to reverse the decline in traffic throughput at Dover, we are realistic about what areas the reverse can be achieved in and will concentrate efforts on those.
Guest 688- Registered: 16 Jul 2009
- Posts: 268
My suspicion,Vince,is that Dr Bob would have the same effect on the Egyptians as he had on the Irish and you know what a great success he was there.I think the Muslim Brotherhood would be just as hospitable
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Just came across this e-petition, looks as if it's closing today at 11 minutes past 10.
e-petition
The Port of Dover Should Not be sold off
Responsible department: Department for Transport
We, the undersigned, petition that the port of Dover is not granted permission to sell itself to private equity and that it should instead be enabled to transfer into.the ownership of its community of local stakeholders in perpetuity.
Sign this petition
Not received your confirmation email?
Number of signatures:
341
Created by:
Neil Wiggins
Closing:
16/10/2012 10:11
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
not much more than an hour for anyone who wants to sign to do so.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Alex.
Many thanks, 342 now.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
342 is a very poor response to such an important petition.
Considering the amount of views to this thread is 4.155
The DPPT needs more momentum.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
there were queues to sign a petition in pencester gardens a while back, if this is the same one anyone adding their name to the online petition could cause problems.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
As I understood it, the Pencester Gardens petition was not run by DPPT, where-as this e-petition is.
This would make them two separate petitions.
This e-petition was started 3 months ago in July.
Perhaps a DPPT manager can confirm whether they are two different petitions.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
you're right alex, thinking back on it the petition was organised by the "unite" union at the pencester event.
i don't think that dppt have managers though.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Howard, just checked, they have directors, eight in all.
I don't know how the directors are elected in DPPT, or whether any member can put forward their candidacy to become a director. Nor do I know if the number of directors can be limited to only eight, or for how long a director can hold their post before requiring reelection.
Nor is it clear who can take part in re-election of directors.
If there were no periodical re-election of the chair and other directors, it would be paramount to a private business.
So some clarification needed here from "The Eight".
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Thinking of offering your service Alex
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
DPPT Rules here:
http://peoplesport.org.uk/downloads/dppt-rules.pdf These have been in the public domain since day 1. I'm surprised you missed it, Alex. You will find everything is abundantly clear.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Absolutely no clarification needed Alexander, all the information that you ask has been in the public domain in one form or another for 2 yrs and 3 mths and all details on how directors are nominated and selected are also available in the DPPT constitution, which has been available for public scrutiny in full as a download for at least 9 months.
Not only that, but I have written at some lengths on other threads in answer to very similar questions that you posed on those threads. You ask a question - you are provided with a full and frank answer - some time later you ask pretty much the same question.
The e-petition that you highlighted this morning from the web was a private petition generated by me, not DPPT, although it was mentioned on the DPPT website for a time. Some members of DPPT expressed a desire, during the consultation period earlier this year, to have an e-petition that they could sign. Still others wanted a hard copy that they could sign and still others opposed to the privatisation but unsure about community ownership wanted a hard copy petition with slightly different wording. I set the e-petition up to run for the minimum period of just 3 months and, now that it has served its purpose, it is closed.
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
The Government and its Departments/Advisors are taking a very long time on this. You cannot even be sure that they are actually devoting any time on it at all. No-body knows, because it is shrouded in secrecy.
Ofcourse, the DHB are also relaxed about it all, they can just carry on with their secrecy too, and cull all the jobs and the Harbour. They are answerable to no-one.
Meanwhile, all the nit picking and all the out-siders disagreeing constantly with one another, just plays into the
DHB court.
Divide and rule and nothing ever is decided or progresses either in the Port or the Town. I confess Doverians might be wiser that anyone gives them credit for, and this is why they do not vote, it has all been seen and done before..
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
There are more people reading this thread than signed the e-petition.
As for many petitions, the DfT will probably wonder whether there are more petitions than signatories.
I signed a couple of petitions in 2010.
If 10 Downing Street take Charlie's 2010 petition by its face value, they would have to note a turn-coat policy of the same MP, who later asked for the sale of the Port to a group of which he is co-founder.
Anyway, if we are to go by numbers, I've noted a trend: parish pole 25%, DPPT members 1000, e-petition 345.
Looks like a spiral dive South.