howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i have a grudging admiration for both of the main protaganists, neither will give ground and both take a lot of time setting out their case.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
#281 - both 'sides' may be taking a lot of time setting our their cases, but one side had decades of relevant experience and expertise on their side, the other is someone that is just being awkward for being awkwards sake. Choose which is which
Looking forwards to CGI's resubmitted plans for the Heights and Farthingloe so that 'debate' can start again
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Neil, the following information from you is satisfying, and is an answer to some of my questions.
"I am clear that match and partner funding could raise the initial amount investmented in regeneration from a seed of £50m to between £125 and £150m."
The would "could" is appropriate, as it means it is not a certainty. In fact it answers my question whether DPPT already had any evidence of future match funding. It doesn't, and so the Public can also take note of this.
It's important we know what figures are on the table, and what figures are in the air.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Of course they don't Alexander and everyone else other than you can understand that !!!
Just as YOUR idea for port tolls and the back of fag packet calculation you are spouting. How can YOU guarantee that a port/road toll won't scare of huge amounts of traffic to other ports or the Channel Tunnel, and all your GUESSES of ££££ don't come to fruition??????
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, I must have written tens of times that this Port Toll should be for all British commercial ports, thus is it presented in my representation to the Department for Transport. It would be a public revenue separate from any existing port fees and about 70% would go to local port communities at various Council levels, the rest to the Pill Box (Treasury).
I can see you have never had a chance to read my reps to the DfT. Or read about them on other channels of communication, including Dover Forum.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Have probably seen them, just can't be ar*ed to read them
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 705- Registered: 23 Sep 2010
- Posts: 661
So Alexander what you are advocating is an overnight change in UK legislation to satisfy your vexatious craving to get noticed. Do your illusions of grandeur know no bounds? DPPT are a highly professional organisation, steeped in integrity .Neil has told us in great detail,in half a dozen posts how Port Tolls are just not workable-legally or as a practical measure. Why don't you believe him? You now appear to be at best trying to batter down an open door and at worst implying that DPPT is just another work-a-day port option making false promises and plotting to rip off the Dover community.
If you want to make a difference why not work with DPPT -if you want a fight there is another port organisation who will I'm sure will provide you with plenty of reasons to do battle..
Never give up...
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
come on chaps this is turning into one of those toxic threads were personal insults get traded, other people with something to add decide not to and is a total turn off to people looking in.
works better when we play the ball not the man.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Alexander won't work with people, despite keen-ness to 'save' the Western Heights, I am yet to see him turn up to help WHPS or WCCP or turn up at meetings with WHPS to discuss plans for the Heights.....
I am simply looking at the DPPT website and seeing the decades of expertise from various people that has gone into coming up with their current plan VS ........
Been nice knowing you :)
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
we can all class ourselves as experts(im sure some are)
but on this forum its just view points
i dont share much of alexanders views
but he has a view
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Richard, going by your post 287, it would seem you are not aware that the Public Consultation is open to the Public, and is part of democracy.
Posts such as Roger wrote, indicating that as I am a painter and decorator I am not entitled to have a part in the Public Consultation, are quite disturbing, in particular when coming from a Councillor.
Whatever Neil wrote about Port Tolls comes from Neil, not from the DfT or the Government in general, and I do not have to be told by anyone other than the DfT that my representations are not valid or feasible. They have in fact replied to me in each instance that my proposals are being taken into consideration, from March 2010 to August 2012.
The first line in your above post, Richard, could easily be flung at any person proposing something or partaking in a public consultation, and would be considered in any case as offensive, no matter who it were directed at.
I do not need to work with DPPT, but have been asking Neil or other DPPT directors questions regarding their proposals, and was quite satisfied with Neil's last explanation in reply to my questions, that DPPT have no offers for match funding, which was one question I specifically asked.
For the moment I have no other questions.
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
All of this in print, is playing very nicely into the present DHB hands
Have you noticed, they never say a word?
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
And they won't comment Christine - but you are right that DHB personnel do look into the Forum and read what's being said.
Alexander, as you really know, I was not saying that you cannot take part in a public consultation, of course you can; where in my post(s) have I said that ? If you want to be credible, stick to the truth and facts.
What I said was "Many people have likened you to a brick-layer telling a brain-surgeon how to operate; would you as a painter and decorator, tell someone how to rewire a house - or do you know all about that as well ?" That is not saying you cannot take part in a public consultation
You constantly question Neil's explanations and doubt their veracity and tell him what he should be doing; with all his knowledge and experience, it seems obvious to everyone else, that his investigations and knowledge are a valuable asset to Dover and DPPT's future.
Have a view or an opinion by all means, but don't twist/corrupt my words - or any one else's.
Roger
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Roger, I have never told Neil what he should be doing.
The brain surgeon speech has not been made at me by many people, as you claim, but notably by Barry Williams and yourself.
You have suggested that as I work as painter and decorator, I should not question DPPT policies which aim to exclude people from future community involvement in Dover regeneration unless they become members of DPPT.
I will not! And were it ever to get so far, that DPPT were to be considered as the owners of Dover Port, I would challenge it constitutionally. I will not be told by anyone that I have no right to take part in decisions concerning Dover's future regeneration!
Charlie may have overstepped his mark with his attempts to make decisions - as MP and director of the self-proclaimed "community" (DPPT) - that are not part of his Parliamentary prerogative and which aim at excluding members of the local Community from participating in Dover's regeneration.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Alexander;
Let me explain further(this could i know make it worse lol)
No one is saying you should not have a view, and even be critical of any posts(including the peoples port proposals)
And having checked further I cannot see anyone say you should not be part in any consultation,(in fact they could not stop you if they wanted to)
What's clear here is that if I were D.H.B. part of my bid would be to use all the divisions that could be shown on this forum as part of there argument that the opposition is very divided.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Furthermore, you will find, Roger, that DPPT is not an elected administrative body, they have never been elected as councillors, whose term in office is also limited until the successive election.
Neil has clearly stated that unless I were a member of DPPT, I would be excluded from presenting proposals on regeneration, and that all decision-making in that respect would depend on the DPPT board, with the input from sole members.
Instead of making brain-surgeon speeches, Roger, try reading the laws of England and informing yourself on the rights of citizens within their Community!
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Alexander
Sorry i have to say it, that last post is the most misguided i have read.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
You put it very politely Keith...
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Again - my view is that Alexander is just stirring rather than trying to add anything worthwhile to the debate, just to get effect....
Been nice knowing you :)
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
again this is all about personalities not the issue which is very important to dover district.
the port of dover joined here a few months back and have never logged in or posted, maybe they don't need to?