Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Mr Vic, I have no interest in looking good. Neither am I backing away from anything. My interest is in doing what I believe to be the right thing in a field (ports and maritime) that I know extremely well. I am sure that your interest is the same Mr Vic. We disagree on what each of us thinks is the right thing in this case.
You state that DPPT will bankrupt the port as if it were fact - I say to you that such an outcome is so extremely unlikely that it is barely worth consideration. We disagree, each of us considering that the other is incorrect.
I trust that people will see how the DHB thumbs its nose at their expressed will and at the Government's desire to deliver a new model of governance and cooperation that will benefit the community. I trust that people will see how little the Trust Port model delivers to the actual best interests of its stakeholders.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Hi Howard. The decision letter itself and the Minister for Shipping's instruction to DHB. Other than that, DPPT continues to correspond verbally with Government Ministers, Civil servants and with national politicians of all politicial shades at the highest levels who understand and concur with the arguments, both philosophical and financial, that DPPT has put forward in favour of creating Dover as the first true community owned port, people's port, in the UK.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
mr neil
only verbal communications then, your main rival mr alex puts everything in writing to ministers and civil servants so he then gets their name when they reply.
i remember clearly the decision letter and the reference to "community benefits", too lazy to go back and look at the detailed wording but have they not formally replied to the proposals of dppt.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
There I told you a no and a no it was.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
again i will wait for mr neil to post something sensible.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Yes waiting for a remark like that from you,
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Hi Howard, I know all the Civil Servants names that are involved with Dover, as I know the name of the Minister and how to reach all of them at need. Seeing a project through to a successful conclusion takes a lot more than a letter or few.
As the previous period, which ended on 20th December 2012 was all about the DHB plans, the Government were solely responding to that directly and only indirectly, through the wording of the decision letter and subsequent instruction to DHB, to the DPPT proposal.
Our original offer was made more than 2 years ago and was responded to in a positive way by the Government at the time, but as the consultation then was whether to allow the DHB scheme to proceed or not, they could not legally accept our offer.
Two years is a long time in business and politics, so now that the DHB scheme has been rejected and the community offer can be properly considered, it is necessary to bring it up to date. DPPT is currently updating our offer for the port with all the latest traffic numbers and projections from Govt. statistical and forecasting models for short sea traffic. We are also getting renewed letters of support from the port's main stakeholders, legal opinion and banks. Once the formal offer has been signed off by the DPPT board and we are ready again to proceed to full due diligence, then we will again write to the DfT with it.
To date, the response to our continued efforts and on-going verbal discussions with government has been positive.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
A letter came unto me from 10 Downing Street about a week ago.
The Prime Minister read the attached enclosures and passed them on to the Department for Transport, with the recommendation they send me information in regards to my request.
It was about local regeneration in Dover stemming from Port-related revenues.
The Public Consultation required there be a decision in this respect, as well as on the DHB privatisation bid.
Clearly, as I pointed out both to DfT and the Prime Minister, Dover is still awaiting a decision on local regeneration from Port revenues.
So I'm awaiting a response from the DfT.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
alex is doing better than me, my best effort is a letter from mr prosser on house of commons notepaper.
still have it.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
Perhaps you can only trump that one with a letter from Maradona.....
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
neil
good luck with your updated proposals but i understand that the government would have to request it first, assuming they give the go ahead surely they would have to offer the same opportunity to other interested parties?
Guest 644- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,214
As you appear to have the fate of the port in your hands Alex, any chance of you copying your representations here? I'm sure we'd love to read them.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#612, Howard, the government can act under s10 or s12 of the Ports Act or it can use the Public Bodies Act to implement what it considers best for the port. It beggars belief that the current board of DHB think it's still business as usual. I don't think the implications of their defeat have sunk in yet.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
partly true peter but what about eu competition laws?
should dppt put in a bid any private equity group would want to do likewise.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
They would still have to fulfil the Secretary of State's criteria for significant and enduring community involvement. That will prove to be a deal breaker for private equity buyers. It only flies if the community owns the port. And I don't think it would raise the eyebrows of the EU competition chappies. They didn't turn a hair when the tunnel bought them thar ferries.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Phil, my representations, starting in Feb 2010 and culminating in the last one of July 2012, include explanations why the Port should not be privatised or put into any kind of financial debt situation.
This was accepted by the Decision Minister, who rejected the DHB bid.
The relevant part of my representations that I know for sure the DfT is dealing with is in relation to a constant Port revenue to finance Dover and District in terms of local regeneration.
So I made some viable examples of how this could come about, presenting figures on port traffic and possible incomes for the Town and District based on these Port-traffic figures.
The minimum annual income which I pointed out would be £14 million a year committed to financing Dover and District, although it can be more.
This minimum sum is by far better than anything put forward in the offers made by DHB and DPPT .
It's clearly in the better interests of Dover.
If anyone is interested in considering backing my proposals, including Phil, and wishes to know more, please email me, and I'll discretely explain what my proposal to DfT consists of.
Guest 868- Registered: 25 Jan 2013
- Posts: 490
I highly suspect Phil isn't "backing my proposals", merely pointing out if they are that amazing that you come up with ideas that experts in their fields aren't capable of coming up with, why not just post your letters if full for all to see.
If you are doing things "in the better interests of Dover." then the people of Dover have a right to see them
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, the Decision Minister mentioned one of my proposals as an alternative option in December 2012.
And later, the DFT corrected the wording in the Decision Minister's letter at my request, as it had not correctly reflected the proposal I had made.
However, as DPPT are currently involved in discussions of their own with ministers, I am not publicising my own on-going correspondence, so as to safe-guard confidential information from going over into another camp.
As you know I have send letters to the Queen in the pass,and having tea with her and phil in the royal gardens.So it does work