Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
I think that all that can be agreed is that it appears 98% that posters want to wrestle the hold of the D.H.B. and as i keep saying as have other posters, the only option on the table at this time is that of the D.H.B.
So the first hurdle is to convince the cobbled together govt to make a decision one way or the other.
Should the cobbled together govt make a decision, and decide against D.H.B.(Which at this time is not certain)
then other options can be considered.
What we shouldn't get into on this thread is personalities.
to be fair i don't share alexanders views, but its right that he should be able to post.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
#93 Sorry to have to say this but I feel that was not very polite plus it all depends who YOU deem to call quality others might not agree.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
You and me both Jan - hence my removal of all my posts if they are not deamed worthy...
Been nice knowing you :)
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
I think there are a lot of frustrations out there and if we are to be even handed on this, some have decided to home in on one individual just because he does not share the same view.
Its my humble view that we should be more tolerant
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith - if you read what was actually written, you will see it is nothing to do with 'his view'. The problem is that he is attempting to speak with authority without knowing about what he is speaking about while ignoring people who do have wider knowledge of the subject.
The point is that there must be a basis of fact or knowledge behind any opinion, regardless of what that opinion is. To just ignore better informed, more knowledgeable and expert points of fact to pursue crazy ideas begs to be attacked and it should be expected.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Barryw';
I have no idea of who has the expertese, as there are many issues within the peoples port proposal,, anyway
i presume you refer to alexander, whilst i may not agree with alexanders views but should be able to put his view.
The peoples port also gives the same impression so lets not get into that.
As i keep saying the only option is the Harbour Board at the moment.
If anything the pressure should be put on the govt to make a decision,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and soon
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
Is it not possible to ignore the postings of someone who annoys you so much, I do not read any of Alexander's posts as quite simply I could not understand them.
Audere est facere.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
We could say that of many martin but we should encourage posters whether we agree with them or not
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
I fully agree Keith Alexander is as much entitled to post as anyone else, and quite right too, but it is not too difficult to stop yourself getting wound up by not reading posts or threads that have that effect on you.
Audere est facere.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
perfectly summed up martin.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
or take another tablet martin lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
I am just intrigued more than anything else as to Alexander's comment:
"My representation is realistic, it has tested everything from carbon emission laws and the need for a rail link for freight for a future T2, to possible future inconvenience deriving from oil-dependent road transport; from constant road pollution in the town owing to Pot traffic to realistic local regeneration; from vitally needed local projects (such as a tunnel under Townwall Street) to the creation of employment through a local Port Toll revenue creating economic regeneration."
If it is that good and he can single-handedly do more than experts in their field with decades of experience, why not post the representation here in full so that we can all benefit from it and even back it up if deamed suitable? Surely it can only be good for the people of Dover and the future of our port ?? Why not post it??
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
I was incorrect about Alexander and King Arthur yesterday and apologise unreservedly for that factual error on my part. I have explained how the impression arose in my mind. I can only hope that Alexander would apologise for the many, many factual inaccuracies that he has written about DPPT, all of which I have answered to, in full, many many times, yet still he repeats the same inaccurate statements.
Keith, I think that you'll find that I have consistently written that the DHB proposals are what are currently under consideration and are being examined in the light of all the submissions that have been received during the course of the public consultations. Once the Government have made a decision on the DHB request, we can move forward to the next stage.
Martin P, I may take your advice, but it is extremely difficult not to write when false statements are made.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Gonna take a chill pill now and get on with the real work that is required to truly ensure the best result for Dover and the Port.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Iwill be glad when this is over,and the port is back in a new updated Royal Charter,thatb way it will be safe from being sold off to anyone,Like two ,D.H.B. and the other one,what is it called now?
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
Vic, with respect, you seem to be unclear as to what a Royal Charter actually is.
Going back many years a number of very large organisations such as The British East India Company were incorporated by Royal Charter, they were simply the forerunners of the Limited Company, a modern day company still in existence is P&O but it was originally incorporated by Royal Charter.
To summarise it is the remnant of a by-gone era and no longer holds a place in modern business.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I think it does sir,our history our Royal Charter,and as I said it could be updated if there is a need to,to stop this happing again.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
I think the problem is that something like the Charter can not be updated as it is a historical legal document, it would have to be scrapped and then start again with a new one. I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
We are at a stage where by it's all in the laps of this cobbled together govt,
once they make a decision things will move on at pace
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
Royal Charters are generally renewed every ten years Jan.
