Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Ed, meanwhile many EU countries have gone bust, there has been the financial collapse of 2008 and the resulting bailouts. Things have changed.
And there is the Localism Bill.
Also, council budgets are being drastically reduced through reduced Government Grants due to lack of available funding possibilities.
So all counted, the Government should have realised that my proposal is optimal.
Anyway it's on the table in London, has been received and acknowledged as being taken into consideration.
Finally, I have never presented my representations on the Port in the vest of any political party, so whatever Charlie Elphicke or Clair Hawkins say in terms of political penny-tossing is absolutely irrelevant, and I'm sure the Government thinks likewise.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
Alex. The financial collapse is part of the reason for the government wanting to flog off the port, to put a few more pennies in the coffers. The fact that all they stand to get is a measly couple of hundred million for a port worth a multiple of that sum is probably one of the reasons that they are in no rush to come to a decision. It is a drop in the ocean in respect of our national finances and not worth the aggro, particularly after the endless series of debacles that have punctuated this government's tenure.
Neither you nor anybody else concerned have any reason to state any political affiliation, this should be purely a commercial matter. The reference above to the two main political parties locally attempting to distance themselves from having anything to do with the port sell-off is relevant to the decision to be made in the first instance, that of whether to privatise or to remain in national ownership. It will have to be taken by a government of one complexion or the other and they will hopefully be cognisant of all the opprobrium that their decision is likely to bring down on them.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Mr Connell,I t is very nice to see that I am not the only one on the Dover Forums and that means both of them that think the port should stay a trust port,that is the only 100% way that the port wll stay British,and the 100s of years history that goes with it.I do also think goverment is thinking the same way now,that is why it is taking so long for them to tell the public,because lots will say "It is a "U TURN AGAIN" but in this case it would be the right move,winning them more seats next time round,it will be the end of Dovers Blue MP.BECAUSE of his stand with the P/P bad plan,but they will find some one easy to fill his boots
.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Only way there will be a rail link in the Western Docks again would be as a "heritage line" into the cruise terminal as they are missing a trick there !
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
Vic I also want the Port to remain a Trust.Port
Audere est facere.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Well done SIR at last we are coming out of the woodwork,and members of the public are picking up on that. " THE P/P WILL NEVER BE." Thats sounds good to me.As for the members of the D.H.B. let them all go,without big patyoffs,and get new members on it that are behind keeping the great port as it is in the ROYAL CHARTER the only way it will be safe for always,and our history of this great town and port. Most of the members behind the P/P are outsiders who over the years have moved into Dover,and that does not give them the right to take over the port.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Pity to see that there are still a few who prefer the old Trust Port that does nothing at all for Dover and prefer the mismanagement of Goldfinger and his crew...
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
There are a great many who would prefer the port to remain a Trust Port - the ferry companies and the Dover Society amongst a host of others.
There is almost nobody who wishes to see Goldfinger and his crew continuing to administer DHB - a change of personnel would solve most of our problems.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
vic
my understanding of the dppt is that all members have to be resident in dover district or have a business here.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Ed - but it would still not be doing anything for Dover.
For me that is the priority - to get the Port playing a full role to benefit the Town and only the DPPT will do that.
Goldfinger's crew have seriously damaged the Port through their mismanagement creating divisions between them and the town and Port users including the ferry company. Anyone who thinks their recent overtures are anything but artificial pr with an ulterior motive is seriously naive.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Read my post again Mr Barry please, and this time please get it right thank you. A resident yes but again you have not read my post right,What I said was outsiders that have come to live in Dover which makes them in your words a resident,I do not mind being pick up on,but please get it right. Thank you both.Who is on about Goldfinger and his mob ,none of us,
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
If the Trust Port status was working for Dover and if it really truly afforded any protection against being sold off by the next generation of execs and/or government, then I'd say and campaign to keep the status just as it is.
The sad and undeniable facts are that the Trust Port Status has done nothing for Dover and promises nothing for Dover. The even sadder fact is that, as a creature of statute, the Trust Port Status as it stands will always create the danger and threat of private sale whenever the whim of executive or government moves that way. The surest way to ensure that the port will be up for sale again in 10 years time is to maintain the status quo now, or create a modified Royal Charter which, as 'common practice', can be over-written by later legislation just as the existing charter has been.
The 1606 charter was basically written out of existence by the 1954 Port of Dover Consolidation Act and had previously been undermined by Acts of Parliament in the 1830's, 1840's and 1940's. The port has periodically, with some regularity, been placed on the block ready for sale at least 8 times since 1850. If it stays as it is now, then some of you won't be around anymore when it is sold, but I will and I will be forced to watch as a significant proportion of my life and most of the wealth that my company has generated over the last 3 years is wasted because we did not achieve the perpetual protection of ownership that the DPPT proposes and which is lacking in Trust Port Status as currently constituted under UK law.
Most of the members of DPPT are NOT incomers. The vast majority of members are Dovorians through and through from generations back.
The DHB executive and board of directors in partnership with national government are trying to sell the port, that sort of makes it anyone's right to take it over provided they can finance the purchase and demonstrate sufficient financial resilience in their business model to secure its future as part of the UK's transportation network. DPPT is able to meet these requirements, but because we have a different model of ownership, which is mutual, and will not be rewarding executives with shares from embedded value, our proposal will never conform to DHB's requirement. The DHB proposals must therefore be rejected and the Ports Act process brought to a close as a consequence so that the future ownership of the port can be settled permanently and never again be put at risk by executives and politicians. DPPT aims to ensure that that right of ownership, put up for grabs by the DHB, is taken up in perpetuity by Dovorians for the benefit of Dover, the surrounding area and the Nation.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Saying the same old words,Mr Wiggins sir,and we are not been taken in with them.Its not the trust that is wrong but the members of the D.H.B. that are running the port.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
I did think we had got past all this and accepted that the vast majority of posters who posted on this thread were against the privatisation of the port.
only a few posters stick out on wishing the harbour board as it is to stay in place.
the sticking point after this presuming the cobbled together govt does go down the road of stopping the privatisation is the next step which is more unclear.
alexander, you state the views have come from a govt dept but i presume these letters you have are in reply to letters you have sent to them?
i do think alexander whilst your views on who could/would run the port in the future is far from reality, i welcome your viewpoint
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Mr Vic, I'm not in the business of 'taking people in' as I am not a con man or illusionist. I'm just an ordinary chap with a bit of expertise in the Maritime and Ports industry. I put out there what I believe, from the body of evidence that is available to us all, to be true and state it as clearly as I can.
The Trust Port Status is, as a matter of demonstrable fact, vulnerable to sale or change of emphasis at the whim of executive and/or government.
Guest 688- Registered: 16 Jul 2009
- Posts: 268
At this moment in time this factious in fighting will only result in foreign ownership of the port and then we will see how much Dover's proud heritage is worth on the open market.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
the pro's and con's will be debated for years to come rightly or wrongly it needs a firm deision sooner rather than later.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
John(now i won't forget your name lol) we had a long chat on this and a number of subjects.
you are correct, divisions we will end up like we did with the hospital fiasco nowt!!!
for me i'v opposed the port privatisation,
the next stage(should the cobbled together govt decide the harbour board wont get its way) is the important one
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 688- Registered: 16 Jul 2009
- Posts: 268
Never was truer words spoken Keith,if we are not vigilant that prophecy about a 'decaying hinterland' will come to pass and my fear is that the decay may become terminal.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i suspect john may be right in post 76, slightly different but who can forget the great hospital fiasco 20 million quid on the table and egos took over leaving us with an outside chance of an office hours minor injuries unit and a room to take blood tests.