howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
cannot do a u turn on this one, the government have simply ground to a halt.
they have now changed the criteria to "an enduring and significant level of community participation" and have asked the harbour board if they wish to amend, withdraw or carry on with their bid.
the harbour board say that their bid meets all the criteria, they have 4 weeks to make any changes.
this one will run and run, how long has it taken them so far?
meanwhile possible inward investment is stymied.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#2
I thought DHB submitted a new bid umpteen weeks ago reflecting the new criteria.
This sounds like further procrastination on the part of the government by saying "are you sure, are you really really sure?"
According to the FT:
"Opponents of plans to privatise the port of Dover have called on the government to use a revised set of criteria for the sale of trust ports - to be published on Wednesday - to block the proposed traditional sell-off of Europe's busiest ferry port."
We have heard a great deal from the People's Port and from DHB regarding their respective privatisation plans. It sounds as though those opposing privatisation, arguably the great majority of Dovorians, have finally found their voice.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#3
seems like old wounds will be reopened on this one.
i wonder who the "opponents of plans to privatise" are, certainly not an organised group locally.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#4
Certainly won't be our MP as he campaigned on a platform of total opposition to privatisation then did a U-turn immediately on being elected and supported the Peoples Port privatisation plan. Was this the first government U-turn?
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#5
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#6
That is not true Ed, the Peoples Port proposal is a plan for the port to be owned by a not-for-profit industrial provident society with charitable status, to be run in perpetuity for the benefit of the town and people of Dover. How far from privatisation can you get?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#7
Peter: My understanding is that the not-for-profit industrial provident society is borrowing £400 million of private money to purchase the port from the nation. Call it mutualisation or any other financial euphemism that you like but purchasing a nationalised concern with private money is privatisation in my book.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#8
Therefore we have a privatised government because all its assets are financed with borrowed money.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
#9
Exactly. We all admire charitable concerns but don't complain about them being "privatised" even though they operate as industrial provident societies, in effect.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#10
Interesting slant. In that case, one day when we see the error of our ways and the government starts to buy back all our ports, airports, railways, electricity, gas, water, etc, from the assorted foreign companies who have bought them then we shall in fact be privatising them.
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
#11
Of all the Trust Ports Dover were the only one to go down the privatisation route when the opportunity became available, so the are you sure comments are valid.
Audere est facere.
Guest 664- Registered: 23 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,039
#12
We all know that privatisation is an excuse for a bunch of glistening warthogs to feather their own nests. Don't you just get sick of all the cabals and vested interests holding back this town?
You think that an overwhelming vote in a public consultation cannot be ignored?
Maybe DDC would care to remind us of the near unanimous rejection by the people of Whitfield of their plan to build 9,000 homes there.
Or Perhaps, since they chose to ignore it outright, maybe they wouldn't.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#13
We have 3 possible ownership models for the port.
1. Nationalised. Political control, profits to the exchequer.
2. Mutual ownership. Community control, profits to the community.
3. Privatisation. Overseas control, profits remitted abroad.
What do you prefer?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#14
I think we should heed barryw words
he says the peoples port is a privatisation move and attempts to justify it
its clear which ever route you go it will be a form of privatising our port
just read the trades council view in last weeks express
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#15
1. Nationalised. Political control amounts to appointing the members of the board, apart from that it is totally hands off. Profits do not go to the exchequer, they are reinvested in the port which is why it is the leading ferry port in Europe, the second passenger port in the UK, and has a flourishing cargo trade and marina.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#16
interesting replies but the main issue to me is that although is a big thing locally, it is nothing for the government in the great scheme of things.
how can they not have reached a decision by now?
Guest 664- Registered: 23 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,039
#17
Option 2, natch.
Can anyone tell me why local bodies like DDC ad DHB keep holding public votes and then ignoring results which are so adverse to what they want?
This is the UK for goodness'sake. Great Britain. The cradle of democracy. Some of these Gauleiters are treating public opinion with utter contempt and it is anti-democratic. do they keep getting away with it?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#18
maybe theres even more infighting in the tory party like alot of other issues
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
#19
The correct option is to remain a Trust Port, profits re invested in administering maintaining and improving the Port.
Audere est facere.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#20
This issue is nothing to do with party politics.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
