Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Thank you Ross for your support.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Peter, before and during the General Election campaign, Charlie assured Dovorians that he was in favour of Dover Port remaining a State asset. I have it written on a pamphlet of Charlie's.
He has mislead us!
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
to me the £10 stakeholder bond/share would be dead money,i would rather invest the tenner in somthing that would make money.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
He found a better option for Town and Port, Alexander. The alternative would have resulted in Labour's and DHB's sell-off to the highest bidder and the Port would already be in the hands of who knows who....
Only Charlie's intervention and his People's Port idea have prevented that so far.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Barry, that statement does not carry a thread of reality to it! There is absolutely nothing you could do to prove it. The Government have never stated anything to the effect that Charlie's port plan has prevented the DHB privatisation plan from going ahead.
It's a misleading statement on your part!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
No Alexander it is factual. When Labour left office the Port sale was ready and waiting needing only a signature from the Sec of State. This was discussed in the immediate aftermath of the election.
Charlie won a reprieve and that gave him time to work up an alternative which gave him a chance to further delay and to exercise political clout.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
No, Barry! Labour opened the public consultation process, which the present Government continued. Labour had no intention of signing any port-privatisation plan without consulting the public.
Charlie has put himself above this process of consulting the public on the original topic of DHB proposed privatisation. His trust-port is not a decision made in Parliament, it is not a reality, as Dover Port is a State asset, and it does not stem from any public consultation.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Alexander - you are so wrong. Nearly everyone keep telling you this. Perhaps it is time for you to listen instead.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Why are not all the options on the petition then.
UKIP is fully behind a full local referendum with all voting on it
The petition at the meeting is saying that only the public That have homes in a town ward can take part in any vote.Again I am asking all that go to the meeting and i hope to be one not to vote at all ,this not a fair referendum and very miss leading to.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
The meeting was requested by six people on the Dover town electoral role for the motion as stated. By law the town is required to have the meeting to listen to those on the same electoral role and take a vote. If the vote is in favour of a referendum then one has to follow within 25 days. It is the legal requirement that only those entitled to vote on the motion should be allowed to speak for or against the motion. Of course it is up to the chairman of the meeting who they allow to speak but the vote can only include those who are entitled to vote in the Dover town wards.
I trust this makes it clearer.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
This is a Parish petition and therefore applies only to DTC area. This is the law Vic....
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
Didn't I just say that?
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Yes, but it needs shortening and simplifying for Vic's benefit Chris...
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Chris, thanks for (nearly!) answering the question I put on the front page, still not clear though if all and sundry will be welcome as an observer (not that I'm just wanting to go to see the fireworks when Vic is told to shut up
).
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
so it appears that vic will not be allowed to vote at the town hall.
good reason to open a book on this.
2 to 1 on that vic expresses his views forcefully, with or without the permission of the chairperson.
evens that vic gets wrestled to the floor and frogmarched out by security prior to the closure of the meeting.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
The press will be in attendance and I am sure they will be delighted to listen to everyones views after the meeting.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
Sorry Ray, only just read your front page post. Yes an area has been set aside for press and non-voters (those not on Dover town ward electoral roles) to observe the proceedings and, as Sue has pointed out, there is nothing stopping others from asking their parish councils to hold a meeting and take a vote in the issue.
However before there is a flood of requests for referendums on everything, please remember that the meetings cost money and the referendums quite a lot of money. Spend it all on referendums and there will not be much left to actually do anything.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Thanks, I hope to be there to observe. I'll make sure I've got my passport with me
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW,Ross
Sadly some people have to bring along all their baggage and won't give something that doesn't conform to their views/opinions/prejudices a fair hearing. #175
I am assuming, I am one of those in above statement.
Fact, Mr Elphicke stood on the Strand in Walmer and in response to my question, he clearly stated, that, if elected he would continue in Mr Prossers footsteps, not to sell off the Port. Barry, you can offer all the excuses you wish, to justify him but that is what he said and that is a fact.
If Mr Prosser had been re-elected and gone down the same PP route, I would still be very much against it, not because of my, baggage or prejudices, not because it's above me or because I do not understand it, simply because, in my opinion, I do not agree with it.
My support is for the status quo with changing Trust rules to benefit Dover/Deal and as Peter Garstin has informed us, a £10 stake, will at best, only entitle you to a vote, so I will not be taking that offer up.
I think Mr Elphicke is involved in some good local projects and showing he cares about Dover/Deal and I won't dare to presume I am right and he is wrong.
The fact has been said many times, we do not have to agree on everything and i will not stop agreeing with other things, just because i never voted for him.
My feelings are, if this PP Port was such a good idea and was best for the people of Dover/Deal, why did Mr Elphicke not fight his campaign on the back of this proposal? Had he been open about this Peoples Port idea during his campaign, I believe he would have gained more support for himself and for his PP proposal. It would not have changed my mind but I think it would have gained him and his proposal much more support than he has now.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Yes I will be there ,I already know about who can vote and who can not ,and have said that in my own posts over the last 24hours,Will I get up and have my say anyway ,WHAT DO YOU THINK.?
