• The post you are reporting:
   
  Ed, Thanks for the feedback. Whilst this may have been covered before Vic has made it a particular point on this forum as part of his election bid. I think just dismissing it like you have is a bit of an insult, if UKIP have something new to bring to the table then I for one would like to know about it before I commit my vote on the 16th. To date in the DHB Annual Report 2009/10 the chairman stated that Dover had never recieved any tangible benefit from the Port. I'm sure that most people in Dover don't want to see that continue. Privatisation is a serious possibility and raising funding for the purchase and servicing the debt is no big deal in big business. The efficiencies that can be driven into the current port operations means that the port is a goldmine for the private sector. Why do you think that the DHB directors are pushing it. The last thing from UKIP was Lord Pearson saying that he would let the people of Dover have a referendum on privatisation of the port. That has got to be up there with the comments about being a reincarnation of Christopher Columbus.
  Lets have UKIP's plan on the table so that voters can judge for themselves. As I said before I'm not a privatisation fan and to date the Peoples Port are the only ones that have done something more than just talk about it, they have a plan and they have made a submission to government. Just keeping the status quo of the port as it is just immature and unrealistic thinking (thats not an insult by the way). Ports around the country have already privatised because of the huge profit to be made through modern management and better asset utilisation and development. Dover is a cherry waitng to be picked.
  PS the medieval charter you talk about - Is that the same excuse DHB constantly use for not investing in Dover Town?

Report Post

Your Name

Reason