Tom Austin, London Thursday, 4 February 2010 - 9:09am

J Lo,
I did not intend to stretch things as far as Africa. I was responding to DJ's comment on the future of the port. Sustainability etc.
I am with you with the riches of the aid-agencies.
Barry too is correct, correct as far as his model of Governance goes. If only the good people voted for someone other than a Party Placeman, someone who could put the affairs and the future of the town and district of Dover before the needs of Party.

Barry Williams, Dover Thursday, 4 February 2010 - 8:29am

That is well said Jimmy. In respect of DHB the Trust requires any profit to be spent on the Port and not to be passed back to HMG in revenue. The investment that DHB need to make to ensure the longer term competitivness of the Port is simply too big for them to raise it in the way they have in the past. Their Trust status, and the dead hand of Government that goes along with it, does not allow them the commercial freedom to raise the cash on the markets.

jimmy long, Whitfield Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 10:35pm

D J Dover,
I have read your response I hope was referring to my previous letter
The port of Dovers historic past does not matter one iota. It means nothing today and will mean even less tommorrow the sooner it is privatised the better.
At least we seem to agree on some points namely that privatisation is not necessary a bad thing. You are quite correct in stating that the port is controlled by government,this is the largest factor that stops the port investing in Dover.Local people seem to have this nice cosy image of "Us and them" when they think of the port well nothing could be further from the truth the port is a hard nosed business like thousands of others across the land whose one and only creed is profit and to hell with the locals. If the cannot see a profit in the local work force they dump them. As for investing in the local infrastructure forget it, if there is even the slightest chance that port money will be spent.
It does not necessary have to be like this. Let me give you an example. When Cadbury,s started in Bournville at the end of the 19th century they were shrewd enought to realise that if you looked after your work force then the work force would look after the firm. they built houses, schools churches, provided areas where the workers could relax and get away from there daily toils and what happenned?? Cadbury became one of the most sought after firms to work for and a great success in the confectionary industry.
I hope I have made my point that privitisation is not neccessary the evil that some would portray like a certain local politician would like you to beleive

howard mcsweeney, Dover Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 10:25pm

jimmy

i think that the problem with a lot of africa is the tribal system, coupled with a lot of people reliant on the presidency in each country to make money.
the ordinary people rarely see the aid dosh.

incidentally, you have posted on here a few times, have you considered becoming a member and being free to post on all subjects?

a simple e mail to dover7@msn.com would suffice.

jimmy long, Whitfield Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 9:57pm

Tom Austin,London
I am 70 years old,The earliest i can recall seeing film of Africas needy is at about 10 years of age.In those days one could only see these reports in black and white, although there were rare occasions when there was colour. Back then the films seem to convay a population who were quite happy to walk among there own squalor
and, live a barbaric life style. The differance is today, you can watch the same scenes in colour,despite the billions of pounds,dollars,euros and whatever coinage you care to think of.I for one am tired of giving donations to organisations which seem to think that Africa has a god given right to money that people donate
and yet the begging goes onand on. It strikes me as a little ironic that when the Icelandic banks collapsed, who were near the top of the pile shouting "I want my money back" yes you have guessed it right , The aid organisations. which raises the further question wh\t were all those donations doing stuck in an Icelandic bank in the first place??Oh and just for the record I am not a potential politician, god forbid.
Jimmy Long

Tom Austin, London. Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 7:15pm

DJ,
Have you seen those ads about third-world development? You know the ones...
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for one day. Give a man a fishing net and you feed him for life." That sort of thing.
Long term benefit or short term gain?
There will be pressure on the next Government to look good, I dread the re-election of anybody that thought that way, but they are all around. A poser and no mistake.

DJ, Dover Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 6:01pm

I realise this may be a simplistic view, but are not these the basic facts and things to take into consideration when discussing the privatisation (or not) of the Dover ports.

Apart from the ports historic value.

Whilst a trust port and in the government's hands, it is funded by the British public, via taxation, all of whom in one way or another benefit from the said port.
Any profit (does it make a profit?) is returned back into the public purse as it were, to be spent where it is most needed to benefit the British public. (Idealistic I know, but basically the truth).

If the ports were to be privatised, they would be run and owned by a 'private' corporation, who's ONLY interest is it's share holders.
Any investment made would only be made for the benefit of the 'shareholders', NOT the people of Dover, nor the British public (unless you are a shareholder).

Any profit made would be taken by said shareholders to be spent on new houses, cars, other investments...........anything they wish to spend their dividend on, but you can bet it WON'T be in Dover, or if any, a very small percentage.

Yes, fresh investment may help to create new jobs\keep existing ones, here in Dover, but at what cost?
I am sure, in the long run, MORE money will LEAVE Dover than is invested into it, and we lose another part of our heritage.

I would have thought a better idea would be to ensure the existing controllers run the port more efficiently, with some accountability, and someone come up with some ideas to develop the existing port infrastructure that will be of a benefit to the nation and Dover.

If a private company is willing to invest millions(?) into the ports, then they know they can make a healthy profit to keep their shareholders happy, then so can the existing owners\controllers!

Is that me living in an 'ideal' world? Well if you want my vote then start trying to make this place an ideal place to live.

PaulB, Dover Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 4:05pm

Thanks for that Reg. You may indeed have sent that info to me before but sometimes I have so much info hurled at me that its sometimes difficult to remember it all. The newspapers might explain more tomorrow as to why Buckland is suddenly 'the chosen one' but at this moment its a bit of a headscratcher!

Ah yes Dovorian I did indeed see Yam at the Sea Sports opening...took his picture too which is now in our All Recent Features section to this very day, so everyone will recognise him now! Not sure what the award was for but I imagine there will be more in their newspaper about it. I guess Yam is on that ladder skywards to greater things.

Dovorian, Dover Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 9:39am

Saw this on the Dover Express website:

"EXPRESS reporter Yamurai Zendera has been recognised at the annual Shepherd Neame journalism awards."

Not quite sure why this makes headlines. I am sure PaulB, Paul Watkins, Roger and others recognised him at the opening of the new restaurant at the Dover Sea Sports Centre the other week, and I am sure I have recognised him at various other events.

Reg Hansell, Shepherdswell Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 8:43am

Hi Paul Not sure if I have sent this to you before.Reg Hansell.The unofficial news is the East Kent Hospital University Foundation Trust Board have chosen Buckland site for our new Dover Hospital.
This decision now goes to the Health Overview Scrutiny Committee at County Hall on the 5 Feb 10am.
We hope to make the following statement to the HOSC Committee.

Draft Statement.

We have set out our reasons for a site to be chosen that allows future expansion,car parking,excellent access and available for all the people of Dover District.
New developments have added to the urgency and reason to chose Whitfield as the most suitable and intelligent site for our Hospital.
The Local Development Framework has confirmed that the Dover Core Strategy is sound which means Whitfield is to receive approx 8,000 homes an additional population of approx 30,000 persons.A one third increase to our population.
The second is the accident of a lorry crashing into the railway bridge at the approach of coombe valley road--the entrance road to Buckland Hospital site resulting in our Hospital being isolated--No access.
The Buckland site is extremely congested--No chance of expansion--No car parking--extremely difficult access which is vital for any Hospital.It is infact in a chicane and virtual cul-d-sac.
If the choice of the two sites is between Buckland and Whitfield it is truely no contest.Whitfield wins hands down.
Any other choice would be a seriously missed opportunity and would result in our Hospital being obsolete before construction and will be a major failure of service to the long overdue Health Provision to the people of Dover District.
If this decision is approved it will come back to haunt us all.

Thankyou Mr Chairman.

PaulB, Dover
dover7@msn.com Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 8:10am

It seems that Buckland has been chosen as the site for the new hospital. The newspapers will no doubt have the full story tomorrow thursday. Isnt there a touch of deja vu about all this..like we have all gone round in circles and arrived at the same place. A lorry gets stuck under a bridge and none of us can get to the place. There must be some logic to this but what it is i dont yet know....

PaulB, Dover
dover7@msn.com Wednesday, 3 February 2010 - 7:27am

It was said on TV recently that the two main players to buy the Port were indeed as Jimmy says, both foreign. One name mentioned on the beloved BBC was the Port of Calais and the other was Dubai Holdings. I expect the preferred option there would be Calais as at least the two ports are inextricably linked and could develop a sound future together...but it just shows the level of money at the disposal of our near neighbours in Calais. They have always been far better off than poor neighbour Dover...why this should be so is bewildering, as they both do the same job. They both process the same level of trucks every day, they both have the same amount of ferries docking...etc etc.

melissa clements, Dover Tuesday, 2 February 2010 - 9:39am

Blimey Anno. do you need help? specsavers are in the town lol. Keith is a very happily married man.

Anno, Dover Tuesday, 2 February 2010 - 8:37am

Howard how can i be patient have you seen what a hottie keithie is?

Terry Nunn, Top floor looking at the rain. Tuesday, 2 February 2010 - 7:40am

Given that Bob Goldfield has stated publicly that Dover's traffic problems have nothing to do with him(!) and that the DHB has never shown any interest in Dover town then surely any change must be for the better.