Ramsgate Port £7million Madness On Thursday the Council will be voting on taking out a £7million loan over 10 years at a cost to taxpayers of £1million per yea...r to develop an alongside quay for Ramsgate Port for cruise liners and cargo ships. Only yesterday Dover Harbour Board announce a massive investment to develop the western dock for cruise and cargo ships. Just before Xmas the state of the art Thames Gateway Cargo Port was opened with massive capacity and excellent transport connections. How can Ramsgate compete against these giants? In usual Thanet Council style there has been no public consultation on whether people would like to spend their council tax on a scheme which is likely to be a white elephant. Nor have councillors been provided with the business plan and project costings before been asked to vote. This it a typical Thanet Council example of mismanagement and secrecy. In my humble opinion the port should be redeveloped with a focus on leisure rather than commercial activity.
The commercial competition is simply too strong. However a leisure focus could be very successful. I will be opposing these plans but fear that once again the Council is likely to be repeating the mistakes of Pleasurama, EKO, TransEuropa Ferries.
This has suddenly been put to the councillors? I for one have never heard of this nonsense until now. It looks like Macgonigal is leading our idiots by the nose
ReplyDeleteCllr Driver,
ReplyDeleteWhat leisure activities do you have in mind?
Why think in limited terms, Mr Holyer? One needs to look at all leisure activities
Delete11:46,
DeleteIn other words you don't have a clue.
Since when has it been within the remit of a local authority to make purely speculative multi-million pound investments in new commercial activities in which it has no expertise and that do not deliver any service that is required by the local community? The only benefactors will be the constructors who will not be from Thanet. The number of permanent jobs per million invested will be very small, and the prospects of securing long-term business that is so profitable that it delivers a surplus in excess of the £1 million p.a. quoted plus wage bill plus plant costs, plus dredging seem very remote indeed, especially when it seems the south east is heading for over capacity in this, and so prices and income will drop. The risks are way too high for local tax payers, especially when you factor in TDC's track record with the port. History repeats itself. If this was such great idea they would be able get private investment to fund it because of the supposed profitability. The same jobs would be created, but somehow I think the private investor wouldn't want to touch it, so why should we. They already wasted 3 years and 3 million on Transeuropa for which the port was designed on the excuse of saving jobs, but the jobs have gone other than a few it TDC which should have as well, so there is nothing to protect, this is pure speculation at council taxpayers' expense.
ReplyDelete"So Ms McGonical your council recognised there was a problem what strategy was used to address it"
ReplyDelete"We deployed and lost 3.4 million pounds"
"And the problem was solved ?"
"No by general consensus the problem got worse"
"And your next strategy to solve the problem"
"Try a bigger amount of public money"
"Have you heard of the military wisdom of never pouring reinforcements into an inherently weak position ?"
"I'm sorry I am unable to answer I don't understand wisdom."
As a construction expert I would look for public funds for infrastructure whether needed or not and fill my boots. I would put in a small park for newts and a donation to Ramsgate Labour party.
ReplyDeleteWhen was this £7M Port loan first raised/discussed? Or is it the secret gang of Clive, Bob, Everitt and Wise and Mcgonigal again?
ReplyDeleteAnd cruise liners would fit within Ramsgate Port with a new quay? And where would those cruise liners be sailing to? And when?
Pleasurama was corruption but this is just stupid. Whose name is on the memo?
This is the height of stupidity. if somebody who had significant experience of running a port were borrowing money to develop the harbour I might listen to what they had to say, and if money were to be invested I would be insisting that the person promoting the scheme put their own money in. If nobody with experience would put money into this scheme why one earth would you allow some jumped up council officers with delusions of grandeur to risk vast sums of public money on it? They have already demonstrated that they know jack-sh*t about running a harbour when they allowed the ferry company to run up massive debts and failed to secure any of the debt against the company's assets. Is this crackpot idea a desperate attempt by the officers to deflect attention from their own monumental failings? Will any of them still be around when we find out whether this £7 million was a wise investment? If not, where's the accountability? I don't think that commercial shipping is any part of the answer for the port. I do think that they should focus on leisure use and commercial use by smaller boats. The big issue is the dredging. The ignorance of the council in running a port is again demonstrated by their decision not to dredge the harbour. The sandbank which has now built up is a major obstruction and hazard, and will cost hundreds of thousands to clear. We are reaching the stage where the harbour is only usable either side of low tide.
ReplyDelete