I have to say I am surprised that Thanet District Council have issued no information about this, there is nothing on their website and as port operator one assumes they must have known about this.
One does wonder what the point of the council having a press department is if the don't keep local voters and taxpayers aware of significant things the council is involved in.
My own feelings with Port Ramsgate, is that while the main
channel crossings especially the Port of Dover are running below capacity and
investing heavily in increasing their capacity, Ramsgate can’t compete
economically as a port.
We are just in the wrong place geographically from the point
of view of land and sea, on land Ramsgate can’t become a transport hub because
three quarters of the land wheel is sea and on the sea the Goodwin Sands are
between us and the closest part of Europe.
While Ramsgate leisure marina makes a healthy profit it doesn’t
appear, looking at the convoluted accounts, that Port Ramsgate has ever made a
profit.
Obviously if you sustain an open commercial port, which is
doing no business, then if you get any business it will be both business that no
one else wants and it will be loss making.
Interesting especially in view of the port gates still padlocked up this morning.
ReplyDeleteOn another issue to do with the westcliffe undercliffe beaches the tidal surge and high winds have scoured a lot of sand off the beach. When we asked when the sand was getting put back we were informed it wasn't and this morning a grabber arrived to remove the sand and take it away. The reason given as it had been polluted by being on the road TDC were not allowed to put it back.
Barry it’s the world we live in, the sand counts as polluted, not because it is but because having been on the road counts as being polluted. The most extreme example of this in Ramsgate is when the surface water drainage in Harbour Parade gets blocked and we have a heavy rain shower. They are not allowed to have an overflow for the road into the harbour, so in practice the water floods the basements of the café culture and is then pumped by the fire brigade into the harbour.
DeleteAs an open port they have no option to refuse any legal cargo, so the port operator TDC can’t simply refuse the animal export ship Joline or the animal lorries
True but they could set the berthing fees such as to make it uneconomic that isn't illegal but would have the same effect.
DeleteIf the sand boards on the railings at the Western Undercliff were fixed on properly and not secured with small wood screws into the plastic composite boards. They would not keep blowing off. For years the boards were ply, but for some reason TDC took them away and left the sand blow on the road
ReplyDeleteAnon most was the tidal surge it has been there since then
DeleteThe sand was cleared after the pre Christmas tidal surge by TDC and contractors. The sand that is in the road now has come up only in the last few weeks. I have noticed a few sand boards off since then.
Deletethe sand was removed from the road a piled up ready (it seems) for collection. None of it was ever put back on the beach. Any windblown sand has just added to the piles
DeleteAs you said the sand once on the road is classed as polluted and could not go back onto the beach. But I saw a lorry taking loads of sand away in January and nearly all the sand gone from the road and port entrance.
DeleteThe large amount of sand now there is quite new. But a few sand boards were missing last week. So I think this has not helped.
Actually I didn't say the sand was polluted that was TDC. I think the sand needs to be on the beach where it belongs
DeleteI think we all know the sand is not really polluted, I just wonder where it is all going and who has decided it was polluted?
DeleteThe sand being polluted sounds a random excuse to do nothing by TDC. Sand is piled up on the promenade by Pleasurama/hoardings too and the public toilets locked. Similalry locked drains/floods are due to inaction. Does RTC and TDC do anything? We're paying a 1.99% tax increase now why hasn't it been cut and redundancies made for failure?
ReplyDeleteLet's hope the Port remains locked for the animal exports too - and at Dover. The Judge can come down and open the gates himself if he feels that strongly about allowing animal exports.
My God. What a lot of fuss. The same sand that causes the harbour to silt up will also be deposited on this beach. It's called longshore drift.
ReplyDeleteTim I wish it was ending up on the beach. A local I spoke to said the current sand level is the same as when the groynes were put in (he said) 100 years ago. In fact he said metal detectorists have been finding a lot of stuff buried at least 70 years ago including (if you believe it) a gold coin
DeleteThe issue with the sand on the road is one of Environment Agency rules, sand or anything else from the road is treated as contaminated, oil, broken glass etc. sand from the main sands promenade, which isn’t a road is treated as uncontaminated and can be retuned to the beach.
ReplyDeleteThe real issue here is that of live animal exports, bad press for Ramsgate, what I would like to hear is that the council had closed the port and from Easter the site would be used as a tourist attraction, funfair, water sports, or something like that.
The labour group are saying. “Doing all we lawfully can Michael but DEFRA not helping us in our particular circumstances.” And the Conservatives, seem to focusing on the compensation for closing the port when the sheep were killed.
What we need here is council and councillors to think outside the box.
Michael,
DeleteIt occurred to me that the outer harbour would make quite a good site for holiday caravans :-). I don't know however if there are any restrictions in TDC's lease governing what the land can be used for. [Quite a lot of the outer harbour actually belongs to Crown Estates, as the land was reclaimed from the sea: TDC holds the land on a long lease, for which they pay an annual rent.]
Closing the port entirely might be tricky, as there are some companies based in the outer harbour. As tenants, I'd imagine they probably have an automatic right to use the harbour under their (sub-)leases.
TDC don't seem to give much of a stuff about contaminating Margate Sands with polution pumping, oil leaking motorbikes.
DeleteWhy could that be? Oh yes. Money.
"Obviously if you sustain an open commercial port, which is doing no business, then if you get any business it will be both business that no one else wants and it will be loss making."
ReplyDeleteHow very true; but have you considered how this statement applies to TDC's entire strategy for economic development :
"Obviously if you sustain an open airport, which is doing no business, then if you get any business it will be both business that no one else wants and it will be loss making.
Bottom line - Thanet District Council's obsession with having ports has been damaging the area's economy for a long time. First they wanted a hoverport - now a derelict wasteland; then, they wanted an airport - none of the promises made have proved to be true; now they want to run a commercial port - they're already in the hole for millions because of their incompetence in running it but they still haven't learned their lesson.
Stick a Butlins Holiday Camp there
ReplyDeleteA Butlins holiday camp makes lots of money for Butlins. It doesn't do anything for the area. We need an amenity which can be used both by local people and by visitors.
ReplyDeleteI agree actually 5.14, you do get the feeling you are being processed in those places. 4.28 aboves' suggestion seems a good starting point
ReplyDeleteYou have to be very, very careful when giving planning permission for caravans. There is a whole body of case law involving legal arguments about when is a caravan a caravan and when does it becomes a permanent building. However, if usage was confined to stays of two weeks or less by roadworthy caravans and motorhomes I reckon it would be very popular.
ReplyDeleteI would have no objection to expanding the marina and using the port area for Winter storage and repair and maintenance of leisure craft. I think people would sail from far and wide to take advantage of such a facility if it was reasonably priced.
Do a Dover. Hold berth repairs but give Shaun Keegan the contract.
ReplyDeleteIn return for.......?
DeleteAbout 14 years free of sheep exports through the harbour. Giving the sheep trade the Shaun treatment.
DeleteThe worth of the mirth of the dearth of the berth.
I dunno.
Well I'm off to the chief executive peer review shortly LTP. Goodness knows what I shall hear or be expected to contribute?
DeleteAs far as Ramsgate Port is concerned, reading between the lines, is perhaps Shaun Keegan could be given a contract to do something there, perhaps in return surrender the leases on Pleasurama (or guarantee the safety of the cliff and resubmit plans?). And the sheep exporters use the facilitiltes up to a notional value of around £1 million or until such time as TDC can pay them off and realise new plans for the port?
And if I remember correctly, were the residents of Thanet offered free trips on the Sally Line in order to win approval for the port to be built? (or something like that?). lol.
Report back on your findings SG. I see what you did there with pier review by the way.
DeleteAlthough Michael does not like the analogy to the chalk quarry at Upper Hale it does illustrate the difficulty of a chalk face property boundary. When it retreats the face becomes the neighbour property. So its seems inevitable that TDC would have to guarantee (and pay for) chalk face in perpetuity. Michael has often rightly pointed out the design created physical maintenance difficulty.
My own impression is that Shaun has no need to do deals because all along he appears to have had a business strategy. For all we know he may have been thinking all along that chap Child is right. Give it time and tame the council.
John Holyers linkie from comment below
DeleteDo you really want to know Lyndon? Out of 7 Attendees I was the only community member. We were told by the LGA members that what we discussed within the room was to remain confidential (but I will be getting some sort of transcript?). Needless to say my/our pet themes were raised once again, as you would expect!
DeleteA couple of points I wish I had raised :
Deletea) Shortly after the undemocratic decision to remove the Compact out of Thanet Council Offices after the lively May 2011 meeting, to be hosted by Labour controlled Thanet Community Networks(TCN), I was invited to participate in their magazine. I wanted to publish a short story about what I noticed on the way to their first TCN Network, at the Pavillion in Broadstairs the following September in 2011. I parked on the Eastern Esplanade and I saw how a much loved Edwardian Shelter landmark had been replaced with what looked like a modern B & Q bench with a featureless looking roof and with no protection from the wind at your back. The original seating was comfortable and had a back to it. When I challenged the reason why my story/observation was not published, I was told they only wanted to publish "Good News".
b)Farmers at Manston have been ploughing over walkways in recent years.
The above observations would only be of interest to those engaged in joining up the dots. The Compact is/was basically a talking shop between the community/voluntary sector and statutory agencies. What I observed at the time though was either a reluctance or fear to do this in practice. It will not have gone un-noticed among those involved in these things, that Community Development Services have been decimated at Thanet Council.
I am well used to raising issues and receiving unsolicited advice, from authority, of how I might pursue the issues further. (Usually with another authority).
DeleteThe possible weakness in your argument is the use of the word "Undemocratic". Who voted for the spokespersons of the community/voluntary sector ?
Our places at the table hinged upon producing a constitution and community bank account i.e. that our group was open, and that we adopt basic Health and Safety and Equality and Diversity Policies. I then saw it as a joint responsibility with Community Development Services to develop what we started. I think we can agree there are times in our lives when we feel we could benefit from being part of a membership organisation.
DeleteThe chair of the compact when I was around was a bit weak possibly, and out of his depth. I felt the best thing would have been to elect a new chair at the next meeting, not allow the location to be changed as he did. Another problem was having meetings every 3 months because you lost momentum. Because the last meeting at the council offices in May 2011 was packed with assorted community/voluntary groups (which I had not seen before), I think we all felt we were understanding each other better, and finding common ground. The behind the scenes deals which were struck following that meeting certainly left us with the feeling that we were always going to be dictated to by political bosses and we should think about making our exit. I cannot speak for others of course Lyndon, and as you quite rightly point out, who does speak for the Community/voluntary sector? You have a turn of phrase for these kinds of arguments, which is to be found on my first post of Gay in Thanet, which you commented on, but escapes me temporarily?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteLyndon, we are given to understand that it is possible to approach some barristers direct to appraise cases. We are looking for an opinion on disability discrimination. legal Aid is not a possibility so we need to keep costs down a bit by cutting out a solicitor. I would be exceedingly grateful for a reply at any of the channels available to make contact.
DeletePossible contact list
Deletethanks 5.50. Looks like a good place to start and have passed this on.
Deletehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2577985/End-pensions-gravy-train-councillors-Axing-officials-perk-save-taxpayers-7million-year.html
ReplyDeleteInteresting.