Apparently they have the financial backing of the British taxpayer.
To run ferry services.
With their zero boats.
I can let you into a little secret, apparently not widely known, especially amongst journalists: London is one of the world's leading centres of ship chartering.
London is also one of the world's leading centres for large-scale financial fraud.
Every council in the land will bypass their procedures process a dozen or so times a year at least. It sometimes happens. it is not evidence of corruption.
You realize that saying "other corruptions are available" isn't really much of a defence, right?
That *isnt* corruption. Corruption is exceptionally rare in Government, local or national. Not that it doesnt happen at a local level.
The only time I can think of in the last thirty years in which it even got close was the "selling of peerages" under Blair, and even that was for noble reasons. Bung a million or two into an academy school and we will get you in the Lords.
Of course parliamentarians are, like most other people greedy sods, and a good number over claimed or over egged their own personal expenses.
But go on, help me out, give me an example of some kind of criminal investigation and subsequent charges that have resulted from a member of any recent british government awarding contracts.
Bernie Ecclestone and his million.
Blair feared the game was up after barely a few months in the job. Luckily, a "honeymoon period" press gave him a free pass.
Oddly enough, that backfired on the Conservatives, in a way. Bernie was very much in favour of the Conservatives before that (and was a big donor to them, and a lesser one to Labour), but the way they threw him to the wolves over what he saw as a business deal made him rather anti-Conservative, and especially anti-Hague.
Looks like the same guy. Haircut's different, but the same in-bred piggy little piggy face.
I'm gonna say, yes.
So his brother is Anthony Bamford of the family owned business JCB, whose net worth is in the Billions, and his businessman brother is somehow corruptly obtaining government contracts rather than making a limited investment into a possible business opportunity that may happen if no deal Brexit happens.
No - there is no one called Bamford listed as a director of Seaborne Freight on the Companies house database. I think we are getting into deep water here (I'll get my coat).
It looks like a small startup though, and the accounts for 2018 show negative assets of more than £300k so it would not be likely to pass the kind of financial solvency test that would normally be part of public procurement procedures,
That would depend on what financial backing they have lined up, which won't be public information.
Apparently they have the financial backing of the British taxpayer.
To run ferry services.
With their zero boats.
Seems to me the Govt. could either:
a) go into a short-term ferry business itself (and get a good kicking when it goes wrong) or
b) sub-contract that business to somebody (and give that somebody a good kicking if it goes wrong).
I'd put money on Govt. going for b) every time.....
The real scandal is not this exploitation of the public purse, but rather the pisspoor planning for No Deal.
No boats, no contacts, no contracts, no crew, no customs posts at either end, no functioning harbour.
This is not a real plan.
It looks like real plan to get some wealthy Tory donors some fat wodges of public money via fake shell companies before anybody notices what's happening.
OK. This what their Facebook page says. Direct copy; it's apparently in the public domain.
'As regular followers of RAG will know, we have been demanding proper “due diligence and compliance” on Seaborne Freight since April 2018. And in the absence of any action from TDC, we have twice undertaken such an exercise ourselves, showing that Seaborne Freight did not have the ships they claimed to have – or the investors. But the Ramsgate Action Group has now had sight of a formal company risk assessment of Seaborne Freight and Albany Shipping conducted by an FCA licensed lender using a highly reputable credit check company. Because of confidentiality and data protection law, we cannot publish these reports in detail. However, we can say the following things in general. 1) The credit score recommends a credit limit of no more than £500 and a contract limit of no more than £1,000. (as a point of comparison when I enter my own details into the same credit check, my credit limits and contract limits are more than ten times higher) 2) In the commentary, the report identifies two aspects of both companies’ finances which it considers to be very high risk; and one that it considers to be a “matter of concern”. 3) The report is also worried that Seaborne Freight has not made its VAT number or Company Registered Number obviously available in any of its details. So far, so damning. But it gets worse. If you add the £93k deficit on Albany’s books to the £416k short term loans “repayable to investors” in Seaborne Freight’s accounts, you have two companies who are technically insolvent. But if they are awarded a Government contract – or indeed any contract – that £509,000 of taxpayers’ money which comes straight off the top of any funds available. (Spookily, the first thing that Seaborne did on being awarded the contract (Dec 22nd) was to “pay” themselves by publishing accounts which showed the directors were owed upwards of £82k each in “consultancy fees”.)
That post is dated 31st Dec. As I say, it's a copy; I take no responsibility for anything said there which may be inaccurate. Others may well be able to challenge or otherwise disprove the statements made, but take them up on a third party basis, please, don't attribute anything to me.
This financial analysis does not seem unreasonable to me (and I am an accountant) BUT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON ANY PUBLIC RECORD THAT THIS COMPANY IS LINKED TO A PROMINENT TORY DONOR and unless anyone knows differently I suggest it is unwise to suggest that such a link exists.
Apparently they have the financial backing of the British taxpayer.
To run ferry services.
With their zero boats.
I can let you into a little secret, apparently not widely known, especially amongst journalists: London is one of the world's leading centres of ship chartering.
Apparently they have the financial backing of the British taxpayer.
To run ferry services.
With their zero boats.
I can let you into a little secret, apparently not widely known, especially amongst journalists: London is one of the world's leading centres of ship chartering.
How long does it it take to charter a ship? Genuine question. Presumably there's an element of due diligence on both sides. Does one charter it with or without crew, and how long does it take to recruit a crew, with officers used to/capable of sailing the Channel?
Every council in the land will bypass their procedures process a dozen or so times a year at least. It sometimes happens. it is not evidence of corruption.
You realize that saying "other corruptions are available" isn't really much of a defence, right?
That *isnt* corruption. Corruption is exceptionally rare in Government, local or national. Not that it doesnt happen at a local level.
The only time I can think of in the last thirty years in which it even got close was the "selling of peerages" under Blair, and even that was for noble reasons. Bung a million or two into an academy school and we will get you in the Lords.
Of course parliamentarians are, like most other people greedy sods, and a good number over claimed or over egged their own personal expenses.
But go on, help me out, give me an example of some kind of criminal investigation and subsequent charges that have resulted from a member of any recent british government awarding contracts.
Bernie Ecclestone and his million.
Blair feared the game was up after barely a few months in the job. Luckily, a "honeymoon period" press gave him a free pass.
Oddly enough, that backfired on the Conservatives, in a way. Bernie was very much in favour of the Conservatives before that (and was a big donor to them, and a lesser one to Labour), but the way they threw him to the wolves over what he saw as a business deal made him rather anti-Conservative, and especially anti-Hague.
Not sure Bernie had much reason to feel aggrieved. Didn't he get what he wanted AND his money back?
Apparently they have the financial backing of the British taxpayer.
To run ferry services.
With their zero boats.
I can let you into a little secret, apparently not widely known, especially amongst journalists: London is one of the world's leading centres of ship chartering.
Equally I could point you to a large number of places where there are boats awaiting either a charter or a final decision to decommission them...
This really is a complete non-story although it does perfectly sum up British politics. We waste time on everything but the things we need to be dealing with...
Apparently they have the financial backing of the British taxpayer.
To run ferry services.
With their zero boats.
I can let you into a little secret, apparently not widely known, especially amongst journalists: London is one of the world's leading centres of ship chartering.
can you charter a ferry? not exactly Baltic dry
Perhaps that's why they're getting a new company to do it...
It's nowhere near my area, but they would have to: *) Find a ferry (or ferries) that is available somewhere in the world, and which can be brought up to standard *) Hire it / them. *) Train crew *) Pass safety tests and legislative requirements in the UK and France.
All in an almighty hurry.
None of this is trivial, and I'm probably missing lots of gotchas in the above. It's perfectly conceivable that you would set up an arms-length style company to deal with all of this.
* Grayling bypassed the public sector tendering process. He gave no justification for doing so.
* He awarded the contract, without tender, to a company that has no track record, and NO ACTUAL BOATS.
* The company is owned by the brother of the single largest Tory donor.
It's not even the corruption aspect of it annoys me, it's that it's so blatant, and so little attempt has been made to hide it, that it's an insult to everyone's intelligence to even be lowering ourselves to Grayling's level.
1) it was awarded alongside other similar contracts not on its own. Presumably there was a specific process as part of no deal planning
2) that’s the nature of a start up! They started in 2017 with a view to opening their first services in 2019. Presumably pre-Brexit its not economic
3) irrelevant as to the fact. But good political knock about
That’s not evidence of corruption. That’s an accusation without evidence.
Don't go in to bat for these bent fuckers. Ferrygate is just going to be the tip of the shitberg when it comes to corruption and waste on no deal spending.
I’ve a very simple approach.
When someone is corrupt or breaks the law they should be prosecuted and punished if found guilty. Public office is a huge responsibility and probity is of utmost importance
But members of the public have a responsibility not to devalue a serious crime by making allegations without evidence of wrongdoing
I imagine I can hear Orff's O Fortuna in the background when I read this.
Apparently they have the financial backing of the British taxpayer.
To run ferry services.
With their zero boats.
I can let you into a little secret, apparently not widely known, especially amongst journalists: London is one of the world's leading centres of ship chartering.
How long does it it take to charter a ship? Genuine question. Presumably there's an element of due diligence on both sides. Does one charter it with or without crew, and how long does it take to recruit a crew, with officers used to/capable of sailing the Channel?
Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
Assume you can lease at, say, an 8% yield, so £7m p.a.
Don’t know what the other costs would be (presumably if it is a charter then the government will be responsible for the operating costs) but there will be insurance, maintenance etc
I would prefer to lay Trump for the nomination rather than the bi-partite bet of (a) Trump not getting the nomination (b) it being by mechanism X or Y, favouring a particular part of the GOP, and (c) that part of the GOP putting forward the named candidate. Half of OGH's bets have (d), that the candidate wins.
I agree, though in fairness there's a question of value but also a question of personal preference/temperament here. I've spent this morning topping up on Trump to be the nominee, but I could have laid Romney instead (some available at around 30s on Betfair). OGH gets huge odds by being willing to go for very specific bets from a general viewpoint. And he does have a good track record of some long odds winners in primaries.
Really? I am sure that if he had had a bet come in at, say, 50/1, he would have mentioned it.
Every council in the land will bypass their procedures process a dozen or so times a year at least. It sometimes happens. it is not evidence of corruption.
You realize that saying "other corruptions are available" isn't really much of a defence, right?
That *isnt* corruption. Corruption is exceptionally rare in Government, local or national. Not that it doesnt happen at a local level.
The only time I can think of in the last thirty years in which it even got close was the "selling of peerages" under Blair, and even that was for noble reasons. Bung a million or two into an academy school and we will get you in the Lords.
Of course parliamentarians are, like most other people greedy sods, and a good number over claimed or over egged their own personal expenses.
But go on, help me out, give me an example of some kind of criminal investigation and subsequent charges that have resulted from a member of any recent british government awarding contracts.
Bernie Ecclestone and his million.
Blair feared the game was up after barely a few months in the job. Luckily, a "honeymoon period" press gave him a free pass.
Oddly enough, that backfired on the Conservatives, in a way. Bernie was very much in favour of the Conservatives before that (and was a big donor to them, and a lesser one to Labour), but the way they threw him to the wolves over what he saw as a business deal made him rather anti-Conservative, and especially anti-Hague.
Not sure Bernie had much reason to feel aggrieved. Didn't he get what he wanted AND his money back?
"Doing a Bernie": To give money to get something you want, to get it, and then to get your money back.
There's a biography of Bernie by Susan Watkins that goes into this a little. I think from Bernie's perspective it was a perfectly rational business deal: AIUI he didn't want to stop the advertising ban, just to delay it so that teams would not need to cancel expensive advertising contracts mid-term. He ended up with his reputation being trashed.
He had donated the money well before Labour won, and had donated to both parties, so probably did not see a direct connection between the donation and his request.
What happened can certainly be painted as corrupt; I doubt Bernie believed it was corrupt. He was just greasing the wheels.
IMV it was either corrupt or politically naive of him. To work out which, you need to look at some of his other dealings.
As an aside Bernie's a lovely man. I haave a lot of time for him. I have considerably less for Max Moseley.
The one in Italy looks the best bet. The cruise ferry in Australia looks too big for Ramsgate, and all the Greek ones look too small for the Ostend route.
Personally, I would psss and stick to the Red Funnel line.
Assume you can lease at, say, an 8% yield, so £7m p.a.
Don’t know what the other costs would be (presumably if it is a charter then the government will be responsible for the operating costs) but there will be insurance, maintenance etc
Some profit but not a huge amount
Bear in mind that Seaborne has been set up to run this service anyway, so I imagine the real benefit to them from the government contract is that it gives them guaranteed revenues to kickstart their business and cover some or all of their start-up costs, which in turn should help unlock the finance. A lucky break for them, to be sure, but there's nothing improper in that.
If there's one thing I've learned from Brexiteers is that Seaborne Freight doesn't *need* boats. It just has to *believe* in boats.
I'm not a Brexiteer and think you're bang out of order on this.
The government are also giving money to DFDS and Brittany ferries as part of this scheme. So I ask you: what would you do if you were in power to try to ensure we have more services?
Nautilus International has warned that the UK government's move to spend more than £100m to secure additional ferry capacity to keep trade flowing in the event of a no-deal Brexit could create a costly and damaging own goal for the British shipping industry.
The union says the plans to use ships from Brittany Ferries, which has no significant UK employment offer, as well as a start-up UK operation Seaborne Freight, could undermine existing operators who train and employ British seafarers.
Nautilus is challenging ministers to ensure that seafarers serving on the chartered ships are employed on UK wages and conditions, and is questioning whether the government has put sufficient safeguards in place over the technical and crew management of the vessels.
The real scandal is not this exploitation of the public purse, but rather the pisspoor planning for No Deal.
No boats, no contacts, no contracts, no crew, no customs posts at either end, no functioning harbour.
This is not a real plan.
That is the real scandal here despite all the rather amusing ranting by @grabcocque. Less than 100 days before we could leave the EU with no deal and the government is scrabbling around looking for a start up ferry company that just might be able to help. The incompetence of this government in failing to make preparations for a no deal Brexit over the last 2 years is, in my opinion, incompetence at a criminal level and careers should end for it at a minimum no matter what happens, starting with Mrs May's.
Bear in mind that Seaborne has been set up to run this service anyway, so I imagine the real benefit to them from the government contract is that it gives them guaranteed revenues to kickstart their business and cover some or all of their start-up costs, which in turn should help unlock the finance. A lucky break for them, to be sure, but there's nothing improper in that.
*Nothing improper*?
You and I clearly have very different moral compasses.
This is one of the chaps setting up Seaborne "Who We Are Managing Director
Ben Sharp (50) served in The Royal Navy for ten years as a Submarine Officer. During his service, he gained an Engineering Degree and completed his naval professional training. After his service in The Royal Navy, Ben went to the City of London where he re-trained as a Marine Underwriter and became the General Manager of a P&I management company. In 2002, he joined QBE-HKSI Insurance Limited (QBE) in Hong Kong as the Regional Protection & Indemnity Insurance Underwriter and subsequently the Marine Underwriter of QBE Hong Kong.
In 2005, Ben formed his own company Mercator in Hong Kong with the primary aim of providing consultancy to financial institutions and chartering/operating vessels. Mercator has operated over 20 vessels for a variety of offshore projects and undertaken consultancy to International Financial Institutions. In 2014, Ben took the decision to develop Mercator into a Ship Owner Operator and Albany Shipping Limited was formed to achieve this." http://albanyshipping.co.uk/who-we-are.php
Bear in mind that Seaborne has been set up to run this service anyway, so I imagine the real benefit to them from the government contract is that it gives them guaranteed revenues to kickstart their business and cover some or all of their start-up costs, which in turn should help unlock the finance. A lucky break for them, to be sure, but there's nothing improper in that.
*Nothing improper*?
You and I clearly have very different moral compasses.
This is one of the chaps setting up Seaborne "Who We Are Managing Director
Ben Sharp (50) served in The Royal Navy for ten years as a Submarine Officer. During his service, he gained an Engineering Degree and completed his naval professional training. After his service in The Royal Navy, Ben went to the City of London where he re-trained as a Marine Underwriter and became the General Manager of a P&I management company. In 2002, he joined QBE-HKSI Insurance Limited (QBE) in Hong Kong as the Regional Protection & Indemnity Insurance Underwriter and subsequently the Marine Underwriter of QBE Hong Kong.
In 2005, Ben formed his own company Mercator in Hong Kong with the primary aim of providing consultancy to financial institutions and chartering/operating vessels. Mercator has operated over 20 vessels for a variety of offshore projects and undertaken consultancy to International Financial Institutions. In 2014, Ben took the decision to develop Mercator into a Ship Owner Operator and Albany Shipping Limited was formed to achieve this." http://albanyshipping.co.uk/who-we-are.php
The one in Italy looks the best bet. The cruise ferry in Australia looks too big for Ramsgate, and all the Greek ones look too small for the Ostend route.
Personally, I would psss and stick to the Red Funnel line.
Bear in mind that Seaborne has been set up to run this service anyway, so I imagine the real benefit to them from the government contract is that it gives them guaranteed revenues to kickstart their business and cover some or all of their start-up costs, which in turn should help unlock the finance. A lucky break for them, to be sure, but there's nothing improper in that.
*Nothing improper*?
You and I clearly have very different moral compasses.
Indeed. Mine is based on looking at the facts.
Yours seems to be based on the assumption that using quasi-fake preparations for a no-deal Brexit as a get-rich scheme is acceptable political practice. No Deal Brexit shouldn't just be some cheeky venture capital fund for billionaires to exploit.
This is one of the chaps setting up Seaborne "Who We Are Managing Director
Ben Sharp (50) served in The Royal Navy for ten years as a Submarine Officer. During his service, he gained an Engineering Degree and completed his naval professional training. After his service in The Royal Navy, Ben went to the City of London where he re-trained as a Marine Underwriter and became the General Manager of a P&I management company. In 2002, he joined QBE-HKSI Insurance Limited (QBE) in Hong Kong as the Regional Protection & Indemnity Insurance Underwriter and subsequently the Marine Underwriter of QBE Hong Kong.
In 2005, Ben formed his own company Mercator in Hong Kong with the primary aim of providing consultancy to financial institutions and chartering/operating vessels. Mercator has operated over 20 vessels for a variety of offshore projects and undertaken consultancy to International Financial Institutions. In 2014, Ben took the decision to develop Mercator into a Ship Owner Operator and Albany Shipping Limited was formed to achieve this." http://albanyshipping.co.uk/who-we-are.php
This is one of the chaps setting up Seaborne "Who We Are Managing Director
Ben Sharp (50) served in The Royal Navy for ten years as a Submarine Officer. During his service, he gained an Engineering Degree and completed his naval professional training. After his service in The Royal Navy, Ben went to the City of London where he re-trained as a Marine Underwriter and became the General Manager of a P&I management company. In 2002, he joined QBE-HKSI Insurance Limited (QBE) in Hong Kong as the Regional Protection & Indemnity Insurance Underwriter and subsequently the Marine Underwriter of QBE Hong Kong.
In 2005, Ben formed his own company Mercator in Hong Kong with the primary aim of providing consultancy to financial institutions and chartering/operating vessels. Mercator has operated over 20 vessels for a variety of offshore projects and undertaken consultancy to International Financial Institutions. In 2014, Ben took the decision to develop Mercator into a Ship Owner Operator and Albany Shipping Limited was formed to achieve this." http://albanyshipping.co.uk/who-we-are.php
The one in Italy looks the best bet. The cruise ferry in Australia looks too big for Ramsgate, and all the Greek ones look too small for the Ostend route.
Personally, I would psss and stick to the Red Funnel line.
I do see problems with regulatory compliance on vessels not designed for service within the EU. I'd expect the likes of the International Transport Workers' Feeration to be all over that (and rightly so).
And MS Clipper Point is currently laid up in Liverpool.
This is one of the chaps setting up Seaborne "Who We Are Managing Director
Ben Sharp (50) served in The Royal Navy for ten years as a Submarine Officer. During his service, he gained an Engineering Degree and completed his naval professional training. After his service in The Royal Navy, Ben went to the City of London where he re-trained as a Marine Underwriter and became the General Manager of a P&I management company. In 2002, he joined QBE-HKSI Insurance Limited (QBE) in Hong Kong as the Regional Protection & Indemnity Insurance Underwriter and subsequently the Marine Underwriter of QBE Hong Kong.
In 2005, Ben formed his own company Mercator in Hong Kong with the primary aim of providing consultancy to financial institutions and chartering/operating vessels. Mercator has operated over 20 vessels for a variety of offshore projects and undertaken consultancy to International Financial Institutions. In 2014, Ben took the decision to develop Mercator into a Ship Owner Operator and Albany Shipping Limited was formed to achieve this." http://albanyshipping.co.uk/who-we-are.php
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.
Phew, I see the PB Tories have got their mojo back after the Christmas break. All is right (wrong) with the world.
We are all PB Tories now, comrade!
I have no boats And I must ferry
When he was in business, my dad once got a large but short-term contract which he could not fulfil with the plant he had at hand (most of which was at work on other jobs). So (shock, horror) he went out and rented / borrowed the JCB's, dumpers etc he required.
The people who gave him the contract knew he did not have the plant available at the time, but were confident he could get it. Which he did.
Again, instead of carping, say how you would solve the problem?
I imagine I can hear Orff's O Fortuna in the background when I read this.
I do like that piece
"...[Arthur] Ready my knights for battle; they will ride with their King once more. I have lived through others far too long: Lancelot carried my honor and Guinevere my guilt; my knights have fought my causes and Mordred carries my sins. Now, at last, I will rule. [Aide] Guards. Knights. Squires. Prepare for battle..." (Excalibur, John Boorman, 1981)
I imagine I can hear Orff's O Fortuna in the background when I read this.
I do like that piece
"...[Arthur] Ready my knights for battle; they will ride with their King once more. I have lived through others far too long: Lancelot carried my honor and Guinevere my guilt; my knights have fought my causes and Mordred carries my sins. Now, at last, I will rule. [Aide] Guards. Knights. Squires. Prepare for battle..." (Excalibur, John Boorman, 1981)
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
I think the theory is that Dover is going to turn into an enormous traffic jam, so even if the ferries there are running you won't be able to get to them.
Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.
It's a shame you picked Hull. Stoke, Crewe, Preston, Darlington all have similar problems without the isolation issue....
Well, chaps, if you want to know about real fraudulent dealing and corruption and other misconduct have a look at this - http://barry-walsh.co.uk/news/.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
It's not the "more stuff", it's the "longer time to process it due to increased bureaucracy", which means a port can handle fewer ships a day.
As I pointed out to LuckyGuy1983 the other day, mitigation processes are being put into place and hopefully thay will cope and a no-deal Brexit will be undramatic (the problems will be un-newsworthy IMHO). But at the moment uncertainty rules.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
I think the theory is that Dover is going to turn into an enormous traffic jam, so even if the ferries there are running you won't be able to get to them.
Right. So we need more ferries that we cannot get to. Got it.
2018 gave us a myriad of evils, none as insidious as the #FBPE
Mmm. Some rum characters in there.
I have many arguments, some of high principle, others more pragmatic, against the holding of another referendum on the EU.
But if I'm honest, the one that swings it is not an argument at all, it's an actual full body spasm at the thought of Alastair Campbell all over the TV on the morning after Remain romps home.
Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.
It's a shame you picked Hull. Stoke, Crewe, Preston, Darlington all have similar problems without the isolation issue....
I imagine I can hear Orff's O Fortuna in the background when I read this.
I do like that piece
"...[Arthur] Ready my knights for battle; they will ride with their King once more. I have lived through others far too long: Lancelot carried my honor and Guinevere my guilt; my knights have fought my causes and Mordred carries my sins. Now, at last, I will rule. [Aide] Guards. Knights. Squires. Prepare for battle..." (Excalibur, John Boorman, 1981)
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
It's not the "more stuff", it's the "longer time to process it due to increased bureaucracy", which means a port can handle fewer ships a day.
As I pointed out to LuckyGuy1983 the other day, mitigation processes are being put into place and hopefully thay will cope and a no-deal Brexit will be undramatic (the problems will be un-newsworthy IMHO). But at the moment uncertainty rules.
Can handle fewer ships, so we need more ships. Got it.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
I think the theory is that Dover is going to turn into an enormous traffic jam, so even if the ferries there are running you won't be able to get to them.
Right. So we need more ferries that we cannot get to. Got it.
No these are ferries that will be leaving from ports other than Dover in order to ease congestion in and upto Dover.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
I think the theory is that Dover is going to turn into an enormous traffic jam, so even if the ferries there are running you won't be able to get to them.
Right. So we need more ferries that we cannot get to. Got it.
The rate limiting step is likely to be customs, not cargo capacity.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
It's not the "more stuff", it's the "longer time to process it due to increased bureaucracy", which means a port can handle fewer ships a day.
As I pointed out to LuckyGuy1983 the other day, mitigation processes are being put into place and hopefully thay will cope and a no-deal Brexit will be undramatic (the problems will be un-newsworthy IMHO). But at the moment uncertainty rules.
Can handle fewer ships, so we need more ships. Got it.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
I think the theory is that Dover is going to turn into an enormous traffic jam, so even if the ferries there are running you won't be able to get to them.
Right. So we need more ferries that we cannot get to. Got it.
No these are ferries that will be leaving from ports other than Dover in order to ease congestion in and upto Dover.
Think along the lines of a city bypass road.
Ah ha! An answer I can believe in. Cheers. Have a biscuit!!
Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.
Just throwing it at the wall to see if it sticks, but Hull is an existing ferry port. Has it got extra capacity?
Edit: though I guess increased ferry traffic wouldn't necessarily help the local economy.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
I think the theory is that Dover is going to turn into an enormous traffic jam, so even if the ferries there are running you won't be able to get to them.
Right. So we need more ferries that we cannot get to. Got it.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
I think the theory is that Dover is going to turn into an enormous traffic jam, so even if the ferries there are running you won't be able to get to them.
Right. So we need more ferries that we cannot get to. Got it.
Different routes - Ramsgate to Ostend, also to Poole and Plymouth
Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.
It's a shame you picked Hull. Stoke, Crewe, Preston, Darlington all have similar problems without the isolation issue....
Piece of cake compared to Workington or Barrow.
Hard to see how Brexit benefits any of these places, or is Barrow going to be the Changi airport of Singapore in the Atlantic?
Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.
It's a shame you picked Hull. Stoke, Crewe, Preston, Darlington all have similar problems without the isolation issue....
Piece of cake compared to Workington or Barrow.
Hard to see how Brexit benefits any of these places, or is Barrow going to be the Changi airport of Singapore in the Atlantic?
Yeah. It was a protest vote, not a well-thought-out position on future benefits or global trade.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?
If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
A knighthood/damehood?
you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
We had a funny moment a few months back when some leavers pointed at some undeveloped land right by the Eurotunnel terminal that they said could be used to store lorries. They'd checked Google Maps.
If they'd actually have used their brains they'd have realised that undeveloped land was actually a very steep slope leading up onto the North Downs ...
Hmmm I'm having difficulty imagining what that would be like. If only there was some place where I could have read such things every day since the referendum, that would help.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
We had a funny moment a few months back when some leavers pointed at some undeveloped land right by the Eurotunnel terminal that they said could be used to store lorries. They'd checked Google Maps.
If they'd actually have used their brains they'd have realised that undeveloped land was actually a very steep slope leading up onto the North Downs ...
Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?
If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
A knighthood/damehood?
you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.
It's a shame you picked Hull. Stoke, Crewe, Preston, Darlington all have similar problems without the isolation issue....
Crewe? It's one of the busiest train stations in the UK with no less than six railway lines converging on it.
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?
Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?
If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
A knighthood/damehood?
you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
I was (OK, only slightly) surprised with both the vehemence and number of those opposing it before Christmas. I'd have credited enough MPs with enough common sense* to have couched their opposition in terms like "it's not great; shame she couldn't do better; will have to consider carefully", which would have given them some space in which to carry out the manoeuvre described above.
But the number queuing up to explain that it really was the worst shit sandwich since sliced bread and only a moron would vote for it, does rather leave them all open to the allegation that, well, they're morons if they do.
(*clearly not actual common sense.. shorthand for "enough short-term nous not to box themselves into a standpoint which might bring their government down when they didn't really want to")
Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?
The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?
IANAHaulier/Shipping expert, but I think I read that it's the wrong type of ferry (need smaller ones for the other ports)
Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?
If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
A knighthood/damehood?
you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
Most Tory MPs that are either hardcore remainers or ultra-Brexiteers don't seem to think things through much. Witness the recent confidence vote in favour of May where they'd have been better off switching their votes.
Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?
If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
A knighthood/damehood?
you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
Comments
a) go into a short-term ferry business itself (and get a good kicking when it goes wrong) or
b) sub-contract that business to somebody (and give that somebody a good kicking if it goes wrong).
I'd put money on Govt. going for b) every time.....
*™ Sajid Javid
This really is a complete non-story although it does perfectly sum up British politics. We waste time on everything but the things we need to be dealing with...
It's nowhere near my area, but they would have to:
*) Find a ferry (or ferries) that is available somewhere in the world, and which can be brought up to standard
*) Hire it / them.
*) Train crew
*) Pass safety tests and legislative requirements in the UK and France.
All in an almighty hurry.
None of this is trivial, and I'm probably missing lots of gotchas in the above. It's perfectly conceivable that you would set up an arms-length style company to deal with all of this.
... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).
The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.
What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.
What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.
https://www.theyachtmarket.com/static/boattype_ro-ro_1.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Herald_of_Free_Enterprise#Sister_ships
Assume you can lease at, say, an 8% yield, so £7m p.a.
Don’t know what the other costs would be (presumably if it is a charter then the government will be responsible for the operating costs) but there will be insurance, maintenance etc
Some profit but not a huge amount
Any discussions about Seaborne now requires a link from a reputable source.
Use of words like corruption will see posting privileges revoked.
There's a biography of Bernie by Susan Watkins that goes into this a little. I think from Bernie's perspective it was a perfectly rational business deal: AIUI he didn't want to stop the advertising ban, just to delay it so that teams would not need to cancel expensive advertising contracts mid-term. He ended up with his reputation being trashed.
He had donated the money well before Labour won, and had donated to both parties, so probably did not see a direct connection between the donation and his request.
What happened can certainly be painted as corrupt; I doubt Bernie believed it was corrupt. He was just greasing the wheels.
IMV it was either corrupt or politically naive of him. To work out which, you need to look at some of his other dealings.
As an aside Bernie's a lovely man. I haave a lot of time for him. I have considerably less for Max Moseley.
Personally, I would psss and stick to the Red Funnel line.
The government are also giving money to DFDS and Brittany ferries as part of this scheme. So I ask you: what would you do if you were in power to try to ensure we have more services?
Nautilus International has warned that the UK government's move to spend more than £100m to secure additional ferry capacity to keep trade flowing in the event of a no-deal Brexit could create a costly and damaging own goal for the British shipping industry.
The union says the plans to use ships from Brittany Ferries, which has no significant UK employment offer, as well as a start-up UK operation Seaborne Freight, could undermine existing operators who train and employ British seafarers.
Nautilus is challenging ministers to ensure that seafarers serving on the chartered ships are employed on UK wages and conditions, and is questioning whether the government has put sufficient safeguards in place over the technical and crew management of the vessels.
You and I clearly have very different moral compasses.
"Who We Are
Managing Director
Ben Sharp (50) served in The Royal Navy for ten years as a Submarine Officer. During his service, he gained an Engineering Degree and completed his naval professional training. After his service in The Royal Navy, Ben went to the City of London where he re-trained as a Marine Underwriter and became the General Manager of a P&I management company. In 2002, he joined QBE-HKSI Insurance Limited (QBE) in Hong Kong as the Regional Protection & Indemnity Insurance Underwriter and subsequently the Marine Underwriter of QBE Hong Kong.
In 2005, Ben formed his own company Mercator in Hong Kong with the primary aim of providing consultancy to financial institutions and chartering/operating vessels. Mercator has operated over 20 vessels for a variety of offshore projects and undertaken consultancy to International Financial Institutions. In 2014, Ben took the decision to develop Mercator into a Ship Owner Operator and Albany Shipping Limited was formed to achieve this."
http://albanyshipping.co.uk/who-we-are.php
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/Gha9jvs6tE2F65ld0JfiQHgPbSI/appointments
Wonder if @Dura_Ace knows him?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Nord_Pas-de-Calais
I expect better of you.
"albany shipping" panama papers
Took me seconds. Why don't you try looking in to things before you start working yourself into a lather about conspiracies?
You really need to be more careful about these allegations.
https://www.ferryshippingnews.com/ports-of-ostend-and-ramsgate-welcome-new-cross-channel-freight-ferry-operator/
Or rather Albany Shipping's owners, Flexagon:
https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/search?utf8=✓&q=flexagon&e=&commit=Search
These are the ferries they used:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Line#Fleet
I wonder if we can obtain Moondance:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Moondance
I do see problems with regulatory compliance on vessels not designed for service within the EU. I'd expect the likes of the International Transport Workers' Feeration to be all over that (and rightly so).
And MS Clipper Point is currently laid up in Liverpool.
Even if 79% of Labour get the second referendum they want they aren't going to win it
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1080441296580419585
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1080441849041616898
And I must ferry
The people who gave him the contract knew he did not have the plant available at the time, but were confident he could get it. Which he did.
Again, instead of carping, say how you would solve the problem?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16Y_as3nHUY
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1080383804030832641
There is nothing new under the sun.
And now off for a walk.
Have a good day all.
As I pointed out to LuckyGuy1983 the other day, mitigation processes are being put into place and hopefully thay will cope and a no-deal Brexit will be undramatic (the problems will be un-newsworthy IMHO). But at the moment uncertainty rules.
I have many arguments, some of high principle, others more pragmatic, against the holding of another referendum on the EU.
But if I'm honest, the one that swings it is not an argument at all, it's an actual full body spasm at the thought of Alastair Campbell all over the TV on the morning after Remain romps home.
Temple of Doom
Think along the lines of a city bypass road.
Edit: though I guess increased ferry traffic wouldn't necessarily help the local economy.
If they'd actually have used their brains they'd have realised that undeveloped land was actually a very steep slope leading up onto the North Downs ...
But the number queuing up to explain that it really was the worst shit sandwich since sliced bread and only a moron would vote for it, does rather leave them all open to the allegation that, well, they're morons if they do.
(*clearly not actual common sense.. shorthand for "enough short-term nous not to box themselves into a standpoint which might bring their government down when they didn't really want to")
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp
Amy Klobuchar: +13
Sherrod Brown: +12
Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
Beto O'Rourke: +3
Bernie Sanders: -3
Elizabeth Warren: -12