No Deal More ferries to Plymouth

From a Ferry site.

Many who read these pages will not understand the nuances of this “contract”. Yes, there will be extra rotations on certain routes with the only tangible extra costs being fuel. However, just because there will be extra rotations does not mean an increase in passenger capacity – this “contract” is NOT for the benefit of passengers, it is purely freight orientated and could even have a detrimental effect on passenger services as high volumes of “Dangerous Goods” severely restrict passenger numbers. More than anything it is a fall-back position for the UK government, a position that will cost UK taxpayers.

At present contingency planning is almost impossible, something the Department of Transport understands as nobody knows what President Macron has up his sleeve. At present he is looking to punish the UK for leaving the EU which may include UK driving licences NOT being valid in France, the imposition of visas for UK citizens and possibly the re-introduction of the old “TIR” system and the “T” form regime. Similarly Jean-Claude Juncker is proposing charging UK motorists to use EU roads. We may even see the return of the road permit system of the late 1960’s, which means UK hauliers facing fewer opportunities to cross the channel post-Brexit.

There is also the possibility that every vehicle carrying refrigerated goods, food and other natural products may face inspections upon arrival in France after Britain leaves the EU. This would mean around one third of the freight units carried by DFDS & Brittany Ferries every year would be affected. The infrastructure required for such an inspection regime – huge warehouses - do not exist in ports like Dunkerque, Roscoff, Sant Malou or Cherbourg. Nor are they likely to be constructed by March 2019.

There is the possibility that some ports may also be excluded from preparations completely, meaning fewer entry points for hauliers into France and rendering pointless plans to boost capacity. Even though the UK may take a pragmatic approach and wave trucks through upon arrival into the UK. Saying that, cross-Channel trade works both ways but no one is in any way certain the French or Belgians would reciprocate. The worst case scenario is British hauliers carrying refrigerated goods could face the prospect of far longer journeys – perhaps hundreds of additional miles – to find a French or Belgian port equipped to process their consignment. When they finally get there they could encounter further delays waiting for checks to take place.

Customs procedures are a far bigger problem as goods will still need to go through the same customs procedures in ports - which is where the real problems would be. Whilst the “contract” is, in theory, admirable it is not clear how government-chartered ships can move goods faster or more efficiently than the private sector. From what has been made public the three firms chosen will retain a portion of their award even if their services are no longer needed, due to a deal being reached with Brussels. However, in that event, the government would then seek to sell the extra capacity back to the market.

The reality of this would be a loss of connectivity and a significant threat to jobs and long term investment in regions like the south west of England.

Then there is the £13+million to Seaborne Freight, They do not own or operate a ship, see website. It is worth noting that Glenn Dudley and Jean-Michel Copyans (Directors) both worked for My Ferry Link.

What we are seeing is further evidence of the last-minute rush to implement Brexit no-deal contingency planning by a government that has made basic mistakes since the first day of negotiations.

seadog wrote:

From a Ferry site.

Many who read these pages will not understand the nuances of this “contract”. Yes, there will be extra rotations on certain routes with the only tangible extra costs being fuel. However, just because there will be extra rotations does not mean an increase in passenger capacity – this “contract” is NOT for the benefit of passengers, it is purely freight orientated and could even have a detrimental effect on passenger services as high volumes of “Dangerous Goods” severely restrict passenger numbers. More than anything it is a fall-back position for the UK government, a position that will cost UK taxpayers.

At present contingency planning is almost impossible, something the Department of Transport understands as nobody knows what President Macron has up his sleeve. At present he is looking to punish the UK for leaving the EU which may include UK driving licences NOT being valid in France, the imposition of visas for UK citizens and possibly the re-introduction of the old “TIR” system and the “T” form regime. Similarly Jean-Claude Juncker is proposing charging UK motorists to use EU roads. We may even see the return of the road permit system of the late 1960’s, which means UK hauliers facing fewer opportunities to cross the channel post-Brexit.

There is also the possibility that every vehicle carrying refrigerated goods, food and other natural products may face inspections upon arrival in France after Britain leaves the EU. This would mean around one third of the freight units carried by DFDS & Brittany Ferries every year would be affected. The infrastructure required for such an inspection regime – huge warehouses - do not exist in ports like Dunkerque, Roscoff, Sant Malou or Cherbourg. Nor are they likely to be constructed by March 2019.

There is the possibility that some ports may also be excluded from preparations completely, meaning fewer entry points for hauliers into France and rendering pointless plans to boost capacity. Even though the UK may take a pragmatic approach and wave trucks through upon arrival into the UK. Saying that, cross-Channel trade works both ways but no one is in any way certain the French or Belgians would reciprocate. The worst case scenario is British hauliers carrying refrigerated goods could face the prospect of far longer journeys – perhaps hundreds of additional miles – to find a French or Belgian port equipped to process their consignment. When they finally get there they could encounter further delays waiting for checks to take place.

Customs procedures are a far bigger problem as goods will still need to go through the same customs procedures in ports - which is where the real problems would be. Whilst the “contract” is, in theory, admirable it is not clear how government-chartered ships can move goods faster or more efficiently than the private sector. From what has been made public the three firms chosen will retain a portion of their award even if their services are no longer needed, due to a deal being reached with Brussels. However, in that event, the government would then seek to sell the extra capacity back to the market.

The reality of this would be a loss of connectivity and a significant threat to jobs and long term investment in regions like the south west of England.

Then there is the £13+million to Seaborne Freight, They do not own or operate a ship, see website. It is worth noting that Glenn Dudley and Jean-Michel Copyans (Directors) both worked for My Ferry Link.

What we are seeing is further evidence of the last-minute rush to implement Brexit no-deal contingency planning by a government that has made basic mistakes since the first day of negotiations.

I hope that's just a C&P because none of our ATD Brexit dullards will read it or have the mental capacity to understand it if they try to.

C&P baby, I know my audience.

All you can do is tell them.

If they choose to ignore facts and common sense and insist that their belief in rocking horse manure will triumph then nobody can stop them.

At least you tried and, ultimately, that is all you can do.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I hope that's just a C&P because none of our ATD Brexit dullards will read it or have the mental capacity to understand it if they try to.

Nice, poor grammar as well as being illiterate. What were you saying about mental capacity?

One finds it hard to understand why the official Labour party policy is to leave the EU, are they as a party Brexit dullards lacking in mental capacity?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

So we're down to simple insults now, are we?

No debate.

No comment.

Pure abuse?

Time to roll out Maggie's greatest moment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Says the man who has spent two years calling all leavers racists and thick dullards.
Anyway I think we all get that roll on roll off will take longer but your claim that there are no checks now is bollocks there are loads of checks on both sides and the French have ramped up their checks massively in the last couple of years. In two checks on the French side in the past four years I've been turned over completely along with hundreds of other holiday makers costing us an average of two to three hours. In Plymouth we have been subjected to two hour delays whilst border force have looked long and hard at every bodies passports in some kind of attempt to look like we are being tough on immigration.
What we won't need post Brexit is more ferries. The ones we have will in your words take longer and that problem won't be solved by putting more ferries on. And you think I'm thick?

Delays to the west of Dover are not as significant, it is the newly discovered, TM D Raaaaab, Dover corridor where any more delays will hit hard and cause gridlock.

Any extra ferries will be to ease this and will all be outside Dover Calais.

Some Tory has already set up her or her retirement with a £14 million donation to Seabourn, a company devoid of ships or routes. Kerching for private enterprise.

More vehicles to different ports to avoid possible gridlock is probably sensible, especially with perishables. The A38 will be crammed with cauliflowers going to Londinium like the good old days. LOL

That some friend of a friend will make a fortune on this latest government gimme would be par for the course in today's corrupt UK. Whenever there's a sniff of government money or assets o the cheap, you'll find a queue of Brent's all gagging to help out their community.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

So we're down to simple insults now, are we?

No debate.

No comment.

Pure abuse?

Time to roll out Maggie's greatest moment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Says the man who has spent two years calling all leavers racists and thick dullards.
Anyway I think we all get that roll on roll off will take longer but your claim that there are no checks now is bollocks there are loads of checks on both sides and the French have ramped up their checks massively in the last couple of years. In two checks on the French side in the past four years I've been turned over completely along with hundreds of other holiday makers costing us an average of two to three hours. In Plymouth we have been subjected to two hour delays whilst border force have looked long and hard at every bodies passports in some kind of attempt to look like we are being tough on immigration.
What we won't need post Brexit is more ferries. The ones we have will in your words take longer and that problem won't be solved by putting more ferries on. And you think I'm thick?

Just as I have never said that all Leavers are racist (although quite clearly all racists are Leavers) I also was at pains to say that there are "almost no checks".

And yet you still claim not to be stupid when much of the available evidence as supplied by your continuing misapprehensions and defined by your own hand suggests something else entirely.

Which part of more checks = slower crossings = more ferries is it so hard to understand?

I genuinely don't get it.

No you don't "get it" Frank I doubt that you ever will. You obviously don't read anything that you write please don't expect me to. As I've already said your Maggie pic is the most epic own goal I've ever seen.

I'm happy to have enriched your world but saddened that enlightenment has not followed.

Then again I suspect it never will.

beesrus wrote:

More vehicles to different ports to  avoid possible gridlock is probably sensible, especially with perishables. The A38 will be crammed with cauliflowers going to Londinium like the good old days. LOL

That some friend of a friend will make a fortune on this latest government gimme would be par for the course in today's corrupt UK. Whenever there's a sniff of government money or assets o the cheap, you'll find a queue of Brent's all gagging to help out their community.

Its very rare to have any sensible solutions in these days of Brexit, if you do they are delivered in an hysterical fashion designed to pour petrol onto the already burning fires. In reality we wil have some botched up deal thrust upon us and the ferrie companies will absorb the extra capacity to their own profit and obviously the friends of friends that will have now bought some nice cheap shares over Christmas.

The only sensible solution to Brexit is not to Brexit at all.

Everything else is nonsensical with merely the degree of nonsense changing.

The only sensible solution to Brexit is Brexit.

Anything else would be anti democratic.

Get over it. You Lost the vote!

PatDunne wrote:

One finds it hard to understand why the official Labour party policy is to leave the EU, are they as a party Brexit dullards lacking in mental capacity?

it isn’t the official Labour Party policy.

seadog wrote:

Some Tory has already set up her or her retirement with a £14 million donation to Seabourn, a company devoid of ships or routes. Kerching for private enterprise.

I see from the BBC below, a local Kent Tory county councillor is now suspicious of the weird contract suddenly awarded to "No ships" Seaborne. Trouble is he looks like some Bojo/Dennis Pennis, so wonder what his REAL angle is. Take a look. Would you trust him walking down the street toward you ?  Something dodgy going on down in Ramsgate. LOL.
Is there a serious consistent honest  Tory anywhere in this whole brexit charade ? Redwood has just shown his true two faced brexit colours and his ex-wife is dishing the dirt on him. What a nest of vipers. LOL

BBC advert free link... they don't even get paid for clicks

beesrus wrote:

seadog wrote:

Some Tory has already set up her or her retirement with a £14 million donation to Seabourn, a company devoid of ships or routes. Kerching for private enterprise.

I see from the BBC below, a local Kent Tory county councillor is now suspicious of the weird contract suddenly awarded to "No ships" Seaborne. Trouble is he looks like some Bojo/Dennis Pennis, so wonder what his REAL angle is. Take a look. Would you trust him walking down the street toward you ?  Something dodgy going on down in Ramsgate. LOL.
Is there a serious consistent honest  Tory anywhere in this whole brexit charade ? Redwood has just shown his true two faced brexit colours and his ex-wife is dishing the dirt on him. What a nest of vipers. LOL

BBC advert free link... they don't even get paid for clicks

That looks like a deal Mr Brent is involved in. I see the other ferry contracts have gone to firms in the EU

Ramsgate/Broadstairs/Margate is a dodgy Tory council/Government area anyway....who shipped in Tory activists and finance beyond the guide lines for a general election.....to make sure that Nigel Farage didn't win the seat.....the fear of him being in parliament and being a thorn in their flesh put the frighteners on them regarding someone with EU experience to show up their underhand cheating ways....which was well beyond the ability of dim-witted Labour MP's to understand. That Tory councillor looks as if he has come out of the standard Tory mould.

And this should be the real story. How our hard earned is being diverted away from us and channeled to the top of the food chain. I see that under the government crack down on exorbitant hospital parking charges has resulted in many trusts doubling their charges in the last year. But as a rich farming relation told me yesterday "who else is going to pay for the health service?" This comment was from someone who has diverted some of his farm subsidy over the years into dot.com shares, the sort of firms that pay zero feckin tax. This guy also voted to remain so it's obvious he's very intelligent.

From Ramsgate Action group.

RAG ..Ramsgate Action Group
Just picked this from another thread: "Investigation into SEABORNE FREIGHT...
NOT SAILING BUT FAILING:

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”.)

Even more disturbingly, there is a Blind Trust in the name Seaborne, registered @ Broadgate Tower EC1 along with approx 250 other companies with names including consultancy and property management firms.

Are the two companies connected? And if so, who are the hidden beneficiaries of the Blind Trust and can they pass normal due diligence and compliance?

Yet, in its press release, the Department of Transport claim: “as with all contracts, we carefully vetted the company's commercial, technical and financial position in detail before making the award."

Really? This is a company that has no ships, no funds, no identified investors, no employees and no real premises.

It has only one telephone line which goes straight to voicemail and appears to have no European (Belgian) numbers to take bookings or conduct business.

And Seaborne Freight’s website is barely a lick and a promise.

It also operates in conjunction with Albany Shipping which has connections with a variety of dubious off-shore companies and investment funds identified in the Paradise Papers.

What kind of “careful vetting” fails to notice these facts?

What kind of commercial, technical and financial position would a company have to be in to not get awarded a contract by the Dept of Transport?

So, it is beyond belief that Chris Grayling could approve handing over £14 million of taxpayers’ money in these circumstances."

And Chris Grayling is defending the contract today saying that it's "helping British business!" What might help British business is the government opening up the market to those not in the old school tie network. An absolute disgrace.

Would have been better handing the 14 million to the Torpoint Ferry Joint Committee they probably have more experience

And more ferries.