Liverpool Cruises

[Kelvin Davies]

Time for the Southampton crowd to begin the ritual wailing and gnashing of teeth!
The first cruise to start from Liverpool, since it was granted permission 6 days ago for "Turn around cruises", is about to leave.
At 16:00 BST today, Ocean Countess will begin a cruise from Liverpool to the Norwegian fjords:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-18246361
Kelvin

[Dave Forbes]

All those people who do not realise that they can start their cruises from several ports in the UK now , or just ignore them , yet fly out to the MED on four hour flights to join a ship. Imagine having to get to the airport 3 hours before your flight in hot airports awaiting your call to join the plane , when you can get someone to drive you to your chosen British port to embark your ship. Good for Liverpool.

[ChasB46]

Hi Kelvin, apparently Liverpool will be breaking the law if the cruise goes ahead. Reason 1. no money paid back 2. the European Commission have not given the go ahead. We will see what "powers" our MPs and MEPs possess, and if two fingers to the European Competition Commission is all it takes.

[BobS]

There may be (I hope) even more ritual wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Southampton crowd - and, with a bit of luck, from the Dover lot, too - if/when plans for a new cruise terminal at Greenwich come to fruition.

[Allan RO]

Hi Guys

Bloody marvellous organisation to get a cruise up an running withing 6 days, what a feat of advertising and marketing..........methinks someting stinks here

Allan

[Ship's Cat]

Hi Guys

Bloody marvellous organisation to get a cruise up an running withing 6 days, what a feat of advertising and marketing..........methinks someting stinks here

Allan

Yes. As if it (the cruise from Liverpool) was agreed all along and they knew they'd get approval.

Once Liverpool have paid back ALL public money and there is a level playing field, then good luck to them. Until then I think that Southampton and other ports are entitled to complain.

[polsteam]

Hi Kelvin, apparently Liverpool will be breaking the law if the cruise goes ahead. Reason 1. no money paid back 2. the European Commission have not given the go ahead. We will see what "powers" our MPs and MEPs possess, and if two fingers to the European Competition Commission is all it takes.

I do not understand the above.  Please, be so kind as to explain in more detail...
Is the UK an independent country or a province of EU ?...

Is EC in position to decide (over national governments), which port may be turnaround cruise port and which may be not ?...  If EC was really given such a power, than it is so wrong, so much wrong !


"I have fought hard for turnaround status for our city, because I know how important it is - for our economy, for our tourism offer and for our unrivalled reputation as a major maritime city. I'm delighted that the hard work has paid off and the momentous day when Liverpool welcomes its first turnaround cruise is finally here."

I am interested - with whom did he fight?... against market perception and attitudes of cruise lines?... or against formal obstacles and rules?...
what rules may prevent a port from being a turnaround port (if only it has sufficient infrastructure to be convenient for passengers and chosen by a cruise line) ?...

[davidships]

There may be (I hope) even more ritual wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Southampton crowd - and, with a bit of luck, from the Dover lot, too - if/when plans for a new cruise terminal at Greenwich come to fruition.

Why?  Is public money involved?

[BobS]

I neither know nor care whether there is public money involved or not. Nor do I give a hoot about the politics. I just want to see more cruise ships coming to the London River.

[davidships]

That's good, Bob.
We agree.

[Kelvin Davies]

There we are then; as predicted!
May I say that talk from the Southampton mob of repaying public money is a bit rich.
Has anybody looked at how much Joe Taxpayer has stumped up for the rail improvements that will allow Southampton to shift more cargo, particularly containers, in and out of the port? The costs are huge and they are not restricted to the lowering of the line through the tunnel, they have also had to build more capacity into the system between Southampton and Basingstoke in order to improve the capacity on the route from Southampton to the midlands.
Now stop it and settle down!

Chas; don't believe all you read in the Daily Echo!
Allan; they agreed to repay the money back in February so it wasn't that swift. Not only that but the Ocean Countess voyage was announced in the local press on 3rd February! Incidentally, cruise ships have previously been using Langton Dock, the only major change here is the use of the river terminal.
PS for Bob; Greenwich would seem to be an ideal situation for cruises. I hope you get the more interesting ships, rather than the floating blocks of flats that infest Southampton!

[ChasB46]

Sorry Kelvin, not the Echo but written statement from Minister/Dept. of Transport to Commons on 22nd May. "Final removal of the grant condition by DCLG will be dependent on securing State Aid clearance from the European Commission, which will now be sought. The Department will assist in that process."

[Allan RO]

Hi Polsteam

In answer to your query.  Yes of course we are a province of the EU, that's why they make virtually all our rules and the infernal unelected European Court of Human Rights rides roughshod over our own laws -  we can't even deport terrotists because it infringes their human rights !! Just as Poland is now a province of the EU, which is one of the reasons why the shipyards in Gdynia and Szczecin closed down.  At least neither of us are suffering directly at the hands of the Euro.....yet.


Hi Kelvin

Yep...they promised to pay the money back........but when will it be paid ?   I suppose when they have made enough from cruises to be able to affort to.

Allan  

[polsteam]

Just as Poland is now a province of the EU, which is one of the reasons why the shipyards in Gdynia and Szczecin closed down.  At least neither of us are suffering directly at the hands of the Euro.....yet.

I fully agree with your interpretation and diagnose regarding Polish yards in Gdynia and Szczecin... they "had" to be closed down, just because the powers (mainly Germany and France) needed it and forced it in conspiracy because (still having Far East competition on their backs) they wanted at least to ease competition within Europe by eliminating Polish yards...
now Croatian yards are forced to be closed down or to be sold to unknown future for a dime...
it is important to emphasize here, that French and German yards STILL keep getting public support (funds), while the two mentioned Polish yards were punished with forced closing down just because of the same "crime" (getting public support)... 

[BobS]

In Comecon days Polish yards were a long way from being Europe's most efficient but they were among the very cheapest. That - particularly the 'cheapest' part - all started to change when Poland joined the EU, though they did have a competitive edge for a while, until costs started to catch up.
If living standards in Poland in general have worsened since joining the EU, then you have my sympathy, Polsteam. Otherwise you and Allan will just have to put down the shrinkage of the Polish shipbuilding industry as part of the cost of the benefits (if there have been any) of EU membership.
It's no use bleating about the Germans and French. Their shipbuilding industries have been decimated, too, in recent decades, despite all their 'back door' subsidies.
But what's all this got to do with cruises from Liverpool and Southampton?