ShipSpotting.com Forum
Shipspotters all over the world => Shipping News and information => Topic started by: Kelvin Davies on May 29, 2012, 09:37:35 AM
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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. :-X
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.
-
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) ?...
-
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?
-
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.
-
That's good, Bob.
We agree.
-
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!
-
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."
-
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
-
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)...
-
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?
-
Hi Bob
Very simple, subsidies, legal, illegal or ignored. One rule for one, one rule for another.
I dont think I ever said Polish yards were particularly efficient but they could turn out a box boat or a car carrier as quickly as anyone else, and also specialist chemical tankers with stainless steel tanks and fittings with very few worldwide builders. The subsidies the yards received kept thousands in work. These people are presumably no longer in work, either in Poland - or anywhere else in Europe where they have become economic migrants in search of work. So the government either pays subsidies to keep them in work and produce someting worthwhile, or they sit on their backsides with no work and the government still has to pay out, but nothing is produced. Logic ? I think not.
So the turnround terminal built with subsidies (not yet paid back) may reduce by a small amount the unemployment in Scouseland, but if it grows, as is the intention, then Southampton may well lose out and jobs will be lost from terminals not built with the aid of subsidies - so where is the fairness in that ?
Allan
-
Judging by their cars' licenceplates most of these workers are now involved in the construction of the Rotterdam Maasvlakte extension....and a bit more over here !
And who'll be involved in the construction of this Liverpool cruise terminal ?
Brgds,
Robert.
;D
-
Allan,
Stop bleating about subsidies not yet repaid.
As the government & Liverpool City Council have agreed a repayment schedule, this is now a loan.
When you get a mortgage for your house, the bank allow you full use of the house even while you are still repaying the loan!
Incidentally, the amount to be repaid etc was determined by an independent firm of consultants employed by the government, so the politicians were kept out of it.
Now; who is going to answer my question re the huge costs for upgrading the railway infrastructure to allow improvements to Southampton container movements?
-
Hi Kelvin,As Liverpool paying by instalments.. then its
-
Before or in case we start getting carried away with this "get it off the roads onto rail" thing, it should be borne in mind that doubling the amount of freight currently carried by rail would make less than a one percent reduction in the number of truck journeys on the roads.
-
Hi Bob
I can't wait to see the gridlock on the A13 when Thames Gateway is fully operational, all those Cobelfret trucks and 40' containers........methinks not a place to go.
Allan
-
Allan,
I doubt that it will make enough difference for anyone to notice!
Anyway, there is talk about a new, outer, London Orbital motorway, with a river crossing in Gravesend Reach.
It is possible, though, that with the Gateway open and the economy still in recession, you'll find the M271 a lot quieter as Southampton loses box traffic to the new terminal that is nearer the capital!
BTW: I took a cruise from So'ton last month. Getting down there to catch the boat was the least hassle-free bit of the trip. I disembarked in Greenock and took the train home. No bother!
The next cruise is from Dover (just down the road) and, hopefully, the one after that will be from the new termnal at Greenwich - right on my doorstep.
I am sure Scousers, Mancunians and many people from North of Watford Gap will be welcoming the new Liddypool cruise terminal and will be giving not a jot about how it was financed.
Cheers
Bob
-
Bob
You've probably hit the nail on the head, no one really gives a stuff..... except the poor sods that will be losing their jobs.
And one other thought too, London Gateway may be nearer the capital, but as London is a financial and service centre, I doubt many boxes are actually destined there - it is simply an obstacle that has to be navigated around.
Allan
-
With around 8 million people living in greater London, all wanting to buy Chinese-made computers, electronic gear and miscellaneous cheap junk from Pound Shops, it is inevitable that a considerable proportion of import boxes are heading for the capital. With all these people, even though they mostly work in banks, shops and offices, London also produces a considerable proportion of what is one of Britains biggest exports in terms of weight - recyclable waste (especially clapped-out Chinese-made computers and the cardboard boxes they originally came in).