Seabourne Freight

As many of us have heard, the contract between HMG and Seabourne has been cancelled.
inews.co.uk/news/brexit/seabour … -contract/

And this how Mr Grayling currently appears on Wikipedia:
“Christopher Stephen Grayling (born 1 April 1962) is a British Conservative Party politician and author serving as the Secretary of State for Transport since July 2016,…
…Leader of the House of Commons and the Lord President of the Council between 2015 and 2016. He is the most incompetent man alive.”

Daresay someone will tidy up the last bit soon!

Chris grayling is ■■■■■■■ clueless.

Another chapter in the Brexit farce.

All this farce is highlighting to me is we have people making decisions about subjects that they have absolutely no experience in .
It has also focused the spotlight on the local council who have mismanaged two very valuable assets. The port of Ramsgate and the airport at Manston . Both are laying dormant and neglected while the Council and the County Council sit with their thumbs up their bums and minds in neutral.

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

Ok lets look at this a different way.

The government awarded a total of £107m, most of that, (£94m,) was awarded to well established ferry companies.

Seabourne would only have got the money if they had actually provided a ferry service, so no money has been given to a company without ferries.

Maybe they took a punt on Seabourne because if they had provided a ferry service it would have brought back into operation another cross channel ferry port, providing an alternative to Dover and jobs in an area not known for its wealth employment opportunities. It is also the closest port to Manston the place they’re planning to hold many of the trucks if there are problems.

As for Seabourne, it appears at the time of being told they could have the money they were actually linked to a company that does operate, charter and manage ships, although none of them seem to be ferries, now they’re not linked with them, the offer has been pulled.

grumpyken52:
It has also focused the spotlight on the local council who have mismanaged two very valuable assets. The port of Ramsgate and the airport at Manston . Both are laying dormant and neglected while the Council and the County Council sit with their thumbs up their bums and minds in neutral.

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

Happened at Alconbury, there was network rail going to put new rail infastructre to Alconbury then up to felixstowe, Air frieght diverted from Heathrow and Gatwick so enabling more passenger flights in, the Upgrade A1 and A14 all were green lighted, a few locals and councilors said what about the noise, not thinking of the millions of pounds of income jobs and tax revenues, They went crying to fatty two jags, who advised it wasn’t a good plan due to the carbon footprint etc, all plans for rejected, councilors happy, area suffers… And they wonder why people hate local councils…

biggriffin:

grumpyken52:
It has also focused the spotlight on the local council who have mismanaged two very valuable assets. The port of Ramsgate and the airport at Manston . Both are laying dormant and neglected while the Council and the County Council sit with their thumbs up their bums and minds in neutral.

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

Happened at Alconbury, there was network rail going to put new rail infastructre to Alconbury then up to felixstowe, Air frieght diverted from Heathrow and Gatwick so enabling more passenger flights in, the Upgrade A1 and A14 all were green lighted, a few locals and councilors said what about the noise, not thinking of the millions of pounds of income jobs and tax revenues, They went crying to fatty two jags, who advised it wasn’t a good plan due to the carbon footprint etc, all plans for rejected, councilors happy, area suffers… And they wonder why people hate local councils…

Then within a couple of years all the locals are up in arms because of budget cuts because revenues cannot keep up with local needs . The problem seems to be it’s always short term projects because political parties cannot do long term planning .

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

grumpyken52:

biggriffin:

grumpyken52:
It has also focused the spotlight on the local council who have mismanaged two very valuable assets. The port of Ramsgate and the airport at Manston . Both are laying dormant and neglected while the Council and the County Council sit with their thumbs up their bums and minds in neutral.

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

Happened at Alconbury, there was network rail going to put new rail infastructre to Alconbury then up to felixstowe, Air frieght diverted from Heathrow and Gatwick so enabling more passenger flights in, the Upgrade A1 and A14 all were green lighted, a few locals and councilors said what about the noise, not thinking of the millions of pounds of income jobs and tax revenues, They went crying to fatty two jags, who advised it wasn’t a good plan due to the carbon footprint etc, all plans for rejected, councilors happy, area suffers… And they wonder why people hate local councils…

Then within a couple of years all the locals are up in arms because of budget cuts because revenues cannot keep up with local needs . The problem seems to be it’s always short term projects because political parties cannot do long term planning .

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

If only there was some sort of political system where the …ummm…Commissioners?..were not dependent on local elections and so could plan for the longer term?
To reflect political leanings, they may be appointed by the elected Government(s) and their schemes would still need to be passed by the elected representatives of the people?
Hhmmm.

But they did have ships.

Feel free to count them.

asl.ie/fleet/

Seaborne freight only had the contract due to arklow backing them.
I suspect Seaborne was a subsidiary of Arklows made up with just to do this and keep Arklows name out of it. Soon as arklow pulled out due to the media hysteria the deal ended.

Now you could argue why wasn’t Arklows involved made public then there would of been no issue. Well the contract had a clause in it, so Chris couldn’t say who was backing Seaborne freight.

So media hysteria wins again… Yay.

Just another possibility, the Irish government had some sort of deal to get Arklow to pull out of the contract ■■?

Pennineman:
Just another possibility, the Irish government had some sort of deal to get Arklow to pull out of the contract ■■?

Its possible might explain why they was using Seaborne freight.

Regardless though isn’t easier to just blame Chris grayling.■■
Who BTW would of been crucified if he broke the confidentiality agreement in the contract just to appease the media dogs.

Am I the ONLY person who had NEVER read ANYTHING about ARKLOW SHIPPING being a backer of SEABORNE before the news that they had pulled out of a BREXIT ferry deal was published?

Maybe I just missed not reading anything about this over the last few months. If not then was it a secret only known to themselves and the Government until the
pull out news was made public?

japhfred:
Am I the ONLY person who had NEVER read ANYTHING about ARKLOW SHIPPING being a backer of SEABORNE before the news that they had pulled out of a BREXIT ferry deal was published?

Maybe I just missed not reading anything about this over the last few months. If not then was it a secret only known to themselves and the Government until the
pull out news was made public?

No. You’re not the only one.
And is there any statement anywhere saying:
“Seabourne Freight have a backer, but we can’t reveal their name.” ?
Anyone?

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

adam277:
But they did have ships.

Feel free to count them.

asl.ie/fleet/

Seaborne freight only had the contract due to arklow backing them.
I suspect Seaborne was a subsidiary of Arklows made up with just to do this and keep Arklows name out of it. Soon as arklow pulled out due to the media hysteria the deal ended.

Now you could argue why wasn’t Arklows involved made public then there would of been no issue. Well the contract had a clause in it, so Chris couldn’t say who was backing Seaborne freight.

So media hysteria wins again… Yay.

I counted how many ferries Arklow have.
Didn`t take very long, they have none.
Ferries can be chartered in, but on what time scale? The same questions about getting ferries apply to Arklow as to any other hirer: where and when can they get a ferry?

If there was a “no publicity” clause in the contract it was (former BBC news producer) Chris Grayling who signed it. What were Seabourne/Grayling trying to hide?
It is the job of the Fourth Estate to examine and question Government. If an ex-media worker who has risen to become a minister, and has all the support of those around him, couldnt see how this would look, then what is he apart from incompetent? "Media hysteria"? If a Minister signs up a start up company then he should say "Look, its a long shot, but its worth a punt" and stand by it. Its his choice and up to him to defend his position. If he tied his own hands with confidentiality clauses HE is to blame.
The media are doing their job, and if they see a company has it`s terms and conditions copied from a takeaway menu, who can blame them for taking the mickey? Is that hysteria?
And proposing a ferry port that needs maybe months of dredging before any operations could take place? Grayling, at the very least jumped the gun: maybe saying “Further talks are ongonig, but are in the early stages, and no details yet”? But maybe that would have been (justifiably) criticised as being too insubstantial, too little, too late.

muckles:
Seabourne would only have got the money if they had actually provided a ferry service, so no money has been given to a company without ferries

That is true. Some money may have been expended on chasing this project, but that is a just a normal cost. No great financial loss, tis true.

No great financial loss at the end of the day.
A startup with no shipping experience, backed by a shipper with no ferries, and no viable port.
A minister trying to make a speculative contract spin-up into something more substantial?
Looks like it to me. And the media did their job of letting us know.

I seem to recall the government chartered ships at short notice when the Falklands war took place, this included car ferries.

waddy640:
I seem to recall the government chartered ships at short notice when the Falklands war took place, this included car ferries.

Do you think that the surprise invasion of the Falklands, is similar to the current situation, following a vote nearly 3 years ago? Half of the civilian ships used were requisitioned, not chartered. Requisitioning the vessels meant they could escape ongoing contracts.
It appears all the Ro-Ros were STUFT, ships taken up from trade.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_n … from_trade

Franglais:

waddy640:
I seem to recall the government chartered ships at short notice when the Falklands war took place, this included car ferries.

Do you think that the surprise invasion of the Falklands, is similar to the current situation, following a vote nearly 3 years ago? Half of the civilian ships used were requisitioned, not chartered. Requisitioning the vessels meant they could escape ongoing contracts.
It appears all the Ro-Ros were STUFT, ships taken up from trade.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_n … from_trade

I was simply making the point that these things can be found when required, of course there is no comparison with the two issues, one was far better organised than the present farce.

Franglais:
I counted how many ferries Arklow have. Didn`t take very long, they have none.

And even if they do own everything on their web site, I’m pretty sure they’d have a small problem - someone forgot to put a door in the front as can’t find any which aren’t top loading. Could be interesting loading a lot of trucks via a crane, what could possibly go wrong, as long as the 5th wheel holds on as gets picked up.

Looking at the pics of Ramsgate harbour, I think they might have a bigger problem that it appears to be falling apart. Not really been used since 2013 so 5 years of rot set in, just be careful where you walk as there might be a few holes in the gangplank (no, I have no idea about technical names). But there is a butty van that comes 3x a week so we’re sorted on the catering front, err…

(Could I suggest a better option would be Brighton or Morecambe even)?

Pennineman:
Just another possibility, the Irish government had some sort of deal to get Arklow to pull out of the contract ■■?

I’ve only read of one other person insinuating this,Jacob Rees Mogg. Why would the Irish government encourage a company to pull out of providing extra capacity on cross channel routes?
The fact of the matter is it would more beneficial to traffic from Ireland going to the continent via landbridge having another route to choose from so I dare say that the Irish government would be encouraging rather than dissuading ASL involvement.
As for the notion of Seaborne being a subsidiary of ASL, I wouldn’t put a weeks wages on a bet that it wasn’t but I seriously doubt it. have any of the personnel involved in Seaborne any connection to ASL? I would imagine a parent company would have a senior figure involved in a subsidiary to protect their interests. ASL is one of the leading European company’s in bulk shipping and has been operating since 1966, so I suspect there is more to their pulling out than is being made public. It might be the case that ASL’s involvement was to provide experience and advice to Seaborne.

^^^^
Seems to make sense.
The Irish have a clear interest to provide an easy route through the UK, not hinder it. J.R-M is showing about as much logic as he always does.