British Party: Port Toll Revenue

Prosperity in Dover should come in the name of prosperity for all Britain.

Port Toll Revenue

Dover's main economic activity is the passage of freight traffic through the Port of Dover. Some of the town's central roads have been dedicated to the constant passage of vehicles, with the result that the town suffers heavily under pollution and urban decline.

A port toll on freight and vehicles passing through all British commercial ports, including the Port of Dover, would bring deserved revenues to the towns and cities in Britain that offer commercial port service. The toll would be £5 for a car, £20 for a commercial van and £50 for each heavy goods vehicle, bus and freight container.

The revenue would be divided between the local councils and the national Treasury. The local councils of Dover are: Dover Town Council, Dover District Council and Kent County Council. The amount of port toll set apart for the national Treasury would be 30%, the remaining part to be divided among the local councils.

A port toll in all British ports would be similar to motorway and tunnel tolls that can be found in many European countries, and which usually exceed the figures proposed for British ports.

Dover's income from a port revenue would be the financial basis for economic prosperity and regeneration in the town and district. The same port revenues on traffic passing through the Channel Tunnel would bring equal prosperity to the neighbouring district of Shepway, and Kent's county treasury would receive incomes from both the Port of Dover and the Channel Tunnel to the benefit of the whole of Kent.

Benefits to the National Treasury

Apart from receiving a 30% share in the port revenues, the national Treasury would further gain from the port tolls through not having to allocate funds to the local councils that base their income on their share of revenue from port traffic.

Adding to this, economic regeneration in Dover district and Shepway would provide work for local people, thus reducing the amount paid by the State on out-of-work related benefits. More local employment would also increase the amount of income-tax paid into the Treasury.

Written by D. Alexander

British Party campaigns for port toll revenues in order to reduce public spending, tax and national debt, on the grounds that those who use British ports should pay for their upkeep and contribute to the revenues of local councils which offer their territory for port services.

British Party: celticbritannia.blogspot.com/2011/09/british-party.html

To put it plainly, the Government has not accepted my Port toll proposal for local County, District and Town funding.
On 19th February 2013, after I requested a specific reply as to whether my proposals had been accepted, the Department for Transport specifically replied informing me that they had been rejected.  

The Department for Transport's concluding phrase was: "The position for ports is slightly different as port users already pay harbour dues whenever they use a port, therefore the Government is not considering an additional toll on harbour users."

Therefore, local community revenues from ports have been rejected by the Government, about three years after I made the proposal. It took the Government three years to tell me that!

There is only one party that campaigns for Prosperity over Britain, this is British Party, and there is no other!
The Government chose to impose Austerity over Britain.
Prosperity has been rejected by the Government!

http://youtu.be/PEq9Qhx1bGI

Dover People's Port

Dover People's Port, or Paper Port?

What is the Dover People's Port? It is a proposal, styled on paper, sometimes referred to as a trust (Dover People's Port Trust). The Dover People's Port was put to paper in 2010 with the intention of presenting it as an alternative to the privatisation plans of Dover Harbour Board (DHB).

Location of the Dover People's Port

The Dover People's Port is not situated anywhere, as it does not exist. The only Port in Dover is the Dover Harbour Board, and consists of two ports, the Eastern Docks and the Western Docks. The seafront between these two docks is also part of the Dover Harbour Board.

Support for Dover People's Port at the Parish Poll

A parish poll held in Dover town on 23 March 2011 saw a staggering 75% of Dover's people declining to take part in the poll, which asked people to choose between the Dover People's Port and the Dover Harbour Board privatisation proposals.

The majority of people in Dover do not accept either proposal, preferring Dover Port to remain a charter port, practically a state asset, with no form of privatisation, neither that proposed by DHB nor the privatisation proposals of the Dover People's Port Trust.

Dover's People and the Port

With 75% of Dover's town residents refusing to vote in the parish poll, the obvious question is: why were the people of Dover not asked in the poll if they want the Port of Dover to remain a State asset? If this question had been asked on the ballot paper, then perhaps the vast majority of people in Dover would have turned out to vote, which would have meant a resounding: No! to the privatisation proposals both of DHB and of the Dover People's Port Trust.

As the obvious question was not asked, the vast majority did not turn up to vote, which equates to a resounding thumbs down to both privatisation proposals concerning the Port of Dover, and as a result, the Dover People's Port project has remained a paper port, its value equal to the paper it is written on.

Article written by D. Alexander

Update:

This Is Kent reported on 17 February 2012 that "BOSSES at the People's Port Trust are stepping up their efforts to take control of the Port of Dover with a massive membership drive.

A total of 55,000 letters are to be sent out to companies and households asking them to join the group for a one-off fee of £10. The People's Port letters will be arriving in the post on March 1st ..."

Three weeks later, 22 March 2012, the Dover Express has reported that only "hundreds respond to People's Port appeal". The 55,000 requests for money were sent not only to Dover's town residents, but all over Dover District, yet even then, the support for this project numbers only hundreds of people.

Hopefully, this dismal response will bring to a final end all illusions on the part of the Dover People's Port Trust to be representative of Dover's community. The privatisation proposal of Dover's port is very unpopular in Dover and in the whole district, whether it is in the form of the Dover Harbour Board proposal, or that of the Dover People's Port Trust.

D. Alexander

Update 2:

On April 20th 2012, managers of Dover People's Port Trust announced that the number of people who have sent in a membership application together with the required £10 is over a thousand, specifying that only 1% of the population of Dover town and district have joined. 

This very low number of members of a widely publicised trust that claims to represent Dover's Community, indicates how shallow their support really is among the communities of Dover town and district. It would be expected the Department for Transport will take note of the public response to Dover People's Port Trust's assertion to be the voice of the local public.

D. Alexander

Update 3:

The Dover People's Port Trust Limited ("DPPT") was created as an industrial and provident society and registered on 23 August 2010 with number 31026R. It is also registered as a charity by HM Revenue & Customs with number XT28458.

Update 4:

On 20th December 2012 the Department for Transport issued a letter to the Chairman of Dover Harbour Board announcing the Dover Harbour Board privatisation bid has been rejected. 

Under the heading Alternative Options, at point 58, the following wording was put: 

One correspondent suggested the creation of a port service toll to fund developments at ports, and to provide funding for the local authorities in which ports were based as well as an income stream for central Government.  The levy would be £50 a vehicle.   

In fact, the proposed levy is £5 per car and £50 per heavy goods vehicle.

The third paragraph in the letter I received from the Department for Transport, written 20th December 2012, states: The (Decision) Minister concluded that the transfer scheme proposed would not ensure a sufficient level of enduring community participation in the port. 

He also concluded that so far as the Board made the application in order to be able to obtain the additional finance necessary to undertake the proposed redevelopment of the Western Docks, there were other options available to secure that development. 

Could one of the other options indicated by the Decision Minister be the one I proposed, and that was mentioned in point 58 of the Decision Minister's reply to Dover Harbour Board?  

D. Alexander Kent, of Kentish origin.

Read on: Dover Port privatisation, how unpopular is the idea of privatising Dover's port?

doverkent.blogspot.com/2012/01/dover-port-privatisation.html

Read also about a rail link to Dover Port:
celticbritannia.blogspot.com/2011/11/british-party-rail-link-to-dover-port.html

What do you think of a port toll for Dover's prosperity?
celticbritannia.blogspot.com/2011/11/british-party-port-toll-revenue.html