Dibden Bay back on the port's agenda? (From Daily Echo)

New Forest East MP Julian Lewis told the Daily Echo: “It’s a pity there isn’t an organisation like Alcoholics Anonymous for people obsessed with building unnecessary container ports in wholly inappropriate places. "

or one for out of touch politicans who think they know best. if you stop this the docks will just move elsewhere crippling the economy, are you that blinkered.

Since they've already desecrated the mud flats and built a marina they may as well go the whole hog.

There's very little wildlife to displace and the way I see it building a port there will enhance Southampton's prospects, create (local) jobs and may have other side spins, for example the installation of a public railway service to the waterside for us commuters would be handy.

Security word "user-hike" - nicely ironic given I travel to Salisbury every day.

If, instead of converting docks into yachting marinas, as a money-grabbing exercise, ABP had more foresight as to their needs as a port, there would be no need to build on a green field site.

IF (IF) they get planning permission, I forecast that, with the draught of the even bigger container ships currently on line, it will be found that Dibden Bay is unsuitable and, surprise! surprise! it is changed into another yachting marina!

Hang on a minute!

Isn't this the same company who announced that increased shipping charges imposed by the Government and soon to come into force would ruin the port and that shipping companies would go elsewhere...(see The Daily Echo 10th June 2009)

And yet they need to expand the port to increase capacity!

Surely there is some sort of paradox here, or am I missing something?!

Could someone who has read the whole article please advise me here. Does the full article confirm that ABP has DEFINATELY confirmed it will resurrect plans to develop Dibden Bay by a given date, or, has the company successfully argued against this 1950's reclaimed land, (which has always been set aside for future Port development) being formally incorporated within the New Forest National Park?
I think it may well be the latter and this would enable ABP to keep their options open when the recession lifts.
Personally I do not see any likehood of any development on Dibden Bay in the immediate future but, should this ever occur at a future date, I do hope that the good people of the Waterside would look at both sides of the argument. Perhaps the local MP, Julian Lewis will make better use of his Arts doctorate and take a more philosophical approach to the different arguments on this issue, which there are, rather than follow a very narrow minded path, as in the past.

To be honest, this could be an environmental disaster, but if the plan includes levelling Marchwood, it has to be a good thing for Hampshire as a whole.
Shame the plan doesn't extend as far as flattening Totton also.

Beware of mission creep...could get as far as Millbrook!

Security word: make-date!!!

Ben Doone wrote:
Could someone who has read the whole article please advise me here. Does the full article confirm that ABP has DEFINATELY confirmed it will resurrect plans to develop Dibden Bay by a given date, or, has the company successfully argued against this 1950's reclaimed land, (which has always been set aside for future Port development) being formally incorporated within the New Forest National Park?
I think it may well be the latter and this would enable ABP to keep their options open when the recession lifts.
Personally I do not see any likehood of any development on Dibden Bay in the immediate future but, should this ever occur at a future date, I do hope that the good people of the Waterside would look at both sides of the argument. Perhaps the local MP, Julian Lewis will make better use of his Arts doctorate and take a more philosophical approach to the different arguments on this issue, which there are, rather than follow a very narrow minded path, as in the past.

i dont know if this helps you, but the mud flats and banks are now protected, under the fisheries bass nursery and breeding ground.

The area concerned was virtually created by ABP, but how much of it will be used, can we have a decent map of the project? I would support it if it promised to create jobs and prosperity, BUT only if it was properly planned, I cannot see them getting it right for a moment, the current transport infrastructure couldn't take it and the NIMBYS would defeat every effort to build a decent road or rail system.

A port expansion is needed to guarantee jobs and prosperity. The trade will go either to Felixstowe or Europort if it doesn't come to Southampton. SCT has really advantages over those not least the double time, greater draught and better infrastructure.

But I suppose if it doesn't go ahead we''ll have some nice mud flats for frogs and birds.

No wonder this country is going down the pan.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
The area concerned was virtually created by ABP, but how much of it will be used, can we have a decent map of the project? I would support it if it promised to create jobs and prosperity, BUT only if it was properly planned, I cannot see them getting it right for a moment, the current transport infrastructure couldn't take it and the NIMBYS would defeat every effort to build a decent road or rail system.

plans like your asking for only tell you how many jobs it will create over all, that will include the jobs building it, what would be important would be how many jobs will there after it is finished and up and runnning, another thing they dont like to talk about is how many jobs would be lost. seen it to many times now, where the say (this is an example) it will create 1000 jobs though the board, but when completed the jobs that are there is only 200, then the next thing you hear is other people losing there jobs has a knock effect because this was done.its the hiden jobs that people dont relize that are all ready there, example again those mud flats contain the biggest black claims beds in europe, you not just killing a few fishermen jobs here, you will also kill the jobs down the line.ie people like lucus who cleans those shellfish so they are safe for eatting, then theres the driving who gets them out to the salers and storage the market wholesales, then theres the people who helps to run those boats and companys that supply the fuel the maintaince for that boat ect ect ect and before you relize it theres a thoasand jobs gone for ever, and all for what 200 jobs. the environmental damage that the docks have done over the years is great and it now sits on a knife edge. all those small life forms dont get counted and what job they do in a river, to small off a number and they all start dieing and you need them in the river or the river will begin to smell and become unsafe to swim in and the effects will go right down into the solent.
look up in history why parilament had to stop. a bad smell coming from the river thames. this was all down to river being over contaminated and the lost off mud flats due to reclaiming and dredging, they had lost all the living things in the river. and that was over 150 years ago, and about 20 years the first salmon returned back to the river thames after 300 years being absent from the river.

southy, a great diatribe despite the errors,

I did say it had to be properly planned, taking in all of the environmental concerns, I get fed up with uninformed tree huggers who really have no proof of possible damage, Mother Nature has a fascinating way of adapting to changes, something victorian thinkers cannot handle. The Thames example is a good pointer, it was only when the authorities recognised the problem and reacted to it that the chance to repopulate occured. It can be done. As you say, it will create a number of permanent jobs, with the bonus of plenty of temporary work, that in itself will bolster the economy, ask any jobless person what is their opinion?

southy, a great diatribe despite the errors,

I did say it had to be properly planned, taking in all of the environmental concerns, I get fed up with uninformed tree huggers who really have no proof of possible damage, Mother Nature has a fascinating way of adapting to changes, something victorian thinkers cannot handle. The Thames example is a good pointer, it was only when the authorities recognised the problem and reacted to it that the chance to repopulate occured. It can be done. As you say, it will create a number of permanent jobs, with the bonus of plenty of temporary work, that in itself will bolster the economy, ask any jobless person what is their opinion?

I would love to hear from the union leaders who tried to prevent workers from losing their jobs at the present container terminal at southampton docks.The JOBS WERE LOST because there was no hope, of winning any trade from other ports.All UK ports were fighting to stay viable businesses, we in southampton were strugling to survive!.Can we hear the facts from a union or workers view point, the real truth!.

i agree with you on the tree huggers, they are a pain in the rear. but there is more marine life on that side off the river, than there is on weston shore side.
but the number off jobs it will make in the long run will be lest than the jobs that would be lost. and it will destroy one economy just to make another. southampton container port will only become a feeder container port in the end any way. if they want to stay near top then they will need to move the container port down to say like calshot or gosport.

I'm glad to see this back on the agenda. Road and rail infrastructure improvements were part of the original plan and were adequate for port usage. There is alrady a rail spur running into the military port next door and it only generates a couple of trains a day. Question for Southy - when the former Dibden Bay was filled in this must have totally destroyed the marine ecology all the way across to the western docks - yet now it is not only back and thriving but is apparently the most important area in the world! Therefore can we conclude that the best way to protect black clams and other molluscs is to build another deepwater quay?

Good news

Get on and build it

The area needs sustainable jobs a helluva lot more than it needs mudflats that no one can access anyway.

BUILD IT.

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
I'm glad to see this back on the agenda. Road and rail infrastructure improvements were part of the original plan and were adequate for port usage. There is alrady a rail spur running into the military port next door and it only generates a couple of trains a day. Question for Southy - when the former Dibden Bay was filled in this must have totally destroyed the marine ecology all the way across to the western docks - yet now it is not only back and thriving but is apparently the most important area in the world! Therefore can we conclude that the best way to protect black clams and other molluscs is to build another deepwater quay?

Andy
A perceptive point. As I undersatnd it the existing port covers approx 750 acres all reclaimed since the 1840's from the sea, similar in size to Dibden Bay. The second stage of reclaimation ie the Western Docks was undertaken in the late 1920's/early 1930's in trading conditions far worse than today. Arguably this development stimulated the growth of Southampton and its hinterland, just as much as development of the Esso Refinery did to the Waterside in the 1950/60's.
Imagine if Dr Lewis and his team had been around then. I suspect very few people posting on this forum would be here now. Reminds me of all the fuss about the Winchester & Newbury By Pass.
Finally I am fascinated to learn from Southy that the area has such a thriving commercial fishing community. Wasn't Lucus a character in one of Lennie Henry's comedy skits?

Andy Locks Heath wrote:
I'm glad to see this back on the agenda. Road and rail infrastructure improvements were part of the original plan and were adequate for port usage. There is alrady a rail spur running into the military port next door and it only generates a couple of trains a day. Question for Southy - when the former Dibden Bay was filled in this must have totally destroyed the marine ecology all the way across to the western docks - yet now it is not only back and thriving but is apparently the most important area in the world! Therefore can we conclude that the best way to protect black clams and other molluscs is to build another deepwater quay?

andy when they reclaim this land, they reclaimed the upper salt marsh the mud flats was left alone. how they reclaim this land was in four stages the first stage was to dump rumble the form a dam a round the first part they made two drying pans like this, a wooden jetty was built running out to deep water out on to the edge of the gimbles banks the sludge barge would pull along side the jetty and pump the sludge in the pan nearest to soild land the silt would sit on the bottom and tthe over flow off water would flow into the next pan. then the water over flow from this would drop down though a drain well ( this drain well had its sides built up to just under the level off the retaining wall bank) whitch the end off the pipe had a gravel bank over it and the water was allowed to flow out very slowly, when the first pan was filled with silt and started to go dry and harden off, a lot off this was dug out to build the next 2 drying pans, along the next to they also used concrete barges to help to retain the man made banks in place, and they built the second wooden jetty, some off this drying out mud was dug out and dump between the the first 2 pans and marchwood miltry camp, with the kind permission of veals farm, who owns the rights to that part down to the spring tide high water mark, then 2 more pans as done this is the final 2 drying pans, those 2 was later sold to make for the marina. thats basicly it was done andy very little silt endded up in the river.
but now if they build a quay side there that would mean dredging out a very large mud flats and banks. back in the 90's when they got the marco polo dredger up here that dredging killed alot off shellfish, ragworms, lugworms, wire and white worms shirps prawns the salmon and sea trout numbers drop very fast, plus it left slit right up to the iron bridge killing the upper tidal meadows ( and theres still a lot off places where the ground still has not recovered from. winkles still have not returned back up has far has the railway bridges yet, black mussels have only return to the causeways bridges in the last few years, the only way you can protect black claims is to leave the bank a lone they will only grow at a narrow depth ban to between low water neaps and just above a low water spring tide, deep water quay will kill them, thats why there is none along southampton docks apart from the few on mayflower tidal bank.
andy not the world just europe. most marine life is in the top 5 meters off water, after this it starts to get less. need to remember the river around here are what is know has coloured rivers so any sun light will not go has deep in to the water, unlike say the down in cornwall. where a lot off the rivers down there are class has clear water.

the port will happen,its jusy a question of when,if it was no go it would have been protected by now.

thesaint wrote:
the port will happen,its jusy a question of when,if it was no go it would have been protected by now.

the mud flats are protected, under the fishery, its a bass nursery, feeding ground.

What do we need more of? Jobs or fish?

Jobs its is.

BUILD IT.

Nothing to say wrote:
What do we need more of? Jobs or fish? Jobs its is. BUILD IT.

Jobs?

IF it were built and IF it was eventually a container port and not, as I suspect, another yacht marina, with modern technology and automation, precious few long-term jobs would be created, just short-term during the building.

Not so many jobs at the refinery for that very reason!

With that in mind, I'll settle for fish!

We have to eat!

southy wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote: I'm glad to see this back on the agenda. Road and rail infrastructure improvements were part of the original plan and were adequate for port usage. There is alrady a rail spur running into the military port next door and it only generates a couple of trains a day. Question for Southy - when the former Dibden Bay was filled in this must have totally destroyed the marine ecology all the way across to the western docks - yet now it is not only back and thriving but is apparently the most important area in the world! Therefore can we conclude that the best way to protect black clams and other molluscs is to build another deepwater quay?

andy when they reclaim this land, they reclaimed the upper salt marsh the mud flats was left alone. how they reclaim this land was in four stages the first stage was to dump rumble the form a dam a round the first part they made two drying pans like this, a wooden jetty was built running out to deep water out on to the edge of the gimbles banks the sludge barge would pull along side the jetty and pump the sludge in the pan nearest to soild land the silt would sit on the bottom and tthe over flow off water would flow into the next pan. then the water over flow from this would drop down though a drain well ( this drain well had its sides built up to just under the level off the retaining wall bank) whitch the end off the pipe had a gravel bank over it and the water was allowed to flow out very slowly, when the first pan was filled with silt and started to go dry and harden off, a lot off this was dug out to build the next 2 drying pans, along the next to they also used concrete barges to help to retain the man made banks in place, and they built the second wooden jetty, some off this drying out mud was dug out and dump between the the first 2 pans and marchwood miltry camp, with the kind permission of veals farm, who owns the rights to that part down to the spring tide high water mark, then 2 more pans as done this is the final 2 drying pans, those 2 was later sold to make for the marina. thats basicly it was done andy very little silt endded up in the river. but now if they build a quay side there that would mean dredging out a very large mud flats and banks. back in the 90's when they got the marco polo dredger up here that dredging killed alot off shellfish, ragworms, lugworms, wire and white worms shirps prawns the salmon and sea trout numbers drop very fast, plus it left slit right up to the iron bridge killing the upper tidal meadows ( and theres still a lot off places where the ground still has not recovered from. winkles still have not returned back up has far has the railway bridges yet, black mussels have only return to the causeways bridges in the last few years, the only way you can protect black claims is to leave the bank a lone they will only grow at a narrow depth ban to between low water neaps and just above a low water spring tide, deep water quay will kill them, thats why there is none along southampton docks apart from the few on mayflower tidal bank. andy not the world just europe. most marine life is in the top 5 meters off water, after this it starts to get less. need to remember the river around here are what is know has coloured rivers so any sun light will not go has deep in to the water, unlike say the down in cornwall. where a lot off the rivers down there are class has clear water.

ENOUGH ALREADY! You seriously need to get out more

Linesman wrote:

Nothing to say wrote: What do we need more of? Jobs or fish? Jobs its is. BUILD IT.

Jobs? IF it were built and IF it was eventually a container port and not, as I suspect, another yacht marina, with modern technology and automation, precious few long-term jobs would be created, just short-term during the building. Not so many jobs at the refinery for that very reason! With that in mind, I'll settle for fish! We have to eat!

I agree with NTS Build the thing asap and I don't like fish food anyway. You're from Fareham so what do you care It won't affect you not unless you are a relative of that nutter southy from redbridge the land reclaim and black clam expert

Linesman wrote:

Nothing to say wrote: What do we need more of? Jobs or fish? Jobs its is. BUILD IT.

Jobs? IF it were built and IF it was eventually a container port and not, as I suspect, another yacht marina, with modern technology and automation, precious few long-term jobs would be created, just short-term during the building. Not so many jobs at the refinery for that very reason! With that in mind, I'll settle for fish! We have to eat!

Linesman
I very much doubt that ABP would countenance construction of another Marina in close proximity to the land they own at Dibden Bay. The company's decision to allow the building of Hythe Marina, to be inhabited by well heeled and well connected out of towners, who then complained about the development of the neighbouring in-fill area, was a major factor in the defeat of the Dibden Bay proposal.
Accept the point you make on automation but there are a surprising amount of support workers who earn a livehood out of ports, just like there are with car factories and their service providers. Oil terminals are another example.How many people do you think actually work at Fawley and how many ancillary businesses would fail if Fawley wasn't there? Far more than you are suggesting, I warrant.

Soton Spanky wrote:
A port expansion is needed to guarantee jobs and prosperity. The trade will go either to Felixstowe or Europort if it doesn't come to Southampton. SCT has really advantages over those not least the double time, greater draught and better infrastructure. But I suppose if it doesn't go ahead we''ll have some nice mud flats for frogs and birds. No wonder this country is going down the pan.

More like guaranteed to secure loads more of Chinese imports so that the British public can buy loads more junk that they don't need.

No wonder this country is going down the pan!

Red & White Never Blue
tell me what do you know about the the river test ecology. what your asking to do is to kill the river, and bet you be one off the first to moan about the awful smelly stench that would drift across the city, dont think for one moment it will only effect a very small area with this stench, it will not it will effect the whole off the hampshire basin, and if that happens what would be the first thing to be destroyed southampton ecomony eg:- people not wanting to get on the liners here in southampton, firms not wanting to come here to set up business, and companys pulling out. you need to think a bit more.

Ben Doone wrote:

Linesman wrote:

Nothing to say wrote: What do we need more of? Jobs or fish? Jobs its is. BUILD IT.

Jobs? IF it were built and IF it was eventually a container port and not, as I suspect, another yacht marina, with modern technology and automation, precious few long-term jobs would be created, just short-term during the building. Not so many jobs at the refinery for that very reason! With that in mind, I'll settle for fish! We have to eat!

Linesman
I very much doubt that ABP would countenance construction of another Marina in close proximity to the land they own at Dibden Bay. The company's decision to allow the building of Hythe Marina, to be inhabited by well heeled and well connected out of towners, who then complained about the development of the neighbouring in-fill area, was a major factor in the defeat of the Dibden Bay proposal.
Accept the point you make on automation but there are a surprising amount of support workers who earn a livehood out of ports, just like there are with car factories and their service providers. Oil terminals are another example.How many people do you think actually work at Fawley and how many ancillary businesses would fail if Fawley wasn't there? Far more than you are suggesting, I warrant.

like you ben i dont think its a marina, but abp needs to make there self very clear and what they intend to do there, every one knows that they dont need more quay side space, they have to much all ready, and has ships get bigger they will need less quay side space, but what is needed is ground to put those containers on mainly the empty ones.

Bartonian wrote:

Soton Spanky wrote:
A port expansion is needed to guarantee jobs and prosperity. The trade will go either to Felixstowe or Europort if it doesn't come to Southampton. SCT has really advantages over those not least the double time, greater draught and better infrastructure. But I suppose if it doesn't go ahead we''ll have some nice mud flats for frogs and birds. No wonder this country is going down the pan.

More like guaranteed to secure loads more of Chinese imports so that the British public can buy loads more junk that they don't need.

No wonder this country is going down the pan!

the country going down the pan because off the capitalist system thats in place. china has a nationalize system thats why there ecomony is a lot stronger and more stable, and dont have the boom and bust like we do in our capitalist system.
and southampton having a double high water dont mean a lot, this is counter-acted by the fact that our high water 2 meters is lower than every where else.

southy wrote:
Red & White Never Blue tell me what do you know about the the river test ecology. what your asking to do is to kill the river, and bet you be one off the first to moan about the awful smelly stench that would drift across the city, dont think for one moment it will only effect a very small area with this stench, it will not it will effect the whole off the hampshire basin, and if that happens what would be the first thing to be destroyed southampton ecomony eg:- people not wanting to get on the liners here in southampton, firms not wanting to come here to set up business, and companys pulling out. you need to think a bit more.

So you're trying to tell me that everywhere in the world where land has been reclaimed it stinks so bad that whatever the land is being reclaimed for is unsuccessful. I don't think so

southy wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Soton Spanky wrote:
A port expansion is needed to guarantee jobs and prosperity. The trade will go either to Felixstowe or Europort if it doesn't come to Southampton. SCT has really advantages over those not least the double time, greater draught and better infrastructure. But I suppose if it doesn't go ahead we''ll have some nice mud flats for frogs and birds. No wonder this country is going down the pan.

More like guaranteed to secure loads more of Chinese imports so that the British public can buy loads more junk that they don't need.

No wonder this country is going down the pan!

the country going down the pan because off the capitalist system thats in place. china has a nationalize system thats why there ecomony is a lot stronger and more stable, and dont have the boom and bust like we do in our capitalist system.
and southampton having a double high water dont mean a lot, this is counter-acted by the fact that our high water 2 meters is lower than every where else.

Southy don't get into areas you don't understand or you will look foolish. The Chinese economy has expanded massively because they have liberalised the movement and influx of (western) capital which has enabled their economy to expand. However they still have a workforce who work for pay and conditions that would be unacceptable in the (capitalist) western economies where the standard of living of the workdforce is far higher. With your profound ignorance of economics do you wonder why you and your chums in socialist workers party get ignored at every election?

Red & White Never Blue wrote:

southy wrote:
Red & White Never Blue tell me what do you know about the the river test ecology. what your asking to do is to kill the river, and bet you be one off the first to moan about the awful smelly stench that would drift across the city, dont think for one moment it will only effect a very small area with this stench, it will not it will effect the whole off the hampshire basin, and if that happens what would be the first thing to be destroyed southampton ecomony eg:- people not wanting to get on the liners here in southampton, firms not wanting to come here to set up business, and companys pulling out. you need to think a bit more.

So you're trying to tell me that everywhere in the world where land has been reclaimed it stinks so bad that whatever the land is being reclaimed for is unsuccessful. I don't think so

no i not red&white and true blue, each river is different in its own ecology. but you can only do so much to a tidal part off any river, you take away the smaller marine life and you will break the river life chain, to many people dont relize or dont care what could happen, those small marine life keep the rivers clean, just think what would happen to your house price if there was a stench hanging over the hampshire basin whitch southampton is the lowest part, and who would want to come to southampton, a lot off well off people would lose a lot off money, because on one would want to come here to trade. southampton container port was built in the wrong place, and when you look at to-days size ships the best place for a container port would be on the other side off fawley power station, or over gosport way.

andy but china kept it nationalise industry, they did go selling them off like they did here in the 80's, there work for pay and conditions your right the capitalist western economies would not pay them so high, thats why they very few chineeze in this country, apart from the students and those that come from hong-kong (note for you andy hong-kong has the highest unemployment rate, crime and poverty in china), when you look at china they have what we had in the 70's, a job for life better working conditions, they even only have a 30 hour week and any more then 30 hours is over time whitch most do, they all so have more paid holidays than us, and if a company gets in to trouble the chineeze government will pull money out off company to support that company thats in trouble, chineeze products are no longer that cheaply made and sold cheap like they use to be in the 50's to 70's. they have come along way, if you get dodgey goods from china now they what to know about it and are willing to listen and put things right. unlike western capitalist lot they will try and flog you off or they keep it on going till the stuff that you got is out off date.
and you saying ""you and your chums in socialist workers party get ignored at every election?"" may i remind you the EU elections we just had was the first time socialist group had put up people for any elections, up till last year there support all ways went to labour and with 21,455 votes that mainly came from southampton and portmouth, and the socalist labour party picking up another 15,000 plus votes from the same area, and the third socalist group pick up another 35,000 plus votes down in sussex and kent way and to the north off the south east uk eu election group area, they done very well, and in ireland they voted in 1 socialist party member into the EU, need to remember this is the first time the socialist have done this they have all ways back the main labour party.

Like every other communist regime, The Chinese economy was until recently very centrally controlled and completely commodity based - (there being no such thing as a "consumer" in Chinese economic thought). It was only when western capital and industrial expertise was invited in by the Chinese leadership that their industry began to perform. They still rely on Western help and capital even for primary industries like raw material production - just look what happened when Rio Tinto Zinc pulled out of its joint venture with the Chinese state mining corporation in favour of closer ties with BHP Billiton. The Chinese are not as strong economically as you would believe. I don't need lessons from you in the quality of Chinese goods and services - part of my professional remit is global outsourcing so I know the value of Chinese productivity and what they can and can't do. A note back to you regarding Hong Kong is that crime rates are lower in totalitarian states because there are less things to steal and nothing to buy if you steal money anyway. Affluence promotes envy and opportunity equally. I always wondered which gullible folk believed the ridiculous propaganda films from the USSR and China depicting smiling peasants bringing in huge abundant harvests, and happy workers in factories producing tanks so that they could be driven endlessly past doddery corrupt half senile old apparatchiks on May Day. Well now I have just the collective noun for such misguided people - let's call them socialist workers.

no western capital, apart from countrys like britain holland france and a few others who are still paying china for leases on land that they use to run (uk case hong kong)but yes there was and still is western expertise, and china paid a good price for union members to go over there and show them how it was done and the best way,whitch upset a load off muti-nationals companys, Chinese state mining corporation, is now the worlds most profitable now, after austrailian union experts went over there, you will find there zinc and lead in most batteries that are produce today, and the only reason Rio Tinto Zinc pulled out was because china said no to them when they wanted more profits they got greedy, the chineeze can have every thing we have got if they chose to and many have and there cost off living is a hell lot less than here, whitch is reflected in lower pay. whitch is the main reason there is less crime theres no need to steal because there unemployment is a lot less than than here and people are spending money because they have got spare money to spend, that what a nationalize industry dose for you keeps people in work so they can spend money, and if it was't for trade embargos place on them from the western world theres ecomony would be a hell a lot stronger than it is now, you dont think the western world dont put out propaganda, umm think again what was it for the uk, streets paved with gold, usa the american dream its all propaganda, a better way off life, yea sure you get there if you got no money you have no hope just look at the usa and its slums, the rich get richer the poorer get poorer, one law for the rich one law for the poor. andy propaganda works both ways.

You don't know a thing except what people like Bob Crow tell you, and as you seem to lap up everything you read in Socialist Worker without checking its context it is no wonder your information is partial, mininterpreted and incomplete. Anyone reading this may wonder why there hasn't been a flood of illegal western immigrants risking life and limb to forge a better more prosperous life for themselves in China North Korea or Cuba. Where are they all? Could it be that you completely and hopelessly wrong or is it all part of a secret government conspiracy to conceal the truth about all those happy chinese? I happen to work with Global offshoring in China so I deal with the reality constantly - can you accept that concept? Don't tell me I have to rely on propaganda - I have to do my sums the same as everyone else who works with corporations. I can only assume your maths is as poor as your english.

i work with the chineeze to andy. and they are better off than most, did you know that the american government stops its own people going to cuba, because they are scared that people would come back and say that country wealth is shared out, in a capitalist world you dont get that, the wealth go's to a few, lets face it when you only got a few with wealth less is bought, but when its spread out to every one then more get bought. simple sums.

Southy
There is no such thing as a perfect world.
However if you have ever been to a truly Socialist/Coomunist country you will understand that there are far more inequalities there than almost all capitalist countries. I can think of capitalist countries building physical barriers to keep people out (US/Mexico border)but non such as North Korea or the old Soviet regime who built physical barriers to keep their citizens in.
Incidentally what sort of business do you do with the chineeze?

mines and oil. send people over there to show there guys how to do things the right way and training. must remember ben it was the western world who put up those barriers first, look what monti and patton said right at the end off the war, they where making threats to russia at the end off WW2. before then there was no problem and they where not the only 2 that though like that, so you cant blame them for putting barriers up. was not so much for keeping people in its was more for the case and try to keep some people out.
you start to alienate countrys and put up trade embargo's, just because they chose to solialist is wrong, a capitalist system fears a socialist system. because it scared to let the world masses see that there are other ways, lift those trade embargo's and anti-trade-flooding laws on china and see what happens, its funny when you look at asia and you look at whitch countrys thats got trade embargo's and anti-trade-flooding laws against them are all socialist countrys, and the capitalist countrys dont, thats how scared they are, they are not willing to trade on level peggings.

Southy
You have a very 'unique' way of looking at things.
First time I have ever seen someone put forward that the Berlin Wall was built to keep people out!!
How many West Germans were shot trying to get into the East?
What sort of business do you do with the chineeze?

look at time when that wall was built, and look what was said,and done by the westerners in the time period between end off WW2 and the berlin wall the western world triggered the cold war, by what was said and done (like the trade embargo that was put in place way before the berlin wall went up) a fair number ben they was being shot going both ways and on both sides.
more off the training side ben, well i dont any more, but the guy who took over still do.

What were you training the chineeze to do?

in rigging ben, like in mines showing and teaching them, how and where to place hydraulic jacks and at what sort of pressure you have, and where not to place them, that sort off thing.

Southy
That's really interesting. Did you do that in the Uk or in China?
Was this basically container work or in general cargo?
Was this your company or did you work for someone else?

Southy - are you saying that West German Guards shot people trying to get into East Germany? I'm ingtrigued where you have evidence of this. And I'm interested in how Cuba's socialist equality managed to keep the same man in power until he became too senile to continue when who should take over the reins but (gasp!) why his own brother!! Isn't socialism wonderful Is Cuba the personal property of the Castro family by any chance?

ben how it was ship was not my problem.

andy one off the early one's to get killed was a guy who was nipping across the wall to the east side to see family members, was shot by a french gaurd, yes killing happen on both sides.
handing the head off state over to his brother is not a new thing, it happens more in the capitalist world than it do in a socialist world, all the worlds royal family's do it this way, but the big difference between the two is when socialist head off state die's then there is an election, where has royal familys dont. castro dont run the cuba thats left to the elected cuba government, remember it was the people off cuba that put casio head off state, lets face it those people are better off than before, being controlled by the americans capitlist in cuba was raping the country wealth and selling it to the americans.

Southy
the case of the guy who 'nipped over the wall' and was shot by a French Guard is a fitment of your imagination. I have a German colleague who lived in Berlin and told me that anyone wanting to visit the East could apply for a visa to enter.
Whilst there were literally hundreds of people shot (and often left to bleed to death) trying to get into the West, there is not one report of the reverse happening.
This reminds me of the inaccuracies you introduced on a separate thread regarding Light Dues. Have a look at yesterdays Daily Telegraph which confirms that Light Dues aren't payable throughout Europe and that the UK pays for the Channel Isles Lights, not the French, as you incorrectly stated.
There are many of your other inaccuracies which need correcting too.

no the french pays for the channel islands, but are maintained by the british. did see that in the tory graph, and light and nav dues are payable in every port, and is added in to the cost on berthing in a port.
and there was killing on both sides, and the visa came about after wall was put up, before then you could going in and out by just showing your id's if you was german, but when the wall first went up every body was stop for a little while, thats what the berlin air lift was all about, russia had retaliated because off the western world put a trade embargo on russia.

Southy
I think you would make an excellent script writer for Hollywood films where factual events are secondary to the story line.
btw you are wrong about the Channel Isles, ask one of your local Shipping Agents who collect Light Dues on behalf of the Govt.

How about checking with me, I use to work for trinty. And Southy is right ben, France do collett and pay for the up keep in the channel isles, But its the british that maintains lights.
And the only reason you see channel isles on the forms is because off head off state.

ST Mary's on sea.
Welcome to the forum. Am I right that you went to the same school as Mr Southy? Your spelling and grammatical mistakes are identical to this error strewn poster who often seeks to post under other names, always supporting Southy's view. That's another clue!!
Oh and you are both wrong. It's laughable really.

ben its a bit like your income tax forms, on there it tends to say. uk,n/ireland,channel islands and isle of man, but each place collets its own tax, and only reason you see those other locations is because they all have the same head off state, there's a lot of things this applys to

give st marys on sea his due ben apart from now and again he or she agrees with me they also have rip in to me in the pass. he might off gone to the same school thats a possablity, but i am more incline to think they are just lazy typers, if your not sure get the echo to run an ip check.