P&O's simply amazing Grand Event in Southampton

P&O's simply amazing Grand Event

The seven P&O ships in Southampton

Ventura and some of her sister ships in Southampton during the Grand Event

Five of the seven P&O vessels in Southampton together

Darcey Bussell

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Shipping & Heritage Reporter

Click here to view and purchase images

EVEN the wettest summer on record could not spoil Southampton’s special day.

It was quite simply an amazing sight which unfolded on Southampton Water, the like of which had never been seen in the city before.

Over the decades, Southampton’s waterfront has witnessed many memorable and historic occasions, but it will be a long time before anyone who saw the spectacle of more than half a million tons of shipping lined up together, all on the same day, will forget the date Tuesday, July 3, 2012.

Billed as the Grand Event, it took two years to organise this one-off celebration to mark the 175th anniversary of P&O Cruises, and it certainly was on a grand scale.

For Carnival UK, the parent company of P&O Cruises and Cunard, which staged a meeting of its three Queen ships in Southampton last month, the occasion was the culmination of a series of events which showcased some of the most famous cruise ships in the world as a thank you to the city and people of Southampton.

Bad weather dogged both the Cunard and P&O Cruises celebrations forcing cancellations of some elements of the planned events, but Carnival UK, who would not reveal the total bill for both events, put on a brave face.

P&O Cruises’ managing director, Carol Marlow, said: “Everyone has worked so hard to make the Grand Event a success and of course we are honoured to have the Princess Royal with us on such a prestigious day.

“This celebration of 175 years of heritage will go down as one of the great days in British maritime history.’’ Before first light broke over Southampton, the ships Adonia, Arcadia, Aurora, Azura, Oceana, Oriana, and Ventura began arriving to take up their positions in both the Eastern and Western Docks.

One by one the vessels eased alongside their individual berths and mooring ropes were made secure until the stage was set for a day of celebrations.

The thousands of sightseers who crammed into Mayflower Park throughout the day had the most impressive view, with the gleaming white hulls and distinctive buff coloured funnels of the ships stretching away up Southampton Water.

Later the Princess Royal, who officially named Aurora and Oceana in Southampton, arrived for a VIP reception on board Oriana, where she met celebrity chefs Marco Pierre White and Atul Kochhar, together with wine expert Olly Smith, who all oversee restaurants and bars on P&O Cruises’ ships.

Former prima-ballerina and Strictly Come Dancing judge Darcey Bussell was also welcomed on board Azura, the ship she named in 2010.

As departure time approached passengers on all seven ships crowded the decks and enjoyed a “Sail Away’’ party, which included a team of chefs barbecuing a total of 1,750 whole lobsters, while a 175th birthday toast saw the corks popping on 2,600 bottles of champagne.

On the ships’ bridges, seven captains gave the order to cast off the mooring ropes and the maritime pageant began. A blizzard of “flutterfetti’’ and streamers cascaded over the ships’ rails while a fusillade of pyrotechnics saluted each vessel as they passed the Eastern Docks.

As the ships formed up and made their way down Southampton Water, the Princess Royal boarded the Trinity House vessel Patricia, which was escorted by the Royal Navy’s newest Type 45 destroyer, HMS Dragon, out into the Solent.

The fleet was reviewed by the Princess Royal who took the salute as the seven ships went their separate ways, heading for the Mediterranean, the Baltic, Scandinavia and the Canary Islands.

Thousands lined the waterfront to see the ships, with Hythe Pier and the nearby marina packed solid with people.

Comments (67)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:06am Wed 4 Jul 12

The Salv says...

Just to make my point again.
.
It was a total shambles, people just parked up there cars where the hell they wanted and caused complete chaos. Literally parking people into car parks, parking fully onto the pavements and cycle paths, parking both sides of the roads so no cars could pass.
.
Where were the Police and why wasnt something organised it was obvious that this would happen.
.
Saying that it was very enjoyable to watch. Does anybody know the numbers that came to watch? Would like to know how many people were on Weston Shore.
Just to make my point again. . It was a total shambles, people just parked up there cars where the hell they wanted and caused complete chaos. Literally parking people into car parks, parking fully onto the pavements and cycle paths, parking both sides of the roads so no cars could pass. . Where were the Police and why wasnt something organised it was obvious that this would happen. . Saying that it was very enjoyable to watch. Does anybody know the numbers that came to watch? Would like to know how many people were on Weston Shore. The Salv
  • Score: 0

10:13am Wed 4 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

That's OK as long as you are not blaming the Event organisers for the stupidity and selfishness of the motorists.
That's OK as long as you are not blaming the Event organisers for the stupidity and selfishness of the motorists. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

10:35am Wed 4 Jul 12

saintdavie says...

It took me an hour to get home from Central Southampton to Netley Abbey.
Cars were parked on both sides of the road all along Weston Shore. Not particularly well organised to be honest but it is not as if this sort of thing happens every day.
It took me an hour to get home from Central Southampton to Netley Abbey. Cars were parked on both sides of the road all along Weston Shore. Not particularly well organised to be honest but it is not as if this sort of thing happens every day. saintdavie
  • Score: 0

11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry.

By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?
Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry. By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

11:20am Wed 4 Jul 12

jameswhite2011 says...

All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+
All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+ jameswhite2011
  • Score: 0

11:23am Wed 4 Jul 12

Proud from LIVERPOOL says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry.

By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?
Paramjit Bahia says...
11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12

" By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? "

********************
***

Could that be the same " Tax Haven " where ABP the owners of Southampton docks are based.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry. By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?[/p][/quote]Paramjit Bahia says... 11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12 " By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? " ******************** *** Could that be the same " Tax Haven " where ABP the owners of Southampton docks are based. Proud from LIVERPOOL
  • Score: 0

11:44am Wed 4 Jul 12

saint robbie says...

Whoever is responsible for Calshot? you are completely useless.

I am sure the £5 parking charges that you amassed yesterday could have paid for a few parking attendants? (Did it really take 3 parking attendants to stand and collect the money, 1 to collect it and 2 to count it was it?

I queued for well over an hour and a half outside the main entrance not knowing if the car park was full or closed (as so many people were coming out) and when we eventually did get up to the gate we paid and parked easily (loads of room left)
You knew this would be an extremely busy day, yet it seems you did nothing to plan for it.

Anyway rant over,
Well done to P&O for laying on such a great event in Southampton.
Whoever is responsible for Calshot? you are completely useless. I am sure the £5 parking charges that you amassed yesterday could have paid for a few parking attendants? (Did it really take 3 parking attendants to stand and collect the money, 1 to collect it and 2 to count it was it? I queued for well over an hour and a half outside the main entrance not knowing if the car park was full or closed (as so many people were coming out) and when we eventually did get up to the gate we paid and parked easily (loads of room left) You knew this would be an extremely busy day, yet it seems you did nothing to plan for it. Anyway rant over, Well done to P&O for laying on such a great event in Southampton. saint robbie
  • Score: 0

11:47am Wed 4 Jul 12

drakey says...

It was an awesome event - it rained, so what, it is the UK! And besides - the photo opportunities were amazing! http://www.flickr.co
m/photos/drakester43
21/sets/721576304098
22934/ heres my pics!
It was an awesome event - it rained, so what, it is the UK! And besides - the photo opportunities were amazing! http://www.flickr.co m/photos/drakester43 21/sets/721576304098 22934/ heres my pics! drakey
  • Score: 0

11:53am Wed 4 Jul 12

saint robbie says...

jameswhite2011 wrote:
All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+
I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.
[quote][p][bold]jameswhite2011[/bold] wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+[/p][/quote]I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare. saint robbie
  • Score: 0

12:16pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Buntylicious says...

Those are great aerial shots of the ships - taken from the Daily Echo helicopter? or someone on a Flybe plane coming in to land at Southampton?
Those are great aerial shots of the ships - taken from the Daily Echo helicopter? or someone on a Flybe plane coming in to land at Southampton? Buntylicious
  • Score: 0

12:17pm Wed 4 Jul 12

allsaintsnocurves says...

Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere. allsaintsnocurves
  • Score: 0

12:28pm Wed 4 Jul 12

chunky_lover says...

allsaintsnocurves wrote:
Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
[quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why. chunky_lover
  • Score: 0

12:32pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Smilzo says...

The Salv wrote:
Just to make my point again.
.
It was a total shambles, people just parked up there cars where the hell they wanted and caused complete chaos. Literally parking people into car parks, parking fully onto the pavements and cycle paths, parking both sides of the roads so no cars could pass.
.
Where were the Police and why wasnt something organised it was obvious that this would happen.
.
Saying that it was very enjoyable to watch. Does anybody know the numbers that came to watch? Would like to know how many people were on Weston Shore.
The Salv wrote:

"It was a total shambles, people just parked up there cars where the hell they wanted and caused complete chaos."

That's a normal day outside Shirley Post Office.

Couldn't get to see the Grand Event, and shame about the lousy weather and P&O's allegedly dubious employment practices, but otherwise a fine spectacle for Southampton to be proud of.
[quote][p][bold]The Salv[/bold] wrote: Just to make my point again. . It was a total shambles, people just parked up there cars where the hell they wanted and caused complete chaos. Literally parking people into car parks, parking fully onto the pavements and cycle paths, parking both sides of the roads so no cars could pass. . Where were the Police and why wasnt something organised it was obvious that this would happen. . Saying that it was very enjoyable to watch. Does anybody know the numbers that came to watch? Would like to know how many people were on Weston Shore.[/p][/quote]The Salv wrote: "It was a total shambles, people just parked up there cars where the hell they wanted and caused complete chaos." That's a normal day outside Shirley Post Office. Couldn't get to see the Grand Event, and shame about the lousy weather and P&O's allegedly dubious employment practices, but otherwise a fine spectacle for Southampton to be proud of. Smilzo
  • Score: 0

12:42pm Wed 4 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

chunky_lover wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote:
Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
Snob 1st Class
[quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st Class OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

12:43pm Wed 4 Jul 12

chunky_lover says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote:
Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
Snob 1st Class
I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st Class[/p][/quote]I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty. chunky_lover
  • Score: 0

12:55pm Wed 4 Jul 12

solo1 says...

chunky_lover wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote:
Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
Snob 1st Class
I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.
Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.
[quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st Class[/p][/quote]I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed. solo1
  • Score: 0

12:57pm Wed 4 Jul 12

The Salv says...

saint robbie wrote:
jameswhite2011 wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+
I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.
Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.
[quote][p][bold]saint robbie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jameswhite2011[/bold] wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+[/p][/quote]I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.[/p][/quote]Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere. The Salv
  • Score: 0

1:01pm Wed 4 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

chunky_lover wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote:
Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
Snob 1st Class
I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.
That's snoberry 1st Class with an Order of Paranoia included.
[quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st Class[/p][/quote]I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.[/p][/quote]That's snoberry 1st Class with an Order of Paranoia included. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

1:04pm Wed 4 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

The Salv wrote:
saint robbie wrote:
jameswhite2011 wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+
I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.
Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.
Sadly the cut backs in Police numbers means that what are left are all out pursuing criminals, can't be in two places at once.
[quote][p][bold]The Salv[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]saint robbie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jameswhite2011[/bold] wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+[/p][/quote]I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.[/p][/quote]Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.[/p][/quote]Sadly the cut backs in Police numbers means that what are left are all out pursuing criminals, can't be in two places at once. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

1:05pm Wed 4 Jul 12

IanRRR says...

solo1 wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote:
Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
Snob 1st Class
I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.
Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.
Buses are used by very ordinary everyday people. But like in any walk of life, there are just a few that we would prefer not to be with. In the main, bus passengers are lovely folk, the young, the elderly, and most important of all, people who value the planet and who see all the advantages of not clogging up our streets, by using our fantastic public transport system. Thanks to all the operators, who work so hard to make sure we all get to our destinations safely and efficiently. Well done to P&O for a great day that I will remember for a long long time.
[quote][p][bold]solo1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st Class[/p][/quote]I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.[/p][/quote]Buses are used by very ordinary everyday people. But like in any walk of life, there are just a few that we would prefer not to be with. In the main, bus passengers are lovely folk, the young, the elderly, and most important of all, people who value the planet and who see all the advantages of not clogging up our streets, by using our fantastic public transport system. Thanks to all the operators, who work so hard to make sure we all get to our destinations safely and efficiently. Well done to P&O for a great day that I will remember for a long long time. IanRRR
  • Score: 0

1:11pm Wed 4 Jul 12

IanRRR says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
The Salv wrote:
saint robbie wrote:
jameswhite2011 wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+
I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.
Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.
Sadly the cut backs in Police numbers means that what are left are all out pursuing criminals, can't be in two places at once.
Like the one I witnessed at Shirley precinct yesterday, who was spending his valuable time harassing a few schoolgirls for smoking. He was being downright disrespectful to them, and I so wanted to intervene, but knew that his type would probably then turn on me (not that I have anything to worry about). I just wanted to ask him whether he may have something better to do with his time? He seemed to be on a personal anti smoking crusade, which is not what we should be paying the police for...
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Salv[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]saint robbie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jameswhite2011[/bold] wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+[/p][/quote]I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.[/p][/quote]Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.[/p][/quote]Sadly the cut backs in Police numbers means that what are left are all out pursuing criminals, can't be in two places at once.[/p][/quote]Like the one I witnessed at Shirley precinct yesterday, who was spending his valuable time harassing a few schoolgirls for smoking. He was being downright disrespectful to them, and I so wanted to intervene, but knew that his type would probably then turn on me (not that I have anything to worry about). I just wanted to ask him whether he may have something better to do with his time? He seemed to be on a personal anti smoking crusade, which is not what we should be paying the police for... IanRRR
  • Score: 0

1:13pm Wed 4 Jul 12

southy says...

Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry.

By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?
Paramjit Bahia says...
11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12

" By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? "

********************

***

Could that be the same " Tax Haven " where ABP the owners of Southampton docks are based.
No ABPj is money is in Jersey, P&O if I remeber correctly is in Lichtenstein.
[quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry. By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?[/p][/quote]Paramjit Bahia says... 11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12 " By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? " ******************** *** Could that be the same " Tax Haven " where ABP the owners of Southampton docks are based.[/p][/quote]No ABPj is money is in Jersey, P&O if I remeber correctly is in Lichtenstein. southy
  • Score: 0

1:46pm Wed 4 Jul 12

andysaints007 says...

The Salv wrote:
saint robbie wrote:
jameswhite2011 wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+
I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.
Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.
Well there you go then - you have answered your own question !!!
Risk of trouble -zero
Risk of Salv whinging like a little schoolgirl - 100%
[quote][p][bold]The Salv[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]saint robbie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jameswhite2011[/bold] wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+[/p][/quote]I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.[/p][/quote]Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.[/p][/quote]Well there you go then - you have answered your own question !!! Risk of trouble -zero Risk of Salv whinging like a little schoolgirl - 100% andysaints007
  • Score: 0

2:12pm Wed 4 Jul 12

bigfella777 says...

I expect people will have a go at me when I say that I just do not see what all the fuss is about.We have cruise ships in every day,just because there are seven of them what is the big deal.
It's all just free publicity for a big company,"Oh look at me I stood in the rain and saw a boat", wow wee get a life.
I expect people will have a go at me when I say that I just do not see what all the fuss is about.We have cruise ships in every day,just because there are seven of them what is the big deal. It's all just free publicity for a big company,"Oh look at me I stood in the rain and saw a boat", wow wee get a life. bigfella777
  • Score: 0

2:27pm Wed 4 Jul 12

rightway says...

bigfella777 wrote:
I expect people will have a go at me when I say that I just do not see what all the fuss is about.We have cruise ships in every day,just because there are seven of them what is the big deal. It's all just free publicity for a big company,"Oh look at me I stood in the rain and saw a boat", wow wee get a life.
Well said.
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I expect people will have a go at me when I say that I just do not see what all the fuss is about.We have cruise ships in every day,just because there are seven of them what is the big deal. It's all just free publicity for a big company,"Oh look at me I stood in the rain and saw a boat", wow wee get a life.[/p][/quote]Well said. rightway
  • Score: 0

2:30pm Wed 4 Jul 12

flatulence hero says...

The whole fleet of P & O in port at the same time is very special.
It has never happened before.

I expect you get a buzz up your trouser leg when you open your breakfast cereal and find a plastic toy in there.
You Tw@t.
The whole fleet of P & O in port at the same time is very special. It has never happened before. I expect you get a buzz up your trouser leg when you open your breakfast cereal and find a plastic toy in there. You Tw@t. flatulence hero
  • Score: 0

2:44pm Wed 4 Jul 12

rightway says...

IanRRR wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
The Salv wrote:
saint robbie wrote:
jameswhite2011 wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+
I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.
Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.
Sadly the cut backs in Police numbers means that what are left are all out pursuing criminals, can't be in two places at once.
Like the one I witnessed at Shirley precinct yesterday, who was spending his valuable time harassing a few schoolgirls for smoking. He was being downright disrespectful to them, and I so wanted to intervene, but knew that his type would probably then turn on me (not that I have anything to worry about). I just wanted to ask him whether he may have something better to do with his time? He seemed to be on a personal anti smoking crusade, which is not what we should be paying the police for...
So you think it’s wrong for a police officer to give children a hard time over smoking.
Hopefully his approach will have the desired affect or, in thirty years when they are sitting watch the world go by with an oxygen mask over their faces, they will wish they’d listened.
Well done to him for having the backbone to approach them, unlike you whose bravery is somewhat lacking unless you think it’s brave to slag the police off whilst hiding behind your computer.
[quote][p][bold]IanRRR[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Salv[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]saint robbie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jameswhite2011[/bold] wrote: All those complaining about parking problems, this is a problem at most events. You should hear yourselves it doesn't happen often! Clearly in the 50+[/p][/quote]I agree, you do expect parking problems and congestion at these events. However the people who are responsible for these places just dont seem to prepare.[/p][/quote]Thats exactley my point, you expect these problems, so where's the Police. I wonder if it was because they were all Middle Englanders? Imagine if 3000 students were to gather in one place or Football fans, Police would have been everywhere.[/p][/quote]Sadly the cut backs in Police numbers means that what are left are all out pursuing criminals, can't be in two places at once.[/p][/quote]Like the one I witnessed at Shirley precinct yesterday, who was spending his valuable time harassing a few schoolgirls for smoking. He was being downright disrespectful to them, and I so wanted to intervene, but knew that his type would probably then turn on me (not that I have anything to worry about). I just wanted to ask him whether he may have something better to do with his time? He seemed to be on a personal anti smoking crusade, which is not what we should be paying the police for...[/p][/quote]So you think it’s wrong for a police officer to give children a hard time over smoking. Hopefully his approach will have the desired affect or, in thirty years when they are sitting watch the world go by with an oxygen mask over their faces, they will wish they’d listened. Well done to him for having the backbone to approach them, unlike you whose bravery is somewhat lacking unless you think it’s brave to slag the police off whilst hiding behind your computer. rightway
  • Score: 0

2:45pm Wed 4 Jul 12

flatulence hero says...

bigfella777 and rightway.

Complete dipsticks.
bigfella777 and rightway. Complete dipsticks. flatulence hero
  • Score: 0

3:15pm Wed 4 Jul 12

X Old Bill says...

southy wrote:
Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry.

By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?
Paramjit Bahia says...
11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12

" By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? "

********************


***

Could that be the same " Tax Haven " where ABP the owners of Southampton docks are based.
No ABPj is money is in Jersey, P&O if I remeber correctly is in Lichtenstein.
P & O keep some of their money in Guernsey - As is stated in the Guardian article, if you read it.

But then again the Guardian refers to India, when they probably specifically mean Goa.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry. By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?[/p][/quote]Paramjit Bahia says... 11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12 " By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? " ******************** *** Could that be the same " Tax Haven " where ABP the owners of Southampton docks are based.[/p][/quote]No ABPj is money is in Jersey, P&O if I remeber correctly is in Lichtenstein.[/p][/quote]P & O keep some of their money in Guernsey - As is stated in the Guardian article, if you read it. But then again the Guardian refers to India, when they probably specifically mean Goa. X Old Bill
  • Score: 0

3:21pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Sovietobserver says...

A quick calculation suggests that P&O / Carnival Group workers would need to work for almost 500 days to pay for a cruise themselves, assuming that they did not spend a single penny of their wages on living costs.
It's high time the disgraceful practice of allowing the shipping industry to pay poverty wages to workers who don't live in the UK was stopped.Exploitive rates of pay for their workers on British ships have no place in a modern society.
An estimated 1.2 million people work at sea, for those working on board a ship has never been an idyllic operation. Over 200 years after the men of HMS Bounty rebelled against their captain for mistreatment (commemorated in a number of books and films like 'Mutiny of the Bounty'), activists say that the ship workers are still exploited routinely. It is just a sweat shop at sea.
95% of these crew work seven days a week, with the majority working between 12 and 14 hours per day. Overtime is not paid on many vessels because no union agreement exists.
They also pay up to $2000 to get their jobs from unscrupulous agents, so that their first few months income is spent paying off their debt.
A quick calculation suggests that P&O / Carnival Group workers would need to work for almost 500 days to pay for a cruise themselves, assuming that they did not spend a single penny of their wages on living costs. It's high time the disgraceful practice of allowing the shipping industry to pay poverty wages to workers who don't live in the UK was stopped.Exploitive rates of pay for their workers on British ships have no place in a modern society. An estimated 1.2 million people work at sea, for those working on board a ship has never been an idyllic operation. Over 200 years after the men of HMS Bounty rebelled against their captain for mistreatment (commemorated in a number of books and films like 'Mutiny of the Bounty'), activists say that the ship workers are still exploited routinely. It is just a sweat shop at sea. 95% of these crew work seven days a week, with the majority working between 12 and 14 hours per day. Overtime is not paid on many vessels because no union agreement exists. They also pay up to $2000 to get their jobs from unscrupulous agents, so that their first few months income is spent paying off their debt. Sovietobserver
  • Score: 0

3:43pm Wed 4 Jul 12

rightway says...

flatulence hero wrote:
bigfella777 and rightway. Complete dipsticks.
Why ?
Just because others do not share your shallow sense of nostalgia does not then make them dipsticks.
Although name calling because someone doesn’t agree with you must surely make you the dipstick, and a very childish one at that.
[quote][p][bold]flatulence hero[/bold] wrote: bigfella777 and rightway. Complete dipsticks.[/p][/quote]Why ? Just because others do not share your shallow sense of nostalgia does not then make them dipsticks. Although name calling because someone doesn’t agree with you must surely make you the dipstick, and a very childish one at that. rightway
  • Score: 0

4:00pm Wed 4 Jul 12

rightway says...

Sovietobserver wrote:
A quick calculation suggests that P&O / Carnival Group workers would need to work for almost 500 days to pay for a cruise themselves, assuming that they did not spend a single penny of their wages on living costs. It's high time the disgraceful practice of allowing the shipping industry to pay poverty wages to workers who don't live in the UK was stopped.Exploitive rates of pay for their workers on British ships have no place in a modern society. An estimated 1.2 million people work at sea, for those working on board a ship has never been an idyllic operation. Over 200 years after the men of HMS Bounty rebelled against their captain for mistreatment (commemorated in a number of books and films like 'Mutiny of the Bounty'), activists say that the ship workers are still exploited routinely. It is just a sweat shop at sea. 95% of these crew work seven days a week, with the majority working between 12 and 14 hours per day. Overtime is not paid on many vessels because no union agreement exists. They also pay up to $2000 to get their jobs from unscrupulous agents, so that their first few months income is spent paying off their debt.
I have no sympathy for them.
As I have said before on here, where were the bleeding hearts when, after fighting for pay and conditions the British merchant seaman were marched down the gangway only for the present day employees to run up it and take their jobs.
Most will only work a few years before retiring on the handouts of the patronising cruise ship passengers, so feeling sorry for them is the last thing anyone should do.
[quote][p][bold]Sovietobserver[/bold] wrote: A quick calculation suggests that P&O / Carnival Group workers would need to work for almost 500 days to pay for a cruise themselves, assuming that they did not spend a single penny of their wages on living costs. It's high time the disgraceful practice of allowing the shipping industry to pay poverty wages to workers who don't live in the UK was stopped.Exploitive rates of pay for their workers on British ships have no place in a modern society. An estimated 1.2 million people work at sea, for those working on board a ship has never been an idyllic operation. Over 200 years after the men of HMS Bounty rebelled against their captain for mistreatment (commemorated in a number of books and films like 'Mutiny of the Bounty'), activists say that the ship workers are still exploited routinely. It is just a sweat shop at sea. 95% of these crew work seven days a week, with the majority working between 12 and 14 hours per day. Overtime is not paid on many vessels because no union agreement exists. They also pay up to $2000 to get their jobs from unscrupulous agents, so that their first few months income is spent paying off their debt.[/p][/quote]I have no sympathy for them. As I have said before on here, where were the bleeding hearts when, after fighting for pay and conditions the British merchant seaman were marched down the gangway only for the present day employees to run up it and take their jobs. Most will only work a few years before retiring on the handouts of the patronising cruise ship passengers, so feeling sorry for them is the last thing anyone should do. rightway
  • Score: 0

4:03pm Wed 4 Jul 12

elvisimo says...

bigfella777 wrote:
I expect people will have a go at me when I say that I just do not see what all the fuss is about.We have cruise ships in every day,just because there are seven of them what is the big deal. It's all just free publicity for a big company,"Oh look at me I stood in the rain and saw a boat", wow wee get a life.
yeah and those red arrows - who cares it it was cancelled - its just s few planes flying around. AND those darn expensive olympics - pointless - you can see just the same for free at the sports centre. All this inconvenience, you have no idea how difficult it is to get from my flat to Greggs and back. Blo ody students
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I expect people will have a go at me when I say that I just do not see what all the fuss is about.We have cruise ships in every day,just because there are seven of them what is the big deal. It's all just free publicity for a big company,"Oh look at me I stood in the rain and saw a boat", wow wee get a life.[/p][/quote]yeah and those red arrows - who cares it it was cancelled - its just s few planes flying around. AND those darn expensive olympics - pointless - you can see just the same for free at the sports centre. All this inconvenience, you have no idea how difficult it is to get from my flat to Greggs and back. Blo ody students elvisimo
  • Score: 0

4:11pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Keith Oftergrass says...

IanRRR wrote:
solo1 wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote:
Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
Snob 1st Class
I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.
Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.
Buses are used by very ordinary everyday people. But like in any walk of life, there are just a few that we would prefer not to be with. In the main, bus passengers are lovely folk, the young, the elderly, and most important of all, people who value the planet and who see all the advantages of not clogging up our streets, by using our fantastic public transport system. Thanks to all the operators, who work so hard to make sure we all get to our destinations safely and efficiently. Well done to P&O for a great day that I will remember for a long long time.
Sorry, I've got to agree with Chunky Monkey on this one. You only travel on a 'Loser Cruiser' if you have to and cannot afford the better alternatives. Personally I would rather walk that put up with the behaviour and odour from some of the lower class you inevitably end up travelling with.
Hear-hear !
[quote][p][bold]IanRRR[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]solo1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st Class[/p][/quote]I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.[/p][/quote]Buses are used by very ordinary everyday people. But like in any walk of life, there are just a few that we would prefer not to be with. In the main, bus passengers are lovely folk, the young, the elderly, and most important of all, people who value the planet and who see all the advantages of not clogging up our streets, by using our fantastic public transport system. Thanks to all the operators, who work so hard to make sure we all get to our destinations safely and efficiently. Well done to P&O for a great day that I will remember for a long long time.[/p][/quote]Sorry, I've got to agree with Chunky Monkey on this one. You only travel on a 'Loser Cruiser' if you have to and cannot afford the better alternatives. Personally I would rather walk that put up with the behaviour and odour from some of the lower class you inevitably end up travelling with. Hear-hear ! Keith Oftergrass
  • Score: 0

5:23pm Wed 4 Jul 12

elvisimo says...

Keith Oftergrass wrote:
IanRRR wrote:
solo1 wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
Snob 1st Class
I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.
Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.
Buses are used by very ordinary everyday people. But like in any walk of life, there are just a few that we would prefer not to be with. In the main, bus passengers are lovely folk, the young, the elderly, and most important of all, people who value the planet and who see all the advantages of not clogging up our streets, by using our fantastic public transport system. Thanks to all the operators, who work so hard to make sure we all get to our destinations safely and efficiently. Well done to P&O for a great day that I will remember for a long long time.
Sorry, I've got to agree with Chunky Monkey on this one. You only travel on a 'Loser Cruiser' if you have to and cannot afford the better alternatives. Personally I would rather walk that put up with the behaviour and odour from some of the lower class you inevitably end up travelling with. Hear-hear !
agree. If we got rid of buses, the sort of people on them would have to say at home, jd wetherspoon and lidl would go out of business and it would free up the roads for my car. Perfect.
[quote][p][bold]Keith Oftergrass[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IanRRR[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]solo1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st Class[/p][/quote]I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.[/p][/quote]Buses are used by very ordinary everyday people. But like in any walk of life, there are just a few that we would prefer not to be with. In the main, bus passengers are lovely folk, the young, the elderly, and most important of all, people who value the planet and who see all the advantages of not clogging up our streets, by using our fantastic public transport system. Thanks to all the operators, who work so hard to make sure we all get to our destinations safely and efficiently. Well done to P&O for a great day that I will remember for a long long time.[/p][/quote]Sorry, I've got to agree with Chunky Monkey on this one. You only travel on a 'Loser Cruiser' if you have to and cannot afford the better alternatives. Personally I would rather walk that put up with the behaviour and odour from some of the lower class you inevitably end up travelling with. Hear-hear ![/p][/quote]agree. If we got rid of buses, the sort of people on them would have to say at home, jd wetherspoon and lidl would go out of business and it would free up the roads for my car. Perfect. elvisimo
  • Score: 0

7:02pm Wed 4 Jul 12

arizonan says...

What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop. arizonan
  • Score: 0

7:03pm Wed 4 Jul 12

andysaints007 says...

elvisimo wrote:
Keith Oftergrass wrote:
IanRRR wrote:
solo1 wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
chunky_lover wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.
Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.
Snob 1st Class
I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.
Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.
Buses are used by very ordinary everyday people. But like in any walk of life, there are just a few that we would prefer not to be with. In the main, bus passengers are lovely folk, the young, the elderly, and most important of all, people who value the planet and who see all the advantages of not clogging up our streets, by using our fantastic public transport system. Thanks to all the operators, who work so hard to make sure we all get to our destinations safely and efficiently. Well done to P&O for a great day that I will remember for a long long time.
Sorry, I've got to agree with Chunky Monkey on this one. You only travel on a 'Loser Cruiser' if you have to and cannot afford the better alternatives. Personally I would rather walk that put up with the behaviour and odour from some of the lower class you inevitably end up travelling with. Hear-hear !
agree. If we got rid of buses, the sort of people on them would have to say at home, jd wetherspoon and lidl would go out of business and it would free up the roads for my car. Perfect.
It's really nice to know that there are bigger d*ckheads on here than me !! lol
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Keith Oftergrass[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IanRRR[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]solo1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chunky_lover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: Not sure why so many people drive to that part of town anyway. It's close to the station and there are plenty of buses that go there. Maybe Southampton needs a park and ride somewhere.[/p][/quote]Ever been on a bus? Seen the class of people who travel by bus? That's why.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st Class[/p][/quote]I'm not a snob, although I do prefer to limit my exposure to infectious diseases, foul language and the general stench of poverty.[/p][/quote]Snob 1st class not a correct description. More descriptive text needed but sadly disallowed.[/p][/quote]Buses are used by very ordinary everyday people. But like in any walk of life, there are just a few that we would prefer not to be with. In the main, bus passengers are lovely folk, the young, the elderly, and most important of all, people who value the planet and who see all the advantages of not clogging up our streets, by using our fantastic public transport system. Thanks to all the operators, who work so hard to make sure we all get to our destinations safely and efficiently. Well done to P&O for a great day that I will remember for a long long time.[/p][/quote]Sorry, I've got to agree with Chunky Monkey on this one. You only travel on a 'Loser Cruiser' if you have to and cannot afford the better alternatives. Personally I would rather walk that put up with the behaviour and odour from some of the lower class you inevitably end up travelling with. Hear-hear ![/p][/quote]agree. If we got rid of buses, the sort of people on them would have to say at home, jd wetherspoon and lidl would go out of business and it would free up the roads for my car. Perfect.[/p][/quote]It's really nice to know that there are bigger d*ckheads on here than me !! lol andysaints007
  • Score: 0

7:10pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Jdejohn says...

A grand event yes, but a shame the Canberra was not still around to add some grace and beauty to a group of seven ugly sisters!!
A grand event yes, but a shame the Canberra was not still around to add some grace and beauty to a group of seven ugly sisters!! Jdejohn
  • Score: 0

7:57pm Wed 4 Jul 12

The Salv says...

arizonan wrote:
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
You are a tw@t
[quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.[/p][/quote]You are a tw@t The Salv
  • Score: 0

9:25pm Wed 4 Jul 12

phil maccavity says...

Bit of a harsh comment but what he says could be a possibility but all passengers would have to embark in Soton first.
Whereas Soton was able to turnround all seven P&O ships from privately financed terminals, Liverpool would only be able to berth one at their currently EC grant aided tent and could only transfer a maximum 1200 passengers at this location, with the other two Cunarders anchored in the Mersey.
So whilst the 3 Cunarders could possibly call in the Mersey the Soton connection would have to remain to ensure all passengers could get on and off the ships in one day
Bit of a harsh comment but what he says could be a possibility but all passengers would have to embark in Soton first. Whereas Soton was able to turnround all seven P&O ships from privately financed terminals, Liverpool would only be able to berth one at their currently EC grant aided tent and could only transfer a maximum 1200 passengers at this location, with the other two Cunarders anchored in the Mersey. So whilst the 3 Cunarders could possibly call in the Mersey the Soton connection would have to remain to ensure all passengers could get on and off the ships in one day phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

9:53pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

rightway wrote:
Sovietobserver wrote: A quick calculation suggests that P&O / Carnival Group workers would need to work for almost 500 days to pay for a cruise themselves, assuming that they did not spend a single penny of their wages on living costs. It's high time the disgraceful practice of allowing the shipping industry to pay poverty wages to workers who don't live in the UK was stopped.Exploitive rates of pay for their workers on British ships have no place in a modern society. An estimated 1.2 million people work at sea, for those working on board a ship has never been an idyllic operation. Over 200 years after the men of HMS Bounty rebelled against their captain for mistreatment (commemorated in a number of books and films like 'Mutiny of the Bounty'), activists say that the ship workers are still exploited routinely. It is just a sweat shop at sea. 95% of these crew work seven days a week, with the majority working between 12 and 14 hours per day. Overtime is not paid on many vessels because no union agreement exists. They also pay up to $2000 to get their jobs from unscrupulous agents, so that their first few months income is spent paying off their debt.
I have no sympathy for them. As I have said before on here, where were the bleeding hearts when, after fighting for pay and conditions the British merchant seaman were marched down the gangway only for the present day employees to run up it and take their jobs. Most will only work a few years before retiring on the handouts of the patronising cruise ship passengers, so feeling sorry for them is the last thing anyone should do.
Yes many people from third world or developing nations played in the hands of shipping companies and back stabbed members of seamen's union by what was basically scabbing. 

As that time active member of T&G I fully supported the cause of many friends whose jobs were under threat.

Sadly those days Seamen's union was dominated by likes of Prescott who sacrificed the interests of their members at the alter of Tabloid press and for promoting fake socialists like Kinnock.

Leadership of that union has lot to answer for immoralities they practised. They were metaphorically speaking 'slave trading' because their union used to get small amount of money from employers for tolerating every third world worker on peanut wage.

Yes it is difficult to forget all that, but now few decades later both us and workers from places like Bangladesh, India and Philippines etc should learn to unite. Because in my view only united stand by all the workers where ever they come from will sort these shark practises. Otherwise by undermining each other all of us will become sitting ducks whom they will shoot one by one.

So from that point of view I think it is a good development that at least some of them are starting to realise exploitation and have taken a token stand. But they must do more than a token protest and also join proper union and MUST demand that virtual discrimination against British workers should also be stopped. 
[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sovietobserver[/bold] wrote: A quick calculation suggests that P&O / Carnival Group workers would need to work for almost 500 days to pay for a cruise themselves, assuming that they did not spend a single penny of their wages on living costs. It's high time the disgraceful practice of allowing the shipping industry to pay poverty wages to workers who don't live in the UK was stopped.Exploitive rates of pay for their workers on British ships have no place in a modern society. An estimated 1.2 million people work at sea, for those working on board a ship has never been an idyllic operation. Over 200 years after the men of HMS Bounty rebelled against their captain for mistreatment (commemorated in a number of books and films like 'Mutiny of the Bounty'), activists say that the ship workers are still exploited routinely. It is just a sweat shop at sea. 95% of these crew work seven days a week, with the majority working between 12 and 14 hours per day. Overtime is not paid on many vessels because no union agreement exists. They also pay up to $2000 to get their jobs from unscrupulous agents, so that their first few months income is spent paying off their debt.[/p][/quote]I have no sympathy for them. As I have said before on here, where were the bleeding hearts when, after fighting for pay and conditions the British merchant seaman were marched down the gangway only for the present day employees to run up it and take their jobs. Most will only work a few years before retiring on the handouts of the patronising cruise ship passengers, so feeling sorry for them is the last thing anyone should do.[/p][/quote]Yes many people from third world or developing nations played in the hands of shipping companies and back stabbed members of seamen's union by what was basically scabbing.  As that time active member of T&G I fully supported the cause of many friends whose jobs were under threat. Sadly those days Seamen's union was dominated by likes of Prescott who sacrificed the interests of their members at the alter of Tabloid press and for promoting fake socialists like Kinnock. Leadership of that union has lot to answer for immoralities they practised. They were metaphorically speaking 'slave trading' because their union used to get small amount of money from employers for tolerating every third world worker on peanut wage. Yes it is difficult to forget all that, but now few decades later both us and workers from places like Bangladesh, India and Philippines etc should learn to unite. Because in my view only united stand by all the workers where ever they come from will sort these shark practises. Otherwise by undermining each other all of us will become sitting ducks whom they will shoot one by one. So from that point of view I think it is a good development that at least some of them are starting to realise exploitation and have taken a token stand. But they must do more than a token protest and also join proper union and MUST demand that virtual discrimination against British workers should also be stopped.  Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

10:18pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

X Old Bill wrote:
southy wrote:
Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote: Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry. By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?
Paramjit Bahia says... 11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12 " By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? " ******************** *** Could that be the same " Tax Haven " where ABP the owners of Southampton docks are based.
No ABPj is money is in Jersey, P&O if I remeber correctly is in Lichtenstein.
P & O keep some of their money in Guernsey - As is stated in the Guardian article, if you read it. But then again the Guardian refers to India, when they probably specifically mean Goa.
  Goa is province of India. Most of Indian crews working on These ships tend to b e from provinces/states Goa Kerala or mainly from city of Mumbai (new fanciful name for Bombay, where place name got changed by opportunist politicians who ignored many other real problems of it's inhabitants, which may remind you of our own political class)
[quote][p][bold]X Old Bill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Hope those who braved the weather and turned up enjoyed the spectacle. I was only looking forward to Red Arrows display, but their cancelation although disappointment meant I saved on petrol and stayed home in dry. By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’?[/p][/quote]Paramjit Bahia says... 11:11am Wed 4 Jul 12 " By the way has anybody read the article in financial pages of the Guardian other day on how badly low paid workers (75p per hour) have been recently treated by this shipping giant’s agency, which is based in some ‘tax haven’? " ******************** *** Could that be the same " Tax Haven " where ABP the owners of Southampton docks are based.[/p][/quote]No ABPj is money is in Jersey, P&O if I remeber correctly is in Lichtenstein.[/p][/quote]P & O keep some of their money in Guernsey - As is stated in the Guardian article, if you read it. But then again the Guardian refers to India, when they probably specifically mean Goa.[/p][/quote]  Goa is province of India. Most of Indian crews working on These ships tend to b e from provinces/states Goa Kerala or mainly from city of Mumbai (new fanciful name for Bombay, where place name got changed by opportunist politicians who ignored many other real problems of it's inhabitants, which may remind you of our own political class) Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

11:25pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Proud from LIVERPOOL says...

arizonan wrote:
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .
[quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.[/p][/quote]I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands . Proud from LIVERPOOL
  • Score: 0

11:33pm Wed 4 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

I must admit I only use the bus because I have a bus pass (I don't drive a car or ride a bike), but they have mutilated my local route (ex 7 now 5) and it's only Blue Line with their No. 2 that are much use. Had the weather been better I would have ventured out to get some pics of the boats, but didn't bother in the end, pity.
I must admit I only use the bus because I have a bus pass (I don't drive a car or ride a bike), but they have mutilated my local route (ex 7 now 5) and it's only Blue Line with their No. 2 that are much use. Had the weather been better I would have ventured out to get some pics of the boats, but didn't bother in the end, pity. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

1:33am Thu 5 Jul 12

andysaints007 says...

Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
arizonan wrote:
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .
Oh yeah we forgot you scousers can control the weather!! IDIOT Now f*ck off back up there if its so good
ps ...Is that why your local rag reckons only a few hundred lined up for your first turnaround cruise then!!
[quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.[/p][/quote]I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .[/p][/quote]Oh yeah we forgot you scousers can control the weather!! IDIOT Now f*ck off back up there if its so good ps ...Is that why your local rag reckons only a few hundred lined up for your first turnaround cruise then!! andysaints007
  • Score: 0

1:44am Thu 5 Jul 12

andysaints007 says...

arizonan wrote:
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
....but only 3 little boats though - we get that every week down here with big boats - it's nothing special you ar*ehole
[quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.[/p][/quote]....but only 3 little boats though - we get that every week down here with big boats - it's nothing special you ar*ehole andysaints007
  • Score: 0

1:47am Thu 5 Jul 12

andysaints007 says...

andysaints007 wrote:
Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
arizonan wrote:
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .
Oh yeah we forgot you scousers can control the weather!! IDIOT Now f*ck off back up there if its so good
ps ...Is that why your local rag reckons only a few hundred lined up for your first turnaround cruise then!!
Are you talking about the tens of thousands queueing every other Wednesday on benefit day? Still I suppose that is a big event up there hey!
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.[/p][/quote]I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .[/p][/quote]Oh yeah we forgot you scousers can control the weather!! IDIOT Now f*ck off back up there if its so good ps ...Is that why your local rag reckons only a few hundred lined up for your first turnaround cruise then!![/p][/quote]Are you talking about the tens of thousands queueing every other Wednesday on benefit day? Still I suppose that is a big event up there hey! andysaints007
  • Score: 0

2:32am Thu 5 Jul 12

flatulence hero says...

No worry andysaints007, with 3 ships it will look nothing compared to P & O and its 7 in the best port in the UK, Southampton.

Anyway who the hell would want to see 3 "QUEENS"!!!.

Those scousers will nick things off them anyway.
No worry andysaints007, with 3 ships it will look nothing compared to P & O and its 7 in the best port in the UK, Southampton. Anyway who the hell would want to see 3 "QUEENS"!!!. Those scousers will nick things off them anyway. flatulence hero
  • Score: 0

5:35am Thu 5 Jul 12

arizonan says...

phil maccavity wrote:
Bit of a harsh comment but what he says could be a possibility but all passengers would have to embark in Soton first.
Whereas Soton was able to turnround all seven P&O ships from privately financed terminals, Liverpool would only be able to berth one at their currently EC grant aided tent and could only transfer a maximum 1200 passengers at this location, with the other two Cunarders anchored in the Mersey.
So whilst the 3 Cunarders could possibly call in the Mersey the Soton connection would have to remain to ensure all passengers could get on and off the ships in one day
Cunard have no plans to embark any passengers in Liverpool in 2015 as I understand their plans at the moment.
However, the operators of the Ocean Countess were gobsmacked at the speed and efficiency of the embarkation of the first cruise from the Liverpool Cruise Terminal.
BTW, you may need to check your facts re. the funding of the, 'tent.'
I thought the EU money went to the pontoon, not the tent.
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: Bit of a harsh comment but what he says could be a possibility but all passengers would have to embark in Soton first. Whereas Soton was able to turnround all seven P&O ships from privately financed terminals, Liverpool would only be able to berth one at their currently EC grant aided tent and could only transfer a maximum 1200 passengers at this location, with the other two Cunarders anchored in the Mersey. So whilst the 3 Cunarders could possibly call in the Mersey the Soton connection would have to remain to ensure all passengers could get on and off the ships in one day[/p][/quote]Cunard have no plans to embark any passengers in Liverpool in 2015 as I understand their plans at the moment. However, the operators of the Ocean Countess were gobsmacked at the speed and efficiency of the embarkation of the first cruise from the Liverpool Cruise Terminal. BTW, you may need to check your facts re. the funding of the, 'tent.' I thought the EU money went to the pontoon, not the tent. arizonan
  • Score: 0

7:03am Thu 5 Jul 12

flatulence hero says...

Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
arizonan wrote:
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .
You are off your rocker.

Only one ship to berth and two at anchor in the Mersey.

Or is Liverpool planning another "con" to obtain more money to build another landing berth.

Come, it is already looking like a farce and could easily become the next "Carry on cruising up the Mersey" film.

You scousers are pillocks and so envious of what Southampton did for the P & O beautiful 7.
[quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.[/p][/quote]I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .[/p][/quote]You are off your rocker. Only one ship to berth and two at anchor in the Mersey. Or is Liverpool planning another "con" to obtain more money to build another landing berth. Come, it is already looking like a farce and could easily become the next "Carry on cruising up the Mersey" film. You scousers are pillocks and so envious of what Southampton did for the P & O beautiful 7. flatulence hero
  • Score: 0

7:29am Thu 5 Jul 12

phil maccavity says...

arizonan wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
Bit of a harsh comment but what he says could be a possibility but all passengers would have to embark in Soton first.
Whereas Soton was able to turnround all seven P&O ships from privately financed terminals, Liverpool would only be able to berth one at their currently EC grant aided tent and could only transfer a maximum 1200 passengers at this location, with the other two Cunarders anchored in the Mersey.
So whilst the 3 Cunarders could possibly call in the Mersey the Soton connection would have to remain to ensure all passengers could get on and off the ships in one day
Cunard have no plans to embark any passengers in Liverpool in 2015 as I understand their plans at the moment.
However, the operators of the Ocean Countess were gobsmacked at the speed and efficiency of the embarkation of the first cruise from the Liverpool Cruise Terminal.
BTW, you may need to check your facts re. the funding of the, 'tent.'
I thought the EU money went to the pontoon, not the tent.
Stand corrected
The EU grant of £8.5m, or so, did fund half of the pontoon and passenger cabin. It was the local taxpayer who has funded the £500k tent (or 'terminal building' as it is described) and this will remain the case for the next 3 years at least.
The local taxpayer also picks up the ongoing operating loss on the calling cruise operation which runs at another £500k per year.
Say what you like about Soton's cruise operation but none of it costs the tax payer a penny
Good on Liverpool for turning round 1,000 or so passengers within a normal turnround day.
If Liverpool wants to step up to the next level the challenge will be to undertake speedy turnrounds on ships carrying 3-4,000 passengers possibly during a multiple cruise day when there are 5 or more ships in port.
It is a very steep learning curve!!
[quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: Bit of a harsh comment but what he says could be a possibility but all passengers would have to embark in Soton first. Whereas Soton was able to turnround all seven P&O ships from privately financed terminals, Liverpool would only be able to berth one at their currently EC grant aided tent and could only transfer a maximum 1200 passengers at this location, with the other two Cunarders anchored in the Mersey. So whilst the 3 Cunarders could possibly call in the Mersey the Soton connection would have to remain to ensure all passengers could get on and off the ships in one day[/p][/quote]Cunard have no plans to embark any passengers in Liverpool in 2015 as I understand their plans at the moment. However, the operators of the Ocean Countess were gobsmacked at the speed and efficiency of the embarkation of the first cruise from the Liverpool Cruise Terminal. BTW, you may need to check your facts re. the funding of the, 'tent.' I thought the EU money went to the pontoon, not the tent.[/p][/quote]Stand corrected The EU grant of £8.5m, or so, did fund half of the pontoon and passenger cabin. It was the local taxpayer who has funded the £500k tent (or 'terminal building' as it is described) and this will remain the case for the next 3 years at least. The local taxpayer also picks up the ongoing operating loss on the calling cruise operation which runs at another £500k per year. Say what you like about Soton's cruise operation but none of it costs the tax payer a penny Good on Liverpool for turning round 1,000 or so passengers within a normal turnround day. If Liverpool wants to step up to the next level the challenge will be to undertake speedy turnrounds on ships carrying 3-4,000 passengers possibly during a multiple cruise day when there are 5 or more ships in port. It is a very steep learning curve!! phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

7:43am Thu 5 Jul 12

arizonan says...

The Liverpool Cruise Terminal disembarked 800 pax and luggage in just over an hour from the Ocean Countess.
The owners could not believe it and said it was a world record for the ship.
The Liverpool Cruise Terminal disembarked 800 pax and luggage in just over an hour from the Ocean Countess. The owners could not believe it and said it was a world record for the ship. arizonan
  • Score: 0

8:16am Thu 5 Jul 12

phil maccavity says...

Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK.
Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'.
No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers.
To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities.
It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise.
Still fair play for a good start.
Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK. Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'. No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers. To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities. It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise. Still fair play for a good start. phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

8:33am Thu 5 Jul 12

Proud from LIVERPOOL says...

andysaints007 wrote:
Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
arizonan wrote:
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .
Oh yeah we forgot you scousers can control the weather!! IDIOT Now f*ck off back up there if its so good
ps ...Is that why your local rag reckons only a few hundred lined up for your first turnaround cruise then!!
Most people who post here can discuss things without using the language of the sewer ( I had hoped that people like you would have been removed by the Echo from this site ).Try to behave yourself and not lose it and the adults might let you out to play.
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.[/p][/quote]I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .[/p][/quote]Oh yeah we forgot you scousers can control the weather!! IDIOT Now f*ck off back up there if its so good ps ...Is that why your local rag reckons only a few hundred lined up for your first turnaround cruise then!![/p][/quote]Most people who post here can discuss things without using the language of the sewer ( I had hoped that people like you would have been removed by the Echo from this site ).Try to behave yourself and not lose it and the adults might let you out to play. Proud from LIVERPOOL
  • Score: 0

12:13pm Thu 5 Jul 12

peter sowerby says...

The only thing the P&O simply amazing event to me was P&O getting away with the exploitation of thousands of men and women crew members. Paying slave wages,contracts and gratuities systems that would put the criminal mafia to shame. P&O hang your heads in shame you are a disgrace and should immediately start paying staff a living wage.
The only thing the P&O simply amazing event to me was P&O getting away with the exploitation of thousands of men and women crew members. Paying slave wages,contracts and gratuities systems that would put the criminal mafia to shame. P&O hang your heads in shame you are a disgrace and should immediately start paying staff a living wage. peter sowerby
  • Score: 0

4:15pm Thu 5 Jul 12

arizonan says...

phil maccavity wrote:
Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK.
Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'.
No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers.
To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities.
It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise.
Still fair play for a good start.
The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK. Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'. No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers. To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities. It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise. Still fair play for a good start.[/p][/quote]The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters. arizonan
  • Score: 0

7:52pm Thu 5 Jul 12

phil maccavity says...

arizonan wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK.
Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'.
No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers.
To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities.
It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise.
Still fair play for a good start.
The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.
Pedantic I know but it was the charterers and not the owners who were reported as saying this.
On the surface a positive for Liverpool.
What needs to be explained is why the ship in question,which is due to turnround in Liverpool on 12 occasions this year is only promoting 5 calls in 2013??
Interestingly one of these calls starts in the exotic location of Avonmouth Dock in Bristol (accessed through a lock!!)
Any ideas?
[quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK. Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'. No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers. To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities. It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise. Still fair play for a good start.[/p][/quote]The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.[/p][/quote]Pedantic I know but it was the charterers and not the owners who were reported as saying this. On the surface a positive for Liverpool. What needs to be explained is why the ship in question,which is due to turnround in Liverpool on 12 occasions this year is only promoting 5 calls in 2013?? Interestingly one of these calls starts in the exotic location of Avonmouth Dock in Bristol (accessed through a lock!!) Any ideas? phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

11:00pm Thu 5 Jul 12

arizonan says...

phil maccavity wrote:
arizonan wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK.
Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'.
No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers.
To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities.
It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise.
Still fair play for a good start.
The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.
Pedantic I know but it was the charterers and not the owners who were reported as saying this.
On the surface a positive for Liverpool.
What needs to be explained is why the ship in question,which is due to turnround in Liverpool on 12 occasions this year is only promoting 5 calls in 2013??
Interestingly one of these calls starts in the exotic location of Avonmouth Dock in Bristol (accessed through a lock!!)
Any ideas?
'The owners, Cruise & Maritime Voyages, couldn't believe it and said this was a world record for the ship,' said Angie Redhead, Manager of the Cruise Terminal.
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK. Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'. No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers. To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities. It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise. Still fair play for a good start.[/p][/quote]The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.[/p][/quote]Pedantic I know but it was the charterers and not the owners who were reported as saying this. On the surface a positive for Liverpool. What needs to be explained is why the ship in question,which is due to turnround in Liverpool on 12 occasions this year is only promoting 5 calls in 2013?? Interestingly one of these calls starts in the exotic location of Avonmouth Dock in Bristol (accessed through a lock!!) Any ideas?[/p][/quote]'The owners, Cruise & Maritime Voyages, couldn't believe it and said this was a world record for the ship,' said Angie Redhead, Manager of the Cruise Terminal. arizonan
  • Score: 0

12:37am Fri 6 Jul 12

andysaints007 says...

Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
andysaints007 wrote:
Proud from LIVERPOOL wrote:
arizonan wrote:
What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !.
Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.
I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .
Oh yeah we forgot you scousers can control the weather!! IDIOT Now f*ck off back up there if its so good
ps ...Is that why your local rag reckons only a few hundred lined up for your first turnaround cruise then!!
Most people who post here can discuss things without using the language of the sewer ( I had hoped that people like you would have been removed by the Echo from this site ).Try to behave yourself and not lose it and the adults might let you out to play.
Yeah sorry - I forgot you are so 'adult' that you come on this site just to wind up the locals down here!! You put yourself in the firing line so be an 'adult' and take it - you moany little scally
[quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Proud from LIVERPOOL[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: What a pity the 7 ships did not have a better backdrop to contrast against !. Never mind, in 2015, Cunard's 175 anniversary will have a World class backdrop.[/p][/quote]I totally agree, Cunard's event in Liverpool in 2015 will be spectacular and properly organized as are all the big events here . We don't talk about thousands of sightseers lining the waterfront, we talk of ten's of thousands .[/p][/quote]Oh yeah we forgot you scousers can control the weather!! IDIOT Now f*ck off back up there if its so good ps ...Is that why your local rag reckons only a few hundred lined up for your first turnaround cruise then!![/p][/quote]Most people who post here can discuss things without using the language of the sewer ( I had hoped that people like you would have been removed by the Echo from this site ).Try to behave yourself and not lose it and the adults might let you out to play.[/p][/quote]Yeah sorry - I forgot you are so 'adult' that you come on this site just to wind up the locals down here!! You put yourself in the firing line so be an 'adult' and take it - you moany little scally andysaints007
  • Score: 0

1:38am Fri 6 Jul 12

flatulence hero says...

I heard the passengers were so happy to be back they fell over each other to get off so as they could get some decent grub, a real cup of tea and coffee and a decent English pint of beer.

Lets face it if the cruise started in Liverpool and ended in Liverpool it would have been mostly filled with scousers.
They do not have much luggage and what they have they carry in one or two Tesco plastic bags!
Very easy to explain the quick unloading.
I heard the passengers were so happy to be back they fell over each other to get off so as they could get some decent grub, a real cup of tea and coffee and a decent English pint of beer. Lets face it if the cruise started in Liverpool and ended in Liverpool it would have been mostly filled with scousers. They do not have much luggage and what they have they carry in one or two Tesco plastic bags! Very easy to explain the quick unloading. flatulence hero
  • Score: 0

10:42am Fri 6 Jul 12

phil maccavity says...

arizonan wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
arizonan wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK.
Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'.
No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers.
To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities.
It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise.
Still fair play for a good start.
The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.
Pedantic I know but it was the charterers and not the owners who were reported as saying this.
On the surface a positive for Liverpool.
What needs to be explained is why the ship in question,which is due to turnround in Liverpool on 12 occasions this year is only promoting 5 calls in 2013??
Interestingly one of these calls starts in the exotic location of Avonmouth Dock in Bristol (accessed through a lock!!)
Any ideas?
'The owners, Cruise & Maritime Voyages, couldn't believe it and said this was a world record for the ship,' said Angie Redhead, Manager of the Cruise Terminal.
Either poor reporting by the local Liverpool press or Angie Redhead needs to check her facts.
Same applies to your beloved elected mayor who claimed to be chasing business from Ocean Village when this brand disappeared a few years ago!!
The registered owner of 'Ocean Countess' is Maximus Navigation based in Portugal.
UK based Cruise and Maritime Services took over the charter in April 2010.
Pehaps you might give them a ring to find out why their Liverpool calls have reduced next year in favour of Avonmouth in Bristol.!!!!
[quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK. Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'. No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers. To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities. It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise. Still fair play for a good start.[/p][/quote]The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.[/p][/quote]Pedantic I know but it was the charterers and not the owners who were reported as saying this. On the surface a positive for Liverpool. What needs to be explained is why the ship in question,which is due to turnround in Liverpool on 12 occasions this year is only promoting 5 calls in 2013?? Interestingly one of these calls starts in the exotic location of Avonmouth Dock in Bristol (accessed through a lock!!) Any ideas?[/p][/quote]'The owners, Cruise & Maritime Voyages, couldn't believe it and said this was a world record for the ship,' said Angie Redhead, Manager of the Cruise Terminal.[/p][/quote]Either poor reporting by the local Liverpool press or Angie Redhead needs to check her facts. Same applies to your beloved elected mayor who claimed to be chasing business from Ocean Village when this brand disappeared a few years ago!! The registered owner of 'Ocean Countess' is Maximus Navigation based in Portugal. UK based Cruise and Maritime Services took over the charter in April 2010. Pehaps you might give them a ring to find out why their Liverpool calls have reduced next year in favour of Avonmouth in Bristol.!!!! phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

4:28pm Fri 6 Jul 12

arizonan says...

phil maccavity wrote:
arizonan wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
arizonan wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK.
Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'.
No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers.
To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities.
It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise.
Still fair play for a good start.
The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.
Pedantic I know but it was the charterers and not the owners who were reported as saying this.
On the surface a positive for Liverpool.
What needs to be explained is why the ship in question,which is due to turnround in Liverpool on 12 occasions this year is only promoting 5 calls in 2013??
Interestingly one of these calls starts in the exotic location of Avonmouth Dock in Bristol (accessed through a lock!!)
Any ideas?
'The owners, Cruise & Maritime Voyages, couldn't believe it and said this was a world record for the ship,' said Angie Redhead, Manager of the Cruise Terminal.
Either poor reporting by the local Liverpool press or Angie Redhead needs to check her facts.
Same applies to your beloved elected mayor who claimed to be chasing business from Ocean Village when this brand disappeared a few years ago!!
The registered owner of 'Ocean Countess' is Maximus Navigation based in Portugal.
UK based Cruise and Maritime Services took over the charter in April 2010.
Pehaps you might give them a ring to find out why their Liverpool calls have reduced next year in favour of Avonmouth in Bristol.!!!!
So this lady, Angie Redhead was lying, I presume is what you are saying. This lady has the advantage over you and I, by the fact that she was there and you and I were not.
On the subject of a reduction in the number of cruises from Liverpool next year, I understand that this company usually offers cruises from the West Country, i.e. Plymouth or Falmouth.
This year they were unable to agree this and so increased sailings from Liverpool.
For 2013 they are adding the Port of Bristol/Avonmouth to the Ocean Countess programme, which has affected the number of cruises from other ports.
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arizonan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: Check out ports that Ocean Countess disembarks passengers in the UK. Tilbury, Hull, Newcastle, Falmouth, Leith so the competition is 'fierce'. No doubt you will be able to advise where else in the 'world' the ship the ship disembark passengers. To disembark 800 pax and luggage is indeed a decent effort from a small ship even with limited shoreside facilities. It is maintaining the same flow rate when the passenger figures increase by a factor of four and the baggage per head doubles after a world cruise. Still fair play for a good start.[/p][/quote]The comments came from the owners of the Ocean Countess, who you would think, knew about such matters.[/p][/quote]Pedantic I know but it was the charterers and not the owners who were reported as saying this. On the surface a positive for Liverpool. What needs to be explained is why the ship in question,which is due to turnround in Liverpool on 12 occasions this year is only promoting 5 calls in 2013?? Interestingly one of these calls starts in the exotic location of Avonmouth Dock in Bristol (accessed through a lock!!) Any ideas?[/p][/quote]'The owners, Cruise & Maritime Voyages, couldn't believe it and said this was a world record for the ship,' said Angie Redhead, Manager of the Cruise Terminal.[/p][/quote]Either poor reporting by the local Liverpool press or Angie Redhead needs to check her facts. Same applies to your beloved elected mayor who claimed to be chasing business from Ocean Village when this brand disappeared a few years ago!! The registered owner of 'Ocean Countess' is Maximus Navigation based in Portugal. UK based Cruise and Maritime Services took over the charter in April 2010. Pehaps you might give them a ring to find out why their Liverpool calls have reduced next year in favour of Avonmouth in Bristol.!!!![/p][/quote]So this lady, Angie Redhead was lying, I presume is what you are saying. This lady has the advantage over you and I, by the fact that she was there and you and I were not. On the subject of a reduction in the number of cruises from Liverpool next year, I understand that this company usually offers cruises from the West Country, i.e. Plymouth or Falmouth. This year they were unable to agree this and so increased sailings from Liverpool. For 2013 they are adding the Port of Bristol/Avonmouth to the Ocean Countess programme, which has affected the number of cruises from other ports. arizonan
  • Score: 0

7:41pm Fri 6 Jul 12

phil maccavity says...

What in my post suggests that the lady was lying, as you put it?
What I actually wrote was that, if she was reported correctly (and she may not have been,of course), she obviously doesn't know the difference between the ship owners and the ship charterers.
It just seems rather odd to me that despite £17m+ of public money being spent on the initial calling cruise facility on the wonderfully optimistic premise that at least 50 calls a year would be achieved by 2010 (av of 16 actually recorded!!) and the forecast of enough business to support a second terminal, the flagship turnround operator is reducing its call itinerary by over 50% for 2013.
The terminal already places a significant annual operating loss on the Liverpool Tax Payer. Added to this will be the hire cost of the tent/marquee (another £500k pa) plus another equivalent £900k pa+ repaying the UK Govt grant (if LCC ever stump up for this)
What a wonderful waste of money on a grandiose scheme which fits in well with those who no longer live in the area and dont have any concern that their council tax money has been wasted.
The money could have easily have been spent actually helping needy people in the city eg renovating some of the decent old housing stock in areas like Toxteth rather than knock down whole streets where community is strong and relocate the residents to cheaply built newer houses dispersed around the city.
Having a cruise terminal is fine but the principle of getting someone else to pay for it on a failed business plan is wrong and this is the nub of the argument down here.
What in my post suggests that the lady was lying, as you put it? What I actually wrote was that, if she was reported correctly (and she may not have been,of course), she obviously doesn't know the difference between the ship owners and the ship charterers. It just seems rather odd to me that despite £17m+ of public money being spent on the initial calling cruise facility on the wonderfully optimistic premise that at least 50 calls a year would be achieved by 2010 (av of 16 actually recorded!!) and the forecast of enough business to support a second terminal, the flagship turnround operator is reducing its call itinerary by over 50% for 2013. The terminal already places a significant annual operating loss on the Liverpool Tax Payer. Added to this will be the hire cost of the tent/marquee (another £500k pa) plus another equivalent £900k pa+ repaying the UK Govt grant (if LCC ever stump up for this) What a wonderful waste of money on a grandiose scheme which fits in well with those who no longer live in the area and dont have any concern that their council tax money has been wasted. The money could have easily have been spent actually helping needy people in the city eg renovating some of the decent old housing stock in areas like Toxteth rather than knock down whole streets where community is strong and relocate the residents to cheaply built newer houses dispersed around the city. Having a cruise terminal is fine but the principle of getting someone else to pay for it on a failed business plan is wrong and this is the nub of the argument down here. phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

9:03pm Fri 6 Jul 12

arizonan says...

What does it matter if the representatives on the day are owners or charterers?
How do you know that she was misquoted?
That sounds as if you don't like the fact that praise was forthcoming from the cruise operators to Liverpool Cruise Terminal.
I do like the fact that you stick to the point in question.
What does it matter if the representatives on the day are owners or charterers? How do you know that she was misquoted? That sounds as if you don't like the fact that praise was forthcoming from the cruise operators to Liverpool Cruise Terminal. I do like the fact that you stick to the point in question. arizonan
  • Score: 0

10:50am Sat 7 Jul 12

phil maccavity says...

I agree.
In the overall scale of things who actually owns the ship hardly matters and, if you read my original point I did say this was a pendantic point.
Also, on the surface, praise for a 'world record' passenger/baggage performance is a positive.
I guess the real embarrassment here is despite all this praise, the owners/charterers have decided to reduce their calls into Liverpool by more than 50% next year.
I am sure in commercially run cruise terminals elsewhere in the UK heads would roll especially as the original business plan for calling cruises (in which Liverpool should excel given all its attributes) has consistently fallen short of expectation and even a nearby 'back water' such as Holyhead is doing better with no UK/EC support.
The point in question is, of course, the duplicity of Liverpool City Council applying for £17m of grant aid to build cruise terminal, specifically for calling cruises, in the knowledge that they would not get the money if they applied for turnround status from the beginning.
I was up on the Wirral earlier in the week and was heartened by the response of some Merseyside
business people who agree that this cruise terminal issue has turned into a fiasco and underscores the misuse of a lot of grant aid money which could well have been used in a much more commercially astute and community related way in a deprived area.
I agree. In the overall scale of things who actually owns the ship hardly matters and, if you read my original point I did say this was a pendantic point. Also, on the surface, praise for a 'world record' passenger/baggage performance is a positive. I guess the real embarrassment here is despite all this praise, the owners/charterers have decided to reduce their calls into Liverpool by more than 50% next year. I am sure in commercially run cruise terminals elsewhere in the UK heads would roll especially as the original business plan for calling cruises (in which Liverpool should excel given all its attributes) has consistently fallen short of expectation and even a nearby 'back water' such as Holyhead is doing better with no UK/EC support. The point in question is, of course, the duplicity of Liverpool City Council applying for £17m of grant aid to build cruise terminal, specifically for calling cruises, in the knowledge that they would not get the money if they applied for turnround status from the beginning. I was up on the Wirral earlier in the week and was heartened by the response of some Merseyside business people who agree that this cruise terminal issue has turned into a fiasco and underscores the misuse of a lot of grant aid money which could well have been used in a much more commercially astute and community related way in a deprived area. phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

3:46pm Sat 7 Jul 12

arizonan says...

If this facility is such a failure, then why has ABP, MP's, MEP's, ex Southampton F.C. managers, the Southern Echo, put up this incredible opposition to a failed project?
That does not make sense, does it?
The operators of the Ocean Countess at least want to bring cruise facilities to all parts of the country and are to be commended for that.
Liverpool cannot complain if this company wishes to start cruising out of Bristol.
You are also aware that Liverpool can handle only a limited number of passengers, so that must play a part in the type of cruises it can offer.
See the statement by Fred Olsen on their return to Liverpool next year.
If this facility is such a failure, then why has ABP, MP's, MEP's, ex Southampton F.C. managers, the Southern Echo, put up this incredible opposition to a failed project? That does not make sense, does it? The operators of the Ocean Countess at least want to bring cruise facilities to all parts of the country and are to be commended for that. Liverpool cannot complain if this company wishes to start cruising out of Bristol. You are also aware that Liverpool can handle only a limited number of passengers, so that must play a part in the type of cruises it can offer. See the statement by Fred Olsen on their return to Liverpool next year. arizonan
  • Score: 0

6:50pm Sun 8 Jul 12

phil maccavity says...

Newcastle and Harwich are also amongst those publically against the change of use arrangement
Ironically Portsmouth now seem to appear against the issue having been 'persuaded' to support it prior to the first failed application to the Labour Govt.
Newcastle and Harwich are also amongst those publically against the change of use arrangement Ironically Portsmouth now seem to appear against the issue having been 'persuaded' to support it prior to the first failed application to the Labour Govt. phil maccavity
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree