Ford closure: Donate factory site to city, demands MP (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Ford closure: Donate factory site to city, demands MP
10:53am Tuesday 6th November 2012 in News
By Matt Smith, Politics and business reporter
Southampton Test MP Alan Whitehead
FORD has been urged to donate its Southampton Transit factory site to the city if it presses ahead with its closure plans.
Speaking during a Westminster debate Southampton MP Alan Whitehead said it would be a “slap in the face” if Ford were to sell off its Swaythling plant for development after receiving state handouts in recent months.
The Labour MP called for the site to be “donated to the community and the city that has put so much into Ford in the past and has been such a pivotal part in making that site work over so many years."
Commercial property experts estimate that the 52-acre industrial site would be worth between £10m and £15m.
Dr Whitehead said it would be “some reparation” for what he said seemed to be a "very grubby episode as far as the future of Ford manufacturing is concerned."
He was speaking during an Westminster Hall debate this morning secured by Caroline Nokes, Tory MP for Romsey and Southampton North.
The local MPs, including Southampton's John Denham and Eastleigh's Chris Huhne, were demanding answers on Ford’s plant closure plan and what the Government was told and when.
Ford announced nearly two weeks ago that it plans to close the plant in July, with the loss of more than 500 jobs.
The MPs questioned the awarding of a £9.3m Government grant just days before the announcement was made and a £80m (€100m) loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB) signed off for Ford Otosan's sprawling Turkish Transit plant in July, which will take over Southampton’s work.
Michael Fallon, a minister from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, said the department was told by Ford in September it would continue to produce the chassis cab variant of the Transit in Southampton in 2013, adding “we had no reason to question what they told us.”
He said Ford only revealed their closure plans to the department the evening before the announcement was made to the world.
Mr Fallon said he was “disappointed they chose not to engage with us until the day before the announcement.”
He said the EIB loan was approved for the retooling of Ford’s Turkish plant to make the next generation of the Transit and was “not based on the cessation of production in Southampton.”
Comments(53)
Sovietobserver
says...
11:04am Tue 6 Nov 12
They count British politicians as having zero influence over their businesses.
arthur dalyrimple
says...
11:07am Tue 6 Nov 12
Portswoodfoke
says...
11:20am Tue 6 Nov 12
This is usual PR bull from a career MP interested in votes not working people, pathetic.
Over the Edge
says...
11:22am Tue 6 Nov 12
Totton Ric
says...
11:22am Tue 6 Nov 12
one in a million
says...
11:31am Tue 6 Nov 12
southy
says...
11:48am Tue 6 Nov 12
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
georgetheseventh
says...
12:02pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Lone Ranger. wrote:Dont be so 'stupid'....Ford is a 'business' not a charity...this is the usual Southampton MP's baying and naying in the house.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
I thought you lot were staunch Tories ?.
peenut81
says...
12:07pm Tue 6 Nov 12
That should be changed. Be interesting to see how much the Royal Family still actually own for a start...
Paramjit Bahia
says...
12:13pm Tue 6 Nov 12
But to expect Ford to do something decent is like expecting a vulture giving the meat away from its beak. If Ford had any such conscience they would not have closed the plant in the first place.
These mega businesses are driven by pure greed, consideration for humanity and communities is hardly likely to appear on their radars.
Lone Ranger.
says...
12:33pm Tue 6 Nov 12
georgetheseventh wrote:Staunch Tories ......... How dare you.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Dont be so 'stupid'....Ford is a 'business' not a charity...this is the usual Southampton MP's baying and naying in the house.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
I thought you lot were staunch Tories ?.
.
Its a Labour Council ... again thankfully. and its a Labour area in Parliament .... until you get to the outlying areas and its ToryDem area
Brock_and_Roll
says...
12:35pm Tue 6 Nov 12
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
southy
says...
12:41pm Tue 6 Nov 12
peenut81 wrote:In reality the Crown owns all the land even freehold land, and freeholders are only guardians of the land for the crown.
Opens up the wider question of why we are not allowed to know who owns what land in this country, there is no compulsory register and no method of forcing disclosure.
That should be changed. Be interesting to see how much the Royal Family still actually own for a start...
But the Transit van was going to be built in the Docks where American Dump was that is now part of the container port, When plans change in the 60's, the Ford Transit went to Langley plant first on a temp base while a new location was found, and where it is now is where they use to build planes, but because of demilitarization of the British war machine was still going on this plant stop production and became vacant and thats when Fords moved in 1972 I think, it was only let out as a lease, Which the Tax payers paid for, when Fords first moved in there they was still using the machinery that produce planes to build the Transit van, retooling and replacing the old machinery was also paid by the Tax payers.
southy
says...
12:45pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Lone Ranger. wrote:More to the point Lone is that Fords is a business that gets every one else to pay for every thing while they just take the pure profit with out any out-lay
georgetheseventh wrote:Staunch Tories ......... How dare you.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Dont be so 'stupid'....Ford is a 'business' not a charity...this is the usual Southampton MP's baying and naying in the house.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
I thought you lot were staunch Tories ?.
.
Its a Labour Council ... again thankfully. and its a Labour area in Parliament .... until you get to the outlying areas and its ToryDem area
ohpoppycock
says...
12:46pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy
says...
12:48pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Brock_and_Roll wrote:They could carry on making vans there of the same design but with a different name.
Just assumung that Ford did donate the land what exactly would the City do with it?
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
Hdg end mo
says...
12:52pm Tue 6 Nov 12
owen_thesaints
says...
12:55pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:Are you for real? Call it a Fraud instead of Ford?
Brock_and_Roll wrote:They could carry on making vans there of the same design but with a different name.
Just assumung that Ford did donate the land what exactly would the City do with it?
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
loosehead
says...
12:59pm Tue 6 Nov 12
he said a while ago the biggest problem Ford's had they didn't own the site it was leased from the Airport owners so they needed a new pant shop to guarantee it's survival but as they didn't own the site Ford's would not invest in a new paint shop.
Now I never worked there or new/now exactly who owns it but as all political parties were meeting to find out what happened I think this is nothing but politicking by Whitehead.
Did he actually find out who owns the site?
Or did he want people to say "Look Whiteheads fighting for us?
All parties are fighting for us or is the Echo wrong?
acid drop
says...
1:03pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Portswoodfoke wrote:couldnt have said it better myself
Alan Whitehead is a waste of space, when real people contact him for him he does not even bother to reply...
This is usual PR bull from a career MP interested in votes not working people, pathetic.
Just another reader
says...
1:07pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Gutted that Ford are going, but at least give the city a chance to recoup some much needed jobs.
Cyber__Fug
says...
1:14pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:yawn.... no you cant..... or something like that.
Brock_and_Roll wrote:They could carry on making vans there of the same design but with a different name.
Just assumung that Ford did donate the land what exactly would the City do with it?
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
sarfhamton
says...
1:22pm Tue 6 Nov 12
MGRA
says...
1:27pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Cyber__Fug
says...
1:28pm Tue 6 Nov 12
MGRA wrote:and the further left they go the more stupid they get !
And labour wonder why they were dumped out of power ? yes thats right Alan in the fluffy world you live in , loss making car companies just "give away" land. What a total and utter fool this man is....
hulla baloo
says...
1:35pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
hulla baloo
says...
1:41pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:All is not lost. Southy will be along to nationalise Fords, rebadge the Transit, probably call it the 'Southy Bulls++t' of which there may also be the
Brock_and_Roll wrote:They could carry on making vans there of the same design but with a different name.
Just assumung that Ford did donate the land what exactly would the City do with it?
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
Turbo charged version.
Each model will come with a detailed history of the Bildenberg meetings of 1945, a copy of the Mormon code and confirmation that Turkey has been refused entry to the EU, and will do so again shortly.
His Sikh friend, Rahit Maryada will be in charge of production
OSPREYSAINT
says...
1:46pm Tue 6 Nov 12
MGRA wrote:That would go against every Tory Capitalist ethos, getting something for nothing.
And labour wonder why they were dumped out of power ? yes thats right Alan in the fluffy world you live in , loss making car companies just "give away" land. What a total and utter fool this man is....
bazzeroz
says...
1:47pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy
says...
1:54pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Cyber__Fug wrote:You mean the more right wing they get, Labour as beeing moving slowly more to the right in economics and political policy.
MGRA wrote:and the further left they go the more stupid they get !
And labour wonder why they were dumped out of power ? yes thats right Alan in the fluffy world you live in , loss making car companies just "give away" land. What a total and utter fool this man is....
Lone Ranger.
says...
2:16pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Brock_and_Roll wrote:Well if you walk to the site or look across you will see several businesses very close by.
Just assumung that Ford did donate the land what exactly would the City do with it?
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
.
Airways Optical, Magna Seating, Regus etc...... So a business park is possible
southy
says...
2:19pm Tue 6 Nov 12
hulla baloo wrote:No they did not, the the van was first called taurus and made in Germany, the name Transit came in a meno from Germany and the head of uk fords jump on the name and that was in the 60's, when production started on the first transit vans they was made in Langley plant and had a Perkins engine, the last Transits made in Langley had a Perkins 4/108 engine.
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
The land that they was filling in around Tanners brook (and I sure Loosehead knows where I mean) American dump, was ear mark for Fords to build there new plant, in the late 60's, But plans change in the 60's and this land became part of the container port, and the reason why Transits was first built in Langley and not southampton, The new location came up when the old Moons family plane manufators stop making planes because of the government cutting back on prop planes, what also did not help was the plans for the M27 motorway and Fords acquired the site in the very early seventys
Cyber__Fug
says...
2:27pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:There you go again..... you have jumped straight in and are wrong !
hulla baloo wrote:No they did not, the the van was first called taurus and made in Germany, the name Transit came in a meno from Germany and the head of uk fords jump on the name and that was in the 60's, when production started on the first transit vans they was made in Langley plant and had a Perkins engine, the last Transits made in Langley had a Perkins 4/108 engine.
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
The land that they was filling in around Tanners brook (and I sure Loosehead knows where I mean) American dump, was ear mark for Fords to build there new plant, in the late 60's, But plans change in the 60's and this land became part of the container port, and the reason why Transits was first built in Langley and not southampton, The new location came up when the old Moons family plane manufators stop making planes because of the government cutting back on prop planes, what also did not help was the plans for the M27 motorway and Fords acquired the site in the very early seventys
Shoong
says...
2:29pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:No, they couldn't Peter.
Brock_and_Roll wrote:They could carry on making vans there of the same design but with a different name.
Just assumung that Ford did donate the land what exactly would the City do with it?
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
You are the King of Silly Ideas but not solutions, but this is bad, even for you.
Shoong
says...
2:36pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:In 1953 Ford acquired Briggs, and hence gained control of the 630,000 square feet Southampton plant.
hulla baloo wrote:No they did not, the the van was first called taurus and made in Germany, the name Transit came in a meno from Germany and the head of uk fords jump on the name and that was in the 60's, when production started on the first transit vans they was made in Langley plant and had a Perkins engine, the last Transits made in Langley had a Perkins 4/108 engine.
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
The land that they was filling in around Tanners brook (and I sure Loosehead knows where I mean) American dump, was ear mark for Fords to build there new plant, in the late 60's, But plans change in the 60's and this land became part of the container port, and the reason why Transits was first built in Langley and not southampton, The new location came up when the old Moons family plane manufators stop making planes because of the government cutting back on prop planes, what also did not help was the plans for the M27 motorway and Fords acquired the site in the very early seventys
The first version was the 'FK 1000' in Germany in 1953.
In 1961 it was renamed Ford Taunus Transit, until 1965. This was the first Ford Transit.
The Ford Taurus is a saloon car.
middlestream
says...
2:37pm Tue 6 Nov 12
g all their rubbish onsite...theyve got deadlines to meet in turkey now..they wont be interested in making swaythling a green and pleasant land again..
hulla baloo
says...
2:42pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:http://www.factoryto
hulla baloo wrote:No they did not, the the van was first called taurus and made in Germany, the name Transit came in a meno from Germany and the head of uk fords jump on the name and that was in the 60's, when production started on the first transit vans they was made in Langley plant and had a Perkins engine, the last Transits made in Langley had a Perkins 4/108 engine.
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
The land that they was filling in around Tanners brook (and I sure Loosehead knows where I mean) American dump, was ear mark for Fords to build there new plant, in the late 60's, But plans change in the 60's and this land became part of the container port, and the reason why Transits was first built in Langley and not southampton, The new location came up when the old Moons family plane manufators stop making planes because of the government cutting back on prop planes, what also did not help was the plans for the M27 motorway and Fords acquired the site in the very early seventys
ur.co.uk/southampton
/
This must be another website that is wrong then.
southy
says...
2:53pm Tue 6 Nov 12
hulla baloo wrote:why don't you read "This website is not associated with any factories or manufacturers."
southy wrote:http://www.factoryto
hulla baloo wrote:No they did not, the the van was first called taurus and made in Germany, the name Transit came in a meno from Germany and the head of uk fords jump on the name and that was in the 60's, when production started on the first transit vans they was made in Langley plant and had a Perkins engine, the last Transits made in Langley had a Perkins 4/108 engine.
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
The land that they was filling in around Tanners brook (and I sure Loosehead knows where I mean) American dump, was ear mark for Fords to build there new plant, in the late 60's, But plans change in the 60's and this land became part of the container port, and the reason why Transits was first built in Langley and not southampton, The new location came up when the old Moons family plane manufators stop making planes because of the government cutting back on prop planes, what also did not help was the plans for the M27 motorway and Fords acquired the site in the very early seventys
ur.co.uk/southampton
/
This must be another website that is wrong then.
hulla baloo
says...
2:58pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:I never said it was associated. But the info it contains is relevant.
hulla baloo wrote:why don't you read "This website is not associated with any factories or manufacturers."
southy wrote:http://www.factoryto
hulla baloo wrote:No they did not, the the van was first called taurus and made in Germany, the name Transit came in a meno from Germany and the head of uk fords jump on the name and that was in the 60's, when production started on the first transit vans they was made in Langley plant and had a Perkins engine, the last Transits made in Langley had a Perkins 4/108 engine.
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
The land that they was filling in around Tanners brook (and I sure Loosehead knows where I mean) American dump, was ear mark for Fords to build there new plant, in the late 60's, But plans change in the 60's and this land became part of the container port, and the reason why Transits was first built in Langley and not southampton, The new location came up when the old Moons family plane manufators stop making planes because of the government cutting back on prop planes, what also did not help was the plans for the M27 motorway and Fords acquired the site in the very early seventys
ur.co.uk/southampton
/
This must be another website that is wrong then.
Linesman
says...
3:09pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Portswoodfoke wrote:If you make as much sense in a letter to him as you do in your first sentence, then is it any wonder that you get no response?
Alan Whitehead is a waste of space, when real people contact him for him he does not even bother to reply...
This is usual PR bull from a career MP interested in votes not working people, pathetic.
southy
says...
3:18pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Shoong wrote:The Taurus are also small vans about the size of a estate car, the transit was a med size class van, the same range as the Bedford CA and the BL J4 vans, the first name Transit was used at langley plant in the sixtys, the ford taurus van that was made in germany model design was indeed the FK 1000, and was the about same size as the VW beetle camper van, smaller than the CA and J4. Briggs use to make army chassis and had the use of a side building.
southy wrote:In 1953 Ford acquired Briggs, and hence gained control of the 630,000 square feet Southampton plant.
hulla baloo wrote:No they did not, the the van was first called taurus and made in Germany, the name Transit came in a meno from Germany and the head of uk fords jump on the name and that was in the 60's, when production started on the first transit vans they was made in Langley plant and had a Perkins engine, the last Transits made in Langley had a Perkins 4/108 engine.
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
The land that they was filling in around Tanners brook (and I sure Loosehead knows where I mean) American dump, was ear mark for Fords to build there new plant, in the late 60's, But plans change in the 60's and this land became part of the container port, and the reason why Transits was first built in Langley and not southampton, The new location came up when the old Moons family plane manufators stop making planes because of the government cutting back on prop planes, what also did not help was the plans for the M27 motorway and Fords acquired the site in the very early seventys
The first version was the 'FK 1000' in Germany in 1953.
In 1961 it was renamed Ford Taunus Transit, until 1965. This was the first Ford Transit.
The Ford Taurus is a saloon car.
Fords did not aquire any land only leases, check with the land registery in weymouth, first lease was registered in the 50's at langley after that next was Daginham, the Transit plant was the last lease to be taken up 1970/71
southy
says...
3:21pm Tue 6 Nov 12
hulla baloo wrote:Info was put up by some one like your self, check with the land registery at weymouth.
southy wrote:I never said it was associated. But the info it contains is relevant.
hulla baloo wrote:why don't you read "This website is not associated with any factories or manufacturers."
southy wrote:http://www.factoryto
hulla baloo wrote:No they did not, the the van was first called taurus and made in Germany, the name Transit came in a meno from Germany and the head of uk fords jump on the name and that was in the 60's, when production started on the first transit vans they was made in Langley plant and had a Perkins engine, the last Transits made in Langley had a Perkins 4/108 engine.
southy wrote:Fords acquired the site in 1953.
Lone Ranger. wrote:Thats just it Fords do not own the site, Fords was giving the money from tax payers money to lease the site, the original plan was for the ford factory to be in the docks, when plans changed and this site came up for lease.
So it does appear that Fords do own the site ........... despite all of our business and property expert posters.
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City
The land that they was filling in around Tanners brook (and I sure Loosehead knows where I mean) American dump, was ear mark for Fords to build there new plant, in the late 60's, But plans change in the 60's and this land became part of the container port, and the reason why Transits was first built in Langley and not southampton, The new location came up when the old Moons family plane manufators stop making planes because of the government cutting back on prop planes, what also did not help was the plans for the M27 motorway and Fords acquired the site in the very early seventys
ur.co.uk/southampton
/
This must be another website that is wrong then.
southy
says...
3:33pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Shoong wrote:Yes they could, for Fords to be able to stop it they need to of paid and own every thing, but thats not how Fords operate unless they are force to, Fords gets every one else to pay for them Mainly Governments so fords only gets pure profits with no out laying costs.
southy wrote:No, they couldn't Peter.
Brock_and_Roll wrote:They could carry on making vans there of the same design but with a different name.
Just assumung that Ford did donate the land what exactly would the City do with it?
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
You are the King of Silly Ideas but not solutions, but this is bad, even for you.
And like I pointed out before, its the British tax payers that own the building the land and the tools and machinery with in that plant, You try and get back the money given to
Fords by the Government it will amount into the £billion plus.
When this plant finally close Fords production of Vehicles production will come to an end, Daginham is only a component factory, and an Import docks for Fords, and there are plans to close Daginham down in 2014 to 2016
loosehead
says...
3:45pm Tue 6 Nov 12
What he said there compared to this article weren't the same thing.
on Telly he said it wouldn't go down to well if after getting grants from the government & the EU.
Ford then sold this land for a large amount.
or words very similar to what I've put forward.
Maybe the Airport can buy it if they don't already own a chunk of it &* turn the airport & runway around close the road & make the runway longer & become an International Airport with all the extra jobs that would bring?
Soon have the Anti expansion brigade out wouldn't it?
Maybe a Helicopter port?
ox69ful
says...
3:53pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Shoong
says...
3:54pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:Yes Peter, it's an idealistic IDEA or a theory. That's all you have.
Shoong wrote:Yes they could, for Fords to be able to stop it they need to of paid and own every thing, but thats not how Fords operate unless they are force to, Fords gets every one else to pay for them Mainly Governments so fords only gets pure profits with no out laying costs.
southy wrote:No, they couldn't Peter.
Brock_and_Roll wrote:They could carry on making vans there of the same design but with a different name.
Just assumung that Ford did donate the land what exactly would the City do with it?
This has the potential for some kind of public-money swallowing white elephant project! a la Boscombe surf reef!
As for housing, the site is much closer to the motorway than any other developments nearby so not ideal.
With proximity to the airport, some kind of aviation related use looks the obvious choice in terms of generating wealth and employment.
You are the King of Silly Ideas but not solutions, but this is bad, even for you.
And like I pointed out before, its the British tax payers that own the building the land and the tools and machinery with in that plant, You try and get back the money given to
Fords by the Government it will amount into the £billion plus.
When this plant finally close Fords production of Vehicles production will come to an end, Daginham is only a component factory, and an Import docks for Fords, and there are plans to close Daginham down in 2014 to 2016
But never a workable or realistic solution.
arthur dalyrimple
says...
4:49pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:And the " Crown " is The City of London corporation ,yours ,mine and everyone elses status is corporate slave ,check out your STRAWMAN.
peenut81 wrote:In reality the Crown owns all the land even freehold land, and freeholders are only guardians of the land for the crown.
Opens up the wider question of why we are not allowed to know who owns what land in this country, there is no compulsory register and no method of forcing disclosure.
That should be changed. Be interesting to see how much the Royal Family still actually own for a start...
But the Transit van was going to be built in the Docks where American Dump was that is now part of the container port, When plans change in the 60's, the Ford Transit went to Langley plant first on a temp base while a new location was found, and where it is now is where they use to build planes, but because of demilitarization of the British war machine was still going on this plant stop production and became vacant and thats when Fords moved in 1972 I think, it was only let out as a lease, Which the Tax payers paid for, when Fords first moved in there they was still using the machinery that produce planes to build the Transit van, retooling and replacing the old machinery was also paid by the Tax payers.
middlestream
says...
5:31pm Tue 6 Nov 12
phil maccavity
says...
5:54pm Tue 6 Nov 12
southy wrote:Usual mish mash of Southy picking up on a few snippets on information and oming out with erroneous 'facts'
peenut81 wrote:In reality the Crown owns all the land even freehold land, and freeholders are only guardians of the land for the crown.
Opens up the wider question of why we are not allowed to know who owns what land in this country, there is no compulsory register and no method of forcing disclosure.
That should be changed. Be interesting to see how much the Royal Family still actually own for a start...
But the Transit van was going to be built in the Docks where American Dump was that is now part of the container port, When plans change in the 60's, the Ford Transit went to Langley plant first on a temp base while a new location was found, and where it is now is where they use to build planes, but because of demilitarization of the British war machine was still going on this plant stop production and became vacant and thats when Fords moved in 1972 I think, it was only let out as a lease, Which the Tax payers paid for, when Fords first moved in there they was still using the machinery that produce planes to build the Transit van, retooling and replacing the old machinery was also paid by the Tax payers.
1. Fords never had a plan for a Transit factory in the Docks (however,apparently, Fords did try to buy some land off the Barker Mill estate at Millbrook in the 1920's to develop a car plant with the intention of moving from Trafford Park in Manchester where they first built cars in the UK)
2. Fords bought out the Briggs Vehicle Body Company in 1953 and acquired the Factory site. (it once had an onsite football field where Briggs Sports played)
3. Before Briggs took over the factory it was operated by Cunliffe Owen, a plane manufacturer
3. Transit production started in 1965 so Fords did not 'move in' in 1972
.
Torchie1
says...
7:39pm Tue 6 Nov 12
peenut81 wrote:The only time a piece of land must be put on the Land Registry by law is when it is sold. Unregistered land can be voluntarily put on the Land Registry but when land changes hands within families or under the terms of a Will, there is no requirement to do anything. Would you sleep more soundly knowing who owned the fields you drive past on your way to work?
Opens up the wider question of why we are not allowed to know who owns what land in this country, there is no compulsory register and no method of forcing disclosure.
That should be changed. Be interesting to see how much the Royal Family still actually own for a start...
wilson castaway
says...
7:42pm Tue 6 Nov 12
Sovietobserver
says...
7:42pm Tue 6 Nov 12
They are evidently endeavouring to take advantage of their forthcoming extra output / capacity from their Turkish plant in nearby markets in Eastern Europe and beyond, in competition, especially with Iveco and MAZ before they take any lucrative trade from some of the ex-USSR central Asian states that are booming at present.
The Southampton closure could be part of this grand plan of making economies and investing in new territorial sales tactics.
Lone Ranger. says...
10:59am Tue 6 Nov 12
.
Not a bad idea for Fords to give the site to the City