Pressure for port extension may be irresistible (From Daily Echo)

Excellent news!

If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest.

They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

I suspect Dibden Bay residents are relieved they now have the National Park chiefs behind them in resisting plans for the Bay. So now we have a new body of people who will be fighting in the other corner, Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC), are they also quango Government born and bred with us footing the bill? It could be one quango against another - hey ho, this is going to be an expensive time for us. If half our trade is taken by Portsmouth and/or Liverpool I only hope they take the containers with them - it sure as hell adds no flavour to tin pan alley at West Quay. Again, I wonder what will happen to all those hotels who no doubt depend on the passing trade?

goard

I could understand if it was IN the National Park but its not it's on the EDGE of the National park. Just like Fawley refinery and power station. Marchwood military port, and now the power station at Marchwood.

It astounds me how so many people don't want our City to succeed. Lets build the docks, build infrastructure for the country, build up the City's reputation and stop moaning.

if they took the container port with them goard, i might be able to sleep at nights.
the new forest park, has the power of compulsory purchase order, and if they use this power, then all the price, would be the same price you will pay for farm land, whitch i belive can be up to £3,000 an acre.
interesting times coming up i think.

Nod wrote:
It astounds me how so many people don't want our City to succeed. Lets build the docks, build infrastructure for the country, build up the City's reputation and stop moaning.

Dibden Bay is not part of the City of Southampton and nor should it ever be so.

I don't give a fig about Southampton's reputation and I'll continue to moan!

Not In My Back Yard.

Let's hope they mean what they say.
Time will tell.

Nod wrote:
It astounds me how so many people don't want our City to succeed. Lets build the docks, build infrastructure for the country, build up the City's reputation and stop moaning.

ummm maybe its because, southampton docks is limited to the city boundrys, check the port of southampton merchant carter, in there it says that the port can not go pass the city limits, and has the right to control the approach channels. if southampton port extends out side those limits, then it can be confidecated, and the crown shall resume full control again, this why western docks was built after when the southampton limits was extended and went up to the town limits, they then had to wait till the 60's when southampton extended its limits again to build the container port. this carter is very interesting in what can be done an what can not be done, to read it you will need to go to the city archives, but there maybe a copy in the library. it use to be on the city web site but has been removed.

Every time there is proposed expansion, developers go for the Green Field option because its the cheapest. Southampton is no exception with abandoned derelict ghettos from the City Centre, Above Bar, Ocean Village, East Street, Eastern Docks, Northam, Woolston etc. as examples.
Consolidate and redevelop rather a sprawl

Get the thing built in Diben Bay as soon as possible...the NIMBY watersiders are ok to take years of prosperity from the city yet want to give nothing in return. After all, this reclaimed mud pit is squashed into an existing industry area with incinerators, power stations, a couple of chemical works and a refinery - so why not a container port.
And as for it being part of the new forest – what a load of bull…its just another ploy of locals to involve their mates on the NPA to put a spanner in the works. This NPA is the same body that recently ‘U’ turned on its own ideals and scrapped a series of their own proposals and initiatives in the Forest – and included Dog free car parks, Road Tolls and curbs on recreational horse owners. I bet some of the locals did not like being labelled service villages either by the NPA; it’s funny how people change opinion overnight when it suits.
The name Dibden Dock Bay just rolls off the tongue.

Linesman wrote:
Excellent news!

If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest.

They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

In what way could the docks have been used "more efficiently"? The area around Ocean Village was completely unsuitable for a container port due to its lack of hinterland not to mention the size of container ships compared to the small cargo ships for which the eastern docks were originally developed. Why do you persist with this absurd myth about the old Eastern Docks that has been carefully explained time and again by Ben Doone and others? Do you employ Southy as a Consultant?

Night Mare wrote:

Nod wrote:
It astounds me how so many people don't want our City to succeed. Lets build the docks, build infrastructure for the country, build up the City's reputation and stop moaning.

Dibden Bay is not part of the City of Southampton and nor should it ever be so.

I don't give a fig about Southampton's reputation and I'll continue to moan!

Not In My Back Yard.

It isn't in your back yard - it isn't even in your street or technically even your village and unless you live in the Marina itself you would be almost unaffected, save that Hythe would become more prosperous and therefore a more pleasant place to live so I don;t know why you worry about your house prices. You don't own Dibden Bay but its owners have a right to develop it for the purpose for which they always stated it was to be put as everyone on Waterside knows full well even though a sudden mass amnesia from RADBP seemed to descend on the public enquiry.

Jammy Donut wrote:
Every time there is proposed expansion, developers go for the Green Field option because its the cheapest. Southampton is no exception with abandoned derelict ghettos from the City Centre, Above Bar, Ocean Village, East Street, Eastern Docks, Northam, Woolston etc. as examples.
Consolidate and redevelop rather a sprawl

Dibden Bay is not greenfield - that is a myth. This is RADBP disinformation. It is brownfield - constructed using the dredgings from the excavation of the Western Docks. Why do you think it is called a "bay" when the frontage is a perfectly straight line?

Andy Locks Heath i agree with you on one point eastern docks on the itchen cant be used for a container port and i very much doubt if any of eastern docks can be used has a container port, but how ever if they moved the cruise terminals to eastern docks, then western docks could become a container quay. it just takes a little bit of thinking and good planning how and where to put things, and its in this area abp and abpj are failing on, they really do need to make better use of the docks and not just southampton docks all of the abpj docks that they own, like they could move some of the car business to one of there east coast ports, it would not hurt them to share the work out to there other ports, insted of bring the other port work to southampton like they have done in the pass.
and its this the government report refers to, they need to make better use of all there land and not use mainly a few ports. after all abpj owes ports that get very little used, where they drag the work to southampton.

oh i also for got andy it is green field has its never been used for industery. and its also reg under the ssi, and has been in the ssi list for at lest 15 years to what i know off

I would pin my flag to the mast of Southy and andy of Locks Heath - probably each end of the mast - but I appreciate their rhetoric is far more valuable than many who profess to know our Solent. Best of luck!

goard

Linesman wrote:
Excellent news! If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest. They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

In total agreement with this.

Bartonian wrote:

Linesman wrote:
Excellent news! If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest. They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

In total agreement with this.

More fool you. See previous comments

southy wrote:
Andy Locks Heath i agree with you on one point eastern docks on the itchen cant be used for a container port and i very much doubt if any of eastern docks can be used has a container port, but how ever if they moved the cruise terminals to eastern docks, then western docks could become a container quay. it just takes a little bit of thinking and good planning how and where to put things, and its in this area abp and abpj are failing on, they really do need to make better use of the docks and not just southampton docks all of the abpj docks that they own, like they could move some of the car business to one of there east coast ports, it would not hurt them to share the work out to there other ports, insted of bring the other port work to southampton like they have done in the pass.
and its this the government report refers to, they need to make better use of all there land and not use mainly a few ports. after all abpj owes ports that get very little used, where they drag the work to southampton.

For once Southy that is a good point. I suspect though that it would have taken a better man that any of us to forecast the revival and expansion of the cruise industry when the Eastern docks were being wound down 30 years or so ago, so "we are where we are". However I would be interested to see Ben Doone's view on consolidating all cruise facilities in a purpose built enclave in the Eastern Docks (not that it would free up anything like enough space for something on the scale of Dibden Bay)

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Linesman wrote: Excellent news! If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest. They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

In total agreement with this.

More fool you. See previous comments

I COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT YOUR DRIVEL.

Andy
Thanks for the confidence that what I post may be of value.
Considerations, as I see them, are:

1. Where would you put the minmum 3 extra cruise terminals in the E Dks to ensure you could moor 5 cruise ships simultaneously and cope with future demand projections?

2. Need to consider cruise car parking requirements which are land hungry. Multi Storeys are very expensive but might work. However where would space come from unless you move existing E Dkds customers. They may have term contracts on their current operating areas

3. Potential traffic chaos along West Quay/Town Quay when 5 large ships are in E Dks, particularly during Boat Show

4. Would need another Dock Gate (current major issues already when two ships are using No 4 gate)

5. What contracts do Cruise Lines have on the two Western Docks Terminals? Presume term deals so would they want to relocate to the E Dks as proximity to the M271 and railway Station is better in the Western than E Dks?

Worthy of consideration but if I was a port operator I would want to start with a blank sheet of paper and build state of the art facilities from Day One. This is why Dibden Bay is of interest.
However I am sure Dibden will only proceed if a commercial case can be made.
Would be interesting to turn the clock back and see how the debate on port extensions in 1920's and 1970's and development of Fawley Marine Terminal, which all advanced the economic prosperity of the Soton area would have been dealt with on these forums (if they had existed)!!

Bartonian wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Linesman wrote: Excellent news! If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest. They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

In total agreement with this.

More fool you. See previous comments

I COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT YOUR DRIVEL.

Tell me one thing I've said that is not backed by material fact. You can't understand complex issues - as you've proved in the past. If you don't want to engage in adult debate where facts are presented to inform a subject why not go read comics and watch Cbeebies rather than coming on here. You don't seem to form a rational view about anything.

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

southy wrote: Andy Locks Heath i agree with you on one point eastern docks on the itchen cant be used for a container port and i very much doubt if any of eastern docks can be used has a container port, but how ever if they moved the cruise terminals to eastern docks, then western docks could become a container quay. it just takes a little bit of thinking and good planning how and where to put things, and its in this area abp and abpj are failing on, they really do need to make better use of the docks and not just southampton docks all of the abpj docks that they own, like they could move some of the car business to one of there east coast ports, it would not hurt them to share the work out to there other ports, insted of bring the other port work to southampton like they have done in the pass. and its this the government report refers to, they need to make better use of all there land and not use mainly a few ports. after all abpj owes ports that get very little used, where they drag the work to southampton.

For once Southy that is a good point. I suspect though that it would have taken a better man that any of us to forecast the revival and expansion of the cruise industry when the Eastern docks were being wound down 30 years or so ago, so "we are where we are". However I would be interested to see Ben Doone's view on consolidating all cruise facilities in a purpose built enclave in the Eastern Docks (not that it would free up anything like enough space for something on the scale of Dibden Bay)

Notice from the above that Southy continues to show extreme naivety when it comes to business matters.
You just can't move trade from one port to another as Southy is suggesting.
It is the customer who decides where they want to go not ABP. This is a simple commercial reality.
Also Southy must really be endearing himself to anyone working within the Soton Docks car trade. Glibly moving their jobs to the east coast.
V positive stuff for the area Southy, well done!!

ben the old abp, gave an incentive to shipping lines to move to southampton from there other ports, now the time to give them another one to go back. there was alot of things that went on behind closed doors, in the 80's, some of it leak out, but i am sure there is much more that is not known about. like rover cars never use to come here, land rovers and range rovers did lo, cars started to come into southampton docks in the 80's, it use to be renaults in, load up transits and range rovers and land rovers, and that was it, apart from the few odd other cars, the bulk of exports cars used to go out though other ports, and not out of southampton. so it might be time to return that trade back to the other abp ports.
any way what i think abpj should do, is,
1/ buy back all the docks that was sold.
2/move the ocean uni to where gate 1 use to be, they be able to use the top itchen quay wall for there ship when it do come in here.
3/the marina area use for what small amount of cars there will be left for import and export, even use the old ferry link span, well just use the itchen side for cars ect. you could even fill them in, if room is needed,
4/ use the test side for liners, how many liners could be fitted down the that side of eastern docks, you could even build slots in the quay. whitch would accommodate more liners,
and if you still stuck for more space for liners,
then look at town quay, pull it down and build a new one closer to eastern docks so that you can fit one more on the eastern docks and one on each side of the new town quay, red funnels can stay where it is or it can be move to where ocean village is, if its not filled in.
5/ western docks turn into a container port, and more space is need for container storeage then look into buying al those place at the back of the docks.
the biggest problem is that a few people many who dont even live in southampton, are trying to turn it into a tourist city or a rich man play ground or both. it will not work for southampton, southampton is a working city, and try and change it into some thing its not will only destroy it, like what is happening slowly, like with all those lucretius ideas that the council keep coming up with. and the echo publishing silly ideas, the sooner those people relise this the better, and start treating southampton for what it is a working city, that be the day when things start to work right.

You do talk a lot of old tosh
In amongst all this nonsense is the statement that Rover Cars were never shipped out via Soton
I used to do some work with STVA the haulage company and have photos on file which show Rover Cars being discharged in the Eastern Docks and stored in a compound where the new Multi Deck car park is situated. These cars came directly down from Longbridge and probably averaged 60,000 units a year at busy times. A decent volume.
Most went into Europe but some were shipped to Australia and New Zealand
I also have photos of Renaults being discharged by crane (pre Ro/RO days) in the 1960's ie 20 years before you say it happened.
Also in the 1970's Soton was a major port for Datsun imports (now Nissan)
You also say that ...'a lot of things went on behind closed doors in the '80's'..so how on earth do you know then unless you were at the door with a listening device!!!.
You go on to say that Southampton is a 'working city' and then try to move car trade to other ports.
Priceless!!!

Plenty of Land Rovers going through the Docks, delivered by rail so not clogging the roads up, no doubt Ford Transits could go the same way if they were to keep making them! How about a new "green" version?

For goodness sake. Why are we now subject to our communites slipping into regression and losing excellent investment opportunities for the sake of people who are just sad NIMBYS and BANANAS (build absolutely nothing anywhere never again) What about jobs for our children? What about improving the local infrastructure? (A 326 Dualling?)
You people who are against this are just selfish and sad. Please move elsewhere if you do not like it.

rover cars did not start shipping out of southampton till the mid to late 80s ben, renault have been ship here a lot longer. transits have been ship out of southampton for a while to. where that multi car park is, is located on top of the old graving dry docks, and it was the only one or two rovers cars, just up from the row of shops in side the eastern docks use to be the land rover compound, and they was the biggest number of export vehicles, the docks back then was not geared up to ship great volumes of vehicals, and only dealt with a small number, it was not till later in the 80's when all this change. if you had been around you remember the sheds that was pulled down and the dry docks being filled in, to make room for cars export.

but you sais that rover cars never came here full stop which is obviusly wrong. rover had a big compound for many years oppositre the Un iversity marine buildings at 25 berth
Also the main Ford Transit compund has been in the western docks for 20 yrs or so. ask your brother-he works next door!!.
you say docks was not geared up to handle large bno of cars before 1980/s
suggest you buy yourself bert moodys book - a history of Southampton Port- shows thousands of VW's coming off a ship at the ol;d timber yard at 34 and 35 berths in 1972!!!! Good read. you will lkearn something for once

but you sais that rover cars never came here full stop which is obviusly wrong. rover had a big compound for many years oppositre the Un iversity marine buildings at 25 berth
Also the main Ford Transit compund has been in the western docks for 20 yrs or so. ask your brother-he works next door!!.
you say docks was not geared up to handle large bno of cars before 1980/s
suggest you buy yourself bert moodys book - a history of Southampton Port- shows thousands of VW's coming off a ship at the ol;d timber yard at 34 and 35 berths in 1972!!!! Good read. you will lkearn something for once

i did not say rover car did not get ship from southampton, rovers never came to southampton till the mid to end of the 80's.
renaults was the biggest importer, and if you read things right you would see that a few vw ships was diverted to here, because the port they normally go to ran out of room, it was only a temp.
land rover and transits was our biggest exporter, and there was not that many of them, and if you look at southampton vehicle exports and our imports though the 60' to 90's, you see even records show that there was a very big increase in the late 80's, ( even the number of car transporting ships went up ) this was mainly due rover cars switching ports to southampton,
southampton port was geared up to take passenger ships mainly, and only dealt with a small amount of import and export goods, but in the late 80's this all changed, and it was not a case of winning new contracts, it was a case of moving operations to southampton from other abp ports. just check and also look at what ports they moved in from. and look at there figures to, you see a drop at the same time.

Southy
Another factual mistake.
Transits was not..'our biggest exporter'.. as you state
Most Transits built at Swaythling were for UK distribution only. A few were for export aboad (mainly to Ireland) but most Transits bound for mainland Europe and elsewhere were produced in Ford's factory in Ghenk (Belgium) and, more recently, Turkey.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers Year Book is a very useful reference book if you want to know about facts rather than your 'assumptions'
Also in the 1980's the number of passenger ships calling in Southampton was less than half of todays total

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Linesman wrote: Excellent news! If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest. They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

In total agreement with this.

More fool you. See previous comments

I COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT YOUR DRIVEL.

Tell me one thing I've said that is not backed by material fact. You can't understand complex issues - as you've proved in the past. If you don't want to engage in adult debate where facts are presented to inform a subject why not go read comics and watch Cbeebies rather than coming on here. You don't seem to form a rational view about anything.

ANDY FROM LOCKS HEATH

You know what? I couldn't care less anymore what yout think because the likes of you belittle what others say. You are an arrogant little ****, a jack of all trades and a master of none.

People like you have got a real chip on their shoudler. You say only what you want to say.

Call me names and belittle me, then you can have it back. Maybe you like to provoke an instant reaction.

You don't have a life, as this website takes up much of ytour time.

Just go away and ignore my point of view you don't like it, bacause I'm not imterested in what you have to say. Why don't you read comics you shallow minded, stupid twit.

Bartonian wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Linesman wrote: Excellent news! If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest. They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

In total agreement with this.

More fool you. See previous comments

I COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT YOUR DRIVEL.

Tell me one thing I've said that is not backed by material fact. You can't understand complex issues - as you've proved in the past. If you don't want to engage in adult debate where facts are presented to inform a subject why not go read comics and watch Cbeebies rather than coming on here. You don't seem to form a rational view about anything.

ANDY FROM LOCKS HEATH

You know what? I couldn't care less anymore what yout think because the likes of you belittle what others say. You are an arrogant little ****, a jack of all trades and a master of none.

People like you have got a real chip on their shoudler. You say only what you want to say.

Call me names and belittle me, then you can have it back. Maybe you like to provoke an instant reaction.

You don't have a life, as this website takes up much of ytour time.

Just go away and ignore my point of view you don't like it, bacause I'm not imterested in what you have to say. Why don't you read comics you shallow minded, stupid twit.

I enjoy your fits of pique, I really do. The truth is you don't like it when I hold up a mirror to your stupidity and you are forced either to justify your views (which you can't) or retract (which you are too stubborn to do). But when you do neither and just lose your temper it is even funnier, especially when you accidentally turn on the caps lock in your rage as you did in an earlier post! Oh my aching sides, stop it please.

Ben Doone wrote:
Southy
Another factual mistake.
Transits was not..'our biggest exporter'.. as you state
Most Transits built at Swaythling were for UK distribution only. A few were for export aboad (mainly to Ireland) but most Transits bound for mainland Europe and elsewhere were produced in Ford's factory in Ghenk (Belgium) and, more recently, Turkey.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers Year Book is a very useful reference book if you want to know about facts rather than your 'assumptions'
Also in the 1980's the number of passenger ships calling in Southampton was less than half of todays total

not a factual mistake ben, its just pointing out that the amount of export vehicles that was exported though southampton was very low,
and i fully aware that in the 80's passenger ships was low, but your missing the point, southampton was mainly geared up for that sort of work, passenger ships and not cargo ships, even lo we did get a few in, but in the mid to late 80's this was change round, think about it ben

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Andy Locks Heath wrote:

Bartonian wrote:

Linesman wrote: Excellent news! If ABP had been more efficient in the use of the current Southampton Docks area, there would be no need to extend into the New Forest. They saw a 'fast buck' could be made by turning part of the docks into a marina and Solent Village, and with a little foresight, that is where the container port extension could have been, with the rail access reopened.

In total agreement with this.

More fool you. See previous comments

I COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT YOUR DRIVEL.

Tell me one thing I've said that is not backed by material fact. You can't understand complex issues - as you've proved in the past. If you don't want to engage in adult debate where facts are presented to inform a subject why not go read comics and watch Cbeebies rather than coming on here. You don't seem to form a rational view about anything.

ANDY FROM LOCKS HEATH

You know what? I couldn't care less anymore what yout think because the likes of you belittle what others say. You are an arrogant little ****, a jack of all trades and a master of none.

People like you have got a real chip on their shoudler. You say only what you want to say.

Call me names and belittle me, then you can have it back. Maybe you like to provoke an instant reaction.

You don't have a life, as this website takes up much of ytour time.

Just go away and ignore my point of view you don't like it, bacause I'm not imterested in what you have to say. Why don't you read comics you shallow minded, stupid twit.

I enjoy your fits of pique, I really do. The truth is you don't like it when I hold up a mirror to your stupidity and you are forced either to justify your views (which you can't) or retract (which you are too stubborn to do). But when you do neither and just lose your temper it is even funnier, especially when you accidentally turn on the caps lock in your rage as you did in an earlier post! Oh my aching sides, stop it please.

The feeling is entirely mutual. The trouble is, in this world, both you and I are just little people, trying to outdo each other on big issues. Nobody cares what we say, as our voices, including that of the bitter minded Southy, are just wasting our time. I have done what you say I haven't in the past, so why have you said that you have agreed with many of the points that I have previously made? You don't like it when someone has a go at you, so maybe it is best that we both go and find something else better to do, rather than just use up our resources on what is pointless discussion. If those people in power decide what they want to do with big issues as the port, then they won't be stopped by small voices. You are out of your depth I'm afraid, as like I said, nobody cares what you have to say. You are the weakest link....goodbye!

Bartonian, Chandler's Ford so truth in what you say, those at the top dont care what we think, they dont care in what we want or need.
oh by the way i not bitter one bit, deep thinker yes but not bitter, i can see the problems thats going to be for us in the future, and if you want your grandkids to grow up in a safe place, and not suffer for the need of basic things in life, and this go's for every one, stop thinking short term, and start thinking real long term. technology is moving forward and has it do so, so there will be less employment out there for people. the population is growing and has this grows there will be more out of work. a capitalist system will not and do not address this, they want to employ the fewest amount of people has possable, keep pay below the poverity line, because this means money money in there pockets, and there only answer is to have a war to thing out the population numbers, and if this keeps up the way it is, there's only one out come in the end, civil war, where there be blood shed, socialist do not want this to happen, and want to make the change peacefully, and are the only group willing to address this unblance system, things need to be shared out. just needs for people to sit down and think a litlle in to the future. other wise whats the point in doing what your doing now for your future generations of your family yet to come, and for them having a good chance in being wipe out in a messy bloody civil war.

southy wrote:
Bartonian, Chandler's Ford so truth in what you say, those at the top dont care what we think, they dont care in what we want or need. oh by the way i not bitter one bit, deep thinker yes but not bitter, i can see the problems thats going to be for us in the future, and if you want your grandkids to grow up in a safe place, and not suffer for the need of basic things in life, and this go's for every one, stop thinking short term, and start thinking real long term. technology is moving forward and has it do so, so there will be less employment out there for people. the population is growing and has this grows there will be more out of work. a capitalist system will not and do not address this, they want to employ the fewest amount of people has possable, keep pay below the poverity line, because this means money money in there pockets, and there only answer is to have a war to thing out the population numbers, and if this keeps up the way it is, there's only one out come in the end, civil war, where there be blood shed, socialist do not want this to happen, and want to make the change peacefully, and are the only group willing to address this unblance system, things need to be shared out. just needs for people to sit down and think a litlle in to the future. other wise whats the point in doing what your doing now for your future generations of your family yet to come, and for them having a good chance in being wipe out in a messy bloody civil war.

Ok comrade Southy. See you in the revolution! Yawn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

southy wrote:
Bartonian, Chandler's Ford so truth in what you say, those at the top dont care what we think, they dont care in what we want or need. oh by the way i not bitter one bit, deep thinker yes but not bitter, i can see the problems thats going to be for us in the future, and if you want your grandkids to grow up in a safe place, and not suffer for the need of basic things in life, and this go's for every one, stop thinking short term, and start thinking real long term. technology is moving forward and has it do so, so there will be less employment out there for people. the population is growing and has this grows there will be more out of work. a capitalist system will not and do not address this, they want to employ the fewest amount of people has possable, keep pay below the poverity line, because this means money money in there pockets, and there only answer is to have a war to thing out the population numbers, and if this keeps up the way it is, there's only one out come in the end, civil war, where there be blood shed, socialist do not want this to happen, and want to make the change peacefully, and are the only group willing to address this unblance system, things need to be shared out. just needs for people to sit down and think a litlle in to the future. other wise whats the point in doing what your doing now for your future generations of your family yet to come, and for them having a good chance in being wipe out in a messy bloody civil war.

The lord will be returning before then.

And as for it being part of the new forest – what a load of bull…its just another ploy of locals to involve their mates on the NPA to put a spanner in the works. This NPA is the same body that recently ‘U’ turned on its own ideals and scrapped a series of their own proposals and initiatives in the Forest – and included Dog free car parks, Road Tolls and curbs on recreational horse owners. I bet some of the locals did not like being labelled service villages either by the NPA; it’s funny how people change opinion overnight when it suits.
The name Dibden Dock Bay just rolls off the tongue.

At the previous proposal, I noticed, from a photo in the Echo that most people at one of the meetings of people against Dibden Bay were retired old folk, who, some of, in their working lives, would have been MORE than grateful for the work constructing the container port. NIMBY's of the WORST kind!!!!

And as for it being part of the new forest – what a load of bull…its just another ploy of locals to involve their mates on the NPA to put a spanner in the works. This NPA is the same body that recently ‘U’ turned on its own ideals and scrapped a series of their own proposals and initiatives in the Forest – and included Dog free car parks, Road Tolls and curbs on recreational horse owners. I bet some of the locals did not like being labelled service villages either by the NPA; it’s funny how people change opinion overnight when it suits.
The name Dibden Dock Bay just rolls off the tongue.

At the previous proposal, I noticed, from a photo in the Echo that most people at one of the meetings of people against Dibden Bay were retired old folk, who, some of, in their working lives, would have been MORE than grateful for the work constructing the container port. NIMBY's of the WORST kind!!!!