John Wright Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 53 minutes ago, monasqueen said: It's to be hoped that they do a proper job, and then keep it maintained, rather than just allow it to silt up again. Heysham has suffered from many years of neglect. Or many years of investment and development. Given current freight usage it’s unlikely it’ll be left to silt again. Don’t forget how dire the place was in 1978, and the years beforehand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 16 minutes ago, b4mbi said: can it nip over and do the peel marina? could have saved £5m.... We are flying it over next week. Then transporting it by road to peel for reassembly. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh G Rection Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 Baker seriously emanates that little b*stard Oliver Twist approaching big boy alf at his pedestal. "Please sir can I have some more?" "I know i've been a VERY NAUGHTY BOY and I'm sure you will punish me in the Sefton later xD" "But please sir can I have some more?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 (edited) I see Liverpool have lost their UNESCO Status. Is that the DOI's fault too? Edited July 21, 2021 by Declan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 22 minutes ago, Declan said: I see Liverpool have lost their UNESCO Status. Is that the DOI's fault too? Probably. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 21, 2021 Author Share Posted July 21, 2021 22 minutes ago, Declan said: I see Liverpool have lost their UNESCO Status. Is that the DOI's fault too? Joe Anderson was probably siphoning.... 😄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 Just now, Non-Believer said: Joe Anderson was probably siphoning.... 😄 I'll have you know that Comrade Jo is a supporter of Mann.... he said so in an interview once on TV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said: I'll have you know that Comrade Jo is a supporter of Mann.... he said so in an interview once on TV. He probably meant Mann Island Which is one of the reasons they lost UNESCO status. (I quite like it but it's hideously out of place and scale). Edited July 21, 2021 by Roger Mexico Add picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twitch Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 Fortunately for Liverpool I suspect that losing UNESCO status will have zero impact on their ability to attract new business, new residents and tourists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 4 hours ago, Declan said: I see Liverpool have lost their UNESCO Status. Is that the DOI's fault too? Everton’s apparently. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 4 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: He probably meant Mann Island Which is one of the reasons they lost UNESCO status. (I quite like it but it's hideously out of place and scale). I’m rather confused that what is presently a non-existent football stadium is considered to be the straw that broke the riverfront’s back, and yet this Star-Wars reject carbuncle is not mentioned by the UNESCO spokesperson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4mbi Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 People don't invest in Liverpool because it's a UNESCO world heritage site. They invest because it's a dynamic vibrant city. But clearly it is the DoI's fault, and Everton's, and Carlo Ancelloti's and Alex Iwobi's. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 UNESCO status isn't worth having if it means having to preserve some kind of ye olde worlde look. The new blocks which the UNESCO people hate reflect a modern positivity. Liverpool has spent far too much time competing for "City of ..." (this, that and the other) status over the years. It's not a museum. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 25 minutes ago, Uhtred said: I’m rather confused that what is presently a non-existent football stadium is considered to be the straw that broke the riverfront’s back, and yet this Star-Wars reject carbuncle is not mentioned by the UNESCO spokesperson. Well the official statement was accompanied by a photo featuring this very monstrosity, so that might give a hint. But the reason given is: [...] the proposed development of Liverpool Waters. The project has since gone ahead along with other developments both inside the site and in its buffer zone. The Committee considers that these constructions are detrimental to the site’s authenticity and integrity. This is of course the Peel Group's baby into which the Manx Taxpayer is pouring £50 million plus. Ironically to pay for the only bit that is continuing the maritime heritage. Maybe they should be paying us rather than using giving them the key to the Treasury and telling them to take what they want. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 46 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Well the official statement was accompanied by a photo featuring this very monstrosity, so that might give a hint. But the reason given is: [...] the proposed development of Liverpool Waters. The project has since gone ahead along with other developments both inside the site and in its buffer zone. The Committee considers that these constructions are detrimental to the site’s authenticity and integrity. This is of course the Peel Group's baby into which the Manx Taxpayer is pouring £50 million plus. Ironically to pay for the only bit that is continuing the maritime heritage. Maybe they should be paying us rather than using giving them the key to the Treasury and telling them to take what they want. Hilariously I’ve just looked into my futurescope and in 125 years from now there’s an outcry both here and in Liverpool at the plan to demolish the ‘classic maritime architecture’ of the IOMSPC passenger facility. Mind you, the futurescope also identifies that the eventual total cost was £87 million. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.