Taxpayers to dig for £20M for Liverpool Dock

[hissingsid]

If we want to attract tourists Liverpool is a must.    Heysham is ok for freight or if you are travelling in a vehicle but for foot passengers it is awful.    Having done it a lot it is not a good set up.   A train that goes infrequently or a  taxi , if you can get one to Lancaster it takes nearly as long as the journey.  Liverpool on the other hand is right there,  I used to walk into the city on a nice day or the bus is only a quid to LimeStreet, plenty of taxis and you are at a station that is full on for travel.   Loads of shops etc.   Lancaster is dead.   The Liverpool connection must be maintained and the landing stage is a must and we will own it no more messing with user agreements.   The government waste money on vanity projects but this is not one of them.

[Non-Believer]

10 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

The Liverpool connection must be maintained and the landing stage is a must and we will own it no more messing with user agreements.   The government waste money on vanity projects but this is not one of them.

But we won't own it for long (relatively speaking), the land is leased. Upon expiry it and the facilities on it return to Peel Holdings. Leaving us back at square one, again.

What is looking like £100M (if it even stops there) can't be justified, even on the grounds you outline above. How many visitors will have to pass through it to recoup the spend and how will it be recouped? Some sort of charge which would make it less attractive to travel?

Or shall we just invent a new Toilet Tax and dump it (no pun intended) on the local residents? Because this presently has New Power Station written all over it with the only difference being the absence of Mike Profitt. Though maybe we've got Joe Anderson instead.

[asitis]

2 hours ago, hissingsid said:

If we want to attract tourists Liverpool is a must.    Heysham is ok for freight or if you are travelling in a vehicle but for foot passengers it is awful.    Having done it a lot it is not a good set up.   A train that goes infrequently or a  taxi , if you can get one to Lancaster it takes nearly as long as the journey.  Liverpool on the other hand is right there,  I used to walk into the city on a nice day or the bus is only a quid to LimeStreet, plenty of taxis and you are at a station that is full on for travel.   Loads of shops etc.   Lancaster is dead.   The Liverpool connection must be maintained and the landing stage is a must and we will own it no more messing with user agreements.   The government waste money on vanity projects but this is not one of them.

Jesus, for this to make sense you would have to be attracting tourists in droves 365 days of the year ! Tourists are the last reason we should splurge 100 million !! The days of mass tourism to the island are long gone !

[Non-Believer]

Just now, asitis said:

The days of mass tourism to the island are long gone !

Not according to those operating The Good Doctor....they are on the way back, all attributable to the skills of the DfE  😂

[Gladys]

5 minutes ago, asitis said:

Jesus, for this to make sense you would have to be attracting tourists in droves 365 days of the year ! Tourists are the last reason we should splurge 100 million !! The days of mass tourism to the island are long gone !

If you read Sid's comment he is justifying the expenditure for IOM pax, not tourists.

A couple of million a year would surely secure a good train connection at Heysham?

Those who want day trips to Liverpool, and from an IOM perspective that is all who would miss a Liverpool terminal, this is an extravagance. 

[Shake me up Judy]

Bin Liverpool. If they want us back they'll make a better offer. The current one is just taking the piss and our clowns have fallen for it.

[Roger Mexico]

10 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Those who want day trips to Liverpool, and from an IOM perspective that is all who would miss a Liverpool terminal, this is an extravagance. 

Indeed - especially as it wasn't really possible to do day trips that often and when it is most people would prefer spending under an hour on the plane than five on the boat.  Not for the first time this is baby boomers demanding a recreation of their past which they then have no intention of actually using themselves.  

[2112]

42 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Not according to those operating The Good Doctor....they are on the way back, all attributable to the skills of the DfE  😂

Ahhhh and the through the skills of the DfE that we are supposed to be getting 6 Chinese Banks. Skelly/Allinson no difference.

[The Voice of Reason]

4 hours ago, hissingsid said:

If we want to attract tourists Liverpool is a must.    Heysham is ok for freight or if you are travelling in a vehicle but for foot passengers it is awful.    Having done it a lot it is not a good set up.   A train that goes infrequently or a  taxi , if you can get one to Lancaster it takes nearly as long as the journey.  Liverpool on the other hand is right there,  I used to walk into the city on a nice day or the bus is only a quid to LimeStreet, plenty of taxis and you are at a station that is full on for travel.   Loads of shops etc.   Lancaster is dead.   The Liverpool connection must be maintained and the landing stage is a must and we will own it no more messing with user agreements.   The government waste money on vanity projects but this is not one of them.

I must agree.

Not only does Liverpool have good rail and road links, it is a destination in itself.

There are museums, art galleries,good restaurants, concerts etc, and yes football and shopping.

Its like saying Gatwick is no longer available but you can fly to or from Biggin Hill instead. Or substitute Barrow/ Walney Island airport for Manchester Ringway.

I’m sure that would go down well with the traveling public

 

[Lost Login]

4 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

But we won't own it for long (relatively speaking), the land is leased. Upon expiry it and the facilities on it return to Peel Holdings. Leaving us back at square one, again.

Over 200 years seems a fair amount of time to me. I presume it is also at a fairly standard rent for a long lease of one peppercorn if demanded. 

[Boris Johnson]

17 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I must agree.

Not only does Liverpool have good rail and road links, it is a destination in itself.

There are museums, art galleries,good restaurants, concerts etc, and yes football and shopping.

Its like saying Gatwick is no longer available but you can fly to or from Biggin Hill instead. Or substitute Barrow/ Walney Island airport for Manchester Ringway.

I’m sure that would go down well with the traveling public

 

Liverpool is just another Northern town with a few good things to look at once in a lifetime.

Its not a "Destination" 

The iom Tourist industry, what there is will be unaffected if the boat does not go there. FFS you can fly here for less and hire a car if you want to come and see our new prom and other wonders of the world................

[Lost Login]

4 hours ago, hissingsid said:

If we want to attract tourists Liverpool is a must.    Heysham is ok for freight or if you are travelling in a vehicle but for foot passengers it is awful.    Having done it a lot it is not a good set up.   A train that goes infrequently or a  taxi , if you can get one to Lancaster it takes nearly as long as the journey.  Liverpool on the other hand is right there,  I used to walk into the city on a nice day or the bus is only a quid to LimeStreet, plenty of taxis and you are at a station that is full on for travel.   Loads of shops etc.   Lancaster is dead.   The Liverpool connection must be maintained and the landing stage is a must and we will own it no more messing with user agreements.   The government waste money on vanity projects but this is not one of them.

I totally agree. I don't care whether the boat goes to Liverpool or not as long as its goes to somewhere else that is not the arse end of nowhere. (Apologies to any Heysham residents reading this). I am also not greatly in favour of Heysham as a freight port as apart from decent links to the M6 I am not sure what else it really has going for it. It has limited facilities, susceptible to delays due to low tides and high winds.

Having proper links by both sea and air to a major metropolis are important, in my view, for maintaining the status of the IoM in the eyes of others and attracting business and residents. If we want health and education professionals to come to the Isle of Man, or students on qualifying to return then you need to ensure that there is a quality of life in the IoM that they are happy with.  That I am pretty sure means having decent links to a metropolis where there is a fair bit going on and being able to travel easily and in comfort on and off the Island and beyond.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

3 minutes ago, Boris Johnson said:

Liverpool is just another Northern town with a few good things to look at once in a lifetime.

Its not a "Destination" 

Well I, and many others of my acquaintance, have spent more than a few weekends in the city, enjoying what it has to offer. (As I have in London  and Manchester for example)

If that doesn’t make it a “destination”, what does?

 

[Boris Johnson]

We dont need to spend 100 million making a boat dock.

If you want to get there go via plane

[Roger Mexico]

16 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

Having proper links by both sea and air to a major metropolis are important, in my view, for maintaining the status of the IoM in the eyes of others and attracting business and residents. If we want health and education professionals to come to the Isle of Man, or students on qualifying to return then you need to ensure that there is a quality of life in the IoM that they are happy with.  That I am pretty sure means having decent links to a metropolis where there is a fair bit going on and being able to travel easily and in comfort on and off the Island and beyond.

Yes, London's complete lack of decent, direct sea connections means that no one wants to go there.