Reinstate Sunderland Shipbuilding

smoker said:
IKR, my old man worked all round the country when Sunderland yards shut.

This wouldn't actually create any new jobs for Sunderland people though.
Click to expand...
Are you sure? Would they not be bringing in expertise from outside to take the leads, but potentially lower skilled and apprentice jobs from the local area?
 


Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
 
Roo said:
Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
Click to expand...
Show me your business plan.
 
Roo said:
Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
Click to expand...

People do want it. They just don't think your group is capable of delivering it.

"It's out there" Here's a perfect platform to show us where but once again you haven't taken that opportunity. If any one of your group has ever worked in PR or marketing strategy you want to sack them off.
 
Paddy O'Dors said:
To stop councils going bankrupt like Liverpool did in the 1980's. Ultimately it's the taxpayer that picks up the tab if it goes tits up.
Click to expand...

Weirdly, although I'm no militant fan, they went over spending limits by borrowing for capital - namely 5,000 houses 3 leisure centres and a load of other capital schemes.
The total cost of the loan they needed was 150,000.

If those homes are now worth more than 30k each average (which they almost definitely are) it shows the scheme was a success and thatcher was wrong.
 
Roo said:
Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
Click to expand...

Here's your opportunity to post the details and get Sunderland people behind your plan.
 
Roo said:
Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
Click to expand...

Sounds like your proposal is shite.
 
Roo said:
Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
Click to expand...
Do you have the express permission of the current Pallion yard owners to progress your business plan? If yes, can you tell who you spoke to, so I can check it with them.
 
smoker said:
:lol:

If they were any good they would have backing lined up and not need a crowd funder to pay for leaflets.
Click to expand...

This. Sounds like they'd need major loans to get the place up and running, which banks wouldn't dream of offering without seeing a business plan. Yet instead of creating a Business plan, they're too busy sending leaflets to people in Sunderland, none of whom are going to see the profits of their business. It's baffling.

They believe in this project that much, that they've been stuck at the first hurdle for 5 years and even when they've been told what is required consistently, they've refused to do it. Why would anyone have faith in them?
 
I had family working in the shipyards from the 1930s to the end. It would be a nice thing to see but won’t happen as all the skills required are long gone and those who could retrain them are also long gone.
 
smoker said:
Here's your opportunity to post the details and get Sunderland people behind your plan.
Click to expand...
I’ll go one better. PM me the plan and I’ll put in front of my infrastructure and project finance colleagues at the large European corporate bank I work at. I’ll literally speak to the Heads of Structured Finance and the Managing Director of Corporate Banking and run it past them for you.
 
HellsBells said:
I’ll go one better. PM me the plan and I’ll put in front of my infrastructure and project finance colleagues at the large European corporate bank I work at. I’ll literally speak to the Heads of Structured Finance and the Managing Director of Corporate Banking and run it past them for you.
Click to expand...
I can call the yard owners in Athens/Switzerland for him if he wishes! ;)
 
Roo said:
Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
Click to expand...
Interesting strategy. 3 attacks on Sunderland Labour, one vague statement and 3 attacks on the people of this board who have questioned the stance.

If Sunderland Labour agree to support, what is the next step? Planning permission? Why not go for that and see if they block it, show you mean business.

Have you engaged the government? They want to show they support the north and make permanent inroads into Labour rich territory. If the business case is sound, this is gold for them. Provide something much loved by the region and show that Labour tried to prevent it happening.
 
Roo said:
Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
Click to expand...

I genuinely think people want this to happen and are trying to keep politics out of it however the way the group communicate on various platforms is making it political ie addressing a lot of your messages to the local MP’s and the council.

As most have said on here if there is a proposal can this be shared or put forward so people can see it? I’ve noted various comms on LinkedIn but nothing where there is a single document setting out the proposal beyond what the site could be utilised for, apologies if there is.

Also Is the current proposal detailed enough to state you have secured an option on the Pallion building (lease or freehold) subject to raising the necessary finance? The budget cost of bringing it up to scratch? Is there a legal company and has it been incorporated yet - presumably that would explain who is on the board of the organisation? Has the appraisal been finalised? And what is the programme to get from here to commencing production / maintenance / repair of vessels assuming you are given the support of the council.

Finally one of the issues is that presumably this development will not bring further income to the council other than any harbour charges imposed by the port for vessels to navigate the port and river, as this is an existing facility presumably already providing business rates? I do appreciate however that this opportunity does provide new jobs.
 
The Council have replied publicly saying to send the business plan and they’ll respond in kind. If they then refuse after you’ve sent it and the plan is as good as made out to be, release it to the public then you have the Council over a barrel.

Until then, and without you showing any of the comms from Sunderland Labour, the Council appear to be potentially supportive but it’s the group who are being obstructive by not sending them the business plan.
 
Roo said:
Many thanks for all your comments.

However, seven points here need now to be stated:
  1. Sunderland Labour as a whole have rejected this. We sent them our full proposal and on the basis of this, it was rejected. Therefore, if they cannot agree to support even an idea in principle, then a business plan is pointless for any business plan naturally follows on from an interest in the intial proposal.
  2. We already know through numerous communications with senior council personnel such as Graeme Miller and Peter McIntyre amongst others that they simply don't want this to happen. A reinstated shipyard amongst all the numerous developments proposed would simply get in the way of their plans.
  3. Whilst we have never asked SCC to fully pay for the dredging costs, we would naturally expect them to make a contribution towards it given the level of job creation, inward investment and revenue for the council treasury it would bring in.
  4. As for marketing and awareness, we will use anything and everything - old and new - to get the word out.
  5. None of you know who sits on our project team, what experience / contacts they have and in what sectors they operate in - even though we won't make this public yet.
  6. It is also clear that none of you even know what we're actually proposing to do - despite it being openly out there.
  7. It is only you who are looking backwards, we are looking forwards and should we be successful, this will be a cutting edge, 21st century enterprise and one that takes full advantage of the various offshore developments right on the city's doorstep.
It is clear that most of you, like the Labour Party in Sunderland, do not want to see anything happen to the city other than gentrification. You cannot see what is around you and only think of Sunderland and shipping in terms of the past.

On the other hand, we want to see Sunderland thrive and with Pallion shipyard reinstated as an 'offshore service centre' then long term, high skilled jobs will be created, a growing and stronger supply chain will be created, genuine apprenticeships will be created, inward investment into the city will occur, greater vessel traffic for the port will happen, the reduction of future flooding events up river, greater revenue for the council, local people being able to buy the new houses, greater work diversity, a stronger global presence particularly in the maritime world etc.

Why would you not want that?
Click to expand...
Why can your proposal not be situated further downriver, like in the docks for example, which would do away with the need for dredging?
 

Back
Top