Thanet District
Council has signed a ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ with the Thanet and
East Kent Chamber (TEKC) in a move that signals a strong commitment to
supporting local business.
It will run for three years, and gives council recognition that TEKC is the largest representative of local business.
Underpinned by the
Memorandum of Understanding are mutual interests such as the growth of
the local economy, inward investment and job creation.
Details laid down
include a council undertaking to consult with TEKC when developing
policies and major initiatives that seek to promote the area’s growth.
In response to this, TEKC has agreed to provide the council with regular
feedback on commercial issues and to give its backing to jointly agreed
policies and initiatives.
Both parties have
pledged to liaise over initiatives to encourage new businesses and to
back existing firms operating within the district. TEKC will give public
endorsement to council measures designed to promote the business
community.
In an extra boost
to the local economy, the Memorandum of Understanding commits the
council and TEKC to support activity that provides advice to commercial
organisations. The document also heralds joint working on promoting the
area to inward investors and encouraging start-up businesses.
Regular contact
between the council and TEKC will strengthen all the aims and objectives
of the two organisations as they work towards helping the local
business community.
Leader of Thanet
District Council, Cllr Clive Hart, said: “The council and TEKC are both
dedicated to supporting the local economy through job creation, business
promotion and attracting inward investment. As the largest business
support agency in Thanet, TEKC has an intimate knowledge of the needs of
the local private sector, and we’re very happy to have forged such a
strong and effective relationship.
“The Memorandum of Understanding represents a tangible and auspicious pledge to the local economy and the people of Thanet.”
The Chief
Executive of TEKC, David Foley, said: “This agreement marks a
significant step forward in strengthening the links between the
democratically elected local government body representing the district
and the largest business support organisation. We look forward to
working together to promote local companies, to ease the growing pains
of start-ups and to attract inward investment for the benefit of all
companies, workers and residents.”
Tuesday, 20 November 2012
19 comments:
Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive and anonymous derogatory comments about real people will be deleted. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts.
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
One wonders how the TDC strong commitment to local businesses sits alongside a councillor, and committee chairman too boot, going on TV to call for a boycott of a local pizza restaurant. That is really the way to attract inward investment - spend your capital on a Thanet business and a councillor will go on the BBC calling for it to be boycotted.
ReplyDeleteWonder what they might dream up if they were not committed to supporting local business.
What democratically elected local government body is that then. I seem to recall that back in May 2011, the Conservatives got the largest share of the vote by quite some margin, but thanks to some floor crossing three councillors, presumably only attracting a relatively small percentage of the overall Thanet vote, call the tune. Is that democracy? Sounds more like some third world banana republic where the wishes of the majority are suppressed by the power ambitions of a small minority.
ReplyDeleteAllan I don’t think it was floor crossing, just that neither party had an overall majority and needed the support of the independents to stay in power.
DeleteThere were two defections to independence forming a new independent group, and one defection from the existing independent group to the new independent group.
I think the underlying problem for the Conservatives is one of not accepting that they are in opposition, because the other elected groups have put them there and instead considering that they should be in power.
Obviously they would be in power under some other types of voting system, but they don’t seem to be working on electoral reform.
Since the election the Conservatives have lost a seat and Labour have gained one, so I think the balance is now about equal.
On balance the Conservative seem to be more likely to lose another seat fairly soon, so their future within this term is not looking good, it seems unlikely they would get back into power and not very likely thy will get voted back in ant the next local elections.
My guess is that any future they have in the medium term would rely on either having a generally disliked Labour government in power at Westminster, or forming themselves into a credible and united opposition.
At the moment I would say the local Labour group’s mindset is framed in about 1980 with the local Conservatives group’s mindset framed in about 1970, by this I mean here we are debating the issue online and there is very little chance of creative input from either group.
Just a bit of anonymous moaning about the independents and how unfair life is, as a floating voter, one of the minority who decides which party gets into power, I ask my self, is this enough to make me vote Conservative?
I would say if Ian Driver were standing in my ward I would consider voting for him, not because I agree with all his views, but because at least he seem to have some.
Michael, the fact remains that the Conservatives had the largest share of the popular vote, by a clear margin, and it was the resignation of John Worrow that led to them losing control. Now I would agree that with subsequent happenings they would have lost their slender seat majority anyway, but it does not change the fact that three floor crossers, one from Conservative, one from Labour and one from Indepedent are now calling the shots. That, I would suggest, is not particularly democratic and I am sure, in truth, many Labour councillors are just as unhappy with the situation as the Conservatives must be.
DeleteAgree with you that Conservatives are unlikely to return to power in Thanet anytime soon, but would like to see some co-operation between the main parties to avoid the situation where a minority group of three have effective control. Having not been around on your blogsite long I had, nonetheless, come to regard you as fairly well informed on local affairs and making an interesting contribution on many issues. Appalled and surprised then that you have yet to see through Ian Driver for the self promoting opportunist he really is. I wonder if he will be returned to office next time without the Labour rosette.
Realistically Allan I live in a town seriously blighted by the main high profile council owned sites being disused and derelict.
DeleteThis is the main issue I took up repeatedly with the Conservative councillors when they were in power, not only did they fail to listen, they made the situation considerably worse.
Now we have Labour in power three of the about seven council owned, long term, high profile empty properties have been let.
With the main one Pleasurama the underlying problem seems to relate to the developer never having developed anything, having no track record in fact.
Having taken this up with the various councillors, Labour appear to wish to sell the site freehold to the developer who hasn’t really developed anything over a period of nine years since he gained planning permission.
The Conservative group are now accept that there is a problem, but their line is that there is nothing they can do because they are not in power.
In an act more of desperation than anything else, I took the issue up with Ian Driver who called the decision in, is keeping me updated with his progress and has had some success in getting the problem over to the media.
As far as the main one of these properties to be open goes and producing some considerable benefit for the town, the maritime museum, Chris Wells has made it quite clear in his comments here that he would prefer it to return to a useless and disused building.
Now in these circumstances what would you do?
Not ideal with this business meorandum as Foley already tends to rubberstamp what the council tell him. He's inavariably wrong on business issues anyway.
DeleteAnd far more businesses are not members of this or any other chamber of commerce so either strange favouritism or a pointless memo or he'll open his membership list for scrutiny.
Michael, see your point on council owned Ramsgate properties, but the Pleasurama one is a complex issue, when allocating responsibility, as well you must know. This saga has gone from Labour being in charge to Conservative and back to Labour again with little or no progress. It is manna from heaven for Cllr Driver being yet another bandwagon he can jump on, but don't hold your breath on results.
DeleteDriver has a track record of noisy campaigns, some based entirely on hearsay or rumour, that have suddenly gone quiet with no change. Thanet Earth offending employment laws, false, QEQM A & E closing, false, Broadstairs Health Practice, storm in a tea cup already being dealt with by KCC and absolutely nothing to do with a Ramsgate ward councillor, are just some examples of this councillors 'nothing' campaigns, invariably supported by the far left rabble rousing group from the Red Hall in Broadstairs.
All for trying to get our councillors to perform, and I would agree that requires an effective opposition as well, but let's be careful about who we champion as our saviours.
Why can't the council just get on with the job and stop engaging in management-speak nonsenses like Memorandums of Understanding? They are our representatives, not David Foley, whose views I consider are already given more importance than they merit.
ReplyDeleteIt is difficult to take you in any way seriously Michael if you cannot even reproduce debate from your own website without twisting it to suit your own purpose. I only ever challenged the costings and costly operation of the Maritime Museum deal, which despite repeated requests have not been properly costed, and even the improperly costed elements have not been made public.
ReplyDeleteI shall be watching your blind faith in Ian Driver and Clive Hart with interest as the months go by, in particular their combined intent to raise council tax by 2% in each of the next two years; an action necessitated by their inability to manage an extra 1% saving on the current budget, and thus accept the government offer of 1% rise to prevent higher taxes.
To put that in context; the new Director post@£90,000 per year; the new cabinet position, and shadow and support at around £20,000 per year; the rise in councillor allowances, at around £10,000 in a full year; the mysterious £50,000 for 'another Iris Johnston project'; the £40,000 lost parking revenue, redirected for political reasons to buy supportive votes in council add up to around the 1% savings required. That doesnot inckude the current consultants hired to help us understand thanet; nor the coming consultant hire to understand the Theatre Royal - whose report should sinply reflect Jeff Fendal's excellent analysis in the Gazette today.
You have previously said there is no evidence of Labour 'blowing the budget'. I am delighted for you that the second hand book business is profitable enough to cover an unnecessary 2% council tax rise next year. I am not convinced many others out there will agree with you.
Distort what I have said for your own convenience, and continue to duck many of the real issues. Life in 'Child' land was once entertaining; now its boringly predictable.
Chris I think the key here is the TDC Conservative group is perceived as anti Ramsgate and the damage to Ramsgate’s prime council owned sites, perceived as being the result of Conservative spite towards the town.
DeleteAs local people petitioned and voted to pay more for a town council, in the hope it would represent Ramsgate, against what was perceived as a hostile Conservative run district council, the problem here doesn’t seem to relate to expenditure.
With the maritime museum, are you saying that the Conservative group would now support its continued opening? There is a very real concern in the town, that if the Conservatives regain power, they will seek to make it difficult for the museum to run events and close the museum again if they can.
The main issue in Ramsgate though is the Pleasurama site, the problems with this site have always been seen as problems brought about by the Conservative group, both in terms of the planning being granted when Whitbread pulled out and their failure to determine the development agreement in 2009.
I think the difficulty now is one of can the council extract itself from the situation there without incurring an expensive legal battle, but the real question for you is what would the Conservative group do about the problem were they in power now?
In 2009 the officer recommendation was to determine the agreement and your cabinet did the opposite, now the officer recommendation seems to be seek proper due diligence and go ahead if they get it or risk having to pay the developer for the progress so far.
Personally I think that it is time the council extricated itself from this one, even if there is a price, the blight on the town of this and now another adjacent empty because of this involvement.
Perhaps the Conservative group could even now assist with this problem, I will send you some documentation and see what you think.
Micael, I think the key here is the TDC Conservative group is constantly portrayed by you as anti Ramsgate and the damage to Ramsgate’s prime council owned sites, portrayed by you, and the Labour party, as being the result of Conservative spite towards the town.
ReplyDeleteI supported local people's petition to pay more for a town council, in the hope it would counter balance this futile portrayal Ramsgate as being vicitmised by a hostile Conservative run district council. The problem here doesn’t seem to relate to expenditure, rather to the interesting fact that Cllr David Green, one of your heros at one time, was against the extra expenditure and cost of a town council for Ramsgate. You have never, to my reading, ever highlighted the hypocrisy of campaigning against a body, and then taking full advantage of its existence to continue the propoganda war against the District Council in the supposed non political role as Mayor. Nor do you ever acknowledge the clear victimisation of Broadstairs projects that followed the accession of a minority Labour administration at the District Council, or the u turns that resulted.
With the maritime museum, are you saying that the Conservative group would now support its continued opening? There should be very real concern in the town, that the true cost/benefit case for the reopening of the museum is properly calculated, and should the Conservatives regain power, they will seek to make the public aware of the true, currently hidden costs of the arrangements, which were not universally supported by Labour councillors from Ramsgate. The only way any administration could make it difficult for the museum to run events would relate to a proper evaluation and costing of the already abandoned failed Labour parking policy, which would have to be consulted upon again; arguably for the third time in under three years - another hidden cost you choose to ignore.
No one has stated any potential to close the museum, merely a wish to have a properly calculated cost benefit analysis, which I would expect any sane opposition to ask for, and be able to see.
I note, insurprisingly, you duck factual questions, and depart on your own invented, scaremongering paths with your usual enthusiasm. Council Tax rises? Silent. Politically distorted parking fees? Silent. Pleasurama? Once again you pretend it was not the Labour party who gifted us all this glorious developer, on whom they knew no one would ever be able to undertake proper due diligence from the start.
Of course, you know damn well, that just like at national government level, sooner or later a conservative administration will have to come in and clear up the mess your heroes leave behind.
The main issue in Ramsgate though is the Pleasurama site, the problems with this site have always been seen as problems brought about by the Conservative group, both in terms of the planning being granted when Whitbread pulled out and their failure to determine the development agreement in 2009.
I think the difficulty now is one of can the council extract itself from the situation there without incurring an expensive legal battle, but the real question for you is what would the Conservative group do about the problem were they in power now?
In 2009 the officer recommendation was to determine the agreement and your cabinet did the opposite, now the officer recommendation seems to be seek proper due diligence and go ahead if they get it or risk having to pay the developer for the progress so far.
Personally I think that it is time the council extricated itself from this one, even if there is a price, the blight on the town of this and now another adjacent empty because of this involvement.
Perhaps the Conservative group could even now assist with this problem, I will send you some documentation and see what you think.
Chris presumably you now have the documentation related to Pleasurama and my suggestions as to how you could help us to extricate ourselves from this one, what do you think?
DeletePerhaps I should just publish the document on line, what do you think?
I mean it is all very well pontificating about what is wrong with Labour and as I am not a Labour supporter, it does rather run off my back.
The Conservative group did have eight years in power and at least two occasions where they could have resolved the Pleasurama situation, any idea why they didn’t?
On the parking issue, to me this is an inter party wrangle and not one I can be of much help with, we went to Birchington yesterday, parked outside the shops and paid. We then went to Westgate parked outside the shops and it was free. Here in Ramsgate my customers have to pay for parking, all of the free parking in the vicinity of my shop, Turner Street, Belmont Street and so on was removed under Conservative control at county and district levels. Would Labour have done the same, I guess the answer is probably. Will taxes rise, well I guess we all know the answer to that one.
Now my guess is that the Conservatives would like to get back into power and I think to do this you really need to win back some of Ramsgate, so what you need for starters is to persuade some of the remaining Ramsgate business people like me that this will be beneficial. I don’t think we really need the snags of Labour government outlining to us, what we would like to know from the local Conservatives is what they would do for us.
Finally,the most entertaining part of Driver's newspaper rant last week was the bit about how crass it is to have an untried and untested 23 year old student in charge of anything serious. No bells ringing there from your photographs either Michael?
ReplyDeleteYou continue to portray convenient inconsistency; superb memory loss about what has actually been stated, rather than your revised versions, and have now adopted the scaremongering tactics of your chosen heroes as the norm.
Chris I missed this one, so you will have to point me in the right direction, I did cover pizzagate, where I think I hit the right note.
DeletePerhaps it's no accident Polly Toynbee went to Ramsgate on her fact finding tour. However, with Michael doing such a brilliant job for the Guardian readers I'm sure her visit was quite unnecessary
ReplyDeleteDriver letter re Pleasurama in the Gazette last week. Tought he was keeping you informed? Funny how often you 'miss' things which do not fit your view, or believe they are better covered 'elsewhere'.
ReplyDeleteApologies both to you and Cllr Driver, it seems he did send it to me, this is the young wimin not fit for the helm SFP industries one and I will publish it in a post about the Pleasurama saga.
DeleteI guess it is looking increasingly unlikely that the Royal Sands will get over the cliff top, so it does raise the where do we go from here question.
Council owned but now with tank traps, any chance of getting some sort of combined parking and leisure use for next summer do you think?
Not really much to show from our local politicians after 10 years is it? Pleasurama derelict still. Manston bust several times, missing fines. Several dodgy deals such as 0% and Manston fines and monitors. And WC that has destroyed the town centres and still lays claim to being a 4th town centre wiht more housebuilding. Officials sacked and arrested for fraud. And tuppence on tax and parking. Are they standing again? Changing their seats around to get back in? No wonder the turnout slips ever lower. They're just about only voting for each other.
Delete21:08, with your jaundiced view of everything probably best if you just top yourself, mate.
Delete