The Department for Transport appear to be backtracking on the terms of a contract worth £13.8million awarded to Seaborne Freight – the firm that proposes to run a Ramsgate/Ostend ferry route despite not yet having any vessels.
The firm was one of three which received a share of £107million in contracts designed to provide extra ferry capacity to UK ports in the event of a no deal Brexit on March 29.
The others are French company Brittany Ferries, receiving £46m and DFDS with an award of £47m.
Yesterday the government department insisted Seaborne had been carefully vetted before being allocated the award but today (December 31), amid widespread criticism of the deal, the BBC reported that a spokesman now said the company would be required “to meet a number of rigorous time-staged requirements” before any cash was handed over.
The DfT spokesman also told the BBC if an effective ferry service is not running from Ramsgate by March 29 – when the UK exits the European Union – the contract could be cancelled.
The aim of the awards was to use UK ports to help alleviate pressure on Kent’s roads which would come with a ‘hard border’ and could lead to a backlog of traffic, particularly HGVs, trying to access Dover Port and the Eurotunnel.
The ferry firms would add extra crossings to their timetables. It was not clear how the terms for Seaborne Freight, which as yet is not recorded as owning any vessels, would work but the procurement document says there will be “additional freight capacity on ferry services between England and Belgium.”
Members of Ramsgate Action group had questioned the award of the contract to “a company that has no ships, no funds, no identified investors, no employees and no real premises,” and no apparent phone line for the Belgian end of the route. The group added: “It is beyond belief that Chris Grayling could approve handing over £14 million of taxpayers’ money in these circumstances.”
A shipping industry insider added that it was “incomprehensible that neither the Baltic Exchange, nor one of the big six shipbroking companies in the London were approached to advise on such an operation.”
Seaborne Freight said directors and shareholders have been working over the last two years on a business plan to reintroduce the Ramsgate to Ostend ferry service from early 2019.
A spokesman said: “During the development phase and pending the finalisation of robust funding arrangements, the business has been financed by the shareholders.”
Thanet council has said Ramsgate Port is one of the UK’s largest municipally-owned commercial ports and is the second closest to the continent, meaning it could play a significant part in providing additional capacity.
Yesterday Seaborne issued a statement to say two ships would be running on the Ramsgate/Ostend route next March, which four vessels by the Summer.
But the port cannot currently accommodate the larger cross-Channel ferries due to the restricted size.
Despite negotiations with Seaborne Freight no deal has yet been signed for a ferry service from Ramsgate. A service had been mooted to start in March but there has been no update on progress to date.
There has not been a cross-Channel operation at Ramsgate since the collapse of TransEuropa in 2013 which left Thanet council owed an unpaid debt of £3.4 million accrued by the ferry firm in port fees.
It’s all very well running this down but even the very large ferry companies had to start somewhere like that . So let’s give. Them a chance to get started. If they run the company correctly they could end up being a good credit to Ramsgate harbour AND Ramsgate itself. Anything is better than what we have at present, the sooner the better eh.
It’s all very well running this down but even the very large ferry companies had to start somewhere like that . So let’s give. Them a chance to get started. If they run the company correctly they could end up being a good credit to Ramsgate harbour AND Ramsgate itself. Anything is better than what we have at present, the sooner the better eh. This is not a repeat reply !!!
It’s all very well running this down but even the very large ferry companies had to start somewhere like that . So let’s give. Them a chance to get started. If they run the company correctly they could end up being a good credit to Ramsgate harbour AND Ramsgate itself. Anything is better than what we have at present, the sooner the better eh. This is not a repeat reply to the above statement of the new ferry company, please note.
I am glad the government are being cautious now. Better late than never. TDC have allegedly spent 18 months in negotiations with Seaborne and have got absolutely nowhere! The whole issue of Port Ramsgate seems a bit fishy to me! Let’s hope the real truth comes out soon. I don’t think we’ve heard the last of this. I think there’s a can of worms waiting to be opened.
It seems a bit fishy to me as well. And not because of the smell of the sea.
I understand that Seabourne shares an office in London at 59 Mansell Street. Not a current “dockside” location. I am told that the other users of that office address are believed to be a firm of Maritime lawyers called Campbell, Johnson and Clark. No idea who those three are but,apparently, one prominent figure in the firm is someone called Mark Bamford. Someone (else? or not?)called Mark Bamford is the brother of JCB owner, Anthony Bamford , one of the biggest donors to the Tory Party.
Just a thought.
Please may I quote your comments on posting this page on Facebook.
Please feel free, Lynne. The information and suspicions that I describe are increasingly well known anyway, though, so far, inexplicably not available from our fearless, “investigative” Press and TV. You would think that the mainstream media would have the resources to quickly investigate and , hopefully, put my mind at rest.Or not.
I may not be an expert on cross channel Ferries, but I have been a serious user since around 1980, although not so much now! Folkestone had a couple of ferries in the 80’s, the Hengist, and the Horsa, around 6,000 tons, but the Channel Tunnel put them out of business, that and the extension of Dover Harbour, that allowed much larger ships to be used.
Ramsgate can’t compete because it has the same problem, it can’t take large enough ships! Even if it was dredged, it would probably still only be able to take small ferries, which just wouldn’t have the capacity, and not be viable! It was recently reported that Dover shift 11,000 trucks a day, how many would Ramsgate take, 40 to 50 at a push perhaps, both ways?