Plans for a £7.6m project aimed at bringing ferry operations back to Ramsgate Port as part of the town’s £19.8m Levelling Up programme are likely to be ditched.
The Ramsgate Port and infrastructure project, which was to include the refurbishment of berths 2 and 3, and land based works needed to support ro-ro ferry operations, , failed to attract an operator when it was put out for procurement in August 2024.
The operator would have been responsible for running a substantial part of the Port of Ramsgate, including 17.8 acres of port land and the two roll-on roll-off (ro-ro) ferry berths.
Initially £3.5 million was allocated for improved port infrastructure but an additional £4.12m funding was transferred to the scheme last year following a report to councillors outlining how port infrastructure work is likely to need £14m, far exceeding the £3.5 allocation for site clearance and remediation; improved breakwater and new berthing infrastructure.
The additional funding was taken from projects to improve fishing facilities and funds set aside for an overnight accommodation project at the Sailors’ Church/Smack Boys Home.
A grant of £4.5m was to be made available to the prospective concessionaire, as a contribution to the delivery of works at the Port.
But now Cabinet members will consider a proposal not to progress the project and also to reallocate the funding to other schemes in the programme.
Thanet council has been exploring other options to support the Port concession contract route, including seeking additional funding from the government to increase the value of the £4.5m grant. Costs for a new concession operator to get the port ready are anticipated to be in the region of £14.8m.
However, additional funding has not yet been secured and Thanet council says that given the significant time constraints imposed as part of the government funding requirements – with delivery of the regeneration projects originally due by March 2026- carrying on with the project as part of the Levelling Up (Pathfinder) scheme is not viable.
Council Leader, Cllr Rick Everitt said: “Identifying a long-term sustainable future for Ramsgate Port remains a key objective for the council. Although the timescales associated with the Pathfinder Programme mean we can’t continue to progress the project within this funding stream, there remains a strong strategic case for the Port of Ramsgate.
“There has been, and continues to be, wider interest in the future potential. The challenge is that as a small district council we can’t deliver the infrastructure required. “It’s too big for the council alone. If we don’t intervene then the opportunity will be lost not only for Thanet, but also for the country.
“There is no ‘do-nothing’ option and in my view this means we must now look at alternative uses for the site, alongside other potential ways of renewing the port infrastructure. But we can’t risk losing £7.6m of funding for Ramsgate, so we have to take the concession project off the table.
“Should the proposals be agreed by Cabinet, officers will work up detailed options for the potential next steps with a further report to come to Cabinet later this year.”
The Cabinet meeting will take place on June 26.
On behalf of Thanet Green Group, Cllr Tricia Austin said: “We had severe doubts about this plan from the start, but it gives us no pleasure to say ‘we told you so’. We feel very sorry for officers who have put in so much time & effort trying to make this project work for both the current and the previous administrations. We are, however, pleased that Cllr Wing will now not have to eat her hat, as she promised if we did manage to restart ferry services in Ramsgate!
“We now need all groups on TDC to work together to agree a way forward, though sadly that will not be simple, with expensive legalities to go through if we wish to deregister the port and consider other uses. We will be pushing for local residents & businesses to be consulted and their views & experience taken on board.
“Meanwhile, we hope to see a renewed focus on the other Pathfinder projects. Residents know work has been going on behind the scenes, but they now quite rightly expect to start seeing spades in the ground, and to have definite start & end dates confirmed for the remaining projects.”
Extension request
The council has also asked the government for a 12 month extension to deliver the remainder of the Pathfinder programme. Following detailed discussion, it is anticipated that this request will be approved, which would move the deadline for projects to March 2027.
Thanet council says this is an issue other Local Authorities are also facing. Work on a number of projects will start on site this year, alongside the Newington Community Centre extension and refurbishment which has already started.
Cabinet members are also expected to approve the reallocation of the £7.6m funding to other existing projects within the Pathfinder programme.
The proposed reallocation is £2m to the Green Campus; £1,7m for the Clock House; £2m for harbour placemaking; £585k Broad Street and £100,000 for fishing fleet facilities plus £1,247,603 contingency funds.
Cllr Everitt said: “Since responding to the government’s call out for projects as part of the Future High Street Fund in 2019, Thanet has been successfully awarded over £50m in regeneration funding. This is an exceptional achievement and it is critical we deliver this programme.
“This has proven particularly challenging in Ramsgate due to the very short timescale the council was given to design new projects for the funding bid in 2021, as well as the difficult economic environment since the award was confirmed.
“However, the need to consider reallocating the £7.6m provides an important opportunity to ensure that the valuable benefits of these projects for the town and the wider community in terms of jobs and growth can be delivered to the maximum extent possible.”
The reports will be reviewed by the Overview and Scrutiny Panel on Tuesday 17 June, prior to the Cabinet meeting.
Ramsgate Clock House
The refurbishment of the Ramsgate Clock House was included as part of the original Ramsgate Levelling Up Fund submission. The scheme aims to refurbish the Grade II* Listed structure, creating a heritage centre for the town and a new café.
The original project was based on a successful Heritage Lottery Fund bid. As this was ultimately unsuccessful, the scheme has undergone a number of changes. It will include a café to the side of the Clock House. The ambition is for it to support the sustainability of the Heritage Hub, by providing a small income for the maintenance of the building.
The project had £3.36m allocated to refurbishing the building and creating a heritage hub for the town.
Since the Clock House building was returned to the council in November 2023, the electrical wiring has been upgraded and made safe, and urgent repairs to the stonework facades completed.
A planning application was submitted in February for the Grade II* Listed building to be refurbished to provide the heritage and community space and new café.
Ramsgate Pier Yard and Highways works (placemaking)
The Pier Yard scheme was part of the original Ramsgate Levelling Up Fund submission and the Highways works was part of the Future High Street Fund bid.
The two schemes have been combined to benefit from one construction contractor and programme
In the Pier Yard car park, the scheme aims to remove the parking and create a public square.
The aim of the highway works is to improve the roundabout and crossing points along Harbour Parade, Military Road and Royal Parade and improve connectivity between the town centre and harbour areas.
Ramsgate Green Campus
The Green Campus scheme was awarded funding as part of the Levelling Up Fund. The original scheme anticipated a level of match-funding from the private sector. This has not been forthcoming.
The design is now for a phased scheme with a budget of £6,101,350.
The first phase includes two buildings; a public-facing central core for the Green Campus, with café, conference and meeting facilities, and the first workspace block, to support small and new maritime businesses, as well as provide education opportunities.
Facilities for the Fishing Industry
The project is for quayside fishing facilities at the Royal Harbour, to support the growth and resilience of the Ramsgate’s fishing community.
The original allocation of grant to this project was £3.918m but this was reduced last year with funding moved to the Ramsgate Port and infrastructure project. It is now proposed to move £100k back to the scheme in addition to the £100k already allocated.
The original plan was to create a site for the local fishing fleet where they could unload, freeze, store and process their catch. With the ability to process fish and seafood on site the fishing fleet would have been able to increase their income from each catch.
A scheme was developed jointly with the Thanet Fishermen’s Association (TFA). During Autumn 2023, following a period of engagement with the council, design team and the TFA on size and design of the facility, the TFA confirmed that their members were unable to financially commit to the maintenance and operation of a new facility, given the current state of decline in the fishing industry in Ramsgate.
Thanet council says the TFA then put forward proposals for smaller scale improvements including better refrigeration, ice making facilities and fencing.
Thanet regeneration projects
Thanet’s regeneration projects all come under a £51m scheme across programmes – Margate Town Deal £22.2m; Ramsgate Levelling Up £19.8m; Margate Levelling Up £6.3m and Future High Street Fund £2.7m.
In March 2021, Margate was allocated up to £22.2m of government funding through the Town Deal. The funding has been allocated to projects in the town with a focus on creating jobs, supporting the town centre, boosting businesses and connecting people to where they live and work either through infrastructure or digital technologies.
In October 2021, the government confirmed two bids to the Levelling Up Fund had been successful; one bid for Ramsgate (£19.8m) and one bid for Margate (£6.3m).
The bid for Ramsgate was made up of three components: the Port, the Royal Harbour and Assets to Connect with Opportunities. The bid for Margate focused on the MargateDigital project.
In July 2023, the government’s Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) invited 10 local authorities across England to pilot a new approach to funding delivery called the Simplification Pathfinder Pilot. Thanet District Council was one of the authorities selected to take part.
did anyone ever believe any of this nonsense ? it was never going to happen , all they want that area for is more development , and the people involved will enjoy a hefty rake off as usual . do they not realise people have the ability to see straight throuh them and thier lies , they are not as clever as they think they are
This is an utter disgrace at this stage. A total failure by the council’s regeneration team, no value for money, no accountability, and taxpayers left footing the bill. The Conservative councillor now leader rightly flagged the risk when the funds were shifted from the Smack Boys and was ignored. Now we’re seeing the cost of that incompetence, enabled by a weak Labour leader. I feel embarrassed for you all here is hoping that finally someone will hold this all to account.
Labour proving once again that they can’t be trusted with our money – either at a local or national level. Bunch of clowns who, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, still tried to sell us the mirage of a functioning ferry terminal. Now, shock horror, it isn’t feasible.A generational sum of money coming into Thanet which has just been spaffed away due to sheer incompetence.
How embarrassing for everyone involved.
Thanet needs to stop living in the past.
Forget the failed part. Forget the fail airport.
Move into the modern world .
Port would make a great leasure area with cafes etc.
Airport could be used instead of minster marshes.
This is a total let down to the people of Thanet by the current powers that be at TDC, it is obvious to get a operator of ferry services and port operations involved at the Port Of Ramsgate, not so far up the coast in Dover.
Either rent the port to the Port of Dover operators or sell it to them.
It would solve a whole load of issues at Dover, no more closing part of the motorway, no more congestion in Dover at peak times, send either cars or HGV to Ramsgate to ease congestion. Ramsgate is an obvious choice as a reliever port, to take up the strain.
It would cost nothing to residents of both Thanet and Dover to have this in place and both communities would aslo benefit financially and employment opportunities.
At last a good idea. Not cafés and art galleries.
If possible ,then perhaps not such a bad idea for Dover port authority to use the site . Are there any negative unintended consequences of such a venture?
Perhaps developing tourism for this location along with trains opportunities in catering and tourism wouldn’t also be a bad idea and f course investment in fishing 12
Why would the Port of Dover want a port that can only take smaller ships (where will they come from?) for a crossing that is much longer and takes more time needing to avoid the Goodwin Sands? If it was viable and could make/save money they would be jumping at the chance…. the fact they aren’t says a lot !
Thank goodness-after all the money that was wasted on it by a prior administration.
Hopefully if we are still allowed local elections in a couple of years we can get rid of Labour & their Orwellian smoking bans to raise money under the guise of health & their already failed equally 1984 style dispersal orders & the already failed trying to fine/arrest people for spitting or swearing & this nonsense can be totally shelved, as clearly the current leader & his crew still wants to sail ahead with this folly
Reading this reminded me of Tory minister Chris Grayling who awarded a multimillion pound contract to a ferry company that appeared to have copied its terms and conditions from a takeaway outlet.
Seaborne Freight received £13.8m of public money to provide ferry transport in the event of a no-deal Brexit, despite not owning any ferries and had a section on its website that refers to “placing an order” and advising customers to check goods “before agreeing to pay for any meal/order”.
£13.8m would have made up the shortfall nicely and Ramsgate could have had its ferries. I wonder who trousered it instead.
Did we ever find out who the boss of that company was friends with in the Tory Party?
But you’re gonna tell us. Or not?
Ah “Lord Trumpton” you go to the same School of Finance as Zia Yusuf and don’t understand the difference between contracts and spend…. Seaborne Freight received absolutely no public funds !
“1. If any tax-payer/public money was paid/transferred to Seaborne Freight Ltd
following the award of a £13.8 million contract to run ferry services between
Ramsgate and Ostend to lessen the consequences of probable capacity
constraints on the Dover – Calais route after 29 March 2019 in the case of a no-
deal Brexit. ”
“Your request has been considered under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
I can confirm that with regard to your question numbered 1 above, no taxpayer money
has been transferred to Seaborne Freight. “
Future High St Fund and most of LUF still unspent. Viable, important projects such as the Clockhouse ignored for the diversion of funds to a ferry operation destined never to return. This is the pet project of Labour, to match the airport pet project of the Tories.
When will we get competence and effectiveness?
It doesn’t take 5 years to spend hard won project funds. Unless something is fundamentally wrong.
At least there seems to be no chance of it becoming a “marina village” .
Just build a marina village, with small shops , bistros, etc etc, a proper area for tour boats to go from, sunbeam photographs, anything but the stupid idea that a ferry can operate to France .
No one is interested in running ferries from Ramsgate. To much money involved and limited area for parked trailer units or cars. I am not surprised to see this plan failing. A decent marina would be better . Might actually make some money in the end. As the world goes round so do TDCs idea go round and round in a useless spiral of wasted money on new but old plans.
No one is interested in running planes from Manston either-they weren’t from 1998-2014 when everybody who tried bled money & at great cost to the taxypayers. but here we are doing it all over again, with the same guy shilling for Wiggins nearly 30 years back now shilling for RSP & making the same promises he backtracked on then once again.
Just like nobody with any common sense thought that Dreamland as a theme park was ever financially viable again-yet it reopened while still being built & had gone bust within a year.
A decade on it is has gone from being a theme park run by TDC to some property enterprise run by somebody in in Switzerland (tax haven) & the Channel Islands (tax haven)-even the day to day manager of operations Kemsley, despite living in Thanet has the correspondce address of Guernsey (tax haven) at Companies House for four of the six AG MARGATE PROPCO companies her & this Swiss asset manager/banker/portfolio manager etc are listed as officers at.
Shops and cafés? Maybe enough empty shops in High street waiting for new destinations. Ferries, not of the inflatable type, could bring in tourists with money to spend, but who can’t afford a luxury yacht of their own.
Dig it up and grow carrots….you can never have enough carrots.
With the large amount of Thanet people wearing glasses tells the tale of the need for carrots 4 times a day.
A final thought on this.. much as people moan about the “waste” of pursuing this project, both Tory and Labour have supported it at various points.
Why? Because there was a feeling that the electorate wanted ferry services to resume and also desired the potential economic/job opportunities. If you are going to enter local government, then what is the point if not to try (reasonable!) things? And this is a reasonable ambition.
As recently as Labour’s funding was offered, I read in Kent Current (sorry Kathy) more details about this project. Essentially the Port of Dover were very interested.. but (even with the government subsidy) they recently decided that they didn’t want to go ahead, either because the cost/risk was too high or they had limited funds available at the current time.