My KCC Election Manifesto & Video

Tuesday, 6 August 2013

THANET "FERRYGATE", PETE TONG, FISH & CHIPS


In 2010 under the leadership of Chief Executive, Dr Sue McGonigal, Thanet Council embarked upon a major re-structuring exercise. One of the “big” changes, according to the report (written by Dr McGonigal) which led to the re-structuring, was to develop a Commercial Services function which “maximises its income – thereby supporting the budget and reducing pressure on the Council tax”.

 One of the key components of the new super-duper “income generating” Commercial Services function was of course Maritime operations which, under the Directorship of Mark Seed, was ordered to “review profit and performance and maximize income recovery”.

Dr McGongigal’s report went on to say that Commercial  Services and  Maritime operations would work to “strict income targets” and if these targets were exceeded Director Mark Seed and his team would be eligible to receive bonuses from a “profit sharing scheme”.
 
So why did it all go Pete Tong?

Well, whilst the good Doctor and her Director were espousing, to all who would listen, the new Council credo of income maximisation, profitability and developing a more business-like approach, they were simultaneously ensconced in secret meetings in Thanet and Ostend with Transeurpa Ferries (TEF)  and its 3 Cypriot registered associates, agreeing a deal which ran totally contrary to  Dr McGonigal’s maritime master plan.

Instead of maximising and recovering income at the Port, it was agreed in November 2010 and March 2011 that TEF and its associates would not have to pay a penny in fees and charges for the foreseeable future.

Instead of working to “strict income targets” at the Port it was agreed that the Maritime Service could allow its largest customer to run up a bill of £3.3million in unpaid fees.

Instead of requiring the Port to generate income to “reduce pressure on the Council Tax”, it was agreed to embark on a reckless, high risk, gamble with public money which achieved the reverse of what was intended.

And of course whilst the re-structuring plan was launched with  a media fanfare and countless staff  briefings, the hypocritical, double dealings with TEF were kept secret by the good Doctor, her Director, the Council Leader and his Cabinet  Finance Portfolio holder.

Whether or not anyone had a cut of the profit sharing scheme for successfully delivering this fantastic profit-focused, income-maximising  deal with TEF, I don’t know. Perhaps I should ask?

Anyway, dear readers, the next time I see him I will ask Peter if this is any way to run a Fish Factory.
 

1 comment:

  1. Never mind profit sharing, someone should pay for this - and I don't mean us taxpayers!

    ReplyDelete