London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Tango, Si. The waiting game drags on but I sleep well trusting the words of JW and our new Chairman in various RNS's, most recently Apr 30th:
The Company will respond to any clarifications that DAERA seek following closure of the public consultation as soon as such clarification requests have been received. The Company has had numerous discussions with DAERA, and the Company continues to maintain that it sees no reason why DAERA will not recommend the granting of the marine licence to the relevant ministers.
"Enough said, now just wait"
No Project is bullet proof and without risks, this is why we have regulations and guidelines, as long as INFA has followed all the guidelines then all that is left is the "acceptable risks" otherwise they would have been regulated for.
Not withstanding the socio-economic needs of NI and the UK as a whole and how much weight they may or may not influence the final decision, Lottie is correct that the proposal should be bullet proof on all the aspects he mentions.
Having read a lot of the objection replies from the like of NIMTF, UW, RSPB i'm left wondering if they do. Yet.
This is why I suggested that there may be a lot behind the scenes interaction between Infa and DAERA since the end of the PC, to update or address the issues raised. And that is why it's taking time and why meanwhile we have been given lots of other news not related to IM. H&W, FSRU, Spanish shipbuilders, maybe hydrogen....
This is why I have not gone all in here as much as I would have liked too.
Just biding my time, whilst accruing funds elsewhere for when it's sorted.
Anyhoo, off twerk. Laters all. Have a good day. :)
Not forgetting jyst how stupid and self-destructive the N.I MLA's/Assembly can be at times with refusal to see the clear writing on the wall in front of them.
But we can not forget the emphasis on economic recovery, which will be/ IS a priority but not above safety/Environment. All the reports state they have met or surpassed all requirements for enviro control so other than some "unknowns" turning up I can not see it being knocked back.
As we are going it alone in 6 months time and limited security of supply, We need to be self sufficient in all commodities, and IM will go a long way to our security and Barrow. IMHO
I hope that the potential job aspects are not an important issue in this decision. If an investment of this type is to be taken seriously, the basis (for agreement) should be squarely based upon the quality of the proposal. Its engineering aspects, environmental protection and most importantly, the future needs of the UKs energy requirements. Whilst job creation is always a positive, especially in an area of high unemployment, it can not unduly influence the decision.
The merits of this proposal must stand the test of time.
The previous secretary of state Julian Smith did a lot of good in my opinion for INFA, and the new secretary of state Branden Lewis has a strong naval background and a solid supporter of small businesses, This should also be a strong positive as I am sure Mr Poots and Mr Lewis will have pooled ideas/thoughts.
Regarding "DAERA's OPINION" I don't think there is a cat in hells chance of being told that :-)
Answering my own question, I guess they would have to, being a public body.
But I assume their decision only a recommendation?
On a similar theme, I did wonder if DAERA's decision would be made public before it was handed off to the Minister.
So as not to put the onus on him alone.
TTNY- That all depends on the impact, I am sure the minister is fully aware of this project and the massive impact it will have on local communities and businesses so one could assume he will not dilly dally with his decision.
Good thinking Bat Man (or Si Man) but I'm hoping your tankers aren't needed.
Hopefully after the extensive research and reports submitted to DAERA with the ML application that they'll be content that INFA are doing everything they need to minimize environmental impacts.
Just thinking out loud here again, but I'm wondering that once DAERA issue their ML decision how long will it be before the Environment Minister actually issues his decision.
We'll know these answers fairly soon I imagine.
As Tango picked up on this morning, Killik's sell off was actually last month, 12th of May.
Around one of the last spikes to .44p funnily enough.
Then the date on which Infa were notified was the 15th of this month.
Okay, so Infa can't dictate when an ii informs them ,but why over a weeks delay in RNSing it to shareholders.
Also, on the RNS it states, " Total number of voting rights of issuer as 152,704,300"
Now I know that we have not had that many shares in issue since early 2015.
Wish we still did, tbh. :)
Anyhoo, what's the dealio? RNS resposible Infa personage.
Yes, I can see your valid reasons for your correspondence and was aware that you are somewhat local so had no issue with your email. Just didn't like the idea of loads of shareholders doing similar with no other reason other than profit.
Even as a LTH I have a healthy regard for the worries that, for want of a better term, the anti's, have regarding their beloved IM.
Have said before that I live in a very similar area (ANOB, SSSI) so understand their issues with protecting their environment.
Just hoped that things could be done in a way that had least inpact and went as far as possible to appease all concerned.
Tricky, yes. But as you both point out, the bennefits to the local economy would go a long way to mittigate such impact.
If done correctly.
I did come up with a solution, kind of thinking outside the box. :)
We buy a couple of old tankers, but in good nick. Pump the brine into them and when one is full just pootle out a safe distance and slowly disperse the brine over a wider area whilst the other is filling up. Then on the way back fill up with fresh sea water for injecting into the caverns. Couple of big tanks onshore for the surplus.
Then I thought when/if the FSRU was up and running the empty gas tankers could fill up and empty on their homeward journey. Genius.
JW, I expect royalties if you use this method. ;)
Keep 'em rolling
No matter what emails are sent he will have a skivvy to sift them and give him the synopsis. I sent my opinion during the consultation and would not send direct to him, But if I were a resident not just a biased shareholder I would definitely email him.
SI_Derman, completly agree with you on the posts to Mr Poots, I don't think he would be in the position he's in if he was was to make his judjment based on letters of support from either side. TTNY I also understand your valid points. Some good posts here today.
I agree its crucial that he grants the ML as you say all them jobs lost could be taken up with the projects lined up imho
Ttny, that's precisely what spurred me on to email, the bombardier job losses and that of an airplane seat manufacturer
Si, I'm guilty of it. I emailed him a week ago but no response yet. My intention was to highlight the many benefits granting the licence would bring to the area and h&w. Politicians are in place to represent the public and I see no harm in lobbying them to support a cause. In this case its economic development in line with environmental regulations. Don't worry I do hear ur point, and wrestled with it too in the past. But for the reasons given, I decided to press send
You won't need any tin hat Si, lol. Your points are very valid and it's good to share our thoughts here, even if we don't always agree.
I've always known the buck stopped with Edwin Poots and indeed I've previously emailed him before Christmas. DAERA also received an email of my support for the IM project during the consultation process.
I'm living in N Ireland and why I emailed him again is that we've recently had an announcement of 600 job losses at Bombardier in NI. Bombardier is literally beside the H & W site and these guys are mainly from the area and 20 mile radius. This massive job loss makes the ML and IM project now even more essential for the local area. More than ever now we need the H & W jobs secured and if we can get some of these 600 highly skilled guys back in work too then all the better.
This change in circumstances locally re jobs in the last few weeks means a lot more is at stake re the granting or otherwise of the ML. Mr Poots will be well aware of this, however I think it's good that the local politicians are updated on public sentiment when circumstances change.
I kept my email fairly brief rather than some of the spiels I can do at times, so even if it does get to his eyes he won't taking too much time over it.
Ta for your thoughts on this Si, healthy discussion is always good I feel.
Personally, and I may be unpopular for saying so, I'm not sure that inundating the ministers inbox with emails, at this late stage is such a good idea. Regardless of good intentions. The time for that was during the PC, IMO.
And telegraphing the proposal to those in opposition is just going to make it worse.
He'll need a bigger inbox. :)
I'm sure he's fully aware of the pro's and con's of the situation and if not he's not doing his job right, no disrespect.
Also, and no offence, but I can't believe that everyone was not aware of the fact that the buck stops with him. It's been discussed here many times over the last six months.
Even though I was aware he's the environment minister I just had a quick google of the man.
As it happends, just this afternoon he announces £800k of grants for projects to help DAERA’s strategic aims.
So he's obviously beeing seen to be doing right by thing as per his post.
Anyhoo, this all sounds a bit negative, not my intention. I even bought a load yesterday, bouyed by the arrival of the viking ships. Pun intended. :)
I just think that a load of emails from "shareholders" is not a good idea, just sayin'.
From locals, for or against, yes of course.
Just my thoughts, fwiw.
Regards, Si. (tin hat on)
Reading Tango's below post about objectors writing letters to register their protest and the 'don't minders' doing nothing has got me thinking.
The final investment decision regarding the marine license is down to Edwin Poots, MLA.
Now the objectors lobby as many people as they can to increase the likelihood of their voice being heard.
Here's my thoughts. We do exactly the same with our thoughts and forward these directly to Mr Poots. We could also encourage as many people to do the same (obviously assuming they feel they way we do about the opportunities INFA can provide to so many people).
I've just emailed Mr Poots myself, stating various points Inc why I feel the granting of the marine license is essential on so many fronts. The reasons include the security of existing jobs, the potential for many more jobs for NI, the positive financial impact these jobs bring to other businesses with spending, as well as other benefits for the local economy.
Obviously Mr Poots will make the final decision on all data he has at hand (and not just the DAERA report). He'll also have letters of objection on his desk. I think he needs to hear the thoughts of the supporters for it too !
He now also has my email of support towards the granting of the ML as off 20 minutes ago. If anyone else sees this as a good idea or something they also want to do, then ive pasted below contact details for Mr Poots .
This project is in national interests , although protesters are within their rights to complain I would hope they would be overruled on this.
I have always been sceptical of these processes, because if you don't mind the project going ahead you are not really going to put that in writing, but if you object you most likely would write to object, ending up with a miss conception that locals don't want the project.. not sure how they handle that, protesters would obviously muster as many objections as humanly possible.
Correct Speedy.. I would be totally surprised if this project does not get the go ahead!! And regards the strong local opposition to this project, personally from what I've seen many locals support this project and want it to go ahead