Posted by Mark on 9/21/2006, 1:02 pm, in reply to "Re: OUR WATERWAYS!!" Phillip, I have spent some time reading the exchange between you and John and quite informative it has been. I have been looking over the maps and have gained more knowledge of the old dock system and how it evolved. Phillip, you came on the forum stating that docks should not be filled in needlessly and went at length justifying the building of the Kings Dock stadium on the filled in Kings Dock and Dukes Dock. I did support this plan when it was announced going along with the hype, until I read the Save Liverpool Docks web site and realised the stadium could have been built on the Dock Road side of the Queens Dock, which is a better site for a stadium that seats many thousands. The access if it was built on Queens Dock is better with more space around for cars and car parks for out of town people. You selfishly dismissed this location, preferring to fill in old docks, as you like to drive to work along the Dock Road. If the old Kings Dock was developed for residential homes with pubs and cafes as normal districts have, then I might have been typing this from Kings Dock. As your posts progressed it was clear you supported every dock that was filled in and the proposal to fill in the West Waterloo dock with no supporting arguments except you thought it a good thing. You even thought it a great thing that all docks that have been filled in has been a good thing for the city. John pointed out the large scale of the docks that have been filled in, which you inaccurately stated was small. Half the south end docks and large parts of Central docks is not a small amount of docks that have been filled in. I never realised the scale of the loss until I read the website. You have dismissed history completely. These docks were the lifeblood of our city and families, and filling them in is a crime against us. We were told the docks were to be developed for residential use and I would like to live around a dock one day. A dock my grandfathers worked around all their lives. I think they would have approved of me living around the docks they worked and loved. I know the names of most of the docks, like Sandon and Canada, without ever being in most of them, because my grandfathers would talk about the docks and ships at every opportunity. I heard about Coolie crews, China Boats, Maru boats, electric bogies, Cunarders, Alexander tugs, Harrison Line, the whole nine yards. To them it was a way of life with a strong emotional attachment, not a job. I toured around the docks and realised why they were hooked. They could have got jobs in the new factories around Speke earning more money. Moving to a factory to them would have been torture and a price not worth paying. They never once considered it. Alternative sensible argument is a good thing as long as they are well thought out and justified. The onus is on the dock filler to justify their points, not those who want to keep our history and water space to live around. I can't see why anyone who loves Liverpool would want any of the docks filled in and have more of our heart ripped out. Peel Holdings are a Manchester based company who hold no emotional attachment to Liverpool. I have sussed that you must work for a company who has an interest in having docks filled in, as your arguments are shallow and in parts inaccurate, being against the water community we were promised.
--Previous Message--
: I think it is great that John has developed
: this site as an indication of the strong
: feelings that people from Liverpool and
: elsewhere have about our dock system and its
: importance to the identity of the city.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread