The post you are reporting:
A successful vibrant town will always be a mixture of long term locals (i.e. many generations) and more recent incomers. It is also surely preferable to, as far as is possible, have people who wok in a town also live in or at worst very close to that town (economically this is good, environmentally this is good).
In order to keep the former and attract the latter one needs to provide adequate quality housing to meet the demand/need of both groups as well as good social infrastructure (schools, health facilities, transport links etc.) and a decent retail/leisure environment.
It is clear that over the last generation, due to many factors, mostly economic, the town has declined and possibly hit stagnation point, however a small minority of people (some involved in local government, some not) are not happy with this situation and have got off their backsides and tried to address the issues and make Dover an attractive destination for both incomers and locals.
None of the proposed housing developments (Whitfield, town centre brown field/in fill) or the improved transport links are exclusively aimed at or for the benefit of incomers, but these are convenient shorthands for the aspirations held not only by the likes of Paul W and Roger, but also many of us in the town and district.
(P.S. apologies for my previous intemperate post which has kindly been removed)
