The post you are reporting:
You are right, Barry, that the fundings of the DHB workers and the maintenance of the Port come from the turnover, I skipped a logical link in my paragraph there.
But up to now, the annual profit, quoted at £10 million, is not considered enough to supplement a pension scheme, a participation of the DHB workers in some share scheme, T2 and Dover regeneration, all of which are part of the public consultation process, as you probably know if you have seen the representations (I have).
My other point was, that a purchaser would not only have to see to all these obligations, but also try to get their invested money back and on top of it all make some profit for their own return, this being the logic of a private investor in any business.
My point is, that if the tariffs of the ferry operators were to be increased to cope with all this, they would probably have to stop operating, as they would be likely to lose business.
So to leave DHB as owner of the Port would be the best solution, as they wouldn't have to get back a purchase sum.
The port-levy to the local Councils, including KCC, would cover generation in Dover, road maintenance (which is necessary for a port to fumction), and even some regeneration in Dover District.
Sorry that I missed that logical link in my previous post about the turnover, my apologies!