• The post you are reporting:
   
  Hi Mr Vic. I opposed the private equity sale of the port and the actions that the DHB were then taking to facilitate that outcome. I also put forward viable alternative views and possible outcomes and was very public and open about it. It is incorrect to say or suggest that I ever indicated that the DHB could do nothing right - the only things that made it into the mainstream public domain and which were discussed and argued were the main points of contention. In fact, I frequently said that the managers and staff did a fantastic job. I am now an independent non-executive director of the board and am bound to speak and act in the best interests of the organisation, just as I am bound by collective responsibility to support the decisions of the board as a whole. That does not mean that I do not bring a different viewpoint into the boardroom and speak accordingly in the boardroom, its my job to bring an independent perspective and use my 30+ years of industry knowledge and experience into the boardroom and apply it for the benefit of the organisation and its stakeholders and that is what I do.
  
  My post above on the Goodwins merely corrects an inaccuracy that has crept into the public domain and gives readers of this forum a pointer to a website where the DHB is answering questions and publishing updates on the license application and the development of the Western Docks.
  
  I have always posted, when I see something that is clearly inaccurate, with the facts as published or measurable on the ground. Just as I did when inaccurate postings were made about the PoW and the possibility of it reopening along its full length, also the new distances that would open to the public with the creation of a Marina curve and new Marina pier.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason