The post you are reporting:
Yes Richard, and the Public Debt was £850 billion 2 years ago, so it's gone up by over 150 billion in such a short time.
And that is notwithstanding the Bank of England has printed a few hundred billion pounds since May 2010, else it would have been much worse! The Treasury can count on corporate and income tax, on fuel tax and VAT, and on road tax and various other taxes. Yet, the Treasury is not able to get out of the Debt, but only increases it.
DPPT would have no chance to print money or collect taxes, but would be responsible for the DHB pension pot.
So the only revenue would be that coming from the ferry companies, plus from the smaller businesses operating within the Port. Then there are the many maintenance works that need paying for in Eastern Docks, not even to mention the construction of T2 at Western Docks.
Then the regeneration of the District to pay for!
How, Richard?
In particular considering that Neil has ruled out Port tolls as the obvious solution for local regeneration.
Then let's not even look at what would happen if there were an oil crisis, and the Port stopped functioning for a while, through lack of rail facilities.
Has the DPPT plan really been tested, Richard?
My representation is realistic, it has tested everything from carbon emission laws and the need for a rail link for freight for a future T2, to possible future inconvenience deriving from oil-dependent road transport; from constant road pollution in the town owing to Pot traffic to realistic local regeneration; from vitally needed local projects (such as a tunnel under Townwall Street) to the creation of employment through a local Port Toll revenue creating economic regeneration.
It requires that the Port must not be in debt. The Government must NOT sell the Port, but transfer it free of cost to the local Community. This has been my view since February 2010 - first representation - and has never changed.