The post you are reporting:
Neil, having gone through some reading, I firmly believe the Department for Transport would have had to write to me and inform me of any further public consultation process, as I was already part of it. I have NOT ignored any invitation, I simply never received one!
It would be probably better for the Transport Dep. to clarify this and the whole issue of my participation, and I expect to hear from them in the coming days.
They cannot just ignore my request, because if they do, I shall take the request to other offices until I receive a reply.
Clearly, my rail link proposal, the port-toll proposal to finance local Government, and the proposal that the Port of Dover pass to local Government, have been part of my official and public campaign.
I am of the opinion you want to take some of these proposals off me and claim them for yourself, in particular the rail link one. I gather this from your denial of any public campaign of mine and your assertion that I have "ignored" an invitation to be part of a public consultation.
Perhaps you could clarify to us all now if you do have any intention of taking over my rail-link plan for Western Docks, in particular for freight transport.
Your reply to this would be helpful.
However, the replies sent to me from the Transport Department are full proof in my favour, they have legal value, and my proposals cannot be taken away at a later date and attributed to DPPT or any other person or group.
As for technical expertise, the idea would be that local Government nominate experts to administer the Port of Dover and to consult with any other experts on technical matters where relevant.
Further to the claims that there is an imminent sale plan to Dubai or any other potential buyer, there is still one factor to take into consideration: the Government would risk a constitutional crisis.
The carbon emission laws do not validate the DHB reasons for privatisation, which are, according to the official DHB statements as released on the Dover Express in 2010, a 100% increase of road traffic through the Port of Dover within 30 years starting from 2010, or, as later stated by DHB, a 70% increase of road traffic over 27 years.
The sale, according to DHB, would finance a T2 terminal at Western Docks to accommodate this increased traffic.
This was their reason for requesting privatisation.
Should the Government accept a sale of the port, they would immediately be challenged on constitutional grounds, I personally am seeing to this.
Adding to that, it should be clear to everyone that Dover would suffer tremendously under the pressure of doubled port road traffic.
All in all, Neil, you should take into account that I have prepared for all eventualities should the Government do a dirty one on us: if they try something that is blatantly unconstitutional, such as flouting the carbon emission laws, I WILL challenge them legally.