The post you are reporting:
DHB suggest that approx 8% holding in a private equity company is significant. That a tradable share is enduring and that £10m now and £5m to come is a lot of money for regeneration. Their actual proposal, rather than the glossy PR that dropped on our mats this morning, shows that the community interest and involvement in the future of the port is anything but significant or enduring and the wording surrounding all apparent community protections is such that they can all be undone, redacted, erased, changed in whatever way they wish if they get the 'minded to approve' and the new owners decide to do things differently.
Howard, without input from the Public we would already have been saddled with DHB's first offer from 2 years ago. If we, the public don't like the idea of our port being owned by remote private equity and with the sop of a few £m over the first 5 years, then it is up to each one of us to make our own submissions to the Ministry rejecting privatisation as proposed by the DHB. Politicians and Civil Servants do play a game of numbers and if they think that they can slip something through due to a fog of apathy, they will. If it is clear that there are very significant numbers of people awake, on the ball and prepared to make a sufficiently loud noise, but who are also prepared to be constructive and find an alternative way forward, then they are more likely to listen.
DHB execs and directors are well aware of this and want everyone to believe that the DHB way will win out, that there is nothing that we, as private citizens, can do to stop the port being sold. The fewer people that make submissions, the more likely that a DHB future awaits us all. Public input WILL make a difference here, the more input from the public, the greater the difference.