The post you are reporting:
Neil.
Having spent most of my working life down the docks, from Townsend's to George Hammonds and the Cruise Terminal.
I am passionate that the docks do not get privatised and the idea of DPPT must be and is the best option to privatisation.
However, privatisation does not have to be the solution to the problem.
The problem is that the port is not being run properly and Dover/Deal does not benefit anyway near enough from the DHB operations.
I still go for keeping the port under trust Status and agree with your first sentence in your #72
"If the Trust Port status was working for Dover and if it really truly afforded any protection against being sold off by the next generation of execs and/or government, then I'd say and campaign to keep the status just as it is".
Your whole #72 post is proof to me and should be to others, that you have considered all angles and have shown that your commitment is initially about saving the docks, with the DPPT being your preferred option.
To be honest, the DPPT has always been a good alternative idea to privatisation but I have always been sceptable about the motives behind it and direction it would take if it succeeded. Reading your post on here, I now have confidence in the DPPT plan.
What is still uncertain is how it will pan out if it was accepted.
That is why I am still for changing port trust management and port trust rules, to benefit Dover/Deal and to safeguard the selling off, of the port.
As you say in #72, the charter can be changed to accommodate these safeguards and whilst I agree that they could be altered again in the future, I still believe this is where our efforts should be concentrated.