The post you are reporting:
Get a grip people!!!!
The fact is Charlie has produced a compromise that would result in the following key objectives being achieved:
1/ The ownership of the Port remaining in British hands, not only British but in local hands with a much greater input from local people.
2/ A regeneration fund for Dover - something that we desperately need particularly in these difficult financial times.
3/ A means by which the Port management (seperated from the Port ownership) can go to the markets to raise the finance for its vital development without impacting of the Public Sector Borrowing Requirement.
4/ The Port operation, being under contract, needs to abide by the terms laid down in the contract determined by the locally controlled trust. This operating contract would be for a term of years (I suspect a fairly longish term would be necessary, so they can raise commercial money, maybe 10 years or perhaps 15).
5/ The Port Operation company could be any company with the right experience and knowall, including the current Board.
I was urging before the election that Charlie (or Gwyn) should be looking at a route that offers the best possible deal for Dover rather than just act like King Canute trying to hold back the waves.
Charlie has done this, applying his financial expertese and experience to the problem in order to get a compromise. The alternative was only before this the DHB plan - this is much better and it does not involve the selling of the Port.
If you dont get behind Charlie then the result would be exactly what few of you want, the outright sale of the Port.
As for why nothing was mentioned before the election.
I know Charlie was focussed on fighting against privatisation, we had enough debates on the matter, but he also did not forget the need to find an alternative that would be more palatable locally as a fall back position. In his newly elected position as MP he has clearly now had the clout to do two things: get key people like the new Transport Minister and the boss of DHB to look at his idea seriously and also to work it up to a viable proposition, instead of going off half-cocked. He would not have had that before and also, do you really think that his idea would have been viewed seriously and calmly enough during an election? This is too important a matter to be played with. Cynisism does you no credit.