From Jeremy Gully, trustees of Bembridge Harbour Trust:

The fact an independent national body (GMB) is calling on the government to intervene in Bembridge Harbour indicates the seriousness of the situation (CP, 15 and 22-06-18). Not a matter of difference of opinion, as readers might imply.

Bembridge Harbour Trust (BHT) wishes to clarify some points raised:

1. The charity, BHT, is governed by six trustees on behalf of 175 members of the harbour community. As BHT’s chair, Jeremy Gully acts as their spokesperson.

2. Whether the harbour is in private or public ownership is not the issue here. Our overarching aim is to see the harbour thrive. We hold any owner to account as the Statutory Authority empowered by Act of Parliament and thereby entrusted to manage in the interest of the community.

3. BHT does not mislead. We rely on evidence and professional advice. We are always happy to point people to our sources on request, as we did when approached by the GMB.

4. The Harbour Regeneration Plan is a development scheme set out as benefiting the harbour, when on Mr Thorpe’s figures the harbour would see additional costs, the major beneficiary being a development company.

5. Our fact checking of the developer’s submissions to the IW Council planning department prompted BHT to commission a legal report raising nine serious questions that the published accounts do not answer. The £1 houseboat plot question is just one of those.

6. Concerns were raised by planning committee members about the inter-company relationships.

7. Mr Jefferies refers to investment in harbour dredging. His view of a well-maintained harbour does not tally with reports by our members.

The most important question is, will the Thorpes put an end to all the speculation by showing the full accounts? If not, why not?