The point about this procedure is twofold. Throughout this process, ABP took guidance from the MMO as to what requirements it needed to fulfil. It was reasonable for ABP to do that. It is because it was not well advised—indeed, it was advised to do other things—that we have ended up in this position.
In April 2010, following the re-advertisement and the intervention from Hutchison, which has no local interest at all in this matter—it is purely a commercial rival issue—and having raised those issues, the chief executive of the MMO wrote to ABP, stating:"““Please be assured that the MMO is working pro-actively with ABP to resolve these cases swiftly.””"
However, it was not until February 2011, more than three years after the original application, that the MMO finally issued consent, in good time to get this work under way.
Port of Southampton
Proceeding contribution from
John Denham
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 January 2012.
It occurred during Adjournment debate on Port of Southampton.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
538 c267WH 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 22:31:44 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_801786
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_801786
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_801786