The Herald quoted Sheehy stating the following: "Sydney Harbour Investment Partners consists of the partners from the previous firm in charge of promoting the project, Harbour Port Development Partners, and some new ones, such as Canderel Developments of Montreal., and others who Sheehy declined to name." I would suggest it might be important for our CBRM council to have disclosure on all partners involved. We should never be dealing blindly. These decisions are too costly to make without full due diligence. With the Whalley lawsuit already alleging a conflict of interest related to some aspects of port business, that would be an additional indication of why it's so important to ensure that we demand full disclosure. We must avoid the inclination to be less scrutinizing even as more reputable stakeholders emerge. In fact, we should be more so, as we'll be faced with far more sophisticated corporate operations with resources and expertise we simply cannot rival. They serve the best interests of their shareholders, first and foremost. We fall into the classification as a stakeholder who has ownership over a resource. Corporations don't arrive with the intent of rebuilding local economies, regardless of what their public relations and communications reps tell us. There is now a proposition being floated that the CBRM council will be asked to grant a 5-year extension to the current 2-year port marketing contract in a rushed move, with some councillors suggesting that they haven't been given sufficient information beforehand as to what is being planned. So perhaps before we extend contracts by a month, much less 5 years, we should know exactly who the partners actually are in newly re-branded operations like SHIP (Sydney Harbour Investment Partners), formerly HPDP (Harbor Port Development Partners).