So, in summary, the campaigne has no money.....
This is not totally my understanding of the situation.
As I understand it, benefactors have been found; however, in the recent talks between the council and representatives of the campaign, rather than DMBC councillors and officers present respecting the anonymity of the these benefactors there was baiting and only interest in the amount of money on offer.
There was also championing of the RHC site, as well as one particular officer saying that putting the museum into a trust was not an option. When challenged he could not substantiate his statement, other to say that it was his opinion.
So, in short, we are up against intransigence and bias, with a total lack of empirical information or research to back up thoughts and statements.
It seems to me that no benefactor is going to be prepared to write a blank cheque without knowing what it is for, or indeed whether the proposed alternative is an acceptable proposition through having had a successful negotiation to which both parties can subscribe.
Surely, rather than the myopic vision that DMBC exhibits, they should be investigating these offers with an open mind within meaningful talks. In other words, if money from a benefactor is on offer they should be wooed and not shouted at. Politeness costs nothing, moreover it can achieve much.
The Shorter Oxford Dictionary definition of ‚Äėnegotiation‚Äô is:
‚ÄúTo confer (with another) for the purpose of arranging some matter by mutual agreement; to discuss a matter with a view to settlement or compromise‚Ä¶‚Ä¶.‚ÄĚ
So how about it DMBC, do you want to make a World Class Glass Museum ‚Äď or just pay lip service and go off and do your own thing?