triskelion Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 Triskelion, there are some things we can't produce ourselves (as you rightly said). I work in a tiny store, with only a few members of staff working each day, deliveries are bad enough whilst regular with no space out the back to put the cages we get. With this SINGLE boat cancellation we are going to have a "rollover" delivery with probably around 10 cages of stock coming in with the next delivery. I'd imagine this is the case for most small shops. There couldn't be a worse time for this to happen, with it being nearly chrimbo and everyone stocking up on alcohol and snacks and the like. I wouldn't want to imagine what it would be like if the boat did get canceled for a couple of days.. I totally forgot to think of it from that point of view. D'oh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homarus Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 7mins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 http://tynwald.org.im/papers/early/keys/epk041207.pdf pp24-26 discuss some of things we have looked at on here and Amadeus gets a name check (or two) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 LEAVE OF ABSENCE GRANTED The Speaker: Hon. Members, I have given leave of absence today to the Hon. Member for Ramsey, Mr Bell; the Hon. Member for Onchan, Mr Earnshaw; and for the later part of this morning, the Hon. Member for Douglas West, Mr Corkish. Coincidence, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 Synchronicity perhaps.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 I don't get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ean Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 He used to be the SP's PR man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybs Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 The Transport Minister is like any government representative and does not seem to like the "Status Quo" being questioned, at least some Members still represent The People! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 The Transport Minister is like any government representative and does not seem to like the "Status Quo" being questioned, at least some Members still represent The People! I have no idea if the transport minister dislikes the "Status Quo" being questioned but I would argue that any Minister has to take a more conisdered and reflective position than a non Minister who can bang any drum or take any position that they really please. However as for inferring that only some Members represent the people what a load of baloney. All MHK's do to an extent as otherwise they would not be elected but none can do more than claim to try to represent their electorate. To suggest that some do so more than others is probably a reflection of your own prejudices and that some MHKs reflect your own point of view. Presumably those that do represent the people and those that that do not do not represent the people. What if I or others have an opposite point of view. Are thos members still representing the people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 The Transport Minister is like any government representative and does not seem to like the "Status Quo" being questioned, at least some Members still represent The People! I'm not sure how you got that impression? He answered Mr Karren's questions sufficiently: Yes the department is aware of the petitions (adding that it is also aware of other internet groups involved in the debate) and that the Company continues to look at possible improvements to the fleet. Yes the department had discussed these issues with the Steam Packet. And yes, as a result of those discussions, the Steam Packet had reviewed the idea of using the SuperSeaCat II at weekends to Liverpool. Mr Karran then adds a supplementary where he seems to ask the minister to agree that the fast craft are unsuitable for winter service and that fuel is expensive (The minister agrees). Mrs Cannel then poses a 'what if?' question, which the minister dismisses on the basis that that situation is very unlikely (and has since been proven right). Mr Karren then asks a question that implied the cancelling of two sailings was actually the evil machinations of businessmen and that he feels their should be two freight boats in case one breaks down, to which the minister replied simply that the User Agreement had not be violated. They were hardly incisive questions in any event, but I am unsure what better answers the minister could have given? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybs Posted December 8, 2007 Share Posted December 8, 2007 I'm not sure how you got that impression? He answered Mr Karren's questions sufficiently: Yes the department is aware of the petitions (adding that it is also aware of other internet groups involved in the debate) and that the Company continues to look at possible improvements to the fleet. Yes the department had discussed these issues with the Steam Packet. And yes, as a result of those discussions, the Steam Packet had reviewed the idea of using the SuperSeaCat II at weekends to Liverpool.They were hardly incisive questions in any event, but I am unsure what better answers the minister could have given? lost login and triskelion, This is what is good about free speech, I respect your opinions, but on reading the minutes once more I still have the same opinion, that at times perhaps too much loyalty is being shown to The Steam Packet (name only) the financial backers, who do not seem always to be in full control as far as an all year round Island shipping service commitment to the Island is concerned. Often I look at solutions to problems from the SP's financial backers as purely "sticky tape". The Minister I did not strongly criticize, my opinion is at times when you are close to and part of an "agreement" then it may be easier to look at the "status quo" I would be most interested in seeing a report on how "Caledonian MacBrayne Ferries" operate, its fleet, service and reliability, they cover similar distances, rough waters and Islands that depend on their service. Regards John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahc Posted December 8, 2007 Share Posted December 8, 2007 Oh I wish we were having a day trip to Liverpool today.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted December 8, 2007 Share Posted December 8, 2007 The Minister I did not strongly criticize, my opinion is at times when you are close to and part of an "agreement" then it may be easier to look at the "status quo" I would be most interested in seeing a report on how "Caledonian MacBrayne Ferries" operate, its fleet, service and reliability, they cover similar distances, rough waters and Islands that depend on their service. Regards John If my memory is right CMac I believe get substantial Government fund via the Scottish Parliament. I am sure somebody will correct me if I am wrong The Minister may be to close to the situation I have no idea, just as I have no idea what is going on or being said behind the scenes. Maybe nothing, maybe a lot. However the Minister was presented some very banal questions and you would really hope MHK's with a few weeks to think about it could have come up with something more incisive than is the minister aware of the online petitions Off the top of my head they could have been. “Has the minister had discussions with the SP about amending the user agreement to ensure there are day return trips to Liverpool. If not would the Minister ensure those discussions are entered into and reported back to the house. The Liverpool daily service is not apparently entered into as it is apparently loss making in the winter and a vessel is not available with the ability to cope with the majority of the winter seas. Would the minister please advise the house the cost of such a vessel and the shortfall on the Liverpool route to make it viable. The Minister may not have provided the answers in which case I am sure good follow ups could have had him under pressure to obtain. If the answers were available it would have given some insight into the costs in providing the type of service “the people” of the IoM or at least those that signed the petition want and whether the Govt have actually been quietly behind the scenes being try to negotiate with the SP Instead we got simple to answer questions, that put the minister under no pressure and provided from what I remember not one piece of useful additional information. Yes the Minister could have been more forthcoming if he wanted to but equally you need MHKs of sufficient calibre to ask the right specific questions. Presently the average standard of question appears to be along the lines of the difference in asking “do you know what is on TV” and “what is on TV at present. The first can be correctly answered yes or no and you are relying on those answering volunteering the additional information you really want to know. The second should give you the specific information you want if the respondent knows it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saltire Posted December 9, 2007 Share Posted December 9, 2007 If my memory is right CMac I believe get substantial Government fund via the Scottish Parliament. I am sure somebody will correct me if I am wrong You are correct, Cal Mac are subsidised by the Scottish Government, due to alot of the routes being needed by the islanders, but not maybe used much by tourists. At least they haven't decided to use Seacats on these routes yet! More info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian_MacBrayne And their official site here: http://www.calmac.co.uk/islands.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"V" Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 I have written to the Transport Minister, David Anderson , twice and I received quite detailed replies. However the general tone is that he is a supporter of the IOMSP and is following a "laisser faire" attitude to the whole affair. Key to his arguements is: The IOMSP don't have a monoply - the link span isn't the only way for freight and other users could apply to build their own linkspan in Douglas (!) Passengers can fly The IOMSP are keeping to User Agreement (I think he sees his job as "done" provided the minimum is maintained) The IOMSP are looking to buy a more suitable vessel but the "threat" of Easyjet put them off last time and the Seashore Shipping case this time (looks to me like any excuse will do) He maintains that if enough people complain to the IOMSP they will re-examine the service the offer As mentioned here earlier he is too close to the IOMSP/User Agreement to want to rock the boat and disrupt the status quo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.