More Dosh Sought By Airport

[manshimajin]

Another scheme to decrease the increase in passenger number decline has been proposed by Ann Reynolds:

 

Hot Tar

 

The £3.2 million funding had already been earmarked by Treasury but the project was originally to be phased over three years. Now the Department of Transport says costs can be saved by doing it all in one go using a massive batching plant machine

that has been brought to the Isle of Man by Colas to produce the 'black top' asphalt for the runway extension project.

 

So why ask for the full amount then guys??????

[keyboarder]

It sounds like they've knocked the director's door to say they are in the area and would she like the drive tarmaced. (sp?)

[bluemonday]

knocked the director's door

One possible connotation is profoundly unsettling.

[Sebrof]

knocked the director's door

One possible connotation is profoundly unsettling.

 

You have an evil mind, BM.

 

S

[thesultanofsheight]

It sounds like they've knocked the director's door to say they are in the area and would she like the drive tarmaced. (sp?)

 

Yeah. You can see 6 of them turning up in a dirty white Transit "Can we tarmac your drive love? We were just in the area and we noticed that it needs a bit of work. Tell you what we'll do a discount for cash. In fact why don't we drive you to the cash point and we can start this afternoon"

[Nkon]

Colas left a very expensive machine sitting idle for over 7 months just on the off chance of some more work?

 

"She said the batching plant machine should have left the Island at the end of last year to be used on another contract but Colas had informed the airport that it was still available."

 

Maybe the machine in question has been used on other projects on the island?

Colas had no other work anywhere else for the machine?

 

Whatever the answer, it is certainly is a stroke of good fortune for the taxpayer that we do not have to pay to bring a machine over.

 

I presume that Colas when tendering for the extra work that is when they informed the airport?

Or had Colas already tendered and been awarded the contract for the project based on bringing the machine over a number of times during the next 3 years in which case there will be a saving.

 

Treasury had earmarked £3.2m for the 3 year phased project. The fact it can be completed in one single phase will mean a costs will be saved.

 

'We will be able to get twice as much work done for the same amount of money,' she said, (does this mean that the original £3.2m budget would have been insufficient or twice as much work is now required than was originally planned for.)

 

Based on the facts reported in this article: from the original treasury budget of £ 3.2m the saving will be £5,000 based on an actual cost of £3.195m.

 

Is this just poor reporting or just another tactic to confuse the taxpayer?

 

If anyone has any other information perhaps they could let me know what the actually cost saving is?

[manshimajin]

Colas left a very expensive machine sitting idle for over 7 months just on the off chance of some more work?

 

Whatever the answer, it is certainly is a stroke of good fortune for the taxpayer that we do not have to pay to bring a machine over.

 

I presume that Colas when tendering for the extra work that is when they informed the airport?

Or had Colas already tendered and been awarded the contract for the project based on bringing the machine over a number of times during the next 3 years in which case there will be a saving.

 

Treasury had earmarked £3.2m for the 3 year phased project. The fact it can be completed in one single phase will mean a costs will be saved.

 

'We will be able to get twice as much work done for the same amount of money,' she said, (does this mean that the original £3.2m budget would have been insufficient or twice as much work is now required than was originally planned for).

 

If anyone has any other information perhaps they could let me know what the actually cost saving is?

 

Nkon, I do not have the answer to your question but I find the whole thing 'typical' and intriguing. There is this little quote from the Minister to add to the ones above:

'The output from this batching plant is unmatched by anything currently on Island, so it is a once-only opportunity to get better value for money and to carry out more work for the budget.'

Taking this and Ms Reynolds quotes together - 'twice as much work can be done for the same amount of money' plus we can 'carry out more work for the budget'.

 

So the thinking of these bureaucrats is that, "whilst we budgeted for X we will now be able to get that for half of what we budgeted originally. Of course we cocked up on the financing of the runway project and blew the budget there, but this is a different budget and we don't want to hand money back to the taxpayer or try to recover some of the expenses caused by our mismanagement."

 

And it sounds like a typical Ms Reynolds story. Chapter 1 - this is what we need. Chapter 2 - the original justification has now been changed to another one. Chapter 3 - could you throw in a Control Tower whilst we have all these people round. Chapter 4 - It looks like we can save some money - what on earth can we spend it on so we don't have to hand it back.

 

If there really was a GOOD justification for the extra work why did neither the redoubtable Ms Reynolds or the DoT identify them before and include them in the original budget. Smells of rushing something in to Tynwald at the last minute to the compliant MHKs and making it sound important and necessary when they did not think it was at the time they asked for the budget.

 

All this at a time when we have 11% fewer people using the airport.

 

Do none of our MHKs have balls! Mr "Rolls Royce" needs to get a set!

 

Would Stu dare to ask the questions as to why money is not being handed back to the taxpayer instead of spent and why these now seemingly critical works were not identified when they made the budget?

[slinkydevil]

She's spent a lot of our money since she has been at the airport hasn't she?

[Tempus Fugit]

but with deflation now upon us, wouldn't it be cheaper next year, we have all got so used to things being more expensive year on year it is assumed that's the norm

[Dave Hedgehog]

She's spent a lot of our money since she has been at the airport hasn't she?

 

Yes but to be fair things at the airport have never been better.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haven't they?

[manshimajin]

She's spent a lot of our money since she has been at the airport hasn't she?

 

Yes but to be fair things at the airport have never been better.

 

Haven't they?

"Yes of course, and we have fewer passengers now to spoil things, to upset our helpful staff and to make the place look untidy; and I have a nice parking spot." - Ann Reynolds

 

BTW - all this business about the taxiways being in bad shape and having WW II cores - I guess that has only happened since they put in the original budget request for some (lesser) work to be done?

[Bobbie Bobster]

but with deflation now upon us, wouldn't it be cheaper next year, we have all got so used to things being more expensive year on year it is assumed that's the norm

 

OMG, deflation is so last year. IoM prices (as measured by RPI) are going back up:

 

 

P.S. Index for June was 135.0 making it a full 3 months of increases.

 

P.P.S. Note for Slim, of course we still have a little way to go before we hit the October 08 max of 137.2

[Topaz]

"Now the Department of Transport says costs can be saved by doing it all in one go using a massive batching plant machine

 

that has been brought to the Isle of Man by Colas to produce the 'black top' asphalt for the runway extension project. "

 

So it was brought here for that purpose?......then why was it supposed to go back last year?

 

 

Further, if it has been used for some other contract, surely the costing of the project would have included the expense of returning the machine to its' place of origin after completion of the project. If that is the case then somebody else has already unwittingly made a donation to the resurfacing of the runways etc.

[Nkon]

Seems to me that we either have a problem with the reporting of this story or someone is trying to justify their own existence.

 

The standard of journalism for whatever reason on the Isle of Man is poor. Very few journalist bother to investigate the facts of the stories they publish and take at face value any facts spewed forth by government.

 

The other area of concern is that government departments fail to act in a way which gives me any confidence that they are spending taxpayer’s money wisely. They fail on many counts in this respect; they appear not to live in a commercial world, they show no inclination to do this and to make matters worse they shy away from employing people who have commercial experience, (Mike Proffit being one good example of this). The pot of money supplied by the taxpayer is simply there to be spent, the fact it is spent is all that really matters.

 

Cost savings are alien to government departments, operating efficiently is also alien. To make savings means that they might have to give back some of their budget allocation or make do with less staff.

 

I say all these things because I have yet to see any major project on the island come in on time, on budget and delivering everything that was promised to the taxpayer. Yet no one is seems to be responsible when they fail to do this.

 

As I bounce along the patchwork quilt they call a road in my car and past yet another DOT major project on Lord St I personally do not find it gratifying when in my opinion they cannot get even the basics right. On the road out of Kirk Michael to Peel the bridge just past Glen Wyllin has had temporary warning signs littering the road for two years because they cannot be arsed to repair the bridge wall.

 

The point of this rant. Well we have a civil service which tells our MHKs what to do and how to vote, then when things go wrong they then get the MHK's to carry out an inquiry. We also have journalists who just toe the line and publish the facts verbatim told to them by government. No oversight at all.

 

The commercial world is not a cosy place and neither should it be for our civil servants when it comes to delivering efficient and good quality services to the people they serve. I think everyone on the island knows that the civil service is a cushy little number, no pressure, job for life, good pay, nice working conditions, nice pension at the end etc. If you look at the number of applicants for jobs in the civil service and compare this with the private sector then this will support this view. When I have been looking for staff in the private sector why have I found it so hard to get to get staff with the right qualifications and experience, the majority of the time I have had to go off island to recruit. (I was unsuccesful in an interview for a gov position, reason I had spent to long in the commercial world????? Should have realised during the interview when I explained how in one business I had reduced the number of employees by 50% yet improved production and quality, there was a startled look on the interviewers face and an immediate reaction from one member of the panel who blurted out in horror "we are not looking at reducing staff numbers here")

 

Sorry about the rant but nothing gets me more riled than some civil servant spouting facts that make little sense and journalists who just report this propaganda without questioning the obvious inconsistencies. Shocking state of affairs.

[asitis]

Any guesses where this will end up cash wise ? or indeed who will chair the enquiry with of course no one being responsible ?

 

Does this include the 5.1 miles of security fencing to be a further blot on the landscape ?

 

I note the minister is quoted as saying if we dont get the money the taxiways may have to be closed, for his information they have been for the past 18 months !