Pinewood...more Govt Propaganda

[newsnight]

A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a

Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern

ignorance. And a people who mean to be their own Governors must arm themselves with

the Power that knowledge gives.

James Madison.

I can only strongly recommend that you go and read the information and you will know how and by whom the decisions have been made. I urge you to and read the information and you will know how the Treasury processed the reports made to it by Cinemanx Ltd and Gasworks Ltd, take the time and go and read and then having read, think, it is a concatination that will lead you to understanding.

[Slim]

take the time and go and read and then having read, think, it is a concatination that will lead you to understanding.

I suggest you do the same. Apparently you read, then having read, make stuff up to fit your own conclusions to fit your assumptions.

[alibaba]

Hmmmm. Great work collating this information by Newsnight. Slim, you seem to be doing that thing you do. You should probably stop it.

 

Were Ernst and Young not pissed off when Mr Christian set up his own thing and took the clients?

[Donald Trumps]

I beginning to think that Mr Teare must have signed a charge on all our assets & we are in fact owned by Pinewood

[Lost Login]

Slim. So because the final decision rest with the Treasury there is no potential conflict. Sorry but that is rubbish. The advisors are paid to give advise. If they are presented with a turkey of a project to advise on they are potentially conflicted. On the one hand as advisors they would advise that the project should not proceed, on the other hand as a provider of services they would want the film to go ahead so they earn fees for providing services. If you cannot see or understand why there is a conflict there I can only presume you are good mates with the three wise monkeys. On you definition a conflict of interest would basically never exist.

[Mr Shoe]

Again. Thanks newsnight.

 

As long as this site exists (or an archive on google somewhere) your posts constitute a valuable resource for when the information accidentally is "lost"

[2bees]

Newsnight, you're almost as good as Roly was before the establishment murdered him, be careful.

 

Slim, just grrrrrrr.

[Slim]

On you definition a conflict of interest would basically never exist.

Don't be silly. If he worked for government, there would be a clear conflict of interest.

[Mr Shoe]

Thing is, I can see Slim's point of view. No sarcasm at all.

 

Is Christian actually guilty of Conflict of Interest? Truly?

 

Or is he guilty of being an unscrupulous conman (as Slim proposes)? Taking advantage of two feeble-minded old fuckers? I think if you're stupid enough to take a dodgy second hand car salesmans "advice" as gospel then you deserve what you get.

 

Pity they're doing it with our money though.

 

They do seem to the the only two conclusions I can arrive at. If Teare is not able to see how Christian is playing him, then he is guilty of negligence, ineptitude and a basic capacity to run a petty cash tin, never mind a small Treasury.

 

ETA: Also, it's not a Conflict of Interest if the people making the decisions are colluding in all this with the intent to line their pockets. That's straight forward Corruption.

Edited November 22, 2014 by Mr Shoe

[newsnight]

Newsnight, you're almost as good as Roly was before the establishment murdered him, be careful.

 

Slim, just grrrrrrr.

Thanks to one and all for the encouragement. I must say that at the very best I could ever be would not be 10% of Rolly at his worst, he is the light I follow because he was a remarkable human being and he loved the Isle of Man and her people and would have, and ultimately did give up his life in its service. Sadly missed. If he was here now he would put some stick about and deservedly so. I know what I am dealing with and I know the depths they will sink to.

[Slim]

Is Christian actually guilty of Conflict of Interest? Truly?

 

Or is he guilty of being an unscrupulous conman (as Slim proposes)? Taking advantage of two feeble-minded old fuckers? I think if you're stupid enough to take a dodgy second hand car salesmans "advice" as gospel then you deserve what you get.

 

I think this is how it started, and the pinewood deal was put in place following the report and the change of subsidies and VAT. We're clearly still tied up with some individuals, but we're now also sharing interests with one of our most successful residents and that seems to be working out better.

[asitis]

I'm a little lost as to how it is working out better, the share price has risen but by all opinions could not be easily crystallised in a time of need, the value of the cash fund for investment has dropped by variously reported amounts not sure what they are now but not chicken feed, the dividends on the shares has been I believe 13/14 90k and we have paid consultancy fees of 365k in the same period.

 

If this is working out better I'll eat my hat ! I accept that prior to the end of the VAT fidd scheme money was made but where the investment returns are now are debatable.

[Slim]

I'm a little lost as to how it is working out better, the share price has risen but by all opinions could not be easily crystallised in a time of need, the value of the cash fund for investment has dropped by variously reported amounts not sure what they are now but not chicken feed, the dividends on the shares has been I believe 13/14 90k and we have paid consultancy fees of 365k in the same period.

Because I think being partnered with Pinewood and Peel is more likely to bring benefits than trying to grow our own stand alone film industry on our own. Even a small slice of what they do is worth having.

 

Like I've said though, do think the money would be better spent here.

[Lost Login]

Slim. Why is it relevant if the advisor works for the Government. It is not.

 

The advisor is retained on a fee to provide advise. That advise is presumably meant to be provided on an independent and impartial basis. However the advisor earns additional income if his client follows his advise to follow course of action A but which they will not earn if course of Action A is not followed. It is therefore very clear that it is in the financial interest of the Advisor to hat course of Action A is followed so that earns that additional income. The potential conflict is that the opportunity to earn this additional income if course of Action A is followed MAY influence the Advisors advise to his client on whether or not to follow course of Action A.

 

It is such an obvious potential conflict. Advising against taking course of action A is in direct conflict with the advisors ability to earn additional fees. What do you do. Give the correct advise and not earn the fee, or give the wrong advise and earn the fee. The former sees you meeting your responsibilities to your client, the latter sees you meeting your responsibilities to look after your own or your companies interest. You can not do both.

 

The way you are going on you would be perfectly happy if the guy advising Govt on procurement of new buses had an interest in a bus supplier and recommend that they all be bought from that supplier. Or if an IT advisor advised that the Govt needed to retain an IT consultant and that should be his firm just as long it was Govt formally signing off. Recently Govt has signed up for a new Tetra system. It was not the case would you really have been happy if the advisor to the Govt on what system to go for or what was need was the supplier. Or if the advisor to the Govt re getting rid of the post offices was the firm that takes them over.

 

As I said the signing off by Government is a red herring as the potential conflict is in the giving of the advise. However as you rightly said earlier I do not know if Treasury basically just rubber stamp through. I expect they do but would be interested to see how many times they have rejected the advise and how many they have rejected. I would also state that if Govt is paying the best part of £400,000 per annum for advise and management then I would expect that they would invariably follow the advise given. If they do not why the hell are they incurring such a cost if they just ignore the advise.

[Wankleaks]

 

I'm a little lost as to how it is working out better, the share price has risen but by all opinions could not be easily crystallised in a time of need, the value of the cash fund for investment has dropped by variously reported amounts not sure what they are now but not chicken feed, the dividends on the shares has been I believe 13/14 90k and we have paid consultancy fees of 365k in the same period.

Because I think being partnered with Pinewood and Peel is more likely to bring benefits than trying to grow our own stand alone film industry on our own. Even a small slice of what they do is worth having.Like I've said though, do think the money would be better spent here.

Grow our own standalone film industry? This is, and never has been an 'industry', it was an offshore VAT structure that is now an onshore VAT structure. It has never been, and never will be, an industry that will generate significant employment for Manx people which you would expect from any other local industry. We have some magic beans we'd like to offer up for sale if you're interested if you are gullible enough to believe any of the above has anything to do with local job creation or creating an industry that might provide any financial stability for the people of the IOM.