Gladys Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 5 minutes ago, Johnny F said: Just think about how Albert Gubay used to work, always on site watching everything that happened, he didn't pay some random bloke to watch what was going on. He was a millionaire and we are getting shafted, simple really isn't it. I tell you what though this announcement that we have now got a representative on site begs the question, who was watching what was going on prior to their appointment? Indeed it does. My concern was thinking that sending someone from the Sea Terminal would solve the problems. It wouldn't, there needs to be an appropriately qualified professional there. Glad there is one and surprised if there wasn't someone watching out for the DOI's interests from day one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 7 minutes ago, Gladys said: Indeed it does. My concern was thinking that sending someone from the Sea Terminal would solve the problems. It wouldn't, there needs to be an appropriately qualified professional there. Glad there is one and surprised if there wasn't someone watching out for the DOI's interests from day one. Perhaps we should be insisting on a webcam on site, displayed with all of our other webcams from the Bungalow, Sea Terminal etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 10 minutes ago, Max Power said: Perhaps we should be insisting on a webcam on site, displayed with all of our other webcams from the Bungalow, Sea Terminal etc? Those Scousers would have it rigged like the one on the bus in 'Speed' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 Quote Glad there is one and surprised if there wasn't someone watching out for the DOI's interests from day one. Are the DoI's interests the same as the taxpayer's interests? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 12, 2022 Share Posted January 12, 2022 13 minutes ago, Two-lane said: Are the DoI's interests the same as the taxpayer's interests? That is a good question. They are aligned certainly - value for money, quality, functionality and so on. But not the same in relation to the contract. The DOI has the contractual position and rights and obligations under it. They in turn owe the people of the IOM (not just taxpayers) via Tynwald a duty to discharge their functions properly, spend the money correctly, be accountable, etc. Just because it is an IOMG funded contract doesn't give a member of IOM Joe Public a direct right to approach the contractor for info, sue them etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 7 hours ago, Two-lane said: Are the DoI's interests the same as the taxpayer's interests? Clearly not ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 9 hours ago, Gladys said: That is a good question. They are aligned certainly - value for money, quality, functionality and so on. But not the same in relation to the contract. The DOI has the contractual position and rights and obligations under it. They in turn owe the people of the IOM (not just taxpayers) via Tynwald a duty to discharge their functions properly, spend the money correctly, be accountable, etc. Just because it is an IOMG funded contract doesn't give a member of IOM Joe Public a direct right to approach the contractor for info, sue them etc. I'm not totally sure that's exactly correct. If the DOI is a department of IOMG then isn't the Client (The Employer) then the IOMG. The responsibility is resting with the DOI as they have been given the task but contractually wouldn't IOMG have the rights of the 'Employer' under the terms of the contract. I am guessing here and maybe someone can help us out. Is the DOI a separate legal entity (like the post office) or is it just a department as the title would lead you to believe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 35 minutes ago, Happier diner said: I'm not totally sure that's exactly correct. If the DOI is a department of IOMG then isn't the Client (The Employer) then the IOMG. The responsibility is resting with the DOI as they have been given the task but contractually wouldn't IOMG have the rights of the 'Employer' under the terms of the contract. I am guessing here and maybe someone can help us out. Is the DOI a separate legal entity (like the post office) or is it just a department as the title would lead you to believe? For the purposes of the argument, the distinction and finer details of the constitutional status of DOI as a Govt department does not alter whether the interests of DOI and the Manx general public are the same and can be conflated. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 46 minutes ago, Gladys said: For the purposes of the argument, the distinction and finer details of the constitutional status of DOI as a Govt department does not alter whether the interests of DOI and the Manx general public are the same and can be conflated. Well on the surface you are correct and maybe I am being pedantic, but the way I see it is: If the contract was with the DOI then the commercial/confidentiality terms are with the DOI. If the contract is with the IOMG then that is a much wider set of people. How does one define the IOMG as an entity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 2 minutes ago, Happier diner said: Well on the surface you are correct and maybe I am being pedantic, but the way I see it is: If the contract was with the DOI then the commercial/confidentiality terms are with the DOI. If the contract is with the IOMG then that is a much wider set of people. How does one define the IOMG as an entity Yes, but IOMG is not every Tom Dick and Harry on the island, that is the point. Just because the contract is entered into by a government department, does not mean that every IOM resident is a party to it, regardless of the constitutional definition of the contracting party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 8 minutes ago, Happier diner said: How does one define the IOMG as an entity I'm sure an awful lot of very fed up taxpayers could have some fun with this !! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 8 minutes ago, Gladys said: Yes, but IOMG is not every Tom Dick and Harry on the island, that is the point. Just because the contract is entered into by a government department, does not mean that every IOM resident is a party to it, regardless of the constitutional definition of the contracting party. That's correct. However the subtle difference in my mind is that if the contract IS with the IOMG then basically they have just asked some geezer from the DOI to manage it. So we keep blaming the DOI but really its the government who is accountable. The DOI is merely responsible for executing the task. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleepyJoe Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 Do we still have silo government with the department the contracting party? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 4 minutes ago, Happier diner said: That's correct. However the subtle difference in my mind is that if the contract IS with the IOMG then basically they have just asked some geezer from the DOI to manage it. So we keep blaming the DOI but really its the government who is accountable. The DOI is merely responsible for executing the task. You are veering off into a different argument. But isn't it the position that DOI is responsible for discharging certain of IOMG's functions and responsibilities? Nobody is saying IOMG is not accountable for this but that the lead responsibility is with the DOI. Do you really think that DOI has no responsibility to perform its functions with due skill and care and that what happened is IOMG chose the wrong geezer so responsibility lies in a wider amorphous thing without a single human taking the rap? That really is semantic hair-splitting of the highest order, worthy only of a Yes Minister bureaucrat. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 9 minutes ago, Happier diner said: That's correct. However the subtle difference in my mind is that if the contract IS with the IOMG then basically they have just asked some geezer from the DOI to manage it. So we keep blaming the DOI but really its the government who is accountable. The DOI is merely responsible for executing the task. The buck stops with the DOI Minister on behalf of IOMG, irrespective of which entity's name is on the contract. The clue is in the name, "Infrastructure". Unless you're saying no one is responsible? In any case it's too late for subtleties/niceties. If I didn't know any better I'd say your'e a former DOI Minister or Chief Exec of DOI 🤣 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.