Taxpayers to dig for £20M for Liverpool Dock

[Non-Believer]

13 minutes ago, Hmmmm said:

The liverpool landing stage will be a albatross for generations similar to the MEAdebt pile, Thomas is deluded if he thinks otherwise.

This. With the same effect on taxpayer's disposable income as the MEA business ultimately, through impacting everything that comes to the island via surface freight let alone the ticket prices for those wishing to travel. 500k visitors a year?

[Two-lane]

1 hour ago, P.K. said:

Have to say the crass grandstanding delay by Watterson looks petty. Claiming they will be "better informed" to make a "proper" decision on the next £10m tranche is a nonsense. If it takes £10m to finish it then that's what it costs so pay up and shut up...

Recently, in another thread, there was a reference to the way in which Civil Servants keep Ministers informed.

If you believe there is nothing wrong with the way money has been disposed of during this project, then you are right - just pay up and get the job finished.

 

[2112]

As I’ve said before, and as much as I detest he waste of taxpayer funds, this project whilst out of control, has to be completed, and completed quickly. If it’s not completed then it’s a total waste of taxpayer funds. Also if it’s not completed the island will be a laughing stock. and it’s likely that the contractor will commence legal proceedings against IOMG to recover any monies owed. At this stage, IOMG could be on a blacklist and they will find it difficult to get specialised contractors. 

[code99]

46 minutes ago, 2112 said:

As I’ve said before, and as much as I detest he waste of taxpayer funds, this project whilst out of control, has to be completed, and completed quickly. If it’s not completed then it’s a total waste of taxpayer funds. Also if it’s not completed the island will be a laughing stock. and it’s likely that the contractor will commence legal proceedings against IOMG to recover any monies owed. At this stage, IOMG could be on a blacklist and they will find it difficult to get specialised contractors. 

I agree. It would now be beyond the pale to walk away from the project. The times for revisions and withdrawing have gone - those boats have all sailed. 

[P.K.]

2 hours ago, Two-lane said:

Recently, in another thread, there was a reference to the way in which Civil Servants keep Ministers informed.

If you believe there is nothing wrong with the way money has been disposed of during this project, then you are right - just pay up and get the job finished.

I don't believe there is nothing wrong with all the profligate spending.

However, as I'm sure we all know, it's a bit late to do much about it now.

That ship sailed ages ago! (Sorry, couldn't resist it...)

I'm sure at the end of it there will be the usual blamestorming meeting where they seek out the guilty and punish the innocent. Step forward Mr Thomas...

[2112]

1 hour ago, code99 said:

I agree. It would now be beyond the pale to walk away from the project. The times for revisions and withdrawing have gone - those boats have all sailed. 

Some of the lessons to be learned.

Other lessons to be learned ……….

Weak politicians and controlling civil servants

Lack of financial control and accountability 

CM Cannan as Treasury Minister has questions to answer, along with previous Ministers of the Department of Infrastructure. 

[2112]

4 minutes ago, P.K. said:

I don't believe there is nothing wrong with all the profligate spending.

However, as I'm sure we all know, it's a bit late to do much about it now.

That ship sailed ages ago! (Sorry, couldn't resist it...)

I'm sure at the end of it there will be the usual blamestorming meeting where they seek out the guilty and punish the innocent. Step forward Mr Thomas...

The winners are the contractors, the civil servants and politicos who make the decisions safe in the knowledge that their jobs are safe. The Losers are the GMP and taxpayers who saddled with this behemoth for generations, paying it off and paying for its upkeep and maintenance. I’m afraid Chris Thomas wasn’t dismissed solely on his performance over this, but his performance on various other issues. It wasn’t helped by his disagreement(s) with CM Cannan. 

[Two-lane]

21 minutes ago, P.K. said:

However, as I'm sure we all know, it's a bit late to do much about it now.

I am not a businessman of any kind. However, if I were and I found that an essential project was leaking money, I would authorise the additional money required to finish the essential job.

And then, immediately, I would set about finding out where the money went. I would not be satisfied with waiting two years for some consultancy to come up with a report and would certainly not just let it slide.

Doing nothing is not an option unless you want the same results from the next project.

Years ago I worked for Marconi - part of GEC. At that time it was rumoured that Weinstock went through the accounts of every part of the company every month. Maybe a slight exaggeration. But he did build up GEC to be a significant organisation. Then he retired and some managers took it over.

There does not seem to be anybody, whether Civil Service or MHK or MLC who is keeping on top of all these projects.

So - how many MHKs have taken a look at the accounts and the project plans for the landing stage? Is it all too difficult for them to understand?

 

[cissolt]

Our politicians have had several private presentations on the landing stage and costs but so far no information has made it into the public domain. 

[Two-lane]

8 minutes ago, cissolt said:

Our politicians have had several private presentations on the landing stage and costs but so far no information has made it into the public domain. 

They have been told stuff. I expect them to be as cynical as me, take everything with a pinch of salt, to go looking through the documents themselves. What was the phrase used when the Civil Servants modified Ranson's documents before presenting them to the MHKs?

[ADELE]

This revaluation has really let the cat out of the bag.    How many other instances when facts have been omitted, slewed to suit the c.s. ‘s own opinion or liking on the premise that they know better and they are better informed.   They probably are better informed as they have the full knowledge not the edited version.      This is so serious and seems to be acceptable by many and glossed over.    I hope some of the MHKs have digested this because they are the ones that are making decisions without all the facts which is dangerous and really alarming.

[P.K.]

1 hour ago, Two-lane said:

Doing nothing is not an option unless you want the same results from the next project.

Such naivety.

IOMG vanity projects are a litany of financial mismanagement.

MEA, IRIS, Incinerator, Linkspan, Airport, Hospital, Promenade and now Half Tide Dock to add to their recent proud record of being seriously wanting in all departments...

Manxman stands out from this lot!

Make of that as you will...

[Roger Mexico]

I'm just going to repeat a comment I made about a year ago:

asitis said: Have our MHK's seen a full cost breakdown of where the money has gone before they voted to continue this farce ?

Of course not.  Tynwald finally revolted back in December when the demand to increase the budget to £71 million from £38 million and Watterson got the motion modified to also demand:

the Department of Infrastructure to publish by the last day of January 2022 a report to Tynwald which should include (i) a detailed cost breakdown of the budget as envisaged in February 2019, July 2019, July 2021 and December 2021; (ii) a detailed explanation of each area in which the budgeted cost has increased along with all relevant reports

Now in any sort of remotely competently managed project all this information should be available in any case, so it would just me a matter of putting things together.

But they simply didn't.  Eventually, some time in May, I think, a report was produced:

Isle of Man Ferry Terminal at Liverpool Budget Breakdown:  February 2019, July 2019, July 2021, December 2021

So it took them six months to come up with something that should have been available in a few days

Proving again that the DoI thinks itself above any sort of democratic control and Tynwald seems unable to stop it.

It's worth reading through, both to get some detail and to get the feel of the civil servant attitude - basically just shrugging their shoulders and saying "Shit happens".  The fact that Tynwald just put up with this is also telling - in any normal organisation an underling who failed to come up with this stuff in a few days would be fired (this is stuff that you'd expect to be the subject of regular internal reports).  Given over a month to do so, the DoI simply ignored a Tynwald motion until it suited them four months after that.  And Tynwald - did nothing.

Edited August 6, 2023 by Roger Mexico
Add link

[P.K.]

17 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

I'm just going to repeat a comment I made about a year ago:

asitis said: Have our MHK's seen a full cost breakdown of where the money has gone before they voted to continue this farce ?

Of course not.  Tynwald finally revolted back in December when the demand to increase the budget to £71 million from £38 million and Watterson got the motion modified to also demand:

the Department of Infrastructure to publish by the last day of January 2022 a report to Tynwald which should include (i) a detailed cost breakdown of the budget as envisaged in February 2019, July 2019, July 2021 and December 2021; (ii) a detailed explanation of each area in which the budgeted cost has increased along with all relevant reports

Now in any sort of remotely competently managed project all this information should be available in any case, so it would just me a matter of putting things together.

But they simply didn't.  Eventually, some time in May, I think, a report was produced:

Isle of Man Ferry Terminal at Liverpool Budget Breakdown:  February 2019, July 2019, July 2021, December 2021

So it took them six months to come up with something that should have been available in a few days

Proving again that the DoI thinks itself above any sort of democratic control and Tynwald seems unable to stop it.

It's worth reading through, both to get some detail and to get the feel of the civil servant attitude - basically just shrugging their shoulders and saying "Shit happens".  The fact that Tynwald just put up with this is also telling - in any normal organisation an underling who failed to come up with this stuff in a few days would be fired (this is stuff that you'd expect to be the subject of regular internal reports).  Given over a month to do so, the DoI simply ignored a Tynwald motion until it suited them four months after that.  And Tynwald - did nothing.

I would expect this information/schedules to be available at each Project Progress/Milestone Meeting to be appended to all the minutes.

In other words the minutes of the last meeting should have had all the latest.

Someone needs to put them on a trowel and explain what they have been doing to manage the progress/spend on a regular basis.

[The Voice of Reason]

19 minutes ago, P.K. said:

I would expect this information/schedules to be available at each Project Progress/Milestone Meeting to be appended to all the minutes.

In other words the minutes of the last meeting should have had all the latest.

Someone needs to put them on a trowel and explain what they have been doing to manage the progress/spend on a regular basis.

“ put them on a trowel” ? What’s that mean?