Happier diner Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 1 hour ago, woolley said: . I think we are entitled to some meat on the bone, Perhaps. So long as it didn't disclose commercial information. As FOI that asked for payment but not specifically what for would work. However I fear it wouldn't tell us anything really meaty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 6 hours ago, woolley said: Doesn't mean that there shouldn't be consequences, but obviously there won't be. Well, not the right consequences anyway. Oh there will be consequences, cuts are already in the offing, grandma will have to wait for her cataracts ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted August 8, 2023 Share Posted August 8, 2023 The latest rumour doing the rounds is that dredging fee's will amount to £20,000 per week! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted August 8, 2023 Share Posted August 8, 2023 On 8/7/2023 at 10:32 AM, Happier diner said: That could be tricky as Contractors are not keen to, and are legally permitted to refuse to, share their rates and charges. The NEC Project Manager, The Quantity Surveyor and the DOI project sponsor will be party to this information but to share it would put them at breach of contract. You have to remember that this is a Cost Reimbursable Contract. The contractor claims his costs (Staff, materials, hire etc) and the Quantity surveyor assesses these and passes this to the Pm who approves the payment. Once approved the Client is legally obliged to pay them. All this bluster about Tynwald approval is bullshit. It will have to be paid. Unless the client thinks there has been a mistake or a fraud, they pay as recommended by the NEC PM. If you look at the flow chart below you will see no mention of the Client (or Tynwald) Well this is likely not completely true. If it were the original price then you would be correct, but any increase would either be under a change to the defined cost (if target cost), indexation (only a minor part, if any, of this one) or compensation events. For changes through target cost route or compensation events, they most definitely would have to share their workings - the defined cost associated with any change. Whilst these defined costs don't necessarily equate to actual costs (but in some cases will) they should be more or less representative of the actual costs incurred by the contractor for changes (or shared pain if on target). If reimbursable than obviously they have to show their workings (although hopefully a project such as LLS would not be on this option). For compensation events it would be difficult to see how releasing the total amounts and details of the event would be prejudicial to either side's commercial interests. Obviously the detailed build-up including rates would likely be sensitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted August 8, 2023 Share Posted August 8, 2023 2 hours ago, finlo said: The latest rumour doing the rounds is that dredging fee's will amount to £20,000 per week! Good god, it's to be hoped not or this will eclipse the MEA in terms of utter stupidity. What I do know is, an SPCO captain said moons ago that it was on the worst part of the Mersey for silting. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted August 8, 2023 Author Share Posted August 8, 2023 46 minutes ago, asitis said: What I do know is, an SPCO captain said moons ago that it was on the worst part of the Mersey for silting. Considering that the new Dock is effectively a cul-de-sac with its mouth facing towards the sediment-laden natural flow of the Mersey, he could well be right? 🤔 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moghrey Mie Posted August 8, 2023 Share Posted August 8, 2023 3 hours ago, finlo said: The latest rumour doing the rounds is that dredging fee's will amount to £20,000 per week! Will Peel Ports bid for that contract? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omobono Posted August 8, 2023 Share Posted August 8, 2023 14 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Considering that the new Dock is effectively a cul-de-sac with its mouth facing towards the sediment-laden natural flow of the Mersey, he could well be right? 🤔 thats why its lain dormant virtually since the second war not viable and too much money to keep the silt and mud at bay perhaps the steam packet should have invested in a ferry with a dredging capability two for the price of one ! Heysham will be the same the Ben was stuck on the sandbank again last week Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yibble Posted August 8, 2023 Share Posted August 8, 2023 3 hours ago, Omobono said: perhaps the steam packet should have invested in a ferry with a dredging capability Perhaps a vessel that would produce a powerful scouring action? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code99 Posted August 9, 2023 Share Posted August 9, 2023 13 hours ago, asitis said: or this will eclipse the MEA in terms of utter stupidity. This week’s Examiner publishes an open letter from Henry Kennaugh to the Treasury Minister. The title of this letter is ‘Treasury’s lack of transparency’. The letter makes some observations about the financing of the SPC and the MDC. Mr Kennaugh is concerned about the accounting of the SPC and how the new boat (the Manxman) is or is not recorded. Mr Kennaugh is also asserting that there has been a change in the arrangements between the IOMG and MDC and that the IOMG has underwritten a £100m overdraft facility between the MDC and Lloyds Bank. He is worried about how this banking facility has the potential to burden the IOM Treasury with even more debt and how little public awareness there is of this. I do not know Mr Kennaugh and I do not know how accurate all of the statements in this letter are, but the issues he raises seem to be important. It will be interesting to see if the Treasury Minister’s response to this letter confirms what Mr Kennaugh is saying or draws a completely different picture. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted August 9, 2023 Share Posted August 9, 2023 9 hours ago, Yibble said: Perhaps a vessel that would produce a powerful scouring action? Or a hovercraft? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted August 9, 2023 Author Share Posted August 9, 2023 (edited) 54 minutes ago, code99 said: This week’s Examiner publishes an open letter from Henry Kennaugh to the Treasury Minister. The title of this letter is ‘Treasury’s lack of transparency’. The letter makes some observations about the financing of the SPC and the MDC. Mr Kennaugh is concerned about the accounting of the SPC and how the new boat (the Manxman) is or is not recorded. Mr Kennaugh is also asserting that there has been a change in the arrangements between the IOMG and MDC and that the IOMG has underwritten a £100m overdraft facility between the MDC and Lloyds Bank. He is worried about how this banking facility has the potential to burden the IOM Treasury with even more debt and how little public awareness there is of this. I do not know Mr Kennaugh and I do not know how accurate all of the statements in this letter are, but the issues he raises seem to be important. It will be interesting to see if the Treasury Minister’s response to this letter confirms what Mr Kennaugh is saying or draws a completely different picture. "We have lift off.....another major step for Mann.....Hear Hear". To quote the end of the second article pictured.... Edited August 9, 2023 by Non-Believer typo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moghrey Mie Posted August 9, 2023 Share Posted August 9, 2023 1 hour ago, code99 said: This week’s Examiner publishes an open letter from Henry Kennaugh to the Treasury Minister. The title of this letter is ‘Treasury’s lack of transparency’. The letter makes some observations about the financing of the SPC and the MDC. Mr Kennaugh is concerned about the accounting of the SPC and how the new boat (the Manxman) is or is not recorded. Mr Kennaugh is also asserting that there has been a change in the arrangements between the IOMG and MDC and that the IOMG has underwritten a £100m overdraft facility between the MDC and Lloyds Bank. He is worried about how this banking facility has the potential to burden the IOM Treasury with even more debt and how little public awareness there is of this. I do not know Mr Kennaugh and I do not know how accurate all of the statements in this letter are, but the issues he raises seem to be important. It will be interesting to see if the Treasury Minister’s response to this letter confirms what Mr Kennaugh is saying or draws a completely different picture. This was not announced to the public back in February. https://www.gov.im/media/1380131/variation-of-shareholder-agreement-manx-development-corporation.pdf 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted August 9, 2023 Share Posted August 9, 2023 1 hour ago, Moghrey Mie said: This was not announced to the public back in February. https://www.gov.im/media/1380131/variation-of-shareholder-agreement-manx-development-corporation.pdf What the hell's going on ? Did they learn no lessons from the MEA running up massive public debt ? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted August 9, 2023 Share Posted August 9, 2023 5 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said: What the hell's going on ? Did they learn no lessons from the MEA running up massive public debt ? What do you think...? 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.