Taxpayers to dig for £20M for Liverpool Dock

[Dirty Buggane]

As per usual nobody is responsible,lessons not learnt yada yada yada. Bend over manx public you know the position, no need for lubricant should be used to it by now.

[Andy Onchan]

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

The DOI. That's because, I am reliably informed, the Government cannot be a client as its not a legal entity. But not my field of expertise so I am surmising that the government use departments to be the client on major capital projects (like landing stages). That's why its harsh to keep blaming the DOI for this project's failures as they are just puppets (or even muppets) in the process.

Someone like @John Wright or @Roger Mexico would be better placed to advise the forum on matters like this.

If not DOI then where/who else does the decision making reside with? 

[Non-Believer]

16 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

If not DOI then where/who else does the decision making reside with? 

It would appear that it was passed "upwards" to our uninformed elected, few of which would have any expertise in the matter, to vote whether or not to continue. At this point, political embarrassment becomes a factor so they all vote to continue.

Another factor here is that our elected (at any level) are never told bad news by the unelected under them as this would reflect badly on those unelected.

The only information therefore passed up is pink and fluffy and sweetness and light. Our elected then have to make calls based on these half stories that they are told and we wonder why they get it wrong. And it subsequently takes (such as) PAC inquiries manned by themselves to actually get to the truth eventually.

Remember Alf Cannan's edict back in 2021 around the time of Black's sacking, about Ministers not being able to rely on their CS to relay accurate and truthful information? Welcome to the results.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Non-Believer
Extra bit

[asitis]

Courier just dropped through the letterbox, it says 10 million more needed for Liverpool terminal ? I'm confused, is this 10 million of the 70 million or 10 million of the 80 million or 10 million of the twenty million ! I have no idea, which probably reflects where we are in the scenario !

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, asitis said:

Courier just dropped through the letterbox, it says 10 million more needed for Liverpool terminal ? I'm confused, is this 10 million of the 70 million or 10 million of the 80 million or 10 million of the twenty million ! I have no idea, which probably reflects where we are in the scenario !

Think of a number between 70 and 120 and then add 10 😁

I think its 70+10=80

[Two-lane]

3 hours ago, Happier diner said:

For the Liverpool landing stage a world leading Engineering Consultant (AECOM) was appointed. It could be argued that they have made a right mess of it. However you cant really blame the DOI if they have chosen a reputable designer.

Well, something  went wrong. AECOM may be world-leading and done some good stuff, but Google took about half a nanosecond to come up with this:

"According to attorneys for AECOM employee and whistleblower Robert Romero, AECOM knowingly submitted more than $100 million of false claims for several of its clients via inflated repair estimates and other false information. The lawsuit also says that those clients certified the information in the false claims, even though they knew it was not accurate.

The DOJ also maintains that, as early as 2011, AECOM's management was aware of "systemic problems" that led to the false FEMA claims between 2007 and 2013 but did not notify the government. "

So you still have to keep an eye on them, but who on the IoM, apart from retired civil engineers, is capable of doing that.

[Happier diner]

33 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

Well, something  went wrong

It certainly did. Have I disputed that? I don't remember.  AECOM will probably say that they had not been given adequate information (That's normal consultant speak) but in this case probably correct

 

34 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

he DOJ also maintains that, as early as 2011, AECOM's management was aware of "systemic problems" that led to the false FEMA claims between 2007 and 2013 but did not notify the government.

I dint say they were always right. But they are a top consultant and al consultants get things wrong from time to time. Who would you have selected.

36 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

So you still have to keep an eye on them

That's why a project manager is appointed. Not sure how you keep an eye on them. They didn't build it.

 

36 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

but who on the IoM, apart from retired civil engineers, is capable of doing that.

I have no idea. Have you?

 

[Happier diner]

8 hours ago, Dirty Buggane said:

But I am more concerned about no consequences for anyone involved. Nothing like getting tossed out on your ass no pension to make sure what you are doing is up to scratch. Instead of how's it going George/Steve/William, not sure really but not to worry how's the golf going these days. 

[asitis]

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

Well it won't bring the cash back but it might focus a few minds on the value of other peoples money ! LOL !

[Mercenary]

8 hours ago, Happier diner said:

The Interweb can be misleading. On NEC projects the Project sponsor role does not exist. It is the Client and yes the Client is ultimately accountable for the success of the project. I think the quote you have posted is confusing responsibility with accountability. For the Liverpool landing stage a world leading Engineering Consultant (AECOM) was appointed. It could be argued that they have made a right mess of it. However you cant really blame the DOI if they have chosen a reputable designer.

If I get Jamie Oliver in to cook me a meal, and give him Iceland fish fingers & mouldy bread, is it Jamie's fault that my meal is a 'right mess'?

[Happier diner]

49 minutes ago, Mercenary said:

If I get Jamie Oliver in to cook me a meal, and give him Iceland fish fingers & mouldy bread, is it Jamie's fault that my meal is a 'right mess'?

That's a bit too philosophical for me.

[Gladys]

54 minutes ago, Mercenary said:

If I get Jamie Oliver in to cook me a meal, and give him Iceland fish fingers & mouldy bread, is it Jamie's fault that my meal is a 'right mess'?

He should put it in the bin. 

[asitis]

22 minutes ago, Gladys said:

He should put it in the bin. 

Which is exactly what should have happened to this project at some point during its spiral out of control !

There's no money for new schools and other infrastructure , no money for improving failing vital public services but 100 million sat on a dockside at Liverpool ! Madness !!

Edited November 17, 2023 by asitis

[Happier diner]

18 minutes ago, asitis said:

Which is exactly what should have happened to this project at some point during its spiral out of control !

There's no money for new schools and other infrastructure , no money for improving failing vital public services but 100 million sat on a dockside at Liverpool ! Madness !!

It's a poor analogy but I see the point. Yes £100M on a landing stage we don't even need is crazy. 

[asitis]

12 hours ago, Happier diner said:

It's a poor analogy but I see the point. Yes £100M on a landing stage we don't even need is crazy. 

Posters have spoken above about how we don't have experts in this that and the other, and failings weren't identified. My view would be, at some point we shouldn't have needed experts, we didn't need consultants, we just needed someone with common sense. This person/s would have been able to see that a non freight port, costing god knows how much, with upkeep, looking at it's glass, dredging etc etc was going to be expensive, made no sense at all. This project has been like many here where it assumes a life of it's own (power station, airport etc) and dissenters cannot possibly be correct. Of course one would assume that this is why we elect sensible people to be MHK's and at least have common sense if not specialist knowledge !

ETA. I can see the wind farm heading inexorably this way !

Edited November 18, 2023 by asitis