Jump to content

Taxpayers to dig for £20M for Liverpool Dock


Non-Believer

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Beelzebub3 said:

CT was DOI minister for part of the build and will have had a peak at the books, so I would assume he will know the answer or where the skeletons are buried. If he did not have his finger on the pulse at the DOI as minister who really is pulling the strings? I suspect that the answer will be as revealing as the CS are prepared to divulge.

If something untoward happened, and if he was aware, perhaps, he could use his moral conscience and tell the Manx public - cathartic unburdening. The public have a right to know, sadly, it won’t be the end of this nonsense which will run and run. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

But you pal already knows doesn't he. Why not pass his contact details onto Chris. Cut out the middle man! 😂

As you're so sure that "modern project management accountancy and QS standards" can ensure that everything is perfect and nothing is lost or misappropriated, then none of us have anything to worry about, do we?

Nor does Chris Thomas have any reason to be asking questions on the subject. Clearly, he is misguided and wasting Tynwald time. 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

As you're so sure that "modern project management accountancy and QS standards" can ensure that everything is perfect and nothing is lost or misappropriated, then none of us have anything to worry about, do we?

Nor does Chris Thomas have any reason to be asking questions on the subject. Clearly, he is misguided and wasting Tynwald time. 😂

I never said it was perfect.  Maybe we do have something to worry about, I just don't think it's crime. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the amount of money it has cost, the place feels cheap and massively underwhelming. There better be an engineering reason why so much cash was needed because the building is basic to say the least. 

IMG_0341.jpeg

IMG_0342.jpeg

IMG_0345.jpeg

IMG_0338.jpeg

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An enquiry into this debacle would be long and add a mil or so to the costs.

By then we would all be probably 'used' to the anomalies??? Which is often the purpose of an 'inquiry'?

In the mean time, we could be given the costs to date, the contractual costs in the pipeline and constituencies.

Not really hard???

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todays bullshit from the DoI on the NPM is absolutely pathetic and laughable.

The DoI has refused to release the snagging list for the Liverpool Ferry Terminal. Its excuse is ‘the DoI has to protect its commercial interests’ WTF? It has spent between £70m-£100+m on this project using taxpayer funds. The only commercial element is the cafe upstairs, selling hot drinks, crisps and biscuits. Do you think the DoI could make a cafe run at a profit?

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 2112 said:

Todays bullshit from the DoI on the NPM is absolutely pathetic and laughable.

The DoI has refused to release the snagging list for the Liverpool Ferry Terminal. Its excuse is ‘the DoI has to protect its commercial interests’ WTF? It has spent between £70m-£100+m on this project using taxpayer funds. The only commercial element is the cafe upstairs, selling hot drinks, crisps and biscuits. Do you think the DoI could make a cafe run at a profit?

 

 

Yes, but if they think there is a right to claim against certain parties, they are not going to want to prejudice their position or any negotiations to rectify by publicising the issues. 

The deeper issue is that there is a perceived lack of transparency in everything that IOMG does, possibly justified in many cases, and public trust and confidence has been lost.  That doesn't mean that we should have the ins and outs of the proverbial, but that they must be more open and direct in their communication.  That will restore trust so that when some things cannot be divulged, for good reason, the public, even though they may not like it, will accept it. 

Tomorrow's MR piece with the CM will be interesting.  Let's see if he tackles the restoration in public trust. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gladys said:

Yes, but if they think there is a right to claim against certain parties, they are not going to want to prejudice their position or any negotiations to rectify by publicising the issues. 

The deeper issue is that there is a perceived lack of transparency in everything that IOMG does, possibly justified in many cases, and public trust and confidence has been lost.  That doesn't mean that we should have the ins and outs of the proverbial, but that they must be more open and direct in their communication.  That will restore trust so that when some things cannot be divulged, for good reason, the public, even though they may not like it, will accept it. 

Tomorrow's MR piece with the CM will be interesting.  Let's see if he tackles the restoration in public trust. 

 

Yes - interesting maybe. But will probably be, as usual, disappointing.   By the time the MR boys and girls have finished, Alfie will feel as if he has been savaged by a couple of marshmallows.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Gladys said:

Tomorrow's MR piece with the CM will be interesting.  Let's see if he tackles the restoration in public trust. 

He's been talking about that since Oct 2021 when he sacked Black. And again since April 22 following Ranson and emptying Greenhow. Not much to show for it so far, if anything it's becoming more and more risible.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...