Taxpayers to dig for £20M for Liverpool Dock

[asitis]

1 hour ago, cissolt said:

Lots of members criticised the private briefing that was given at short notice.  Seems to be a familiar tactic when government want something approving without much oversight

You mean like Gawne asking for competitor tenders to the SPCO over Christmas !

[asitis]

26 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

I'll readily admit I don't know enough about major schemes like this to add much, but it does seem that most of them globally go significantly over budget. I'd have thought a fixed price contract would have been preferable, but I'm guessing nobody would tender on that basis? 

I think there is over budget Stu, then there is this, how many hundreds of percent is this over the 3.5 million joyous deal for the island at the outset ?

[Non-Believer]

5 minutes ago, asitis said:

Yes, we are all paying to use the loo because of that, what are they going to tax to pay for this cluster ? !

The thing is, the power station project was all but completed when its shit hit the fan, what had been going on wasn't generally public knowledge until then.

The Terminal however has been an evolving situation in the public eye. There has been plenty of opportunity for things to be stopped and questions asked. Why haven't they been? The costs have risen with each increment reported in the media - yet it's got to this stage before anything substantive has happened.

Is this another case of CS being unable to be relied on to relay truthful or accurate information to the Ministers? Or are the Ministers simply in thrall to their Departmental public servants to the degree that they don't ask?

There's another 18 months to the projected completion date. With what has passed and the remaining time, my gut feeling is that this will not be the last request for extra funding.

[Passing Time]

52 minutes ago, asitis said:

I think there is over budget Stu, then there is this, how many hundreds of percent is this over the 3.5 million joyous deal for the island at the outset ?

1,900% if it sticks at £70m

[joebean]

4 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

Nonsense. John Wannenburgh suggested that those responsible for this mess be held to account, and I think we all agree on that. Trouble is, it will be incredibly difficult to prove anything - arses will have been exceptionally well covered to the point that the Nuremberg defence will probably suffice, or the people most responsible will have already departed before the fan is even switched on.

This may be true. However a thorough examination of all the circumstances leading up to the point we are now at, is still essential. Some of the senior figures involved may have gone but they should still be required to give evidence and be held to account for any failings for which they are responsible. It is not all right to see that the game is up and bugger off with your pockets full of taxpayers money with the only explanation that you are making way for someone else, for example. I guess you would agree with that Stu. 

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Stu Peters said:

I'll readily admit I don't know enough about major schemes like this to add much, but it does seem that most of them globally go significantly over budget. I'd have thought a fixed price contract would have been preferable, but I'm guessing nobody would tender on that basis? 

On these types of contracts there is an option for a fixed cost. However the contractor can still claim for extra costs if the conditions or the design do not match what is defined in the contract. So in that respect it would not have helped and costs can still spiral.

I am guessing, but I guess that the original contract was for a linkspan, a car park, a bit of road and a terminal. What seems to have gone wrong is 

1. COVID . Fair enough

2. That the wharf is not in the condition they thought and also needs significant structural work to make it fit for bow thrusters/the new vessel. This is a risk that should have been mitigated out by pre design ground investigations.

Like I say, I am guessing, but it must be something like this to go so badly wrong.

All this talk of PAC investigations and reviews is fine but what is really needs is someone to take over as PM and someone who can deal with difficult situations. This would include hard negotiation with the contractor. Reviews after are of little use.

[Happier diner]

I don't think the 'senior figures' could be 'held for account' after they have left. Unless there is an element of criminality.

If they are still I  post they could (and should) be disciplined for poor performance if that is the case.

Being criminally inept would not count.🤣

[P.K.]

1 hour ago, joebean said:

This may be true. However a thorough examination of all the circumstances leading up to the point we are now at, is still essential. Some of the senior figures involved may have gone but they should still be required to give evidence and be held to account for any failings for which they are responsible. It is not all right to see that the game is up and bugger off with your pockets full of taxpayers money with the only explanation that you are making way for someone else, for example. I guess you would agree with that Stu. 

I was involved in a product development / launch where all the entities involved were doing all the right things.

Marketing, Finance, Sales, Manufacturing, Pricing, Customer Support etc etc were all giving it 100% but we were headed for disaster.

Shit happens....

[Gladys]

25 minutes ago, P.K. said:

I was involved in a product development / launch where all the entities involved were doing all the right things.

Marketing, Finance, Sales, Manufacturing, Pricing, Customer Support etc etc were all giving it 100% but we were headed for disaster.

Shit happens....

Shit does indeed happen, particularly in the business world where you are willing to accept the risk of shit because of the opportunity of profit. 

Shit should be limited to IBS when public money is involved. 

[asitis]

33 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Shit happens....

...to taxpayers on the Isle of Man far too frequently !

[P.K.]

8 minutes ago, asitis said:

...to taxpayers on the Isle of Man far too frequently !

My guess would be missing SOP's for stage sign-off by responsible bodies...

[Stu Peters]

4 hours ago, asitis said:

I think there is over budget Stu, then there is this, how many hundreds of percent is this over the 3.5 million joyous deal for the island at the outset ?

Apologies if I'm wrong, but I think the original £3.5m was simply for the lease on the piece of land (and rights to dock there etc). AFAIK the agreed budget for the whole job was £30+m. So it's only double that, not ten times it.

I know, but every little helps, right?

[littlebushy]

I recall the words 'at no cost to the taxpayer' being used because Peel Ports were paying for it originally. So cost to the taxpayer has gone up somewhat. Here's a link from a while ago https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/upside-of-landing-stage-relocation-gawne/

Gawne states its going to be an extra 5 minute walk. To put that in context....that's 10 minute mile pace. Or in even more context, the average steam packet foot passenger should complete the Parish Walk in 14 hours 20 minutes absolutely smashing Richard Gerrards all time record.

[Max Power]

19 minutes ago, littlebushy said:

I recall the words 'at no cost to the taxpayer' being used because Peel Ports were paying for it originally. So cost to the taxpayer has gone up somewhat. Here's a link from a while ago https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/upside-of-landing-stage-relocation-gawne/

Gawne states its going to be an extra 5 minute walk. To put that in context....that's 10 minute mile pace. Or in even more context, the average steam packet foot passenger should complete the Parish Walk in 14 hours 20 minutes absolutely smashing Richard Gerrards all time record.

Part of the problem I would think is that having Peel construct the whole terminal would have emasculated the DoI, no involvement, smaller budgets, nothing to wave their willies at! The SPCo would pay docking fees at a guess and there would be no control over these?

[littlebushy]

Think you are missing the bigger picture here....a 14 hour 20 Parish Walk pace. I hope Gawne would be paying me in kind with sweets at that pace.