TheTeapot Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 There was an extras clause in the contract, it got brought up on here a hundred or so pages back. Basically an open cheque book Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nellie Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 (edited) Unless the Chief Minister has the balls to remove both Black and Baker from their posts, then there is absolutley no point in having Parliamentary Scrutiny Committees. It is quite clear that they have deliberatley conspired to overturn the will of Tynwald, obfuscate the cost of the scheme, spend significant sums in ways which were not authorised and take out the parts they didn't like. ETA - It would be interest to know if Black has contravened Financial Regulations in signing-off expenditure for purposes that were not authorised, and if he can be dismissed, without compensation, which is what would happen in any business like, or professionally run organisation. Edited May 7, 2021 by Nellie 1 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 54 minutes ago, Nellie said: Unless the Chief Minister has the balls to remove both Black and Baker from their posts, then there is absolutley no point in having Parliamentary Scrutiny Committees. It is quite clear that they have deliberatley conspired to overturn the will of Tynwald, obfuscate the cost of the scheme, spend significant sums in ways which were not authorised and take out the parts they didn't like. ETA - It would be interest to know if Black has contravened Financial Regulations in signing-off expenditure for purposes that were not authorised, and if he can be dismissed, without compensation, which is what would happen in any business like, or professionally run organisation. He's got history though . From memory didn't he have to appear in front of Tynwald and apoligise for previous unauthorised spending ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanShimmin Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 Just now, Numbnuts said: He's got history though . From memory didn't he have to appear in front of Tynwald and apoligise for previous unauthorised spending ?? Was that Baker or was it Harmer? There was an issue with public transport spending outside of budget from what I remember Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 Like just about every government project, they seem to be seen as a way of keeping a small number of people gainfully occupied for the longest possible time, rather than something which needs completing in the soonest possible time to benefit the island! 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 2 hours ago, TheTeapot said: There was an extras clause in the contract, it got brought up on here a hundred or so pages back. Basically an open cheque book I very much doubt that there was an extra clause. However, the kind of contract that it is, certainly favours the contractor. Basically the employer pays for anything extra or anything that is not specifically written into the scope of the contract. Variations. I don't believe the contract for the Prom is any different for any other large civil engineering project contract. The skill is defining the scope clearly so the contractor cannot find loopholes to extract money from the employer (IOM Gov) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 1 hour ago, AlanShimmin said: Was that Baker or was it Harmer? There was an issue with public transport spending outside of budget from what I remember No def Black as it was the first time I believe a CEO actually had to directly apologise to Tynwald in person 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 1 hour ago, Happier diner said: I don't believe the contract for the Prom is any different for any other large civil engineering project contract. That's probably about par for the IOM but not for UK I would suggest. It's clear that in light of this Promenade debacle that there's a requirement for a complete overhaul of contract terms for civil works. We seem to get shafted at every opportunity by the DOI and others. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 12 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said: That's probably about par for the IOM but not for UK I would suggest. It's clear that in light of this Promenade debacle that there's a requirement for a complete overhaul of contract terms for civil works. We seem to get shafted at every opportunity by the DOI and others. In my experience, it's just as bad on UK projects. It's the way it is and the contractors become rich as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD4ELI Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 28 minutes ago, Happier diner said: In my experience, it's just as bad on UK projects. It's the way it is and the contractors become rich as a result. Really? Every project I've encountered round here has been finished on time and on budget. I've never come across a cock-up on the epic scale seen on Douglas prom, have you? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevster Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 36 minutes ago, GD4ELI said: Every project I've encountered round here has been finished on time and on budget. Wait until Cornwall gets metalled roads and modern services like electricity and sewerage - it will be different then 1 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 The DOI were determined from the outset that this job was going to happen, even when it was knocked back at the first (couple?) of times of asking, they came back with revised plans, to include warning of the voids under the road. They've had Gawne, then Harmer and now Baker all proposing and latterly defending it. What I'd like to know is, behind the elected, who and why were they driving this? The stated financing has proved to be bollocks, the timescale was bollocks (as predicted by many) and the scaremongering over the foundations has been proven to be bollocks too. So the reasons that the project was predicated on have mostly been false. Somebody has been adamant that this project was going to be done, regardless of truth, facts or need and has led Tynwald and the taxpayers up the garden path. A cynic might suggest that that somebody knew full well that once started, there was no going back regardless of cost. Any future committees looking at this might like to examine who and why, IMHO. 3 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTail Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 It must be important that those responsible do not profit from this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 3 hours ago, NoTail said: It must be important that those responsible do not profit from this. They are profiting daily by virtue of their salary and pension while most if in private sector would have long been binned . Its going to get worse when lots of truths come out. They cant suppress it forever 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanShimmin Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 2 hours ago, Numbnuts said: They are profiting daily by virtue of their salary and pension while most if in private sector would have long been binned . Its going to get worse when lots of truths come out. They cant suppress it forever It would be good to 'compare notes'. I have a few things that I'm sure will come out soon. 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.