Braddan Commissioners Community Centre

[Jarndyce]

4 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

They can't.  That's why they've put the rates up by 30%.

So why didn’t they “Just Say No”?   Why are some posters implying that IOMG put pressure on the commissioners to build it?

[The Phantom]

6 minutes ago, Jarndyce said:

So why didn’t they “Just Say No”?   Why are some posters implying that IOMG put pressure on the commissioners to build it?

No idea.  I guess that is what the meeting is being called about.  The thing is, it was approved originally in 2017 but started building in 2021?  Surely alot changed over that period.  Should someone have re-visited the proposal (has anyone seen this?) and thought, does this still make sense? 

[Roger Mexico]

14 hours ago, Jarndyce said:

Well, ok - but what pressure could actually be brought to bear?   Surely in that situation Braddan Commissioners could just refuse and say “we can’t afford it”?

Well you've got a situation at the moment where a Government department (DHSS) is bringing considerable pressure to bear on Braddan Commissioners and the DoI for example has a lot more power over them than that.  There can be a lot of negotiation on the lines of "If you don't go ahead with this, we won't approve you doing that".  We also don't know what prior agreements there might be as well - talks about this have been going on for about 25 years.

[Jarndyce]

11 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

There can be a lot of negotiation on the lines of "If you don't go ahead with this, we won't approve you doing that".  We also don't know what prior agreements there might be as well

Fair enough.   Entirely speculative - but fair enough.

[John Wright]

3 hours ago, The Phantom said:

No idea.  I guess that is what the meeting is being called about.  The thing is, it was approved originally in 2017 but started building in 2021?  Surely alot changed over that period.  Should someone have re-visited the proposal (has anyone seen this?) and thought, does this still make sense? 

Well, we know that when it went to planning it was estimated/budgeted at £4million. 3 years later at tender stage that had increased to £7million.

[Non-Believer]

If we look at the facts;

BC embarked on a project of questionable necessity;

the costs of which were known from the start and which could only grow;

that they did not have realistic means of funding, then or now without what has proved to be a near 40% hike in Rates;

Who in their right minds would do that?

This has been driven by parties with a CS mindset, where cost and subsequent burden to the tax/ratepayer doesn't enter into the equation.

Edited February 14 by Non-Believer
Extra bit

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Jarndyce said:

Fair enough.   Entirely speculative - but fair enough.

Oh quite.  My point is just that there is clearly more going on here than a simple story of Commissioners'  grandiosity will explain and trying to pin it all just on Jessopp is even sillier.  What the full story is, I haven't much idea, we can only look at other situations to get hints. Another factor may be that IOMG threatened to take the land back off Braddan if they didn't build this.

A lot of it may just be a shared culture in both national and local government about 'supporting' the construction industry being the priority rather than building stuff the people actually need.  So what gets put forward are projects that will attract big design fees and contracts, rather than more housing (which might undermine the 'housing market' model that is very profitable for some.

[Jarndyce]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

What the full story is, I haven't much idea, we can only look at other situations to get hints.

For example?   I’m assuming you must have had something in mind - and have used the hints to formulate your view.   For avoidance of doubt: I’m not suggesting you’re wrong - but I am interested in how you reached your view without knowing something concrete (arf!).

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Jarndyce said:

For example?   I’m assuming you must have had something in mind - and have used the hints to formulate your view.   For avoidance of doubt: I’m not suggesting you’re wrong - but I am interested in how you reached your view without knowing something concrete (arf!).

I was thinking about various other LA projects we've seen proposed in recent years such as the Port Erin Megacafe or replacement of the 30-year old LA houses in Peel (and indeed perhaps many other of the rebuilds we've seen over the last couple of decades).  In the case of Braddan there's also clearly a long backstory and there may have been some extra pressure because they were making the decision to go ahead in the early months of the pandemic.

The Commissioners shouldn't be let off the hook, but if we want to stop the same thing happening over and over again, we need to look at wider factors as well as how the case for such developments gets made.  And how assessed at IOMG level as well - none of these can go ahead without their approval.

[asitis]

49 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

The Commissioners shouldn't be let off the hook, but if we want to stop the same thing happening over and over again, we need to look at wider factors as well as how the case for such developments gets made.  And how assessed at IOMG level as well - none of these can go ahead without their approval.

Well looking at the Liverpool debacle, one can probably assume there isn't a very watertight process in place for a business case in large developments !

[Banker]

6 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

If we look at the facts;

BC embarked on a project of questionable necessity;

the costs of which were known from the start and which could only grow;

that they did not have realistic means of funding, then or now without what has proved to be a near 40% hike in Rates;

Who in their right minds would do that?

This has been driven by parties with a CS mindset, where cost and subsequent burden to the tax/ratepayer doesn't enter into the equation.

They always needed borrowing, I raised with my MHK Bill Shimmins at 5he time and he was also against it but BC went ahead anyway so I don’t think any Government pressure was applied to build, in fact probably the opposite.

[Kopek]

6 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

BC embarked on a project of questionable necessity;

But did they??? I've no intention of using the Roundhouse facility but other , more sporty people, may look forward to the , I dunno, Squash, badmington 5 a side may consider this to be an ideal location??? If there are organisations willing to pay, a community service provision, then was it not a reasonable punt at those provisions??? Should it always be left to the private sector, would they provide such???

 

5 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

A lot of it may just be a shared culture in both national and local government

I don't think it is fair to compare the Govts mass of CS with the 'back office' LA CS? These people are 'probably' held much more to account than the Govts CS seem to be?

Unless, of course, there is, as you imply, that there is a surreptitious collaboration between the Govt and LA staff??? 

[Non-Believer]

15 minutes ago, Kopek said:

But did they??? I've no intention of using the Roundhouse facility but other , more sporty people, may look forward to the , I dunno, Squash, badmington 5 a side may consider this to be an ideal location??? If there are organisations willing to pay, a community service provision, then was it not a reasonable punt at those provisions??? Should it always be left to the private sector, would they provide such???

 

I don't think it is fair to compare the Govts mass of CS with the 'back office' LA CS? These people are 'probably' held much more to account than the Govts CS seem to be?

Unless, of course, there is, as you imply, that there is a surreptitious collaboration between the Govt and LA staff??? 

There's squash, badminton and 5 a side available at the NSC and possibly Mount Murray, both are within 15 minutes drive and won't cost £7M.

Re. the second point, LA staff, in particular at senior level, are usually recruited directly from the CS.

[WTF]

there is a nice sign directing the way to the roundhouse on the entrance to the hospital site shown for use on  the original plans that were passed, i'm surprised it hasn't been torn down yet by the hospital stazi .

[Kopek]

I don't think that the Govts CS can be held as accountable as those in the LA backgound?