Roger Mexico Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 52 minutes ago, asitis said: The reason the MEA saga didn't go any further than it did was simple .. It was a question of what those at the top of the MEA saga knew about those at the top in Government ! And also what those at the top of government knew about it as well. It was fairly clear from the report that some of those in Treasury and the Chief Minister's office were aware of what was going on and did nothing to stop it. Much whirring of shredders, apparently. At the very least it was the usual laziness and failure to stand up to bullies. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 13 hours ago, Bazza Smurf said: Same could be said as to why gas consumers cross-subsidise the Government gas bill at Nobles. Just short of 18,000,000 kWh of gas was consumed there in 2020. Why is it only has consumers cross-subsidising the hospital when the services are used by all? I simply don't believe that. That seems to be implying that 49% of the gas consumption on the Island is on behalf of one single customer - Nobles Hospital. That simply isn't plausible - are other things being included in this heading? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 8 minutes ago, Declan said: As important as not getting the correct authorisation is, does it really change the bottom line for consumers? A new power station was needed, it needed financing, that financing would have been paid by consumers over the long term. Would we have ended up where we are anyway? Most likely, but perhaps not with the excessive costs of an arty construct with glass frontage etc ! FFS its a power station. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Lost Login said: Nice conspiracy theory. In my view it did not go any further as the costs to take to court and argue would have been huge and IoM Govt were always going to have to agree honour as they had been backed into a corner. If they had gone to court and argued the loan was void it would make any party wary of doing business with them in the future. It would have caused huge reputational damage. If you new a party tried to get out of a contract due to a technicality rather than honour it would you be wary of dealing with them? unlike government who changed women's pension contract rights and there wasn't even a technicality, they just said fuck the deal we made we have changed it . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Lost Login said: Nice conspiracy theory. In my view it did not go any further as the costs to take to court and argue would have been huge and IoM Govt were always going to have to agree honour as they had been backed into a corner. If they had gone to court and argued the loan was void it would make any party wary of doing business with them in the future. It would have caused huge reputational damage. If you new a party tried to get out of a contract due to a technicality rather than honour it would you be wary of dealing with them? But wasn't the chairman who drove the loan agreement through the board conflicted? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ham_N_Eggs Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Andy Onchan said: But wasn't the chairman who drove the loan agreement through the board conflicted? Yes. Everything about this deal was wrong but by Tynwald agreeing to ratify the loan no one went to prison. The reputational damage would have been mostly on Barclays for allowing this loan to go ahead without proper due diligence. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cissolt Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 11 hours ago, James Blonde said: The 27.5% increase seems vastly out of sync with the UK price rises of between 12 and 15%. We are already paying more than 50% per unit more than the UK. Somebody somewhere is laughing. 27.5% is the increase plus the 10% profit Manx gas are allowed to make Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 2 hours ago, asitis said: Most likely, but perhaps not with the excessive costs of an arty construct with glass frontage etc ! FFS its a power station. But if it was left in a totally utilitarian state you would have the usual moaning about it being a monstrosity, carbuncle etc after costing all that money. Cant really win! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said: But if it was left in a totally utilitarian state you would have the usual moaning about it being a monstrosity, carbuncle etc after costing all that money. Cant really win! It is a utility building, not the Louvre, symptomatic of the perception that "its only government money", for goodness sake lots more money is needed to provide basic services for the population. It was a feeding frenzy without limits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 2 hours ago, WTF said: unlike government who changed women's pension contract rights and there wasn't even a technicality, they just said fuck the deal we made we have changed it . Strange that they couldn't do it with Govt pensions though. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramseyboi Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 minute ago, Non-Believer said: Strange that they couldn't do it with Govt pensions though. Not really since they are completely different propositions. Also the changes to state pension impact people who previously worked for government exactly the same as those who didn’t. I am no government fan but you are really grasping at straws if you are trying to use that as a way to have a go at them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, asitis said: Most likely, but perhaps not with the excessive costs of an arty construct with glass frontage etc ! FFS its a power station. Totally agree. The power station needed to be built and funded as it was. It was the excessive overspend financed by the cable company loan that was the issue and the fact that their may have been a loop whole which enabled the company to borrow the money when the MEA could not have. I have no argument that it was pretty murky just with a statement of fact that the matter was Ultra Vires. That still is a matter of opinion as I understand it. Edited October 5, 2021 by Lost Login missed the word not from "when the MEA could not have" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 Next step burn the stairs stick a ladder up through the ceiling. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: And also what those at the top of government knew about it as well. It was fairly clear from the report that some of those in Treasury and the Chief Minister's office were aware of what was going on and did nothing to stop it. Much whirring of shredders, apparently. At the very least it was the usual laziness and failure to stand up to bullies. I am pretty sure that is the case as it seems not unusual to turn a blind eye to things only to change their point of view when the shit hits the fan. Was that not effectively what happened with Mount Murray? I also saw in the private sector during the financial crash. Some banks, with prices rising, were desperate to lend but what had informally been agreed and accepted during the good times suddenly caused the banks to change position once the financial crash came. Same with money laundering. Pre AML days banks were happy to go and accept bags of cash from Ireland etc and turned a blind eye that it was probably undeclared money. Pressure comes on later and all of a sudden banks were happy to make this a problem for their clients to save themselves. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 14 hours ago, WTF said: and dandara still insist on fitting gas heating in all their new builds .. maybe getting heavily subsidized boilers from manx gas has something to do with it ?? and many public sector housing tenants also got moved onto gas and had their chimneys removed, we must be heading for the most expensive heating on the planet. They don't need subsidisation to choose gas Gas Boiler >£1k Oil Boiler £4k Heat pump boiler £6k+ increased insulation They aint going to volunteer, they need incentive or regulations. Meanwhile houses are still being thrown up with poor insulation and gas boilers which is unbelievable 1 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.