DoI not fit for purpose

[cissolt]

Thanks Stu. I heard the 40 million figure.  That puts to bed the assertion that non car motorcycle users are contributing towards road maintenance.

One of the shocking things about Tim's reply was that the Kirk Michael vanity bridge was not even put before Tynwald for approval.  That was quoted as 1.3 million.  Then we have the work going in towards Ramsey where land needs to be bought from property owners.  Another incredible waste of money from DOI

[Non-Believer]

So on the currently available information we can surmise that the DOI has been spending millions of pounds of motoring taxpayers money on minority interest groups infrastructure without political debate or sanction, whilst at the same time largely neglecting the infrastructure of those paying the taxes? All under the premise that, "This is the future"?

One of the first things that needs to happen is that predecessors Baker, Harmer and possibly Gawne as well need to be brought back before Tynwald/PAC and asked how and why this situation was allowed to propagate under their watch.

[Happier diner]

13 hours ago, cissolt said:

The usual band wagon hoping mix of local councillors and middle class virtue signalers

And what makes you think (or made you think) that the  "mix of local councillors and middle class virtue signalers " whatever they are - don't pay road tax just like everyone else?

Do you think that  "mix of local councillors and middle class virtue signalers" don't have cars or something?

What bitter and twisted planet of misinformation do you live on? 

Do you think that the alternatives to driving into Douglas are adequate and safe?

I agree that spending money on bridges, that are no where near commuting routes, should not be considered 'active travel'. They, like the Heritage trail, are leisure facilities and should never be considered anything else.

However in terms of Active travel, IMO, we are miles behind the developed world and the lack of facilities on the Island is a joke and needs to be sorted.

[James Blonde]

2 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

So on the currently available information we can surmise that the DOI has been spending millions of pounds of motoring taxpayers money on minority interest groups infrastructure without political debate or sanction, whilst at the same time largely neglecting the infrastructure of those paying the taxes? All under the premise that, "This is the future"?

There should be an investigation into pro-cycling lobbying that took place during the Harmer and Baker eras of the DOI. 

There may be some very tangled webs! 

[Non-Believer]

23 minutes ago, James Blonde said:

There should be an investigation into pro-cycling lobbying that took place during the Harmer and Baker eras of the DOI. 

There may be some very tangled webs! 

Two things occur to me in this, both obviously conjecture at this point.

Firstly is that they led it as policy as enthusiastic cyclists or secondly, that their enthusiasm for the activity was recognised by their CS who then played on it and offered it as sweetener for Lord only knows what, perhaps not interfering too much with the CS great designs for promenades, train sets and buses.

Either way, I draw similarities with the Sloc Rd previously just happening to need resurfacing with 4" deep tarmac up to Phil Gawne's drive because with what is now outing into the public domain via the new administration, how the hell Baker and Harmer before him could incessantly defend that Department without some sort of incentive takes some thinking about... 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Non-Believer
extra bit

[WTF]

3 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

 

One of the first things that needs to happen is that predecessors Baker, Harmer and possibly Gawne as well need to be brought back before Tynwald/PAC and asked how and why this situation was allowed to propagate under their watch.

the why is easy, government needed the money for other things that it isn't prepared/willing to increase income tax to cover. 

[Derek Flint]

Really interesting stuff. I think it shows how skint Government is.

[Banker]

18 hours ago, CallMeCurious said:

See they paid £75k (although Bill it was only £65k) to Beach Buddies or was it

https://www.gov.im/news/2018/may/04/beach-buddies-scheme-to-help-maintain-more-of-the-islands-footpaths/

No tender process as Nick Black signed the waiver and 3 years later we now have a footpath Tsar because of the atrocious state of the footpaths. Guess that is value for money then? Though to be fair on the scale of incompotence and wastefulness in the DoI it's only five figures.

Notice BB wasn't willing to disclose his salary as exective of the charity after moaning about how much it had cost to buy sit on mower etc. Maybe hold a fund raising event or two then? Isn't that what charities normally do? Not bad when you get free labour from volunteers and the community service by the sounds of it.

Sounds like a right scheme to me. Wonder how much I could get from a charity set up to re-paint road markings, uncover and clean road signs and fix potholes with a cheque from the DoI. Maybe call it  Save The Islands Highways Locally ~ STIHL. That'd be good for a sponsorship deal at least.

 

 

 

 

 

This all sounds a bit strange, either their volunteers or not & surely the prison service should be sorting out transportation & equipment for these tasks using community service & prisoners 

[Non-Believer]

44 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

Really interesting stuff. I think it shows how skint Government is.

I'm not sure the Govt is skint, Derek. I think there's plenty of money, the problem is its direction and unauthorised use. Where and how it's being spent. Some people have quite simply got into the habit of self-service and taking the piss. Regally.

In this instance, a largely unviable method of commuting for this part of the world has been carefully and very expensively conflated with a largely seasonal, minority interest leisure activity.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Non-Believer
extra bit

[Roger Mexico]

3 hours ago, James Blonde said:

There should be an investigation into pro-cycling lobbying that took place during the Harmer and Baker eras of the DOI. 

I think you've got to realise that the "pro-cycling" thing is irrelevant.  There's not much evidence that they went to cyclist or surveyed potential cyclists to genuinely see what they wanted.  The reaction of cyclists to many of the DoI 'improvements' such as the Peel Road cycle lanes should tell you that.  It's the same situation with the horse trams.

The only purpose of these 'projects' is to inflate the self-importance, numbers and salaries of the DoI management and to give lucrative contracts to the right people in the construction industry.  So whether they are necessary or well-planned or whom they are supposed to be for is not important.  If cyclists are the supposed beneficiaries, it will only be because they can borrow some of the jargon from schemes in the UK.

It's important that people realise this situation, because the next lot of nonsense may be said to be benefiting something they approve of, but could turn out to be just as big a waste of money.

[Gladys]

58 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

DOI now found to have given Beach Buddies £75K without any formal tender process so that their volunteer wombles can look after the footpaths for them.

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=64515

You should be able to get the accounts of Beach Buddies from the AG's office.  They should show remuneration.  

[Stu Peters]

5 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

Two things occur to me in this, both obviously conjecture at this point.

Firstly is that they led it as policy as enthusiastic cyclists or secondly, that their enthusiasm for the activity was recognised by their CS who then played on it and offered it as sweetener for Lord only knows what, perhaps not interfering too much with the CS great designs for promenades, train sets and buses.

Either way, I draw similarities with the Sloc Rd previously just happening to need resurfacing with 4" deep tarmac up to Phil Gawne's drive because with what is now outing into the public domain via the new administration, how the hell Baker and Harmer before him could incessantly defend that Department without some sort of incentive takes some thinking about... 

You know I love a good conspiracy theory? One I heard a while ago is that the roads most important to the two DoI Ministers in the run up to the two last elections were resurfaced to make it seem that they had pulled strings for personal benefit. I'm sure the department bosses wouldn't be Machiavellian enough to orchestrate those events to discredit their Ministers...

[Gladys]

11 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

It was probably a donation. Just seems odd why a charity would agree to provide free labour from volunteered for £75K. They really need to investigate Beach Buddies. 

The article refers to the contract actually being with BB and the money was needed to fund equipment and transport costs.  It also involved specification of the works, so hardy a donation. 

It also says that Bill Dale is remunerated but he declined to confirm the amount. 

ETA. Beach Buddies is a registered charity, no 1267.  It seems to have been preceeded by another entity with the no 1158 which ceased to exist in July 2020.  

Edited November 19, 2021 by Gladys

[Gladys]

2 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

It’s nonsense though isn’t it? They bought £15K of equipment the rest (£50K) was transportation costs for running their own vehicle. What are they running? A LearJet?

However, Mr Dale disputes this figure - saying that the contract was £65,000: £20,000 for two years and £25,000 in the third, an unexpected increase which he said was made ’because the DoI could see we were struggling with the cost of buying equipment’. 

Mr Dale told the Examiner that the DoI funds had gone towards ’a whole pile of kit, something in the region of £15,000 worth’, which included a ride-on mower and hedge strimmers. 

The rest of the money went towards transportation costs associated with operating their own vehicle, and the running of events with the courts probation service.

I am not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that to describe it as a donation  is not right.  I wonder what costs are associated with running events with the probation service? 

[yorik]

4 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

It’s nonsense though isn’t it? They bought £15K of equipment the rest (£50K) was transportation costs for running their own vehicle. What are they running? A LearJet?

However, Mr Dale disputes this figure - saying that the contract was £65,000: £20,000 for two years and £25,000 in the third, an unexpected increase which he said was made ’because the DoI could see we were struggling with the cost of buying equipment’. 

Mr Dale told the Examiner that the DoI funds had gone towards ’a whole pile of kit, something in the region of £15,000 worth’, which included a ride-on mower and hedge strimmers. 

The rest of the money went towards transportation costs associated with operating their own vehicle, and the running of events with the courts probation service.

Hedge strimmers I can understand but which of our footpaths needs a ride on mower? How big a lawn does Bill have?

Have we seen any benefits of this investment?