DoI not fit for purpose

[Roger Mexico]

3 hours ago, Andy Onchan said:

I'm pretty sure the detailed data is there. Most probably the Cyril responsible for answering the question wouldn't have bothered to look beyond the headline numbers because detail is not important in their eyes.

I'm sure there is data there to derive these this figures from, but I doubt if they are ever worked out.  The lack of what you might call normal management accounting is very noticeable in the Government - very occasionally an outsider comes in (as with that report on the Airport a few years back) and is horrified by the lack of allocation and assessment of internal costs.  It's not that the figures are hidden they're not even being done.

Now of course such things are as much an art as a science and always changing, and genuine accuracy is hard to achieve and must always be treated cautiously.  But the most inaccurate thing is to not do them at all.

[Stu Peters]

20 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Not really - they don't run petrol stations or car dealerships either.

It's very odd this insistence (and it's by no means new) that some motorists have that 'their' taxes should be totally used for their related interests.  No other group of consumers demands that the tax revenue from their spending should be hypothecated to be spent on things that they want.  And as Zarley points out those things are usually defined rather narrowly while the revenue is taken very inclusively.

You're right, and given the financial pressures on things like healthcare I'm not suggesting that. The reason I mentioned it though is that in an Economics lesson at school in Manchester in the 60s we were told that Road Fund Licence revenue HAD to be spent on roads maintenance. I appreciate the IOM might never have adopted that, or dropped it in the rebranding as VED. And as stated earlier two Transport/Infrastructure Ministers told me on Mandate (2003-2008) that ALL VED was spent on roads 'and more', and that has clearly changed.

[Beelzebub3]

4 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

You're right, and given the financial pressures on things like healthcare I'm not suggesting that. The reason I mentioned it though is that in an Economics lesson at school in Manchester in the 60s we were told that Road Fund Licence revenue HAD to be spent on roads maintenance. I appreciate the IOM might never have adopted that, or dropped it in the rebranding as VED. And as stated earlier two Transport/Infrastructure Ministers told me on Mandate (2003-2008) that ALL VED was spent on roads 'and more', and that has clearly changed.

It would be very interesting to know how much is spent on actual maintenance ie staff on the ground filling potholes/patching existing roads and doing a permanent fix? how much does the Road marking team cost annually as they are clearly losing a fighting battle trying to keep up with the current backlog (which I had mentioned over 3 months ago) there does not seem to be any rush in completing outstanding work of all descriptions associated with Highway maintenance. DOI management must have blinkers on everytime they leave the Sea terminal as they are not reporting any defects and if they are, they clearly are not acted upon. DOI not fit for purpose is being very generous. I would be a lot less courteous and say the DOI is a complete shambles and should be brought to book with immediate effect. I would have all management around the table and find out who is not doing what they are getting paid for. Come on TC start earning your keep and get this show back on the road.  "pardon the pun"

[Roger Mexico]

2 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

The reason I mentioned it though is that in an Economics lesson at school in Manchester in the 60s we were told that Road Fund Licence revenue HAD to be spent on roads maintenance. I appreciate the IOM might never have adopted that, or dropped it in the rebranding as VED. And as stated earlier two Transport/Infrastructure Ministers told me on Mandate (2003-2008) that ALL VED was spent on roads 'and more', and that has clearly changed.

This is why it is not always as good an idea as it first appears to educate schoolchildren in 'life skills'. The Laws of Thermodynamics or the date of the Battle of Hastings may not change, but 'practical' stuff can become useless or actively misleading in a very short time or even be taught wrongly in the first place.

According to Mr Wiki:

The accumulated Road Fund was never fully spent on roads (most of it was spent on resurfacing, not the building of new roads), and became notorious for being used for other government purposes, a practice introduced by Winston Churchill when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. [...] Hypothecation came to an end in 1937 under the 1936 Finance Act, and the proceeds of the vehicle road taxes were paid directly into the Exchequer. The Road Fund itself, then funded by government grants, was not abolished until 1955

So it wasn't true even when you were taught it (did you mean the 1860s?) and hadn't been since 1937.

[asitis]

31 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

This is why it is not always as good an idea as it first appears to educate schoolchildren in 'life skills'. The Laws of Thermodynamics or the date of the Battle of Hastings may not change, but 'practical' stuff can become useless or actively misleading in a very short time or even be taught wrongly in the first place.

According to Mr Wiki:

The accumulated Road Fund was never fully spent on roads (most of it was spent on resurfacing, not the building of new roads), and became notorious for being used for other government purposes, a practice introduced by Winston Churchill when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. [...] Hypothecation came to an end in 1937 under the 1936 Finance Act, and the proceeds of the vehicle road taxes were paid directly into the Exchequer. The Road Fund itself, then funded by government grants, was not abolished until 1955

So it wasn't true even when you were taught it (did you mean the 1860s?) and hadn't been since 1937.

None of this excuses why a lot of roads are in a bad state of repair (TT course excepted) !

It seems pissing about with decorative tiles and paviors is far more desirable than fixing holes in the highway !

[Roger Mexico]

3 minutes ago, asitis said:

None of this excuses why a lot of roads are in a bad state of repair (TT course excepted) !

It seems pissing about with decorative tiles and paviors is far more desirable than fixing holes in the highway !

Well  quite!  But I'm not convinced the solution is to give the DoI loads more money in the hope that they will suddenly start to spend it responsibly.

[manxman34]

3 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

This is why it is not always as good an idea as it first appears to educate schoolchildren in 'life skills'. The Laws of Thermodynamics or the date of the Battle of Hastings may not change, but 'practical' stuff can become useless or actively misleading in a very short time or even be taught wrongly in the first place.

According to Mr Wiki:

The accumulated Road Fund was never fully spent on roads (most of it was spent on resurfacing, not the building of new roads), and became notorious for being used for other government purposes, a practice introduced by Winston Churchill when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. [...] Hypothecation came to an end in 1937 under the 1936 Finance Act, and the proceeds of the vehicle road taxes were paid directly into the Exchequer. The Road Fund itself, then funded by government grants, was not abolished until 1955

So it wasn't true even when you were taught it (did you mean the 1860s?) and hadn't been since 1937.

The last time SP learned anything new, and it was wrong.

[ian rush]

1 hour ago, manxman34 said:

The last time SP learned anything new, and it was wrong.

He's now paid even more than before by the state to have these opinions and doesnt need to listen to so called experts on things his mind is made up on.

[Stu Peters]

So a teacher in 1969 gave a class of boys some duff information. And now it's MY fault? Get a grip.

[wrighty]

11 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

So a teacher in 1969 gave a class of boys some duff information. And now it's MY fault? Get a grip.

Yes. As an MHK (or future MHK) you shouldn’t just accept everything you’re told as gospel. Particularly The Gospels. I think we established that here in the run up to the election 😉

[Lost Login]

12 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

So a teacher in 1969 gave a class of boys some duff information. And now it's MY fault? Get a grip.

No, but but simply accepting it for over 50 years when then is considerable amount of information out there to the contrary when you thought it might not be correct is. Raising a question because of something you were told over 50 years ago in school does seem rather odd.

I hate to break it, and sit down before you read the next bit, but your parents, teachers etc probably gave you some duff information about Father Christmas when you were young.

[Declan]

13 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

So a teacher in 1969 gave a class of boys some duff information. And now it's MY fault? Get a grip.

Perhaps you misremembered what he said? Even if it was correct it would have been correct for the UK, and not necessarily the IOM.

Anyway your learning opportunity here is to  check what you think you know.

[Stu Peters]

Thank you Declan, I made the point about IOM vs. UK earlier in the thread. My Tynwald question was to see if it was still the case that all the VED was spent on roads, as had allegedly been the case some years ago. What I was taught in 1969 had little to do with it but add context on here.

 

Edited November 23, 2021 by Stu Peters

[Declan]

3 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

Thank you Declan, I made the point about IOM vs. UK earlier in the thread. My Tynwald question was to see if it was still the case that all the VED was spent on roads, as had allegedly been the case some years ago. What I was taught in 1969 had little to do with it but add context on here.

 

I thought it was well known that went into the general pot. It's been mentioned on here several times before - Slim used to explain it ad nauseum.

[Itsmeee]

Quick rant. Why the actual flip are the DOI spaffing cash AGAIN (or is it still) on the railway lines on the Groudle road? There are temporary traffic lights there, and in the one lane available for cars there is a pothole so big you could fall in and never be seen again, and it’s so narrow that you can’t avoid driving into the bloody thing. I am so pissed off with the amount of money wasted on this nonsense when the roads are so utterly shite. Rant over.