Roger Mexico Posted January 27, 2022 Share Posted January 27, 2022 5 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: I must disagree. You are either eligible or you are not. I believe Mr Quayle has at least one child,from the conspiracy theory advanced as to the timing of the travel restrictions relating to a birthday party. Yes he was paid a “handsome salary” as CM ( although many in the private sector are paid much more), but should the court of public opinion have disqualified him from claiming child benefit for his issue? They wouldn't need to because you can't claim child benefit if you're on over £80,000 a year. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted January 27, 2022 Share Posted January 27, 2022 7 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: They wouldn't need to because you can't claim child benefit if you're on over £80,000 a year. Oh ok thanks I didn’t know that never having been in that position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Halsall Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 Not before time but Alf does waffle: https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/blocked-foi-request-over-cm-support-was-error-of-judgement/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 1 minute ago, offshoremanxman said: Alf is right to apologize. At least he has the balls to do so. The problem that you have with FOIs is still the little Hitlers who administer requests within departments. Who arbitrarily decide that you have no right to ask for certain stuff. Even when the legislation clearly says that you have. 100%. It also reveals, perhaps, a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between politician and civil servant. I am not saying the two should become distant or adversarial, but the CS are servants of the public not the politicians. A reinforcement of that may focus CS minds better, avoiding the Emperor's new clothes syndrome which we have seen. Mishandling matters to this degree should also be considered as a disciplinary offence. 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-59760562 You haven't made a good start mate !!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 38 minutes ago, Gladys said: 100%. It also reveals, perhaps, a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between politician and civil servant. I am not saying the two should become distant or adversarial, but the CS are servants of the public not the politicians. A reinforcement of that may focus CS minds better, avoiding the Emperor's new clothes syndrome which we have seen. Mishandling matters to this degree should also be considered as a disciplinary offence. 😂 disciplinary offence? More like a promotion at best or sideways move at worse. The whole Quayle Holiday Cottages Saga is just another sorry saga, totally avoidable, and all the more embarrassing that Alfie is on the NPM saying it was an error of judgment. Well that’s bollocks for starters, Alfie and Co, knew what they were doing, except it took a referral to the arbiter to decide, and Government have been embarrassed again. Why not say we should have complied at the start and sorry for this mess and it won’t happen again. I’m beginning to think that Alfie is starting to end up like the Manx equivalent of Boris Johnson, whereby the backbenchers and opposition MHKs and critics are going in for the kill, using FOI and past statements, speeches and no doubt select committee appearances to try and make Alfie look like he is inept and tells untruths, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 I'm not up to speed on this. Is this a summary of the situation - He had three sources of income during the period CM Salary Rental income on the holiday flats Grants to cover loss of income His government decided to close the borders and at one point to require people to stay in holiday flats the level of the grants and the rules required to claim 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 (edited) 13 hours ago, Passing Time said: They were still receiving handouts after lockdowns finished. Whilst I and others like me opened up in the hope that people would start coming out again. Any help was stopped the minute we turned the lock. It's not a level playing field and never will be That seems odd if you are in the accommodation providing sector as my understanding is that the support was dependant on a reduction in turnover. Provided the reduction in turnover an accommodation provider could claim the agreed amount per room etc per night for the relevant period. It does not matter if you are open or shut or whether accommodation is let or not, just whether you have had a fall in come. My understanding is that if you are a 2 or 3 star B&B, you can claim £10 a night per registered room in respect of the current quarter if turnover has fallen more than 18.6% against the pre pandemic figure. If you have 5 rooms the claim would be £50 per night for the quarter. So £4,500. Ballahowin cottages have 25 bedrooms so if they had an an 18.6% reduction in turnover they could claim £22.500 this quarter. The Premier Inn has 85 bedrooms as a hotel it could theoretically claim £108,400 for the current quarter as hotels get a higher rate. I say theoretically as I don't think it was open 2 years ago so they have no comparative turnover. I believe they can therefore claim 50% of this. The scheme started in March 2020 so we have had nearly 2 years of. Rates etc have varied but it gives an idea of the level of claims that could have potentially been made. On top of these amounts I presume that businesses could have also claimed under other schemes such as the salary support scheme or to furlough staff - but I have not checked the rules. Edited January 28, 2022 by Lost Login Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 21 hours ago, Gladys said: It isn't quite that is it? God forbid that I am ending up defending HQ, but as already pointed out there may be financing to service and other costs. It also diverts from the main issues of how support was given and how FOI requests are handled. Those who really, really had their backs to the wall would probably look to a lender for a loan based on the equity of the land. I know of a couple who ended up having to do that because they did not qualify for any of the handouts. All of which has to be paid back, one way or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 1 hour ago, Declan said: I'm not up to speed on this. Is this a summary of the situation - He had three sources of income during the period CM Salary Rental income on the holiday flats Grants to cover loss of income His government decided to close the borders and at one point to require people to stay in holiday flats the level of the grants and the rules required to claim Doesn't he get a wedge for being a farmer too? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SislemanJ Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 In the Decision Notice there is a timeline - 18/06/21 initial FOI submission; 15/7/21 DfE refuses requests; 27/7/21 FOI Applicant requests a review; 19/8/21 DfE confirms its refusal decision. In other news on 20/7/21 Lawrence Skelly was appointed President of Tynwald and so ceased to be the Minister of DfE; Howard Quayle became the Minister by default. So at the time the refusal of the FOI was being reconsidered by DfE, HQ the subject of the FOI was the Minister. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 2 hours ago, asitis said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-59760562 You haven't made a good start mate !!!! Yes but: Quote Meetings of the cabinet, which now features a record number of women, have included "some pretty strong debates" over the issues, Mr Canann said. "It is not always smooth going, but I would say I am happy with the diversity, and I am finding a good solid range of balanced opinions and expertise in that council chamber at the moment," he added. For me that's encouraging. Let's hope that includes some push back on some of the more outlandish & OTT capital projects. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 (edited) 7 hours ago, Gladys said: Mishandling matters to this degree should also be considered as a disciplinary offence. It's an interesting one. In "normal" circumstances the refusal wouldn't cause ripples- asking how much, say, the Comis received wouldn't usually be disclosed. It would be considered confidential information and Iain Mcdonald wouldn't have got his panties in a wad. I get the fact it's the CM tilts things towards public disclosure, but I'm still not massively comfortable with the idea of this sort of information being disclosed naming each business individually. And I say that as someone very critical of how Quayle has benefitted from a scheme he designed. Edited January 28, 2022 by Ringy Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 7 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said: It's an interesting one. In "normal" circumstances the refusal wouldn't cause ripples- asking how much, say, the Comis received wouldn't usually be disclosed. It would be considered confidential information and Iain Mcdonald wouldn't have got his panties in a wad. I get the fact it's the CM tilts things towards public disclosure, but I'm still not massively comfortable with the idea of this sort of information being disclosed naming each business individually. And I say that as someone very critical of how Quayle has benefitted from a scheme he designed. I'm not sure that true. As far as I can see the Information Commissioner's ruling seems to apply to all grants given out under the scheme. The fact that the requested recipient happens to be a 'politically exposed person' and have been one of those in charge of setting the scheme up is secondary. The decision says: It's just that the particular request only applies to Quayle, but someone else could apply for the full list. The UK Government issued lists of Employers who have claimed through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme for example and that led to some hurried repayments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omobono Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 12 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: I'm not sure that true. As far as I can see the Information Commissioner's ruling seems to apply to all grants given out under the scheme. The fact that the requested recipient happens to be a 'politically exposed person' and have been one of those in charge of setting the scheme up is secondary. The decision says: It's just that the particular request only applies to Quayle, but someone else could apply for the full list. The UK Government issued lists of Employers who have claimed through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme for example and that led to some hurried repayments. there was someone on the radio today who claims to have been living at Ballahowin holiday cottages during the period in question , that the financial support was given , if that claim is true then the police should be investigating the matter after bragging openly about how much money he is worth even the Fat controller ,can't have his cake and eat it , as I understand it occupied property does not qualify , 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.