Roger Ram Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 8 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: Not necessarily...corruption can include practices such as deliberately overemploying and ignoring consistent project failures. Overemploying involves creating unnecessary positions to funnel funds to unqualified, connected individuals, wasting resources and reducing efficiency. Ignoring project failures allows for continued misuse of funds and justifies further unwarranted expenditures, undermining trust and progress. Have you any evidence of any of that though? I would suggest good, honest and old fashioned incompetence at nearly every level is more of a factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 57 minutes ago, Roger Ram said: Have you any evidence of any of that though? I would suggest good, honest and old fashioned incompetence at nearly every level is more of a factor. Oh that's OK then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 1 hour ago, Albert Tatlock said: Not necessarily...corruption can include practices such as deliberately overemploying and ignoring consistent project failures. Overemploying involves creating unnecessary positions to funnel funds to unqualified, connected individuals, wasting resources and reducing efficiency. Ignoring project failures allows for continued misuse of funds and justifies further unwarranted expenditures, undermining trust and progress. That is not corrupt. It's bad and not acceptable, but not criminal. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 Just now, Happier diner said: That is not corrupt. It's bad and not acceptable, but not criminal. My above definition is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 For example...how about Longworth pressing ahead with his electric trams on the prom brainstorm with no mandate to do so? BV's annual purchase of minibuses with no political discussion or mandate too? Millions of pounds have been squandered on those two points alone, there must be (or should be) a point where that reaches criminal proportions? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 2 hours ago, Non-Believer said: For example...how about Longworth pressing ahead with his electric trams on the prom brainstorm with no mandate to do so? BV's annual purchase of minibuses with no political discussion or mandate too? Millions of pounds have been squandered on those two points alone, there must be (or should be) a point where that reaches criminal proportions? Proportion and criminality are not linked. Therefore it is just as criminal to steal 1p or £1,000,000. So if something is not illegal (but not good management) it doesn't become illegal if you do it more. It just becomes worse management Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 (edited) Joney Faragher is having a rant ………… again. This time it’s about how private developers shouldn’t be constructing bus station. In part I do agree, but sadly Joney Faragher is a dinosaur stuck in the past, wedded to the concept that the state should do everything. IOMG could have done something with the site, which turns it into a bus interchange with other additional facilities, but unfortunately the site has been allowed to fester, even in the hands of IOMG favoured friends. The site could have been a bus station with Corpy flats on top. If IOMG were imaginative and thought outside the box, it could have been redeveloped efficiently and inexpensive, but sadly instead of keeping it simple, basic and functional it’s now a behemoth, all singing and all dancing, bus station, waiting room, shops, offices and much more ….. From the NPM - Faragher says it shouldn't be responsibility of a private developer A bus station for Douglas should be the responsibility of the Department of Infrastructure according to one MHK. The Planning Committee is currently considering plans by a private developer which include an indoor bus information centre on Lord Street. The last facilities there were demolished in 2002. Douglas East member Joney Faragher says the DoI should be the ones leading on the project. Amy Griffiths has this report: Manx Radio contacted the Isle of Man Government for comment and was told a response would be provided in next week's Tynwald sitting (18 June). Edited June 14 by 2112 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 If the DOI were tasked with building a bus station it would take them as long as the site has remained empty. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 5 hours ago, 2112 said: Joney Faragher is having a rant ………… again. This time it’s about how private developers shouldn’t be constructing bus station. In part I do agree, but sadly Joney Faragher is a dinosaur stuck in the past, wedded to the concept that the state should do everything. IOMG could have done something with the site, which turns it into a bus interchange with other additional facilities, but unfortunately the site has been allowed to fester, even in the hands of IOMG favoured friends. The site could have been a bus station with Corpy flats on top. If IOMG were imaginative and thought outside the box, it could have been redeveloped efficiently and inexpensive, but sadly instead of keeping it simple, basic and functional it’s now a behemoth, all singing and all dancing, bus station, waiting room, shops, offices and much more ….. From the NPM - Faragher says it shouldn't be responsibility of a private developer A bus station for Douglas should be the responsibility of the Department of Infrastructure according to one MHK. The Planning Committee is currently considering plans by a private developer which include an indoor bus information centre on Lord Street. The last facilities there were demolished in 2002. Douglas East member Joney Faragher says the DoI should be the ones leading on the project. Amy Griffiths has this report: Manx Radio contacted the Isle of Man Government for comment and was told a response would be provided in next week's Tynwald sitting (18 June). We shouldn’t be running bus services never mind build a bus station, privatize & save £ms 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 2 hours ago, Banker said: We shouldn’t be running bus services never mind build a bus station, privatize & save £ms In part I agree with your comments, sadly if came to the practical element, I’m sure IOMG/DoI would make a complete mess of things, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc.fixit Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 8 hours ago, Non-Believer said: If the DOI were tasked with building a bus station it would take them as long as the site has remained empty. ....and when they'd run the tram/ railway lines into it they'd realise the plans said BUS station, not train! The proposed plans don't appear to include a bus station just a covered information area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 (edited) 7 hours ago, Banker said: We shouldn’t be running bus services never mind build a bus station, privatize & save £ms Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. Oh wait, you’re actually serious. Wow. Can tell you don’t use buses when you go to the UK. As for any bus station, if we’re not going to do the obvious and sensible thing and use the Sea Terminal car park as the bus station, then the example I’d follow is the Liberation bus station in St Helier. Fully enclosed bus station underneath, offices and flats above. The private developer plans aren’t that though, they’re offering an “enclosed information office”. Which will be a small shop on Lord Street Edited June 14 by Ringy Rose 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nellie Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 The old bus station was demolished in 2002, according to Manx Radio today. If we've managed without one for 22 years, why are we even having conversations about building a new one? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred the shred Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 If you want to encourage people to use public transport you have to provide decent amenities. Make your mind up do you want to cut down on emissions or not. It is only in the last ten or so years that bus shelters have increased over the routes which have been a very welcome innovation. The busses themselves are great and the service is good on busy routes, at least I find it so. We had a decent terminus with seats and toilet facilities years ago why it was knocked down is a mystery. So if this new plan is passed will the shelters that are there now be removed? Joney is right to have a rant she is not asking for anything new just a replacement for what we used to have surely that is not asking for much. The money that is going to showcase the Peggy could go towards it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 14 Share Posted June 14 15 hours ago, 2112 said: bus 14 hours ago, Non-Believer said: bus 9 hours ago, Banker said: bus 5 hours ago, doc.fixit said: BUS 2 hours ago, Ringy Rose said: bus 1 hour ago, Nellie said: bus So have you all submitted your views to the current strategic review of Bus Vannin? https://consult.gov.im/infrastructure/review-of-the-bus-service/ 2 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.