Alf Cannan's I Have A Dream

[2112]

12 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Well the Manx Radio piece says: it's estimated as many as 500 people are registered to attend each day.  "As many as" is one of those useful phrases like "up to", so it could be zero for all we know.  Of course they will know exactly how many people are registered at any time from Eventbrite, but it's obvious that they're not worrying about having to close the Villa due to overcrowding.

Actually a better question might be "How many are students etc?".  Because they've decided to devote most of the first day to a youth conference, a Youth Impact Summit indeed:  "All 16 – 18 year old students across the Island, whether that’s at a school’s sixth form or at UCM, are being invited".  So all the Youth are being bussed in[1] to provide an adoring audience for our Dear Leader and his minions.

(The Programme seems even more depressing and embarrassing than the one for grown-ups.  We do treat our kids so badly.  The only positive is they get a free lunch and the chance to bunk off early).

But of course if you're automatically registering all these students as attending, then you can get up to 500 quite easily for the Wednesday and there's your 'as many as' figure - even if Thursday is just Alf Cannan and Lily's dog wandered in off the beach.

 

[1]  Literally.  All primary school swimming lessons are cancelled for the day so that the buses can be used to get the older students to the Villa instead.

With Douglas having two high schools and the college, and IOMG obsessing about its green credentials, would it have not have been prudent to encourage those students to make their own way to the VM - as IOMG like to spout, rely on the Active Travel policy - or Shanks pony, good physical exercise. I can understand buses being provided for Ramsey, Peel and Castletown Schools. 

[Jarndyce]

1 minute ago, 2112 said:

would it have not have been prudent to encourage those students to make their own way to the VM - as IOMG like to spout, rely on the Active Travel policy - or Shanks pony, good physical exercise.

Risky - they might bunk off instead of attending.

Edited September 19, 2023 by Jarndyce
Clarity

[2112]

Just now, Jarndyce said:

Risky - they might bunk off.

Is attendance by pain of death? Very North Korea. 

[Jarndyce]

8 minutes ago, 2112 said:

Is attendance by pain of death? Very North Korea.

I don’t know - but I suspect not.

However, how you extrapolated that view from my comment is a mystery to me…

[2112]

1 minute ago, Jarndyce said:

I don’t know - but I suspect not.

However, how you extrapolated that view from my comment is a mystery to me…

Mass audience participation from an adoring audience for the Dear Leader, and his nodding dogs. 

[CrazyDave]

1 hour ago, sherlock moans said:

No thanks I don't engage with pond scum 

 

Ah.  One of those who moans but isn’t prepared to even try to do anything to validate what they are claiming or to put it right.

[cissolt]

Perhaps the schools are doing a little dance routine for our dear leader?

https://youtu.be/WrQ0bJpx7D4?si=Hgx-kmeDbQ11llHv

[Twitch]

4 hours ago, english zloty said:

Easier to ask how many of Cabinet office are manning the fort. Answer not many.

I'm sure Dan Davies will be earning a crust running around with the microphone

He's hosting a session on FOI.

[Fred the shred]

The numbers quoted are probably people who have been informed that the conference is on plus the pupils of all eligible schools and some more for luck.

[Roger Mexico]

We actually had some insight into the participant numbers at last year's Conference from a Tynwald Question asked by (inevitably) Moorhouse:

How many delegates signed up to attend the Government Conference, and of these how many used email addresses ending with (a) @gov.im and (b) @sch.im.

The Minister for the Cabinet Office (Ms Lord-Brennan): There were 751 registrations in advance across all of the sessions on Day 1 of the conference. Of these registrations, 52 used email addresses ending with @gov.im, and eight used email addresses ending with @sch.im.

There were 864 registrations in advance across all of the sessions on Day 2. Of these registrations, 47 used email addresses ending with @gov.im and none used email addresses ending with @sch.im.

In addition to those pre-registered, approximately 150 people turned up across the two days without pre-registration and were given entry to the conference.

This sounds impressive, but the give-away is the "across all of the sessions".  Someone coming for the day might register for the day; for a business breakfast; for a networking lunch; to express their interest in particular sessions in the morning; ditto the afternoon; for more of these if the boxes were ticked at different times; for an after-event.  So one person coming for one of the days might be counted five, six, seven, maybe even more times.  It makes the numbers rather less impressive.

Of course that's just registrations, whether people turned up is another matter - there were certainly lines of unused badges on the registration tables at the end of the day.  Some of these people may not even have known they were registered.  Moorhouse asked a supplementary: I was surprised to be classified as a delegate when I arrived at the conference. Were all Tynwald Members classified as delegates and were any other people in that category? 

I suspect Tynwald members made up a lot of the @gov.im registrations.  The @sch ones were probably the teachers who brought along students doing relevant subjects I referred to earlier.  That the students also registered individually using personal emails is possible, certainly there would have been more than eight in total.

[2112]

The NPM ( MR) are trailing CM Cannans big idea for creating a big housing association. Great idea but doomed for failure from the offset. IOMG are obsessed with the idea of ‘arms length’. If they want involvement/ownership without the actually managing of it then create an ‘arms length’ organisation known as an ALMO. In the meantime Housing Association should free from IOMG involvement or interference. They would be operated as a not for profit, be able to get loans from banking institutions or other lenders. IOMG would have no ownership of the transferred properties, thereby the taxpayers wouldn’t be responsible for them either. 
 

I don’t think an Arms Length Organisation will solve the current issues either, which is down to supply and demand - high demand and not enough housing, due to government investment. A change in ownership structure will mean a larger hierarchical structure - more layers of civil servants - more government and politico interference. The organisation will still be beholden to the taxpayers for funding, especially for new development. Which then begs the question, what is the Manx Development Corporation for? It would seem they are another IOMG/ALMO/Hybrid competing with another ALMO. Confusing, inefficient and wasting taxpayers money. 
 

What should be done is all the LA, DoI and DBC other properties transferred to a locally created Housing Association with large and respected North West England HAs invited to apply to take on the properties and management function - subject to approval by tenants, and politicos. By hiving off properties both the ratepayers and the taxpayers will benefit. Have either CM Cannan, Minister Crookall, ex Minister and ex Chair of the Housing and Communities Board Chris Thomas approached/investigated with the likes of Great Places Housing Group, Riverside HA and others are receptive to establishing a IOM subsidiary and take on the housing stock? Naturally the taxpayer isn’t giving it away. 

IOMG talk of consultations with everyone, sadly as Professor Ashford has clearly stated, that IOMG don’t give organisations enough time etc. They clearly aren’t interested in the outcomes either, and will press on regardless. 

Edited September 20, 2023 by 2112

[Andy Onchan]

38 minutes ago, 2112 said:

The NPM ( MR) are trailing CM Cannans big idea for creating a big housing association. Great idea but doomed for failure from the offset. IOMG are obsessed with the idea of ‘arms length’. If they want involvement/ownership without the actually managing of it then create an ‘arms length’ organisation known as an ALMO. In the meantime Housing Association should free from IOMG involvement or interference. They would be operated as a not for profit, be able to get loans from banking institutions or other lenders. IOMG would have no ownership of the transferred properties, thereby the taxpayers wouldn’t be responsible for them either. 
 

I don’t think an Arms Length Organisation will solve the current issues either, which is down to supply and demand - high demand and not enough housing, due to government investment. A change in ownership structure will mean a larger hierarchical structure - more layers of civil servants - more government and politico interference. The organisation will still be beholden to the taxpayers for funding, especially for new development. Which then begs the question, what is the Manx Development Corporation for? It would seem they are another IOMG/ALMO/Hybrid competing with another ALMO. Confusing, inefficient and wasting taxpayers money. 
 

What should be done is all the LA, DoI and DBC other properties transferred to a locally created Housing Association with large and respected North West England HAs invited to apply to take on the properties and management function - subject to approval by tenants, and politicos. By hiving off properties both the ratepayers and the taxpayers will benefit. Have either CM Cannan, Minister Crookall, ex Minister and ex Chair of the Housing and Communities Board Chris Thomas approached/investigated with the likes of Great Places Housing Group, Riverside HA and others are receptive to establishing a IOM subsidiary and take on the housing stock? Naturally the taxpayer isn’t giving it away. 

IOMG talk of consultations with everyone, sadly as Professor Ashford has clearly stated, that IOMG don’t give organisations enough time etc. They clearly aren’t interested in the outcomes either, and will press on regardless. 

I downloaded several dox relating to HA legislation and COPs in all the UK legislatures and damned if I can find them now but..... suffice to say that not all housing associations in the UK are run at "arms-length" (whatever that means). The most successful ones are mostly tenant-managed and have income from commercial rentals (ie. housing over shops and offices for example) as a way of meeting ongoing costs, including the "mortgage/loan" repayments. They are however subject to the relevant regulations and must report periodically to the Regulator.

I agree with most of what you say in the above. It will be a total dogs breakfast if they insist on going down the arms length route, as all it will do is create yet another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy. The MDC is proving to be another outlet for jobs for mates. 

[Wake Up Call]

They'll be standing there, looking out and thinking 'this is shit'.

Nobody is conned by this bollocks anymore.

[2112]

10 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

I downloaded several dox relating to HA legislation and COPs in all the UK legislatures and damned if I can find them now but..... suffice to say that not all housing associations in the UK are run at "arms-length" (whatever that means). The most successful ones are mostly tenant-managed and have income from commercial rentals (ie. housing over shops and offices for example) as a way of meeting ongoing costs, including the "mortgage/loan" repayments. They are however subject to the relevant regulations and must report periodically to the Regulator.

I agree with most of what you say in the above. It will be a total dogs breakfast if they insist on going down the arms length route, as all it will do is create yet another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy. The MDC is proving to be another outlet for jobs for mates. 

Whether it’s tenant-managed etc, it’s still free from interference from town hall involvement or any involvement. They are free to get their own finance from building societies or banks which specialise in lending to HAs. 
 

Commercial rents - examples could be a pub on a housing estate, or shops on a parade or precinct which was part of the housing development. Many large estates had shops or a pub. 

[2112]

16 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

I downloaded several dox relating to HA legislation and COPs in all the UK legislatures and damned if I can find them now but..... suffice to say that not all housing associations in the UK are run at "arms-length" (whatever that means). The most successful ones are mostly tenant-managed and have income from commercial rentals (ie. housing over shops and offices for example) as a way of meeting ongoing costs, including the "mortgage/loan" repayments. They are however subject to the relevant regulations and must report periodically to the Regulator.

I agree with most of what you say in the above. It will be a total dogs breakfast if they insist on going down the arms length route, as all it will do is create yet another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy. The MDC is proving to be another outlet for jobs for mates. 

Demesne Road the ‘showpiece’ for the MDC will end up in the long run as a DBC ghetto, primarily to appease DBC and other politicos craving their involvement. As for Crookall House, I see this as another white elephant, and a testament to wasted space. If the MDC had anchor tenants lined up you can be assured of showboating, grandstanding and dickwaving galore, and huge urgency to renovate. At present, there are loads of recently renovated modern office developments in Douglas lying empty.