More uselessness from DBC

[Happier diner]

8 minutes ago, John Wright said:

But are Suez the lessors, or IoMG. I think it was sale and lease back between IoMG and IoMBank Leasing. Suez are just the operators. 

Suez set the gate fee, not IoMG. But they don’t pay the capital cost through a lease.

I don’t think there’s any real commerciality between IoMG and Suez.

You could well be right. Not sure of the detail. What I was saying was that somewhere along the line someone has to pay off a big fuck off debt. And, like you say, the gate fee is part of that. So, if the amount of waste reduces, the unit cost at the gate has to go up or else the whole calculation goes awry 

[John Wright]

1 minute ago, Happier diner said:

You could well be right. Not sure of the detail. What I was saying was that somewhere along the line someone has to pay off a big fuck off debt. And, like you say, the gate fee is part of that. So, if the amount of waste reduces, the unit cost at the gate has to go up or else the whole calculation goes awry 

Not if the lease rentals get paid by IoMG, but Suez set and receive the gate payments. IoMG got the capital when they did the sale and lease back. So it’s only the interest they’re paying in reality. It’s one of those government sleight of hand deals capital/revenue.

[Gladys]

53 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Sort of. As per my reply to JW the whole project is based upon paying back a loan. So the more waste they burn the more money they get. The more they burn the more electricity they can sell back to us.

However it's such as inefficient process, don't be fooled into thinking it has many green credentials. 

Not fooled at all, just pointing out the variables and loan servicing wasn't one of them. 

[Non-Believer]

50 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

somewhere along the line someone has to pay off a big fuck off debt.

The Great Manx Taxpayer has increasingly found his/herself paying off rather a lot of big fuck off debts in the last 15 years. As often as not, with no consultation or appreciation or say in how they were arrived at or their scale. Nor with any way of opting out.

And some people are intent on constructing further big fuck off debts faster than the old ones can be paid off.

Edited February 1, 2023 by Non-Believer
extra bit

[Ringy Rose]

13 hours ago, BriT said:

What seems to be fairly clear now looking at the rate increases announced Island wide is that waste disposal fees (ie, gate fees at the EFW) seem to be the main driver in all the rate rises.

The second biggest expenditure from DBC, behind the EFW, is debt repayment.

Suez are ripping us off, but there's lots of financial mismanagement too. Sadly there's no consequences because DBC can charge what they want and we have no say.

[Happier diner]

Just now, Ringy Rose said:

The second biggest expenditure from DBC, behind the EFW, is debt repayment.

Suez are ripping us off, but there's lots of financial mismanagement too. Sadly there's no consequences because DBC can charge what they want and we have no say.

How do you know this?

[Ringy Rose]

Just now, Happier diner said:

How do you know this

I look at the gate fee.

[Non-Believer]

14 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

I look at the gate fee.

I've been of the opinion for some time that the situation may well be being "exploited", shall we say? A little like MG "exploited" the previous user agreement. But without knowledge of exactly what the contractual arrangements are between IoMG and the operator, it's impossible to prove.

Yet the rises come thick, fast and steep and nobody seems to be able to question them. Why are the LAs not making representation to DOI/Central Govt and why can't the latter question the fees? Unless of course, they are locked into some sort of cast iron contract.

Nobody could have anticipated the sort of draw on rates that the EFW imposes when it was mooted, designed and built. Nearly £1M annually for Ramsey. Twice that at least for Douglas. Every other LA citing them as the driver behind Rates rises  and for many a year now too.

Somebody in Govt should be looking into this; unless Govt itself is complicit.

[Omobono]

17 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I've been of the opinion for some time that the situation may well be being "exploited", shall we say? A little like MG "exploited" the previous user agreement. But without knowledge of exactly what the contractual arrangements are between IoMG and the operator, it's impossible to prove.

Yet the rises come thick, fast and steep and nobody seems to be able to question them. Why are the LAs not making representation to DOI/Central Govt and why can't the latter question the fees? Unless of course, they are locked into some sort of cast iron contract.

Nobody could have anticipated the sort of draw on rates that the EFW imposes when it was mooted, designed and built. Nearly £1M annually for Ramsey. Twice that at least for Douglas. Every other LA citing them as the driver behind Rates rises  and for many a year now too.

Somebody in Govt should be looking into this; unless Govt itself is complicit.

Give Moorhouse something to get his teeth into, he used to teach economics  all that skill going to waste , come on Boy time to make a name  for yourself and save the local authorities some money and embarrass that spin doctor Chris Thomas 

[Mercenary]

24 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I've been of the opinion for some time that the situation may well be being "exploited", shall we say? A little like MG "exploited" the previous user agreement. But without knowledge of exactly what the contractual arrangements are between IoMG and the operator, it's impossible to prove.

Yet the rises come thick, fast and steep and nobody seems to be able to question them. Why are the LAs not making representation to DOI/Central Govt and why can't the latter question the fees? Unless of course, they are locked into some sort of cast iron contract.

Nobody could have anticipated the sort of draw on rates that the EFW imposes when it was mooted, designed and built. Nearly £1M annually for Ramsey. Twice that at least for Douglas. Every other LA citing them as the driver behind Rates rises  and for many a year now too.

Somebody in Govt should be looking into this; unless Govt itself is complicit.

Isn't it RPI linked & gov also pay rent to IoM bank for the building?

 

I think the contract is on gov website somewhere (Rob Callister was querying the mechanisms at one point)

[Happier diner]

5 hours ago, Ringy Rose said:

I look at the gate fee.

The gate fee change does not necessarily mean anyone is being ripped off. It's a contractual agreement. 

[Cassie2]

[NoTailT]

2 hours ago, Cassie2 said:

Well then.

Michael isn't a particularly small parish these days either.

[cissolt]

2 hours ago, Cassie2 said:

Well done Kirk Michael.  Prudent management is the key, something DBC could learn from.  Too busy with vanity schemes and ineffective greenist policies 

 

[Non-Believer]

If they're imposing a below-inflation rise then surely they're either subsidising it through reserves or storing it up for rises in future years though? Their costs won't have gone away or reduced, how are they absorbing the EFW fees that will have been imposed on them the same as every other LA? Although their refuse collection costs are combined with the other Northern Parishes.

Their litter bin emptier and street cleaner is a gardener who part-times for the KMC and they have very small public areas and facilities to maintain, one can't compare KMC responsibilities with those of a larger town or district, not that I'm defending DBC.

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by Non-Believer
extra bit