A fool and his money..... Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 1 minute ago, Happier diner said: In my experience they will do this. And what experience is that exactly? You seem very well up on the detail of the process. How so? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 25 minutes ago, Happier diner said: There is no acceptance phase. That's the organiser putting the risk onto the government. The organiser of the road closure has all the risk. They have to assess the risks and how the traffic is going to be managed. Absolutely not. For the reason given above. Select the route you want. Do all the assessments. Submit the application. Yes, once the application is in its reasonable to expect the DOI to comment and allow an adjustment rather a bland rejection. In my experience they will do this. How is it the organiser putting the risk on government? The two phase approach seems reasonable to both sides. The organisers put in the proposed closures with a risk assessment, the DOI assess whether those closures are permissable for other reasons (access to properties, commercial premises, planned road maintenance (don't laugh), other road closures and how the overall will impact), allow or not. Then the organisers must complete the safety plan. Is that not reasonable? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 1 hour ago, Gladys said: How is it the organiser putting the risk on government? The two phase approach seems reasonable to both sides. The organisers put in the proposed closures with a risk assessment, the DOI assess whether those closures are permissable for other reasons (access to properties, commercial premises, planned road maintenance (don't laugh), other road closures and how the overall will impact), allow or not. Then the organisers must complete the safety plan. Is that not reasonable? It is reasonable but it's not how it works. We live in a litigitious society. I believe that the DOI are happy to informally discuss a potential route and give advice and even indication of the likely success. But the application has to be from the organiser. Giving partial approval infers acceptance of that route. I thing the DOI has a duty to offer what advice it can. If they did not then shame on them. But I do not agree with a 2 stage process. I think the organisers should engage with he DOI and agree an route on a informal basis. The applicant should then do all the work to make a good quality application. We have to remember that these are public roads. The wider public has a right to enjoy access to those roads and to be safe. The isle of man had a very open and tolerant attitude to events like this but there is a limit to what can be enjoyed without some sort of proper process. Anyway., this is the crogga thread so perhaps we should move this discussion to the rally vs DOI thread. 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 (edited) 14 hours ago, A fool and his money..... said: And what experience is that exactly? You seem very well up on the detail of the process. How so? I have assisted organisations with road closure applications. It's a while back. The DOI may have changed but my experience, whilst sometimes very frustrating, was that if you engaged with them they would help. Sometimes they would be intransigent over things but then I guess that's their job. But never unhelpful. Edited August 4 by Happier diner Oops 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 12 minutes ago, Happier diner said: It is reasonable but it's not how it works. We live in a litigitious society. I believe that the DOI are happy to informally discuss a potential route and give advice and even indication of the likely success. But the application has to be from the organiser. Giving partial approval infers acceptance of that route. I thing the DOI has a duty to offer what advice it can. If they did not then shame on them. But I do not agree with a 2 stage process. I think the organisers should engage with he DOI and agree an route on a informal basis. The applicant should then do all the work to make a good quality application. We have to remember that these are public roads. The wider public has a right to enjoy access to those roads and to be safe. The isle of man had a very open and tolerant attitude to events like this but there is a limit to what can be enjoyed without some sort of proper process. Anyway., this is the crogga thread so perhaps we should move this discussion to the rally vs DOI thread. 👍 Where is the potential for litigation? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 8 minutes ago, Gladys said: Where is the potential for litigation? If the DOI part approve something then it could be inferred that they believed it to be safe. I think it's right that they should only formally approve something once the full application is made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 1 minute ago, Happier diner said: If the DOI part approve something then it could be inferred that they believed it to be safe. I think it's right that they should only formally approve something once the full application is made. You do understand the concept of an approval in principle, subject to satisfying certain conditions? If the in principle approval is subject to a safety plan then how can it be inferred it is safe until that plan is submitted and approved? If it isn't fully approved, can it even go ahead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 5 minutes ago, Gladys said: You do understand the concept of an approval in principle, subject to satisfying certain conditions? If the in principle approval is subject to a safety plan then how can it be inferred it is safe until that plan is submitted and approved? If it isn't fully approved, can it even go ahead? I can see your view. If they part approved anything without seeing the full application then might it make it harder for them to backtrack? What's wrong with old fashioned talking about things and then going from there? My experience is that they will quickly give verbal feedback., especially if it's a no gooer. It's worth noting that the process here is much less bureaucratic then it is anywhere in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Happier diner said: I can see your view. If they part approved anything without seeing the full application then might it make it harder for them to backtrack? What's wrong with old fashioned talking about things and then going from there? My experience is that they will quickly give verbal feedback., especially if it's a no gooer. It's worth noting that the process here is much less bureaucratic then it is anywhere in the UK. Easy to backtrack if the condition isn't met. Nothing wrong about old-fashioned talking, provided both sides are willing to engage. We have all been on the receiving end of 'we cannot advise, you must seek your own advice". I don't know who is in the right on this one, but it does seem odd that a longstanding event has been refused. ETA an approval in principle is not a part approval and if the conditions aren't met, there is no backtracking, just no final approval. Edited August 3 by Gladys 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted August 3 Share Posted August 3 The danger for 'us' is that Crogga, seemingly underfunded, could pull out and leave the viability of perhaps, a reasonably good gas field, in doubt to any future investor??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted August 4 Share Posted August 4 11 hours ago, Gladys said: we cannot advise, you must seek your own advice Have they ever said that? What makes you even think it? Like I said on the other thread, so many events go ahead just fine. One fails. The only common denominator is the applicant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted August 4 Share Posted August 4 On 8/2/2024 at 3:42 PM, Happier diner said: Didn't Chris Thomas get sacked because he was 'holding it up'? He went. Still nothing happening. Well quite. Apparently things weren't being reformed enough. Following which Cannan appointed the previous Minister whose failure to reform things was apparently OK. Which suggests the real problem was really that Thomas was trying to reform things. Of course at the time it was briefed that Crogga was the reason and in December Cannan claimed that "Chris Thomas, was a key reason for ‘very little progress’ with Crogga" in reply to one of Thomas's regular questions asking in effect "How's it going then?". Chris Thomas was only DoI Minister for about 13 months and it's now more of less that long since he was sacked. And yet... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted August 4 Share Posted August 4 2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: Well quite. Apparently things weren't being reformed enough. Following which Cannan appointed the previous Minister whose failure to reform things was apparently OK. Which suggests the real problem was really that Thomas was trying to reform things. Of course at the time it was briefed that Crogga was the reason and in December Cannan claimed that "Chris Thomas, was a key reason for ‘very little progress’ with Crogga" in reply to one of Thomas's regular questions asking in effect "How's it going then?". Chris Thomas was only DoI Minister for about 13 months and it's now more of less that long since he was sacked. And yet... Quite. Since Thomas was sacked for lack of progress, there has been no progress at all. Bit of a competition for being the worst at progressing things. A race to the bottom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Posted August 4 Share Posted August 4 3 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: Well quite. Apparently things weren't being reformed enough. Following which Cannan appointed the previous Minister whose failure to reform things was apparently OK. Which suggests the real problem was really that Thomas was trying to reform things. Of course at the time it was briefed that Crogga was the reason and in December Cannan claimed that "Chris Thomas, was a key reason for ‘very little progress’ with Crogga" in reply to one of Thomas's regular questions asking in effect "How's it going then?". Chris Thomas was only DoI Minister for about 13 months and it's now more of less that long since he was sacked. And yet... Good point - arguably despite all the rhetoric a couple of years ago the DOI remains essentially unchanged - the new CEO was the past long-standing deputy, the new minister is the old Minister, there's no real change to the scope of the Department or headcount. Other than kicking off a few consultant studies since Nick Black & Ian Longworth were unceremoniously booted it doesn't seem like anything has changed (rightly or wrongly). And coming into election season it's unlikely anything will change further (other than a possible ministerial change who will only be looking to not cause waves) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moghrey Mie Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 On 8/2/2024 at 11:47 AM, english zloty said: Crogga are on the list for an employment tribunal case soon. That could be interesting https://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/crogga-founder-takes-company-to-tribunal-over-pay-dispute-711606?fbclid=IwY2xjawE9RgxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHSWzMPFP09EffOq3KYAhoDViRGNd8hfwzIbRfivoP7SM2u1ICGTZnvTOgA_aem_3I8LS1_20C_j0clDzcj3tA 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.