joebean Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 5 hours ago, Anyone said: I think Watterson and Hooper are both chartered accountants so could , if so motivated , earn more in the private sector. Callister would I think have been on a decent wage working with the Louis Group. Not sure how much teachers earn , depend on rank I suppose but it would not be that bad. I imagine pot men in a pub don’t earn that much so might want to stand for re-election. Yes, but accountants who don’t want to be accountants and teachers who don’t want to teach don’t tend to earn much either. As for Callister, he would have to go and convince an employer that he wasn’t an ass, when he’s spent the last few years proving that he is. Again, when you think of Watterson, to go and get a decent salary he would have to convince an employer that he wanted to accept responsibility, with a CV that would suggest something to the contrary. Is there a fancy dress store on the Island? That might be an avenue for him. Hooper is a basket-case of patronising arrogance. I doubt he could get through 30 minutes of an interview without the interviewers wanting to tell him to fuck off. That will be up to the good people of Ramsey, next time round. Edited March 9 by joebean 3 2 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebean Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 Allinson is also a definite to stand again. The Good Doctor’s work is far from done. He’s sorted getting rid of the unwanted at the start of life and is working on the end of life issue. The bit in the middle is work in progress. Trust him; he’s a Doctor and we should gleefully swallow the medicine he prescribes, however bad it makes us feel. He knows it’s good for us. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code99 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 15 hours ago, Stu Peters said: What’s your question. If I can answer it I will. Genuine question: did you go to the yesterday's "a briefing for Tynwald members about the government's tax strategy" - any feedback ? Thank you. https://www.three.fm/news/isle-of-man-news/only-three-backbench-mhks-at-tax-briefing/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 39 minutes ago, joebean said: Allinson is also a definite to stand again. The Good Doctor’s work is far from done. He’s sorted getting rid of the unwanted at the start of life and is working on the end of life issue. The bit in the middle is work in progress. Trust him; he’s a Doctor and we should gleefully swallow the medicine he prescribes, however bad it makes us feel. He knows it’s good for us. He isn’t the cure, he is one creating the symptoms. He will give the island an almighty headache. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 4 minutes ago, code99 said: Genuine question: did you go to the yesterday's "a briefing for Tynwald members about the government's tax strategy" - any feedback ? Thank you. https://www.three.fm/news/isle-of-man-news/only-three-backbench-mhks-at-tax-briefing/ Did Sarah Maltby MHK, Ann Corlett MHK and Daffy MHK attend? Or were they in Malta? If so, obviously jollies are more of a priority. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 4 minutes ago, 2112 said: He isn’t the cure, he is one creating the symptoms. He will give the island an almighty headache. Aye, the medicine he's prescribed won't cure the problem. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 11 hours ago, Stu Peters said: Yes I have said in public and in DOI that I think it should be reinstated. However, the newspaper headline was disingenuous as it made it look as if only politicians got free parking - AFAIK it was made free to all government workers during Covid and never reinstated. I can afford to pay it, many people probably can’t. [I'm replying to this here rather than than on the Airport topic because it doesn't have anything to do with the Airport or even Airport Parking (whether you get free airport parking is another matter).] Charging for parking for politicians and civil servants was introduced in April 2016 after a consultation in the previous year. Note that the title was Allocation and charging for Government Car Parking spaces in Central Douglas. Because as the opening remarks state: [...] most Departments, Boards and Offices are only able to provide limited car parking for staff. At the same time, it is recognised that provision of free car parking for staff in areas where the public may be charged to park in order to access public services, is neither fair nor defensible. [...] It is recommended that this policy is also applied to all Members of Tynwald, Members of staff within the Clerk of Tynwald’s Office and Members of the Judiciary and other Crown appointments. Because spaces were limited, Departments were responsible for who got them and paid for them. So I suspect few of those who got places were those who "probably can't" afford them. I also believe that a couple of decks of Chester Street are allocated for civil service parking, so indeed "areas where the public may be charged to park". And of course spaces taken by staff are ones that can't be used by members of the public who need to go to government offices on business. It's difficult to see how any of this has changed since 2016. There will need to be suitable accommodation made for those who frequently need to use their car during the day for work or who have disability requirements, but that seems to be allowed for anyway. The background to the suspension was set out in a reply from Thomas to a WQ from Wannenburgh last March that asked: What steps have been taken to ensure Tynwald members recommence paying for parking; and will the charges be applied retrospectively to October 2021? Thomas replied: As previously stated in Keys on the 8th November 2022, the Department was instructed by the then Chief Executive to suspend all charges for Government parking spaces in April 2020 following discussion and agreement at the Chief Officer Group due to the pandemic lockdown and the numbers of staff working from home. Since the decision was made to suspend the charges, no instruction has been received to recommence charging on the previous basis. However, I have asked the Department to draft a Parking Order for Tynwald Members in the Government Offices car park. This will need to be considered within the Tynwald Management Process. It would be useful to find out what happened to that Parking Order and why it wasn't progressed. Maybe a member of the Department could ask. As I've already said elsewhere, this was always mainly about civil servants, but politicians shouldn't complain if they are singled out because they are supposed to be the ones in charge. If they are willing to leave even such a trivial and politically embarrassing matter entirely up to the civil service beneficiaries, then you have to ask exactly what they are there for. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 Why would the pandemic necessitate the suspension of parking charges in the first place? Was it to equalise expenses between those who had to go in to the office and those who could work from home? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebean Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said: [I'm replying to this here rather than than on the Airport topic because it doesn't have anything to do with the Airport or even Airport Parking (whether you get free airport parking is another matter).] Charging for parking for politicians and civil servants was introduced in April 2016 after a consultation in the previous year. Note that the title was Allocation and charging for Government Car Parking spaces in Central Douglas. Because as the opening remarks state: [...] most Departments, Boards and Offices are only able to provide limited car parking for staff. At the same time, it is recognised that provision of free car parking for staff in areas where the public may be charged to park in order to access public services, is neither fair nor defensible. [...] It is recommended that this policy is also applied to all Members of Tynwald, Members of staff within the Clerk of Tynwald’s Office and Members of the Judiciary and other Crown appointments. Because spaces were limited, Departments were responsible for who got them and paid for them. So I suspect few of those who got places were those who "probably can't" afford them. I also believe that a couple of decks of Chester Street are allocated for civil service parking, so indeed "areas where the public may be charged to park". And of course spaces taken by staff are ones that can't be used by members of the public who need to go to government offices on business. It's difficult to see how any of this has changed since 2016. There will need to be suitable accommodation made for those who frequently need to use their car during the day for work or who have disability requirements, but that seems to be allowed for anyway. The background to the suspension was set out in a reply from Thomas to a WQ from Wannenburgh last March that asked: What steps have been taken to ensure Tynwald members recommence paying for parking; and will the charges be applied retrospectively to October 2021? Thomas replied: As previously stated in Keys on the 8th November 2022, the Department was instructed by the then Chief Executive to suspend all charges for Government parking spaces in April 2020 following discussion and agreement at the Chief Officer Group due to the pandemic lockdown and the numbers of staff working from home. Since the decision was made to suspend the charges, no instruction has been received to recommence charging on the previous basis. However, I have asked the Department to draft a Parking Order for Tynwald Members in the Government Offices car park. This will need to be considered within the Tynwald Management Process. It would be useful to find out what happened to that Parking Order and why it wasn't progressed. Maybe a member of the Department could ask. As I've already said elsewhere, this was always mainly about civil servants, but politicians shouldn't complain if they are singled out because they are supposed to be the ones in charge. If they are willing to leave even such a trivial and politically embarrassing matter entirely up to the civil service beneficiaries, then you have to ask exactly what they are there for. The issue of parking was tied up with something else that was not considered, namely the number of Civil Servants who are required to work in central Douglas, or even in Douglas itself. The cost of this accommodation is high, access for visitors is difficult and it wastes an opportunity to boost the economies for other towns on the Island. In the digital age it is simply unnecessary to huddle so much of the CS together in Douglas. Edited March 9 by joebean Typo 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeBrew Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, Gladys said: Why would the pandemic necessitate the suspension of parking charges in the first place? Was it to equalise expenses between those who had to go in to the office and those who could work from home? Because many of those civil servants who were paying for parking were working from home and not using the spaces. Also, I think most if not all carparks were free in covid- at least in the first few months: http://www.douglas.gov.im/index.php/news/council-news/item/2483-council-lifts-all-parking-charges-in-chester-street-car-park No idea why they weren’t simply reinstated when things started to get back to normal. Edited March 9 by StrangeBrew 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) On 3/7/2024 at 9:20 PM, Roger Mexico said: Of course these aren't the same as normal work trips. There's no intensive courses, intricate negotiations, delivering and defending papers at a conference or long hours spent selling face to face or convincing people at an exhibition. It's more like an upmarket coach tour where you are shepherded around and treated respectfully and everything is arranged. There are some real reasons for business travel. Training courses with practical examples, technical support where you need all the toys (logic state analysers, sillyscopes etc), Entity policy buy-in, trying to close multi-national customers as you can only build trust face to face and so forth. From a purely IOM perspective I can't think of any reason for political travel unless it's to Westminster to the Foreign Office to gen up on the relationship with the UK with pros, cons and boundaries of being one of three British Crown Dependencies. Where the CPA jollies come in I'm not entirely sure as they are about the Overseas Territories. Personally the only reason I can think of to visit Malta would be to bone up on how to be corrupt what with car bombings and so forth. Another recent example: https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/malta-eight-arrested-investigation-customs-fraud-and-corruption-public-officials I have to say that IMHO the very worst has to be Watterson mainly because he has no shame at all about swanning off on any old flimsy pretext. But then lecturing others on the evils of drink followed by a practical example on a bus merely confirms a lack of integrity... There should be a Travel Requisition system with simple criteria such as " How will your trip benefit the Manx people?" and so forth with the CM and the Treasury Minister both having to sign it off. Of course, copies of all the Travel Reqs should be in the public domain for scrutiny by those funding it. Personally I don't care if the CPA pays something towards it because they don't fund Tynwald salaries... Edited March 9 by P.K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 1 hour ago, P.K. said: There are some real reasons for business travel. Training courses with practical examples, technical support where you need all the toys (logic state analysers, sillyscopes etc), Entity policy buy-in, trying to close multi-national customers as you can only build trust face to face and so forth. From a purely IOM perspective I can't think of any reason for political travel unless it's to Westminster to the Foreign Office to gen up on the relationship with the UK with pros, cons and boundaries of being one of three British Crown Dependencies. Where the CPA jollies come in I'm not entirely sure as they are about the Overseas Territories. Personally the only reason I can think of to visit Malta would be to bone up on how to be corrupt what with car bombings and so forth. Another recent example: https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/malta-eight-arrested-investigation-customs-fraud-and-corruption-public-officials I have to say that IMHO the very worst has to be Watterson mainly because he has no shame at all about swanning off on any old flimsy pretext. But then lecturing others on the evils of drink followed by a practical example on a bus merely confirms a lack of integrity... There should be a Travel Requisition system with simple criteria such as " How will your trip benefit the Manx people?" and so forth with the CM and the Treasury Minister both having to sign it off. Of course, copies of all the Travel Reqs should be in the public domain for scrutiny by those funding it. Personally I don't care if the CPA pays something towards it because they don't fund Tynwald salaries... Our "sponsor" in the UKG is the Ministry of Justice, is it not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Buggane Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 How much are the CPA due's every year and why. Its like DBC crowing about the green flags they are flying, these are nothing to do with the venerated Britain in bloom. These are from a organisation that the council pay a subscription to year on year, once you earn a flag it is not removed the next year. But you get to keep it and then it seems you get another one somewhere else. So basically you pay for a flag evert year and then have to buy a flagpole on which to fly it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 6 hours ago, joebean said: Allinson is also a definite to stand again. The Good Doctor’s work is far from done. He’s sorted getting rid of the unwanted at the start of life and is working on the end of life issue. The bit in the middle is work in progress. Trust him; he’s a Doctor and we should gleefully swallow the medicine he prescribes, however bad it makes us feel. He knows it’s good for us. He could of course also double, maybe even triple what he earns if he went back to being a GP and picked up some private work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 7 minutes ago, CrazyDave said: He could of course also double, maybe even triple what he earns if he went back to being a GP and picked up some private work. Given the pressures on Ramsey Group Practice and Manx Care in General, maybe the Ramsey electorate should make a collective decision not to vote for him in any future election. Thus forcing him to return to doctoring where he may be of more use. Tactical voting if you like Edited March 9 by The Voice of Reason Last para 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.