Roger Ram Posted July 8 Author Share Posted July 8 6 minutes ago, Derek Flint said: the only thing the DOI need to consider is public disruption Which let’s face it, is their speciality. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 On 7/6/2024 at 2:42 PM, Idleweiss said: To be fair though. If it was a cycling event someone would have creamed their pants to close down half the IOM for it. Rallying has been out of favour with the DOI for years now. And through the letterbox today, bang on cue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 1 hour ago, Non-Believer said: And through the letterbox today, bang on cue... And what's wrong with that? Maybe they know how to fill the forms in properly. Ps @A fool and his money..... and @Roger Ram. They are amateurs as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 6 minutes ago, Happier diner said: And what's wrong with that? Maybe they know how to fill the forms in properly. Ps @A fool and his money..... and @Roger Ram. They are amateurs as well. Bit touchy about Gran Fondo are we Ray? I didn't say there was anything wrong with it, I merely pointed out that the event had been enabled in contrast with the rally. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 7 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Bit touchy about Gran Fondo are we Ray? I didn't say there was anything wrong with it, I merely pointed out that the event had been enabled in contrast with the rally. Ray? Enabled? Maybe they just filled in the forms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 Where in the public domain can it be found that this issue with the rally is anything to do with filling in of forms, correctly or otherwise? 🤔 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 It's got nothing to do with filling in forms. It's a choice government make as to whether they can be arsed helping an event or not. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 53 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Where in the public domain can it be found that this issue with the rally is anything to do with filling in of forms, correctly or otherwise? 🤔 9 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: It's got nothing to do with filling in forms. It's a choice government make as to whether they can be arsed helping an event or not. Simple as that. FOI. Get on with it instead of whinging on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 25 minutes ago, Happier diner said: FOI. Get on with it instead of whinging on here. Why are you spreading misinformation about the problems with the rally on these boards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 1 hour ago, Non-Believer said: Why are you spreading misinformation about the problems with the rally on these boards? What misinformation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 1 hour ago, Happier diner said: What misinformation? You've said they can't fill the forms in properly. As if an FOI is going to get to the real problem, you really are extremely naive where the government are concerned - they can do no wrong in your eyes. Incidentally, the only time I've ever submitted a FOI, I was contacted by the secretary of the head of the department trying to arrange a time to speak to me on the phone - fair enough, he phoned and waffled on for a while without answering the question, I told him just to answer the FOI instead of wasting my time and his, a couple of days later I got an email saying the request was closed. I have absolutely no doubt the phone call was an attempt to keep things off the record. I could have complained the closure of the request but I really couldn't be arsed. This fella had all day to play games with FOI requests, I didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 57 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: You've said they can't fill the forms in properly. As if an FOI is going to get to the real problem, you really are extremely naive where the government are concerned - they can do no wrong in your eyes. Incidentally, the only time I've ever submitted a FOI, I was contacted by the secretary of the head of the department trying to arrange a time to speak to me on the phone - fair enough, he phoned and waffled on for a while without answering the question, I told him just to answer the FOI instead of wasting my time and his, a couple of days later I got an email saying the request was closed. I have absolutely no doubt the phone call was an attempt to keep things off the record. I could have complained the closure of the request but I really couldn't be arsed. This fella had all day to play games with FOI requests, I didn't. I didn't say they didn't fill the forms in correctly. Please refer to post number 1 by crazy Dave. That's where I got that information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 1 hour ago, John Wright said: How many cars, support vehicles and team/crew? 50 competitors, 50 support vehicles. Average 4 people per car competing? So, 100 vehicles and 200 people? Even at £500 per vehicle it’s no more £50k. I reckon £750k is an over estimate. Even after hotels and food. And government gets nothing out of most of that. What with there being no VAT on the ferry fares ( unless it’s vans/freight ) and 5% on the hotels/accommodation. What will the costing be, even if there’s only one crash involving hedge reconstruction, carriageway repairs, A&E? [Moved over to the dedicated topic on this as there's more info here generally] As always you need to go back to what was actually said rather than what the media (admittedly without benefit of Hansard) heard and reported: https://tynwald.scorchnetwork.com/?file=/business/listen/AgainFiles/O-202401-1515a.mp3 The information on the £750K estimate came originally from the organisers of the Rally rather than the DfE[1] and was based on an estimate of just over 1,000 visiting, competitors, support, marshals, fans and so on, staying an average of five nights. An average of £750 per head doesn't seem unreasonable, but whether that number would actually have come is another matter. This in turn was claimed to be calculated from the number who came over for the May Rally, the September one was expected to produce the same turnout. no attempt seems to have been made by the DfE to verify these figures, though it should have been possible to get some idea by talking to the Steam Packet, accommodation sector and so on. The interesting thing is that the organisers are the same people who organised the May event as well, so it's difficult to see how they suddenly became unsafe in the course of a few months. We've seen this pattern from the DoI before, with organisers being strung along and given the run-around with regards to requirements until it is too late to go ahead. [1] Obviously if it was a DfE estimate there would be several zeros added on the end. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beelzebub3 Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 On 7/7/2024 at 9:37 AM, Derek Flint said: The only question the DOi really need to ask is whether the team they are giving the RCO to is a competent operator? Insurance, qualified team, clear and defensible safety plans and operating procedures..correct levels of medical, rescue and recovery in place. The position should always be 'how do we facilitate this?' Rather than preventing it happening. Do you seriously believe the DOI are very qualified/competent team with clear and defensive safety plans? ffs Derek the DOI couldn't run a bath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Lamb Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said: [Moved over to the dedicated topic on this as there's more info here generally] As always you need to go back to what was actually said rather than what the media (admittedly without benefit of Hansard) heard and reported: https://tynwald.scorchnetwork.com/?file=/business/listen/AgainFiles/O-202401-1515a.mp3 The information on the £750K estimate came originally from the organisers of the Rally rather than the DfE[1] and was based on an estimate of just over 1,000 visiting, competitors, support, marshals, fans and so on, staying an average of five nights. An average of £750 per head doesn't seem unreasonable, but whether that number would actually have come is another matter. This in turn was claimed to be calculated from the number who came over for the May Rally, the September one was expected to produce the same turnout. no attempt seems to have been made by the DfE to verify these figures, though it should have been possible to get some idea by talking to the Steam Packet, accommodation sector and so on. The interesting thing is that the organisers are the same people who organised the May event as well, so it's difficult to see how they suddenly became unsafe in the course of a few months. We've seen this pattern from the DoI before, with organisers being strung along and given the run-around with regards to requirements until it is too late to go ahead. [1] Obviously if it was a DfE estimate there would be several zeros added on the end. Why does Moorhouse talk like that? Is he hard of hearing, or has he had recent dental work? 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.