DOI Vs Manx rallying

[Roger Mexico]

4 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Like I said on the other thread, so many events go ahead just fine. One fails. The only common denominator is the applicant. 

I'm dragging this back over here to the correct topic again rather than the Crogga one (with which it shares nothing except the involvement of the DoI .... in which case....) because this is clearly untrue.  Firstly because the DoI is obviously also common to both this and the other events that do go ahead and secondly because the same organisers were also responsible for the successful May event which they managed to satisfy all the requirements they are supposed to have not met this time.

We also have the DoI's reply to Moorhouse's question, which he never got a chance to ask in the last Keys: Why permission for the Manx Rally was refused.  You'll remember Crookall was very keen to avoid answering more questions in public. 

Oral questions which are kicked off the agenda are automatically converted to Written ones and the immediate answer that the Minister was going to give, given as the reply.  But of course there's no chance to question further on what is meant and what is missing.  (The replies are also hidden away on the Questions website for technical and possibly deliberate reasons).  Anyway here's the DoI's response:

Permission for the Manx Rally, traditionally held in May, has not been refused.

The Road Races Act 2016, imposes a legal duty on the Department of Infrastructure to ensure an organiser is competent to manage the use of the roads for the activity that is proposed.

Therefore, anyone wishing to run an event on a closed road on the Isle of Man, must produce safety documents in good time, which are accurate and able to withstand scrutiny and challenge. (This applies to all events – The TT/MGP have to pass exactly the same level of scrutiny)

The organiser of the event in September has struggled to produce the necessary documents in good time and therefore the application by Manx Autosport Limited has been rejected by the Department.

The Department can confirm that the officers within DOI have met with the organisers on numerous occasions and provided significant support, however the documentation submitted still fell below the standards required to enable the event to go ahead.

The first bit is the sort of pointless pedantry that stupider civil servants thinks make them look clever - the May event is technically the Manx National Rally, the September one the Chris Kelly Memorial Rally.  But both are organised by Manx Auto Sport and their statement on them being forced to cancel the latter is here. including this:

The Club followed the protocol that it has used several times with the exception that it started the application many months earlier following a request to do so from the Department of Infrastructure.

On 30 March 2024 the Club re-submitted its amended plans to the Department but this was also rejected, on 14 May 2024, for the same reasons.

At no point have the Directors and team at Manx Autosport been made aware of what in, particular, the Department was unhappy with, but the Club’s application emphasised that all its documents were live and could and would be improved upon or extended as and when required.

If the DoI's response was basically "We don't like it, but we're not telling you why" then the blame has to lie there.  And they they don't deal with the allegation that that is how they behaved, except in the most vague terms.

[Happier diner]

53 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

 

If the DoI's response was basically "We don't like it, but we're not telling you why" then the blame has to lie there.  And they they don't deal with the allegation that that is how they behaved, except in the most vague terms.

That's a big leap of a summary🤔

Why would the DOI do that? It makes no sense. Why would the DOI want to stop the event?

The whole correspondence must be FOI able. Surely if they are lying it will all come out. 

[WTF]

52 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

That's a big leap of a summary🤔

Why would the DOI do that? It makes no sense. Why would the DOI want to stop the event?

The whole correspondence must be FOI able. Surely if they are lying it will all come out. 

phone calls and unofficial  face to face meetings aren't so easy to  read in an FOI

Edited August 4 by WTF

[Roger Mexico]

2 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Why would the DOI do that? It makes no sense. Why would the DOI want to stop the event?

The whole correspondence must be FOI able. Surely if they are lying it will all come out. 

Yes, why would a civil servant want to stop something that was going to cause them more work?  It's a mystery for the ages.

[Happier diner]

9 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Yes, why would a civil servant want to stop something that was going to cause them more work?  It's a mystery for the ages.

Why does it cause them more work? Causes more work to reject an application. 

Daft question, but does the 'mexico' of Roger Mexico come from a love of 1970's Ford Escorts? And the associated rallying connection. I sense you are not being your usual impartial self here. 

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, WTF said:

phone calls and unofficial  face to face meetings aren't so easy to  read in an FOI

No. But the quality of the application could be seen and assessed.

 

[Roger Mexico]

2 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Why does it cause them more work? Causes more work to reject an application. 

Daft question, but does the 'mexico' of Roger Mexico come from a love of 1970's Ford Escorts? And the associated rallying connection. I sense you are not being your usual impartial self here. 

It's not much work to reject something if all you're saying is "Computer says 'No'".  Which is what the organisers are alleging: At no point have the Directors and team at Manx Autosport been made aware of what in, particular, the Department was unhappy with.  As I said before there was a similar happening in 2018.  It looks very much as if the DoI are trying to prevent the traditional second rally in the Autumn without actually saying they don't want it.  A Spring rally is apparently the only thing acceptable (next year in April).

My moniker comes from 1970's American literature not 1970's cars.  And I have no interest in rallying, just in good governance and not being told implausible stories such as the same organisers being incompetent when they were competent a few months before.  And a dislike of civil servants being allowed to run things as they like without the need for explanation and disquiet that politicians and others are happy to go along with any old bullshit providing it gives them an easy life.

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

And a dislike of civil servants being allowed to run things as they like without the need for explanation and disquiet that politicians and others are happy to go along with any old bullshit providing it gives them an easy life.

Well. If that's true then they are certainly not getting away with it this time. If it is true then I genuinely hope that they are outed. 

[Harry Lamb]

On 8/4/2024 at 6:42 PM, Roger Mexico said:

It's not much work to reject something if all you're saying is "Computer says 'No'".  Which is what the organisers are alleging: At no point have the Directors and team at Manx Autosport been made aware of what in, particular, the Department was unhappy with.  As I said before there was a similar happening in 2018.  It looks very much as if the DoI are trying to prevent the traditional second rally in the Autumn without actually saying they don't want it.  A Spring rally is apparently the only thing acceptable (next year in April).

My moniker comes from 1970's American literature not 1970's cars.  And I have no interest in rallying, just in good governance and not being told implausible stories such as the same organisers being incompetent when they were competent a few months before.  And a dislike of civil servants being allowed to run things as they like without the need for explanation and disquiet that politicians and others are happy to go along with any old bullshit providing it gives them an easy life.

Stats person, then: figures.