Roger Mexico Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 The really strange thing is that there was a review of the Wildlife Park as recently as May 2022. Here's the press release that was derived from and we even have the Terms of Reference for the review as someone had asked for them in Tynwald. The last document also includes the same for the Meat Plant Review, which we know was produced and published and acted on. So what happened to the report commissioned only two years ago? And why do we need another one? The IOM Newspapers piece appears to derive from a different press release so I don't think it's Darbyshire getting the year wrong. Is this just another someone looking for an excuse to slip a 'consultant' mate some money? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTail Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 I went on a school trip about 1968. I remember it was quite a nice sunny day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 3 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: The last document also includes the same for the Meat Plant Review, which we know was produced and published and acted on. Maybe it's time they were amalgamated...lots of South Africans here now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebean Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 The common theme is anything Government-owned losing money. Yet we still have the obsession with Government having its dead fingers in every pie. A little enterprise is required and that is the one thing Government haven’t got. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoopsaa Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 (edited) 7 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: The really strange thing is that there was a review of the Wildlife Park as recently as May 2022. Here's the press release that was derived from and we even have the Terms of Reference for the review as someone had asked for them in Tynwald. The last document also includes the same for the Meat Plant Review, which we know was produced and published and acted on. So what happened to the report commissioned only two years ago? And why do we need another one? The IOM Newspapers piece appears to derive from a different press release so I don't think it's Darbyshire getting the year wrong. Is this just another someone looking for an excuse to slip a 'consultant' mate some money? Are you saying they linked their review of the wildlife park with the meat plant review? Kill two pelicans with one stone, as it were? Off topic, what happened to Barbers mission to find out how the current lot took over managing the meat plant? Did anyone find the .missing documentation? Edited July 19 by hoopsaa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoopsaa Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 1 hour ago, joebean said: The common theme is anything Government-owned losing money. Yet we still have the obsession with Government having its dead fingers in every pie. A little enterprise is required and that is the one thing Government haven’t got. Pie....wildlife park.....meat plant. Getting worried now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian rush Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 Isn’t the very point of Government / state intervention to do things that improve society as a whole without making a profit because of the intangible other benefits that those things bring? 6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian rush Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 I appreciate there’s a separate debate about the cost of the operation, it’s efficiency and the benefits brought but so much of the debate is framed in terms where loss = waste or bad management = Government and public servants are all shit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meoir Shee Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 1 hour ago, joebean said: The common theme is anything Government-owned losing money. Yet we still have the obsession with Government having its dead fingers in every pie. A little enterprise is required and that is the one thing Government haven’t got. But it is a case of government owned facilities losing money or facilities being loss making and therefore being government owned? There has to be more to life than brass tacks, there are the social benefits to consider too. If the wildlife park/swimming pool/railway etc loses money there is a simple choice: subsidise or close, the economies of scale simply do not exist to make them ‘commercial’ in any meaningful sense. Similar debate with the Island Games, they will ‘lose’ money, government will have to fund, therefore cancel? Where would this end? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebean Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 8 minutes ago, Meoir Shee said: But it is a case of government owned facilities losing money or facilities being loss making and therefore being government owned? There has to be more to life than brass tacks, there are the social benefits to consider too. If the wildlife park/swimming pool/railway etc loses money there is a simple choice: subsidise or close, the economies of scale simply do not exist to make them ‘commercial’ in any meaningful sense. Similar debate with the Island Games, they will ‘lose’ money, government will have to fund, therefore cancel? Where would this end? Maybe with less tax-burden, essential services and infrastructure having better investment, amenities being run with greater efficiency and imagination and private enterprise and investment being encouraged. Of course there are things that Government here needs to own and run but some better focus is needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 I still don't understand why it's not just called a Zoo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 10 hours ago, Last Ten said: Probably would be better if it was privately run and it would turn the place around. Cannan has got to have the worst track record for fu**ing everything he has touched. Cannan loves his privatisations, lots of lovely consultant fees for his mates, so I’m cynical enough to believe a lot of the current hand-wringing about “losses” is to justify privatising everything. That said, the Wildlife Park may well do better as a charity, but it would still require financial support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 11 minutes ago, The Phantom said: I still don't understand why it's not just called a Zoo. It started out at the same time as Woburn, Longleat, Knowsley. It was a marketing ploy to make it seem bigger and more important thank it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 32 minutes ago, Meoir Shee said: But it is a case of government owned facilities losing money or facilities being loss making and therefore being government owned? Usually the latter. The likes of the railway, the buses, even the Gaiety, are now in government ownership because their private owners lost money. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thommo2010 Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 4 hours ago, NoTail said: I went on a school trip about 1968. I remember it was quite a nice sunny day. Last time it was sunny I think haha 1 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.