Connectivity

[Kopek]

16 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Not till you stop taking the cats in there too 🤣

I always avoid that Woman when I meet her on the Terrace.

I didn't know it was Gladys 😄.

[Non-Believer]

6 hours ago, Gizo said:

You can understand why the bus driver aren’t working overtime, overtime usually time and a third nowadays, that’ll make it 22% tax band plus ni so basically your evenings and weekends being paid your basic rate, who’s doing that. ?  if you’re an office staff, course you’re doing overtime as your massive salary at overtime rate will be considerably more. 

All these people at the bottom of the food chain are all earning far too much, according to the people at the top and must be subject to cuts as necessary. Strange that.

[Banker]

6 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

All these people at the bottom of the food chain are all earning far too much, according to the people at the top and must be subject to cuts as necessary. Strange that.

Depends if you w8sh to pay more taxes to increase wages so buses make even more losses, privatise the buses and save us all some money.

[Stu Peters]

9 hours ago, Will Halsall said:

Stu, I do hope that you are simply stating that this was what your department released to the press, and not suggesting that you are in agreement with the constant lack of transparency from your department. If I am wrong, I have to say I thought you were better than that.

That’s what we were told and I have no reason to disbelieve it.

I’m all for transparency and honesty but surely there’s a time and place for it. Questions about snagging lists at the new ferry terminal (for example) are premature until negotiations with contractors are concluded. I get (redacted) copies of FOI requests and many seem unnecessarily intrusive or confrontational, people demanding copies of all meeting minutes and correspondence when they’re simply being nosy or trying to cause trouble. We all have discussions (even at a family level) that we should be able to keep private, to the point where people won’t respond honestly about something in case it is published later.

[Non-Believer]

2 hours ago, Banker said:

Depends if you w8sh to pay more taxes to increase wages so buses make even more losses, privatise the buses and save us all some money.

I'd be more interested in doing some evaluations and cutbacks across the top of the chain before I resorted to tax increases or privatisation.

[A fool and his money.....]

1 hour ago, Stu Peters said:

Questions about snagging lists at the new ferry terminal (for example) are premature until negotiations with contractors are concluded.

What negotiations? We paid £80 million for a basic shed FFS. Don't tell me it doesn't have a guarantee.

If something isn't right there should be no negotiation, it should be fixed - and there's absolutely no need for it to be shrouded in secrecy from the increasingly impoverished mugs who paid for it.

[Non-Believer]

8 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

What negotiations? We paid £80 million for a basic shed FFS. Don't tell me it doesn't have a guarantee.

If something isn't right there should be no negotiation, it should be fixed - and there's absolutely no need for it to be shrouded in secrecy from the increasingly impoverished mugs who paid for it.

Remember the Promenade Of 900+ Snags?

Progress on that's gone quiet too.

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, A fool and his money..... said:

What negotiations? We paid £80 million for a basic shed FFS. Don't tell me it doesn't have a guarantee.

If something isn't right there should be no negotiation, it should be fixed - and there's absolutely no need for it to be shrouded in secrecy from the increasingly impoverished mugs who paid for it.

It will depend on the contract terms, spec and who signed what off.  

Again and again, most of the money was sunk into the groundworks, or whatever the equivalent is of a riverside dock. 

Not that I am defending the expenditure, but if you focus on the shed, you are missing the real issues. 

They were: 

firstly, why we embarked on this in the first place, just to please some footy fans and shoppers?;

secondly whether sufficient surveying of the site was undertaken, Peel Holdings deciding not to undertake the necessary works themselves may have given a clue;

and lastly, there was a tipping point, but that seems not to have been heeded, we were dead set on a course with no ability or appetite to pull out. 

[hoopsaa]

2 minutes ago, Gladys said:

It will depend on the contract terms, spec and who signed what off.  

Again and again, most of the money was sunk into the groundworks, or whatever the equivalent is of a riverside dock. 

Not that I am defending the expenditure, but if you focus on the shed, you are missing the real issues. 

They were: 

firstly, why we embarked on this in the first place, just to please some footy fans and shoppers?;

secondly whether sufficient surveying of the site was undertaken, Peel Holdings deciding not to undertake the necessary works themselves may have given a clue;

and lastly, there was a tipping point, but that seems not to have been heeded, we were dead set on a course with no ability or appetite to pull out. 

I thought it was less about football fans and shoppers, and more about ego and a big city destination?

[Gladys]

Just now, hoopsaa said:

I thought it was less about football fans and shoppers, and more about ego and a big city destination?

Very possibly, either way hardly a justification. 

I remember there was something about how this was a great opportunity to have a little bit of the island in the centre of Liverpool. 

[Gladys]

11 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Remember the Promenade Of 900+ Snags?

Progress on that's gone quiet too.

The snags are still there, the cobbled northern access to the Sefton roundel is collapsing, but we will just learn to live with it. 

[A fool and his money.....]

10 minutes ago, Gladys said:

It will depend on the contract

Well if it's any help I can tell you what type of contract it was. A very one sided on.

I've worked in construction a long time, but I've yet to see a contract in which the price can triple, the job can be finished years after the agreed completion date, and the full cost of the job or details of the snagging list can be kept from the people who are paying for it.

I've no idea who the main contractor was on this job, but I can fully understand why they were reluctant for it to end.

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Well if it's any help I can tell you what type of contract it was. A very one sided on.

I've worked in construction a long time, but I've yet to see a contract in which the price can triple, the job can be finished years after the agreed completion date, and the full cost of the job or details of the snagging list can be kept from the people who are paying for it.

I've no idea who the main contractor was on this job, but I can fully understand why they were reluctant for it to end.

I agree, and how the costs escalated is jaw dropping, but there will be negotiations, and making the details public will not help.  You can only assume that the terms were not as water tight in our favour as they should have been.  Also, there will be quite a few parties involved, all of them trying to dodge liability. 

[A fool and his money.....]

10 minutes ago, Gladys said:

 

I remember there was something about how this was a great opportunity to have a little bit of the island in the centre of Liverpool. 

If the rumours are to be believed, there's quite a big bit of the island that went out through the back gate on that job.

There's probably a little bit of the island in every construction project in NW England over the last few years 😀

[A fool and his money.....]

2 minutes ago, Gladys said:

 all of them trying to dodge liability. 

Which is traditionally very easy where the Manx government are concerned.