Mea Probs

[teapot]

I didn't catch it all but I see Peter Karran was removed from the chamber for 1 hour

I think that was because of Iris and not the MEA. Everyone is very protective of Iris and because Peter was upsetting someone that was praising her, he had to go and sit on the naughty chair for 60 minutes.

[Rog]

Do you have any suggestions has to how the government can sort this problem?

 

Yes, but it would take a neck of brass to do it. Probably balls of brass as well.

 

Are we all going to have to pay more tax to clear the dept?

 

You're gonna have to pay now or pay later but it's only people on the Island who are going to pay.

 

Either directly in taxes, indirectly by price hikes, or cut backs on other projects, or more likley a combination of all.

 

Unless someone in government is sufficiently brazen to do what could be done that is.

[Gladys]

 

Unless someone in government is sufficiently brazen to do what could be done that is.

 

 

Which is....?

[Rog]

Which is....?

 

 

Time for Tynwald to actually use its so called independence for the benefit of the Manx and not just the favoured cabal.

 

Do a ‘Stephen Byers’, declare the MEA bankrupt, and nationalise the whole dam(n) thing.

 

It could be done.

 

It would create a hell of a stink, but it could be done.

 

It would need some pretty fleet-of-foot action but it’s not beyond the wit of man.

 

OK, the shareholders would get their fingers burned, but so would the organisations who provided the finances, and they MUST have known that what was taking place wasn’t kosher.

 

Investments at the level that have been made don’t just get done on the same basis as a mortgage is granted, there’s big-time investigation and risk analysis takes place before hand.

 

Then reconsider the whole dam(n) fool strategy of electricity generation on-Island, the infrastructure is in place to purchase power at a lower cost than locally generating it.

 

And impeach Alex Downie.

[Observer]

I'm for that - wrap it up (current MEA) and buy the best value product for the consumers.

[Jonty]

 

 

Which is....?

 

 

 

 

Do a ‘Stephen Byers’, declare the MEA bankrupt, and nationalise the whole dam(n) thing.

 

It could be done.

 

 

It would need some pretty fleet-of-foot action but it’s not beyond the wit of man.

 

OK, the shareholders would get their fingers burned,

 

 

 

 

Try again Rog. The MEA is alrady nationalised - it is a statutory board, not a company. It has no shareholders.

 

So where are they going to find the extra £120 million now?

 

 

Investments at the level that have been made don’t just get done on the same basis as a mortgage is granted, there’s big-time investigation and risk analysis takes place before hand.

 

You really think so? As Peter Karran said yesterday, the MEA had a bond of £185 million, with a turnover of only £30 million per annum - and £9 million in interest charges per annum. All known facts - before Barclays give a further loans of £120 million -

 

Hard to detect any big time investigation or risk analysis there. They probably would take more care if you or I went for a mortgage. Unless of course we were Chairman of both the lending and borrowing company at the same time.

 

Right Rog, what next then?

[Grumble]

Class. Jonty for teh win...

[Lonan3]

And impeach Alex Downie.

 

Shouldn't the word be impale?

[Rog]

 

 

Which is....?

 

 

 

 

Do a ‘Stephen Byers’, declare the MEA bankrupt, and nationalise the whole dam(n) thing.

 

It could be done.

 

 

It would need some pretty fleet-of-foot action but it’s not beyond the wit of man.

 

OK, the shareholders would get their fingers burned,

 

 

 

 

Try again Rog. The MEA is alrady nationalised - it is a statutory board, not a company. It has no shareholders.

 

So where are they going to find the extra £120 million now?

 

 

Investments at the level that have been made don’t just get done on the same basis as a mortgage is granted, there’s big-time investigation and risk analysis takes place before hand.

 

You really think so? As Peter Karran said yesterday, the MEA had a bond of £185 million, with a turnover of only £30 million per annum - and £9 million in interest charges per annum. All known facts - before Barclays give a further loans of £120 million -

 

Hard to detect any big time investigation or risk analysis there. They probably would take more care if you or I went for a mortgage. Unless of course we were Chairman of both the lending and borrowing company at the same time.

 

Right Rog, what next then?

 

 

So it makes it even easier to do as well as opens up other options, not least surcharging individuals who were instrumental in gross mismanagement and financial irregularities as was done to Dame Shirley Porter and other public servants in the past.

 

Tynwald could and should play hard ball over this matter.

 

But that apart, is there NO private finance involved in MEA other than the loans? Is ALL investment Government investment?

[Jonty]

I am pretty sure there is no private investment in MEA, it is a Government Department.

 

To surcharge individuals would need a lot of proof - and even if that was found, the vast majority of the £120 million has gone in the crazy overspend when constructing.

 

The money is actually in the bricks and mortar and structure, and not recoverable as cash..

 

The only hard ball to play is not to pay back the loans money to Barclays.

 

And if there has been any deception going on, they are probably as much victims of it as the public and the Government. (But they should have known better)

[teapot]

Whilst I agree that Mr "I wasn't at that meeting, well I was at the meeting but don't remember that bit" Downie should be one of the chaps to fall on his sword, what about the Attorney General. Perhaps I heard it incorrectly in Tynwald, and the phone was ringing so I might have done, but did COMIN ask for his legal opinion on the Letter of Comfort, he gave his opinion and missed something in the small print, COMIN also didn't pick the "something" up and signed the document and now we're in the pooh?

What was it that no one spotted? Something to do with the pipeline from Eire or something - anyone know? But there doesn't seem much point in getting legal advice if it's wrong.

COMIN - is it OK for us to sign this document that will cost the manx tax payer fortunes if it goes wrong?

AG - oh yes, I've read it, it's fine!

[Gladys]

 

 

Which is....?

 

 

 

 

Do a ‘Stephen Byers’, declare the MEA bankrupt, and nationalise the whole dam(n) thing.

 

It could be done.

 

 

It would need some pretty fleet-of-foot action but it’s not beyond the wit of man.

 

OK, the shareholders would get their fingers burned,

 

 

 

 

Try again Rog. The MEA is alrady nationalised - it is a statutory board, not a company. It has no shareholders.

 

So where are they going to find the extra £120 million now?

 

 

Investments at the level that have been made don’t just get done on the same basis as a mortgage is granted, there’s big-time investigation and risk analysis takes place before hand.

 

You really think so? As Peter Karran said yesterday, the MEA had a bond of £185 million, with a turnover of only £30 million per annum - and £9 million in interest charges per annum. All known facts - before Barclays give a further loans of £120 million -

 

Hard to detect any big time investigation or risk analysis there. They probably would take more care if you or I went for a mortgage. Unless of course we were Chairman of both the lending and borrowing company at the same time.

 

Right Rog, what next then?

 

Any more tips?

[nipper]

But there doesn't seem much point in getting legal advice if it's wrong.

 

No problems there. You just get the same chaps back at £100s per hour to give you even more advice.

 

Who were the briefs for the MEA?

[Rog]

Any more tips?

 

No need. the sugestion to play hard ball and simply refuse to service the loan would be both possible and desirable.

 

It COULD and SHOULD be done.

 

It won't of course, the Manx people will simply bear the cost.

 

I do think that Downie should be impeached and that all the decision makers should be surcharged even if for no other reason than punishment. Bankrupt the sods. It would send a message to all in government to mind what they do in the future.

[Gladys]

Playing hard ball and refusing to service the loan before establishing its legality would be disastrous for the IOM. At the moment, there are no grounds for the MEA or the relevant subsidiary to refuse to service the loan (other than not having enough money, but that would be a straightforward default position).

 

To do so would put the company into loan default probably forcing Barclays to enforce its security and throwing uncertainty on the future of the whole concern. If Govt. itself presses for a default position, imagine what that would do for the Island's much cherished standing and reputation, not to mention the Standard and Poor credit rating? Barclays is also a substantial employer on the Island so the ramifications of not dealing with this honourably and constructively could be many and widespread.

 

No, this is a situation that has to be managed (whether the right people are around to do that is another debate) and a premature outcome should not be precipitated.

 

As for impeachment and surcharging, I am not sure if those options are available in these circumstances and, as I have said before, it will make us all feel better, but will make precious little impact on the situation. I would fully support those responsible being brought to book, but it also begs the question as to whether one person or department was truly responsible for this situation, or whether there was a culture of mistrust and lack of communication between the relevant players which led to this result.

 

Perhaps the MEA was run on Maxwellian principles and perhaps the Govt was too weak, too commercially naive or downright derelict in exercising sufficient control. We don't know and to start the "high 'em high" against certain individuals may not be the answer .... just yet!