Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/07/2019 in all areas

  1. 7 points
    I see one of three options: 1) We end up with a beautiful marina, the envy of the rest of the silt-plagued Island 2) A half finished job, begging for Govt funding because the original financing proposals were laughable 3) No marina at all and a bunch of marine Mike Proffits waltzing off into the sunset with bulging accounts whilst our great and good wring their hands and promise that "lessons will be learned" Please place wagers according to your own opinions but any other option suggestions freely welcomed.
  2. 5 points
    From home appliance fixer to Home Secretary in two moves. First by getting elected hanging on the coat tails of Peter Karran/Liberal Vannin then dumping the Party
  3. 3 points
    It is not in the government's interest to reduce single use plastic use. Anyone who has read the EFW contract will know this.
  4. 3 points
    more cost for shops........ just ban them and go back to glass bottles........
  5. 3 points
  6. 3 points
    a bit harsh on gibbons me thinks.
  7. 3 points
    There’s a fourth option.... Absolutely sweet FA.
  8. 2 points
    Monkeys...typewriters...
  9. 2 points
    I wouldn't trust this clown with a shopping list let alone somebody's right to release from prison
  10. 2 points
    It's nothing to do with being right wing or the age of politicians, it's more a matter of perception. I believe that the PO, like many government agencies, should offer services to the public, some of those services may not be profitable but they do help the postal service to spin in other ways. The decision to cut services is usually made by the Chief Executive and his cohorts in answer to the requirement to make savings at all costs. This requirement was made by politicians to reel in the waste in the PS, the adverse effect is that the departments turn bandit and try to make a point and make life difficult for the politicians by cutting services, instead of addressing the real problems such as management efficiencies and pay and pensions!
  11. 2 points
    Military Microwave technology information LINK HERE Really explains the dangers that I've been trying to put across. 5G is a weaponised system and there's no ifs or buts about it. I've said it before - You wouldn't live under an electric pylon, so why have one in front of your house and systems within it? Lets keep the island safe and if it means having technology that is hard wired and costs fractionally more, then so be it as I'd rather do that than people being sick or ill which the hospital or mental health services are finding it hard to cope with now.
  12. 2 points
    There is indeed an item in the current Pink Book which earmarks £250,000 for "design fees for non-tidal marina development". It is mentioned in several places. Does anyone know what this is, or which marina it refers to? It probably doesn't refer to Ramsey Marina, but you never know, and it is rather sloppy accountancy to have an item of this magnitude in the budget but with insufficient information to identify what it is.
  13. 2 points
    It’s the law. and in fairness, ha states it is unlikely he would overrule the committee
  14. 2 points
    The shit hit the fan in 2007 but someone realised that the Isle of Man Government had amassed such a huge amount of money from the £100 millions per year extra VAT that there was no need to panic. All they had to do was grab as much of it for themselves as they could and while they could. There were promotions after promotions followed by early retirements and mega lump sum golden cheerios. And the boot-filling continues to this day. The only illusion is the pretence that they are doing something about the problem. There ain't no problem whilst those in charge of the money are still able to grab and distribute to their pals as much of it as they can while they can. And that dear forum reader is the Isle of Man in a nutshell.
  15. 1 point
    Apparently 'Comic Relief' is upon us. I have to admit to having mixed feelings about charity 'events' such as this - and indeed all forms of targeted charity fund raising - for some time. I am not against the principle of charity at all, however there seems to be an increasingly 'political' purpose in the post 'Band Aid' era. This morning I caught a snippet of a radio show which was raising money for Comic Relief - full of the now standard emotionally loaded content about how they are raising money for 'vital' services - you know, the sort of services some would say a government should provide. Last night it was the 'Stand Up 2 Cancer' GBBO - all use the same model now. During the bit I caught on the radio this morning the presenters were introducing a short clip of a pre-recorded joke by another famous. Prior to playing the clip there was some jovial speculation as to whether this famous was a 'Sir', at which point one of the presenters realised this was probably not a good topic to pursue and moved swiftly on - because of course the famous in question is famously not a 'Sir' due to the much publicised discovery they had been investing in tax avoidance schemes. Which sort of crystallises the problem for me. If we lived in a more equitable society where people such as this were not permitted to avoid taxation there would be no need for emotional blackmail to fund 'vital' services - and for them to have the bare faced cheek to support it. There was a later snippet where the same presenters were opening joking about whether they were being paid for this particular 'charity' broadcast, which again was quickly swept under the rug. However it sort of got me thinking... If you wanted to create a broadcast event such as 'Band Aid' or 'Save the Children' or 'Comic Relief', but you wanted to have it focused on encouraging people to pay taxes equitably in order to fund the same objectives that would be viewed as a political broadcast wouldn't it? So why is the reverse not true? Pushing society to the point where services we are told are 'vital' are only funded by voluntary choice is fundamentally a political message isn't it?
  16. 1 point
    Technically practically anyone can apply, they seem to advertise most years (here's 2018's press release) and members serve for three years. There's more details here and in the linked information pack. Like most of these monitoring committees its not that well paid. It was £78 per meeting last year, but if each can last up to 5 hours and require 15 hours prep it's only half minimum wage. The press release says Clare Faulds was the Committee Chair (I suspect the Chair is always going to be a lawyer), but I think that the other members' names tends to be kept private - presumably to stop them being lobbied on behalf of or against prisoners. I'm slightly surprised if Malarkey has the final say, because I thought that EHCR ruling which said the UK Home Secretary was not able to decide on the release (or not) of life prisoners would have applied - maybe it only affects to indeterminate sentences.
  17. 1 point
    That’s not what I asked Derek.
  18. 1 point
    Yes, it's frightening. Mind you I would say the same of elements of the Parole Committee.
  19. 1 point
    Just what we don't need, another tax
  20. 1 point
    like handing ferry contracts to irish backed shipping companies who copy terms off a fast food shop.......
  21. 1 point
    4) iomg step in and it costs £350m........
  22. 1 point
    Joiners use planes, but it’s goid news we won’t see any flat expanses of land flying around.
  23. 1 point
    Don't you go antagonising people with common sense,no good will come of it.
  24. 1 point
  25. 1 point
    Go on then spill the beans who you talking about, as it’s in the public domain due to a court judgment, there’s nothing to hide.
×