Jump to content

code99

Regulars
  • Posts

    515
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by code99

  1. 3 hours ago, SleepyJoe said:


    £400M might just come in useful...Think it's mostly already committed

    Here is the link:

    https://www.gov.im/media/1377792/sustainablebondreport-2022-digital-v42_compressed.pdf

    "I am delighted to present this first annual Impact and Allocation Report, which identifies how we have allocated £400m of funding in accordance with our Sustainable Financing Framework over the course of the 5 year assessment period from 1st April 2018 to 31st March 2023. The report shows that the monies have been allocated across a broad spectrum of relevant categories within the framework, focusing support towards our Island and it’s people" - David Catlow Interim Chief Financial Officer.

  2. 21 hours ago, SleepyJoe said:


    The future is green tech

    I don't agree with you on a 'KPMG whitewash' tho' - my reading of their final recommendation report is that the IOM will prosper with effective climate change response and investment in green digital (sustainable) infrastructure. With that population increase may occur [the unmentioned corollary is that without it population may decrease]

    There is insufficient emphasis on this in the CoMin Economic Plan

    I agree  – “the future is green tech”.

    I’m not saying that KPMG did not have some good ideas (very intelligent people have come up with some very excellent ideas), all I’m saying that underneath those ideas it is hard to find much of substance. That is what I mean by a ‘consultants whitewash’ for the Island’s future, i.e., all superficial image little substance – as if their report is an edited ‘copy and paste’ of similar material that KPMG have previously prepared for some of their other clients. E.g.,:

    • The KPMG report avoids dealing with our today’s substantial challenges, paints a hypothetical picture ten years from now, and provides no ‘pathway’ for how to get from where we are today to that hypothetical future;
    • As far as an “effective climate change response and investment in green digital (sustainable) infrastructure” is concerned, I think that the KPMG report makes our future appear ‘solid’ e.g., they talked about onshore and offshore windfarms, and these farms being partially funded by the private sector. Unfortunately, talking about these things is easy, doing them, especially getting private funding for them is much harder;
    • There is also the important issue that the IOM electricity network would need major upgrades before substantial ‘green electricity’ could be plugged into it. Those upgrades would become the responsibility of Manx Utilities.

    I agree with you that "there is insufficient emphasis on this in the CoMin Economic Plan" - my overall impression is that they don’t have focussed plans that will effectively transform the Island into a much better place.

  3. 2 hours ago, P.K. said:

    From reading this article I have concluded that:

    The building itself was inherently dangerous by design and it seems that the approvals process was to some extent fraudulent and negligent. The fact that no person in a position of responsibility was ever held to account is an appalling miscarriage of justice which still haunts the Island today.  IMHO, the culture of deflect, delay and deny is still alive and well as is evident in Dr Ranson's case.

    • Like 2
  4. 23 hours ago, Apple said:

    Can't really blame him, or anyone else for considering it. Show stopper.

    The newly acquired appetite for ‘fairer and broader’ taxation system is a fundamental U-turn from previous IOM governments’ policies (ironically, is at odds with the Tories in the UK who are actively cutting taxes for the rich, especially for the very rich). For years IOM governments have been offering tax benefits in an attempt to lure self-sufficient individuals and businesses (which happened to be predominantly in e-gambling and offshore financial services) to the Island. E.g., there is the ‘NI holiday’ which is available to certain new residents. However, asking all other residents to repair the resulting leak in the NI Operating Fund/ Reserves, when the government itself does not have a good handle on how to spend taxpayers’ money wisely, is making some of those same residents none too happy.

    The IOMG is clearly in the bind, and has ever decreasing options. Their pompous rhetoric about ‘the future is bright’ and ‘let’s not talk ourselves into a recession’ seems laughable in the context of the many challenges we are currently facing. Personally, I would like our economy to diversify towards industries such as engineering, non-gambling IT and other cutting-edge technologies; industries that improve lives and/or save the planet. New science and medical research (along the lines of Dr Glover’s business), etc., would also be a brilliant way forward.

    At the conference some government ‘officials’ lamented about historic ‘missed opportunities’ such as not building more houses, not insulating more homes, etc., but their current reliance on KPMG’s glossy ‘consultants whitewash’ as a promise to deliver a ‘better’ future, is almost certainly too little too late, IMHO.

    • Like 4
  5. On 9/21/2022 at 7:45 PM, Numbnuts said:

    Ahhhh but hiding in the background is the borrowed 400 million..!! No mention if thats been used , very secretive about it aren't they. And of course, if all else fails theres always the good old NI fund! You know the one ? That's ring fenced and cant be used ....ohh wait ..

    Here is the link. Feast your eyes! Most of the money has been already spent, and spent on what I would personally describe as 'business as usual' initiatives.

    https://www.gov.im/media/1377792/sustainablebondreport-2022-digital-v42_compressed.pdf

     

  6. 21 hours ago, SleepyJoe said:


    Has research has been undertaken to determine what people do actually want if they're to live here?

    A public consultation about tinkering with our taxation system is currently underway - this has been published on the government's website somewhere and the deadline for public feedback is an early October. One of the options they are considering is to levy NI on non-employment income such as dividends and interest. At the conference one gentleman stood up and said that the fact that the IOMG are even 'considering' such an initiative was sufficient for him to already redivert some of his income from the Island.

    There was a quiet murmur around the room that any 'unfavourable' tax changes will make the IOM increasingly less attractive for businesses and presumably also individuals. This message needs to be heard 'loud and clear'. Yes, there are many great things about the Island e.g., 'personal safety', but the most important issue for business people is tax, it seems.     

  7. 16 hours ago, BriT said:

    All I have come out of the conference with is a sense that we’re totally fucked. We’re this and we’re that and actually we’re absolutely nothing of any substance. Hollow strategies delivered by load of guaranteed salary bell ends telling everyone else that they should be entrepreneurial to grow the economy while supporting a system that completely strangles everything you try to do in red tape. Next year they should offer attendees some crystal meth to take before they go in so that we’re all on the same wavelength. 

    Very succinct and sadly very accurate summary, IMHO.

    Although the IOMG’ s objective for the conference was to ‘sell’ the future goals/ targets/ aspirations (i.e.; £10b GDP, 15,000 additional residents, £200m additional Government revenue, 5,000 new jobs, £1b capital investment over 15 years), most questions from the floor were about the problems people personally face today. The most difficult of these questions were either ducted by the panellists, or given mumbling non-direct incoherent or conflicting answers. E.g.;

    • On one hand, according to Dr Alex, the Treasury is a custodian of taxpayers’ money, but on the other hand, unlike the previous approach, where Treasury had the primary responsibility for setting the budget for individual departments, this year, this responsibility appears to be being pushed out to individual departments (it seems to me that by making this strategic change Treasury has ceded their role as the ‘overall custodian of taxpayers money’).
    • Dr Alex also said that the absence of party politics on the Island enables ‘continuity/ stability’ of government policy across consecutive governments. Meanwhile, another member said that the absence of party politics makes the government’s decision-making process a lot harder and a lot longer.
    • My personal ‘favourites’ were the four talking heads from the DfE who were trying to explain to the audience why the 4-year-old agency-based structure of the DfE was more effective and efficient than the previous non-agency-based structure. I came away still not understanding why the ‘agency model’ was needed and what they all actually do.
    • A good question came from Dr Taylor (who is currently developing some kind of hydrogen-based energy technology), who asked the panel as to why they thought it was a good idea to become dependent on the private UK energy suppliers if in 18 months there could be a change in the UK government (a Labor Government was implied), which may have a different political view on ‘tax havens’. I did not hear a good answer.

    Whether people were concerned with individual issues relating to the DfE, or health, or housing, or education, or climate change, my overall vibe was that this government did not want to give specific and clear answers. This evasiveness made the IOMG look as if they were out of touch and also a bit too smug. It is unfortunate that the conference was held prior to today’s ‘emergency sitting’ and the UK tomorrow’s mini budget (one civil servant was describing how his wife needs ‘off Island retail therapy’ every few days when they go off shore - clearly, he is not terribly personally concerned about rising gas prices and is also not making the choice between heating his home and feeding his family). The IOMG’s grand plans will not be worth paper they are written on if our retail and hospitality businesses go under and the current residents start to leave the Island. Should this happen, persuading people to stay here is likely to be at least as big of a challenge as attracting new people to settle here, IMHO.  

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
  8. 5 minutes ago, english zloty said:

    Was there any mention of how much the interconnector is going to cost? Pub talk is billions and about £20k per head contribution

    Unfortunately I did not hear any details of when the interconnector will go in or how much it would cost. But given that this is going to be a major project, the cost must surely be in the millions...

  9. 6 hours ago, SleepyJoe said:


    We also need to know what adequate green credentials are to these companies

    At the conference no one articulated which ESG criteria these companies would use.

    Two other (relevant) things that I noted are:

    1. It seems that they plan a second electricity interconnector with the UK installed and operational by 2030. Once this has happened our (gas powered) power station will be switched off. Switching off the power station will result in a significant reduction in CO2 emissions and therefore significantly boost the IOM’s green profile/ credentials.

    2. The IOMG intends to cut emissions by the services sector by 30% over the next 10 years. I did not hear any quantified statements/ commitments to reducing CO2 emissions in any other sectors of our economy such as manufacturing, transport, etc.

    • Like 1
  10. 7 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

    Did he happen to mention anything about how they propose to recoup the still rising costs or is that another Great Unmentionable amongst the pigs on the wing?

    Other than saying that it will be a great asset for the Island when it is finished, he did not elaborate.

  11. My overall impression from yesterday’s sessions was that the IOMG have set out a long-term vision but the path forward, between the realities of today and their visions of the future, is muddy and unclear. E.g., it seems to me that attracting companies to the Island with ‘digital presence’ only without (many) people will not be possible under the ‘substantiality’ rules (agreed with OECD) that a company must have certain physical presence on the Island in order to be recognised for tax purposes.

    I am hoping that today’s session on ‘Sustainability of Public Finances’ with Dr Alex will be less of a talking shop and will offer some ‘actual’ facts. Speaking of facts, a question was asked about the cost of the Liverpool Dock escalating to £100m. The answer Alf gave was along the lines that through the public consultations the message from the GMP was that Liverpool Dock was what the GMP wanted and therefore Liverpool Dock is what the GMP is going to get. In other words, regardless of the cost, the Liverpool Dock just had to go ahead.

    I am also confused by some peoples’ ongoing vilification of Daphne. She is not saying anything different about climate change emergency to what anyone else who understand how critical the situation has already become is also saying (VIPs, like King Charles III and Sir David Attenborough, are saying exactly what Daphne is saying). In her slides she highlighted that although the IOM’s total polluting emissions are low, our GHG emissions per capita are one of the highest in the world. An interesting point that came up a couple of times was that many companies are adopting ESG principles which will prevent them from investing in/ existing in jurisdictions which do not have adequate green credentials. This change makes a clear link between our green agenda and our economic welfare. Although to date, the IOM has hardly suffered at all from the impact of climate change ‘extreme weather events’ - other countries are, and they are demanding action. E.g., Pakistan’s government is unequivocal in their demand for developed countries to repatriate poor countries for the damage that is being caused by climate change catastrophes such the recent devastating floods. In the UN, over next couple of days, member states will be discussing a ‘global windfall’ tax on fossil fuel companies, etc. This is a moral question as much as it is an economic one.

    Another take-away from the conference was that the UK mini budget could throw a host of spanners in the financial works of the Island. Top of that list of fears is the possibility of the UK cutting the VAT rate. Because we have the FERSA agreement, that change would have an unavoidable and serious impact on IOMG finances.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 4
    • Haha 1
  12. 8 hours ago, Zarley said:

    The finger thing is in reference to the Q Anon motto "where we go one, we go all". 

    QAnon conspiracy theorists are very dangerous in themselves and are even worse when they are Trump’s supporters (e.g., these dangerous delusionists made up some of the mob behind the 6 January Insurrection). It is easy to dismiss them as just nutcases, but these people are anything but harmless - through social media their influence has been spreading like wildfires. QAnon started life in 2017 with an insane conspiracy theory about “elite Satan-worshiping paedophiles in USA”. Then they used this conspiracy theory to try to besmirch some Democrat candidates, but since then they have gone global and unfortunately have even found a vulnerable audience in the UK. I hope that we don’t have QAnon crackpots here on the Island, although the local anti-vax crackpots have some very similar menacing tendencies.

    That said, the diatribe from homegrown right-wingers is not very far away from QAnon’s so called ‘teachings’ and ‘insights’. E.g., British right-wing rags run hate campaigns against Greta Thunberg – they portray her as a ‘bogeywoman’ - a threat to ‘the people’ and ‘our’ collective wellbeing. I note that they don’t go after Sir David Attenborough in the same visceral way, even though he is as committed to saving the planet from global warming/ climate change as she is, and says almost the same things about how urgent the situation is as she does (I wonder if Attenborough’s longstanding friendship with the late Queen is what ‘saved’ him from their vitriol). Presumably, if Prince Andrew was to marry Greta (who is about the right age), the tabloids would be fawning over her and be reporting her green credentials as quaint eccentricities befitting of her royal status.

    • Like 2
  13. 7 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

    ‘This city, is makin’ like a ghost city’, just hasn’t got the same ring to it somehow. 

    I don't know: " We built this city on Rock and Roll (e-gaming)" makes sense.

  14. 5 hours ago, Zarley said:

    Kier Starmer isn't much better (IMO) but obviously one couldn't get much worse than a Tory government led by a brainless Tufton Street puppet like Truss. 

     

    54 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

    That’s all Brexit Britain was ever to be about. The UK has become a dodgy little tax centre where anything goes as long as people make money. 

    Kier Starmer was (apparently) named after Kier Hardie, the founder of the Labor Party. I hope Sir Kier will find some inspiration from this, and start talking about British economic injustice/ inequality more frequently; i.e., Labour's bread and butter. Of course, Brexit is an albaTruss around his neck. And this is what will be so hard for Labour to do - to convince their base that Brexit is a poisonous trojan horse that is destroying Britain economically from within, whilst a few odious opportunists (I wonder if that zealous Brexiteer Sir Jim Ratcliffe has made his mind yet about moving Land Rover production plant from Wales to France?) are laughing all the way to the, probably offshore, proverbial 'bank'. 

    • Thanks 1
  15. 10 hours ago, Zarley said:

    Truss isn't intelligent enough to do any of this on her own: she's a Tufton Street puppet.

    https://99-percent.org/trussed-up/ 

    The above article lays out in clear language where she's getting her policy advice from and how the policies will fail ordinary people, and the people who will ultimately benefit. 

    https://bylinetimes.com/2022/01/18/liz-truss-the-tufton-street-candidate/

    Discusses her longstanding links to Tufton Street.

    Those are two really informative web articles about Truss and how ideologically aligned to the far right of the Tory Party she is; i.e., much more right-wing than BoJo and probably even more right-wing than Thatcher was! As Truss is clearly not ‘one of the people’, I expect her right-wing policies will lead to ‘lots of money for the rich’, ‘poverty for the poor’ and a whole lot of trouble for the UK.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2
  16. 12 hours ago, NoTailT said:

    Club for the egocentric and desperate for attention?

    You do know Josem and HM Sole didn't get elected right?

    Political outliers are always going to struggle to enthral enough of the GMP to win a seat. For me, the main concern was the mystery around the identity of the backers and, if they were elected, their true intentions.

    But would electing these two characters have been a disaster for our governance? Would they be any less capable than the current crop of MHKs? I can only guess. One thing though is clear- if Rob C gets the crucial role of the Health Minister, at this crucial time when the public wants their Minister to act wisely and decisively, then I agree with joebean - this is a huge indicator of how shallow the pool of talent in the HoK actually is. We probably all already know far too much about that reality anyway. Sad.     

  17. 15 hours ago, A fool and his money..... said:

    It amazes me how some people's blinkered view of the monarchy is of a little old lady, smiling and talking to children, completely ignoring the thousand years of imperial brutality that preceded. 

    The imperialist colonial past is often looked at with misty eyes and through the prism of dumbed-down costume dramas which bear no truth to reality. Who wants to recall the reality of the Opium wars (except the Chinese who hold this episode as an historical grievance) when the ‘opium’ of an embellished and mollycoddled history is so romanticised, seductive and convenient? A case in point is the latest William and Kate ‘jollies’ around Caribbean when they were heckled in Jamaica by the protesters who demanded “apology and repatriations for Britain’s slaving past”.

    The truth is that for many Britain’s poorest folks, historical Britain was (and sadly still is, judging by mushrooming foodbanks) a miserable wretched place with a ghastly oppressive class system - until real progress and improvements in health, education and the quality of life in general were delivered, not by the royal family (as much as they do some great charity work it is frankly a drop in the bucket), but by successive progressive governments; starting with Labour’s Attlee and friends who with a stroke of a pen transformed Britain into one of the best countries in the world to live. A country with rising living standards which we could all be proud of. E.g., without the free NHS the UK could not have become that vibrant democracy that it is, the cultural hub that enabled so many sons and daughters from working class backgrounds to get on in life, etc. I wish I could have attended Attlee’s funeral and pay my sincere respect to him.

    • Like 6
  18. 25 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

    Charles III will be a failure as a King anyway. This is a man who flies into a rage at an overly inky pen on his first day at work. Give it a few years and he’ll probably abdicate after a whole host of Commonwealth countries break away from the UK embarrassed by having such a complete knob as their head of state. 

    Charles’s “legendary sense of entitlement is being closely watched”. That said, he is a 'famous eco-warrior' who believes that the greatest threat to humanity is climate change that results from humanity’s collective relentless destruction of the earth’s natural environment - very true. Alas, the new King is full of contradictions.

    • Like 1
  19. Don't worry @A fool and his money..... we can sit this one out. According to a recent UK opinion poll, less than 50% of the under 30s believe that British monarchy should continue unabated, even the over 50s are now less convinced (not so much on moral grounds, but because Charles is not going to pay the inheritance tax is pushing their blood pressures up). Unless nuclear holocaust and/or climate change gets us all first, a British Republic is on the cards; it is only matter of time, IMHO of course.   

    • Like 3
  20. On 9/14/2022 at 10:02 AM, Asthehills said:

    I have invented a new word that I think I could sneak into people vocabulary over the next few days.

    Undignirespectful 

    It means to show your respect in an undignified and crass manner.

    My personal preference was for the TV broadcasters to set up temporary and uninterrupted ‘Red Button’ channel(s) or similar with continuous dedicated coverage (24/7) of all things Royal for those of us who have lots of time to spare. For the rest of us, we can all mourn in our own way, perhaps by going about our own business (e.g., Dougal in Father Ted used to pray to God in his sleep and that did not do him any harm).

    While the Royal pageantry goes on, the cost of living/ cost of doing business crisis are not taking a hiatus and pay ‘their’ respects. Evidently, the UK will fall into a recession due to the loss of productivity that is occurring during these 10 days, including the day of the funeral. But this temporary downturn in business activity may shave off a decimal point from inflation, not that is going to be particularly helpful with the UK energy bills - market intervention that stabilises wholesale energy prices is badly needed, and the IOM would be a beneficiary too (the UK should follow the EU’s example and whack windfall taxes on all energy producers who are making mega profits; the UK should also temporarily ban UK located oil and gas firms from selling their products into a free-market at free-market prices).  

    Post-QEII times will not be plain sailing.        

    • Like 2
  21. On 9/13/2022 at 10:22 PM, Stu Peters said:

    Clearly English isn't your first language, so well done for making SOME sense. But your grasp of global economics is flimsier than my own - this inflation and (dare I say the word) recession is absolutely NOT the fault of our government but as a result of outside forces - not least (IMO) this headlong rush to net zero and bugger the consequences. While we've been 'setting an example' and grandstanding to Greta et al the world has gone to hell in a handcart, Putin playing a role but the massive power of the seemingly untouchable energy companies, their bankers and commodity brokers being the biggest factors. Follow the money, this is going to cost the IOMG not make it any richer.

    I am not sure why the jingoistic remark “English is not your first language” was altogether necessary – is Manx as a first language okay with you? For many people not speaking English as their first language is not an intellectual handicap, as you infer, it is just something else they learn along the way. What is “clear” to me is that no matter what language a democratically elected person speaks, they must have the necessary personality traits, such as having a thick skin, a willingness to engage honestly with other peoples’ points of view and perhaps most of all to be adaptable and giving. Scolding a member of public (who is likely paying your wages through their taxes) for ‘getting on your wick’ is unprofessional and unbecoming of someone who is supposed to be a public servant - this is what MHKs are meant to do, i.e., serving the public is central to their job description. That said, our parish politicos probably can get away with offending their constituents. In the UK though, some politicians, especially those on the left, pay a much higher price for indiscretions than others do (just ask Gordon Brown about the price he paid for his careless “bigoted woman” gaffe).

    Personally, I find your thinly-veiled contempt for people who care about protecting the environment (for all species and all future generations) repellent and sadly predictable. I am disappointed that by your own admission you don’t understand “global economics” very well. Under the surface of the daily newsbeat of 'sensational news' stories, the biggest issue we face is that the Island’s finances are deteriorating and in the medium term they could become unsustainable, unless circumstances notably change for the better. The IOM is facing, and will continue to face, a number of difficult economic, financial and environmental challenges over the next two to five years. The GMP needs their politicians to be able to positively contribute to solving those challenges. If you are not fully conversant with what those challenges are, quite honestly what value can you add to the ongoing welfare of the Island?

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
  22. This whole ‘protocol’ resembles a warped ‘medieval’ costume drama, albeit much of today’s flummery are relatively recent additions to what were previously ‘subdued’ royal occasions. IMHO, it is increasingly lacking decorum and possibly good taste. I am sure that even among the most ardent Royalists there are some (for whom watching a slowly moving hearse/ coffin is more like watching a horror film) who are beginning to think that this painfully drawn-out public display is perhaps becoming to feel a bit too much like state propaganda than paying heartfelt respect; something that would be more appropriate in places like North Korea than in a modern democratic country.

    I have absolutely no problem with anyone who calls for the abolition of the monarchy. This ‘refrain’ is “as old as the monarchy itself and the ability to say these things openly in the UK is a cornerstone of our freedom of speech”. Counter to this proud tradition of Britishness, the Police’s heavy-handedness is a manifestation of our civil rights being gradually eroded. Paraphrasing the old saying: “First, they came for the Unions, then they came for anti-monarchy protesters...,” and so on.

    If the Queen was really as gracious and kind and as ‘caring for her subjects’ as we have been endlessly told she was, then surely, she would have been appalled that, all in her name, important national events have been cancelled/ postponed, and other disruptions are occurring to our day-to-day lives. This would not have been what she would have wanted?

    • Like 4
  23. And I thought our politicos were incompetent when they sunk millions into daft capital projects. It appears that the much anticipated 'Festival of Brexit' that is going to cost UK taxpayers north of £100m has been a "flop" according to the organisers. That worked well...not. 

    • Like 1
  24. 2 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

    That said if you go down the league tables to the local authorities no doubt Devon Watson will spend his day fuming (sorry making jokes) about social inequalities and boomer millionaires on Twitter though. 

    I like Devon. Do I always agree with his ‘parlance’? Of course not, but I recognise a young person who in this age of a politically apathetic electorate is passionate about his beliefs and does not squirm when he is ‘fighting’ for his cause.

    Who knows what will become of our Citizen Smith when he grows up, but for now Che’s famous quote “If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine” seems to be a true reflection how Devon presently lives his life.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...