Jump to content

Doitonce

Members
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Doitonce

  1. Your the psychic one, so why don't you tell me?
  2. I don't need to see, Dill - I know the facts, and I also know all of the figures. You don't, clearly.
  3. The 'truth' is it's ' a commercial secret'. If some bright spark like Dilli wants to establish facts, perhaps he should try and set something like that project up with Government - he may then understand just how incorrect his comments are. Saying that, he's never going to as he'd rather post on here, firing cheap shots at any and everyone, instead of growing a pair, getting off his backside and actually make a positive contribution to something worthwhile.
  4. Sorry Dilli, but you have no idea of the in's and out's of the deal. I can assure you it is a very, very long way from "another give away", far from it actually. You are either extremely ill informed, have an agenda against certain people, or were born an arsehole and have just grown bigger as time went by. Either way, I don't really care which of these issues you have, but whichever it is, doesn't detract from the fact that your assumptions couldn't be further from the truth.
  5. Taken from another part of this forum: "Ohh, I almost forgot, how the government are so able at contradictions - seems DOI & Treasury don't read from the same script... DoI say (FOI 624568) "I am led to believe that there is an agreement in situ whereby all contractors wishing to undertake works on behalf of the DoI must be MACCS accredited. I would like to see any supporting documentation of this relationship between DoI and MACCS (or information which otherwise prove that it is not a requirement to be MACCS accredited to undertake works on behalf of the DoI), so I
  6. Doitonce

    TT 2018

    Answer to all - because that's what protocols dictated, as has been made clear. No one is denying there is a monumental screw up by sending the bikes back to the Grandstand, no one (it appears) is supporting the decision to withhold the content of the report. What is being commented on however, is the apportioning of blame, which, according to the comments of some in this thread, is being apportioned squarely at the feet of the driver of the car, which for me, is out of order (and arguing the toss over who was behind the wheel, police or not, doesn't make a shits worth of difference to t
  7. Doitonce

    TT 2018

    This being my point. The car was responding to an incident, under instruction. Who was behind the wheel, doesn't make a difference to the end result.
  8. Doitonce

    TT 2018

    Would it really make a difference? Car heading one way, bikes other, on 'closed' roads. If the supposed 'limit' on the car was 90, and it hits a bike, sorry, the bike(r) is getting hurt. Suggestions that the car was supposedly doing over 100mph (how do witnesses know - can they tell the difference between 90mph and 100mph, without speed cameras?), with a 'non police' driver, result is still the same - bike(r) is getting hurt. I'm not excusing anything here, but finger pointing/willy waving (delete as appropriate), by people who are unaware of the facts (as they HAVEN'T seen the report)
  9. The general gist of it Gizo, is the fact that you rarely have to chase money where government is concerned, so you aren't so reliant on the general public, where a percentage can be slow to pay. For me personally, the appeal is only for a limited number of contracts, with my target being long running contracts i.e., 5 year terms where you are the sole contractor, as this assists with budgeting purposes. This combined with prompt payment is very valuable to small businesses. For me, the so called 'reputable' tag, and free sticker aren't worth a carrot - I don't need MACCS, or anyon
  10. I'll take things further again - are MACCS checking the professional qualifications of the companies on their list? Another example, on the list I have provided above, there are 6 companies that offer tree surgery to their customers, one of which being the government. The problem with this is, there are multiple 'layers' of qualifications required to work in this field. A basic chainsaw qualification does not qualify someone to climb a tree, or to dismantle a windblown tree for example, yet there are examples of members of MACCS undertaking these works on behalf of private clients, and g
  11. So, reputable tradesman ehh? I will make one example here, and whilst i'm not knocking or criticising any contractors here, can anyone tell me how a current MACCS accredited contractor (with no qualifications for this type of work, or work in this arena) was permitted to spread 100 tonnes of sand, heavily contaminated with glass onto one of the islands football pitches, leading to a significant 6 figure rebuild, ensuring the new surface was safe, and free of all glass fragments, yet not receive any sanction from MACCS, or removal from the so called 'list of reputable tradesman'.
  12. So, some MACCS members: A.M. Tree Care Ace Carpets Ltd Blastaway Ltd Castle Carpets Curtains & Blinds Chris Bell Tree Surgery Ltd Cleervu Aerial Specialists Ltd Countryside & Garden Contractors Ltd Countryside Maintenance Ltd D.G. Wood & Son Garden Maintenance Dave The White Van Man David Noble Gardening Discount Plastic Merchants How many of the above are construction companies? The list goes on - this is only a small amount of companies who do not fall under the category of construction for their core services. So
  13. Ohh the irony! Register yourself on the gov tender portal and look at how many of their non construction related tenders supposedly requires MACCS accreditation. Furthermore, take a look at the MACCS member list - you will see company make sandwiches (does constructing a sandwich class as construction?), tree surgeons, gardeners, farmers, fencing companies and various other non construction related companies. This is the whole problem with the scheme. Treasury make no ruling for MACCS accreditation, unless works are construction based. Other gov departments, say DOI, Utilit
  14. Providing it is not, by definition, Constructions works, you can challenge it, and providing you meet the financial requirement set out by Treasury, no government department can stop you from applying. For info, I carry out contract work for the government, and am not MACCS accredited...
  15. No, you don't need to be registered for gov work. Some gov departments say you do (as per above), but this exclusion based on misinterpretation of Capitol Procedure notes is discriminatory, and therefore, illegal.
  16. Ohh, I almost forgot, how the government are so able at contradictions - seems DOI & Treasury don't read from the same script... "I am led to believe that there is an agreement in situ whereby all contractors wishing to undertake works on behalf of the DoI must be MACCS accredited. I would like to see any supporting documentation of this relationship between DoI and MACCS (or information which otherwise prove that it is not a requirement to be MACCS accredited to undertake works on behalf of the DoI), so I can be fully conversant with the terms and limitations of this
  17. Its a load of absolute shite! The implementation of it in certain government departments is, as far as I can see, discriminatory, and illegal. Allow me to post an excerpt from an email to a minister regarding this scam of a set up: "We discussed various points, and where I feel the current set up is not fit for purpose, which is summarised below: The current scenario: The DoI select list for xxxxx contractors has been extended, to now expire in December 2020 - this is unfairly excluding qualified and competent contractors from securing government work, and
  18. Ballacregga - down Port Soderick way, 40 some odd acres. Owner is a multi millionaire. No stock put into the system from his land. He effectively closed off the section of the coastal walk across the stretch of coast that he occupies. Receives income from the Countryside Care scheme... and he ain't no Manxman. Meanwhile, some of the more genuine farmers, who do put stock into the system are on their arses. This is exploitation of a scheme that is there to be exploited.
  19. Doitonce

    TT 2018

    Maybe not - i'm not a TT fan myself, but this is a tragic accident where a young man has died - a little respect for a loss of life isn't a lot to ask. Whether a fan of the TT or not, one's impatience to see a road opened following a death is quite appalling really.
  20. Doitonce

    TT 2018

    When there's an accident in the TT, the potential severity of it really warrants a bit more consideration than comments like the above. Accidents in the TT are potentially life threatening - in this case, a young man, a good man has passed away. Above all else, all we should really wish for is for all riders to finish safely. RIP Dan, and my deepest condolences to your closest.
  21. The facts are as follows: There will be a 1.2m wide pedestrian footpath along the seawall side of the existing frontage - this is to be demarcated in a different colour from the roadway, which will have limited vehicular access, to those whom are permitted. This is a PROW, and is in place to allow the continuation of use of the coastal footpath (up to the landowners existing property, which the coastal footpath has to circumnavigate). The multiple access point to the beach are to be removed, aside from one, which is to be well away from the apartments, and access to the jetty will a
  22. Fair enough, Neil - i'm not going to get drawn in to an argument with you. I have made my apologies for the reference used.
  23. Wait and see, Neil - you will see exactly what I am referring to in time (even if you don't like the reference I have made). In a visible sense, that is exactly what it will appear like unfortunately. Lots of metal, and 'directed' foot traffic with zero movement outside of what is permitted/barricaded. If you are offended by the wording used, then I will apologise for this, but I will say that there is no other visible comparison that I can come up with - if you can find me something that paints a similar visual representation, by all means make a suggestion and I will happily edit
  24. Wait for the bloody big gates to be erected near the car park (check the planning application...), and then there's the restricted access. Will be just like Buchenwald!
×
×
  • Create New...