Jump to content

Promenade - Megathread


slinkydevil
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Gladys said:

You missed my second sentence. 

And @Non-Believer my comment was tongue in cheek. 

I did read your second sentence. I know what you are trying to say but in the context of the contract it is still not correct.

The Employer (DOI) cant negotiate end dates. The project manager, and only the project manager can change the date. The date is based on completion of tasks on the programme and the estimation of time required to complete the tasks that are outstanding. The estimation of time to complete the outstanding tasks is submitted by the contractor (mostly in their bid) and changes are either accepted or rejected by the project manager based upon his engineering judgement. Certainly not because a minister says something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

Alf just needs to grow a pair. They’ve already done the Manx Care thing with the DHSC management team and there would be no better action than a Black, Robinson and Longworth triple sacking. Not only would he have the public behind him they’d probably have a street party on Lock Prom. If he was looking to get his government off on the right footing in pushing out the message that the incompetence and bungling has to stop then that’s exactly what he should do. I don’t think he has the balls though even when the public would be 100% behind him. 

It may be that he's knocked a few heads together behind the scenes but protocol dictates that it's not been public.

But if he hasn't, with Crookall coming out of the blocks with this approach he's clearly either misread the public mood or he's (Crookall) been very quickly assimilated into the DOI bloc; somebody on here a few posts back has already alluded to Crookall already having a close relationship with some of the "usual suspects", that's not a good omen.

We could be up for another 4 years and 11 months of this before the GMP are listened to?

Edited by Non-Believer
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

Alf just needs to grow a pair. They’ve already done the Manx Care thing with the DHSC management team and there would be no better action than a Black, Robinson and Longworth triple sacking. Not only would he have the public behind him they’d probably have a street party on Lock Prom. If he was looking to get his government off on the right footing in pushing out the message that the incompetence and bungling has to stop then that’s exactly what he should do. I don’t think he has the balls though even when the public would be 100% behind him. 

Yes the public would be overwhelming behind the sacking of the incompetent trio. But - balls or no balls - does the CM or DOI minister have the authority to sack them? Because if one or both of them do have that authority, why didn't it happen years ago? 

Genuine question btw. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

I did read your second sentence. I know what you are trying to say but in the context of the contract it is still not correct.

The Employer (DOI) cant negotiate end dates. The project manager, and only the project manager can change the date. The date is based on completion of tasks on the programme and the estimation of time required to complete the tasks that are outstanding. The estimation of time to complete the outstanding tasks is submitted by the contractor (mostly in their bid) and changes are either accepted or rejected by the project manager based upon his engineering judgement. Certainly not because a minister says something.

That is not what I said.  What I said is contracts can be amended or varied by  the agreement of the parties.  It is obvious that there have been amendments and  variations by the changes, delays etc that we have seen.   Nor did I say that the minister could change things on a whim or without negotiation. 

Things like impossibility of performance (something that may be very relevant here), conditional performance clauses (if X circumstances exist, or don't, then Y will happen)  force majeure clauses, variation clauses, addenda, side agreements, terms of sub-contracts and supplier contracts, can all change the contract. 

Who employs the project manager?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Zarley said:

Yes the public would be overwhelming behind the sacking of the incompetent trio. But - balls or no balls - does the CM or DOI minister have the authority to sack them? Because if one or both of them do have that authority, why didn't it happen years ago? 

Genuine question btw. 

My bet is the influence of the biggest problem, the Chief Secretary . 

Quayle was weak and only interested in ego, gongs and perception. So he wasn't going there . Protected species are CS and the Chief secretary keeps it that way . My opinion for what its worth. I do also think that these issues with points and lots of other problems along the way will be seen to be down to DOI and not Auldyn hence the reluctance to make more of a scene about it. 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Zarley said:

Yes the public would be overwhelming behind the sacking of the incompetent trio. But - balls or no balls - does the CM or DOI minister have the authority to sack them? Because if one or both of them do have that authority, why didn't it happen years ago? 

Genuine question btw. 

Consider the Chief Secretary's defence of the civil servant responsible for the discharge of pollution into Peel Bay?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Consider the Chief Secretary's defence of the civil servant responsible for the discharge of pollution into Peel Bay?

Yes that was criminal. Can't believe the CS got away with it. Boot was (IMO) also responsible for it happening in the first place, as well as the subsequent "nothing (you're permitted) to see here" response. 

The majority of the ten allegations were upheld by the independent Roberts Report, two partially. The allegation that "Mr XY" "knowingly sanctioned deliberate pollution of controlled waters", was upheld in full.

And yet nothing happened to "Mr XY". Meanwhile, Kevin Kennington (the whistle blower) was "chastised, humiliated, and regarded as a traitor" in meetings with Mr XY and "various officers" after KK made a protected disclosure to the AG. Not so protected after all, eh?

KK also made a protected disclosure to DEFA minister Boot.

The dumping occurred in 2016 and KK went to the AG when further plans were made to dredge and dump in 2017. Nothing was investigated until 2018, which produced the Roberts Report, delivered to Greenhow in March 2019.

I don't believe this report (which upheld KK's allegations, see above) has ever seen the light of day - KK certainly hasn't been permitted to see it so I doubt anyone else has been either. Perhaps Greenhow got Asford to show him how to work the shredder.

TL;DR something's rotten in the AG's office and it isn't the half-eaten butty in the back of the office fridge. IMO. 

5 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Which Civil servant is responsible for the discharge of pollution into Peel Bay. Are you referring to the Raggert PCBs or the sewage

The Ragget's PCBs dredged out of the harbour and dumped at sea in 2016 & 17 (and various times before that as well). 

Edited by Zarley
Neglected to include a second IMO disclaimer
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Zarley said:

Yes that was criminal. Can't believe the CS got away with it. Boot was (IMO) also responsible for it happening in the first place, as well as the subsequent "nothing (you're permitted) to see here" response. 

The majority of the ten allegations were upheld by the independent Roberts Report, two partially. The allegation that "Mr XY" "knowingly sanctioned deliberate pollution of controlled waters", was upheld in full.

And yet nothing happened to "Mr XY". Meanwhile, Kevin Kennington (the whistle blower) was "chastised, humiliated, and regarded as a traitor" in meetings with Mr XY and "various officers" after KK made a protected disclosure to the AG. Not so protected after all, eh?

KK also made a protected disclosure to DEFA minister Boot.

The dumping occurred in 2016 and KK went to the AG when further plans were made to dredge and dump in 2017. Nothing was investigated until 2018, which produced the Roberts Report, delivered to Greenhow in March 2019.

I don't believe this report (which upheld KK's allegations, see above) has ever seen the light of day - KK certainly hasn't been permitted to see it so I doubt anyone else has been either. Perhaps Greenhow got Asford to show him how to work the shredder.

TL;DR something's rotten in the AG's office and it isn't the half-eaten butty in the back of the office fridge. IMO. 

The Ragget's PCBs dredged out of the harbour and dumped at sea in 2016 & 17 (and various times before that as well). 

But its still happening so is someone in trouble every day

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would probably be difficult to pin the blame on any one person,or two or three even .  It would be a huge pass the parcel operation starting with the design then the contractor etc, so many people and firms involved it would be impossible to apportion blame and of course no one is ever held to account when the government is involved.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

But its still happening so is someone in trouble every day

The harbour isn't being dredged every day. Perhaps you're talking about the untreated sewage being discharged, I'm talking about the harbour and the Raggett PCBs etc which was the subject of the Roberts Report. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Leachate collected and tankered from the Raggatt site is also regularly discharged into a sewer which outfalls off the Breakwater AFAIK?

I thought they stopped that? Happy to be shown otherwise. 

ETA: not happy if they're still doing it mind, just ok with being wrong. Fucking fuming if it's still happening. 

Edited by Zarley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zarley said:

I thought they stopped that? Happy to be shown otherwise. 

ETA: not happy if they're still doing it mind, just ok with being wrong. Fucking fuming if it's still happening. 

Maybe it has stopped and certainly not before time if so, it was certainly still going on 18 months or so ago? They used to discharge it into a manhole in Mill Road IIRC, I watched the tanker there with a big hose from the back into the manhole a few times. The driver never looked very happy about it either...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zarley said:

Yes the public would be overwhelming behind the sacking of the incompetent trio.

Little bothers me sufficiently to ever join in a protest or similar.  However I would be all over a protest (riot) regarding the complete incompetence of the DOI and demanding someone in Govt attempt to sort out the shitshow.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...