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

Privatise the Airport

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Politics has nothing to do with it.

I simply don't agree with strategic national assets being privatised. 

Ronaldsway fits right in that category. Some low level activities that require little or no training then ok, outsource them and make a saving on having easily replaceable non-public servants doing the job.

Also they could save a bit on their electricity bills by getting rid of that fucking stupid noisy helicopter ride before I do it for them!

However it's clear the airport has management "issues" that need to be addressed  - like getting a grip of their financials and having real-world projections...

When strategic national assets can not be afforded then there are only two realistic options.

#1. Privatise it and amongst other things release it from political interference and influence.

#2. Close I down.because it's unaffordable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Rog said:

 

#2. Close I down.because it's unaffordable.

Reopen Jurby and staff it with inmates, in shackles if need be :ph34r:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rog said:

When strategic national assets can not be afforded then there are only two realistic options.

#1. Privatise it and amongst other things release it from political interference and influence.

#2. Close I down.because it's unaffordable.

The clue is in the name.

A STRATEGIC national asset is one that you can't afford to do without.

So the best you can do is keep it's costings as manageable as possible and it seems here that there is scope for improvement.

Got to say you come across just like this from earlier in the thread:

On 7/9/2019 at 6:38 PM, P.K. said:

I always prefer to look at the figures first. Unlike some who think just trilling "Privatise! Privatise!" like some demented Thatcherite is going to somehow solve all the ills at Reynoldsway.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, P.K. said:

The clue is in the name.

A STRATEGIC national asset is one that you can't afford to do without.

So the best you can do is keep it's costings as manageable as possible and it seems here that there is scope for improvement.

Got to say you come across just like this from earlier in the thread:

 

I think this is the root of the problem " can't afford to do without" whilst true, is a safety net for sloppy management and practices as there will always be joe public to pick up the tab ! There are too many people on the island in various silos of Government who are supposed experts in the field on big salaries, who suddenly find themselves needing independent reports as to the state of what they are supposed to be running ! Airport management seemed to be experts in the field when spending huge amounts of money on some fanciful set of figures about expansion etc etc ! 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, P.K. said:

The clue is in the name.

A STRATEGIC national asset is one that you can't afford to do without.

So the best you can do is keep it's costings as manageable as possible and it seems here that there is scope for improvement.

Got to say you come across just like this from earlier in the thread:

 

Well Maggie politics and principles solved the problems that had drained the lifeblood from Britain to the point where if radical surgery had not taken place the patient  would have died.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rog said:

When strategic national assets can not be afforded then there are only two realistic options.

#1. Privatise it and amongst other things release it from political interference and influence.

#2. Close I down.because it's unaffordable.

Silly Rog. It is a lifeline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alf Cannan said there were NO plans to privatise it, but set up a company effectively owned by IOMG to run it more efficiently. Is Ann Reynolds still in charge - someone suggested maybe she's not?

 

Edited by Stu Peters
Fat fingers
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

Alf Cannan said there were NO plans to privatise it, but set up a company effectively owned by IOMG to run it more efficiently. Is Ann Reynolds still in charge - someone suggested maybe she's not?

 

She's too busy with the role of head taster at Morgan's pies.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

Alf Cannan said there were NO plans to privatise it, but set up a company effectively owned by IOMG to run it more efficiently. Is Ann Reynolds still in charge - someone suggested maybe she's not?

 

Bit like the Steam Packet. We could end up with quite a lot of these Govt-owned "satellite" companies if this is to be the solution to many ills?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dilligaf said:

Silly Rog. It is a lifeline.

Fine, so it's #1then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

Alf Cannan said there were NO plans to privatise it, but set up a company effectively owned by IOMG to run it more efficiently. Is Ann Reynolds still in charge - someone suggested maybe she's not?

 

So nationalize as opposed to privatize. ?  BTW, loved your bit on TH about your statue. Class and probably well deserved. Very funny :thumbsup:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rog said:

Well Maggie politics and principles solved the problems that had drained the lifeblood from Britain to the point where if radical surgery had not taken place the patient  would have died.

Lots of communities DID die.

Strange when you think the government of the day have a duty of care to ALL of their citizens.

It's almost as though the government of the day just looked out for those who voted for them and the rest could just go hang.

But, of course,  being mindful that a democracy should NEVER be a tyranny by the majority no British PM would ever let tnat happen.

Because the government of the day have a duty of care to ALL of their citizens..

Isn't that right Rog...?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, P.K. said:

Lots of communities DID die.

Strange when you think the government of the day have a duty of care to ALL of their citizens.

It's almost as though the government of the day just looked out for those who voted for them and the rest could just go hang.

But, of course,  being mindful that a democracy should NEVER be a tyranny by the majority no British PM would ever let tnat happen.

Because the government of the day have a duty of care to ALL of their citizens..

Isn't that right Rog...?

There were people who had formed communities of PEOPLE who were reliant on producing goods that cost more to produce than they could be sold for, or that could be bought in for lower cost than they could be produced for in the UK. It makes perfect sense to cut costs in business and it makes perfect sense to do the same for a nation.  The people affected were not left to starve, they were provided with the essentials by the state and were free to find work elsewhere. National interests were and are more important than spending hard working taxpayers  money subsidising moribund or dead duck industries. THAT was exercising  a real duty of care for all citizens and not just a few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2019 at 2:53 PM, Bobbie Bobster said:

Has it ever been publicly discosed whether CAT II ops would be definitively possible at Ronaldsway and if so what the cost would be? @madmanxpilot ?

They are possible. There would be a cost, although that has never been assessed as far as I know. it would be a fraction of what it cost to extend the runway a few years back with a much greater benefit..

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, madmanxpilot said:
On ‎7‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 2:53 PM, Bobbie Bobster said:

Has it ever been publicly discosed whether CAT II ops would be definitively possible at Ronaldsway and if so what the cost would be? @madmanxpilot ?

They are possible. There would be a cost, although that has never been assessed as far as I know. it would be a fraction of what it cost to extend the runway a few years back with a much greater benefit..

I am more than happy with a longer runway. The longer the better with some of the landings I have seen while working down there.:o

Share this post


Link to post
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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...