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

Lies, damned lies & experts

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Chris Thomas said:

There was never £95 million of external debt. As stated in the newspaper, “there were two loans of £50m and £70m taken out with Barclays by an MEA subsidiary, the Manx Cable Company Ltd .... which Tynwald went on to retrospectively sanction the loans, which were refinanced by government when they became due for repayment - Treasury advancing funds to the MEA which then repaid Barclays. It is that refinancing which forms a major part of the outstanding consolidated loans fund.”

MUA has CLF loan. This internally borrowed money includes money which was used to pay off external bank loans.

Ok so it wasn’t £95m but actually £120m as you confirm, but I’m not seeing any evidence of it ever being paid off. I’m guessing Treasury ‘refinancing’ it is different to Treasury ‘paying it off’ as I’ve still seen no evidence that this unauthorized loan has ever been paid off if there’s still £270m in the CLF. So if you can, can you please confirm when this £120m unauthorized loan to Barclays was actually paid off by the entity that assumed the liability for the primary borrowing? 

Edited by MrPB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

Your link for Skelly is the same one as Bell.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

Original post now corrected.

Cheers Andy Onchan, I was trawling for that myself but you were a lot quicker than me...the references I did eventually find also pertained to the return from the Chinese expedition in September 2014, with all manner of riches and agreements claimed. Obviously with IoM Newspapers having changed hands there doesn't seem to still be anything retrievable (that I can link to) regarding Mr Skelly's edict though I can clearly remember it.

@ChrisThomas: whilst you're honouring the forum, any sign yet of the 2019 FOM/MGP visitor statistics yet please?

Edited by Non-Believer
Extra bit
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Chris Thomas said:

It is not a mess. It is sorted with a financial, business and pricing plan. And the MEA failing 15 years ago was investigated with conclusions and some action for about 8 years thereafter. What is the point of going back repeatedly?

It is a mess though Chris, that should never have happened and never needed the complex accounting now in place to sort it out. We all know this has been a huge burden on our little nation.

and it is not ‘going back repeatedly’. Individuals made this happen. The investigation was unable to levy suitable sanctions because there aren’t any on our statute books. Whilst that is the position, there is no ultimate deterrent to prevent people in public office running fast and loose. If you can work so far out of your level of authority, massively damage the reputation of your country and cause it substantial financial damage, then walk away Scott free, then there is a problem. Those massive loans were “unauthorized”. Tynwald had to legalize them. We saw a similar situation with Sefton so nothing improved.

I don’t think many would disagree. Until there are clear implications and a likelihood of going to jail if you malfease in a public office, these things will continue to happen.

Edited by Derek Flint
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's face facts here Chris, you are going to appear on this forum from time to time with "statistics". Why not just have the decency to admit the government past and present have let the voters down with their decision making and continue to do so

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Chris Thomas said:

With respect, the statutory annual earnings survey of 2000 + people is more reliable than your personal experience. But you are right that average earnings in private sector have been under pressure, although median earnings not so much, and some in the private sector have had static or falling wages. Thanks for your comment.

With respect, I don't think you understand peoples personal experiences is what  really counts,.not governments made up statistics.

i.e. Mr Thomas would this survey include all people whom receive benefits including pensioners from government, all governement workers including MHKs.

If so statistically this survey might not include any workers from the  private sector statistically. about a 1in 4 chance depending on which American reality

show this survey was based on.

 

Keeping Up with the Kardashians my guess.

 

Edited by Holte End

Share this post


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

Keeping Up with the Kardashians my guess.

Reading the above if there’s a Keeping Up With The Kardashians comparison to be made then  Mr Thomas seems to be the Caitlin Jenner of the series in being someone who politically bears little resemblance to whoever they were 5 years ago! 

  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Chris Thomas said:

Aggregated information about pay and other terms and conditions is available, as you know. 

Yeh, which means it isn't indicative of sector-wide pay rises. The figures are skewed by people at the top who are seeing increases, while people on low to medium incomes have seen their salaries stagnate to the point that they do not match inflation and are therefore actually contracting in real terms. It's disingenuous to increase public sector pay based on the very top in the private sector having increases. It's not comparing like for like.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Chris Thomas said:

With respect, the statutory annual earnings survey of 2000 + people is more reliable .......

It's not reliable at all. It's actually worthless information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Chris Thomas said:

think Minister Skelly said, when and where. 

Minister Skelly????

Like all IoMan citizens, Mr Skelly is, no better, no worse than the rest of us!

What you call him in his office is of little consequence to rest of the population who are in fact, your employers.

It is particularly galling to see a person elected to the Govt. and then, the first thing that they do, is to elevate their selves above the electorate! First you give yourselves a title, Chis Thomas MHK,, this is before you have proved yourselves in your performance of that office. Then you are referred to as, Honourable or worse, Right Honourable! We will decide whether you are honourable and right. Possibly at the next election?

You are there to represent the People, you are, if you wish to create a hierarchy, the bottom, We would be the top and you, our servants!

Skelly or Mr Skelly would suffice.

In journalism, first  referring to someone by first and surname and thereafter by surname is the normal? OK Thomas?

Edited by Kopek
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Chris Thomas said:

What is the point of going back repeatedly?

Perhaps to find and identify a guilty party?

To ensure the public  that the person who made the mistake has been identified and dealt with appropriately, fired, demoted or for an MHK, removed from all Depts and financially punished till the next election?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Kopek said:

Perhaps to find and identify a guilty party?

To ensure the public  that the person who made the mistake has been identified and dealt with appropriately, fired, demoted or for an MHK, removed from all Depts and financially punished till the next election?

Hear Hear. To glibly describe it as "going back repeatedly" is nothing more than purely symptomatic of the unaccountable attitude that exists in the Island's Public Sector.

Let us not forget what happened in this instance. A person or persons entrusted and paid by the taxpayers to manage a Public project decided on a number of things above their station. Including the taking out of illegal, unauthorised loans.

Other persons who were supposed to have oversight of aspects of said project, including the financial, also utterly failed in their duty of that oversight.

As a result, every household on this Island (and by obvious implication, every taxpaying individual), is now saddled with extra charges totalling @ £6M per annum for the next ten years at least. Some of those households could undoubtedly have made better use of their now £250 per year.

And yet, following an expensive inquiry, NOBODY was to blame for these excesses and failings of Public Duty. Not one person. There were no sanctions. Nobody stood down. No admission. No apology. Nothing. For saddling the Island's taxpayers with £6M worth of payback per year for the next decade at least. 

Remarkable. And utterly disgusting. But not surprising, given the attitude that exists. The public can cover it. Every time.

Until, as Derek Flint has suggested, an offence of Misconduct in Public Office is put on the Statute and enforced upon Politicians and Government Officers it will continue to happen. And until such legislation is raised the public will continue to regard most of our elected and their officers (and their statistics) with the total lack of faith that they do. And entirely justifiably.

Edited by Non-Believer
Typo
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the external loan ever repaid? Sorry to be pushy but no answer seems to have been forthcoming. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Grounds Keeper Willy said:

Reading the above if there’s a Keeping Up With The Kardashians comparison to be made then  Mr Thomas seems to be the Caitlin Jenner of the series in being someone who politically bears little resemblance to whoever they were 5 years ago! 

It’s probably no different to the real thing. He became attached to a couple of tits and a strange fanny. 

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...