Jump to content

CrossRoss

Regulars
  • Posts

    770
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CrossRoss

  1. Metropolitan (line not police)
  2. That's stretching it a bit. He's only paid once, his director salary is paid via gassworks as per the pinewood filings. I don't know. as you don't know what is provided from Gasworks to Pinewood. It's pinewood who advise us. As for what anyones paid out of "the cottage", do you have those facts to hand, or did you make it up? ahh, that's confidential, commerciallly sensitive you would not your rivals to find out now would you? or the manx taxpayer who MIGHT be inclined to lynch people should the full scale of the debacle be known. still gettin stiffed is what the manx taxpayer does best
  3. Oh so I am advising the government to spend taxpayers money on a scheme where the government employs my company to advise myself to advise the government to spend money on my company to pay me money. And somehow the government approves this....................hmmm
  4. So clear that you have to make stuff up to make it appear true? some people get the government they deserve
  5. The point is there are clearly conflicts of interest but some people appear to be able to argue that there are not. I was trying to make the point these people seem to operate with impunity at the very heart of government. Mr Shoe made the point very well but I was the only person who liked it.
  6. Exactly, as I pointed out earlier; he gets a tiny salary compared to the other directors. This contract is effectively his salary. As a PAID Pinewood Director, Steve Christian advises that Gasworks (a company that Steve Christian solely owns) be PAID to advise us. Gasworks then advise us to hire Steve Christian as Producer of "the Cottage"*, another £multi-million flop (surprise, surprise) for which he is PAID. Is that about right? That might have been approved by the AG when he was also the Sefton secretary and the govt approved the loan to the Sefton. So obviously no conflict of interest, well no conflict in SC interests anyway.
  7. Hold on, I thought Manxforums was pro-pot, and we all agreed weed is no harm to anyone and those that grow it should be praised as freedom-fighting heroes. Now we're saying the fact someone used it should contribute towards the severity if a prison sentence? I do hope you and your ilk are not including me in the proverbial "we" Please do not presume to speak for me - I am capable of making my own views known and if you were selling your services as a PR rep I would rather not bother.
  8. carry on thinking like that and they will start calling you a conspiracy theorist. of course they have backups and copies - the information is probably so damning that there is no end to the heads that would roll if the full truth were known to the public. it is just easier to lie and cover up - if you are government who can touch you?
  9. SPQR (Senate People Que Rome)
×
×
  • Create New...