Jam_Sandwich Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Amended thanks.I have one too many in the LegCo so need some more feedback on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 The following members of Tynwald opposed the toilet tax moved by John Houghton MHK (Wiilaston and North Douglas) and seconded by David Quirk MHK (Onchan). They are Kate Beecroft MHK, Alf Cannan MHK, Brenda Cannell MHK, Zac Hall MHK, Peter Karran MHK, Bill Henderson MHK, Steve Rodan SHK, Chris Thomas MHK, and Juan Turner MLC. So from this the people that voted FOR it are: Legco Margaret Christian Robert Philip Braidwood Dudley Michael William Butt Edward Alan Crowe Alexander Frank Downie Tony Peter Wild Charles Geoffrey Corkish Michael Ronald ColemanRobert Mar Erskine Paterson House of Keys Edward Teare Richard Alexander Ronan Christopher Roy Robertshaw John Ramsey Houghton David Clifford Cretin Cretney John Philip Shimmin David Moore Anderson Graham Derek Cregeen Robert Howard Quayle David John Quirk Timothy Mark Crookall Leonard Ian Singer Allan Robert Bell Juan Paul Watterson Laurence David Skelly Philip Anderson Gawne Please correct me if I'm wrong *edited as per Roger Mexico - I'll listen to the playthrough tonight at home to re-confirm. John Quinn Removed. 9 for votes in Legco 16 in HoK I have one too many in LegCo - can anyone confirm who I've added who shouldn't be? http://www.tynwald.org.im/memoff/member/Pages/default.aspx *was tempted to remove the Lord Bishop but couldn't confirm Who is Margaret Christian? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I've just spotted an interesting addendum to an oral question from a previous Keys. This happens fairly often when a Minister (or in this case Chairman) doesn't have the information to hand: In a supplementary question from Mr Karran MHK in relation to Question No 8, I was requested to provide Honourable Members with the budgeted deficiency for the Sewerage Function for 2014/15. I am pleased to clarify the position as follows: The anticipated income generated by the Sewerage Charge in 2014/15 will be £2 million, less any discounts taken. The cost of the sewerage function in 2014/15 is budgeted to be £9.46 million as outlined below: Pay £2.01m Operating Costs £4.00m Local Authority Interest £0.17m Depreciation £3.28m Total Costs £9.46m The Authority will receive a Treasury Grant of £6.33 million and budgeted income from Communication Fees and other chargeable works of £0.46 million giving a total income of £6.79 million. The Sewerage Function is therefore budgeting a trading loss on the revenue account for 2014/15 of £2.67 million. Should Honourable Members require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely, John Houghton MHK Chairman of the Water and Sewerage Authority I'll leave it to the accountants to explore, but that Depreciation figure seems very high to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Would they not be depreciating over a ten year period? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam_Sandwich Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Who is Margaret Christian? Legislative Council The Hon Clare Margaret CHRISTIAN BSc MLCPresident of Tynwald Edited February 26, 2014 by Jam_Sandwich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Should she be voting? Isn't it normal for a chairperson to either abstain or vote against a proposal for change? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam_Sandwich Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) You're right. She only votes if a tie etc.Fixing.Should be final now Edited February 26, 2014 by Jam_Sandwich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Amended thanks. I have one too many in the LegCo so need some more feedback on that. Oh sorry, I should have spotted that. Christian as President doesn't normally vote in divisions, though presumably she has a casting vote if there is a tie. DT - she's Clare Margaret Christian. I assume J_S missed off the first name by accident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam_Sandwich Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Thanks to some feedback from Roger Mexico & Donald Trumps we have a confirmed list of who voted FOR: Legco Robert Philip Braidwood Dudley Michael William Butt Edward Alan Crowe Alexander Frank Downie Tony Peter Wild Charles Geoffrey Corkish Michael Ronald ColemanRobert Mar Erskine Paterson House of Keys Edward Teare Richard Alexander Ronan Christopher Roy Robertshaw John Ramsey Houghton David Clifford Cretin Cretney John Philip ShimminDavid Moore AndersonGraham Derek CregeenRobert Howard QuayleDavid John QuirkTimothy Mark CrookallLeonard Ian SingerAllan Robert BellJuan Paul WattersonLaurence David SkellyPhilip Anderson Gawne Again - any errors please point But I'm fairly certain it's accurate Edited February 26, 2014 by Jam_Sandwich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 at 31 March 2013 they've got fixed assets with a cost of £238m so i dont think it looks that high, roughly equivalent to depreciating over 70 years http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/water/annualreportaccounts.pdf depreciation poliy on page 25 From a chartered accountant I asked a minute ago. ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Would they not be depreciating over a ten year period? Depends what it is surely. Sewers last a long time after all - and require maintenance rather than complete replacement. But other IRIS related stuff may have a shorter lifespan. What I was thinking was that if all the IRIS work is going to be paid off over a comparatively short period, giving rise to higher sewage charges than could be justified. Then, at the end of that period, there will be a lot of surplus income around to divert to other things (MEA debt?). It really need someone to look at what accounts are available for WASA and see what it all means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxie44 Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 What a reaction. Not popular when everyone gets hit, is it ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisenchuk Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I've just spotted an interesting addendum to an oral question from a previous Keys. This happens fairly often when a Minister (or in this case Chairman) doesn't have the information to hand: In a supplementary question from Mr Karran MHK in relation to Question No 8, I was requested to provide Honourable Members with the budgeted deficiency for the Sewerage Function for 2014/15. I am pleased to clarify the position as follows: The anticipated income generated by the Sewerage Charge in 2014/15 will be £2 million,less any discounts taken. The cost of the sewerage function in 2014/15 is budgeted to be £9.46 million as outlined below: Pay £2.01m Operating Costs £4.00m Local Authority Interest £0.17m Depreciation £3.28m Total Costs £9.46m The Authority will receive a Treasury Grant of £6.33 million and budgeted income from Communication Fees and other chargeable works of £0.46 million giving a total income of £6.79 million. The Sewerage Function is therefore budgeting a trading loss on the revenue account for 2014/15 of £2.67 million. Should Honourable Members require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely, John Houghton MHK Chairman of the Water and Sewerage Authority I'll leave it to the accountants to explore, but that Depreciation figure seems very high to me. The anticipated income generated by the Sewerage Charge in 2014/15 will be £2 million,less any discounts taken. I think the discounts will only apply to people who quibble the proportionate level of charge relative to their usage and ability to pay. I seriously doubt any discounts will be offered without arguing ones own case firmly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moghrey Mie Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) And what's the cost of the Tynwald Garden Party every year? I never see it turning up in the accounts. Edited February 26, 2014 by Moghrey Mie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh Mona Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I've just spotted an interesting addendum to an oral question from a previous Keys. This happens fairly often when a Minister (or in this case Chairman) doesn't have the information to hand: In a supplementary question from Mr Karran MHK in relation to Question No 8, I was requested to provide Honourable Members with the budgeted deficiency for the Sewerage Function for 2014/15. I am pleased to clarify the position as follows: The anticipated income generated by the Sewerage Charge in 2014/15 will be £2 million,less any discounts taken. The cost of the sewerage function in 2014/15 is budgeted to be £9.46 million as outlined below: Pay £2.01m Operating Costs £4.00m Local Authority Interest £0.17m Depreciation £3.28m Total Costs £9.46m The Authority will receive a Treasury Grant of £6.33 million and budgeted income from Communication Fees and other chargeable works of £0.46 million giving a total income of £6.79 million. The Sewerage Function is therefore budgeting a trading loss on the revenue account for 2014/15 of £2.67 million. Should Honourable Members require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely, John Houghton MHK Chairman of the Water and Sewerage Authority I'll leave it to the accountants to explore, but that Depreciation figure seems very high to me. The anticipated income generated by the Sewerage Charge in 2014/15 will be £2 million,less any discounts taken. I think the discounts will only apply to people who quibble the proportionate level of charge relative to their usage and ability to pay. I seriously doubt any discounts will be offered without arguing ones own case firmly. I doubt there is any discount given for inability to pay. The discount will purely be an early settlement discount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.