Jump to content

Snuff the Windfarm


b4mbi

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Passing Time said:

quite possible the same ones that will vote in favour of this...

Most of them are gone now, sunning themselves with almost as equally large taxpayer-paid pensions and not an ounce of contrition between them.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Passing Time said:

Most but not all - there lies the danger

Personally speaking, given the mire the Island now finds itself in, I would cut the pension entitlement by 50% any Tynwald member who has retired in the last 20 years. And put those of serving members under review as well. Then they can start on reviewing the PS Pension liability. Don't say it can't be done, we have oft seen in the past the ingenuity, purpose and alacrity with which Govt can move when it suits its own benefits and purposes.

These people have got us into much of this mess with their flawed policies, indifference and incompetence, they can share some of the pain.

Call it, "Retrospective Accountability".

Edited by Non-Believer
Extra bit
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Personally speaking, given the mire the Island now finds itself in, I would cut the pension entitlement by 50% any Tynwald member who has retired in the last 20 years. And put those of serving members under review as well. Then they can start on reviewing the PS Pension liability. Don't say it can't be done, we have oft seen in the past the ingenuity, purpose and alacrity with which Govt can move when it suits its own benefits and purposes.

These people have got us into much of this mess with their flawed policies, indifference and incompetence, they can share some of the pain.

Call it, "Retrospective Accountability".

There could be some tricky legal complications on that one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Manx Bean said:

He’s basically a serial con artist.

If he is a con artist, it is not little old ladies being duped out of their football pool money. It is the political elite of the Isle of Man.

You know, people like Allinson how thinks the the Bromley Martin Ramsey Marina fantasy is worth promoting. Or the pink concrete etc. etc. etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've written IOMG press release:-

"Thank you for your proposals Mr Proffitt. We're not interested in anything you're associated with or promoting. Once bitten, twice shy."

It really is that simple.

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

3 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Is he actually asking for any money? On the surface it would appear not. However this is a PPP scheme in disguise. They would not be able to get finance for it until they had an agreement with IOMG/MUA to buy the power at an agreed rate or take over (buy) the facility once complete.

It is a way of getting funding but its a shark invested sea and government would have to employ some smart cookies to make sure we were not ripped off again

Simple, do not f*king have anyhting to do with this clown.

The whole 'would allow the Isle of Man to stop using electricity generated from fossil fuels altogether.' is BS for a start.

What we need to do is support offshore with both leasing the seabed, interconnections between UK and Ireland via  IOM (much like the gas tap off ~ only you don't want an underwater cable tap off) and build a free (literal) port service facility for the maintenance engineers. 

What we don't need is a proven failure who is still costing the taxpayer money scamming the intellectually challenged in Tynwald again. 

On a related note:  

I see we've also just signed up to the Paris agreement, I don't recall a vote on this but I stand to be corrected. https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/paris-agreement-formally-extended-to-the-isle-of-man/

Government says it means the Isle of Man’s climate action will contribute to the UK’s commitment to reduce its emissions by at least 68% on 1990 levels, by 2030.

UK CO2 emmisions = 348,920,000 T (2021) down by 38% from 561,777,000 T (1990). (Target =179,768,000T by 2030 so about 47% so far.

IOM CO2 emmisions = 672,621 T (2020)

This equates to 0.19% of the current UK total. So even if we reduces our emmisions by the equivalent amount (i.e. a further 53%) out total contribution to the Paris Agreement for the UK would be 0.19 x 0.53 =  0.1%.

Even if Mr Proffit's claim of 100% renewable and assuming the CO2 would be totally eliminated from all other forms like cement prodcution, transport etc. so we reduce from 673,621T to 0T is just under 0.2%.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Me?

No, not you personally.

UK Gov had no problems changing the pensionable age for women despite the spectre of legal challenge being raised. IoMG has never, ever had any issues with applying change for its own Tynwald benefits. These things can clearly be done if the will and backbone exists.

I wonder if anybody would actually look at anything or would it just be a case of, "It might be challenged, let's not - plus it's our own bennies too of course"

  • Thanks 2
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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