Non-Believer Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 10 minutes ago, Hairy Poppins said: You start from scratch. You ensure it just does the essentials. You ensure that it is funded equitably. You ensure that it had little to no connection with the current IOM Government structures. It wouldn't happen. The change would have to be devised and implemented by Central Govt (DOI umbrella) with the priority being to protect their mate's jobs, if not empires, certainly in the larger LAs. Think, "The Brotherhood of Town Clerks". They've dodged even reviewing the way Rates are calculated for 50 years. They're certainly not going to contemplate something as seismic as axing their pal's empires. Then you've got their competence to look at. Look at recent electoral proposals for Ramsey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Time that La's were obliged, by central govt to make their rates charges inclusive of refuse charges?? None of this balancing of rates and refuse to give the best public 'view' of their overall charges??? Not as though the high waste charges are going to cause a reduction in the waste charges???? Amalgamate, give us the true figures!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Poppins Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 2 minutes ago, Kopek said: Time that La's were obliged, by central govt to make their rates charges inclusive of refuse charges?? None of this balancing of rates and refuse to give the best public 'view' of their overall charges??? Not as though the high waste charges are going to cause a reduction in the waste charges???? Amalgamate, give us the true figures!!! It would be an interesting exercise if we could take some kind of average property for the island and showing what it would pay in each area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 ....but if we took that 'average' that you call for, that would be an 'All Island'' rate with all the political problems that have prevented its' introduction so far? Do we wait another 20 years? Do we require LAs to be 'honest' in their presentation of their expenses??? Only then can we as an All Island rate supporter be able to persuade the cheap outliners, ie Bride that it is the fairest system for a small Island such as ours???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 hour ago, Gizo said: Where’s Rushen? to the east , and german is a bit west of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genericUserName Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 4 hours ago, Banker said: Well it’s been proposed but all the MHKs outside main towns will not support as they will lose rural vote as their rates are much less . People living in rural parishes already massively subsidise, in particular, Douglas - because they typically work at businesses in Douglas which pay rates. But they seldom use any of the facilities which the rates fund. People in rural parishes do not need a share of a bigger pot. Most of us would be fairly happy to do away with the street lighting too and pay even less. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genericUserName Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 hour ago, Amadeus said: Let’s be honest: it’s time for radical reform and to get rid of all LAs, but how do you ensure a central solution is more efficient? Strongly disagree. Smaller teams with greater autonomy and closer to a solution are invariable more efficient. Nobody believes any longer in socialist style economies of scale. Today it is all about lean. If anything - break up the LAs into smaller units. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Rates are a tax, and all taxes are in some way or other unfair - including income tax Whatever the system in place, people have become accustomed to them and adjusted their lifestyle to suit. Making significant changes to the way rates are computed may create a huge change in the rates payable for some people. After one of the pubic meetings about rates/square metre plan I spoke to Chris Thomas. My point of view was some old dear in an old Douglas terraced house, three storey, many rooms, huge area - but a very low value. If the rates were changed to per sq. meter there would be a massive increase in the amount she would pay. Thomas said, in just about these words, if she could not afford the rates that she would just have to sell. A step change in rates payable is not fair, and would affect the poorest people more than the Range Rover drivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred the shred Posted February 5 Author Share Posted February 5 Yes I can imagine Thomas saying something like that ….nothing helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StCatherine Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Refuse charges are a product of central government’s reluctance to introduce a user pays model. If it’s on rateable value you get cheaper refuse collection for living in an old house which is a load of bollocks. It still costs the same to empty a bin if you live in a corpy house or a mansion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Poppins Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 2 hours ago, genericUserName said: Strongly disagree. Smaller teams with greater autonomy and closer to a solution are invariable more efficient. Nobody believes any longer in socialist style economies of scale. Today it is all about lean. If anything - break up the LAs into smaller units. More smaller units, each with an expensive clerk and a whole load of bureaucrats... the island needs less government, not more. Where would you stop that madness, every street would have it's own bin lorry perhaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 10 hours ago, genericUserName said: Strongly disagree. Smaller teams with greater autonomy and closer to a solution are invariable more efficient. Nobody believes any longer in socialist style economies of scale. Today it is all about lean. If anything - break up the LAs into smaller units. What?? No. You can’t find enough people interested to run the LAs we have. I’ve heard the smaller teams and “we know what’s best for our town / parish” arguments before and don’t buy into it. They can’t even collect their rates properly now and there’s nothing efficient about the current system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 How many of the smaller parishes actually have teams? Often it is just a clerk, and sometimes they are part time. Don't some of them combine to provide services anyway? It would be interesting if there is a list of all LAs with the number of ratepayers and staff in each. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 9 hours ago, StCatherine said: Refuse charges are a product of central government’s reluctance to introduce a user pays model. If it’s on rateable value you get cheaper refuse collection for living in an old house which is a load of bollocks. It still costs the same to empty a bin if you live in a corpy house or a mansion. Current refuse charges are the absolute elephant in the room for all areas. We are all being hammered because of this arrangement between the incinerator operators and Govt and there is little transparency over how they are arrived at. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Buggane Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 What ever happens all LAs need disbanded and not just have Douglas is the biggest so they must know what they are doing, they don't. But they do have the upside down pyramid that government are so amored with, do not be tempted to transfer them on mass to run the new DOI department get shut and start with a clean/lean/mean housing machine. As you may be able to tell, I think the administration of DBC is bloat and waste and made up jobs to enhance personal and there fore wage uplifts and do not get me sorted on the wage the top earners who live for meeting's and not much else. 1 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.