Printed (by Authority) by CORRIE Ltd., 48 Bucks Road, Douglas, Isle of Man.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF TYNWALD COURT

Douglas, Tuesday, 15th December 1998 at 10.30 a.m.

Present: The Clerk: I lay before the Court: The President of Tynwald (the Hon Sir Charles Kerruish OBE LLD (he) CP). In the Council: The Lord Fees and Duties Act 1989 - Bishop (the Rt Rev Noël Debroy Jones), the Fees and Duties (Government Fees) Order 1998 Attorney-General (Mr W J H Corlett), Hon C M Christian, [SD No 274/98] Messrs E A Crowe, D F K Delaney, J R Kniveton, E G Lowey, Hon E J Mann, Messrs J N Radcliffe and Data Protection Act 1986 - G H Waft, with Mr T A Bawden, Clerk of the Council. Data Protection (Fees) Regulations 1998 [SD No 656/98] In the Keys: The Speaker (the Hon N Q Cringle) (Rushen); Mr L I Singer and Hon A R Bell (Ramsey); Social Security Act 1982 - Hon R E Quine OBE (Ayre); Mr J D Q Cannan (Michael); Social Security Legislation (Application) (No. 8) Hon H Hannan (Peel); Mr W A Gilbey (Glenfaba); Order 1998 [SD No 640/98] Mr S C Rodan (Garff); Hon D North (Middle); Social Security Legislation (Application) (No. 9) Mr P Karran, Hon R K Corkill and Mr G T Cannell Order 1998 [SD No 641/98] (Onchan); Mr J R Houghton and R W Henderson Social Security Legislation (Application) (No. 10) (Douglas North); Hon D C Cretney and Mr A C Duggan Order 1998 [SD No 642/98] (Douglas South); Mr R P Braidwood and Mrs B J Cannell (Douglas East); Messrs J P Shimmin and A F Downie Pensions Schemes Act 1995 - (Douglas West); Hon J A Brown (Castletown); Pension Schemes Legislation (Application) (No. 5) Hon D J Gelling (Malew and Santon); Sir Miles Walker Order 1998 [SD No 643/98] CBE LLD (he) and Mrs P M Crowe (Rushen); with Prof T StJ N Bates, Clerk of Tynwald. National Health Service (Isle of Man) Act 1948 - National Health Service (Isle of Man) (General Dental Services) (Amendment) Regulations 1998 The Lord Bishop took the prayers. [SD No 554/98]

Procedural Town and Country Planning Acts 1934 to 1991 - Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) The President: Hon. members, before turning to the Order 1998 [SD No 635/98] order paper, a comment on the Douglas Local Plan. Now, in connection with that plan certain persons have signified Airports and Civil Aviation Act 1987 - their intention to appear at the bar and I think it would be Civil Aviation Acts (Application) Order 1998 therefore helpful for those persons and for members to [SD No 594/98] know that we will commence this item as soon as Civil Aviation (Subordinate Legislation) practicable after 2.30 today, if that meets with your wishes. (Application) Order 1998 [SD No 593/98]

Members: Agreed. Police Powers and Procedures Act 1998 - Police Powers and Procedures Act 1998 The President: Thank you. I would also mention that (Application to Customs and Excise) Order 1998 arrangements have been made for a photograph to be taken [SD No 624/98] of all members inthe chamber immediately following the tea break this afternoon. Sea-Fisheries Act 1971 - Sea-Fisheries (Scallop Fishing) (Amendment) Bye- laws 1998 [SD No 625/98] Papers Laid Before the Court Reports - The President: I call upon the Clerk to lay papers. Report of the Department of Home Affairs on the

Procedural Papers Laid Before the Court T256 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Employment of Security Staff at Night-Club. Is the constitutional integrity of the Isle of Man being Establishments compromised by your government participating in Report of the Ecclesiastical Committee of Tynwald meetings with the UK Government and the Channel Islands on the Draft Assistant Curates Measure (Isle of Man) to discuss the procedure for the implementation of the Report of the Select Committee of Tynwald on recommendations of the Edwards report, contrary to the Manx Patriots undertaking given by you at the June sitting o f Tynwald?

Insurance Act 1986 - The President: The Chief Minister to reply. Redomiciliation of Insurers (Designated Countries) Regulations 1998 [SD No 620/98] Mr Gelling: Mr President, there are a number of questions this morning on the subject of the proposed Currency Act 1992 - meeting with Lord Williams at which the findings of the Currency (Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Edwards review are to be discussed. I think it would be Mother Crowns) Order 1998 [SD No 609/98] helpful if I give to members the latest information that we Currency (Cat Crowns) Order 1998 have about that meeting which would allow it to be seen [SD No 610/98] in its proper context. Currency (Explorers Crowns) Order 1998 At present we have a routine arrangement under which [SD No 611/98] the Channel Islands and ourselves attend meetings at the Currency (Olympic Games Crowns) Order 1998 Home Office twice a year in January and July. At these [SD No 612/98] meetings we are provided with briefings on international Currency (Rugby World Cup Crowns) Order 1998 developments of relevance to our islands. They are useful [SD No 613/98] gatherings which allow us to update on issues arising in Europe, the OECD, World Trade Organisation, or whatever, Employment Act 1991 - and we obviously take the opportunity to pose questions Employment Tribunal - Appointment of Chairman, on the issues which arise. Deputy Chairman, Panels and Members Now, the next such meeting is on 21st January and what [SD No 657/98] is being proposed is that, bolted on at the beginning of the routine half-yearly meeting, there will be an additional item European Communities (Isle of Man) Act 1973 - when Lord Williams will chair a discussion on the Edwards Community Trade Mark Regulations 1998 review. Now, we understand that this discussion will not [SD No 672/98] extend beyond an hour and a half. Therefore, particularly in view of the amount of work that needs to be done in Government Departments Act 1987 - developing the responses to the Edwards Appointment of Members of Departments recommendations, the discussion is unlikely to go beyond Instrument 1998 [GC No 35/98] initial impressions. Appointment of Members of Departments (No. 2) The totality of the meeting will extend beyond what is Instrument 1998 [GC No 36/98] in the Edwards review and will deal with a range of external relations matters. So therefore I now turn to the first part Agricultural Holdings Acts 1969-1976 - of the question and the wording of the question does, Constitution of Land Court [SD No 634/98] therefore, I would suggest, misrepresent the purpose of the discussions with the United Kingdom Government and Merchant Shipping Act 1985 - the Channel Islands. We are not looking at the procedure Merchant Shipping (Cargo Ship Construction) for implementing the recommendations of the Edwards Regulations 1998 [SD No 603/98] report. We are, if I use the press release that came out from the United Kingdom Home Office, and I quote, ‘to examine European Communities - systematically the conclusions of the report and develop a European Communities instruments circulated plan of action to respond to them’, and I repeat, ‘to respond during October 1998 [GC No 37/98] to them’, not to enact them, ‘to respond to them ’The extent to which we adopt and implement the recommendations may well be discussed, but at the end of the day the Edwards Report - Implementation decisions will be taken by Tynwald and implementation Procedure - Constitutional Integrity - will be a matter for Tynwald. Question by Mr Cannan Therefore there is nothing in the arrangements for discussing the Edwards review which is contrary to any The President: Hon. members, we now turn to the undertaking which I gave at the June sitting of Tynwald or question paper and I call upon the hon. member for in fact at any other time. There are no constitutional Michael, Mr Cannan, to ask the question standing in his implications arising from our agreeing to participate in name. meetings with the United Kingdom Government and the Channel Islands. So therefore the answer to the question Mr Cannan: Mr President, I ask the Chief Minister: is no.

Edwards Report - Implementation Procedure - Constitutional Integrity - Question by Mr Cannan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T257

The President: A supplementary, sir? discussing the initial comments of this report. We will not be in any way agreeing to enact anything whatsoever that Mr Cannan: I thank the Chief Minister for his reply has been commented upon by Edwards' We, in fact, will and can I ask him, will he reiterate his unequivocal and, I be most interested to learn what the United Kingdom might hope, solemn undertaking that he will at all times reserve be going to do with regard to the comments that have been the constitutional integrity and independence of the Isle made about themselves. What we want to make sure is of Man? that we know what the implications are, we know what the UK are possibly going to address, so that we in turn M r Gelling: Indeed that is always there in our minds, can address the comments appertaining to the Island. Mr President, when we are discussing anything with anybody off this Island, but I want to repeat that this particular meeting in January is purely the initial responses Edwards Report - Implementation and comments. We will be deciding nothing whatsoever. If there is anything to be decided it will be decided in this Procedure - Authority of Tynwald - Court. Question by Mr Cannan

Mr Delaney: Mr President, at this additional meeting, The President: Question 2, the hon. member for as mentioned by the Chief Minister, will the Chief Minister Michael. and his team, whoever they are, take the opportunity to inform the other place’s home affairs minister that in future Mr Cannan: Mr President, I ask the Chief Minister: if they wish to do any report on the Isle of Man and send any officers to the Isle of Man of their establishment, they Does your government propose to obtain the will do it with the permission of the Chief Minister and authority of Tynwald before entering into discussions with the government of this Island and not the back-door method the UK Government and the Channel Islands on the as used on the Edwards report, so that at least the elected procedure for implementing the recommendations of the parliament of the Isle of Man will know what is going on? Edwards report?

Mr Gelling: Yes, I fear I might stray into further The President: The Chief Minister to reply. questions on the agenda paper, and that is the problem with having so many so close together, Mr President, but I can Mr Gelling: Yes, Mr President, as I said, I fear that we assure the hon. member that at all times we protect our stray from one question to the next and in this one I Island, but I have said before, and I will say again, that we basically start where I left off in my original answer to the could review anything at any time in any other country. first question and that is that I believe that the question The co-operation, however, is only achieved by talking misrepresents the purpose of the discussions because we about it and getting the remit set and I think we got off to are looking at the procedure for the implementing of the a bad start with this one and basically I think it has festered recommendations of the Edwards report. We are not to ever since. But I want to assure hon. members that basically examine systematically the conclusions, we are purely the reason for us to co-operate was that we wanted the going to respond to them. That response could very well proper and correct details of our Island to be the ones that be, ‘No, sir, we do not intend introducing that, we do not were going to be considered. intend doing the other’, but it could just as easily be, ‘We have been four years actually consulting on this particular M r Rodan: Mr President, can I ask the Chief Minister, area and because it is an international norm in business is not the purpose of the meeting on 21st January seen today we are in fact possibly going to implement this.’ somewhat differently in London and does it not go But I repeat that at the end of the day, whatever will come somewhat further than his answer this morning indicates? back to this Court. Is he aware that on 9th December Lord Williams, in a House of Lords answer, said in relation to the Channel The President: A supplementary, hon. member? Islands and the Isle of Man quite clearly, quote, ‘They have promised to co-operate with Her Majesty’s Government Mr Cannan: Mr President, I ask the Chief Minister in tightening up their internal regulation. I am chairing the again that in informing the United Kingdom Government committee and the first meeting of this co-operative what he will or will not do, surely does he not require committee will take place on 21 st January next year. ’ Does some authority of this Court to enter into those agreements this not indicate that a process has already been embarked or negotiations? upon quite clearly in the eyes of the British Government? Mr Gelling: Mr President, I would look at this as it is Mr Gelling: Mr President, what in the eyes of the part of our maturity in our constitutional position. If the British Government they have embarked on is or could be member is saying that we, as the government, cannot go entirely different to what we in the Isle of Man are and speak with another minister or another part of a embarking on, but I can assure the hon. member that the government to discuss and then come back to this situation is quite clear. There is only a very short period at parliament for the ultimate decision as to whether we do the start of the meeting in January where we will be or do not, I am dismayed because I am sure that ministers

Edwards Report - Implementation Procedure - Authority of Tynwald - Question by Mr Cannan T258 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

should speak with ministers of other governments and other Mr Cannan: I ask the Chief Minister, sir: areas because that is the way it is done. So therefore I do not agree with the hon. member, and regarding a Do you have - department of government in fact, if a department of government had to come to this parliament every time they (a) a current policy, or went to speak to their counterpart in another island, whether it be Ireland or England or wherever, it would be extremely (b) a contingency policy difficult, I would suggest, and it would bring us back into the throes of coming back to this parliament for permission (i) to counter proposals of the German Government to do just about everything. for corporate tax harmonisation within the European Union and the dependencies of its Mr Cannan: Will the Chief Minister agree his response member states; and has been trivialising the question? The question is of a constitutional matter of a very important constitutional (ii) to protect and promote the Manx finance sector nature - from attack by external sources?

The President: Hon. member, if you are posing a The President: The Chief Minister to reply. supplementary, pose it. Mr Gelling: Mr President, we have all seen the reports Mr Cannan: I am, sir. Why, in a matter of such in the UK media about German ideas for tax harmonisation importance as this, does he not think it is appropriate that and reports of the United Kingdom’s rejection of those he should have a mandate to enter into discussions and ideas. This is all very speculative and long term and appears possible agreements of such an important issue? to be nothing more than, I would suggest, an initial exchange of ideas. M r Gelling: Mr President, we do not need the authority Now, those members who attended the Euroclub last of Tynwald to talk to another government, any more than week will have heard Tony Cunningham, a Member of the the Home Office needs the prior consent of the House of European Parliament, confirm that moves towards Commons to discuss things with us. That is the situation. harmonisation of corporation tax would require unanimity What I am saying to the hon. member - and I am not making this sound as if I do not treat it seriously, I treat it extremely amongst the member states and that there are a number of seriously - is I cannot understand why the member believes member states who would vigorously oppose any such that we have to have permission from this Court to go and moves. There is therefore no prospect of harmonisation of discuss with another government. corporation tax within the EU in the foreseeable future. Now, whether or not there are moves to harmonise Mrs Canned: Mr President, will the hon. Chief Minister corporation tax in the European Union in the long term, not recognise that the people of the Isle of Man are such moves do not apply to the Isle of Man. Our extremely concerned with his apparent willingness to go relationship with the EU is determined by protocol 3, and along and have discussions with the Home Office prior to tax is not a protocol 3 matter. Therefore we could not be the people and indeed the hon. members within this Court part of any movement to harmonise taxation within the being permitted to debate? EU. Now, the issue of mounting a defence of the Island does Mr Gelling: Mr President, I am not getting through. I not, therefore, arise. The United Kingdom is aware of the cannot understand the question about the people. The relationship and it is our policy to seek to ensure that those people of this Island and the majority of the people that I who negotiate on behalf of the United Kingdom in Europe have spoken to have actually been complimentary in the remain aware and make plain the constitutional and treaty way this government has handled the Edwards report. position in any negotiations about taxation where there is (Several Members: Hear, hear.) That is number one. any suggestion by any member state that tax measures be Number two is that as far as the people of this Island are extended to the Crown dependencies. concerned, they now wish to see Edwards be something Now, I might add, in relation to the recent press reports, that has been accepted, something that we will now look that I have asked that the opportunity of this first of the at, but something on which we will not make any decisions proposed meetings on the Edwards review in January, without this Court. which will be chaired by Lord Williams, be taken for the UK representatives to give us an update on the reported Mr Cretney: Hear, hear. German moves and how they are viewed by the United Kingdom.

The President: A supplementary, sir? Corporate Tax Harmonisation - Question by Mr Cannan Mr Cannan: I thank the Chief Minister for his guidance in this matter but I would ask the Chief Minister is he aware The President: Question 3, the hon. member for that, first of all, the European scene is volatile and moving Michael. very fast and that only yesterday it is reported that the Prime

Corporate Tax Harmonisation - Question by Mr Cannan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T259

Minister of the United Kingdom has now committed representatives from that commission and myself who himself in Parliament and through the media releases to a constituted the panel. more proactive European policy and is he aware that these could have consequences for the Isle of Man? Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the Attorney-General agree with me that the fact of the matter is that it is vital M r Gelling: Yes, indeed, as I have explained, Mr that we get somebody who can understand and interpret President, regarding our position vis-à-vis the EU, I am the long-term effects of EU legislation on the Island and still very well aware of what is happening in the EU and I can he give some sort of timescale of when we will have am well aware of the trade-offs between member states somebody here in order to protect our interests before we and we have to be extremely careful to watch these in case agree with EU legislation being nodded through this Court? there are any implications for the Isle of Man, but I can assure the hon. member we do keep abreast of these issues. The Attorney-General: Mr President, yes, I was very disappointed that in fact there was no candidate of sufficient expertise who applied for the position and I know that European Legal Officer - Appointment - government generally has been very anxious to appoint a legal officer with sufficient expertise. Question by Mr Singer That process is ongoing and in fact I have had two informal interviews with applicants in the recent past and The President: Question 4, the hon. member for the matter is ongoing. I do hope that in due course we will Ramsey, Mr Singer. be able to appoint a suitably qualified applicant.

Mr Singer: Mr President, I beg leave to ask HM Mr Delaney: My question is to do with part (d) of the Attorney-General: original question on the salary scale. Would the learned Attorney convert that into pounds, shillings and pence and Have your chambers advertised for a European legal also accept my congratulations after 10 years of asking officer; and, if so, for such a post to be established?

(a) were there any suitably qualified Manx resident The Attorney-General: Mr President, as I say, the applicants, and were they interviewed; terms of appointment of the post were fixed by the Civil Service Commission but the notes I have indicate that the (b) has an appointment been made; current salary scale would lie within the scale of £23,176 up to £30,504. (c) if so, who has been appointed; and

(d) within what salary scale? Good Government of the Island - The President: The learned Attorney-General to reply. Constitutional Responsibility - Question by Mr Rodan The Attorney-General: Thank you, Mr President. The position of legal officer (European) was advertised by the The President: Question 5, the hon. member for Garff, Personnel Office in the Manx press on 25th and 30th June Mr Rodan. 1998. As only three applications were received in response to the advertisement, two of whom did not require work Mr Rodan: Mr President, I beg leave to ask HM permits, the post was advertised in the Times legal Attorney-General: appointments on 25th August 1998. Eleven applications were received in response to that advertisement. Four Does the constitutional responsibility for the good applicants were interviewed for the position at the end of government of the Island which is assumed by the United October 1998 but to date no appointment has been made. Kingdom ultimately rest with -

The President: A supplementary, sir? (a) the Crown; or

Mr Singer: Could I ask were any of the Manx applicants (b) the British Government; or interviewed in those four that were mentioned and could you also tell me who constitutes the interview panel? (c) Parliament at Westminster; and

The Attorney-General: Neither of the applicants who what is the legal basis for this responsibility? did not require work permits was interviewed, Mr President. The President: The learned Attorney-General to reply. In so far as the constitution of the panel is concerned, I think really that is a matter for the Civil Service The Attorney-General: Thank you, Mr President. It is Commission, but as it happened, there were two implicit within the question raised by the hon. member for

European Legal Officer - Appointment - Question by Mr Singer Good Government of the Island - Constitutional Responsibility - Question by Mr Rodan T260 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Garff that the United Kingdom has de facto assumed is the case, it is correct to say that the Crown has ultimate constitutional responsibility for the good government of responsibility for the good government of the Island, the the Island but that the legal basis for such assumption is other constituent parts of the British constitution, namely questionable. the executive and Parliament, may be recognised as having The constitutional position of the Island in relation to assumed in practice various responsibilities and rights in the United Kingdom is not contained within any formal relation to the Island. constitutional document or statute. Manx constitutional The question refers to the constitutional responsibility development must, therefore, be reviewed in its historical for the good government of the Island which has been and political context. Nonetheless the most recent statement assumed by the United Kingdom but, as is stated in of the relationship between the Island and the United paragraph 1498 of the Kilbrandon report, responsibilities Kingdom is to be found in part XI of volume I of the Report or obligations have their corresponding rights and in of the Royal Commission on the Constitution, known as endeavouring to answer the question from the hon. member the Kilbrandon report, published in 1973. it will be necessary for me to refer to certain of the rights Paragraphs 1360 to 1363 inclusive of the report set out which are asserted by the Crown, the United Kingdom the then existing constitutional relationships between the Government and the Westminster Parliament respectively. Isle of Man, the Channel Islands and the United Kingdom Firstly, in so far as the Crown is concerned, the most and I believe that the propositions contained within those important rights and responsibilities include (a) the right paragraphs hold good today. to grant or withhold Royal Assent to legislation; (b) the On the one hand the Crown has ultimate responsibility right to extend legislation of the Westminster Parliament for the good government of the Island but on the other, by to the Island by Order in Council if the Act specifically convention, Parliament does not legislate for the Island permits, and by convention Acts are extended only if without its consent in matters of taxation or other matters requested and then after consultation; (c) responsibilities of purely domestic concern. for defence; and (d) responsibilities for the international The issue of taxation, particularly in the context of the relations of the Island. EC code of conduct on business taxation is of great topical The legal basis for the rights and obligations of the importance and Lord Williams of Mostyn, in the House of Crown in relation to the Island must, I think, be the Act of Lords on 9th December 1998, in answering a question with Re vestment 1765 where King George ID and his successors reference to the Channel Islands said as follows: ‘The became Lords of Mann, although the basis of the constitutional arrangements between Her Majesty’s responsibilities of the Crown acting through the United Government and the Channel Islands are plain: we have a Kingdom Government for defence and the international power of last resort to interfere with their domestic matters, relations of the Island is probably more correctly which includes taxation. It would be unprecedented for categorised as a British parliamentary convention. Her Majesty’s Government to interfere with their domestic Secondly, in so far as the United Kingdom Government legislation, which includes taxation. I cannot make the is concerned, because the Crown acts through the Privy position any clearer than that. ’ Those comments in relation Council on the recommendation of ministers of Her to the Channel Islands would apply equally to the Island Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom in their and I would emphasise that so far as Lord Williams, the capacity of Privy Councillors, it may be said that to that Home Office Minister, is concerned it would be extent the responsibilities of the United Kingdom unprecedented for the United Kingdom Government to Government, with their attendant rights in relation to the interfere with the Island’s domestic legislation, including Island, derive from the Crown’s ultimate powers as Lord taxation. In fact, of course, legislation on taxation matters of Mann. has in recent times invariably taken the form of laws Finally, in so far as Parliament at Westminster is enacted by Tynwald. concerned, the most important right of the United Kingdom The question raised by the hon. member enquires Parliament is to legislate for the Isle of Man. As the judge whether the constitutional responsibility for the good of appeal Deemster Hytner stated in re CB Radio government of the Island ultimately rests with (a) the Distributors Limited, 1981-83 Manx Law Reports, at page Crown; or (b) the British Government; or (c) Parliament 396, and I quote, ‘Whilst the right of the United Kingdom at Westminster. Before I endeavour to answer those Parliament to legislate may thus be a subject for interesting questions it is, I believe, interesting to note that whereas discussion among constitutional historians and lawyers, the authors of the Kilbrandon report refer to the the issue in our view must now be regarded as academic, constitutional relationship between the United Kingdom because since the inception of the appeal court in the Isle and the islands, including the Isle of Man, Lord Williams of Man the validity of such legislation has never been of Mostyn, in his answer, refers to the constitutional questioned but on the contrary has always been recognised arrangements between Her Majesty’s Government and the and applied. It is now too late to question the right of Channel Islands, which apply equally to the Isle of Man, Parliament to legislate in this matter for the Island, at any and this, I believe, is an indication that each of the Crown, rate in this court.’ the United Kingdom Government and Parliament at As to the legal basis for the right of Parliament at Westminster has assumed responsibilities for the Island Westminster to legislate for the Island, it has been correctly according to the rights and powers which have been observed that as a result of the revestment the Crown acquired and exercised by each of those constituent parts reacquitpd feudal rights and legalities of the Lords of Mann of the British constitution. Accordingly, whilst as I believe but this did not necessarily include the capacity to legislate

Good Government of the Island - Constitutional Responsibility - Question by Mr Rodan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T261

for the Island. Whatever the correct historical analysis may As the Revestment Act, which has been quoted so be, it seemed clear that the Island has acquiesced in the commonly, is virtually the British Government making sure power of the Westminster Parliament to legislate for the that nobody can harm their economy with no real interest Island, at least since 1765 and indeed, as was pointed out for the Isle of Man, isn’t it a matter that the Isle of Man’s by Deemster Hytner, immediately subsequent to the Act welfare for the long term was sold out by the persons who of Revestment Parliament passed an Act stated to extend had acted illegally and held on to the rights and title of the to the Isle of Man relating to customs and excise. This was people of this Island? not surprising since the whole purpose of the purchase of My last question deals with the situation that we will the Island was to enable the British Government to control have with the governing power, as Mr Attorney sees it or smuggling between the Isle of Man and Great Britain. any monitor might see it. Isn’t it a fact that we have no In summary, therefore, I believe that the constitutional written constitution and if we had it would be the Manx responsibility for the good government of the Island, which people who would acquiesce to such a written constitution has been assumed by the United Kingdom, ultimately rests and may well exempt the British Government from any with the Crown, but that whilst the precise legal basis for right or title to make laws for this Island, as has happened this responsibility may be the subject of academic debate in other constitutions since the British Empire started among constitutional historians and lawyers, the collapsing? relationship between the United Kingdom and the Island continues to evolve and is conveniently summarised in the The Attorney-General: Well, Mr President, in so far paragraphs from the Kilbrandon report to which I have as the Kilbrandon report is concerned, I entirely agree that previously referred. it does not have the status of a legislative instrument and it should not be construed as such of course and I dare say M r Rodan: Mr President, I thank the learned Attorney that each party to this argument could find very helpful for his most comprehensive and interesting reply, and I passages within it to assist the respective case which is am sure the hon. Court is most grateful to him. In relation being put forward. However, it is, I think, beyond doubt to his first opening remark that the legal basis of the that it has been referred to both by this Island and by the relationship was questionable, would he consider that the United Kingdom when discussing the constitutional basis of our constitutional relationship with the United relationship between the Island and the United Kingdom Kingdom could be described, therefore, as one of and I think it is a useful starting off point. It does contain a precedent, interpretation and convention and is he saying that it is up to Manx or English case law to establish the précis in a very authoritative way, in my opinion, of the legislative competence of the UK Parliament in the Isle of views which were expressed by the people who gave Man? evidence to the commission and it, of course, contains the views of the commissioners. The Attorney-General: Mr President, that is a very I had tried to indicate in my response that the difficult question. From the limited research I have been relationship with the United Kingdom continues to evolve. able to carry out it strikes me that perhaps this area of the I entirely accept that this commission report, published as constitutional relationship between the Island and the it was in 1973, may not reflect in every respect the position United Kingdom is without the powers of the courts. I think which pertains in 1998 and it may be that if there were to that it is possible that the relationship has evolved on a be another Kilbrandon commission report, certain aspects government to government basis and I cannot say without of the views would be refined in some way, but I do not farther research and without further help from those who think that the 1998 Kilbrandon report would be far short know better than I that it is possible that this matter is of the conclusions that have been reached in the 1973 susceptible of being adjudicated in a court. report. What the Kilbrandon report did, I think, admit was that Now, in so far as the second point was concerned about it was open to the islands, including the Isle of Man, to acquiescence, of course that is an emotive word perhaps present a petition of right to the judicial committee of the but nonetheless I think it reflects the fact that the Island Privy Council if they were concerned about any matters has, and that is a fact, the Island has accepted the power of within their constitutional relationship and it may be that Parliament to legislate for the Island. it is open to the Island in the final analysis to present a petition of right to the Judicial Committee where, of course, Mr Delaney: Wrongly. Her Majesty is represented by the Privy Councillors. But I am afraid I cannot give a definitive answer to the question. The Attorney-General: In so far as the Revestment Act is concerned, I am not an historian, I am not a Mr Delaney: Mr President, can the learned Attorney constitutional expert or a constitutional historian. I am not please tell us? The Kilbrandon report is not a statutory really prepared to pass a comment as to whether the Island’s instrument, it is a reference paper commonly quoted by rights were sold out. The fact is that there was a sale to the both people on the Island and off the Island, but bears no Lord of Mann and we know that that was because of the position in law, and also, when using the words ‘by time problem that was perceived in so far as smuggling was we have acquiesced’, and the definition of ‘acquiescence’ concerned. is ‘to accept’, but in modem times the Isle of Man may not I also accept, to deal with the fourth point, that we do very well accept the situation of the status quo remaining, not have a written constitution, nor of course does the would he agree with me on that? United Kingdom, and I am quite certain that the rights of

Good Government of the Island - Constitutional Responsibility - Question by Mr Rodan T262 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 the people will be safeguarded by the hon. members in Isle of Man Contribution Agreement 1994 - this Court. Question by Mr Rodan

Mr Gilbey: Mr President, could the hon. Attorney- The President: Question 6, the hon. member for Garff, General explain to us what is a petition of right that he Mr Rodan. referred to and how we might use this to our advantage? Mr Rodan: Mr President, I beg leave to ask the Minister The Attorney-General: I knew that was a dangerous for the Treasury: thing for me to mention, Mr President. I do not think that there has been a precedent for a petition of right from this In respect of the Isle of Man Contribution Agreement Island to the Judicial Committee. I could be wrong but I 1994- am not aware of it. Of course we know, even with reference to the recent House of Lords decision concerning the recent (a) what sums have been paid by the Isle of Man extradition of the general from Chile, that sometimes it is Government to the United Kingdom in recognition open to the highest court in the land, the House of Lords o f defence, representation abroad and other services even, to have their decisions questioned and it may be that provided on its behalf by the United Kingdom a petition of right will have to be investigated by Government for each financial year since 1992; constitutional expert lawyers from outside the Isle of Man as well in consultation with myself. (b) is the agreement subject to review;

Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the Attorney-General (c) if so, when is the next review due to take place; and not agree that his responsibility is to the imperialist government and we just pick up the tab as far as it is (d) will the Isle of Man Government seek Tynwald concerned? Would he also not agree with that responsibility approval for the results of the review? that he would have to try and legitimise the bastardy as far The President: The Minister for the Treasury to reply. as the constitutional position of the Isle of Man and the United Kingdom which is purely based on military force? Mr Corkill: Thank you, Mr President. The Isle of Man Contribution Agreement 1994 provides for the payment The Attorney-General: Mr President, my duty is both of an annual amount by the Treasury that recognises to the Crown and to this Island and my oath of allegiance defence and other common services provided by the United reflects that. I have not, and I do not think my predecessors Kingdom government. Under the agreement the Isle of in office have, ever experienced a conflict of interest. If Man and the United Kingdom Governments recognise and such a conflict of interest were to arise, I am sure that would accept that the amount payable does not and will not reflect be identified and the correct steps would be taken. the range of nor the true net cost of the respective services mutually provided by the two governments. Even if it were M r Cannan: Mr learned Attorney, would you be kind possible to accurately cost these services, and I do not enough to circulate at your earliest convenience the believe that to be feasible, there remain intractable issues, verbatim of your original answer, which I believe is a legal for example over which elements of defence should or opinion of your office (Mr Delaney: Hear, hear.), which could be the subject of contribution. To circumvent any you read, sir, so that it can be carefully studied? impasse the agreement simply provides that the United Kingdom accepts the annual amount as a token of The Attorney-General: Yes, Mr President, I will be appreciation and support for the services extant in 1992. pleased to do that. The agreement provides for payments in the years ended 1993 and 1994 of £1,750,000. In the ensuing years the The President: The hon. Mr Henderson, and this is the payments were index-linked and the amounts were, for final supplementary on this question. 1995, £1,785,000; 1996, £1,834,088; 1997, £1,879,940; and for the year 1998, £1,931,638. Mr Karran: Shame. It is perhaps worth noting that the latest amount for the last financial year is still less than the last amount paid under the previous arrangements before the 1994 Mr Henderson: Thank you, Mr President. Would the agreement was negotiated. Of course that amount would Attorney-General not agree with me that in fact the way in be a great deal higher now because the previous which the Edwards report has been launched upon this contributions were from a higher base, linked to the annual Island could be seen in fact as the UK parliament legislating increases in customs and excise duties. Under the 1957 for us and a dangerous precedent could be seen in the Contribution Act and customs agreement the Isle of Man making here? Government was obliged to pay 5 per cent of its customs and excise revenues as an imperial contribution and even The Attorney-General: I do not agree, Mr President. though latterly this government unilaterally reduced this amount to 2lh per cent, the amount payable for the current Several Members: Hear, hear. year would still be in the region of £3.4 million.

Isle of Man Contribution Agreement 1994 - Question by Mr Rodan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T263

The agreement is subject to review on giving six hon. members, I will circulate a copy of that agreement so months’ notice by either government but no notice may that hon. members can see for themselves exactly what be given before the 1st April of 1999. Any variation of the details are there, and I can confirm that what the hon. agreement needs to be agreed by both governments. member has just mentioned is accurate. Since the passage of the Isle of Man Customs, Harbours and General Purposes Act of 1866 it has, in my view, taken 132 years to attain what I regard to be a fair and reasonable Government Building Contracts - Value for agreement for the basis of our financial relationship with Money - Question by Mr Karran the United Kingdom Government. Although notice for renegotiation of the agreement can be given by either side The President: Question 7, the hon. member for next April, there are no immediate plans to do so as far as Onchan, Mr Karran. this government is concerned. Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I beg to ask the Minister for The President: A supplementary, sir? the Treasury:

Mr Rodan: Thank you, Mr President. Will the Treasury (1) When did your department last review the minister take this opportunity to confirm to our critics in procedures for ensuring that the taxpayer obtains the United Kingdom in particular that the Isle of Man the best value for money in the performance of Contribution Agreement clearly demonstrates that we, as government building contracts, including the level a nation, have no intention of sponging off the UK or taking of associated professional fees; and for granted the services that they provide but in fact wish to stick with the principle of as far as possible paying our (2) will your department establish an independent way in the world and wish to be seen to do so? inquiry to examine these matters?

Mr Corkill: Mr President, the agreement which was The President: The Minister for the Treasury to reply. signed by the then Home Secretary and by Mr Gelling, our now Chief Minister and at that time the Treasury Mr Corkill: Mr President, in reply to part (1) of the minister, on behalf of the Isle of Man Government clearly question, the last published version of the Procedure Notes states that this is a contribution that the Isle of Man makes, for Capital Schemes was issued in December 1993. and so I understand the comment that the hon. member Treasury continually keeps the procedures under review makes but I for one am convinced that sponging does not and indeed, as it is about to issue new financial regulations occur. early in 1999, a specific review of the procedure notes is being undertaken as well with a view to a revised version Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, does the Treasury minister being issued in 1999. not agree that the fact of the matter is this agreement is no In August of 1995 the Standing Committee of Public more than cheap protection money from a larger country Accounts carried out a review of certain government in the adjoining isle? building contracts, so in effect the procedures were reviewed at that time and it was recommended by the Mr Corkill: Mr President, one can put a number of committee that the procedure notes be formally adopted interpretations on the word ‘cheap’. I would say that the for all government departments and boards. Therefore a agreement provides excellent value for the people of the seal of approval by independent review separate from Isle of Man in what is provided for us by the United Treasury was given at that time. Kingdom Government. It is a difficult negotiation which I As regards part (2) of the question, I do not consider think was successfully dealt with at the time and I hope this to be necessary. An internal review should suffice if will stand us in good stead for the future. the outcome is approved by Treasury and incorporated in financial regulations. Messrs Brown and Cannan: Hear, hear. Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, could the Treasury minister Mr Downie: Mr President, I would just like to ask the tell this hon. House of the extent as far as the Treasury is Treasury minister if he could confirm that a portion of this concerned with the practicalities of the building industry? contribution goes to provide very important consular and Would he also not agree that it would be a very passport services overseas for Manx people and those who worthwhile exercise to set up a working party of a cross- have a Manx passport while travelling abroad, as well as a section of people who know the realities of the building contribution to air sea rescue, fisheries protection through industry so that they can come back with a report that would the Navy, and many other resources that are provided by produce what needs to be done in order that the taxpayers the UK Government? of this Island get value for money on government projects?

Mr Corkill: That is but one element of this contribution The President: Both those question were answered in agreement, Mr President, and I think for the benefit of the previous reply.

Government Building Contracts - Value for Money - Question by Mr Karran T264 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Shaw’s Brow Car Park - Extension - member holds on that matter; that is a matter for him and Question by Mr Kniveton it is a matter for him to promote. As far as the current estimated cost of the scheme goes, The President: Question 8, the hon. member of the it is costed at October 1998 prices of £6.1 million and that Council, Mr Kniveton. would include the car parking, in effect in the order of 300 additional car parking spaces, bringing the existing 300 to M r Kniveton: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to over 600. It would also include lifts and some office space ask the Minister for Local Government and the for the staff, public conveniences and disabled facilities. I Environment: cannot give die hon. member a figure per space, but if he wishes it, of course, I can get it for him. What is the present situation regarding the extension to Shaw’s Brow car park for which planning approval was given in March 1994? Pyrolysis Plants - Report - Question by Mr Henderson The President: The Minister for Local Government and the Environment to reply. The President: Question 9, the hon. member for Douglas North, Mr Henderson. Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. The 1994 planning approval for Shaw’s Brow car park has now Mr Henderson: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave lapsed. Douglas Corporation, with the agreement of the to ask the Minister for Local Government and the Department of Local Government and the Environment, Environment: have revised and developed their proposals and should be in a position to submit a revised planning application in In view of the public interest in the matter, will you early 1999. make available the report by Professor Andrew Porteous The department and the corporation are currently and Mr Alan Blain on their visit to Aalen and Freiberg finalising a legal agreement requested by the corporation pyrolysis plants of 12th and 13th November 1998? which sets out the formula for funding the scheme by means of a deficiency payment. The President: The Minister for Local Government and Douglas Corporation have indicated that they wish to the Environment to reply. submit a petition for design costs to tender stage as soon as the legal agreement has been completed. Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. This department is pleased to note the considerable interest in this matter Mr Kniveton: Mr President, I thank the minister for and I have therefore arranged for the report to be circulated his reply but does the minister not accept that we could to members of this hon. Court. Upon receipt of the report, have another Villa Marina fiasco saga on our hands, in should any member wish any further clarification, then other words little talk and no action by the Douglas the department’s project director for the proposed Corporation, and thus they are very happy for this integrated incinerator facility (energy from waste) plant government, with the result that there is criticism from the would be pleased, of course, to see them and give them public? that further information.

Mr Quine: I can understand the hon. member’s Mr Henderson: Mr President, I thank the hon. minister sentiments, viewed against the past experiences, but the for his answer and would he include in this report a paper indications are at the present time that there is goodwill in on the recent assessment of the PEC plants in the seeking to enter into this agreement, although I would have Netherlands which show that in fact they score out better to express a view myself that I think it is unnecessary, I than mass burn incineration? think the principles for deficiency payments are well established, but that said, that is their requirement, it is Mr Quine: I will give him the complete paper as their project, and I believe and I hope that it will only be a produced to me by the two officers who went to Germany. short period of time before we are in fact in a position to I do not offer any comment on the comparative costs proceed with this project. because I do not ¿link you will find that they are in this paper in that detail. But in accordance with the offer I made, if you wish to see Mr Blain and try to get further and better Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, could the hon. minister inform particulars, I have no problem with that at all. this hon. Court, in the planning approval that was given, how much are the costs for each of the car parking spaces that are going to be in this place and wouldn’t it make more economic sense to get free transport in Douglas and Incinerator - Cost - Onchan? Question by Mr Duggan

Mr Quine: I have no comment to make on free transport The President: Question 10, the hon. member for for Douglas and Onchan. I know the position the hon. Douglas South, Mr Duggan.

Shaw’s Brow Car Park - Extension - Question by Mr Kniveton Pyrolysis Plants - Report - Question by Mr Henderson Incinerator - Cost - Question by Mr Duggan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T265

Mr Duggan: Mr President, I beg leave to ask .the to provide the link to any future district heating system; Minister for Local Government and the Environment: and the other incidental construction costs associated with housing those additional facilities within the plant. (1) Does the currently projected £37 million capital cost of the new incinerator include drainage, sewage and The President: A supplementary, sir? other site-specific costs; Mr Duggan: A supplementary, Mr President. Could I (2) if not, what will these costs be; ask the minister if he could give us a breakdown of those extra costs from £26 million up to £37 million? Because (3) does the estimated cost of £89.50per tonne o f refuse £11 million in four years is quite a considerable amount. also include the cost o f landfill facilities to dispose Could the minister also enlighten the Court as to whether o f the ash; and this figure of £37 million includes the utilisation of the heat? (4) what was the estimated cost of building the incinerator in 1994? Mr Quine: The breakdown of the costs - he is very welcome to that, sir. Hon. members of course were given The President: The Minister for Local Government and that when they took the trouble to attend the briefing. the Environment to reply. I forget the second point. The second point, if I may, sir? Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. The projected capital cost for the proposed integrated incinerator (energy Mr Duggan: Mr President, could the minister enlighten from waste) facility incorporates all identified site-specific the Court does this figure of £37 million also include the costs related to the proposed development. plant for utilisation of the heat? As advised at the department’s briefings for hon. members, the projected cost of £37.3 million is based on Mr Quine: Yes, as I have indicated, sir, there is a June 1998 capital costs and will be subject, of course, to sizeable figure in there for electricity generation. There is inflationary increases and to adjustments necessary due to also a figure in there for linkage to any district heating any exchange rate fluctuations. Of course that would be system. The actual cost of a district heating system is a common to any such contract. matter which we will be engaging in a study on very soon, The projected cost per tonne of £89.50 prepared as part and there would be further costs, of course, in terms of the of this department’s economic appraisal of the project distribution of that heat, but the connecting element is incorporates projected costs for the disposal of both bottom costed within this project. ash and flue gas treatment residues. In addition the figure incorporates treatment costs for both clinical and animal wastes which presently are not incorporated within the Island Games 2001 - Venues - department’s responsibilities for the disposal of the Island’s waste. The department is actively considering other options Question by Mr Singer for the utilisation or disposal of treatment residues from the proposed energy-from-waste facility. The President: Question 11, hon. member for Ramsey, Members may be interested to note that bottom ash is Mr Singer. already successfully recycled and utilised in construction materials and sub-bases and tarmacadam for roadworks Mr Singer: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to within the United Kingdom and that the technologies ask the Minister for Tourism and Leisure: utilised in this regard may well be applicable to the Island situation. Which sporting events will be taking place outside The estimated cost of the construction of an incinerator Douglas in the Island Games 2001 ? for municipal solid waste for the Isle of Man in 1994, which is the date to which the hon. member refers, was identified The President: The Minister for Tourism and Leisure in the Isle of Man budget in 1994-95 and that figure was to reply. £26.1 million. Again, as has been explained at the department’s briefings for hon. members, this figure related Mr Cretney: Thank you, Mr President. At the outset I only to the provision of a municipal solid waste facility would wish to make it clear that whilst in our first Island provided on a design, build and operate basis to the Games 2001 Executive Committee who are delegated with contractors’ specification. With hindsight members may responsibility for organising the games has prepared a feel that it would have been imprudent to proceed on that provisional schedule of venues, it is exactly that, a basis. provisional schedule. Discussions with the various sporting The current cost of £37.3 million includes the additional organisers are very much ongoing and the executive cost associated with the provision of whole animal carcase committee will be looking to produce a firm list of venues incinerator; clinical and offal waste stream incinerator; the by spring next year. increased throughput capacity of the proposed plant, which In deciding on the eventual allocation of venues the has almost doubled; the facility to produce electricity and executive committee will have regard to the following key

Island Games 2001 - Venues - Question by Mr Singer T266 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

factors in order of priority: ensuring that venues are suitable Games are a particular special occasion? The co-operation for competition at Island Games level and are the best of the schools could be obtained in order that the school available; ensuring that the transportation arrangements halls could be used on these occasions. for competitors, officials and spectators are feasible; Finally, could the minister tell me when he thinks the endeavouring to provide an Island-wide event. At this stage plans will be finalised, so we do know where the events it looks likely that some or all of the following sports will will be taking place? be staged outside Douglas: cycling, shooting, golf, sailing, soccer and table tennis. But I would again emphasise that M r Cretney: I think I indicated in my original answer, this is all provisional. Mr President, that we will need to present at the Gotland Games the final venues. So with that in mind it is hoped M r Singer: I thank the hon. minister for his reply and that the final decisions in respect of the various venues would he agree with me that certainly it appeared as though will be finalised by spring of next year. the decisions were already made and he has confirmed to In terms of co-operation with the Department of me that they have not been made. Education, I have already indicated that co-operation exists. Does he agree that the general public throughout the However, the games will be taking place during term time Island should be given the opportunity to see these events and we do believe that that would cause practical and that the competitors should also be encouraged to travel difficulties. around the Island and that we would have a true Island Games and not a Douglas Games?

M r Cretney: Well, can I first of all re-emphasise the Manx Cable Company Limited - point if I could, Mr President, that no final decisions have Question by Mr Henderson been made. Those decisions have to be made prior to the Gotland Games, which are the forthcoming Island Games, The President: Question 12, the hon. member for at which time the venues will be announced to the various Douglas North, Mr Henderson. participating countries at that stage. In terms of competitors and any visitors that come with M r Henderson: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave the competitors seeing all of the Isle of Man, well obviously to ask the Minister for Trade and Industry: I would wish them to do so. I think it is very important that they would take the opportunity to see outside of (1) Do you intend to table, or otherwise make available, Douglas. the user agreement with Manx Cable Company In terms of the provisional events so far outside of Douglas, we are looking at the possibilities of Ramsey Bay Limited; and for sailing, Ramsey for football, St John’s for rifle shooting, the Point of Ayre for clay shooting, Castletown for golf, (2) are you satisfied that no conflict arises, or will arise, Castletown for football, Peel for football, Santon for table in the chief executive of the Manx Electricity tennis and golf, and as yet the cycle road race has not been Authority being a director of that company? determined. I think that provides even at this stage a fair mix of our lovely Island and I am sure that those who come The President: The Minister for Trade and Industry to to visit us will enjoy it. reply.

M r Canned: Mr President, would the hon. minister Mr North: Mr President, the use of interconnector agree with me that one of the difficulties of accommodating agreement between the MEA and the Manx Cable some of the sports events outside of the capital, where Company is of a commercially sensitive nature and I am considerable investment has been made in the NSC, is that afraid will not be made generally available. in contrast to 1985 the 2001 Island Games will in fact take In response to the second part of the question, I cannot place during school term time which will preclude the use envisage why there should be any conflict of interest in of many of the out-of-town facilities? the authority’s chief executive being a director of the Manx Cable Company. The reason for the appointment of the M r Cretney: Yes, it will in particular preclude the use two MEA representatives is specifically to represent the of school halls where there is very good co-operation between my department and the Department of Education. interests of the Manx Electricity Authority, and the chief It would, I think, cause difficulties if the school halls were executive would seem to be well qualified for this role. to be used as part of the operation and so that has presented one area which has to be examined by those who are The President: A supplementary? looking for the various venues for 2001. M r Henderson: Thank you, Mr President. How does The President: The final supplementary on this one, the hon. minister’s refusal for the information on the user sir. agreement stack up with the MEA’s usual and his own policy of freedom of public information, and if he cannot M r Singer: Can I ask the minister, so far as that last come clean, why not, as an impression is being given here answer is concerned, does he not think that the Island by not giving us the fullest information?

Manx Cable Company Limited - Question by Mr Henderson TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T267

Mr North: Mr President, the Manx Cable Company is Mr Downie: Mr President, I would like to ask the owned jointly between the MEA and the National Grid minister if he would agree that under the terms of the with whom the MEA has legally binding confidentiality Companies Act a company director’s first responsibility agreements, as this is only one of many such agreements is to his company and shareholders (Mr Delaney: Hear, negotiated by the National Grid and I am sure that members hear.) and will he give this Court a categoric assurance will understand and respect the commercially sensitive today that there will not be a clash of interests when the nature of its contents. chief executive and a present board member of the MEA take up their role as directors of this cable company? Mr Delaney: Can I ask a supplementary, Mr President, in relation to the sensitive nature in relation to this limited Mr North: Mr President, as far as I am concerned, I company? How then does the minister acquaint this limited can give that assurance. I do not see any conflict of interest. company with the legal obligation on the persons who become directors of this company under company law in Mr Delaney: Mr President, in answer to the hon. confidentiality to the company and their responsibility to member of the Council Mr Waft’s question, you used the the company where we in this Court and the MEA, which words ‘you assume’. Is it fair to have entered already into is in the ownership of the Isle of Man people, will have no an agreement where you as the minister with direct access to any decisions taken in private by that limited responsibility for this large Isle of Man important company by whoever we make directors, as in the same undertaking assume anything in relation to a contract which way happened when we made directors of the Isle of Man was entered into in millions of pounds? Steam Packet Company from this Court? Mr Houghton: Hear, hear. Mr North: Mr President, there are many confidentiality agreements throughout government which are down to Mr North: Mr President, as I said, I will double-check commercial reasons, and I understand the concerns of the on it but I would be sure that the cable is leased by the hon. member but I do not have any as far as this particular MEA and therefore the use of the cable is entirely at the situation is concerned. discretion and operation of the MEA and they will take the profit from the use of the fibre optic cable. Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the minister not agree that the reason that you do not want to make it public is Mr Henderson: Mr President, could the hon. minister, because the MEA consumers are going to be paying in assuring this Court that there will be no conflict of something between £300,000 and £400,000 a year for an interest, also assure us that the chief executive of the MEA administration charge which the consumers of the Isle of will be in a non-salaried position as a director of the new Man are going to get and would he also not agree that Manx Cable Company Limited, and if not, would he those consumers and this hon. Court should have a welcome scrutiny from the Public Accounts Committee to breakdown as far as this £300,000-odd which is trying to ensure the appropriateness of these new arrangements? be legitimised at this present time? Mr North: Mr President, whereas I would be reluctant Mr North: Mr President, the agreement, which runs to to get involved in the business of a private company, I do over 200 pages, includes details of the terms under which realise the sensitivity of this issue and I shall personally the cable is to be leased to the MEA and the rental to be be seeking details of any fees which might be paid to MEA paid. It also specifies that the Manx Cable Company cannot nominees on the board of this company and shall allow any other operator other than the MEA, and the initial investigate ways in which the information can be brought term of the agreement is for 30 years and the initial rental into the public domain. is calculated on an agreed rate of return over 15 years, and the formula for this rate is in line with that allowed by the Mr Waft: Mr President, perhaps the minister might be regulator in the United Kingdom. It is a basic formula. able to clarify when he says the cable will be leased by the MEA. Does that include the optic cable will be leased by Mr Waft: Mr President, would the minister please tell the MEA and as a subsequent profit-making concern of us who are the beneficial shareholders of this company that leasing, would he confirm that it would go straight and who will benefit from the profits accrued from the into the MEA and consequently through the consumers? Is that the way it works? fibre optic cable that will be running alongside the other cable? Mr North: Mr President, the cable, as I say, is leased to the MEA by the Manx grid company. The MEA takes Mr North: Mr President, the beneficial owners are 50- all the benefit from that cable, including the fibre optic 50 between the MEA and the National Grid, and the cable therein. is leased to the MEA. Now, I do not know the exact details - again, I will check this out - but I am assuming that the Mr Lowey: Could I ask the minister, Mr President, in MEA will have control of that cable, as they are leasing it reply to an earlier supplementary? Is the minister telling from the company and will take the benefit of the fibre this Court that he has not asked for the details of salaries optic cable. or fees to be paid to the directors? He has assured this

Manx Cable Company Limited - Question by Mr Henderson T268 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Court he would take it upon himself to find out. Surely that should have been done prior to and not after the event. Mr Duggan: A supplementary. I thank the minister for Could I also press him on the point about is the Public his reply, sir, but does the minister not agree, Mr President, Accounts Committee of this Court able to inquire and to that in die last five years there has been a big demand for scrutinise this particular company? Because he says it is electricity, which is a demand more for fuel oil, more 50-50. I can understand a company having a 51-49 per emissions, and could the minister at a future date - he will cent shareholding, and that is the option we should have not have the figures today - give us some update on the gone for: holding a golden share. We have no say in the emissions of sulphur dioxide? The last emissions I got were matter of a 50-50 company. about four tonnes per day. These must have increased and I would like to have those figures in due course. Mr North: Mr President, no, I have not examined the individual salaries or whatever. My department is Mr North: Mr President, I think my hon. colleague the responsible for the policy at the MEA and I have not gone Minister for Local Government and the Environment does into that detail. receive those figures from the government laboratory and As far as the company is concerned, the MEA, certainly, if the hon. member requires those figures I will obtain them and this company, the Public Accounts Committee, I would for him. have thought, would be able to examine it if necessary. Mr Henderson: Mr President, could the hon. minister The President: A final supplementary from the hon. give an explanation to this Court, then, as to why on most member for Onchan, Mr Karran. days, or calm days, a plume can be seen from Pulrose power station and what sort of filtration equipment is used in those Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the minister not agree chimneys to try and lessen the impact on the people of that the fact of the matter is that we would not be able to Douglas? investigate it at the Public Accounts Committee if it is a company? Mr North: Mr President, the filters in those particular Would he also not agree that he has allowed a honeypot chimneys and the emissions, I think, are well known to to be there of £300,000 or more, allowed to be charged everybody in this Court in that the old plant hopefully will against the MEA consumers purely for administration and be removed and demolished as soon as possible. It is not directors’ fees and will he come clean about it? perfect. We had a debate last month on this, and that is the procedure and the sooner we get that down the better, and Mr North: Mr President, there is no case of coming that plan is under way. clean. As far as I am concerned the company is 50-50 and As far as the latest plant is concerned, that was the it is leased by the MEA, and I am unaware of this £300,000 standard approved at planning at that stage. I understand administrative fees that the hon. member is talking about. what the hon. member is saying. Everybody in this Court is not happy with emissions from old plants.

Pulrose Power Station - Smoke Emissions - Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the minister not agree that the gentleman’s arrangement we have over emissions Question by Mr Duggan as far as Pulrose power station is concerned is not good enough and would he also not agree that we are now The President: Question 13, the hon. member for spending something in the region of £800,000 a year on Douglas South, Mr Duggan. respiratory drugs in the Island and that there is a need for the Council of Ministers to bring in a Clean Air Act, as it Mr Duggan: Mr President, sir, I beg leave to ask the is not as expensive an option as it has been made out in the Minister for Trade and Industry: past?

What was the cause of the acrid black smoke Mr Duggan: They do not want to know. emissions from the chimney of Pulrose power station at 1.10 p.m. on Sunday, 6th December 1998? Mr North: Mr President, I have a lot of sympathy with the comments from the hon. member for Onchan on a Clean The President: The Minister for Trade and Industry to Air Act. The Public Health Act does exist. It needs bringing reply. in, the part about the clean air, but it will cost a lot of money. Mr North: Mr President, the time referred to by the hon. member coincided with the initial starting and Mrs Hannan: Eaghtyrane, in reply to one of the running-in at no load of one engine following overhaul. questions the Minister for Trade and Industry was critical As there were no engine defects at the time it seems of the old plant at Pulrose. Then is the minister satisfied probable that it was this operation which gave cause to a with the new power station’s emissions? short-term visible plume of smoke. Mr North: I assume the Minister for Agriculture, The President: A supplementary, sir? Fisheries and Forestry is referring to the new plant in Peel

Pulrose Power Station - Smoke Emissions - Question by Mr Duggan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T269

and that does conform with the planning and the regulations Incapacity benefit falls under the reciprocal agreement and standards laid down at that time. on social security with the United Kingdom and therefore the Island maintains the same rules and rates of the benefit Mrs Hannan: Well, does the minister accept, then, that as in the United Kingdom except that in long-term acrid black smoke emissions appear from any of the incapacity benefits in the Island they do attract the Isle of chimneys, not just the old Pulrose chimney? Man pension supplement. As part of the financial adjustments made annually under that agreement the Mr North: Mr President, I am sure that the hon. member department receives over £900,000 net settlement of long­ for Peel will have seen the odd acrid smoke. I have not, term incapacity benefits paid to Manx residents in relation but I am sure it is monitored by those whose responsibility to contributions paid in the United Kingdom. it is to monitor such things. The United Kingdom is removing barriers to work in incapacity benefit and from October the rules were changed Mrs Hannan: Could I ask the minister is he not aware, to enable someone to leave long-term incapacity benefit then, that there are emissions of acrid black smoke from to go to work, then to return to the benefit within a year if the chimney in Peel on a daily basis? the work option proves unsuccessful and return to die old rate of benefit, i.e. the higher rate and not a lower rate. Mr Duggan: What is he going to do about it? However, the department has no proposals to modify the rules relating to therapeutic work, as suggested in the Mr North: Mr President, I am unaware of acrid black question. smoke coming from the power stations in Peel on a daily The benefit is currently the subject of further reform basis and I will check up on that. proposals in the United Kingdom, geared at helping disabled people to get and retain work, and the department is currently studying those proposals with a view to Long-term Incapacity Benefit - determining their suitability or otherwise for the Island. Question by the Speaker However, piecemeal alterations would not assist in that process and in any event would be difficult to entertain so The President: Question 14, the hon. Mr Speaker. long as the benefit falls under the reciprocal agreement. A final point to note is that if a person on incapacity The Speaker: Mr President, I beg leave to ask the benefit does not have other income such as an occupational Minister for Health and Social Security: pension or a working spouse, he or she may be entitled to supplementary benefit in addition to this incapacity benefit, ( 1) How many persons are in receipt of long-term subject of course to the amount of housing costs. Not only incapacity benefit and how many are in therapeutic does that supplementary benefit reduce on the sliding scale employment; referred to by the hon. member in the question but a person may also earn entitlement to a back-to-work bonus in the (2) are you aware that the restriction on earnings event of work eventually being undertaken at more than mitigates against such persons seeking therapeutic 16 hours a week. employment; and The President: A supplementary, sir? (3) will you consider altering the regulations to enable persons on benefit who can earn more than the cut­ The Speaker: Yes, Mr President. Is the minister aware off during the permitted 16 hours of employment to that the restriction actually stops someone honestly seeking enjoy reduced benefit on a sliding scale rather than employment? Therapeutic employment, as is stated in the lose their benefit entirely? long-term incapacity regulations, is to the benefit of the individual and someone now seeking therapeutic The President: The Minister for Health and Social employment, wishing to go to work is actually stopped Security to reply. from doing so by virtue of the fact that the levels imposed of finance recoverable from their 15 hours’ work are now Mrs Christian: Mr President, at the end of November too small. there were 1,270 people in receipt of long-term incapacity Further, would the minister confirm? She was unsure, I benefit, of whom 230 are authorised to carry out therapeutic think, in the answer, because she indicated to me that it work. was a social security reciprocal agreement. I think probably The department has been conscious for some time that national insurance comes within it, so it might be a national there are some barriers in the benefits system to people on insurance benefit. You said that they could get an additional incapacity benefit returning to work. For that reason it sum via the pension element. In this instance government introduced enhancements to the disability working would be saving money if they operated a sliding scale to allowance scheme from October 1996 and further enhanced allow someone to go into therapeutic employment. it in October this year. However, the department’s principal concern is about barriers to people returning to work over Mrs Christian: Mr President, I think we need to be 16 hours a week rather than with the therapeutic work clear about the nature of what the hon. questioner regards element. as a restriction. We are talking here about therapeutic work

Long-term Incapacity Benefit - Question by the Speaker T270 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

and that is in a situation where someone is ill but their, work, they can do it on a voluntary basis, as many do. If doctor advises that it will not do them any harm but in fact they want to restrict their earnings to comply with the may assist their improvement if they do some therapeutic benefit, then that is something they can negotiate with employment. The fact that they are restricted from earning anyone who may seek to give them employment. If they more than a certain amount does not restrict their ability want to earn more than the amount, one has to ask the to do therapeutic work, and I think that is the essence of question whether or not it is appropriate for other people, the issue here. They can of course, and many do, carry out in paying their contributions, to subsidise people whose therapeutic work without being paid for it, and I suppose gross income exceeds the level at which supplementary the balance here is to be found between people undertaking benefit or disability working allowance is payable. The work to improve their health situation and people who principle in many of these benefits is adopted that we will could perhaps do a little bit more paid work but would assist those who most need help. then disqualify themselves from actually receiving a benefit Now, in any individual case we need to look at the for their incapacity because they are ill. There is a balance circumstances of the person concerned. Clearly if a person to be found in how much work you should do when you has other income, as many, many people do, I have to say are ill and how much you may want to be paid for it. it is a matter of concern to the department that the numbers I accept that the hon. member has indicated that there is of people who are claiming invalidity benefit are increasing perhaps a problem at the level at which this is set and I in a disproportionate manner over the years, many of whom will indicate that under the reciprocal agreement this will have occupational pensions and retire on those and have be changing from April next year, under the announced their benefits at the same time, and we have to be looking proposals in the United Kingdom and subject to it being at these issues to make sure that we are using the resources further agreed there, to £58 a week, an increase of some that are available to us in the best possible way. 20 per cent. Now, with regard to the comment about items 9 and 10 It is a fairly complicated area and if a claimant feels which relate to social security legislation, I am not quite that they would like to earn more it is possible that if they sure how the hon. member Mr Speaker relates those are well enough they could move to 16 hours a week or particular orders to this issue. They cannot be amended just more than 16 hours a week and then qualify for and I do not know how he envisages that vehicle being disability working allowance. On the other hand, if they useful. have other resources, that might not be as generous to them I can refer the matter back to the division in the as the invalidity benefit position. Alternatively, it is possible Department of Social Security for further consideration, that if they are high earners and seek to work for a limited but I do think that we need to be very careful about number of hours under 16 hours but at a high hourly rate considering these issues, where on the one hand if we are of return, they could by virtue of agreement with their to balance the therapeutic element of the work against a doctors say, ‘Well, I’m not signed off but I wish to work person’s ability to work either full-time or even part-time and not claim the invalidity benefit’, if it means that their under the disability working allowance scheme, it needs net return is going to be greater. It is a question for the careful examination. individual to analyse their position and seek to decide whether or not it is their income that they are concerned or The Speaker: Mr President, in response to the minister ultimately their health and the advice of their doctor. can I say that both items 10 and 11,1 think, on the order paper, the social security orders, I am aware that they The Speaker: A further supplementary, if I may, Mr cannot be amended, nevertheless they do refer to long­ President. Will the minister seriously undertake to look at term incapacity benefit changes and it is that sort of this particular problem and will she acknowledge that for instrument which we could use. a professional person, even after the uprate which comes The hon. minister says that people are wanting to earn in from April next year of £58, a professional person more than the set-down level. Can the minister take on honestly seeking work has to seek work at a little over £3 board that the individual does not want to earn more, an hour to still maintain what is their long-term incapacity individuals do not want to earn more - benefit? Could the minister equally tell me whether or not we The President: Question, sir, rather than debate. could use item 10 or 11 on the order paper later today to sort out this little problem? The Speaker: - but are precluded from therapeutic work by virtue of the fact that advertised employment, part-time Mrs Christian: Mr President, I take on board the hon. employment at professional rates, precludes them by the Mr Speaker’s comments in relation to the hourly rate. If amount because there is no sliding scale for this particular one looks at the maximum one is allowed to do before benefit? losing this benefit is 16 hours and if you equate that to the £48 maximum that you are allowed to earn before Mrs Christian: I accept the point that the hon. Mr disallowing the benefit, then it equates to £3 an hour, which Speaker says. There are no sliding scales for this benefit. is a very minimal rate, one might say. Now, the position I Advertised rates for part-time work I have taken on board would refer him to again is whether or not this work is . and acknowledged that the hourly equivalent of this being done for therapeutic reasons and if it is therapeutic particular benefit is low, but I have said before, sir, in a and to the benefit of the person’s health they can do that therapeutic sense a person may do this work without

Long-term Incapacity Benefit - Question by the Speaker TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T271

remuneration for the good of their own health and Mr Waft: Mr President, will the minister agree with furtherance of their condition and that element of the issue me that some countries show more concern than in Britain? is there for them to use. They are not restricted from doing In Sweden, for instance, fluoride toothpaste tubes carry a therapeutic work unpaid which does not take them over warning that children under four should not use them, and the limit set by the benefit. British warnings simply say that under seven should only use no more than a pea-sized piece of paste, but TV adverts show people using far more, and would the minister agree Water Supply - Fluoridation - with me that some recent studies have shown cases of dental fluorosis, mottled teeth, in children in Birmingham? Question by Mr Waft Mrs Christian: Mr President, I could sum up by saying The President: Question 15, the hon. member of the that fluoride is safe if used appropriately. Clearly the hon. Council, Mr Waft. member has indicated that the use of fluoride toothpastes can result, if used in too large a quantity, in a lack of Mr Waft: Mr President, I beg to ask the Minister for appropriate use. Health and Social Security: I think I have to say that it is generally held that fluoride is safe in terms of its use in the water supply. The benefit Has your department yet completed the of such a use is that it is produced to the community at an investigation into the practical aspects of fluoridation of appropriate dosing level and not, as he has indicated, the Island’s water supply? subject to abuse by being administered in other ways where the behaviour of the user may not be appropriate, and I The President: The Minister for Health and Social think perhaps the great strength of water fluoridation is Security to reply. that it does not require the users to consider how they are behaving, as do other ways of administering fluoride Mrs Christian: Mr President, I can advise that recently treatments. the Health Services Division has received from the Isle of I think we also have to emphasise that fluoride is a Man Water Authority copies of the final part of the naturally occurring substance in many places and had we fluoridation feasibility study report which was prepared the good fortune to have appropriate levels of fluoride in by them at the request of the DHSS. The health services our own natural supplies we would probably be grateful policy group will be considering the report at its next for that because of the benefits it produces to the meeting in January and will hopefully thereafter be able community. to make a recommendation to the department as to whether However, I think the whole of this issue is one which I fluoridation of the Island’s water supplies should or should know attracts a lot of attention from outwith the Court and not be pursued. in the community in general and I feel quite sure, whatever As requested by the Council of Ministers a paper the department’s proposals on the issue, they will be given detailing the conclusions and proposals of the department serious consideration by the Council of Ministers and will will then be submitted for their consideration before any have eventually to be endorsed by this Court. further action is taken towards introducing fluoridation. Mr Downie: Mr President, would the minister not agree The President: A supplementary, sir? that the Isle of Man for whatever reason took a common- sense approach and allowed the consumer to have choice Mr Waft: Thank you, Mr President. Will the minister with regard to beef on the bone and are we not in a similar agree with me that fluoride as provided by fluoridation is situation where it is up to the consumer now to purchase a toxic substance and that hydrofluoric acid which is added toothpaste with fluoride in order to prevent dental caries to drinking water in some countries is a toxic waste rather than have fluoridation inflicted on the entire commonly obtained from smoke stacks or fertiliser population through the water supply whether they want it factories, and would the minister agree with me that or not? whereas dental fluorosis is easily recognised, the skeletal involvement is not clinically obvious until advanced stage Mr Gilbey: Hear, hear. of crippling fluorosis and early cases may be misdiagnosed as rheumatoid or osteoarthritis? Mrs Christian: Mr President, I do not wish to embark on a debate on the particular issue this morning and I do Mrs Christian: Mr President, there are many not agree with the hon. member but that will be a matter substances which taken in the right quantity are benign which the Court will decide ultimately. but if taken in excessive quantities are toxic, water being one of them. The position that the hon. member has indicated with regard to fluorosis is one, I am quite sure, is taken into Manx Education Policy - Adoption of UK consideration when coming to any conclusion about the Initiatives - Question by Mr Karran safety or otherwise of fluoridating the water supply. I am sure that my department will be acting on the best possible The President: Question 16, the hon. member for medical advice in determining their policy on this issue. Onchan, Mr Karran.

Water Supply - Fluoridation - Question by Mr Waft Manx Education Policy - Adoption of UK Initiatives - Question by Mr Karran T272 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I beg to ask the Minister for would realise that the professional teaching organisations Education: are consulted regularly and are consulted in every change. They insist on being consulted and they are on a regular Before adopting United Kingdom initiatives as basis by the department continuously. aspects of Manx education policy, with whom does your department consult and from which bodies does it seek Mr Cannell: Would the hon. minister, Mr President, approval? not agree with me that one of the benefits the Isle of Man has enjoyed is a stable system of education where it has The President: The Minister for Education to reply. regularly and thoroughly declined to adopt some of the more cranky ideas of education (Mr Delaney: Hear, hear.) Dr Mann: Thank you, Mr President. Education policy which my fellow Onchan colleague has referred to as being has been built up over a period of time and has been the norm in the UK and which now are being abandoned moulded by the Isle of Man Government policies, the Isle for a return to just such a method as the Isle of Man has of Man Board of Education representing the people adhered to with great success? specifically on educational matters, the professional officers of the department, and the local, United Kingdom, Mr Cannan: Hear, hear. European and now increasingly world dimensions of education. Dr Mann: Mr President, in anticipation of some of the Policy also has to be informed by and responsive to supplementaries I tried to construct a list of the differences changes in society, teaching and learning methods, and they are so long that I would not like to bore the Court standards of achievement reached and comparative with the details but I will most certainly supply them to costings for the service, all within the Island, the United any member who wishes. Kingdom, Europe and world settings. In summary the main factors in formulating these policies are the Isle of Man Education Act, the Isle of Man Select Committee on a Minimum Wage - Government through its policies published in the policy document, the Department of Education in which Tynwald Final Report - Question by Mr Singer is represented by its members, the Board of Education with the directly elected education members, the educational The President: Question 17, the hon. member for professional officers of the department, the professional Ramsey, Mr Singer. education scene, and statistics and costs over the western world and Europe. The Department of Education consults, Mr Singer: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to therefore, with all of those participants and takes note of ask the Chairman of the Select Committee on a Minimum all the factors influencing educational change. No UK, Wage: European or worldwide initiative is taken up without information and consultation with all the participants. The When do you expect the Select Committee on a Isle of Man educational policies are different to the United Minimum Wage to table a final report? Kingdom’s and to a different agenda. The President: The hon. member for Rushen, Mrs The President: A supplementary, sir? Crowe.

Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the Minister for Mrs Crowe: Thank you, Mr President. I am very Education not agree that it would benefit if that list was to pleased to report that the select committee have finally include professional teaching organisations to be consulted finished their deliberations and that we are hoping to as far as any changes are concerned for new initiatives in present our report at the February sitting of this hon. Court. Manx educational policy, and is it not a fact, Minister for Thank you, Mr President. Education, that you are bringing in initiatives now following blindly the United Kingdom that they are just about to change to do what you are presently doing in Manx Select Committee on schools because you have got it right over here and the Ministerial Government - Report - adjacent island has got it wrong, and will he investigate my claims and will he also investigate the possibility of Question by Mr Quine bringing in the professional educational bodies within the Island so that they are consulted as far as any new initiatives The President: Question 18, the hon. member for Ayre, are concerned? Mr Quine.

Dr Mann: I feel, Mr President, that the questioner, in Mr Quine: I beg leave to ask the Chairman of the Select spite of the fact he was a member of the department for Committee of Tynwald on Ministerial Government, sir: many years, does not understand the Manx educational system (Mr Cannan: Hear, hear.) or the Manx educational When does the Select Committee on Ministerial policies (Mr Cannan: Hear, hear.) because if he had he Government expect to report?

Select Committee on a Minimum Wage - Final Report - Question by Mr Singer Select Committee on Ministerial Government - Report - Question by Mr Quine TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T273

The President: The hon. Mr Speaker to reply. ‘We could in fact do exactly the same in the United Kingdom, in Jersey, in Gibraltar or wherever we The Speaker: Yes, Mr President, the answer is that as wish to review their regulatory systems, and that is yet I do not know when it will report. However, I would what is happening now. The United Kingdom wish certainly give the undertaking to this Court that it is the to map out and review our regulatory systems of committee’s intent to report before the next summer recess. this Isle of Man?’ When we were appointed in February of Tynwald this year I can tell this hon. Court that the file now contains (2) Does this indicate the Edwards review - that we have considered previous committees’ reports, we (a) to have been purely an information-gathering have considered Tynwald debates, the Chief Minister’s exercise; seminar which was held last January, the results from that meeting, and so far have considered evidence from 18 (b) to have been conducted with the constitutional members and former members. authority as would a review by the Isle of Man I am conscious that there should not be a long delay, Government into the regulatory systems of the especially as we have another committee sitting in parallel United Kingdom, Jersey or Gibraltar; and discussing the power and duty of the Legislative Council. therefore

(c) to have been conducted by the United Kingdom Select Committee of Tynwald on the Petition as if it were a foreign territory? for Redress of Grievance of Mrs Joan Mann The President: The Chief Minister to reply. - Report - Question by Mrs Cannell Mr Gelling: Mr President, part (1) of the question The President: Question 19, the hon. member for accurately reproduces from the Report of Proceedings of Douglas East, Mrs Cannell. Tynwald Court part of what I said in response to a supplementary question in the Court on 16th June last. All Mr Quine: If I may ask a supplementary, sir. that I was endeavouring to say was that any government can initiate a review into anything it wishes. We could The President: No supplementary. review the regulatory systems in the UK, Jersey, Gibraltar and in turn the UK could review systems in France, Mrs Cannell: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to Germany or the United States. There are no constitutional ask the Chairman of the Select Committee of Tynwald on implications which arise simply from the decision to the Petition for Redress of Grievance of Mrs Joan Mann: undertake a review. There is nothing implicit in the decision to initiate a review that the jurisdiction being reviewed When does the Select Committee of Tynwald on the will co-operate. In our case we decided to co-operate because in our view it was in our interests to actually do Petition for Redress o f Grievance of Mrs Joan Mann expect so. to report? Now, part (a) - plainly the Edwards review has not purely been an information-gathering exercise. There are The President: Mr Karran. suggestions to be considered by the Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey and indeed the United Kingdom and it is valuable Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, the select committee hopes to have these suggestions. to present its report in the February 1999 sitting of Tynwald Now, (b) and (c) part of the question - plainly also it Court. would be wrong to suggest that the Isle of Man is a sovereign state in the way that the United Kingdom is or that the United Kingdom is indeed a foreign territory. Edwards Review of Financial Legislation Now, the key issue is how we respond to the review because the United Kingdom represents us internationally and Regulations in the Crown Dependencies and as we had confidence in our regulatory arrangements - Implications - Question by Mr Rodan we agreed to co-operate. It was a piece of administrative co-operation, not a constitutional confrontation. The President: Question 20, the hon. member for Garff, Mr Rodan. The President: A supplementary, sir?

Mr Rodan: Mr President, I beg leave to ask the Chief Mr Rodan: Mr President, would the Chief Minister Minister: agree that if we were to do a mapping exercise into the regulations of Jersey, Gibraltar or wherever and then follow (1) In answer to a question at the June sitting of up the findings with talk of co-operating over the Tynwald concerning the Edwards Review of conclusions, meetings about progress and implementing Financial Legislation and Regulations in the Crown the findings, then those countries would simply tell us Dependencies, did you state - where to get off because it was none of our business?

Select Committee of Tynwald on the Petition for Redress of Grievance of Mrs Joan Mann - Report - Question by Mrs Cannell Edwards Review of Financial Legislation and Regulations in the Crown Dependencies - Implications - Question by Mr Rodan T274 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Did his analogy in June 1998 not clearly imply that the The President: A supplementary, sir? Edwards review into us was done with as much authority as the government of Timbuctoo, but would the Home Mr Rodan: Mr President, can I ask the Chief Minister Office not disagree with him that there is no constitutional if he would agree that just as Chancellor Brown’s threat of overriding authority into the subject matter of the review? the veto with the EU confirms that the UK regard their tax matters as a domestic issue, so are our tax matters a The President: I do not know whether, Chief Minister, domestic issue? But is he not concerned that just as the you are in a position to reply in respect of the Home Office. UK are within their constitutional rights to map out and review our financial regulations, they could if they wished, Mr Gelling: No, I cannot, but certainly the question if under sufficient international pressure to do so, do the can be asked. But certainly, Mr President, in taking the same for the Crown dependencies on tax matters? Haven’t questioner’s first part of the question, I would suggest that we set a huge precedent in our constitutional relationship, in many ways there has been fairly close co-operation which is all about precedent, exposing us to possible policy between the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man over quite intervention in the future whenever this is expedient to the a number of years. Although we are in competition with UK? each other, it is often the way that it is deemed to be the thing to do to have certain regulations so that in fact the Mr Gelling: Mr President, I repeat again that it would Crown dependencies, as we are, are seen as the best be unprecedented for the United Kingdom to legislate for offshore jurisdictions. So often there is this review of each others’ situations regarding regulation and there is co­ the Isle of Man on taxation and other domestic matters operation. without the agreement of this Manx Government. But certainly whether or not the Home Office would Now, basically, having said that, we would have to be agree with the statement, that is something I will have to totally independent before I could make a statement as I ask them in January. have just said yes without any qualifications, but certainly the situation as I see it is the Edwards review has not in Mr Delaney: Mr President, where you state we could any way set any precedent with regard to our tax matters in fact do exactly the same in the United Kingdom, in in the Isle of Man and our domestic situation. Jersey, in Gibraltar or wherever we wish to review their regulatory systems would the Chief Minister agree with Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the Chief Minister not me we would certainly not do it the same way by telling agree that it is up to the individuals in this Court as far as the chief executive officer of the Treasury and your chief the protection of the Isle of Man is concerned and whether executive officer not to inform you or the Treasury we have the backbone in Tynwald not to sell the Island Minister, and where would you think such a request would short, and would he also not agree it is imperative that we take any other jurisdiction? cannot allow this Ihiam-lhiat-ism we are with the Isle of Man one minute and we are Manx one minute and the Mr Gelling: Indeed, Mr President, it would have to be next minute we are UK, and it will be a matter of this hon. done in a different way and I would suggest it might not Court will have to protect its position and its people and always be co-operated with either. develop its own backbone if we are not to see an intrusion as far as our sovereignty is concerned?

Mr Gelling: Mr President, discussion we will have and Domestic Taxation - Constitutional we can without prior authority but the final decision is Arrangements - Question by Mr Rodan within this Court of Tynwald.

The President: Question 21, the hon. member for Garff, Mr Henderson: Mr President, would the Chief Minister Mr Rodan. not agree with me that we are halfway to having a legislative precedent set with the Edwards review and in Mr Rodan: Mr President, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister: fact that there is a danger of the undermining of the confidence in the finance sector of the Island in that we Are you satisfied that the existing constitutional should be sending out far stronger signals? arrangements allow for Tynwald Court’s unfettered legislative competence, and for government’s full executive Mr Gelling: The answer is no, sir. authority, overall areas o f domestic taxation? The President: The Chief Minister to reply. Report of the Review of Financial Regulations in the Crown Dependencies - Mr Gelling: Yes, Mr President, the answer to the question is an emphatic yes, subject to just two provisos: Home Office Meetings First, any primary legislation relating to taxation does - Question by Mr Rodan require Royal Assent, and second, in relation to indirect taxation we are of course bound by the terms of the The President: Question 22, the hon. member for Garff, Customs and Excise Agreement. Mr Rodan.

Domestic Taxation - Constitutional Arrangements - Question by Mr Rodan Report of the Review of Financial Regulations in the Crown Dependencies - Home Office Meetings - Question by Mr Rodan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T275

Mr Rodan: Mr President, I beg leave to ask the Chief going down there to discuss the normal six-monthly Minister: meeting agenda items of external and international affairs, and I have said before that bolted on is a discussion on a In the proposed meetings to discuss the Report of review that has just taken place, taking some 10 months, the Review of Financial Regulations in the Crown between the islands in the Channel Islands, ourselves and Dependencies with the Home Office, will you seek prior the United Kingdom. There are parts in that review which confirmation from the Home Office - comment upon areas in the United Kingdom, ourselves and the Channel Islands. The discussion will be around (a) that the representatives of the Isle of Man our responses to them, nothing whatsoever to do about Government will be treated on equal terms with implying that we will actually implement them, and that the other participants, including representatives is the point. We are going down to talk about it. We are not of the United Kingdom; and going down to make any decisions.

(b) that the United Kingdom Government does not Mr Cannell: Mr President, a supplementary if I may. claim an overriding responsibility and power in May I inform the Chief Minister that as recently as last the areas of policy and legislation covered by Thursday, when questioned by myself in the Palace of the report? Westminster, the MP Mr Austin Mitchell said, when asked about the Edwards report, ‘That is only the start’, and is The President: The minister to reply. that not symptomatic of the attitude of some of the members down in London, while we do accept the assurance that Mr Gelling: Again, Mr President, I repeat I think there the team which will meet with the Chief Minister and the is a danger of members attaching too great an importance Treasury minister may be differently disposed? to the forthcoming discussions on the Report of the Review of Financial Regulations in the Crown Dependencies. I Mr Gelling: In reply to the hon. member, we all have say again we are not approaching these discussions as some our mavericks and he is one of them and he is just one of sort of showdown or trial of strength where there are to be them, Mr President, and we are in constant correspondence winners and losers. with Mr Mitchell trying to furnish him with what is correct We have just come through, and I repeat again, and proper and what is happening in the Isle of Man successfully come through, a very exhaustive review of because he was very, very badly informed prior to this our regulatory arrangements here for our finance industry. recent correspondence and I would suggest that no matter Now, we have put a lot into that review in terms of work what happens and what comes out of anything of the and effort. Now, the Home Office, no doubt, will also have Edwards review Mr Austin Mitchell has his own agenda. received a bill for the work that they have carried out. There are findings and recommendations for all of us to consider Mr Crowe: Mr President, would the Chief Minister and I would suggest that it is perfectly natural at the end of agree that the Edwards review largely gave the finance the exercise that we should sit down together and review sector in the Isle of Man a clean bill of health and those findings, and I would say again there is nothing implementation of some of the recommendations can only sinister in that. be good for the Island? There is also nothing implicit in the forthcoming discussions that we are to be treated as inferior or that the Mr Gelling: Yes, indeed, at our presentation at the United Kingdom is threatening us. Museum when we came out with the review, Mr President, We meet the UK Government regularly on a variety of it was quite clearly stated at that time that if the international issues and there is no need on either side to set down norm in doing business throughout the world looks upon preconditions. I would suggest we can work together us that we should introduce some of the perhaps legislation perfectly well within the norms of the constitutional that we have been consulting upon for the last four years, framework and there is no necessity for the sort of that is something we will consider, and obviously I have preliminaries suggested in the question. to agree with the hon. member that we have come out of this review exceptionally well and we can use that review The President: A supplementary, sir? for the benefit of this Island to market it as a top-drawer jurisdiction. Mr Rodan: Mr President, if there is nothing sinister, and I accept the Chief Minister’s statement in that regard, The President: The final supplementary on this one, then surely it is perfectly reasonable to ask the Home Office the hon. member for Onchan. to confirm before the meetings that they claim no overriding responsibility in terms of implementing the Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the Chief Minister not findings of the review and surely the Home Office, if they agree that when going down to talk with the British Home have no sinister claims over us, would have no reason to Office his position is weakened when his top officers, his refuse a request for such confirmation? Attorney-General, his Chief Secretary, his government treasurer should have their responsibility directly to himself Mr Gelling: I am sorry, Mr President, I do not know as the Chief Minister and to the democratically elected what we are really looking for confirmation on. We are government, and does he not also agree that there is an

Report of the Review of Financial Regulations in the Crown Dependencies - Home Office Meetings - Question by Mr Rodan T276 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

important principle which needs to be established that we local authorities on an individual basis where guidance or should not be sending our civil servants at the top to the advice is sought. In recent months one of the department’s adjacent island to be trained in the ways of the United senior officers has visited several local authorities to Kingdom and to their loyalty and not to ours? discuss different aspects of recycling. This department has given consideration to financial Mr Gelling: Mr President, I do not question the assistance to local authorities in establishing civic amenity information and the advice we get from our top civil sites for community use. This has encouraged recycling, servants and our legal advisers. They are there to advise though more work needs to be done. The southern site is us. As politicians it is up to us how we actually treat that operating successfully and the western site was opened information and that advice, and I would suggest to the earlier this year. Sites for the north and the east are planned hon. member that that is how it is in fact applied. so that all local authorities will be served by similar facilities. This hon. Court will be aware that the department Manx Recycling Forum - supports the recycling of ferrous metals, aluminium, glass, paper, batteries and waste oil at a significant financial cost. Recycling and Composting Initiatives - Our commitment to recycling and to working in Question by Mrs Cannell conjunction with the local authorities to this end is therefore clear and will continue. Before committing money to any The President: Question 23, the hon. member for scheme, however, we must be sure that the scheme is Douglas East, Mrs Cannell. justified on a cost-benefit basis and is sustainable.

Mrs Cannell: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to The President: A supplementary, hon. member? ask the Minister for Local Government and the Environment: Mrs Cannell: Thank you, Mr President. Can I ask the hon. minister with regard to the Manx Recycling Forum - Following the establishment of the Manx Recycling and he was kind enough to give us the date of their very Forum, will your department give full support and first meeting - is it proposed that this forum continues to encouragement to local authority recycling and composting meet in its present form? How often would the department initiatives? envisage such meetings taking place, and with regard to initiatives and full support and encouragement, which the The President: The Minister for Local Government and minister has indicated he is prepared to consider, has he the Environment to reply. considered an increase in budgetary provision towards helping establish recycling initiatives and composting Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. The Manx initiatives for local authorities? Recycling forum held its inaugural meeting, under the chairmanship of my departmental colleague Mr Downie, Mr Quine: As I have indicated, sir, the forum has met on 30th October 1998. The composition of the forum once and will meet again in February and it will meet of includes representatives from the private sector and from course as frequently as is necessary. The more initiatives, certain local authorities and it was agreed at the first the more proposals that come forward for discussion, meeting that notes of each meeting will be made available obviously the more frequently it will meet. There is no not only to those who are represented on the forum but to difficulty in calling reasonably frequent meetings. all local authorities in the Island. It was further agreed that As regards the composition of the forum, it will evolve, the forum should invite proposals and views from any local I am sure. We have a membership of that forum for the authority for discussion by the forum. time being. It is private sector, it is public sector, and Much of the first meeting was given to discussion on depending upon how it plots its course and what matters composting, and the forum will welcome to its next come forward for discussion, clearly there can be some meeting a guest speaker who will assist in consideration change in membership, there can be some people in of this subject and the next meeting is to be held on 5th attendance on occasions to offer advice and assistance. February 1999. Budgetary provision, of course, will be dealt with in The department looks forward to receiving the ordinary way. Each year we will look towards what recommendations from the forum in due course for initiatives we wish to establish or to continue and we will composting and any other initiatives which may be seek budgetary provision for those initiatives. I do not see surfaced and they will certainly consider their that as being a stumbling block. What I do see as being an implementation. issue to be considered on an annual if not a more frequent As indicated in the 1998 policy report, the department basis, possibly in relation to each initiative, is this question will look favourably upon any recycling scheme which of cost-benefit, whether that represents a proper would bring net environmental benefit at affordable cost. expenditure of public funds in relation to what can be In other words recycling and reuse strategies must represent achieved. a sensible use of public funds. Just one further comment, if I may. We have to remind Apart from the Manx Recycling Forum the waste ourselves, I think, quite frequently that recycling in the operations management unit will be pleased to respond to context of our Island situation is quite different from what

Manx Recycling Forum - Recycling and Composting Initiatives - Question by Mrs Cannell TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T277

is the situation which exists across and as a consequence It is certainly for this department to field initiatives and in particular, I think, of that we have to look towards to try to develop initiatives for recycling, subject to the markets for what we are going to recycle and the costs of qualification that I have spelt out. I am not in the business sustaining those markets because we have found in recent of putting money down a drain. It has to stack up in cost- times - and I can give the hon. member particulars of this benefit terms. There has to be a net environmental benefit. - that recycling markets, if they are not collapsing, are on Subject to those considerations, I will exercise all possible a very precarious basis. initiatives to get as much recycling done as possible. The other point that the hon. member raises is of course Mrs Crowe: Mr President, would the minister agree whether or not private companies would be better that the southern amenity recycling facility has been a positioned to stimulate recycling on the Island. My victim of its own considerable success? We now need experience has been - and I am sure from the records and further expansion, we could utilise a composting unit, but I know from the records it has been the experience of my his department seems reluctant to give any help to the predecessor - that that is not so. We are dealing here on the facility until such time as local government reform has Island with very small quantities. We are dealing here with taken place, even though our facility is successfully very heavy transportation costs in terms of getting materials managed by a joint authority board who manage it most on and off the Island, and the interest by and large is not successfully, but they do seem to feel there is a degree of there. At this moment, for example, we are in the middle reluctance from your department for support. of consideration as to how we are going to prop up the scrap metal market and that is going to, in all probability, The President: I am not quite sure of the question being involve a doubling of the subsidy for that because the posed there but you may respond, sir. market is not there and that is in the hands of private companies, but they will continue, they will certainly Mr Quine: Well, I certainly agree with the hon. member remain in these markets as long as they are profitable, but that the southern centre has been a success and I am pleased given the worldwide markets, the national markets, they that that is the case, and I am sure it can be developed and are only profitable with heavy subsidies and there has to composting is one of those areas which we would be be a point at which it does not make sense to go beyond pleased to see developed down there, as in other areas. those subsidies because there are other more cost-effective I see no problem in terms of developing further that and indeed environmentally friendly alternatives. centre or attaching to it, should I say, a prerequisite that So we will exercise all possible initiative. I have no there should be local government reform. I think these two concerns at all in terms of what we should be achieving. matters can run in tandem. They are not essentially We want to maximise recycling. But the fact remains we interrelated and I am not aware of any stipulation by the have to live in the real world and our Island situation is department, certainly not at departmental level or decidedly different. ministerial level, and my department colleagues have One further point, if I may, just in case hon. members certainly, I am sure, not been involved in such discussions are left feeling that perhaps we are doing a little less than which have said that there will not be improvements until our neighbours, I have told this hon. Court before that we there is local government reform. That is not the issue. are recycling almost twice as much as the United Kingdom

Mrs Cannell: Mr President, in view of the reply that the minister has given so far, does he not agree with me Recycling and Composting Schemes - that this particular department of government should be responsible for putting in place the guidelines, the Savings in Landfill Costs - parameters, of waste disposal and waste disposal methods, Question by Mrs Cannell including recycling and composting initiatives, and if he agrees with me in that, does he not further agree that when The President: Question 24, the hon. member for it comes to cost-effectiveness, market demands, fluctuating Douglas East, Mrs Cannell. markets, et cetera, et cetera those sorts of things would perhaps be better placed with a private company that would Mrs Cannell: Mr President, I beg leave to ask the seek to operate and deal with the market situation as Minister for Local Government and the Environment: opposed to a government department? Does he not believe that the government department sets the trend and provides Will you confirm that the savings in landfill costs, a vibrant atmosphere in order for this type of industry, currently estimated by the department at £75 per tonne, recycling and composting, to be undertaken and to be will be passed on to those local authorities who operate successful? effective recycling and composting schemes?

Mr Quine: The guidelines for waste disposal have not The President: The Minister for Local Government and only been established by the department, they have been the Environment to reply. endorsed by Tynwald. We have a waste management strategy which has been set out by Tynwald, approved by Mr Quine: Thank you, sir. This department is tasked Tynwald, and the department is seeking to do everything with implementing the waste management strategy it can to implement that waste management strategy. approved by this hon. Court. As part of that responsibility,

Recycling and Composting Schemes - Savings in Landfill Costs - Question by Mrs Cannell T278 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

included in the programme of projects set out in chapter Mr Lowey: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to 17, volume 2 of the 1998 policy review document, is my ask the Chief Minister: department’s commitment to promote recover, reuse and recycling initiatives in order to reduce waste for disposal How many times since you appointed them have where the environmental benefits justify the cost. This is each of your ministers voted against government policy in an operational as opposed to a regulatory matter and as Tynwald Court, the Legislative Council or the House of such is one which has been earmarked for transfer to the Keys? proposed new waste management board. In preparation for that transfer, which has been approved in principle by The President: The Chief Minister to reply. the Council of Ministers, a business plan has been drawn up identifying the resource implications of separating Mr Gelling: Mr President, the information requested responsibility for operational matters from the department’s is not something that we actually record. However, in an regulatory responsibilities. endeavour to be helpful I arranged a small study of the The possible need for a recycling officer has been raised motions promoted by ministers and chairmen of statutory in this context and arrangements have been made for this boards in Tynwald during the period December 1996 to and other human resource issues to be properly examined date. Now, it includes motions dealing with members’ pay early in the New Year. and conditions, which may be seen as parliamentary, and the shop hours, which tend to be regarded as a matter of The President: A supplementary? conscience. Now, the study reveals that during the period there were Mrs Cannell: Mr President, I thank the hon. minister 466 motions moved by ministers or chairmen of statutory for replying to question 25 which I have not asked yet. boards and 29 instances of a minister voting against one or other of those motions. Now, instances of ministers Mr Quine: Oh, I beg your pardon. voting against government policies are infrequent and generally they are within the guidelines agreed by the The President: Will you accept that response then? Council of Ministers for the operation of collective responsibility. Mrs Cannell: I will accept the response with some supplementaries, please, Mr President. The President: A supplementary, hon. member?

The President: A supplementary to question 24, then, Mr Cannell: Thank you, Mr President. May I ask the is that it? Chief Minister as a supplementary question, please, would he agree that the Government of the Isle of Man is Tynwald Mrs Cannell: Yes, to 24, Mr President, why not. Can I Court, its 33 members? ask the minister, will he accept that the figure written down on the question paper of £75 per tonne is indeed £74 per Mr Gelling: I would agree that the parliament of the tonne as specified in other communication that he has Isle of Man is 33 members, sir. circulated to hon. members, and can he please give an indication as to whether any savings that he would expect to occur would be passed on to local authorities? Disability Discrimination - Mr Quine: I certainly accept, sir, that the figure is not Question by Mr Lowey £75, it is £74. The position in regard to passing on any benefits from The President: Question 27, the hon. member of the the difference in costs is being considered. There is of Council, Mr Lowey. course a difference between simply costs which were calculated in relation to incineration vis-à-vis landfill, Mr Lowey: I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister: which are the figures which the hon. member is referring (a) Is it your intention to introduce legislation based to, and what I would term avoidable costs, that is, the on the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 of the difference which would arise in terms of the two different United Kingdom; forms of treatment. So while not subscribing to the figure as such, I agree that there is a figure which could be (b) how many persons registered as handicapped by considered for supporting that type of activity. disablement are Manx employers required to employ;

Government Policy - Voting by Ministers - (c) who enforces this statutory obligation; and Question by Mr Lowey (d) how many prosecutions have there been for offences The President: Question 26, the hon. member of the under the Disabled Persons (Employment) Act 1946 Council, Mr Lowey. in the last 20 years?

Government Policy - Voting by Ministers - Question by Mr Lowey Disability Discrimination - Question by Mr Lowey TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T279

The President: The Chief Minister to reply. suggest that they might be. So the answer to the hon. member is, no, we do not have a figure of those employed Mr Gelling: Thank you, Mr President. In 1995 the UK but of course we know of many around about government Government introduced the Disability Discrimination Act departments. which covers the employment, access to buildings and goods and services for people with a disability. Mr Lowey: Would the minister not agree that the Now, the Department of Health and Social Security have department has been very slow in evaluating progress in carried out research to examine whether there is evidence this matter and while they have been looking for more of discrimination on the Island. Research has also been than two years it is about time that action was taken, and carried out into the prevalence and needs of people with a is it not a fact that the department does not have an option disability. Now, the department are currently evaluating to enforce the law or not to enforce the law? If the law of the recommendations and will be coming forward with the land says it should be applied, then it should be applied, appropriate proposals in due course. notwithstanding the wishes of the department. Now, item (b) - the Disabled Persons (Employment) Act of 1946 is the current legislation covering the Mr Gelling: Yes, indeed, I have to agree with the hon. employment of people with a disability. Sections 9 and 10 member that when the law is there the law should be deal with the percentage of people with a disability who adhered to, but of course I tried to explain in my original should be employed by employers. Now, employers who answer that the department feel that they get more results have more than 20 employees are required to employ a by persuading employers that the skills that some of the quota of registered disabled people. By an order dated 1st handicapped have are very beneficial to their particular November 1946 the quota was set at 3 per cent of the employment. So it is being used as a persuasion rather workforce. Now, this has not varied in subsequent years. than an enforcement. But I have to agree that perhaps Part (c) - there is currently no-one employed with the something should be moved in that direction, but I must specific task of enforcing this quota. However, the listen to the DHSS and I look forward to their appropriate Department of Health and Social Security do employ two recommendations which will come forward in due course. disability employment officers whose function is to help people with disabilities to find work and then to provide Mrs Crowe: Would the Chief Minister not agree that support to both the employee and the employer. These the disablement settlement officers would be far better officers have proved highly successful. During the current placed working alongside their colleagues who are finding financial year, April to November of this year, they have employment for all members of the Manx population rather had 253 referrals for advice, assessment and placement. than providing this apartheid service which they do at They have an ongoing case-load of some 52 people and present? they have placed 43 in employment, 23 in work experience and 17 for further training. Mr Gelling: A difficult situation that is presently within The DHSS feel that forcing employers to employ a discussion between two departments, Mr President, and I percentage of people with a disability is not the best way await the outcome of that. forward but the best results can be achieved by persuading employers that people with disabilities have skills which Mrs Christian: A supplementary question. Would the will benefit their company. They should ensure that they hon. Chief Minister not agree that where a service is have been trained effectively and are provided, where provided in physical terms is hardly relevant but what the necessary, with the relevant equipment to overcome the nature and quality of that service is is much more handicap. important? Part (d) - over the last 20 years it is thought that there have been no prosecutions for offences under the Disabled Mr Gilbey: Hear, hear. Persons (Employment) Act of 1946. It is interesting to note that in the 50 years that the similar legislation was in place Mr Gelling: Yes, again, I would have to agree that the in the United Kingdom there were 10 prosecutions, only quality and the efficiency of the service and actually getting 10 ever brought. results is what is important, Mr President.

Mr Singer: Mr President, could I ask the Chief Minister, under the terms of the 1946 Act and the 3 per cent that it Recycling Officer - recommends should be disabled, can he tell me what percentage this government employs? Is it up to the 3 per Question by Mrs Cannell cent? The President: Now, hon. members, the hon. member Mr Gelling: Mr President, in, I believe, a question posed for Douglas East, Mrs Cannell, has drawn my attention to by the hon. questioner in the Council some time ago this the fact that question number 25 has not been formally very question was asked and I explained at that time the posed. The Court will recall it was answered inadvertently difficulty. In fact there are a number of people who are by the hon. member for Ayre and I understood the hon. working for government who would not declare that they Mrs Cannell accepted that response at that time. However, are disabled. In fact they feel quite offended if you were to to clear the atmosphere on this one, I call upon the hon.

Recycling Officer - Question by Mrs Cannell T280 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 member to ask the question standing in her name at item Disaster Contingency Fund - 25 on the order paper. Statement by the Chief Minister

Mrs Cannell: Mr President, I beg leave to ask the The President: Hon. members, that concludes our Minister for Local Government and the Environment: scrutiny of the question paper. We will turn now to item 3 on the order paper. I call upon the Chief Minister. Will you consider the appointment of a recycling officer? Mr Gelling: I am sorry, Mr President, a short statement. As members will be aware, there is a modest provision The President: The hon. member for Ayre to reply, the made within the Manx budget each year to contribute funds Minister for Local Government and the Environment. to the relief of disasters which occur in various parts of Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. I do apologise to the world. The provision in the current year is £15,000 the Court but perhaps too much is better than too little. and it is available to the Council of Ministers to expend at With regard to question 25, this department is tasked their discretion. with implementing the waste management strategy That provision has been exhausted this year, as we have approved by this hon. Court. As part of that responsibility, authorised three relief grants, each of £5,000, to Sudan in included in this programme, set out in chapter 17 of volume April to help relieve the effects of famine and disease, to 2 of the 1998 policy review document, is the department’s Papua New Guinea in July to assist in the relief of the commitment to promote, recovery, reuse and recycling effects of a tidal wave, and most recently in November to initiatives in order to reduce waste for disposal where the Honduras and Nicaragua to help relieve the effects of environmental benefits justify the costs. This is an Hurricane Mitch. operational matter as opposed to a regulatory one and the The ongoing plight of those in Honduras who are position has now been reached where consideration is being suffering from the effects of the hurricane will have given to the transfer of operational matters to a new waste stimulated the compassion of all those who have been management board. In preparation for that transfer, which following the situation in the international media. In view has been approved in principle by the Council of Ministers, of the ongoing situation and the possibility of further events a business plan has been drawn up identifying the resource internationally, to the relief of which the Island ought to implications of separating responsibility for operational contribute, the Council of Ministers has agreed that the matters from this department, which of course would vote for disaster relief be augmented by a virement from continue as the regulator. other unexpended moneys from within executive The possible need for a recycling officer has been raised government. A further sum, therefore, of £5,000 is being and arrangements have been made for this and other human made available immediately for relief of the areas affected resource issues to be properly examined in the New Year. by Hurricane Mitch and additional grants and aid will be authorised during the remainder of the year and a virement The President: A supplementary, hon. member? will be authorised at the end of the year to cover the additional expenditure incurred. Mrs Cannell: Yes, thank you, Mr President, and I thank I am sure members will welcome the decision of the you for your indulgence this morning. May I ask the hon. Council of Ministers which will ensure the Isle of Man’s minister with regard to the new waste management board ability to contribute to disaster relief worldwide during which he has enlightened us with this morning - he talks the remainder of the financial year, and I thank you, Mr of a transfer - is that transfer to be undertaken shortly and President, for being able to make that statement. is the transfer going to another department, and if so, might that department be Trade and Industry?

Mr Quine: The issue of the waste management board Forestry Policy - Statement by the Minister of course was referred to in relation to the incineration for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry debate, so that is not something that has just been produced here, referred to this morning. Consideration is being given The President: Item 4, the hon. member for Peel. at this time to the structure for that board. The date when it would come into being, of course, would be relative to Mrs Hannan: Thank you, Eaghtyrane. Hon. members progressing the incinerator project itself and there is no will recall that my department is currently undertaking a finite date on that at this point in time. review of its afforestation policy. In the policy review So far as this board is concerned, its need arises in documents for 1997 and 1998 my department indicated relation to the split of responsibilities for incineration in that it intended to report back to Tynwald by December order to ensure the integrity of the supervision of the 1998. However, as an important part of the review and to incinerator amongst other considerations. It was felt, and ensure that all interested parties are provided with a fully indeed it has been mentioned in debate in this Court, that comprehensive and impartial report, my department has there is a need for to separate regulation from operation decided that it would be advantageous to undertake an and that regulation would be best left with the department environmental impact assessment of the planting proposals and operation would go to a waste management board, of Ballaskella/Block Eary site. This necessitates an and that is the issue which is now being considered. extension of the proposed timetable, as in setting up a field

Disaster Contingency Fund - Statement by the Chief Minister Forestry Policy - Statement by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T281

study at this time seasonal factors can influence the findings will be until 2.30 and, as agreed, we will then take item and are important. In these circumstances it has been agreed number 14 on the order paper. Thank you very much. that the field study should cover a further 12-month period which runs to late 1999. The Court adjourned at 1.08 p.m. Once the environmental statement has been received and its implications considered, it is anticipated that towards the end of 1999 or early in the year 2000 my Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local department will be able to report back to this hon. Court on its policy on forestry and any further planting Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard programme. Thank you, Eaghtyrane. The President: Turning now, hon. members, to item 14 on the order paper, section 14 of the Town and Country M r Downie: A question, Mr President. I welcome the Planning Act of 1936 provides that in respect to orders statement by the minister and I would like to ask the under the Act such as the one referred to in this item, any minister if she is also going to make available for members local authority or interested party may appear at Tynwald of this Court a full business plan which outlines the when such order is being considered and may oppose the department’s clear policy with regard to its aforestation approval of such order. Standing order 8.1 (2) requires such programme and some indication of how much money it persons to give notice of intention to appear. Now, I propose actually costs the taxpayer of the Isle of Man to run the to invite persons who have given notice of their wish to present forestry facilities. Thank you. address the Court to come to the bar of the Court and make themselves known to the learned Clerk. The President: There is a further question from Mr Henderson, I think. The Clerk: Mr President, the persons who have given notice of their wish to address the Court are: Mr R J Astley, M r Henderson: Yes, sir, Mr President, if I may. I too Mr T Coulter, Mr and Mrs Duggua and Mr G F Karran of welcome the statement by the hon. minister for the Dickinson Cruickshank. department. I have some queries resulting from the statement and I welcome the fact an environmental study The President: Is there any other member of the public is going to be undertaken over the 12 months, which I who wishes to address the Court present in the Court and consider to be paramount in any further statement or policy who wishes to appear? If not, we will proceed and I will study that the department are going to release. I would hear the motion formally and, after the motion has been ask, is the hon. minister’s department going to consult with formally moved, objectors can be heard and questioned in all the bodies that were originally consulted in the the usual way before debate actually takes place on the Ballaskella original report and involve people like the motion. I now call upon the hon. member for Ayre, Mr Manx Nature Conservation Trust and so on? Quine, to move the motion standing in his name. In the meantime, can the hon. minister also give this Court an assurance that the status quo will continue at the Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. The process of Ballaskella site and no such further plantation will take reviewing and revising the 1998 local plan for the Borough place until after her policy statement has been released? of Douglas, published as a government circular 31/89, began when the department published an issues and options The President: Reply, minister. document in May 1996. A public notice was issued inviting all interested parties to submit their comments to the Mrs Hannan: Thank you, Eaghtyrane. There will be department as the first stage in seeking to prepare a revised more than a business plan made available on the forestry draft local plan. The views of all government departments policy. Forestry does not just relate to a business plan. It were also sought as part of this process. After the relates to a lot more than that. It relates to social department had carefully considered all the views considerations, environmental considerations and other submitted as part of this consultation process, the impact considerations, therefore I hope by the time this department published an interim report for public report is finalised that it will have information which, as I consultation in March 1997 and again gave public notice said in my statement, will be an impartial report. inviting individuals and interested bodies to make their With regard to who will be consulted with regard to views known to the department on its contents. this environmental impact study, all the comments that have The legislative procedures require the department to been made to the department have been studied by the confer a meeting with the local authority, and a series of environmental impact assessment consultants. They will meetings were held with Douglas Town Council in this be taking more, they will be consulting more and further regard, culminating in a meeting on 23rd October 1996. with many areas and bodies and, as I said, that will be Following this meeting, Douglas Corporation submitted completed in late 1999 and I am sure that members will its further views on the interim consultation document and find the report very interesting and informative. Thank you. formally agreed the contents of the draft written statement at the meeting of the town council held on 14th April 1997. The President: Thank you, hon. member. Hon. The department met on 12th May 1997 to consider all members, the Court will now adjourn and the adjournment the views received and finalise the contents of the draft

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard T282 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

local plan. This included points raised by the Douglas in order to protect and even encourage some secondary Corporation in its submission. A draft planning scheme shopping in residential areas or tourist areas to provide order and maps were then prepared to reflect the decisions them with facilities. which had been taken, and this was embodied in a Mr Bexson considered various representations on the document dated May 1998. The department then gave subject of the town-centre parking provision and he noted notice that a public inquiry was to be held at the Villa that there was overwhelming opposition, including that Marina, Douglas, on 24th and 25th June 1998 under the from the Borough of Douglas, the Department of Transport chairmanship of Mr Peter J Bexson, an independent and the police, for a lower provision to be allowed for new planning inspector. office development. Whilst he commented that the lack of Some 75 persons attended the public hearing and many sites being identified for periphery or edge-of-town parking of them gave oral evidence. Mr Bexson also considered facilities was a limiting factor, linked with the need for 19 further letters which he had received immediately prior improved public transport facilities, Mr Bexson concluded to the opening of the public inquiry or at the inquiry itself, in favour of the objectors, indicating that he felt the existing making comment or representation. The writers of these standards should remain in place. letters either did not appear or speak at the hearing to He also considered the representations on the subject support their proposals, but Mr Bexson confirmed that he of the conservation areas and concluded that the Museum considered these nevertheless. Mr Bexson submitted his should remain within the proposed additional conservation report, dated 21st July 1998, to the department, setting out area and that there was no reason to delete Brunswick his conclusions and recommendations, which have since Nurseries from the proposals. The designation of been considered. conservation areas is not, however, within the remit of this Mr Bexson made four principal recommendations, order. Possible areas have been indicated in the interests namely: firstly, that retail should not be wholly confined of public awareness but their consideration will be under to the defined areas - some flexibility is required and indeed a separate process. this flexibility already exists; secondly, new office parking On the subject of the provision of new offices within requirements should not be relaxed by means of commuted Douglas, Mr Bexson concluded that proposals to permit payments, at least for the time being, until alternative car some office use along the promenades and in the drives parking sites can be identified and programmed; thirdly, should be supported on the basis of protecting the fabric whilst the office development programme will continue of the buildings. as envisaged, a more selective policy should be considered, Mr Bexson concluded that most of the ideas and possibly by the use of development permits in the near proposals for the harbour area and rivers should be future; and fourthly, that the residential proposals outlined supported, including the new bridge link, and he be approved. recommended that proposals for a special study of the River Mr Bexson also recommended that the conclusions he Douglas valley should be endorsed. had reached should be adopted. These related to 11 matters Whilst there had been some criticism of certain and I shall deal with each of these in turn. In relation to the proposals for the road network within Douglas, Mr Bexson need for an all-island strategic plan, Mr Bexson concluded concluded that he could see no reason not to recommend that matters must proceed in relation to the revision of the approval of the section dealing with traffic and roads in Douglas Local Plan despite the lack of a strategic plan. As the written statement. He also supported the need to appoint hon. members are aware, a final draft of the all-island consultants as soon as possible in the interest of achieving strategic plan is now in place and I would hope to bring it a speedy conclusion to the urban regeneration initiative before this hon. Court early in the new year. within Douglas. There had been some suggestion that parts of Braddan The department considered Mr Bexson’s report on a should be considered as part of the revision of the Douglas number of occasions and on 12th January 1998 finalised Local Plan. Mr Bexson concluded that the extension of the contents of the written statement, which is to be read local authority boundaries was an administrative and not in conjunction with the Isle of Man Planning Scheme a planning matter, so the suggestion of a plan for a Greater (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998. Here I think it is Douglas area was not one within his remit. There is, of important to emphasise that the written statement is not course, in any event a political dimension to such a part of the order. This hon. Court is being asked today to proposition. approve the scheme order comprising the order itself and There was comment about the lack of land for further the plans attached to it. The written statement is a separate residential development within Douglas. Here, Mr document which will be reviewed and revised from time Bexson’s conclusion was that the entire question of more to time, subject of course to the constraints of the local land for building must be an all-island matter, and so the plan. preferred option at the moment must be to limit residential The final version of the written statement was then growth to only those areas so defined at the present time prepared and published. This is required under section 9 in Douglas. of the Town and Country Planning Act 1934 for the In relation to retail users, Mr Bexson stated that he saw department to consider whether it is necessary or desirable little orno objection to confirming or limiting development to include provisions in the planning scheme order with to the defined town centre but, as a number of objectors respect to compensation for any persons whose property had stated, some flexibility was necessary. Mr Bexson may be injuriously affected by the making of the scheme concluded that this was a view with which he could agree order. Public notice was issued by the department in April

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T283

1998 inviting representation to be made in this regard. as commercial were sound and based on the best public Three such representations were made and these were interest as tested at the inquiry; secondly, that the zoning considered by the department at a special meeting held on of the area under the draft local plan could be essentially 24th August 1998, at which two of the claimants were short-term in nature and should not be treated as if they granted oral hearings; the third claimant did not request were permanent; thirdly, the company had submitted no such a hearing and was content to rely on his written evidence to show that it owned property in the Lake Road submission. site which had been injuriously affected; and fourthly, that The department concluded, in relation to the claim of any previous planning decisions had been made under the Mr and Mrs Beilis of Erin Brae, Queen’s Promenade, existing zoning and not under the zoning proposed in the Douglas, that, firstly, the proposed zoning represented the new scheme order. In relation to the Lord Street bus station best public interest and that this fact had been tested during site, the department concluded that there was no evidence the local plan process; secondly, in substance there had that the Shoprite Group owned any property near this site been no material change in the existing and proposed which was likely to be injuriously affected; that the zoning, which is predominantly tourist and residential, proposed zoning, which was to be predominantly which meant that the property would not be injuriously residential, was appropriate for this location; and that the affected by the making of the scheme order; thirdly, the zoning of areas under the draft local plan was essentially new developments about which Mr and Mrs Beilis had short-term in nature and the effects should not be regarded complained had been approved under the existing 1989 as if they were permanent. For the foregoing reasons the order and not under the new draft order; and fourthly, that department decided that it was not appropriate to make the zoning effected by the draft order could be essentially provision in the Douglas Local Plan Scheme Order for short-term in nature and should not be regarded as if its compensation for the injurious affection which the effects were permanent. For these reasons the department company had claimed in relation to either of the areas about decided that it was not appropriate to make provision in which they had made written representation. the order for compensation for the injurious affection which To summarise my opening remarks, the revision of the had been claimed by Mr and Mrs Beilis. Douglas town plan, which is contained in the Isle of Man In relation to the second claim, that of the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998, has Steam Packet Company Limited and Sea Containers been completed by my department in full consultation with Property Services Limited with regard to the development all interested parties and in particular with the Douglas site fronting Parade Street, Bath Street, Double Comer and Corporation. All appropriate procedures have been Red Quay and the harbour facilities, the department followed. I beg to move: concluded that, firstly, the proposed change of zoning under the draft scheme order would not result in any injurious That the Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas affection to the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company or the Local Plan) Order 1998 [SD No 635/98] be approved. Isle of Man Steam Packet Company’s property, a point which was conceded by those who attended on their behalf Mr Rodan: Mr President, I beg to second the motion at the oral hearing; secondly, the proposed zoning was and reserve my remarks. representative of the best public interest, having been tested at a public inquiry; thirdly, it would be possible for the The President: Now, hon. members, with the motion Planning Committee to make an exception if it could be before the Court, I will invite petitioners to present their persuaded in relation to any particular planning application case to the Court and initially ask the learned Clerk to call that exceptional circumstances existed which justified out the names of petitioners in alphabetical order of making a special case; and fourthly, the zoning of areas appearance, please. under the local plan process could be essentially short­ term in nature and it would be inappropriate to regard this The Clerk: Mr and Mrs Duggua. as if the effects were permanent. It is perhaps worth noting at this stage that neither the Steam Packet Company nor The President: Would you take your position there, Sea Containers Limited made representations at the public sir? Are you comfortable there? inquiry. For the foregoing reasons, the department decided that it was not appropriate to make provision in the scheme Mr Duggua: Yes, thank you, Mr President. order for compensation for the injurious affection which these companies had claimed. The President: Right, proceed, sir. The third representation was from the Shoprite Group pic of Centre House, Little Switzerland, Douglas. The Mr Duggua: Mr President and hon. members, my name company did not ask for an oral hearing and this claim is Leslie Duggua of Waterfall House, Vicarage Road, was therefore considered by the department on the basis Douglas, and I am here today to speak on both my own of the written submissions which had been made in relation behalf and that of a group of concerned residents who live to the Lake Road site, formerly owned by Quiggin’s, and on Vicarage Road and who have been most affected, both the Lord Street bus station site. As regards the Lake Road in terms of the quality of life and environmentally, by site, the department concluded that the independent developments in our area. planning inspector’s findings regarding the proposed Our homes are located on one of the narrowest parts of zoning - that is, retail warehouse - from the previous zoning this road, which is still effectively a country lane, on the

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard T284 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Douglas east side of the road between Meadow Crescent although it is still being used primarily by heavy plants for a distance of about 150 yards, travelling towards ignoring the restriction, both from the business park and Stephenson’s Way, where a new roundabout has been Kirby Estates, and a 20-mile-an-hour speed limit, which located. The opposite side of the road, the west side, or the is totally ignored and ineffective and was opposed by the Braddan side, is agricultural land which consists of fields police traffic department prior to its imposition as fronting Vicarage Road, and they are bounded by a sod unworkable. bank. This land is owned, I believe, by Mr Bill Campbell, Turning to the last in the current Douglas plans, it is a farmer and property developer who I believe also owns interesting to note that the originally proposed route or operates Kirby Estates Limited, a builder. The boundary through Saddle Road as a link road has disappeared of my neighbours’ property to the Meadow Crescent side although it is substantially wider than Vicarage Road and is fronted by a Manx stone wall to Vicarage Road, behind would therefore cost less in terms of taxpayers’ money which there is a private service road which is owned and rather than the increased emphasis being put on the use of personally maintained by the residents and their private Vicarage Road for this purpose, which would involve gardens are also located in that area. substantially more investment of taxpayers’ money with a I have been a resident on the Island for 20 years and I marginal increase in benefits and potential misery for the have lived in Vicarage Road for more than 10 years, and residents of Vicarage Road. several of the other residents have lived there much longer. No doubt the contentious issues surrounding Vicarage When I relocated to this area it was semi-rural and I was Road and various planning applications submitted in the unaware of any future large-scale development taking past affecting the immediate area are unknown to most of place. During the past few years several hundred houses you and illustrate the folly of not having the foresight to have been built at Farmhill by Dandara, a large properly address these matters at the blueprint stage and development at Ashbourne Park by Kirby Estates, which then implementing a proper road infrastructure prior to is still ongoing through phases 2 and 3 and which allowing large-scale building development. (Mr Cannell: incorporates the recently opened new school. A business Hear, hear.) As a result, you are now engaged in a fire­ park is located at Cooil which is continuously expanding fighting exercise as opposed to forward planning in respect to accommodate its commercial residents, i.e. the MEA, of the road system. Manx Telecom and Scottish Provident. Recently, a car Whilst we are reasonable people and have never dealership has opened also in that area, which is a retail objected in principle to any of the proposed residential operation and supposedly not permitted in this area under development in this area, we have always been concerned the terms of your plans. The adjacent business area to the at the type and density of such developments and have business park, Spring Valley, houses B&Q, the main Post exercised our rights to make our concerns public where Office sorting office and many other business operations, we believed appropriate at the various planning using some very large and small commercial vehicles in applications, appeals and review procedures. The allegedly addition to private cars, and this area is also still expanding independent planning inspectors, who do not live here, and will be for the foreseeable future. seemingly always accept the submissions of the developers, After the period when the most intensive development which are usually supported by civil servants in the DHPP had taken place, a traffic count was carried out on Vicarage who, I was given to understand, are supposed to be Road adjacent to my property about two years ago, and unbiased in these matters, and a decision is then rubber- the number of vehicular journeys was at that time put at stamped by the appropriate minister. about 3,300 a day, many of whom were travelling at Whilst we accept the process may comply with the legal excessive speeds and some of which were being made by requirements of the planning process, it is patently obvious substantial heavy goods vehicles using the road as a short that in this area the system is seriously flawed and has in cut. However, the development proceeds and the traffic is some cases resulted in abysmal failure. In particular, the still increasing. At no time has there been any attempt to siting of the new school at the end of Meadow Crescent make any physical improvement to Vicarage Road along resulted in an upsurge in traffic along Vicarage Road in this section, which is still a country lane with no footpath the rush hour caused by parents taking their children to on either side and no street lighting. The road is a potential school and the subsequent return journey in the afternoon. death trap for pedestrians, including mothers with young This again foreseeable circumstance in turn resulted in part children, often pushing prams, and people walking dogs. of Meadow Crescent being used as a race track by people In view of the comment I heard on Manx Radio last week in and out of the school. This resulted in the need for further relating to government departments having a legal duty of public meetings attended by residents of that area and civil care, I would suggest that in the event of a fatal accident, servants with its added expense and the subsequent need which has fortuitously not occurred yet although a for installation of traffic-calming measures on this brand telegraph pole has been snapped off and ended up in my new development, at no doubt further cost to the taxpayer, garden within the last three years and part of my Manx in order to rectify this problem. stone wall demolished as a result of impact from a crashing Hon. members, as you know, government, like light commercial vehicle happening on this stretch of road economics, is a black art in which the participants - you, . .. During 1996 the DoT introduced a weight restriction the democratically elected representatives of the people - on this section of road after substantial pressure from the are supposed to decide policy on behalf of the electorate residents and our MHK, Mr David Cretney, which has and ensure its proper implementation without the benefit achieved some reduction in its use by heavy vehicles, of the use of a smoke-and-mirrors approach, as illustrated

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T285 in ‘Yes, Minister’ by a coterie of unelected civil servants, by setting back the existing field hedge’ by which he means headed by directors who appear to be unaware or unwilling the sod bank. ‘I am copying this letter to Braddan to acknowledge that members of their departments are Commissioners since the department is at a loss to pursuing their own agendas which result in, at the best, understand how the commissioners, who are not and were chaos and incompetence or, at the worst, corruption in the not even prior to 1985 the highway authority for Vicarage system of government. Road, came to reply to questions on their search concerning To illustrate the previous point raised in this submission, the widening of Vicarage Road.’ I would like to return in more detail to the specifics of In Mr Hannay’s letter of 1st September 1993 he again matters previously raised in connection with Vicarage reiterates the position of his department in relation to the Road. In particular, I would like to bring to your attention road widening of Vicarage Road confirming that the wall examples of what we, the residents, have been involved in in front of Kneale’s property would be left intact and that with the planning procedures, DoT and the then Minister the current scheme was approved by the then minister, Mr for Transport, Mr David North, for about the last six years. David North. He also said that he was in discussion with a During 1993, after negotiations between the Department landowner on the west side in relation to the road widening, of Transport and the landowner on the Braddan side of but these details relate to the finished width of the road, Vicarage Road were unsuccessfully concluded, a detailed not the treatment of the hedge. His final sentence bears survey was carried out along the section of Vicarage Road repeating: ‘I do not wish to make any further comments from Meadow Crescent toward Stephenson’s Way by the on the reason for Braddan Commissioners replying to the DoT, I believe headed by a Mr Derek Tootill, with a view section of the search dealing with highway matters.’ to carrying out some road realignment and providing a A further letter was received dated 5th May 1994 from pavement for the safety of pedestrians. Mr David Cretney, MHK, which said he had spoken to Mr At the end of 1993 an invitation was extended to the Hannay in relation to Vicarage Road. He indicated the residents to view these plans, of which I believe there were minister had not reached a decision on the matter to date. about five options. Subsequently, on 9th February 1994 a He also said that a budgetary provision in the sum of meeting was held at my home which was attended by the £28,000 had been made to carry out the improvements to then transport minister, Mr David North, local MHKs Mr Vicarage Road. To date 4‘/2 years later, no improvements David Cretney and Mr Adrian Duggan, our affected have taken place. In a letter to Mr Cretney on 17th June neighbours on both sides, including the late leading local 1994 Mr Hannay said that his office had not undertaken advocate Mr Peter Kneale, and Mr Bruce Hannay and a any further work on Vicarage Road since the meeting held Mr Quaggin from the Department of Transport. The man with the residents due to other commitments. ‘However, responsible for the actual designs and preparation of the we hope to allocate a design engineer shortly.’ In a letter plans, Mr Tootill, advised us unofficially that he was not to Mr Cretney, 21 st March 1995, Mr Quaggin of the DHPP allowed to attend and was shortly afterwards moved on to stated that he anticipated design work would be able to another job dealing with drains. At the conclusion of that commence in July of this year after two other schemes meeting the residents were left reassured by Mr North that had been completed. ‘He’ - Mr Hannay - ‘may contact any future road widening in Vicarage Road would take you to discuss the broader proposals.’ He never did. In a place on the Braddan side. letter to us on 28th March Mr Cretney said he was still On 15th February 19941 confirmed the synopsis of this pursuing the matter, and in June 1995 at a meeting in this meeting in writing to David Cretney MHK and he replied Court the following question 6(2) was asked by Mr David to the effect that there appeared to be mutual agreement at Cretney in relation to Vicarage Road. I have got details the meeting amongst all present that the course of action here somewhere of the particular question and proposed by the residents would be the most effective in supplementary questions which are already available from terms of the way to resolve this situation and that he would Hansard, I would guess, and the reply, if I may read it out make sure that the minister, Mr North, is reminded of this, in the question and answer from Mr Cretney and from the and looked forward to an early response. minister concerned at the time; Mr Cretney’s question was, Returning to 1993,1 am in possession of copies of two ‘Could I ask the minister, is he aware that the landowners letters, given to me by the late Mr Peter Kneale who, as on the side on which he has indicated that he wishes to you know, was a well-known local advocate, which were proceed with discussions will resist the taking away of signed by Mr Bruce Hannay of the DHPP, Director of their legitimate rights in law and that he would have to, as Engineering Design, dated 17th August and 1 st September a result, consider compulsory purchase orders, and would 1993 respectively which were in support of his attempts it not be more beneficial to consider, if that is the course to clarify legal search inquiries in respect of the sale of his of action which ultimately has to be followed in order to house, Rosanne. In this letter he, Mr Hannay, says ‘I can have road safety, it would be better to do that with one confirm that the inquiry dated 10th August 1993 from the landowner on the right-hand side, as I suggest, rather than department with the statement is correct,’ and then he a number of private landowners on the left?’ Mr North’s quotes, ‘At present the department’ and he highlighted reply was, ‘That may be so, Mr President, but the deeds ‘does not propose to undertake any scheme for the for the properties on the south-east side of the road adjacent construction or improvement of a highway affecting the to the service road contain a reference to it being taken above property. As we discussed, the proposed widening over by the local or highway authority, and this condition of Vicarage Road in the vicinity of your property will be is actually being checked out at the present time. Some undertaken on the western side (Braddan side) of the road time ago I had a meeting with the residents of Vicarage

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard T286 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Park’ - 1 presume he means Vicarage Road there - ‘with In June 1995 I wrote to Mr North relating to his Mr Cretney, and we are relooking at this and at that time statements in this Court, expressing concerns of the the residents were totally against allowing a footpath only residents on two points: one was the road widening on the through the service road which goes down in front of their Braddan Road and the fact that we were given an property but we are revisiting this question.’ So that was undertaking that this would be resolved within 18 months, the relevant question and answer which I will refer to later and two, that phase 2 and phase 3 of Ashbourne Park were on in connection with things as they were at that particular in our opinion, when the planning application was time. submitted, a backdoor attempt on part of the plans to pre­ The reply by the then Minister for Transport, Mr David empt a ministerial decision to widen the road on the North, to this Court was in our opinion either knowingly Douglas side as opposed to the Braddan side.’ There was false or negligently misleading, which may have occurred a lack of replies from Bruce Hannay to our letters and to as a result of misinformation from his officials or a third letters which were also written, I believe, by Mr David party source. In either event we believe it is a serious matter. Cretney at the time. This in turn has resulted in adverse repercussions for the Now, one of the other problems that emanates from this residents in that area. In the light of our own inquiries via is that effectively our own property and the property of a leading local advocate, and subsequently, we understand, the neighbours concerned has been blighted in as much as those of the Attomey-General’s office, into the legal the lack of any decision with regard to this road design position in relation to the service road, there was not at makes properties in that area totally unsaleable. that time or since grounds for the minister’s totally incorrect On 30th April 1996 the matter of Vicarage Road was and misleading answer which we believe is recorded in again raised by Mr David Cretney, MHK. His question Hansard. This matter should be clarified immediately by a was, ‘Will you take action to improve road safety on ministerial statement or by the Attomey-General’s office, Vicarage Road, Braddan, by the acquisition of land for whom we understand has been in possession of the correct road widening on the western side?’ and the minister’s information for some time. In a further reply to a answer was, ‘I confirm it would be the intention of my supplementary from Mr Downie, Mr North replied that department to acquire land on the western side of Vicarage ‘the roundabout at the Spring Valley crossroad is being Road, Braddan, for the purpose of realigning the road to progressed and I hope the majority of traffic will use that provide a reasonable width of carriageway together with a main existing arterial route when that junction is corrected. footway on the Douglas side, subject to obtaining all the The original idea was to put in. . .a 7.3 metre wide road appropriate agreements and approvals. The details for this going up Vicarage’ - he says ‘Park’ again but I presume he road improvement scheme, which will be designed in such means Road - ‘and this would have totally decimated that way as not to encourage the increase in the speed of traffic, area - a full wide road, extra speeding - and I am afraid I have not yet been finalised. The road improvement scheme do not go along with that. What we are trying to do is will of course be subject to normal planning procedure. make that road safe for pedestrians with the minimum Vicarage Road is intended to form an important function amount of alteration in that area, and I have to say it is not as a distributor road linking Peel Road with Farmhill and the top priority.’ And then he goes on. Ballacottier in the proposed Douglas transport strategy. Mr Cretney asked another question here about ‘can [the Subject to the Douglas transport strategy being confirmed minister] recall at the meeting’ - with the residents - ‘which at the May sitting of Tynwald, my department’s intention was held 18 months ago, which my colleague the hon. would be to progress the proposals for Vicarage Road, but member for South Douglas, Mr Duggan, attended, he did I should advise that the scheme does not currently rank as go along with the views of the residents on that occasion a high priority in our programme of works.’ It then goes and his officers did as well, and how long is it going to be on to say ‘Could I ask the minister if he is aware that there until this matter is resolved to everybody’s satisfaction, in are certain pinch points, if I can describe them as such, on particular the pedestrians?’ Mr North: ‘It is both a matter the Vicarage Road on the western side?’ That is directly of finance, priority and of ongoing negotiation.’ Mr opposite our house. ‘A small amount of removal of sod Kermode asked a further question on the subject. ‘Can I bank would eliminate the difficulties which currently exist. ask the minister if he is fully aware of the roundabout at Would he be prepared to undertake these works as a matter the Quarterbridge and once he has finished this roundabout of some priority?’ Answer: ‘I am aware of these pinch at the Four Roads as he intended to do there is a possibility points on there but my department would not be prepared with the congestion that may happen there that you are to do those pinch points at this stage until we can actually going to drive the majority of traffic into Vicarage Road put in a footway as well for the public.’ Mr Downie then where there is this serious problem of road safety?’This is questioned the minister, ‘Would he [the minister] not agree the minister’s answer: ‘The idea of the roundabout at the that if the Douglas transport proposals, which may or not top of Spring Valley is actually to alleviate the problem indicate that the Vicarage Road is to be widened in the that exists there and it will make it easier for people. What not-too-distant future, come to pass, . . . there are we have done is put a weight limit on the Vicarage Road, somewhere in the region o f4,000 to 5,000 new jobs being which I have heard, and I hope the police are attending to created at the business park in Vicarage Road and would this, has been abused and if it is continuously abused, then he not agree that now this has to be a priority to get I hope they will monitor and prosecute those breaking that something done to improve the situation which currently weight limit.’ In fact, that weight limit has again exists with regard to traffic movements and road safety on subsequently been reduced. the Vicarage Road?’ The answer was ‘There is a weight

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T287

limit of 7'/2 tonnes on the road leading down from On 3rd June 1998 a further letter was written by our Ballacottier and we are well aware, my department, of the advocate to Bruce Hannay requesting a response to development taking place at Ballacottier which is why the paragraph 1 of our letter of 28th May and, in respect to new roundabout on the main Castletown Road which is paragraph 2 of our letter, my clients were totally bemused now providing much better access for heavy vehicles to by Mr Hannay’s reply, and if I could just refer to Mr that area.’ Mr Kermode asked a follow-up: ‘Are you aware, Hannay’s reply because I think it is relevant, if I can find minister, that since the introduction of this new roundabout it amongst this lot. You will have to excuse me, Mr that is supposed to take all the traffic on the four roads at President. I am not an advocate or a solicitor, I am just an the end of the Cooil Road, a lot of traffic is now making ordinary businessman. its way down Vicarage Road to avoid the roundabout that you have installed there? Will your department consider The President: No problem, sir. doing a count of cars and traffic management there, please?’ The answer was, ‘Regarding the information given M r Duggua: If I may go on again, Mr President - 1 am by the hon. member for East Douglas, I have totally the sorry for the delay - my response to the second paragraph contrary from the men working at that junction. It is of my letter of 28th May is as follows: ‘On the direction of evidently working extremely well and a lot of traffic is the then Minister for the Department of Highways, Ports coming in from Ballacottier and not going down Vicarage and Properties I advised the then resident of Vicarage Road, Road,’ and as I said earlier, the weight limit was the late Mr Peter Kneale of Rosanne in a letter of 1st subsequently reduced to its present limit, which is either 3 September 1993 that at present the department does not or 3l/2 tonnes. propose to undertake any scheme for the construction and On 11th September 1996 a letter was received from improvement of the highway of the property. At the later David Cretney with a copy letter from Mr Bruce Hannay meeting in Mr and Mrs Duggua’s house in February 1994 in which he says, ‘A measure of agreement has been it was further stated by the minister that road widening reached with Mr Campbell to set back the sod bank on the works would be carried out on the Braddan side as much west side of Vicarage Road to provide passing bays. as possible. No further design work has been undertaken However, due to financial constraints this scheme has been since then. However, the department commissioned a deferred to the next financial year 1997-1998. The major review of the Douglas transport strategy in 1995 and the scheme to provide a proper standard road with an implementation report for the strategy, as received by appropriate provision for pedestrians will be progressed Tynwald in May 1996, contained the following as part of the Douglas transport strategy outer link road. The department will be seeking approval for this scheme recommendations: ‘The revised Douglas Local Plan, and as part of the overall road widening.’ Anyway, they are Braddan and Onchan where appropriate, should include saying that the safety of pedestrians should be paramount. provision for the strengthening of the outer links. I enclose On 8th May 1997 a letter was written on our behalf by a copy of that section of the report.’ I then made a Mr Mark Moroney to Mr Bruce Hannay of the Department submission to the recent Douglas Local Plan inquiry of Transport relating to the access to the building concerning improvements to Vicarage Road, copy development at phase 2, which is adjacent to Meadow enclosed. The inspector’s report and the decision by die Crescent, and phase 3, which is also part of that Minister for Local Government and the Environment is development, actually fronts on to Vicarage Road, or will awaited. ‘My department’s present position on the front onto Vicarage Road when it is built. In relation to the improvement of Vicarage Road as an outer link in the access to the site being from Meadow Crescent and not Douglas transport strategy is that it would be from Vicarage Road, which at that time were not being commissioning a report on the options now available for complied with, the second point in the letter from Mark the road improvement together with the consequential Moroney related to the fact that we at the time were environmental effects later this year. I am not presently considering the sale of our property and required a letter able to make statements concerning any particular option from the DoT stating that there are no current or future until my department has received and considered this plans for road widening that will directly affect the property report. Whichever option is then pursued by my department or its boundaries. A similar letter was provided to the late will then, of course, be the subject of planning procedures. Peter Kneale, one of the neighbours in 1993 when he sold I will respond’ - and this is really the crux of the matter his property to the current owners after the Braddan right at the end - ‘on the matter of the service road when Commissioners offered a contrary opinion. On 2nd June legal advice has been received,’ and to date we have never 1997 a reply was received by our advocate from Bruce received a response to that particular point. So in other Hannay, and he basically said that a full reply would be words our property remains unsalable. forthcoming shortly on paragraph 1, which relates to the I would just like to go through basically conclusions of Kirby estates development, and that he was immediately what I have submitted so far and the residents of Vicarage able to respond to paragraph 2 as the department are Road primarily affected by any proposed widening scheme currently seeking further advice on a clause included within in this area have, despite having a right to fair and equitable the deeds of certain properties on Vicarage Road and will treatment under the law, to date been treated, we consider, be reconsidering their position when this is received, and shabbily. This has been caused, we believe, through a I would note there that this is a reference to the misleading continuing process of maladministration, ministerial statement given to this Court by the then minister, Mr David misleading of this Court and deliberate attempts to thwart North, in June 1995, some two years earlier. the lawful planning process. These are serious allegations

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard T288 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

which we believe are sustainable from our submissions serious option for Vicarage Road would be to make it one and relevant supporting correspondence. These way for part of its length. This, they thought, would mainly submissions, we believe, make a serious challenge to the inconvenience the residents. However, this is the option voracity of a former minister and some civil servants. most favoured by the residents, being the most cost- The first set of circumstances relates both to Mr David effective with the addition of a pavement, street lighting North, the then Minister for Transport, and Mr Bruce and traffic-calming measures being installed and only a Hannay of the Department of Transport. In June 1995 the little road widening being required without a super then Minister for Transport, Mr David North, was, as I highway. This in turn would allow the use of Saddle Road already said, we believe, supplied an answer to this Court as originally planned as the link which is even now to Mr David Cretney which was either false or negligently adequate in terms of width and where the main houses are misleading and in any event palpably untrue; in relation to in the main set back from the road. It should also be pointed Mr Bruce Hannay of the DoT, that he subsequently engaged out that a previous minister in the recent past stated that in delaying tactics in respect of this same manner and either any plans to substantially increase the width of Vicarage attempted to cover it up or to prolong the need for revealing Road should be resisted, as it would devastate the area. the truth in the belief that he would be able to force through Costs are probably one of the main considerations with his own agenda. This over a period of about 3.5 years and the almost certain decline in the finance sector over the to which he has still not admitted although he has seen a medium to long-term due to the changing European letter from my advocate and, I understand, an opinion from situation and the subsequent reduction necessary in the Attorney-General confirming his and his previous government expenditure. This may result in a stable or minister’s errors. In these instances I was informed that reducing population with a consequent reduction in motor the circumstances surrounding these two unfortunate vehicle usage and with it the transport budget. individuals were brought about by the provision of The residents are concerned at the inclusion after information to one or both of them by Mr Bill Campbell paragraph 2.25 on page 12 of the report which, although that a government department had a legal right of free relating to a central area of Douglas, would or may create acquisition of the service road fronting our neighbour’s a precedent to be set in respect of compulsory purchase properties on Vicarage Road. As a previous owner of this which could then be used on Vicarage Road. Paragraph property - and I am referring here to Mr Campbell - and 6.6 of the report does not clearly specify, as originally being an experienced property developer he must have been agreed, that any road widening whether for the purpose of aware at the time he provided these mischievous and road alignment or otherwise should be undertaken on the misleading suggestions that they were untrue. In view of west side - Braddan side - of Vicarage Road. these circumstances, would the Court consider Finally, we would ask that a detailed written statement investigating this matter properly and publicly and, in the is provided to the Court by the Department of Transport event of these allegations being proven, issue an apology outlining their exact plans and intentions, which is to this Court and the affected property owners on Vicarage something we have been asking for for about the last six Road? A rumour is already circulating that the government years, in respect of road widening, footpaths, alignment, has already acquired the service road, and I heard this street lighting and any other peripheral matters affecting rumour only yesterday. Vicarage Road which Bruce Hannay promised he would The second set of circumstances concerns a planning do in 1997 in a letter to Mr Mark Moroney, our advocate. review and appeal held in respect of phases 2 and 3, That, Mr President, is the end of what I have to say. I Ashbourne Park, Douglas, by Kirby Estates at which it is thank you very much for your courtesy and for the courtesy alleged circumstantial evidence exists from my own notes, of the hon. members and I hope I have not bored you too and I assume from the inspector’s notes, that a concerted silly. effort was being made to effectively undermine the status quo between Mr Campbell and the residents on the opposite The President: Thank you, sir, for your presentation. side of Vicarage Road. The result included the provision Would you please stay at the bar, because traditionally at of a strip of land - this was at the final review stage or this stage hon. members may pose a question for whatever the terminology is - on the edge of phase 3 which clarification of your address? Does any hon. member wish actually fronts on Vicarage Road being left in the event to pose any questions? The hon. member for Ayre. that anybody would wish to undertake road widening on that side. The results of taking both sets of circumstances Mr Quine: Mr Duggua, if you could just clarify a couple together, thus the service road and this piece of land that is of points for me? In relation to the public inquiry on this to our boundary on the Cooil side, would appear draft local plan - questionable, to say the least. In view of the foregoing circumstances alone. I would request, on behalf of the Mr Duggua: Excuse me, sir, could you speak up a little, affected residents on whose behalf I appear today, that all I cannot hear you. reference to Vicarage Road be left in abeyance until this matter has been thoroughly and independently investigated Mr Quine: Yes, in relation to the public inquiry on this and the same included in the current Douglas plan. draft local plan that we are discussing today, did you make We have also got one or two constructive - well, we a representation either written o r...? hope they are constructive - comments to make that were suggested by the local constabulary some time ago, that a Mr Duggua: I was off the Island at the time, sir.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T289

M r Quine: You were off the Island. So you did not Mr Singer: Are you aware, though, of the reason why make any representation. Right. Does the draft plan that is those traffic calming measures were put in? before this hon. Court today represent any change in land zoning in relation to what exists at the present, as far as Mr Duggua: I was at a public meeting which I do not you are aware - which affects your particular problem, I believe you were at, I am not sure, but - meant, of course? Mr Singer: That was not my question, Mr Duggua. Mr Duggua: I am not clear on your question, sir, sorry. Mr Duggua: I was at a public meeting when this matter Mr Quine: Today we are concerned with the zoning of was addressed by the residents and representatives of the the land for different purposes on this plan. There is an Department of Transport and, as far as I am aware, these existing plan and before us today for consideration is a measures were put in at the request of the residents because draft plan. Does the draft plan, so far as your particular the road was being used as a racetrack. problem is concerned, represent a change or would it effect some change in the zoning of land in relation to Vicarage Mr Singer: And are you aware that the residents then Road? asked for them to be taken out, which has been done?

Mr Duggua: Not that I am aware of, sir. Mr Duggua: That is right, yes.

Mr Quine: Thank you very much. Mr Singer: The outer ring route for Douglas includes Braddan School Road and Vicarage Road going on to Cooil M r Downie: Mr President, I would just like to ask Mr Road. Now, Braddan School Road has permission to widen, Duggua if the land referred to that is on the west of Vicarage Cooil Road is being widened. Are you aware that the Road is actually in the parish of Braddan or is it in Douglas? current position of the department is that Braddan School Road - the policy is to widen it on the Braddan side, not on Mr Duggua: It is in the parish of Braddan, sir, as far as the houses side and that the - ? I am aware. Mr Duggua: Well, that area is not of any particular M r Downie: So it would not normally come into the interest to me, sir, so I would not know. Douglas plan? Mr Singer: I beg your pardon, Vicarage Road, I am Mr Duggua: Well, it is right on the boundary. That is sorry. The current policy is to widen it on the Braddan where the boundary line is, I believe. side, not on the houses side, and that -

Mr Downie: Your concern today, then, is, you are Mr Duggua: This has never been clearly stated, sir, as saying, a lack of performance by the Department of far as I am aware. Transport in getting something done to alleviate the problems you are currently experiencing with traffic on Mr Singer: - and that the situation is the acquisition of Vicarage Road? the land from Mr Campbell?

M r Duggua: And have been for the last six years, sir, Mr Duggua: Sorry, could you repeat that? yes. Mr Singer: That the land has to be bought from Mr M r Downie: And really that is the basis of your Campbell, that the current position of the DoT is to widen appearance today? on Mr Campbell’s side and not on the side of the houses. Are you aware that that is the current policy of the DoT? Mr Duggua: Yes. Mr Duggua: Well, certainly we have never made aware of this by Mr Hannay, who is the man who has been dealing Mr Singer: Mr President, could I ask you, Mr Duggua, with it on a day-to-day basis. We would also like you mentioned - well, you criticise, in fact - the installation clarification of which side of the road the footpath is going. of traffic calming on Meadow Crescent. You said it was As I say, we have had this red herring thrown in recently - the cost. or not recently, it has been going on for the last three or four years - about a service road. Now, the implication M r Duggua: I was not criticising it at all, sir. What I was that the service road could at some future date be was criticising was the fact that your department had not acquired at no cost at all by a government department - 1 foreseen the problem of the school being located at the do not know whether it is your department or some other end of Meadow Crescent and, if this problem had been department - but in fact there is nothing in the deeds of addressed at the planning stage, it would not have been those properties which have been examined by both our necessary at a later date to have to put in traffic calming own lawyers and, I understand, the Attorney-General which measures. supports that.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard T290 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Mr Singer: I can accept that from you. Mr North: Yes, Mr President. Mr Duggua, you have mentioned my name a lot on this and I can understand Mr Duggua: You accept that? If you accept that, can your frustration. Could you just for me - and the hon. you tell me where the footpath is going to go as well as the member for the area - clarify, please, the misleading road widening? Because the plan - statement? I have not just identified the reference. Was that obviously in answer to a question? When was that? Mr Singer: The plan is not, as far as I am aware, in that detail. What I was saying was that the proposal is definitely Mr Duggua: That was in June, 1995.1 do not know the to widen it on the other side. But certainly the rumour that exact date. you put in here that you heard yesterday I know nothing about, and I am sure that is untrue about the department Mr North: Thank you. already obtaining the road. Mr Karran: Can I just ask, could the petitioner explain Mr Duggua: Can I just ask you, sir, when we might to this hon. House, has he got any idea why such an easy get clarification of where the footpath is going and what issue that could be resolved with common sense has not effect, if any, this is going to have on our properties? been resolved and has taken six years? Are you aware why, sir, we seem to have no movement as far as resolving this Mr Singer: When the detailed plans are drawn up. dangerous piece of road?

Mr Duggua: And when is that going to be? We have Mr Duggua: I think in the main it has been through the been waiting for years. intransigence - if that is the right word - of the landowner on the west side, Mr Campbell, and I think he is trying to Mr Singer: Well, I mean, I cannot answer for a previous hold the department over a barrel with the negotiations administration, I can only answer - and wants something in return other than money for the land. The President: Hon. member, could you pose your questions succinctly, please. We are getting into a stage, I Mr Cretney: Hear, hear. think, of interchange here which is not clear to the Court (Members: Hear, hear.) as to what we are getting to. So Mr Karran: Are you aware that - positive questions, please. The President: This type of questioning I am beginning Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, obviously the reason you are to get worried about. We are making accusations about here today, sir, is that if there is more development in the landowners who are not present and a general pattern of - area where you are, it will have a major effect on this road, which is grossly too small for its present system. So that is Mr Duggua: I was just answering the question! the reason you are here today. The President: Yes. So, hon. members please pose Mr Duggua: Yes, that is right. But we are not questions that are pertinent and let us get this one clarified. necessarily, as I say, advocating widening the road to any The hon. member Mr Cannell. great extent. As I mentioned earlier, we would be quite happy if the department would consider making part of Mr Cannell: Mr President, if I may address yourself, that road one way, which would be much less costly and it rather than Mr Duggua, unless I am much mistaken and has been done at the top end of the road at the Cooil where whilst I have considerable sympathy for anybody who has there was a section of two-way lane and that is now one occasion to use Vicarage Road, with the greatest of respect way, and I would have thought it was a legitimate idea to I see this as an item regarding the Douglas Local Plan and consider doing the same with the section near our place. really the majority of this appears to centre on an argument which is really a domestic one concerning the Braddan Mr Karran: So, you would like hon. members to side of Vicarage Road. Although it is probably pertinent consider that land that has not already been developed in to bring it forward and it is difficult as a layman to actually that area should not be developed until this issue has been see the relevance of a Douglas plan particularly, I feel, resolved? really, that this is the wrong platform for this argument.

Mr Duggua: That is right. In fact, we were given an The President: Your point is made, sir. Now, the hon. undertaking several years ago by Bruce Hannay that this Mr Gilbey. would not happen, that this development would not be allowed until Vicarage Road was sorted out. If I may throw Mr Gilbey: Mr President, could I ask the petitioner: in another point which - you have raised this in connection with the Douglas Local Plan and I can certainly see the connection with the plan; The President: I would suggest you do not throw in is it your wish that we should adjourn approval of the plan any further points, sir! If you have answered the question, till these problems have been sorted out? I would like to that is enough. The hon. member for Middle. get it quite clear what you wish.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T291

Mr Duggua: Yes, sir, that is our wish. The President: Right, thank you for that clarification, sir, and thank you for your appearance at the bar. Learned Mr Delaney: Good question, Walter! Clerk, will you invite the next petitioner to come to the bar, please? Sir Miles Walker: Mr Duggua, you said very clearly in your statement, ‘When I relocated to this area it was The Clerk: Mr Karran. semi-rural and I was unaware of any future large-scale development taking place’. Were you completely unaware Mr G F Karran: Mr President, hon. members, I appear of the 1982 development plan? on behalf of Mylchreest Motors Limited in opposition to the approval of this order in the form as laid before the Mr Duggua: I was, sir, yes. House today. The premises of Mylchreest Motors in Westmoreland Road, Douglas, are probably well known Sir Miles Walker: I think it spelt it out in some detail to the members of this House. Mylchreest Motors and its that all of the land behind you was scheduled for residential predecessor carried on business from this site for many, development. many years. There exists, and has existed during this period, office premises as the headquarters of the company, Mr Duggua: I am not complaining about that, sir; I am a retail sales showroom, a repair workshop and a just stating a fact. considerable amount of open land where vehicles have been stored or parked. Prior to its operation in this form I The President: Right, well I think - Mr Cretney, you am informed that the site was used as a factory and has wish to ask a further question? certainly never been used for housing. The zoning on the present Douglas Local Plan adopted Mr Cretney: Could I askMr Duggua, there has already in 1989 designates the site as a garage. When the document been a statement to some extent made by the hon. member was first published for consultative purposes, and again for Ramsey, Mr Singer; if a further clarification or a greater when a draft written statement and plan was published in clarification of the department’s position in relation to their May 1997, the zoning for the premises was designated intentions and timescaling et cetera with Vicarage Road ‘existing commercial’. The company made representation were to be made, would that alleviate your concerns and in letter form to the public inquiry that the designation would you then not feel that this would have to be held should actually be ‘commercial’, rather than ‘existing back? commercial’, a plea that had been successfully made in relation to other sites within Douglas during the Mr Duggua: Yes, I think so. Thank you. consultative process. What was meant by a designation of ‘commercial’ is a The President: Right, well, I think that concludes - little unclear. The Town and Country Planning (Use Mrs Christian, you wish to pose a question? Classes) Order of 1982 makes no reference to commercial use whatsoever. However, I would certainly be able to Mrs Christian: If I could just get a point of clarification, argue, in a planning forum, that a description of ‘existing Mr President, from Mr Duggua. Could you indicate, sir, commercial’ in a draft document would have enabled the so that I can really understand the issue, what it is about company not only to continue its existing use of the site the zoning on the plan that is before us today that you but also to extend one or more of these actual uses. object to in terms of its zoning as opposed to the issue of A public inquiry was held in June 1997 before Mr the speed with which a road issue has been dealt with? Bexson, who reported on the 21st July 1997.1 can find no specific reference in the inspector’s report to any Mr Duggua: Well, it is just basically the actual wording recommendation with regard to the rezoning of the in the plan itself that we were not happy with, which was company’s site. Notwithstanding this, the department, nine under section 6.6 and, as I say, the earlier one that I months later, without any further consultation and without mentioned was, I think it was, on page 12 that refers to giving the company any right to object, amended the compulsory purchase. previous suggestion for the zoning of this site from ‘existing commercial’, totally removing those words from Mrs Christian: That is not, though, a zoning issue. the plan when that written statement and plan were published in April of this year. The company has now been advised by its advisers that the value of the site has reduced Mr Duggua: Could you clarify what you mean by by over 50 per cent of its previous value by deletion of zoning issue, ma’am, please? those words. I profess that I have some difficulty in interpreting the Mrs Christian: Well, the use of the land as set out on central area of the plan as to what proposal is made the order which we are being asked to approve today. regarding the zoning of this site. It is quite clear, however, from a decision of the Planning Committee on 2nd Mr Duggua: Well, my observations, as I would have November this year, to which I will shortly refer, that the thought you would have been well aware of by now, just Planning Committee considers that the zoning for this site, refer to Vicarage Road, ma’am. if this order is adopted and approved, would be that the

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard T292 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

site is now to be for predominantly residential use. What address housing stocks within the capital of this Island, is clear from the plan is that the site comes within an area the company believe it would be wrong for a planning described as an ‘urban regeneration study area.’ In document to be adopted which would then limit and prevent paragraph 2.2(3) of the written statement it refers to this the use of sites within this area and, in particular, the use study area as having been identified in order that the extent of this site for purposes other than housing. of the problem of the capital housing stock can be It is very noticeable from comments made in determined and options identified. It goes on to say in consultation papers and draft orders that there is another 2.2(4) ‘a study has been initiated into the potential for urban problem that faces the capital of Douglas, and that is the regeneration and, having identified the scale of the problem problem of car parking. TTie previously adopted policy of and having determined the way forward, a programme for the planners to encourage the development of offices within implementation will be prepared.’ a specific area attracts an ever increasing workforce into Mr Bexson, in his conclusions regarding the matter, this area each day, all with motor vehicles, it seems, and agreed that, whilst there was a problem over housing, this car parks must be found for them. The document identifies survey was a sensible way forward although it would take this office area as the central area of Douglas, which it time and may not provide a complete answer. He said there says includes approximately two-thirds of the Island’s was a lack of statistical evidence from the planning office floor space. In 1991 the Department of Transport department but that the proposed study area, with had experts carry out a survey, and they determined at that consultants when appointed, would assist to this end. time that there was a shortfall of approximately 1,200 car It is still, therefore, not clear as to what is actually meant park spaces in Douglas. Paragraph 7.3 of the written by an ‘urban regeneration area’ other than it is an area in statement, produced with the plan, identified that a which we must consider in future the improvement of the significant amount of new development has given rise to a housing stock. The area identified is a substantial area of consequential requirement for an estimated provision in central Douglas, where at the present time there are a large the region of 1,430 spaces for development. It goes on to number of residential properties, but there are also a say, however, that in the longer term it is anticipated that considerable number of properties that have nothing this will rise to an additional 1,360 off-street car park spaces whatsoever to do with housing, such as the hospital, due to the anticipated development, and as yet an unknown schools, offices. Yes, indeed, even the site of the old Finch proportion of these may be required to be located off the Hill Church within the area designated for offices and a site of the actual development. Mr Bexson in his recent approval on appeal has confirmed the use of that site for offices in the future. That lies within this urban recommendations referred to alternative car park sites regeneration area. being identified and programmed. My clients, from the beginning of February this year, We believe the Department of Transport is setting up well before publication of the document and plan in April its own investigation and has employed consultants to which purported to change the zoning of this site, started advise with regard to the problems of car parking in consultations with the planning officers and officials of Douglas. What is clear from the written statement is that the Department of Transport. They subsequently filed an the parking areas must be found in close proximity to application to the Planning Committee for permission to arterial roads. Park-and-ride has been tried in Douglas and develop their site for a multi-storey car park, providing failed miserably. My client company believe there are few 670 spaces. In addition, the application included outline sites in the central area that have the suitable characteristics proposals for offices directly fronting Westmoreland Road, for the provision of long-term car parking facilities, which are considered by the advisers to the company to be particularly if all sites within the urban regeneration area essential to ensure the financial viability of the car park are to be reserved and designated for housing and not for and to prove an acceptable façade solution to the major the provision of much-needed car parking. No objection road frontage on Westmoreland Road. to the planning application made by the company was The application has been refused by the Planning lodged on behalf of the local authority Douglas Committee in November principally on the grounds of Corporation; no objection was lodged to that application zoning, and in particular the refusal notice states that the by the Department of Transport, and in fact the applicants development would be contrary to the revision of the have found the officials of the department in total support Douglas Local Plan published after inquiry and contrary of the provision of car parking on this particular site so to the department’s aspiration to make available, close to close to that central area of office development and so close the town centre, more land for housing development. It is to the main arterial road, Circular Road, one of the policy from this reason for refusal that it becomes apparent that recommendations of the written statement. the department is stating that the site is now zoned, under Therefore my client company feel aggrieved that a this plan, for primarily residential reasons. Its designation designation of this site for predominantly residential within this urban regeneration shows an intent on the part housing would appear to have been inserted into this plan of the planners to limit any future development of lands or after a public inquiry which made no recommendation in premises within this area merely for housing. My clients its conclusion regarding the site, without giving the have applied for a review of this decision and I believe it opportunity to the applicant to comment or object. My will be considered in January; presumably it may lead on client company feel aggrieved that the interpretation of to an appeal. the Planning Committee would now appear to be that the Whilst not decrying the initiative of the department to site can only be used for housing, and presumably any site be considering, by way of study consultants, the need to within the urban regeneration area, unless marked for a

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T293

specific type of development, must be used for housing. If Mr Quine: Thank you. the plan is adopted today, a great opportunity is being lost to deal with another major problem for Douglas, namely Mr Cannan: Mr Karran, when did your clients first the parking of vehicles. We believe like a great many people become aware, then, that the ‘existing commercial’ had that car parking must be provided in this area and the been taken away and that they were now designated ‘urban development of this site, which is on the periphery of the regeneration’. urban regeneration area, in the way that we are proposing would not prejudice the potential for an overall urban Mr G F Karran: I understand, sir, it was round about regeneration. For this reason, my client company urge the same time as they were making the planning members to vote against the approval of this plan in its application, which was round about July 1998. present form. Thank you, Mr President. Mr Cannan: One further question. So they were not The President: I thank you also, learned counsel, for aware or had been informed by the planning department your appearance and presentation. Would you please that existing commercial premises had been taken away? remain at the bar in case there are some questions from the floor? The hon. member for Ayre, Mr Quine. Mr G F Karran: They received no letter from the department following the public inquiry advising them of Mr Quine: Yes, thank you, sir. At least one of your any factor. grievances, Mr Karran, is that this designation has changed the value of this site. Did your client make representations Mr Cannell: Mr Karran, I am interested in the remark for injurious affection as a result of the plan which was you made regarding office development within the urban published showing the proposed change of zoning for this regeneration area, not one which you are acting on behalf site? of Mylchreests for, rather that of the former Finch Hill United Reformed Church. Could you say, either officially Mr G F Karran: Mr President, my clients did not or unofficially, how you see the chronology of that? How formally make any application for compensation. I believe did the chronological order go for the granting of that, with regard to certain other area plans, specific letters permission for that to be developed other than housing informing people who had applied for status with regard within this area? to the inquiries as interested parties were actually sent letters by the department informing them of their right to Mr G F Karran: Mr President, there are indeed, within claim compensation. In relation to the Douglas plan, I this urban regeneration area, a number of sites specifically believe, this practice was not followed and there is the marked for offices. So it is not exclusively for housing, reference only to one advertisement in one newspaper in despite what we now are informed by the Planning April advising the people to make compensation. Committee, but certainly that site has had a designation of Unfortunately my clients did not see that advertisement; offices. We believe, however, that an application is made they did not make the application in time. However, as I and I do not know the detail of it, I am sorry, but I do know stated in my address to you, sir, from February of this year that it was only within the last few weeks that a final my clients have been in active consultation with planners approval was granted, I believe, having been initially and the department regarding their own planning refused by the Planning Committee but it was granted on application. appeal following an independent inspection.

M r Quine: In regard to the public inquiry, Mr Karran, Mr Cannell: But the creation of an urban regeneration did your client make an appearance at the public inquiry? area specifically devoted to housing already takes on that precedent, then, on that principal proviso, that there can Mr G F Karran: As I stated in my address to you, Mr be developments of a different nature providing they were President, my client submitted a letter to the public inquiry marked on the map? in relation to this particular matter; they did not appear at the inquiry. At that time the zoning shown on the plan that Mr G F Karran: That would appear to be the position, had been published was for the premises to be ‘existing Mr President. commercial’, they merely made representation by letter form that the word ‘existing’ should be deleted. They did Mr Henderson: Mr President, I just want to ask a not feel it was therefore necessary to actually appear at the couple of clarifying questions, if I may, Mr Karran, just to inquiry. make sure I have got the facts of your case right. What you are basically saying is that at the outset the concerned Mr Quine: One further question, if I may, sir? On the property was actually designated ‘existing commercial’ plan that went to the public inquiry, was the proposed urban but, due to the nature of the new and emerging Douglas regeneration area marked out on that plan? Town Plan it has now switched to a predominantly housing urban regeneration use, which is going to basically affect Mr G F Karran: The area marked urban regeneration the business and, I think, to quote you, you said it could was marked out on the plan, as indeed was that these well affect the site by as much in value as 50 per cent. Is premises were ‘existing commercial’. that the synopsis of it?

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard T294 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Mr G F Karran: Basically, Mr President, yes, except relation to this site, then I have a problem with my that, in fairness, in the 1997 document there was, as I stated, application. described an urban regeneration area but also at that time this site was designated ‘existing commercial’. Since the Mr Downie: Thank you. public inquiry, and without any explanation, that designation has been removed. Mr Rodan: Mr President, I do not wish to ask you specifically about your clients’ planning application but M r Downie: Mr President, could you just confirm for on a general question of planning law. Would you agree me, Mr Karran, that your initial application for office that when a change of zoning is proposed in the accommodation and a car park has been turned down and development plan process, then the new zoning does not in fact you have the opportunity to go for a review and an dictate against any existing use - in other words, any appeal with regard to that application? existing use can carry on undisturbed indefinitely?

Mr G F Karran: Yes, an application was made, Mr Mr G F Karran: The existing use of the premises by President, in July of this year and we received notification my clients cannot be interfered with. We can carry on dated 2nd November that it had been refused. We have trading in these premises. We would have great difficulty applied for a review of that decision. We believe they will extending our operation in these premises. consider in mid-January whether or not we can have an oral review or they will deal with it by a paper review. Mr Rodan: And without specific reference to your clients, could I ask further, then, that if a proposal for .Mr Downie: Now, should you be successful at the development is made then the material considerations to review and they grant the approval, would that take away which the planning authority has regard is not only the the problems that exist with Mylchreest’s and satisfy the new zoning but existing established use? requirements of the local plan? Mr G F Karran: Existing established use is relevant, Mr G F Karran: If they were granted approval to their Mr President, yes, indeed. application, it would take away my objection. Mr Rodan: And one last question, Mr President. Do you agree that the use of the word ‘predominantly’ in the Mr Downie: It would take away your objection? term ‘predominantly residential’ does not exclude entirely Bearing in mind, then, that your initial land was zoned for any mixed use or any non-residential use within that commercial and there is now a rezoning to introduce urban particular zoned area? regeneration, would I be correct in assuming that your clients fully wish to have the option to maximise the Mr G F Karran: I would accept that interpretation, development potential of their site? Mr President, but the Planning Committee have stated in their reply to us that this is now contrary to this new zoning Mr G F Karran: Yes, Mr President. and contrary to the department’s aspirations for land for housing development, presumably in relation to this site. Mr Downie: And you feel that this rezoning will have an adverse effect on the value of this land? Mr Rodan: Thank you very much.

Mr G F Karran: Certainly if this plan is adopted which Mr Corkill: Mr Karran, have you or your clients ever effectively rezones this site for primarily residential received a definition of what urban regeneration entails? purposes, as would appear to be the interpretation of the Planning Committee, then I feel I would have great Mr G F Karran: I have gone through the document, difficulty in pursuing that planning application. Mr President, and I cannot find an actual definition of that within the document. M r Downie: Would you not accept that, given that the inspector, when he summed up at the planning inquiry, Mr Corkill: Secondly, if I may ask, Mr President, have said that urban regeneration required some further study, there been representations or a demand for car parking there could well be, within an area zoned for urban made to the company - in other words, the need for car regeneration, areas which could have approval for offices parking? and indeed car parking? Mr G F Karran: There have been many consultations Mr G F Karran: .If that is the meaning of this urban with various people prior to this application being made. I regeneration then I have no problem in proceeding. My have referred already to surveys from 1991 onwards and I problem is that the Planning Committee are interpreting believe further surveys are being carried out, and certainly now, through their decision on 2nd November, that this is there has been full support from the Department of now contrary to the zoning that would be adopted by this Transport that Douglas requires more car parking. plan if it is approved and that their wish is for housing in this area. That is their interpretation, and if that is going to Mrs Crowe: Mr Karran, are you aware, and your be the interpretation of the planners and the department in clients, indeed, that there has been major relocation of

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T295

offices in that area? We have a major accountancy firm garage, also it has been for the storage of cars on a relocated there, we now have a major bank relocated in substantial area around the showroom. Therefore that is that area, and all of the employees in those offices have its existing use and I would therefore hope to be able to great difficulty in parking their cars anywhere in the area, persuade an inspector, on an ‘existing commercial’ and I know that people are coming into these offices feeling argument, that that is exactly what we would hope to do - greatly disadvantaged because they are driving in from merely extend the existing usage by provision of a larger the south up to an hour-and-a-half, two hours, before their office and larger car park. working day is due to begin to find car parking spaces and taking residential spaces from the residents in the outlying Mr Quine: In the same way, Mr Karran, as you would areas. have to make your case to embrace multi-storey car park use within ‘commercial’, you will be left, if this plan goes Mr G F Karran: Mr President, I think I have stated a through, with making your case to include that within a great many people have complained that there is a car predominantly residential zone, which is also perfectly parking problem in Douglas. I think that is fairly obvious. feasible.

Mrs Christian: Mr Karran, would the issue so far as Mr G F Karran: Which, according to the Planning your clients are concerned be satisfied either by a Committee’s decision, now means that this is earmarked redesignation of their property on the plan or by the clear for housing, and that is their interpretation of this order if determination of what is meant by ‘predominantly’ and approved. what is meant by ‘urban regeneration’? Mr Quine: In accordance with the Planning Mr G F Karran: I think, Mr President, if I am faced Committee’s initial decision, not on review, not on appeal? with going to an appeal and an inspector with a decision of the Planning Committee that this zoning is now that Mr G F Karran: Correct. this site is earmarked for housing, I would have great difficulty arguing against that if that is the interpretation Mr Henderson: Mr Karran, I just want to check up on of the meaning of this order. the recent Planning Committee’s decision. Now, I am getting signals from yourself that one of the predominant Mrs Christian: But does not the word ‘predominantly’ reasons for their decision was the fact that they did in fact mean ‘not exclusively’? take into account this emerging plan in their decisions and your concern is that it could set the precedent for your Mr G F Karran: If there is a ruling from Court that own future emerging business plan, or your clients’ future ‘predominantly’ does not mean that this site has to be for emerging business plan. Is that correct? housing, then that would assist me in that application. Mr G F Karran: Yes, sir. The reason for refusing, Mr Mrs Christian: Thank you. President, did actually specify that this would be contrary to the draft revision of the plan published by the department Mr Braidwood: Mr Karran, just one point of after public inquiry and that it was contrary to the clarification. You are saying that the application by your department’s aspirations for more land for housing clients was refused by the Planning Committee, or was it development. by the director of planning under delegated powers? Mr Henderson: If I may, Mr President, I have just got Mr G F Karran: Initially, Mr President, we were a couple more clarifying points. It is my understanding informed that the decision was made by the director of that perhaps the garage, or the affected site, in the past has planning. That appeared in the actual refusal notice. We had some sort of approval in principle, initially, for the have subsequently received a letter from the department favourable impressions on the idea. stating that it was the Planning Committee. Mr G F Karran: I have not researched the history. I Mr Quine: Having regard to your objective, or your think the building was converted to a garage prior to clients’ objective, Mr Karran, of a multi-storey car park, planning law so far as the initial introduction to a garage the fact that it is presently zoned for ‘existing commercial’, I think is the term that was used, does that necessarily mean is concerned. There have been, I believe, various alterations that a multi-storey car park would fit that zoning and you to the building which would be subject to a planning would get approval? application.

Mr G F Karran: As I said, there is no actual definition Mr Gilbey: One point, Mr President. Mr Karran, surely of what ‘commercial’ is in planning law in the Isle of Man to put your clients back in a position they were before this that I have been able to find. The existing use of these change, which they were never consulted about, it appears, premises, as I also indicated, has been as office or even told about, they need to have this redesignated on headquarters for a group trading in the Isle of Man. It has the plan as commercial on their property? Is that not what been for a showroom and it has been for a workshop/ they are really asking for?

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard T296 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Mr G F Karran: Yes, sir. that the first meeting with the planners was 5th February 1998. That was before the publication of the written statement Mr Delaney: Just a quick question, Mr Karran. You and plan that was still called a draft in April 1998. referred in an answer my colleague Mr Braidwood to two communications from the planning in relation to your Sir Miles Walker: I was really interested in when your original application for your client. Is it possible for me clients decided there was a need for car parking provision and others who wanted to see a copy of those two letters, and when they started to develop their ideas which led up the one that came from the chief planning officer and then to the meeting with the planners and the submission of the the second letter, which then said it was made by the planning application. Planning Committee? Mr G F Karran: I believe, sir, it was the end of 1997. Mr G F Karran: I am sure that they can be made available to you or any member, Mr President. Sir Miles Walker: So it is all quite a recent change of policy as regards the business that we know as Mylchreests Mr Delaney: Thank you very much. Motors?

Mr Henderson: Mr Karran, from my limited Mr G F Karran: For the use of this site, I think the understanding, if the affected site could provide as many representations that have been made are, it would appear, car parking spaces as indicated and served by arterial roads, that garage businesses of this type are probably better sited then surely, would you not agree, then, that would be a outside of a central area such as Douglas and a lot of the loss to the town of Douglas in its present need for car garages have moved out of that area. The company are parking spaces? therefore mindful of that trend, and that has led to consideration, therefore, of use of this site. Mr G F Karran: Mr President, that is certainly the view of my client company, as backed up by officials that Sir Miles Walker: Thank you, Mr President. we have spoken to with the Department of Transport. Mr Waft: Mr President, I take it you are of the opinion, Mr Rodan: Mr President, it is a question relating to Mr Karran, that an appeal for the July application would the reasons for refusal which are a matter of record of the be prejudiced because of a positive decision to approve initial planning application. Can you confirm for us that the local plan here today? reason number one for refusal stated, ‘The proposed use is not in accordance with the zoning of the land on either Mr G F Karran: Mr President, if the local plan is the current Douglas Local Plan or the draft revision of that approved in its form and if the view of the Planning plan published by the department after public inquiry’? Committee is put forward in the way that it has been put Could I draw your attention to the fact that the reason for forward in its reason for refusal, then I would certainly be refusal related also to the current Douglas Local Plan where prejudiced in appearing before an inspector and appeal on the zoning is shown as a garage which reflects the existing that planning application because he would be faced with use, and not multi-storey car parking? a situation where it would be alleged that this site is now zoned predominantly for housing. Mr G F Karran: That is correct, Mr President. So far as the zoning, I stated in my address to this Court, the Mr Waft: Would you then agree that any appeal on approval in 1990 in the Douglas plan is zoned as a garage. any other plan would therefore be prejudiced on any other ‘Garage’ is defined under the Town and Country Planning local plan in any other area? They would be in a similar (Use Classes) Order 1982 as a building or a part of a position? building for the storage or repair of motor vehicles. My argument on that to any planning body would be that the Mr G F Karran: You cannot necessarily say that, Mr premises, in fact, have moved on since it has been used as President. a garage; it is used for a lot other reasons now other than storage or repair of motor vehicles. As I have stated, it is Mr Cannell: Mr Karran, is it not a fact that either way used as office headquarters, it is used as a retail showroom the ambitions of the urban regeneration area to have and it is used for the parking and storage of motor vehicles housing placed upon the Westmoreland Road site could in in addition to storage and repair. fact be thwarted by your clients because, if their appeal is unsuccessful for use as a car park and offices they still Sir Miles Walker: Mr President. You have told us Mr retain the option to continue business where they are and Karran, that a planning application was lodged earlier this therefore there will be no advantage for housing for the year of which you have had the initial result. Can you give urban regeneration area? me some idea when your client started working on the proposal which led up to the submission of the planning Mr G F Karran: Certainly in relation to this site, Mr application? President, that is a great possibility in the fact that the advice that we have received is that if this site is sold for housing, Mr G F Karran: I informed the Court, Mr President, as I have stated, its value would reduce by over 50 per

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T297

cent. Therefore the company really would have to face department is most anxious to ensure everyone knows is that financial situation and would probably have to decide wished to be retained at Lord Street, not in its present form to stay where they are and operate their business there. where it covers the entire area, which those who are old enough will remember was once a car park, but in fact on Mr Cannell: Which would, of course, presumably be a limited use on the Lord Street side, opposite where St counterproductive to the idea of trying to alleviate traffic Barnabas’s used to stand. The plan for the bus station is in that area because, by your own admission, your clients’ that there will be 10 stands there which will accommodate business does create considerable traffic? the new bus network proposed to be introduced, hopefully, on 1st May, where the buses will come into Douglas and Mr G F Karran: Correct, sir. will spend a short time on the stands at Lord Street rather than now, where they spend considerable times and people The President: I think, learned counsel, that seems to have to change services to accomplish the next part of their have exhausted the Court as regards questions. It just journey. So I would seek an assurance from the hon. remains for me to thank you for your appearance and for minister that this perhaps is a clerical error for the bus answering our questions so lucidly. Thank you very much station at the steam railway station, because the indeed. department’s public transport division are most anxious that there be no suggestion that the main operation of the Mr G F Karran: Thank you, Mr President. national transport service be from the steam railway station rather than Lord Street, as in fact demanded by the public. The President: Hon. members, I think it would be My second point is regarding Lake Road. This is the appropriate for the Court to take a break (Members: Hear, site which is also marked on the southern map and this is hear.) and we will reassemble at twenty to five by the Court dedicated for retail warehousing - on map number 1,1 am clock, but business will recommence at a quarter to five sorry, the central area map, the same map as referred to, of because, in the meantime, the Court is going to be shot; course, for the bus station - and I refer firstly to page 4 of photographers are around, I understand, and a picture will the document where, at 1.8, it is accepted that there exists be taken at twenty minutes to five. Business will continue development pressure for additional land for housing and at a quarter to five. Thank you, hon. members. that the capacity to accommodate such demand within the town of Douglas is limited. Also, at 2.2, on page 6, the The Court adjourned, at 4.25 p.m. office sector has consolidated in the town centre, thus reducing the resident population in the central area - that is under the general heading of Population and Housing. Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local At 2.9 on page 9, a study carried out in May 1997 has indicated a comparatively little land for private sector Plan) Order 1998 - Approved residential development remains and then goes on to list what does remain. Further, at 2.11 on page 10, in relation The President: Hon. members, the Court will come to to future population growth in Douglas, the preferred order, and we resume the debate on item 14 on the order option is seen as being to limit growth to only those areas paper. Does any hon. member wish to address the Court? defined for residential purposes at the present time. At 2.12 The hon. member for Onchan, Mr Cannell. on the same page, ‘Residential development will be restricted to those areas defined in the proposed local plan Mr Cannell: Thank you, Mr President. I have a number and include standards for open space provision or other of points to make which I hope will be strictly within the facilities which will be set down.’At 2.14 at the bottom of preserve of what we are considering today. I must say it is that page, ‘The use of residential areas designated for very easy to stray from the remit and get onto matters which development in conjunction with programmes of may well not be strictly covered by the written statement refurbishment and clearance areas for redevelopment is to and the accompanying literature, but I am sure that you be encouraged,’ and the 2.17 paragraph, ‘As part of will pull me up if I stray off that boundary. redevelopment opportunities the introduction of residential uses in areas such as the area’ - and this is the pertinent The President: Delighted! (Laughter) point - ‘between Lake Road and the River Douglas area and the present bus station at Lord Street will be supported.’ Mr Cannell: The main plank of my first submission is With all that as the foregoing to the requirement - and, that which is of the Isle of Man Department of Tourism as we have heard also on the previous submission for the and Leisure’s public transport division, in that the urban regeneration area that housing is to be encouraged delineation of the bus station, which is on map number 1, back into Douglas because, because, although in the the central area, has apparently been moved to the steam document there is an expression of an opinion that very railway station. Now, it may be that this is just a technical few businesses have relocated out of Douglas other than slip-up because at the steam railway station, as I am sure B&Q, the fact remains that Douglas, particularly, appears members will recall, a substantial sum of money has just to have lost its heart and soul as regards residency and this been agreed to be spent on a bus maintenance facility, and document appears to confirm that fact in the quotes that I it may be that that is what is intended at the steam railway have made to you - it does seem as if, now, the department station rather than the actual bus station, which the is committed to redeveloping Douglas for its housing, no

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T298 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

less, of course, in the previous submissions we have heard mention of Shaw’s Brow car park earlier, which has been for Westmoreland Road. So what I am saying here is, we going on almost as long as the Villa Marina, not quite but have the designation of Lake Road, according to the almost, and of course there is no better illustration; that is independent planning inspector, ‘the use of which is sound only 200 yards away at Shaw’s Brow. in best public interest’. I submit that that is not the case. My final point concerns something, and this is where I I think that the former Quiggin and Company site, one may stray off the remit here, and that is my disappointment of the most magnificent sites to come onto the disposal in at seeing the delineation proposed for the Douglas Head probably the last 20 or 30 years, should also be embraced area where in fact I will confine my remarks to saying that for housing. I feel it is a great loss, as I have mentioned in the traffic situation on the former Gas Works Hill - previous submissions to this Court and to another place, Taubman Terrace and the road leading up now past, what that in fact it is an opportunity going to be lost to the people was once the Fort Anne - and on the way up to Douglas of the Isle of Man, but particularly the people of Douglas, Head in fact is so dangerous that I used to fear for my life that this should be permitted for the purpose which is down to drive along there, not because of my driving standards there, for retail warehousing as outlined on map number but because of just the sheer dangerous nature of the entire 1, the central area, and even though we have heard, of area, and I think a chance has been missed here again on course, that in previous submissions there were applications the Douglas Head road delineation to make an offer to the where zoning was changed for compensation to be paid, people who own the former boarding houses, guest houses, unless it is an absolutely outrageous sum which is being now private residents’ developments, on Taubman Terrace demanded, I still think it would be money well spent by to have that road widened once and for all, particularly in the taxpayer of the Isle of Man to acquire this site and to view of the magnificent scheme which now has been built add further to the housing which is projected to be right by Midocean on the former site of Fort Anne. alongside that. It is on the flat, it is near the new proposals for the marina of south Douglas harbour and die South Mr Henderson: Mr President, after taking careful Quay. The North Quay, we have heard, is going to be partly consideration of the evidence presented at the bar this pedestrianised - but that is another subject - but in general afternoon and, indeed, of the planning orders in our the whole area is perfectly served for housing. Tynwald pack, I must return to the issue of the Mylchreests While I am talking of the bus station at Lord Street, of site and other affected businesses within the now much- course, it is suggested that there is going to be housing talked-about urban regeneration area. I am somewhat there as well, which gives more grist to the mill of the fact surprised: certainly the owners of the said site have tried that that area is ideal for the purpose. It is on the flat, so to progress what seems to me a sound plan, it has been the elderly people who may form part of a housing initially turned down, and certainly one of the main reasons accommodation on the Lake Road/Quiggin’s site would for that - and it is clearly illustrated in their response - is be very, very well served by that: they have a public taking into account the emerging plan and giving it some transport link at Lord Street, they have a public transport great degree of weight. Douglas is desperate for car link to the harbour and they have a public transport link parking, and in my opinion this careful plan would provide via the steam railway. Other than building an airport in the nearly half of the required off-road parking, close to the area, I do not see where any other more ideal site could be main business centre and arterial road structure and in that located for the needs of general housing, both for sheltered respect an attractive and logical position to solve a lot of housing and for public housing, and I think we will rue the problems in Douglas at the minute, and now we find day, as we did when we allowed the Gooseneck site at ourselves in exactly the same situation as the Sulby Local Ballabrooie not to be taken up by the Department of Plan not but a few weeks ago: an application is in the offing, Education rather than for housing. I know it is the exact and we as legislators are going to superimpose what opposite of what I am saying here. I am just trying to appears to be a zoning restriction which could effectively illustrate the fact that an opportunity presented itself. These block planning permission for a perfectly reasonable do not come along. It is like getting your next door proposition. The owners of this land, which was previously neighbour’s house if you want to knock it through to zoned for commercial use, cannot progress a sound and accommodate a better family: the chances come up very, logical business strategy which would benefit the town no very infrequently indeed, and I think this government will end, because the Planning Committee are now on record rue the day if we do not take over that Lake Road site for as taking into strong account the new emerging plan. I housing while we have the opportunity and the opportunity have great difficulty with this scenario and not just because is here. Sure we may have to pay compensation. Sure it I am promoting the appellant’s cause, but there will be may be substantial, but in years to come we will regret it if other affected businesses and people within that area as we do not do that. well which I am also concerned about. The third of my points concerns Mylchreests Motors’ I have great difficulty, as I say, and certainly by the application and I think probably sufficient of that has answers given by the appellants at the bar and certainly already been said, but it is in an urban regeneration area with the ambiguity of the phraseologies that are used and and, as Mr Karran has so eloquently put it and better than there is no definite term, it could be taken one way, it could I, it is difficult to define what an urban regeneration area be taken another way and, as I say, the precedent seems to actually sets out to achieve. But suffice it to say that multi­ be dangerously close to being set at the minute by the initial storey car parking most certainly is needed in Douglas planning decision, and then we have the issue of the (Members: Hear, hear.), as indeed was illustrated by the property being devalued, which I do not think is right either.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T299

Then this flags up questions and I will need categorical question of those areas being defined as predominantly assurances from the minister - and I hope the hon. minister anything, they are quite specifically designated, and I has his pen ready because I have a few assurances to seek would have thought then we have reasonable assumption for this one. Given the nature of the Douglas plan and its to make in that if the word ‘predominantly’ is used it is all-sweeping embodiment of the various areas, I need an there for a reason, and that reason is to imply to us, or it assurance that the urban regeneration study scheme is just certainly implies to me, that there is scope for some that - a study, not set in stone, but open to consultation, flexibility within that area and within the designation on negotiation and subject to fine tuning - and that this is not this plan. yet a definite or finite proposal. The study will be open to Now, I do not know whether, when the mover responds affected parties’ views and will take cognisance of those to the issue, he would clarify, as has already has been views, that planners do not have to give great weight to an indicated by the hon. member Mr Henderson, as to what emerging plan such as this especially since it is a study his particular view is on the use of that word so that we area and no study having taken place as yet or any approved might from this Court give some interpretation beyond our actions as a result of that study have even been initiated. boundaries here to those who are interpreting this just what Certainly I would like an assurance that the urban it is that we intend the words to mean. I think that is where regeneration in the context of the Douglas Town Plan the difficulties are coming from, in the way in which the means more than just housing and applies in the fullest planning authorities or committee are interpreting the plans terms to the businesses just as well, and that present that are set before them. businesses who will be affected in the future will be treated So on the basis of the common acceptance of the word as a special case, will be allowed to continue or enhance ‘predominantly’ meaning ‘not exclusively’, and with their premises or will be subject to usual planning processes particular regard to the site that we have been addressed rather than come under the urban regeneration net, and about today at the bar of the Court, I note that in that area further, given the hon. minister’s recent circular regarding there are other obviously commercial enterprises at the the advice on such matters by our learned Attorney- moment who may also be wondering where it leaves their General’s office, in that - 1 quote - ‘the policies and zoning future position. I do think it is important that where we are in the new draft plan are not given any force in themselves; endorsing this and we see the word ‘predominant’, we expect it to be interpreted in that way, with a measure and it is the effect which granting approval might have on the a degree of flexibility. proper consideration of the draft plan which must be taken into account.’ This is the crux of the matter and I would Mr Singer: Mr President, the changing in rezoning of urgently seek an assurance that this will not be the case the area, particularly including Mylchreests’ land, to when existing businesses are seeking permission at this predominantly urban regeneration does imply housing. We very early stage of the proposal, which is yet only in its have heard that for decades this land has been in infancy and draft stages. I would welcome the minister’s commercial use. It is not as though the use has lapsed and, clarification on this point. because it has not been used, it has been rezoned, similar In the case of any negative assurances, can the minister to the land in Sulby. This land has been used continually then offer loss or compensation to the value of the said in commercial use. Now, JMP traffic consultants in 1991 property or properties which it would have gained if it had identified a shortfall of parking places in Douglas for 1,200 approval in the first instance for its proposals, and would cars, and a new up-to-date review is imminent and it will his department even consider buying the property probably identify a shortfall now of 1,500 spaces. themselves at the price it would achieve if the desired The working party for integrated transport is at present planning permission was granted? considering ways to limit the number of cars travelling If the hon. minister cannot give reassurances that this into the town centre of Douglas. Now, these journeys might property or others in the area will not be adversely affected be limited by encouraging the use of acceptable alternative and that planners can show, and should show, a degree of public transport, cycling, walking and car parking facilities flexibility and consideration to proprietors’ own emerging outside the main town central area. The proposal to change business plans such as we have heard, as I say we are back the designation of the Mylchreests site suggests against to the Sulby plan again, and therefore I will not be able to the development of a multi-storey car park, yet Mr Bexson vote for this scheme in its present format and must advise himself said sites were limited, and here we are being that hon. members of this hon. Court do likewise. offered one for 670 cars. It is certainly suitable for commuters who work in the area and would reduce car Mrs Christian: Mr President, it must be almost an movements into central Douglas. impossible task for the Department of Local Government On page 35 of the report, 7.11, it states that in the central and the Environment to come up with a plan that suits area there should only be considered parking provisions everybody. However, I do think that if we are giving our for those who are seen as essential users; 7.13, as we have endorsement to an order such as this we need to feel heard, says that long-term car parking for office workers confident about the way in which it will be interpreted. If will be based on peripheral surface or multi-storey car parks we look at the plan it is quite clear that certain areas have in close proximity to the main arterial roads and must specific designations, such as light industrial, car parking, provide secure car parking allied to an efficient and regular retail warehousing, steam railway station and so on. So I public transport system. think it is only fair for us to assume that there is some Putting these two together, I think, is speaking for a car significance in the way the words are used. There is no park in this position, certainly not against it. The position

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T300 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

of the highways and traffic division is straightforward: an dedicated to the department, and we hope that that will in application was received by the division on 7th August itself bring this matter to a head, even if it means the and they put in no objection. Their position is as follows, department having to use legislative powers to get this that they believe the Mylchreests garage site is located on matter sorted out. I have no hesitation if that is necessary, the peripheral edge of the centre of Douglas, within short if public safety is being compromised. So from my point distance of many office-based buildings and there is there of view, the department is endeavouring to progress this. a demand for long-stay car parking. Now, the department The gentleman at the bar asked about what is the design is not in the market to acquire land to build car parks but like and so on. It is fair to say there is no design at this will act as a facilitator for private enterprise. The location, stage; we would not go into detailed design when we do surrounded in close proximity by office development, not know whether or not we have got land yet. However, makes the site suitable for a car park. The access onto the the department is endeavouring to identify what land we surrounding highway network is good and, as it is on the would require, then we can sketch up something and then periphery of the office developments in Douglas, it will we can progress purchasing the amount of land we require assist in reducing the traffic movements within the centre to overcome this problem. So it is a difficult issue, it has of the town. been going on for a long time. I have to say it is unfortunate Therefore the division, whilst recognising the zoning to the extreme that when planning permission was given of Mylchreests garage as predominantly residential in the to allow this development to take place it was not a local plan, would support a change in the zoning to permit requirement that a new road should be put up through this a car park to be built. The Mylchreests site is seen by the area, and I think this is something that is a problem, in that highways and traffic division as a most suitable location if that decision had been made in the early days, then we and available and, when looking at other potential sites, could have used everywhere that are now gardens before difficulties arise either on poor access to the main highway the houses were built. But I think there is no point going network or involving the demolition of property. on about that because that has happened. What is important Therefore I believe that this is the right site for a multi­ is to try and resolve the matter for the future and that is storey car park and I also, in order to vote for this plan, what we are endeavouring to do in that area. So whilst I this proposal, need to know from the minister his definition can understand the concerns expressed by the gentleman of the word ‘predominantly’. I think it all hinges on this at the bar, I hope that clarifies that for members in terms particular word: does predominantly mean mainly, or does of the actual development plan. predominantly mean totally? I would welcome that from the minister. As for the other issue that has been brought forward which of course is causing concern, I think firstly I would M r Brown: Mr President, just to echo the remarks of have to say that I think we all welcome any town centre the last speaker, who of course is a member of my regeneration because that is important, not just for people department in relation to highways and traffic, he has really to live in town centres - and it also depends what you mean covered the main points from the department’s point of by town centre - but by getting people to live back in some view as to the use of this site, which really confirms what of these areas, in new properties, but of course it is was said at the bar of the House by the legal adviser for important that there is a mix within any area, and not just the objectors. housing, because my understanding of ‘predominantly Can I just say, to maybe just answer a couple of points, residential’ is it is not just houses, it allows for businesses, firstly with Vicarage Road and the points that were put it allows for commercial undertakings and so on and over by the residents of that area and Mr Duggua, can I certainly, as far as my department is concerned, it must just say that the department has in fact endeavoured to allow for car parking. You cannot have an area where you move along on this one because I know it is a concern that have houses in it with a lot of people either working and/ many members have as to the situation in Vicarage Road. or living in that area and not have car parking. So our view I think it is fair to say it is also an area of concern to myself has been consistent with that, as the planners know, from and my department as to the nature of that road vis-a-viz the department, which Mr Singer has made clear today the amount of development that is going on in the area, here in the debate. and the road is just not suitable for the amount of traffic So I think really the main point is the concern that is now feeding in and out of that road. However, it is fair to there, and I am sure, and I hope the minister will clarify say that it has a long history of difficulty in endeavouring that, not necessarily being site-specific - because, of course, to get land for either widening the road or the provision of there is a danger for him to be site-specific in terms that it another road. The policy of the department at present is may go to appeal and he therefore may have to make a that we do not envisage widening the existing road, we do determination on that - but certainly the principles of not wish to remove the ancient sod hedge that is there, and planning and, where it says ‘urban regeneration’, what we are endeavouring to do now is in fact identify to ‘predominantly residential’, the type of uses that are provide a new road, because we are talking about an outer acceptable in that area, and I think that is really what link road here now which will actually go on the west side members are looking for. of the boundary hedge there and then the existing road, The other point I would just like to again clarify, because hopefully, can be used to service the estate and provide a again we have this problem every time we have a local cycling path and pedestrian access. plan and every time there is a planning issue raised, and Now instructions have been given in an endeavour to members say we need flexibility. Again it has to be made actually purchase this land as against trying to get it clear. My understanding clearly from being minister

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T301

previously, advice received from the Attorney-General of importance and should be determined conclusively by the day and two of them at that time, was absolutely clear: Tynwald through the statutory local plan process and not there is flexibility, and the flexibility is that when a decision left to the developers or planners in the absence of clearly has been made by the planners, they must take into account defined transparent criteria’. And then they go on to refer the zoning of a plan but they can then make a decision that to the fact that the hon. member for East Douglas, Mrs is contrary to that zoning if they feel the case is merited. Cannell, the member of the DTI responsible for retailing, That is your flexibility, and I think as long as that is kept has sent out a questionnaire to all retailers in the Island in mind and the planners do their job - in other words, asking them to provide information regarding the size of they take into account what it is zoned for - they look and their premises, the type of products sold, et cetera and they listen and, if there is a case made that warrants a change, point out that until this information has been received and they can do that, and it is subject to appeal and then it can, collated by the DTI, no sensible planning policy can be of course, be reversed if that is necessary or whatever way formulated and they go on with other very realistic it goes. So there is flexibility within the system. The point arguments. is that people are also looking for comfort in these plans Then hon. members will, I hope, have also received a to say that that is where there are going to be houses or letter from T W Cain, advocates, on behalf of Douglas businesses or whatever, or a mixture, and that is where Steam Sawmill, again expressing great concern regarding there is going to be no development. So you do have the the proposals in this plan. Therefore we have two very Planning Committee and the minister who is having to leading bodies expressing concern regarding it. It is most make these decisions somewhere in the middle trying to unfortunate, I feel, that they did not come to the bar of this get this sorted out, and clearly what is important is laid- Court to express their views as Mylchreests have done. down policies, which there are more of now than there But the matter that concerns me most of all is that of used to be. So I think that if this matter is able to be clarified, Mylchreests Motors. As we all know, Mylchreests are a it will respond to most of the members’ concerns. long-standing, purely Manx, locally controlled company The other point I would say is that there have been major and for many years, as long as most of us can remember, improvements in this plan as against the 1989 plan, and they have used the premises now under discussion for the the 1989 plan was done in a situation where the basis of storage, display, repair of vehicles, and offices. Now we the Island and Douglas especially - its infrastructure was are told quite clearly, and no-one has denied this, that the somewhat different to today, we had a lot of run-down zoning in the draft plan right up to the public inquiry was property, there was nobody investing in it and there was, commercial - that was what was marked on their site - and and still is to some degree, a great demand for that resulted from the 1990 plan. We are told - and no one accommodation for offices, and rightly the department of has denied this, that no single reference was made in the the day made that decision and Tynwald supported it. So inspector’s report to the rezoning of this site in any way at clearly that was considered at that time. Here is the review all. Yet nine months later the final plan came out showing and I think the review has now stepped it on that bit further, two things: first of all that it was part of an urban and I hope that the points that have been made by the regeneration zone; now that may have been known before, members can be rectified this afternoon. but removing the wording from on it on that site was commercial. M r Gilbey: Mr President, the hon. member for Onchan, Now, this I think is much more serious than hon. Mr Cannell, has pointed out an apparent error regarding members have realised, because it is all right saying a the bus station, but in a document like this you cannot redevelopment zone is predominantly housing, but if you have errors at all. If we are going to approve it, once we look, hon. members, at the plan for the centre of Douglas, have approved it, that is that - warts and all, as they say. number 1, and you look inside the red dotted line, which He also pointed out the position regarding the Quiggin’s is the urban regeneration study area, you will see that there site not being used for retailing but for housing. In fact, are many places in that clearly marked for other uses. If this ties up with a letter which I am sure all hon. members we look at where Miam Dhone House is and the Post Office have received from the Isle of Man Chamber of Commerce. headquarters, that is in the urban redevelopment zone, but I certainly will not quote the whole of it because it is too it says quite clearly ‘predominantly offices’. If you look long, but I hope hon. members have read it and I would down the road to Belgravia House, that is in the zone, but just like to touch on some of the main points in it. It says, it says ‘predominantly offices’. If you look at other places ‘In summary the Chamber of Commerce would strongly you will see also ‘predominantly offices’. Even more urge that the final consideration of the plan by Tynwald be telling, if you look up just to the east of the Chester Street adjourned for the following reasons: (1) retail warehouses car park, which is a big yellow area, you will see there is would undoubtedly have a great impact upon existing residential/offices area and then an area in pink, marked retailers in the Island and upon existing retail centres. Until ‘light industrial’. Now, why could not the designation for that impact has been properly assessed, it is submitted that the Mylchreests site have been left in as commercial? We the proposals to allow the development of retail have all these precedents for predominantly offices, light warehouses, as contained in paragraphs 3.15,3.19 and 3.20 industrial and various recreational and leisure, healthcare, of the draft written statement should not be approved. The all kinds of things; they are all in the urban regeneration wording of these paragraphs is imprecise and ambivalent. study area and marked clearly. Why should not However, if retail warehousing is to be allowed, then the Mylchreests’ site have been marked clearly as commercial? location of such retail warehouses will be of critical I say it should have been.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T302 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Worse still, the firm was never consulted by the planning change the law in the future so that at the very least people officers, and no letter was even sent to them advising them whose planning zoning is altered are told about it and not of their right to claim for any devaluation of the site just left to find out (Mr Houghton: Hear, hear.) and are resulting from the change, although this has been done in given a chance to make their representations. other cases outside Douglas. I would say, ‘So much for natural justice’. If we agree to this plan being approved The President: And the next speaker will be the hon. without it being changed back, I think it would show we member of the Council, Mr Delaney, if you will resume do not care two hoots for natural justice at all. your seat a moment, sir. Mr Delaney has asked for certain They applied then for a multi-storey car park to take documents to be circulated. Would the messengers circulate 690 cars and with an office in front to shield it from them now, please. Westmoreland Road. This was turned down apparently - and I am not surprised - in relation to the new proposed Mr Delaney: Thank you, Mr President. zoning as and when an urban regeneration area primarily for housing was set up, and it is not surprising, because The President: I have a problem with circulation in there was nothing there saying that this area had a the course of a debate because that obviously upsets the commercial use and, as we know from a letter which we whole tenor of the debate as members scrutinise the new have all received from the learned Attorney but which of issues. The hon. member of the Council, Mr Delaney. course the advocate appearing for Mylchreests has not had the opportunity to see, we know that when planning Mr Delaney: Thank you, Mr President. I am sorry for committees and appeal inspectors consider planning that slow-down in transmission. First of all I keep with applications, they definitely do take into account any new me, as probably all members know, the dictionary, because plans which are coming out and particularly new plans it an uneducated man like myself has to refer to it pretty appears were about to be approved by Tynwald. So often and I read here ‘predominate: be greater than others therefore there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that this in number and intensity’, to predominate, and I could be change, regarding which the company was not even told - describing as civil servants, I suppose, because the situation it is quite unbelievable - has seriously prejudiced their is I see the minister with some difficulty that I faced up to position. with the last hon. member who served loyally with me for Now, we have already heard from many people that the time we were on the planning and went through this 690 car parking places would be very valuable. Douglas Corporation and the Department of Transport do not object, exercise in 1989 and if nothing else have got to say, it may far from it: the hon. member in charge of highways strongly help others who come after me. What you are told and supports it. what happens are two different things I have found in this Now, contrary to what the hon. member for North Court. In a small community like ours you would honestly Douglas, Mr Henderson, and the hon. member for Ramsey, believe and I always believed this Court had some real Mr Singer, say, no reassurance in this Court, no words of power on the orders and obviously we hope we do, but theirs, of the ministers can really secure the position of when you get to the situation like the 1982 Planning Act Mylchreests. The fact is that we are approving an order which gives authority to planning officers, as Mylchreests with these plans as they are and this is what we are and their companies have found out, who can say in one approving and no words said in this Court by the minister order and letter that was made by the planning officer and or anyone else can legally alter what we approve here. then immediately had to be corrected by the minister to The only way for it to be done is for the minister to either say, no, it was made by the committee, you can see the withdraw this order, which would be the best course, or dangerous road we tread. (Messrs Cannan and Gilbey: for us to vote against it so he has to bring in a new amended Hear, hear.) order. But no-one should believe that any words of the I believe that members should be very wary, and minister’s can put back on this document the word unfortunately I am several years too late to learn it, of what ‘commercial’ over the area owned by Mylchreests, and no they are being told in planning terms. Mr Gilbey and myself definition of the word ‘predominantly’ will either help and our colleague, the ex-member for Onchan, spent much because they do not want the word ‘predominantly’, what time with the then chief planning officer and others and they want put back is what was there which was excellent officers who served us, trying to understand what ‘commercial’ on that area (M r Houghton: Hear, hear.) we were getting this Court into, and I came before this and as I pointed out, there are other areas within this Court with the same planning document for Douglas and proposed urban regeneration study area which have quite what we were told and what I told you, unfortunately, I clear designations from light industrial to offices and did not realise could be overturned by people outside this therefore I shall vote against this order and I hope that Court, and previous chairmen of Planning Committees and other hon. members will do the same. I did consider moving ministers will find that out in the future, I am sure. The the adjournment of this item, but I do not think there is fact of it is what you read is not what you get because the any advantage in that because if we vote against the order interpretation of the wording is up to others. the minister can just as easily bring in a new amended Now, I was lucky enough to be brought up in, I thought, order as he could if we voted for the adjournment. That is the centre of this town, to find out that someone else can what I am advised by our learned Clerk. rule that I was not really brought up there because the town I hope, therefore, in the interests of natural justice and I extended to what I used to know as a boy was the ‘boat think a great injustice has been done and I hope we will field’ that went right up to the ‘hossie river’ as we knew it

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T303

then and yet I thought I was a town centre boy. It is because do we want towards surviving in a better world? And she what other people will interpret as both legally and in is carrying out an exercise to find out exactly how much planning terms is what you will finish up with, and to say retail there is, for example, and according to reading these today that we are getting into the same area when we have documents, which read one way, I can accept that you need the re-urbanisation, the regeneration - lovely words, they a certain amount of retail in housing areas to give people are really constructive words, they make you feel as if you the facilities, but does that mean that suddenly I am going are going somewhere, we are really on the road to marching to finish up with another big super and hypermarket to victory here. But are we? Because when you get down somewhere else in Douglas according to these plans? Mr to what my interpretation coming from the dictionary is Cannell has said, yes, we are going to finish up down in and what others will put on it, you will find you get Lake Road with one because that has gone through, but something else. It is what somebody else believes should there are other areas where the same thing can happen happen to the town, outside of your jurisdiction, completely outside of this town on the periphery of the town, and then outwith there, and no matter what is said here, I have found the town will degenerate, it will go down. The thing that out, did not really matter, and members and the councillors has been spent millions of government money on as well of this town - who are referred to in documents here, by as private money is going to go down, because there are the way, as commissioners, which I have pointed out to not enough customers for everybody. It does not take a the minister, by the planning inspector who sat on the plan genius to work that out. Unless somewhere there is a master - seem to have no say in this at all, because it is others who plan to get 150,000 or 200,000 people on the Isle of Man, will make the decisions for you, and I am worried and we should tell the public, I think, if that is the plan. But concerned about this, because if Tynwald predominates there is not enough business to keep putting these things on this order and it goes through, that would be a great forward and we have got to think about it now, otherwise achievement for the town as we are stepping forward, but the people who pay the taxes and who should get the then you will find from time to time things will be changed benefits of a very successful Island are not going to get and ‘I did not mean that, it means something else’, and I the benefits because their business will be out, they will want a clarification of what this generation of the town be closed, they will be boarded up, we have gone through really means. I want that. I need to know where somebody those stages, and I honestly believe when we find out is going to be, after I am dead and gone, in this town and exactly what retail and other services we have on the Island any other town on the Island when we start using this word we can plan for any future improvement. more frequently that we have brought in. What does it This is not just about Mylchreests site, this is about the mean? What does it really mean, not in what I have just Douglas plan, and I am a bit sorry for the minister because read to you, but what does it mean in human terms to the I know what it is like, but I feel honestly that until we get town, the people who have to live in this town? clear interpretations of where this plan takes us it should I am the keenest man, with the member for South not be grabbed at, it should not be agreed to. Holding it Douglas whose area this is in and his colleague, I want to back at this moment for everyone’s benefit would be the see houses, as many as possible, back in the town. All of answer, because at least it would give a chance of us, I think, do to a certain extent. We realise the mistakes interpretation and then maybe we can support it, but as it we are making. But really when you then start zoning it, is I am very doubtful that once the planners and the other just ad lib, grab this and put a title on it, is that what you geniuses get a hold of it after we have left it and put our are going to finish up with? I do not think so. It is the blessing on it, they are going to reinterpret it and reinvent colour of the moment, it is the most favourite colour of the it to suit their own purposes, because they are the experts, moment, because that is the problem that they are going to but it is us that has got to live in this town and it is us who face up to. have got to be answerable to the people of the town and I want to think that when we put this forward, which the rest of the Island when the plans come. will not last - 1 said five years at the time, I gave it at the So I honestly believe, hon. members, that this plan last Tynwald, and it has taken much longer than that to get should be just held over until we get a chance to get more back to a renewal of it - something will happen in that answers, because we have not had the answers today. It is period of time to benefit the town, and unfortunately I do not in the written statement. It is certainly is not, as far as not see that happening. History has taught me one thing I am concerned with bitter experience behind me, what it and it teaches everyone else a thing, that the only thing it says on this plan. I am not satisfied in my own mind that I can teach you is how not to make the mistakes, and this am not going to vote for something I did in 1989 which last 1989 plan taught me not to do it again. Do not believe will do exactly to this town what I and others have done, everything you are told, go into it much deeper, and here have put a plan forward and said, ‘Hurray, we have got it is an opportunity to learn from history, that do not accept through Tynwald’ and then find out somebody else’s that what they are telling you is going to happen, because interpretation comes on and the people of the town are no they themselves do not know and I think it is time to say, better off. ‘Hang on a minute, let’s get a clear picture of what the town is doing.’ Mr Houghton: Hear, hear. Now, I have circulated a document which deals with an important matter being handled by the hon. member for Mr Downie: Mr President, hon. members, interesting, East Douglas. Where are we in this little place? How much the previous speaker, my hon. colleague and member of of one thing do we want and how much of another thing Council, Mr Delaney. In fact I was in the public gallery in

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T304 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

1989 when he took the Douglas local plan through and I Let us look at some of the positive things. We have know at that particular time he fought tooth and nail to get heard all about the doom and gloom today. Let us look at retail warehousing on the site down there at Quiggin’s Yard, some of the positive things in this plan. There is an because he saw it as a way of lifting the town, and here we opportunity here with this urban regeneration area to clean are in a situation where that land has been zoned since up some of the old parts of Douglas here, to have another 1989, where people have been encouraged to come in and clear-out as it were, to get rid of some of these old properties acquire additional land in that area so that they can put which are falling into decay. You have two schools there together the framework of a reasonable-sized application in the area, Fairfield and Ballacloan, which are coming to for retail warehousing on that site, and what are we talking the end of their lives and when the hospital scheme comes about today? We are talking about government should buy to fruition and Noble’s removes from the present site, there it, we should rezone it. There is about £7 million worth of is the opportunity to relocate those two schools on the land down there at the moment in present-day terms. The existing Noble’s site and bring a whole new ambit into land is zoned, as we know, for retail warehousing. It does this part of Douglas. They are the positive things, they are not belong to us: it belongs to somebody else. Now, if you what is behind the ethos of urban regeneration, to give look at what has happened down there and you compare this part of town a new lease of life, an injection. that with what is happening, say, at the Mylchreests site, Also in the document that has been presented to you you can see there are two sides to the argument. Now, I today was the opportunity to have some regard for our have some sympathy with Mylchreests and I have some registered buildings and our conservation areas in Douglas sympathy with the people who own and have been actively and you will see a study is to take place which will involve encouraged by government to acquire the Quiggin’s site. Derby Square, Woodbum Square, Queen’s Park, Hilary I am a bit disappointed at the eleventh hour submission Park, Eastfield, Little Switzerland, Brunswick Gardens - that has come from the Chamber of Commerce. As far as I delights to people who come from off-Island to go around am concerned their argument just does not stack up. They and say, ‘You’ve so many nice attractive buildings in the have sent us details today counting the cost of superstores. town’, and here is an opportunity to get something done to The study includes the loss of trade between 13 per cent preserve them. and 15 per cent by existing town and district centre food We have even had regard to lots of problems that have stores which has generally followed the opening of edge- appeared over on the drives and part of the promenade. of-town or out-of-town rivals. Now, since when has There is an area over there that has been given some flexibility so the people who are struggling in some of the Quiggin’s Yard been out of town? The Bishop will tell smaller guesthouses have an opportunity to diversify and you that 200 years ago the Quiggin’s Yard and the quay go into something else, perhaps office accommodation, area were the centre, the hub of this town, and between and that has been dealt with in the report. the old St Matthew’s Church and St George’s Church, that I must keep harking back, though, to this business about is where it all happened, and years ago the former this retail survey and indeed I am aghast that we are in a custodians of the town cleared all that area and we had a situation now where we are told the Trade and Industry form of urban regeneration there about 200 years ago, as who are responsible for retail want to get involved with we did just before the war when we got rid of the old this survey under way. Where were they at the public rubbish that was built on what was called the ‘fairy ground’ inquiry? Where was the representation from the department and we had a clear-out. when all these businesses in town were giving evidence? I have got the inspector’s report here and there is no M r Cretney: Busy. acknowledgement that the Department of Trade and Industry made any representation. Now, surely it is a bit M r Downie: Now, times have changed. When I was a late. These studies should be going on all the time and it is lad they used to make ropes in Quiggin’s Yard and there really pointless introducing them at this late hour on an were all sorts of other activities going on and the site issue as big as this. became redundant, and I think what the Douglas Local Now, also in the local plan I think what the department Plan is trying to do is it is trying to highlight the changes are trying to do is they are trying to ring-fence Douglas, as and it is trying to flag up the different ways of proceeding it were, and over the last five or six years the complaint forward and give this town a chance to develop in a proper has been that there has been too much urban sprawl, we way. have been developing too much on the periphery, and what Now, I said initially I had some sympathy for the department has tried to do is identify ways to bring Mylchreests because they, over the years, have become people back into the town, not only on the housing side, land-locked. The commercial sector has spread round them but also to try and find areas, areas out near the White on one side, lots of the old non-conforming uses have Hoe, out behind the cooling towers of Pulrose power actually moved out of town and they are really on some station, where we can have some industrial use, the sort of an island, and I would just urge members not to opportunity to expand the business sector, and I think that throw the baby out with the bath water today. Mylchreests as the plan sits at the moment it is very, very good. have had an initial decision, they still have two But, hon. members, if you throw it back today and you opportunities to make a case to the planners, and as far as do not accept it we are going to finish up where we have I am concerned, that is the planning process and I think got to go to another public inquiry. I would not tike to that should be followed and should be, at this stage, looked think how long it is all going to take. It is not a at completely separate from the local plan issue. straightforward, simple issue that some people think.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T305

The hon. member for Glenfaba, Mr Gilbey, said that injurious affection. That was not the case, but saying that, there was an error in the plan with regard to the bus station. I think that at the end of the day common sense will have Well, the bus station site, as far as I am concerned, is an to prevail here and I would urge members just not to throw area that is ring-fenced because we want something special this plan out willy-nilly, just to give some thought to it. to happen down there. There could well be provision for There are some very, very good points in here and I think buses to come in and out of, but I would think that that the sooner the plan comes in and it is implemented we government really should have a policy to do something can starting working together for the revision of the next outstanding down there. It is a very valuable site, an plan, which is only five years off, and all these studies can opportunity to put some housing on it, local authority take place and we can see how the town is developing and housing, a bit of commercial, and I think this is why it has how the whole thing is panning out. Thank you, Mr been zoned in this way. I do not think there has been any President. sort of a ploy by the department to pull the wool over people’s eyes, and where it is indicated the railway station Mrs Cannell: Mr President, I have enjoyed the debate yard bus station, that can be railway station or a bus garage. so far, but I have to say that I too have some very real I think the old days when we had a purpose-built bus station concerns particularly in relation to sections 3, page 4, have actually gone and I think it is no secret that at the regarding the Douglas retail. As has been mentioned by moment regarding that bus station site there are three one or two of my colleagues in this hon. Court, the minister different departments in government who have got a stake and members are aware that the Department of Trade and in that, including the corporation, and I would like to think Industry is currently undertaking an Island-wide retail that at some stage the Council of Ministers will dictate health check, which when completed will give us a clearer what finally happens on that site because, as I say, it is a picture of the size, scale and condition of this sector. The very valuable piece of real estate within the borough and main aim is to provide a statistical base from which it is whatever happens on that particular site we have to use it hoped a biannual update will be maintained. Once the to its best potential. findings of this health check have been analysed the DTI, I think regarding the letters that have come along from the Department of Trade and Industry, will then be in a the Chamber of Commerce, we have have the argument position to formulate its policy in relation to ensuring that before. I would have thought that if they did have a real this industry continues to be vibrant and that small shops argument they would actually come to the bar of this Court in particular will be sustainable in relation to the importance and give some of the members the opportunity of they play in providing their services for the population as questioning them. I do accept that they have a role to play. a whole. Indeed the importance of small shops has been But at the end of the day I think that the plan as it is at recognised by the Irish Government recently who have the moment goes a long, long way to provide a first-class legislated in order to preserve their industry. They have framework for the future development of Douglas over banned all out-of-town retail development over 22,000 the next five or six years and I accept that there will be square feet. Accordingly the UK Secretary of State for the cases like we have heard today from Mylchreests where Environment is presently considering something similar, there is a grey area, but that could quite easily be and I understand at this point the circulation of additional accommodated when their planning application goes for information, which you permitted earlier on in the debate, review and they will walk away from that happy. backs up that particular concern. Yet we are being asked here today, by approving the order before us, to sanction Mr Cannan: How do you know? something different for Douglas. Why, we should ask ourselves. A Member: How do you know? Well, turning to page 14, section 3, Douglas retail, we are faced with assumptions which are not based on fact Mr Delaney: The judgement of Solomon! and in particular clause 3.2 and 3.3 is an example of this. I appreciate that the department undertook a sampling of Mr Downie: It is not up to me to prejudge it, but some opinion in this regard. However, their snapshot included people in this Court seem to think that they have the power opinions of the public along with the industry. It was not a to remove land and take land away from people. That is comprehensive exercise, merely a sampling, unlike the not within anybody’s power in this Court at die moment Department of Trade and Industry’s initiative which is and I think you have to accept that. Island-wide. Clause 3.4 does at least recognise that it covers One thing is for certain in planning: you will never the perception and not a fact. So I have concerns with please everybody. But I would urge members today to look regard to the wording in these particular clauses because at all the work that has gone into this plan and all the they are merely assumptions and they are not based on consultation process that has taken place, and Mr Gilbey fact. said he was very surprised that the department had not But my real concern is in relation to 3.10, retail contacted Mylchreests, and with respect, there has been warehousing, and we have heard something of this this enough dialogue about the local plan and enough printed afternoon. in the newspapers and had they had a case for injurious But in 3.13 we have a situation where it is stated in the affection I am sure they could have made representation report, ‘The Key Issues have now been identified in relation and come to the department and said that they felt that to retail provision and policies put in place which are they were affected so much they were seeking a claim for intended to respond to those issues.’ Well, I hope that I

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T306 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

have clearly illustrated to you, Mr President, and to hon. for non-food stores for the sale of bulky goods may be members that as far as the DTI is concerned we have not located outside the defined town centre and locations identified our policy or our key issues in relation to this appropriate to this use should be identified? Paragraph 3.19, very important sector. Again, 3.13 is assumption, there is of course, talks of extensions to a specific site. It does not no factual information to actually back it up. name the site but it mentions a specific site. Is this only in But turning to the policy statement at 3.15 on page 16, relation to Douglas, I would ask, or does 3.15 further in the first paragraph it begins, ‘Retail development in the expand this provision? It is unclear in the way it is written. town of Douglas will be restricted to that area defined Again, turning to 3.20, it is stated in the report, within the town centre.’ It goes on, ‘An exception to this ‘Additional areas for large span retail warehousing should Policy is that non food stores for the sale of bulky goods be provided in the existing coal yard area adjoining the may be located outside the defined town centre and Steam Railway Station and this provision should be for locations appropriate to this use should be identified.’ non-food, bulky goods.’ Will this additional area be subject Exceptions to this policy under non-food stores selling to the same requirements as stated in 3.19, such bulky items to be located outside the centre could realise requirements having been satisfied, that is to say, where shops selling toys, sports equipment, electrical goods, there is a need or a demand? computers, carpets, furniture, do-it-yourself, et cetera, et My fourth question is if a developer wishes to build a cetera. I feel sure that we have all witnessed such out of retail warehouse in accordance with the site so specified town shopping areas in the UK and elsewhere. or any other site so specified in the wording of 3.15, what The detriment to local towns and villages has been well steps will that developer be required to take to demonstrate documented and the opening of the new Trafford Centre a need and/or demand for such a facility? in Manchester is another example which, since opening My fifth question: will the minister confirm that it will this year, has resulted in decline for other long-standing be necessary for a developer to submit an independent retail major shopping areas, (Mr Houghton: Hear, hear.) such impact study to the planners in order to demonstrate the as Bolton, for example. Such a decline leads to closed need or demand for such a facility either at land adjacent shops, (Mr Houghton: Hear, hear.) redundant businesses, to the coal yard and/or the coal yard land itself, or any loss of jobs and a general downturn for the area, which other appropriate location which has been identified? leads to all sorts of associated social problems. Finally on this particular subject, why has this particular Should we accept the exemptions as laid down in clause area to which I have referred not been considered for 3.15? Looking at the wording of 3.16,1 have no problem residential use? And I appreciate the comments from my colleague Mr Cannell in this respect. The area is ideally with this at all. Every residential area needs their comer suited for sheltered housing, as was the presumption of shop. the local authority many years ago. If we turn to 3.19, again we are looking at a policy Turning to the regeneration study, I have to say this is decision. Paragraph 3.19 provides for a general acceptance to be welcomed, as it actually covers a large portion of the that there will be a retail warehousing provision, but it constituency of East Douglas which I and my colleague goes further to say that extensions will be permitted into on my right are responsible for and I think the area merits the land adjoining the coal yard if land is available and a such a study. I am concerned, though, that other than this need or demand can be demonstrated. What I would like particular area, there appears little in the plan to actively to know is who will provide the need or demand? Will it encourage residential development, save for the bus station be the developer or someone else? Should it not be this site and Lake Road, but such sites are very small when hon. Court who identifies an area for such need or demand? one considers the demand of those who would like to live I expect, if Tynwald approves this plan today we will have in the town. agreed to such identification as the department has With regard to the regeneration study area, it must be suggested. I, however, cannot agree to this without being said at this stage how disappointing it was to see the major assured of some safeguards being put into place first. site of the former Finch Hill Church, the very cornerstone Secondly, looking at 3.20, it refers to the coal yard area for the study, being given planning permission for a four- itself in that further expansion for retail warehousing should storey office complex with associated car parking recently be provided here. In fact if we accept this policy we will - hardly complementary to a regeneration study and most be supporting the provision of a shed effect, which could damaging to such a close-knit local community, something sound the death knell for the Douglas retailers and others of a mockery of the planning system at present, I would beyond in other areas of the Islan suggest. . As I have been given departmental responsibility for But on the positive side, so it is not all gloom and doom, the retail industry, I am extremely concerned as to the I welcome the policy initiative in relation to 13.30, the implications such policies may pose for this sector. I expect recognition of a wildlife corridor. Yes, we in the town of at the very least to be reassured by the minister moving Douglas do have such wildlife corridors and we do enjoy the order in his reply and would appreciate his comments the presence of wildlife in our gardens and parks and long in relation to the following questions. shall this be the case. So that is a very positive point. My first question is who will identify appropriate I am pleased to see the inclusion of 3.14 and have long locations for such retail warehousing as per the wording advocated the use of playgrounds and sports fields being in 3.15? utilised outside of school hours, particularly important in Secondly, how are 3.15 and 3.19 compatible when, as I East Douglas, I might suggest, where there is a distinct quoted before, 3.15 said that an expansion to the policy shortage of such facilities for our young people.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T307

Paragraph 5.6 is welcomed in relation to the area of the it is the policy of this Court and confines, quite rightly if drives off the promenade, and that again has been that is the way we want to have it, the Planning Committee, something that has been well argued and long fought for the inspector, the minister when they make their final by the hoteliers in that particular area and I welcome the judgement on planning applications. flexibility that is afforded to them in relation to this So I just put my marker down once again that I feel particular plan. concerned about the process that we are going through but Paragraph 4.16 is to be welcomed which permits for a accept that it is part of our planning legislation and indeed living above the shop. Nobody has mentioned that here it is going to be embodied into our planning legislation in today. The concept, which of course includes Albert Street, the forthcoming Act. But I do believe that the planners again is in the area of East Douglas - a very sensible move, need to look at that Act and decide exactly what the very one which should have been adopted a long time ago by important issues are that ought to be brought in front of the Isle of Man. I would, however, like to see this particular this hon. Court and what issues ought to be adopted and policy extended to include areas such as Mona Street and developed by the planners themselves as planning policy. Christian Road, where appropriate, some time in the future. That brings me to my second point and that is the I am pleased to see this policy change at last, which is statements that have been made both today and on a something I and others have requested for some time. previous occasion that it is right to make decisions on Overall I am fairly satisfied with the plan but would, planning applications made on the grounds of a developing with respect, like my concerns regarding section 3 on retail policy, and it seems to me that that is wrong. I cannot get answered. At the moment all I can say is that it will depend my mind round that situation, that it is fair or that injustices on the answers I am given as to whether I will vote in will not happen. support or not in support today. I am giving the benefit of I was interested and thank the minister for the letter the doubt to the minister in his reply. which he circulated to all hon. members with a copy of But just finally, if I can make a point on the interpretation one from the Attorney-General which mentions this issue, of ‘predominantly’, which has been spoken about by a I think. At the end of the second paragraph in the Attorney’s number of members, to my mind the meaning behind letter he says, ‘The degree to which the current plan may ‘predominantly’ means that it is open to argument and that have become out of date is one material consideration and is to say that a developer can come along to a predominantly the existence and progress of a draft plan which may residential area, for example, and argue his case for his supersede it is another. ’ Now, I read that and take it at face business because it is only predominantly residential and value. It seems to me, though, that if the contents of the so therefore I would have thought it is an ill-advised term plan that is superseding the one in existence are not known to use because I understand it actually makes more work and people put planning applications in, as it appears to and causes more controversy in planning and for the me that Mylchreests did, without the benefit of the Planning Committee. It is a very confrontational type of knowledge of the change in zoning, an injustice is likely word to use in relation to the descriptions laid down within to happen, and I feel uncomfortable with that. this report. There is a further point if I could just touch on the case But in answer to some of the questions that were raised made by the company of Mylchreests, for consideration by my hon. member who stands behind me, the Department of their particular problem. It seems to me that whatever of Trade and Industry have put a written marker down with may be said in response to this debate will be interesting the director of planning, and that was done earlier this year but no more than that. There is a changed designation on in relation to the study that we are undertaking. There was the plan which we are asked to approve which significantly no budgetary provision prior to this year to be able to affects the application that is in front of the Planning embark on such a study so any criticism in relation to the Committee and not only that, even if we get all the department not making representation at the public inquiry assurances that can be given in this hon. Court, there is a I feel is ill-founded. Thank you, Mr President. statement in the written policy statement which I think also mitigates against the particular application that was Sir Miles Walker: Mr President, a number of members discussed earlier on and that is where it says very clearly have said they are going to listen intently to what the the long-term parking which would largely cater for office minister has to say in his response to this. I am going to do personnel should be based on peripheral surface or multi­ likewise, but it is worth reminding hon. members of the level car parks in close proximity to main arterial roads point made by Mr Gilbey, that it does not really matter and provide secure parking allied to an effective and regular what is said, interesting though it may be, it is what is public transport system. So it seems to me that even if the designated on the plan that we are being asked to support applicants get over this particular hurdle of rezoning, there (Mr Gilbey: Hear, hear.) and here I go back to a point I is still a further policy issue which will have to be argued made, I think, last month and one I made in the House of by them at the subsequent review and appeal which no Keys when we were considering the Town and Country doubt will be held in due course. So I see that as yet a Planning Bill, that it seems to me that the Department ought further difficulty, and as I say, it seems to me that we are to be looking for a way forward with these development in danger, by approving this plan, of making an injustice. plans which avoids bringing them to this hon. Court, not The 1989 plan was mentioned by the hon. member Mr avoiding the debate, but it seems to me that once they are Delaney. I would say to him I would congratulate him on established as a statutory document it then becomes that plan and the planners who have followed the policies something more than just a Planning Committee’s policy, within it. I think it has been a great success. It has

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T308 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 regenerated this commercial centre of this capital town of was in the right place, it was long term, it would ours, it has lifted the ambience and quality of the shopping accommodate a large number of cars, it seemed to me from centre and is a place now we can be proud of taking visitors that conversation that it was supported by thé Department to this Island, and I think that is a direct result of planning of Transport, and until we heard it had been refused and policies, and it has attracted more investment into the this planning document was produced I thought that it was promenade than any of us could have imagined happening. all a jolly good idea, and I have to say I think a mistake It really is a lively place down there and it is being has been made. regenerated and there is more investment probably taking As far as the warehousing is concerned down on the place down there since took place at the turn of the century Lake Road site, again I was one that was supportive of when the promenade was being redeveloped. All those that provision being made in the last plan and that was things, I think, are very positive and when we walk out of because the Island, the planners, were under pressure for here and see all those office workers at lunch-time spilling warehousing on our industrial estates all round the out and going off down town to do their shipping in periphery of Douglas and it seemed sensible to find a site reasonably well-paid jobs, I think isn’t it wonderful, within reach of the town centre for that sort of development, wonderful for the town of Douglas and wonderful for this that sort of retailing. But again I have to say that I Island? So I think there are some very positive things about anticipated retail warehousing to be in terms of carpets it. and large difficult items and it seems to me that they would I guess the thing we did underestimate, though, was the be better down in Lake Road rather than up round the car parking provision. I do not believe any of us foresaw hospital and in Tynwald Street and wherever. What I did the number of motor cars that were going to come on our not anticipate in retail warehousing was a grocery store. roads when the economy started developing and took off. Now, I suppose a grocery store in a warehouse is warehouse I think we just missed it, and I would accept my part of the retailing, but I have to say that was not the concept that blame in that. was in the minds, or certainly in my mind, at the time of I was interested in these car parking provisions that are those proposals being developed. accommodated within this written policy because it seems I believe the development of Douglas has been to me that if they are successful, the town of Douglas will successful. I hope it will continue to be successful. It is be successful and if they are not successful the town of our capital and we need to be proud of it. The basis of it is Douglas is going to seize up. I am pleased where the in good planning. We are faced and I am faced with a planners are saying with new build, parking standards dilemma today, that I would like to approve this plan should not be reduced. I think that is right and I can because there is a lot of good in it. I have no doubt at all understand where they say that there are some cases with about that. But I do believe that in approving that plan we development of older properties where perhaps car parking will be doing an injustice and I obviously feel can not be accommodated on site. Now, I accept that, but uncomfortable about that situation. I do think that the old policy was better where further car parking could be made within the proximity of the building. The Speaker: Mr President, following as I do my hon. If I read this document rightly what this is saying is that colleague I think I can be brief and certainly from his any further car parking should be made on the periphery opening remarks. His comment at the start was that he of Douglas, and I find it very difficult to see how those hoped the hon. Court would take cognisance of the hon. two issues can be tied together. member for Glenfaba’s submission to us earlier, and I I am wondering whether or not this plan is in front of certainly hope that this hon. Court equally was paying us too soon. There are very firm statements in it about attention to that particular part of the debate. parking on the periphery of Douglas and yet I am not aware The hon. member for Douglas West, Mr Downie, said that there has been any accommodation made on the to us, ‘Give the town a chance to develop in a proper way. ’ outskirts of Douglas for on-the-level car parking, and it That is rather suggestive. Who decides what will be a seems to me that it has to be an intrinsic part of this debate. proper way? Now, I have great difficulty, as every hon. So it concerns me that if we are saying we are going to member knows, with planners because I have this sinking lift to a certain extent parking requirements within Douglas feeling every time I hear planners come into it that in fact on older properties, we are saying that there shall not be they will never be happy until such time as we all live in long-term parking within the town centre and it should be regulated little boxes and are totally controlled in outside somewhere but we are not indicating where, I can everything that happens, and I want to see the Isle of Man foresee problems in the interim period with either evolve, not be regulated, and that is the problem which I development being stalled because of inadequate car find on every occasion when we get into planning. parking provision or else the town coming to a halt because The flexible document which every hon. member who provision has not been made. has contributed to the debate so far has asked for you can I did understand that one of the reasons for raising car not have as long as you have statutory documents which parking charges in government car parks, i.e. Chester Street you approve. A statutory document becomes a statutory or local authority car parks, to such a standard was to document. encourage the private sector to get involved and develop The hon. minister has circulated to the hon. members a car parking, and it seemed to me when I first heard about letter from our learned Attorney-General and our learned the Mylchreests proposal, which was at one of our meetings Attorney-General in that letter quotes case law. Now, hon. running up to the budget, that it seemed exactly right, it members, that is fine. Case law is developed out of an Act.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T309

When an Act is passed by parliament it is made and case The other thing is that if there is an injustice and it takes law evolves. If a new Bill comes forward, the case law is two years to put it right and have a new order and a new still taking precedence, but if that Bill becomes an Act, it plan, then so be it because it is better to have an injustice supersedes the case law, and what we are anticipating today put right than this Court to be seen as the court of last is a statutory document, not necessarily your yellow book, resort in the Isle of Man where people think that they can but the item on your order paper is statutory document come and get justice and fairness and decency, then so be number 635/98. That is the resolution which you are being it, and I too will be turning this down because I think an asked to vote on. It is that piece of paper you are being injustice has been done to a party which we have heard asked to vote on and if you ¡happen to turn it over, it says, today, it has been confirmed by a previous Minister for ‘2. The zones and notations on the plans shall have effect Local Government, a previous chairman of planning. in place of any zones or notations having effect under the Hon. members, I believe there is no alternative but for principal Order or any other Order under section 6 of the this Douglas plan to go back and let us have one properly Act made before the date of the Order.’ That is what it done that is acceptable to everybody. says. It is a statutory document. Now, flexibility, any words which the hon. minister wants to use will not take M r Rodan: Mr President, this is one of the most precedence over this. depressing debates I believe I have heard in this Court. It Now, if you were listening also to the plea put forward is as if hon. members are looking for the very first time at at the bar of this Court by Mr Karran I think he was telling the idea of local plans and strategic planning. They are you that he would be prejudiced, if we accept this, in going looking for the first time and not liking what they see forward to review and appeal because similarly to judges because what they see are the trees and not the wood. having to take cognisance of a Bill which becomes an Act Planning is not an exact science. It is never going to be and supersedes case law, if we pass this it becomes a an exact science. It is a blend of human judgement made statutory document and the planners have to take this into by human beings exercising judgement, independent effect, and therefore Mr Karran and his clients, in my view, judgement and objective judgement, on a basis of policy are prejudiced. that has been arrived at by broad consensus. It is a common mistake to confuse the role of the Planning Committee in Mr Gilbey: Hear, hear. relation to development control matters with the role of the department in strategic planning and policy-making Mr Shimmin: Mr President, as hon. members will by this hon. Court. It is not the Planning Committee which know, I tend to be a man of few words. We have had a makes policy but it must have regard to policy once set in healthy debate. It is getting near to decision time. I have reaching decisions on particular planning applications. It no difficulty whatsoever with the decision that I have taken must have regard to policy and it is Tynwald policy, the on this issue. I found that there is much good work within 1982 planning scheme, which says that the Planning the department’s plans and the written statement. There is Committee must have regard to policy. It is not slavishly much to be credited and much of that has been discussed bound by policy. This is why there is the notion of not already. being an exact science: it involves an element of judgement. From the start of the debate, where my hon. friend Mr But the policy to which it must have regard is best if that Cannell raised his concerns about the Lake Road site, I policy has been reached from a position of consensus. That share those concerns. That is an argument which seems to policy must be, in the case of the Douglas town plan, on have been lost due to the value of that land and the private the basis of consensus within this hon. Court, and I would ownership of it. urge members that we have to make a decision today. We I do not consider this is a good order. I do not consider cannot defer. We cannot adjourn the debate. Voting against that it would be right to support this order, with all the is not going to help the situation. consequences that have been discussed very eloquently this afternoon. I think the message is clear. We all have to M r Cannan: It will. make a decision and I do not wish to reiterate many of the members’ comments but I think the two previous speakers, M r Rodan: It will not help the situation because the the hon. member of the Council, Mr Delaney, and Mr next plan that comes back, having been through a public Gilbey have summarised all of my views. This order at inquiry, is likewise not going to satisfy everyone. We can this time is wrong. If something is wrong you do not vote have public inquiries and Douglas town plans till the cows for it. Thank you, Mr President. come home. They are never going to satisfy everyone in this Court and we are never going to get anything but Mr Cannan: Mr President, I too will be brief. This hopefully a broad consensus. Members have felt strongly order, members must be clear, is a statutory order. I have today about particular aspects of this plan, and rightly so, had experience of this and I have had to come back to this and particular interests have been well argued and well Court and had one changed only a few years ago. No matter advanced, but I come back: we require a consensus of what you say in this Court, if it is not in this book, then agreement today that we must have a Douglas town plan. come planning time it will be said ‘But Tynwald approved So the question is, is this plan one worthy of our this order.’ No matter, ‘flexibility’, ‘predominantly’, it all consensus? Well, what I will say is what it does represent means nothing. It is what is written, as Mr Speaker has is a consensus of the public which has been tested in public said, in this statutory order. before an independent planning inspector. (Mr Cannell

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T310 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

interjecting) This plan is not something dreamed up by Nature Conservation Trust. Albert Street residents were the Department of Local Government and all the words represented. Farmhill Park residents were represented. The contained herein are the pearls of wisdom that the director drives residents and owners were represented. J G Kelly of planning has dreamed up - Homes were represented with advocates, lengthy submissions, their views tested, individual architects were Mr Cannan: He has got too much power. present, Braddan Commissioners made lengthy submissions and so on and so forth. Douglas Corporation Mr Rodan: - or the planning officers have dreamed were there throughout, made submissions. They fully up- supported the residential proposals. Revitalising the residential areas of lower Douglas in their opinion was Mr Cannan: They have got too much power. worthy of consideration support. Now, this is the so-called urban regeneration area. Mr Rodan: - or the minister has dreamed up or the Urban regeneration, I would say to Mr Henderson, is members have dreamed up. This is the net result of public not government policy in its infancy or draft stages. This inquiry into government departments. Their views are in hon. Court, in January 1996, had a debate on urban here. It is government policy that is in this document, regeneration as the way forward for partially answering translated into land use terms as can be best humanly done. the Island’s future housing demands and this was in It will never be exactly done to the satisfaction of everyone recognition of policy which has been accepted by this Court because an element of judgement is always involved, but that the way forward can no longer be continuing indefinite what it does represent is the best human efforts possible greenfield site expansion in the Isle of Man. We cannot on the basis of the submissions that have been made by have, unfortunately from the developer’s point of view, government departments, by outside bodies and by the the cheaper and the quicker option any more of greenfield general public. development, and if that is accepted as government policy, Now, I attended the Douglas town plan inquiry. Now, which it is, then we have got to look to urban regeneration, the afternoon I went there were about 30 people present. and it is not just a pretty sounding sound-bite title: it Now, there are 23,000 people inhabitants in Douglas, and actually has substance to it. This plan shows the area that the public inquiry which went on for three or four days has been identified. Douglas Corporation have been with evening sessions was open to every member of the involved. Douglas 2000 have been involved. It is in the public whether they had made written submissions or not, public domain and policies are being worked up at present every member of the public, including companies who you so that it can be brought into reality on what will be a would think in terms of their own long-term strategic phased basis. It may take 10 years, it may take 15 years planning would take a careful interest in the future land for lower Douglas to be revitalised for people actually to use policies. live in the centre of Douglas, for it to be a place not just to So the opportunity was there. Government departments work in or to park in but to h ve in, for people to live in and to a degree either made written submissions or appeared walk to work. This is the long-term strategy, and what is in person. I regret that they did not all appear in person. being worked up now is that we are in the department By no means did they all appear in person and have their looking at the existing population, looking at the social views tested, but those that did, for example the Transport composition, the social mix, what can be achieved by Division of the Department of Tourism and Leisure, were regeneration that will preserve a good social mix, plus along there and the proposition was tested about this bus result in a good quality living environment with proper station so-called error on the railway station site. There is landscaping, a good place, a place that people would no error there. (Mr Cannell interjecting) Mr Robert Smith positively choose to go and live. confirmed at the inquiry that the Lord Street bus station I would urge hon. members do not turn down the was not required in the future, that new bus points in the opportunities in this Douglas Local Plan. Planning, believe central area, bus shelters, offices for enquiries, public it or not, is not intended to be a hurdle to be overcome. It lavatories could either be at Lord Street itself or in Victoria is intended to be an enabling process for things to happen. Street or even in the Sea Terminal. So there was an intention on the part of the Department of Tourism and Leisure that Mr Cannan: Tell them in Kirk Michael that! (Laughter) the continuation of a bus station per se at Lord Street site was not essential. Public bus provision could be made in Mr Rodan: And the only way things will happen is if the general vicinity but the maintenance and storage facility this hon. Court puts its shoulder behind the process of of buses would be relocated to land under that department’s ownership at the railway station, and that is why on the strategic planning, as we have in this Douglas Local Plan plan bus station is down, but that embraces bus document, the strategic planning necessary for Douglas maintenance facilities. for the next five to 10 years. You will be doing nobody The Department of Education was represented. The any.favours by voting against this or adjourning it in the Department of Transport was represented and there was hope that something better is going to come along, because much discussion about Vicarage Road, for example, and it will be a vain hope. You will never get a document that the Department of Transport’s views were tested by the is going to satisfy everyone. planning inspector. The Society for the Preservation of the Manx Countryside and Environment was present, the Manx Mr Gilbey: Get one that is fair.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T311

Mr Rodan: It is as good and objective as an assessment member of the Council has mentioned his concerns over of the prevailing public view and government policy can the definition of ‘predominantly residential’. Now, I will get. It represents a consensus. I am afraid the only try to give my definition. The term ‘predominantly consensus I have heard in this hon. Court this afternoon is residential’ does not preclude entirely the possibility of a consensus of prejudices against the planning system, other mixed uses so long as the use is predominantly against planning decisions. Historical grievances no doubt residential. Neither does the proposed zoning dictate colour hon. members’ views on planning. I know I have against any existing use. felt the same way myself. (Interjections and laughter) I Now, if we look at the plan again we have got am never going to be happy with every planning decision predominantly offices. In those areas there are residential (Interjections) but that is the nature of the game, it is the areas. So if we look at the area bounded, we have offices nature of the game. Decisions are going to be made that in that predominantly residential area. So Mylchreests have even the chairman of the Planning Committee - not exhausted the planning procedure. They have had their initial planning application turned down. They have review Mr Houghton: Makes. and they have appeal. It also says in the letter from the Attorney-General’s Mr Rodan: - finds uncomfortable. Chambers, which has been allowed to be circulated by the authority of the Attorney-General, the development control Mr Henderson: It is a total mess. is subordinate to the development plan. Now, my own view is that we should leave it to the Mr Cretney: You should not opt out then. planning. Let us go ahead with this Douglas town plan. We have been waiting long enough. My own view is that M r Rodan: So I say, Mr President, that we are never we have the urban regeneration area of Douglas. In that ever going to be in a situation where the minister will come area the department has brought in consultants, looking at with a document that will command universal support. The one specific area. The department has already bought best we can hope for is consensus. So let us get a consensus property in that area to try to regenerate. As has already behind this document, not accepting everything in it, been mentioned, we do not want any more greenfield believing, understanding, and I would remind members development. We want brownfield sites developed to bring what the minister said right at the start that what we are life back into Douglas and mainly in this area surrounded approving is the order and the mapping, not the written by Allan Street, Tynwald Street. It is a very old area of statement. This written statement is a department document Douglas. That is where we want the residential, but in that interpreting in policy terms the mapping zonings that you block there already office block has been given approval. are approving today. Now, it will be for this document to So there is no reason why Mylchreests will not on review respond to an evolving situation and to ensure that there is get their planning application through and have their office the flexibility in interpretation of the zonings approved block which in the area - 1 am looking at the area now - is this afternoon, and it is all very well for members to laugh on the edge. It is surrounded by other offices and then on as if because that is statutory it is then not capable of the other side it is surrounded by residential. But let us interpretation. I go back to what I originally said, that leave it to the Planning Committee and eventually, if it flexibility is essential because planning is not an exact has to go to appeal, to an independent planning inspector. science. I would urge hon. members not to give into the Mr Cannan: Can you trust them? temptation to vote against the document or to adjourn but actually to make a decision today, and as the hon. member Mr Braidwood: Mr President, I do urge the hon. Mr Downie for Douglas West said, when this is approved members of this Court to support the Douglas town plan. we can then embark on the process of revising for the next We have been waiting a long time. Let us not put it now time, but do not leave us with a 10-year-old policy, I do again on the back-bumer and have to wait another three urge members. years. Thank you, Mr President.

Mr Braidwood: Mr President, what an emotive subject, Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I have concerns about the plan the question of planning. I think it is the topic next to love myself today and there are a number of things that concern and war which really gets the adrenaline running. me, but I do not know whether that is the issue that we My departmental colleague, the hon. member for West should be debating today. If we were to look around, we Douglas, put it quite succinctly: don’t throw the baby out have had two petitioners. One petitioner has a very with the bath water. I too have great sympathy with legitimate concern that there is an accident going to happen Mylchreests in the area of their car parking and offices, in my former constituency of Middle sheading. Some child but we have been waiting now four years for a new Douglas is going to be killed one of these days if we do not get town plan. something sorted out on the Vicarage Road and I do not It has been said there are many good things in this plan. know whether we should be unclassifying some of the We have the situation of the drives which has already been development land in order to concentrate minds. mentioned by my colleague in Douglas East. I am concerned today about this plan. I am concerned Now, one thing I would like to look at is there has been that there was a legitimate point that that petitioner has this question of ‘predominantly residential’. The hon. and I am just concerned that we have seen no movement

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T312 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

in that part because once again I think there have been problem in the Island when I listen to the ex-Chief Minister deals done behind closed doors. saying that Douglas is beautiful. I hope that we have managed to stop any proposals for a road to go through the land between Braddan Church Sir Miles Walker: It is. It is wonderful. and Union Mills to stop any urban sprawl over the border in Braddan, but I believe that is partly why the intransigence Mr Karran: As I say, beautiful. I just wonder where has been the problem with some of the civil servants, but that man is as far as that is concerned, the missed that is another issue. opportunities that we have seen, but then when you have I think the point with the other petitioners is I am been at the helm you have got to always justify what is concerned that if people who are well connected can find there today. I would say that there are lots of problems themselves at a loss with this procedure, then what happens with what has been going on in Douglas over the years. to the ordinary man in the street, the man who cannot afford There has been a lack of vision and I would say that as far a lawyer to be at the bar of the Court today? And I think if as this plan is concerned I look at it and I think, ‘Shame: anything needs to be addressed as far as this debate is missed opportunity.’ I can see the points the hon. member concerned today it is the legislation that these orders have for Onchan, my colleague, has said about down there at been placed before us today and maybe we have done the old Quiggin’s Yard. He is quite right: it would be far ourselves a disservice with the Town and Country Planning better to be housing. But at the end of the day I can Act, that we should have forced the issue at that stage and understand the limitations of the minister with this Court - maybe the upper House will take up the opportunity of addressing the anomalies that we find ourselves in such Mr Quine: Thank you, Peter. an intractable situation. I have found the debate very interesting in the fact that Mr Karran: - and I can understand the problems that I have listened to my colleague from Onchan and I thought we have got as far as this is concerned because as a he had some very valid points and I thought, yes, he is politician today I should certainly vote against this plan more likely right. I totally oppose the position as far as because it certainly will not win me any votes. But what Lake Road is concerned. As far as I am concerned the are we putting in its place today? That is the point that I sooner some sanity in this Court is provided as far as trying have to say. I have to say that the primary law concerning to stop crazy plans pumping excrement up mountains and this procedure is wrong and I think we do need to change down dales to Santon and I would have liked to have seen it and I do think that we should have taken that opportunity a situation where we would have been putting maybe the when we had the ability under the Town and Country IRIS plant down there, but again that opportunity has been Planning Act. and gone and been lost, and I could argue over the fact I have to say when I listen to the debate today and we that I have fought and I have written to the Minister for hear about the fixation of building more and more car the LGE about the fact of South Quay and the fact that parking spaces in the middle of Douglas - I am not there has not been any real positive vision for Douglas, addressing the core issue of having decent free public the fact that I would have liked to have seen all industrial transport within the Douglas/Onchan area and sterilising off the South Quay. There is a disaster waiting to happen land - 1 just think, well, it is a shame that we allow ourselves as far as the gas undertakings there are concerned and if to sell this capital short. anything ever does happen, then we will see South Douglas I feel on the issue that the hon. minister is at least trying as an open plan development area, and I think that I am to address the issue of brownfield development and I think saddened that that has not been addressed today. I am it is something that we all talk about but we talk about saddened that I have tried to get the LGE to see whether with forked tongue. We want it, but then when there is they can get the DoT to move from the Harbour Board somebody here at the bar of the Court or there is somebody yard by the breakwater, something that could be done, but here shouting we know that the best thing, and I felt today, again it is not my department, it is another department and is for once keep your head below the kerb and just keep there is no movement as far as that is concerned. quiet. I am saddened, with this report, about Governor’s Hill. I have to put up with my constituents giving me a lot of Mr Delaney: That is two of you for the trench: you and grief over Governor’s Hill, that the kids have got nowhere the Chief Minister! (Laughter) to play so they spend their time playing all round Heywood Park and the fact that there has been no account as far as Mr Karran: The fact of the matter is today, and I think putting something as far as a public open space across the the hon. member for West Douglas said, we can talk one road from Johnny Watterson’s Lane as far as giving the way and vote another, and some in this hon. Court have kids somewhere to run about in North Douglas, in the turned it into an art form. Governor’s Hill area. There is a slum going to be developed There is only one issue that I am concerned about and there if we do not provide the facilities that are needed. one issue that I think needs to be clarified: it is the fairness So when we talk about this plan I could quite easily issue. I think there is an argument as far as the fairness vote against this plan because the fact of the matter is there issue with the petitioners in front of us today (Messrs are so many things that I do not agree with in this plan. I Henderson and Cannan: Hear, hear.) but the problem is, have found the debate very interesting, and I do say to the is it right to throw this plan out? That will be another two new Chief Minister that we definitely do have a drug years before we get something and I think that is the

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T313

problem today. The fairness issue is the only reason why are not given any force in themselves. It is the effect which we can argue to throw this plan out and I have to ask that granting approval might have on the proper consideration we will always find a situation where there will be some of the draft plan which must be taken into account’, and winners and some losers. that is where I find myself with a problem. I am a bit I will be interested to hear what the minister has to say concerned about the mention of the word ‘flexibility’. Now, as far as that issue of fairness is concerned. It does seem ‘flexibility’ is always stated when the zoning for planning ridiculous that you can end up losing half the value of your comes into consideration. I will tell you something about property and not be informed of it, and I think that is flexibility. Nearly 10 years ago we had planning approval something that needs to be addressed, but I do think that granted for residential and parkland and over the years, in maybe it should not be addressed in this Court but it should Onchan, it was completely crowded in that area, the traffic be addressed in legislation. became unbearable and yet the developer held up the I think today, on balance, as much as I do not agree document and said, ‘It’s residential and parkland’, and that with an awful lot in this plan or an awful lot with this is what happened, it is residential and parkland, it suddenly administration or the previous one, I feel that it would be becomes written in tablets of stone, and I am afraid I have far too easy just to run away and say, ‘Oh, well, we’ll run been to at least three of these zonings and each time they away: we won’t vote for it because we are going to be mention flexibility, but when you come to a problem that unpopular.’ We have got to make a decision. What we have is the first thing they reach for, it is the first thing the got to learn today is that primary law as far as this issue is Planning Committee reach for, it is the first thing that is concerned is in a mess and government needs to lead and reached for on review and it is the first thing the appeal needs to sort it out. inspector reaches for: if it is in there, it must be right. Now, let us be fair about this. As Mr Speaker has said, it is a M r Waft: Mr President, I was not going to rise today statutory document and that is what they have to refer to. but when I heard the Chairman of the Planning Committee So flexibility - be careful when you consider that one. put forward his views he put it forward as though it was an With regard to car parking space, I think car parking automatic process for it to come to Tynwald after all this space has been a problem for many years now and as far work has been done, and I would just ask the Court to as the Planning Committee is concerned, when they look consider everything that has been said today. for office accommodation the first thing that they say is, I can well understand the director of planning and his ‘Where is the car parking space going to be?’ So what staff within the Department of Local Government and the happens is the developer says, ‘Oh, yes, we’ll shove it Environment taking into consideration all that has been underneath’, and the next thing is the ridge heights go up said in this Court over the last few years with regard to the about two floors and you have got some car parking space gentrification of Douglas, getting the people back into underneath but you never have enough because they are Douglas - fair comment, and he has done a good job as far always looking around for car parking space. I have been as I am concerned. However, the problem as I see it is that in offices recently who have said, ‘For heaven’s sake, try the houses that have been knocked down and the offices and give us some car parking space. We’ve tried this, one going up is a different story altogether. It is houses have person taking two or three people to work and it just doesn’t have been knocked down and office blocks going up. That work out.’ To a degree it does, but they have tried park is what resulted in people going out of Douglas and living and ride and that has not worked out. It needs to be worked on the outskirts: homes were becoming offices. Now, if out. It can work. you get offices in Douglas and you do not get the people back in there, you are going to have an inner city problem Mrs Crowe: Yes. which they have in the UK, and thank God we have not really got to that stage yet, but that was a possibility and M r Waft: I think the problem was the situation of the that is why the consideration was taken by the department. park and ride. That is what stopped it the last time and it I can well understand that. will stop it in future unless you take more consideration of But with regard to the situation which we have heard where it is going. the petitions for today, having been brought up in the area I am concerned about this application and I would just I can well remember Fargher’s and Ashton’s, and Davies advise the Court to be careful when they make their Garage and all the rest of them. They were always decision. Thank you, Mr President. commercial areas. They were not residential areas. It was not a result of the garages that we have resulted in the Mrs Crowe: Yes, I will be very quick. Yes, I promise. situation that we are in now and we seem to be taking a Mr President, my hon. colleague, the member for Garff, pick into this particular block for some reason. spoke so enthusiastically in favour of this plan as if the We heard the. member for East Douglas say that planners never ever made a mistake, never made a mistake, Mylchreests have not really exhausted the planning process and made great mention of flexibility. Flexibility - the hon. yet and yet I particularly asked the representative, Mr member of the Council, Mr Waft, has just mentioned it Karran, ‘would a positive decision today to approve this again: flexibility. The other word we have got to bear in plan prejudice any pending appeal?’ and he said, ‘Yes’, as mind is ‘statutory’. As my hon. colleague Mr Speaker said, simple as that. this is a statutory document. ‘Flexibility’ and ‘statutory’ Now, the decision we have had has been stated quite do not really seem to sit together very happily, and it is categorically: ‘Policies and zoning of the new draft plan true: it will be taken note of when any planning appeals

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T314 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

come about. Why are our plans statutory ? As far as I know, a two-year process, two objectors. What about the many in the adjacent isle the town plans are not statutory hundreds and thousands of people that this is going to documents. Maybe we should have an explanation from support and benefit? Bear in mind the objectors have a the minister of why they are statutory because it would right to stand there, but those who support this plan have seem that is a stamp of approval: ‘That is what you said, no right, and I would take a small bet on this: if they were Tynwald agreed, it is a statutory document.’ And this is sitting there today, the supporters, there would be a the way we move and we have got an example of that, considerable number of these members giving different haven’t we? We have got policy quoted here on page 35 of views on planning. It is very easy: out of sight, out of mind. the document, ‘Long term car parking for office workers So let us look at this subject with a degree of realism will be based on peripheral surface or multi-level car parks and not as if it is something frivolous and superfluous with in close proximity to the main arterial roads’ et cetera, et little import in terms of what it is going to have on Douglas. cetera, clearly stating the policy. We get a company Yes, we have heard two petitioners today and I am pleased applying to provide that very facility, much-needed facility that we have a process that allows us to hear petitioners, I for the office workers of Douglas, and it was refused. Why am pleased about that, and I will certainly ensure, as long was it refused? Because they took note of the proposed as I can, that that process remains in being, but do not statutory document when they were evaluating whether forget that that is two objectors out of all those who had a this planning permission would go ahead, and I tend to contribution to the Douglas plan. What about all of those agree that once these plans are passed by this Court they who are going to benefit from this? If we were to follow are writ in stone and you have great difficulty, if at all, some of the comments here today, the answer is quite persuading any Planning Committee that these are flexible simple. Because of a lack of a capacity to understand what plans in any way. Thank you, Mr President. lies behind this plan they would throw, as somebody else said here today, the baby out with the bath water, or we The President: Reply, minister. have people sitting here today who have an interest perhaps in a company which has made some input into the M r Quine: Thank you very much, Mr President. I think proceedings. There are a hundred and one reasons. But I you have a hill to climb whenever the subject is planning. suggest, hon. members, that you need to take a broad-based That is an understatement and I think in large part because look at this and look to the public good. perhaps of personal experiences, perhaps of the fact that Now, if I may now deal with the submissions of the we have, as some members have suggested, considerable petitioners before I move on to the contribution of prejudice against planners, and I think that is manifestly members, we heard, of course, a submission from Mr wrong. We must remember that the planners are there doing Duggua - I am sorry if I have pronounced his name what they are doing because you and I, this hon. Court, wrong - have required them to do it, and some of the banter today, while highly amusing, I think is, to say the least, totally Mr Duggua: No, that is right. out of place when we are talking about a matter such as the Douglas plan which is the framework for the Mr Quine: - and he explained in great detail to us the development of the capital city for the next five to 10 years difficulties which he has in relation to his home and the and if it is not put in place today you are going to have a homes of other people in the Vicarage Road area, and I 10-year-old plan, and if anybody can tell me that that is a can sympathise with him. But let us bear in mind that he logical basis upon which to guide the development of did confirm for us that the issue is not one of land zoning, Douglas, then quite frankly I think there is a considerable it is not an issue for this plan, and others have responded lack of comprehension. here today and intimated what is being done to resolve his We are here today because we have followed, yes, a problems, and I trust they will be resolved. So I do not statutory procedure and that again is our decision, not the think we need consider further Mr Duggua’s contribution, planners.’ It is our decision that we follow this procedure: but I thank him for it, for taking the interest and coming we require it. here and making his case. We are here today because we have entered into a very Now, if I could now turn to the case which has been put long process of consultation. I read it all out in my speech. forward by Messrs Mylchreests, on behalf of Mylchreests, We have maximised the opportunity for everybody to the position as I see it Is fairly straightforward. We have participate in that. Up to a hundred interested parties under the existing plan a commercial classification. We certainly made a contribution and entered into that exercise have under the proposed plan a predominantly residential and I thank them for so doing. Others, of course, including classification. That is what is proposed in this draft plan. certain members of this hon. Court, have decided, for Firstly, let me say this, that the existing use continues. There reasons best known tQ themselves, perhaps for purely local is no question of this garage being absorbed or required to parochial reasons, that they would sit back and have their move out. The existing use continues. Secondly, let me pennyworth today. That is not very constructive. That say this, that in relation to any planning application, an leaves us in a situation where we are selling the people of application which has been intimated by Mr Karran on Douglas short. behalf of Mylchreests would be for multistorey garage and So I believe that we should bear in mind today another possibly offices, it does not fit the existing zoning, it does important factor and that is this. We have heard two not fit the proposed zoning. So as far as I can see, there is objectors here today, two objectors at the end of basically very little difference from that point of view. If there is a

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T315

difference, it is perhaps based on a value judgement from at review, it is there to be exercised at appeal. Unfortunately the advocate who feels that he would be in a better position it is only when a planning application is rejected that this to argue a case for an exception to that broad zoning under issue of flexibility assumes importance. Where flexibility a commercial classification than under a predominantly is exercised in the great majority of cases, where that is residential use classification. That is certainly not my view, taken into consideration and there is a successful outcome, but then I am not dealing with the planning application. it is all taken for granted. But there is flexibility and indeed But it does seem to me that if you are talking about the point has been made here today in relation to the commercial, just to take the first reason, the one that Mr position of Mylchreests. We have within this area which Karran has intimated, there is a lack of definition. Mr is marked as being ‘predominantly residential’, this area Karran submitted to us there is a lack of definition in terms which is the subject of urban regeneration and I will come of what is commercial. But what is, to my mind, quite back to that in a moment, we have an example there where clear is this, that as far as ‘predominantly residential’ is we have had offices approved within that zoning. So it is concerned the position is clear and that is that although there. Some members may not notice it, some members that area is designed predominantly for residential housing may not want to notice it, but the facts speak for themselves. - in other words it is identified as an area in which one That flexibility is there and that flexibility can and is would ordinarily expect, and perhaps through government exercised. schemes even, give some encouragement to residential Urban regeneration, because this impacts upon the development, and we in Tynwald have dealt with some of position of Mylchreests Garage. We have had two, if not these schemes in the last 18 months, so we would three, lengthy debates in the last two years concerning encourage residential development in those areas - other getting people back into the centre of Douglas. We had a developments are not excluded, the case can be made, and major report a very significant report, prompted by the the inspector, as we have been advised of course, would hon. member for Onchan, and we had a good debate on look at the existing plan, he would look at the proposed that report and the consensus from this hon. Court was plan, and we have been advised by the learned Attorney as quite clear - urban regeneration should be supported, urban to how he would place weight on the emerging policy regeneration should be pushed forward, and now we are through the draft plan, and he would look at other material doing it we appear to be getting criticised from some considerations and those other material considerations quarters about the fact that we are doing just that. If we would consider and take into account such matters as the want to get people back into the centre of Douglas, and I need for parking. The case is there to be made. But I do completely support that, and if we have a situation where not see that Mylchreests is disadvantaged by this change it makes less sense, it makes no sense, to continue to sprawl in zoning. That is not apparent to me at all. out over the borders of Douglas into the green fields, urban Now, if this was such an all-important problem, perhaps regeneration has to come about, we have to foster urban we could have expected a greater input from them in terms regeneration, and, yes, there is a price to pay for urban of the statutory planning procedures related to this draft regeneration. You cannot have it every way. There is a plan. We are aware, of course, that they sent a letter in price to pay for urban regeneration. That is what you want, where they dealt with the question of whether ‘existing that is what you are getting. commercial’ should be changed to ‘commercial’. We are I can understand where Mylchreests are coming from, aware of that. It has been explained to us why they did not I can understand that, and, as I say, I respect their right to appear before the planning inquiry to make their case. Quite make their case, but I do not believe that if it is viewed in frankly I would have thought that a company of this size an objective fashion it measures up. As I say, if their with so much at stake would have been present at a local concern was one of loss of value, there is a statutory planning inquiry to secure their interests, but that is a matter procedure. It was available to them. They could have for them, but the point that I am going on to make is this exercised it. If it was such an important issue they could and that is that it has been explained by Mr Karran that the have been there at the local plan inquiry making their bottom line in all of this is that there would be a difference representations, and I feel that they are trying to close the in value or it is contended there would be a difference in stable door after the horse has escaped and are trying to value in the property between what they could do with it find sympathy within this Court for the predicament in under ‘predominantly residential’ as opposed to which they find themselves, but I would submit to you ‘commercial’. that that is largely of their own making. Now, let me say this, that the plan was published If I could now move on to some of the members’ showing it as being ‘predominantly residential’ and a public contributions, Mr Cannell spoke about, as he interpreted notice was put in the paper inviting any party who felt that it, a mistake on the plan in terms of the bus station. That is they had been injuriously affected to come forward and no mistake and my hon. colleague, I think, has referred make representations to the department so the department him to the evidence which was led at the public inquiry by could consider applications for injurious affection. The fact his own chief executive and as a consequence of that the is that Mylchreests did not enter into that process, did not inspector recorded in his report, ‘It was confirmed that the claim for injurious affection. Lord Street bus station was not required in the future. New There is flexibility and I do not think I can repeat this bus points in the central area, shelters, enquiries, and too often: there is flexibility. Within the planning system lavatories could be provided at Lord Street or Victoria the planners have that flexibility built in. It is there for the Street or the Sea Terminal.’ Now, what we hear today Planning Committee to exercise, it is there to be exercised appears to represent a shift from that.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T316 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Mr Cannell: I was not in the department then. which we are going to get homes back into the centre of Douglas. Now, hon. members may feel that that is not so Mr Quine: No, and there are many things which I get important as some of these other matters that have been the blame for in respect of which I was not in the identified, but, to me, to reject a plan that has something department at the time either, Mr Cannell. But the fact as positive as that for Douglas would be to throw the baby remains we could only expect the inspector to assess the out with the bath water. position in relation to the evidence led at the local plan Mr Henderson of course spoke on the position of inquiry, and, yes, things do change and sometimes because Mylchreests, and I have dealt with that. I trust I have dealt of the position in which you come in on the inquiry you with Mr Henderson’s concerns there. But he asked for are going to miss out, but that is not fatal. That may be a certain assurances in relation to urban regeneration. What disadvantage, but it is not fatal because, as I say, if the does it amount to? And I am pleased to give you that case can be made, the flexibility is there. assurance. What it amounts to at this stage is that we have, Now, I think the second point that Mr Cannell brought on a provisional basis, identified an area and that area has up of course related to Lake Road and he feels, as indeed been injected into the local plan inquiry procedure and we a number of other hon. members and members of the public have had some useful views produced which have resulted felt, that the area down there, a greater part of that area from that procedure. We are now looking at what further could be used for residential purposes. Of course Mr studies we need in order to carry that exercise forward. Cannell is aware that a part of it is marked for residential Clearly we are going to be looking at a pilot scheme. There purposes. are issues of how one would finance all of this. There are numerous facets of this urban regeneration proposal that Mr Cannell: Which part? have to be staffed up, and that is the phase we are in. You are quite right, it is a study, and as far as existing businesses Mr Quine: The part which is near to the River Douglas are concerned, it does not change anything for them. If of course is allocated for residential purposes. That has they are in business in that area, it stays that way. Nobody already been allocated. In terms of the remainder of the is going to come along and say, ‘You have now got to site, whether or not that should have been marked for move out.’ residential or predominantly residential, that was an issue, The urban regeneration is going to be a long-term very clear from the report, which was considered by the exercise. My guesstimate, and I think one of my colleagues inspector. It was considered. It was reported on. Either we provided a guesstimate, is probably in the order of 10 years have these procedures, we have these public inquiries and to bring about a sizeable change in this area. But nobody we try to be fair by bringing together everybody’s is going to be evicted from their premises, I assure you. contribution and assessing it and allowing it to be done in That is not the object of the exercise, because inherent in an independent fashion by an inspector or we do not, but the overall template that sits on top of that, which is in the to have the procedure and then as a public representative main predominantly residential, there is the flexibility say ‘But, I’m going to throw it out, I’m not going to accept within that zoning for to have various uses. it’, I do not think that is really a very firm foundation. But Mrs Christian helpfully focused on this question of part of this land is for residential purposes, and secondly, predominant use, and indeed I subscribe to that view. It is as I say, whether or not that is adequate or whether more just that, as I have said. It is predominant. It is not exclusive. could have been allocated, it was open to the inspector, It is certainly not exclusive. It is a zoning which is there to evidence was lead, and I have no doubt the inspector - at encourage, certainly to encourage residential development least I assume this information was available to him - would within that area, but it is not exclusive, and I think I have recognise the fact that this land is in the ownership of said enough about that point already, but I thank Mrs whatever the name of that supermarket, CR ... Christian for also focusing on that issue of definition. Mr Singer of course has, in the main, I think, spoken on Mr Cannell: Tesco. this subject wearing his departmental hat as a member of the Department of Transport, as is perfectly in order for Mr Quine: All right, Tesco. That is in their ownership, him to do, and he has stressed of course the need for car they do have planning permission and therefore the ball is parking in this area. That is not in dispute in this order or in their court. But he considered that and he has made his in the plan or in the written statement. The written report. That has been embodied into this particular order statements underline the fact that there is a need for parking and plan. and that other sites must be found. I do not see that there is Again I think Mr Cannell was lending support to the anything in the written statement in regard to parking which moves that have been made and are reflected in this report would work against an application such as that which has in terms of regeneration when he said that Douglas had been mentioned here today. I do not see that at all. lost its heart and soul. Well, to some extent that might be Again, Mr Brown, I think, touched upon this question an overstatement, but certainly there is some merit in that of ‘predominantly’ again and the definition for that, but I statement because we have lost people out of the centre of am sure hon. members have got a full understanding of Douglas. We have, as other members have said, allowed just what that embraces by now. houses to go and offices to appear. That is the reality of Mr Gilbey raised the old hare of the Chamber of the situation. We are now, through this plan, trying to Commerce. I am sure he is well aware that this is a correct that situation. We are trying to produce a means by campaign -

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T317

Mr North: A cause célèbre. department to enter into retail surveys, none whatsoever. If a Planning Committee wishes to address any particular Mr Quine: Cause célèbre, yes indeed, you may call it application and it requires information from the applicant that, which the chamber have made about whether or not in support of the application, yes, of course, there would retailing should be allowed outside the inner centre of be nothing unreasonable in my view in calling for further Douglas. It has been made. They have had the opportunity and better information as to the need for that particular to make their case through the local plan process. They business. That is a matter which would be tied up in the have made their case through the local plan process and in planning application. But certainly there is no requirement a way, in parallel with that, there have been court cases, on the Planning Committee for to involve themselves in there has been indeed a court case which was taken by the determining Douglas retail surveys. chamber which addressed some of these issues. There was Now, Mrs Cannell of course is addressing that. I know a petition of doleance and there was also an appeal, and she is addressing retail surveys and that information, when those issues have been fully addressed here and it has been it is available, will be very, very useful, but it would be made quite clear, it is apparent from these judgements, unrealistic to say that we must wait, not knowing what that in terms of the wording of the written statement, which that is going to produce, not knowing how long it is going was of course at that time the existing written statement, to be produced, and in the meantime kick this exercise, there was no room for misunderstanding whatsoever and I with all its benefits, into touch and start afresh with another do not think there is anything further to be said on that. two-year exercise which will be highly problematic as to They have made their case at the public inquiry, they have what it would produce, because we do not know what is tried to press it through the courts and they have been going to come out of the survey exercise and in any case it unsuccessful in their attempts. I do not think I need to say is secondary to the principal process of land designation, anything more about that. land use. Again the question of whether the ‘commercial’ So I cannot accept from Mrs Cannell that this survey definition provides greater flexibility than ‘predominantly she is doing represents a good cause for to hold up the residential’ in relation to an application such as Mylchreests local plan. There is too much riding on it and I think we has made. I have dealt with that. We may have different should give it a proper chance to make some mark for the benefit of the people of Douglas. opinions and I am sure lawyers are better qualified than I, She referred to certain safeguards which she asked me but the bottom Une remains the same: ‘predominantly to comment on. One of those was Who will identify the residential’ does not exclude other uses, and I cannot say locations? Well, the position of course, as I understand it, that too often. is that the first point of reference will be to the local plans, Mr Gilbey made reference to the question of ‘We must obviously they are going to point to broad designations, be fair.’ Now, I can subscribe to that. We must be fair. I but beyond that it will be up for applicants, in consultation would suggest to the hon. member that we have been no doubt with their own department, because I presume absolutely fair. That is why we have this lengthy public she is talking about industry here, for to come forward procedure. That is why we have the checks and balances and make their particular case. built into this procedure. We have been more than fair and She raised the question of the plan and its position in I do not see what possible cause he has to claim that what relation to the written statement. Now, in my opening we have entered into in terms of this local plan exercise or address I explained that. Today we are concerned with the the way in which it has been executed has been anything order and the plans which are attached to that. The written other than fair. statement is a planning circular. That will be the status of Mr Delaney of course reverted to the position in regard that and that is there for interpretation and guidance. We to Lake Road. That is the same issue as that which was are not here today to approve or disapprove the written raised by the Chamber of Commerce and I have already statement. responded to that. Flexibility was brought into it by Mrs Cannan - Mrs Mr Downie of course explained, I think, four different Cannell; I am sorry, Mrs Cannell. (Laughter and points which he responded to and I do not need to cover interjections) those, those points are already before this hon. Court, but The issue of flexibility was raised and my submission he did make, I think, or underline an important to you is that where we have the definition predominantly consideration and that is the benefits which will flow from residential, we have flexibility. More flexibility than we this plan, which certainly will not flow from a 10-year-old would have under any number of the other designations. plan that is left to continue for another two or three years, Sir Miles raised, once again, this question of whether and one of the examples he gave was the advantage which we are better under a statutory procedure or whether we could arise in relation to some of the present tourist would be better off under a less rigid procedure. It is an premises on the drives. Now, there has been a lot of pressure interesting question to be posed and I am sure it is one for to try to get more flexibility into the zoning to assist which this hon. Court will take some time to debate in the those people. This plan addresses that. The existing plan not-too-distant future, but it is of course irrelevant to what does not address that, and I hope hon. members appreciate we are doing here today. What we have today is an order that position. and a plan that has been produced under the existing law. Mrs Cannell dealt with the need for a retail survey. I I can do no more. That is what I have to work to and it is think the first point I would make there is that in the court my belief that I have worked to that and that it has been case it was made clear that there is no obligation on the rigidly complied with.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved T318 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998

Again, Sir Miles does not feel happy with the Shimmin’s views. Mr Shimmin is normally a very astute interpretation of the law as handed down by the learned gentleman. He calculates these things very carefully and Attorney in terms of this issue of prematurity in relation to normally has a very balanced view. I am sorry he takes planning applications. All I would say there is that we that view because I would honestly submit to him it is not wanted advice from the Attorney. I have got you that advice in the best interests of Douglas. If you take that line, sir, and I am sure it is good advice. I am sure it represents the and I hope you realise this, Douglas is going to be left position as the law stands and while that remains the law, with a very old and outdated plan, it is going to be left then I am sure none of us would argue that we should with a long contentious hole to put something else in its disregard it. It would be folly to do so. place, and of course by rejecting what is here now - and it Again, Sir Miles has some concerns about the position is conceded that there are very considerable benefits riding of the Mylchreests case in relation to the change of on this new plan - you are going to be selling the people of designation. The points I would make on that would be Douglas short, so I would honestly ask Mr Shimmin to these, Sir Miles, that first of all of course there is no reconsider that and have regard to the value as a whole for suggestion, certainly no suggestion, I am sure, from Mr this particular order. Karran, that the procedure that we have followed is I thank the hon. member for Garff. He addressed, I think, anything but the procedure laid down by law. In terms of five points there. There is no need for me to repeat them, notification we are required to do a public notice. We have and I also thank the hon. member for East Douglas, Mr done a public notice. That is what we are required to do. Braidwood, my other departmental colleague, for his That is what we have done. responses. Again, sir, you have dealt with this question of parking Mr Karran - 1 thank Mr Karran for his contribution and provision, whether or not there is sufficient parking I think he expressed a very good understanding of the provision. I have no problem with that. I would just refer difficulties which you are faced with in approaching an you back to the written statement where indeed some of exercise of this nature and in seeking to get concurrence, the policies recognise that there is a need to provide more to get approval for the product of these exercises. No easy parking provision. It is true that one of the views floated matter: there are too many set views, too many opinions at variance. But I think he did sum that up well and he to the inspector was that there should be some cutting back reflected that well in his contribution. on parking provision, but that has been clearly rejected by Mr Waft of course - there is one point that I do wish to the inspector, and the department has accepted that underline in terms of Mr Waft’s contribution. He said that situation, so I do not think there is any real problem there. we should consider everything said today. I certainly Mr Speaker - of course we know what Mr Speaker thinks subscribe to that, because too often we tend to prejudge about planners. We hear it often enough from him. I issues before we get to the end of the debate. I do not think suppose, to be moderate in my response to that, I will that that is a very sensible course of action and I would simply say he has an aversion to planning, but at the same invite members to follow Mr Waft’s advice and consider time I would suggest that the alternative would be anarchy everything that has been said today, not least of course the in terms of town and country development. You must have summing up which I am offering to you now. planning regulations and rules, there must be guidelines, He underlined again this problem that we have had a and I think it is wholly unacceptable that we should suggest track record of knocking down houses, putting up offices. that you do what you wish, which is virtually, perhaps not Absolutely right. What I am offering you today is setting as absolute as that, in essence what Mr Speaker is about reversing that, changing that and correcting that suggesting. situation. Now, the hon. member will put his own value I do not accept the point made by Mr Speaker that the on that. He will determine for himself whether that is worth application by Mylchreests has been prejudiced and I have while, whether the plan deserves support because we are explained my reasons for that. It is, just very briefly to seeking to achieve in terms of its positive aspects. That is repeat the critical part of that, what they propose is not a matter for the hon. member. embraced by the existing zoning. It would not be embraced Mrs Crowe said of course, or asserted, I suppose, is the by the proposed zoning. They are going to have to make way to put it, that planners never make a mistake. The their case either way, whether it is the existing plan or the planners do not assert that. The planners deal with a very old plan, because there is a world of difference, and I am complex and very difficult subject, trying to reconcile a sure hon. members will recognise this, between having an whole range of views and opinions and I honestly believe area that has a garage and has parking and then to consider they do it well. If you have regard to the very small putting in that area four storeys perhaps of multistorey car percentage of unsuccessful applications, if you have regard parking with all the problems, quite different problems, to the even smaller percentage that go to review and appeal that that will attract. That is a different proposition. So I think they do a magnificent job, and I know it is a matter that case will have to.be made and quite frankly I do not of my own experience that when I look for replacements see the difference between making that case under the old to sit on the Planning Committee it is like a search for plan as far as zoning goes or under the new plan as far as gold. People recognise the controversy and the pressures zoning goes. that are attached to serving on a Planning Committee. So I My only regret with Mr Shimmin’s contribution is that think that comment is really unhelpful and it does not he appears to have prejudged the issue, because he said represent the true situation. that he feels not inclined to vote for this issue and he would Yes, again, this issue that we are under a statutory rather put things back two years. Well I respect Mr procedure. We are under a statutory procedure. I do not

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 15th DECEMBER 1998 T319

deny that. I am under statutory procedure because each Against: Messrs Radcliffe and Delaney - 2 one of us here, or certainly a majority of us, have determined that this is the procedure we must work to and The President: In the Council, hon. members, 6 votes until there is a change, that is what we will do and we will have been cast in favour of the resolution and 2 votes do it honestly, objectively and certainly, to use Mr Gilbey’s against. I declare the resolution carried. words, we will seek to do it fairly. Now, hon. members, I think it an appropriate time to Mr President, the order that you have before you today conclude our considerations of this day and the Court will and the plans that you have before you today, as I said, are now adjourn and the adjournment will be until 10.30 the product of a long exercise, yes, a statutory procedure, tomorrow morning. Thank you, hon. members. one that has provided an opportunity for all who would wish to have a proper input into it. We have had a proper The Court adjourned at 7.57p.m. examination of all the evidence done by an independent inspector, a person who is trained in these matters, a person that has had the opportunity to hear the evidence and to test the witnesses. It is very easy for us to read a piece of paper. I can assure you it is quite different when you see a witness giving evidence. He has had that opportunity. He has got no prejudices. He has got no particular side to curry favour with. He has looked at the evidence and he has evaluated and he has handed down his decision. That decision is represented in the order and the plan that are before you. Yes, it will not represent the aspirations of everybody. It will certainly not represent the aspirations of everybody. That is not possible and if you start afresh I will guarantee you will still have that scenario to confront when we are back here in two years’ time, but what you do have in this plan is you have guidelines and a framework for the development of Douglas on, I would suggest, very practical and meaningful lines, and that is what we should bear in mind. That is what the great majority of the people of Douglas want. That is what this order and the plans attached to this order provide for us and I would honestly appeal to members to vote in favour of this order, vote in favour of these plans and accept, yes, it is not exactly as you would wish it. That is not possible. But there is no good reason not to approve it and to have Douglas, have this capital city have the benefit of what is embraced by the order and the plans. Mr President, I beg to move, sir.

The President: Hon. members, the resolution is set out at item 14 on the order paper. Will those in favour of that resolution please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it.

A division was called for and voting resulted as follows:

In the Keys -

For: Messrs Quine, Rodan, North, Brown, Cretney, Braidwood, Mrs Cannell, Mr Downie, Mrs Hannan, Messrs Singer, Bell, Karran, Corkill and Gelling -14

Against: Messrs Gilbey, Cannan, Sir Miles Walker, Mrs Crowe, Messrs Houghton, Henderson, Duggan, Shimmin, Cannell and the Speaker -10

The Speaker: Mr President, the motion carries in the House, 14 votes cast for, 10 against, sir.

In the Council -

For: The Lord Bishop, Mr Waft, Dr Mann, Mr Kniveton, Mrs Christian and Mr Crowe - 6

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Douglas Local Plan) Order 1998 - Approved o

o .

o