Report of the Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON MEMBERS OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

INTRODUCTION

1. Terms of reference of the Committee

At its May 2000 sitting, Tynwald Court resolved: "That a Select Committee of three Members be appointed to consider the responsibilities of members of Government Departments, their appointment and dismissal; and report"

2. Membership of the Committee

At the same sitting, we were appointed to serve on the Select Committee; at our first meeting, hon Member of Council, Dr Mann, was unanimously elected as our chairman.

3. Evidence

We have taken a significant amount of written evidence which is listed and set out in Appendix 1.

C/MGD/mlg

We have also taken oral evidence from Mrs B J Cannell MHK, Hon D J Gelling MHK and Hon D North MHK; this evidence is set out in Appendix 2.

4. Scope of the report

4.1 The scope of the report, and our approach to the terms of reference, is encapsulated in the response of our chairman when asked for guidance on the matter by the Hon D I Gelling in giving oral evidence. The exchange was as follows:

"Mr Gelling: ... I think I would look for a little bit of guidance: are we looking at generalities here or are we looking at specifics or how far do you actually want to go into this?...

Dr Mann: I think it would be correct to say that in terms of the resolution, which is a generality, but as a result of submissions made to us of course an individual case is specifically mentioned. I do not think we are going to avoid the specifics anyway, but I think our total remit has to be general, and in fact we have been at pains to look at the whole scene, the whole mechanism of appointment and dismissal and the way in which an individual operates within a Department. ..."

2 C/MGD/mlg

4.2 It is apparent from the evidence given to us, in particular the oral evidence,

that concern and uncertainty was created as a result of the removal of

Mrs B J Cannell from office as a member of the Department of Trade and

Industry by the Governor in Council. This removal from office followed

public criticism on more than one occasion by Mrs Cannell of the

development and construction of the new acute general hospital, which was

within the responsibility of the Department of Health and Social Security. In

the Department of Trade and Industry Mrs Cannell had responsibility for the

construction industry, but she had not received from the Minister for Trade

and Industry any written or oral formal intimation of dissatisfaction with her

Departmental work. These circumstances rather highlighted the legal and

political parameters within which members of Government Departments are expected to conduct themselves publicly.

4.3 Consistent with our terms of reference, we have sought to draw on these

specific circumstances to further the understanding of the position of

members of Government Departments. It was not, in our opinion,

appropriate to undertake a complete exploration of the circumstances leading

to the removal of Mrs Cannell from her office as a member of the Department

of Trade and Industry, but we would say that the various procedures which

we recommend in this report had been in place at the time, the train of events which led to the removal from office of Mrs Cannell might have developed in a rather different way.

3 C/MGD/mlg APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF MEMBERS OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

5. The present statutory procedure

5.1 Non-ministerial members of Departments are appointed and removed by the Governor in Council (Government Departments Act 1987, s 2) which is the Lieutenant Governor acting upon the advice of Executive Council. The latter has the same membership as the Council of Ministers. Thus the Lieutenant Governor's role in the appointment and removal of these non-ministerial members is purely formal since, at present he acts only on the recommendation of the Council of Ministers.

52 However, the detached apolitical role of the Lieutenant Governor in the appointment of non-ministerial members of Government Departments is perhaps less obvious from the formal statutory procedure than it is in the appointment and removal of Ministers. Ministers are appointed and removed by the Lieutenant Governor, acting on the advice and with the concurrence of the Chief Minister (Council of Ministers Act 1990, s 3). Perhaps as a consequence of being legislation enacted after some experience of the ministerial system, section 3 of the 1990 Act makes it quite clear that the Lieutenant Governor plays a merely formal role. The political responsibility for the appointment and removal of Ministers rests with the Chief Minister who must be satisfied not only that the action is appropriate with respect to the individual but also that an effective and cohesive Council of Ministers is maintained. We consider that there is merit in a statutory procedure which specifies where political responsibility lies.

4 C/MGD/mlg

5.3 We recommend that the statutory procedure for the appointment and removal of non-ministerial members of Departments be amended to provide, with or without the adoption of the ministerial concurrence proposed in paragraph 6, that they are appointed and removed either (i) by the Lieutenant Governor, acting on the advice and with the concurrence of the Council of Ministers, or (ii) by the Council of Ministers.

6. The political and practical aspects

6.1 Although practice will no doubt vary with the personal style of successive Chief Ministers, the present practice seems to be that initial discussions with Members of Tynwald on the possibility of their appointment as non- ministerial members of Government Departments are conducted by the Chief Minister. These discussions appear to emphasise both the appointment strategy of the Chief Minister and the wishes of the proposed appointee, with perhaps rather less emphasis on the wishes of the Minister of the Department in which the non-ministerial appointment is to be made. Similarly, when the proposals for non-ministerial appointments are put to the Council of Ministers, the Minister of the Department in which each non-ministerial appointment is proposed has only one voice in the Council, although no doubt one to which considerable weight would be attached.

6.2 It may be appropriate for the Minister to have a more formal role in the appointment of non-ministerial members of the Department, although it must

5 C/MGD/mlg

be recognised that the appointment of non-ministerial members by the Council of Ministers does allow for a wider appreciation of the factors bearing on the whole range of appointments and for a variety of views to be expressed with authority.

6.3 Further matters would require to be considered if the Minister were to have a similar role in the removal of a non-ministerial member of the Department. So, for instance, were a Minister to recommend removal but the recommendation was not accepted by the Council of Ministers, this would be likely to have a detrimental effect on the continuing working relationship between the Minister and the member. It would not be entirely satisfactory to resolve this by giving the member of the Department concerned an opportunity to present his or her view to either the Chief Minister or the Council of Ministers before a decision was taken on the removal from office. Such a procedure would also have the potential of damaging the continuing working relationship of the Minister and Member. It might also give a certain credence to the misplaced notion that the rights of non-ministerial members of Government Departments are analogous to the statutory rights of employees. Such an analogy does not take sufficient account of the public interest dimension in the appointment and removal of parliamentarians from Government posts.

6.4 We do, however, think that there should be an enhanced formal role for the Minister in respect of the appointment and removal of non-ministerial members of the Department. One approach would be to provide non- statutory guidelines which would require the concurrence of the Minister

6 C/MGD/mig

before the appointment or removal of an non-ministerial member of the Department.

6.5 We recommend that consideration should be given to including within the

statutory procedure for the appointment and removal of a non-ministerial

member of a Department that the appointment and removal only be made

by the Council of Ministers after consultation with the Minister of the

Department. This would require a formal request to the Minister for a

view and a formal consideration of the view when it was received. The

political expectation would be that the advice of the Minister would

normally be accepted; if it were not, the Minister would have the ultimate

sanction of resignation.

DELEGATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES TO NON-MINISTERIAL MEMBERS

OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

7. The delegation of responsibilities

7.1 The evidence which we have received demonstrates that the delegation of responsibilities by a Minister to the non-ministerial members of a Department, other than when the Minister is absent from the Island, varies

widely between Departments. In some Departments there is virtually no delegation and in others extensive delegation. Furthermore, the nature of the delegation also vary. In some cases delegation is perceived as being subject to a de facto ministerial veto. This is, for instance, considered to be the case in the

7 C/MGD/mlg

Department of Trade and Industry, where for certain procedures there is a time lapse between a decision and its implementation which is felt would allow for ministerial intervention.

7.2 We are aware of the widely varying practice of Government Departments on the delegation of responsibilities to non-ministerial members of Departments. We believe that there may be a case for a more rationalised approach and recommend the Government take an early opportunity to consider this.

7.3 In furtherance of this general recommendation, we further recommend that a delegation contain:

(1) a precise statement of the responsibilities delegated; (ii) a date for the termination, or formal renewal, of the delegation; and (iii) a consistent and formal procedure for seeking review of the termination, or non-renewal, of a delegation (which might well reflect some of the elements of our recommended procedure for the removal of a non-ministerial member of a Department).

8 C/MGD/mlg GOVERNMENT POLICY, DEPARTMENTAL POLICY AND THE NON-MINISTERIAL

MEMBER OF A GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT

8. Introduction

Having considered the evidence which we have received, we believe that there should be a clearer formal understanding of the extent to which non-ministerial members of Departments are bound, on the one hand, by a convention of collective responsibility for the policy and administration of the Department of which they are a member and, on the other, bound by an analogous constitutional convention for the policy and administration of Government as a whole. We consider that it would be helpful for these understandings to be declared in general terms in a resolution of Tynwald, and also to be the subject of somewhat more detailed guidance prepared and approved by the Council of Ministers.

9. Departmental policy and non-ministerial members of the Government Departments

9.1 There is perhaps a general political expectation that a non-ministerial member of a Department will support departmental policy in public, unless the member has been excluded from the departmental deliberations which led to the formulation of the policy. The weight of this obligation at present is perhaps not such that it would entitle it to be described as a constitutional

9 C/MGD/mlg

convention. Certainly, even if it were thought to be such a convention, it is not one which has been publicly formulated in any degree of detail.

9.2 We recommend that there should be a much clearer understanding of this matter and that the understanding should contain the following elements:

co unless they have been positively excluded from the process of formulating the policy, non-ministerial members of a Department should be collectively responsible for departmental policy in the sense that they should support that policy in public; (ii) this collective responsibility for such departmental policy should extend to departmental policy as a whole, and not simply to those policy areas for which a non-ministerial member has been given delegated responsibility to act; and (iii) this departmental collective responsibility should be subject to the same exceptions as apply to the collective responsibility of Ministers for Council of Ministers policy.

9.3 We would further recommend that to ensure equity and fairness, the guidelines on collective departmental responsibility prepared and approved by the Council of Ministers, would include procedures which would lead a non-ministerial member of a Department who was finding the obligations of sustaining collective responsibility for the policy of the Department acutely onerous to reasonably expect

10 C/MGD/mlg (a) that the Minister of the Department would discuss with the non- ministerial member the reasons why the member found departmental collective responsibility so onerous; (b) that following such discussion, the Minister would consider whether altering the scope of the formal delegation of responsibility to the non-ministerial member would serve to ameliorate the situation; and (c) that there would be an opportunity for the non-ministerial member to discuss his or her concerns with the Chief Minister, before any other formal action were taken.

10. Government policy and non-ministerial members of Government Departments

There may be circumstances, such as those which prompted the establishment of this Committee, in which a non-ministerial member of a Government Department, exercising a delegated competence, may act or speak publicly in a manner which is considered politically inimicable to the furtherance of the policies of another Department. Given the constitutional and political circumstances of the Isle of Man, we do not consider it either appropriate or practical for non-ministerial members of Government Departments to be otherwise bound to support the policies of either the Council of Ministers or Departments of which they are not a non-ministerial member.

11 C/MGD/mlg If such problems cannot be resolved within the Department, or between

the Ministers of the relevant Departments, we recommend that the Council

of Ministers should resolve the public expression of contrary views, as they

would resolve such differing views between Ministers arising from

Departmental policies which are at variance. Were the Council of

Ministers to take a view on the way in which conflicting policies, or public

expressions of the policies, of two or more Departments were to be

resolved, it would be for the Ministers of those Departments to ensure that

their non-ministerial Departmental members abided by the policy of the

Council of Ministers.

RESPONSE OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS

11. The constitutional, statutory and political context in which non-ministerial members of Government Departments work is clearly a matter which requires clarification and refinement. It would not be unreasonable for those who seek to be returned to the Keys at the General Election in November 2001, were to expect significant steps to have been taken on this before the Election. We do not believe that it would be realistic for the Council of Ministers to have reached a conclusion on reform, if any, of the statutory arrangements for the appointment and removal of non-ministerial members of Government Departments and to have successfully promoted consequential statutory amendments prior to the Election. However, we do believe that it would be possible for the Council of Ministers to formulate a response to our recommendations with respect to the delegation of

12 C/MGD/mlg responsibilities to non-ministerial members of Departments and also on the

obligations of such members with respect to both Government policy and the

policy of the Department of which they are a non-ministerial member.

12. Consequently, we recommend that the Council of Ministers report, no later

than the October 2001 sitting, with a considered response to our

recommendations at paragraphs 7.2, 7.3 and 9.1 - 9.3.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

13. Our recommendations are:

Statutory Procedure for the Appointment and Removal of Non-Ministerial

Members of Government Departments

13.1 We recommend that the statutory procedure for the appointment and

removal of non-ministerial members of Departments be amended to

provide, with or without the adoption of the ministerial concurrence

proposed in paragraph 6, that they are appointed and removed either (i) by

the Lieutenant Governor, acting on the advice and with the concurrence of

the Council of Ministers, or (ii) by the Council of Ministers (para 5.3).

13.2 We recommend that consideration should be given to including within the

statutory procedure for the appointment and removal of a non-ministerial

13 C/MGD/mlg member of a Department that the appointment and removal only be made by the Council of Ministers after consultation with the Minister of the Department. This would require a formal request to the Minister for a view and a formal consideration of the view when it was received. The political expectation would be that the advice of the Minister would normally be accepted; if it were not, the Minister would have the ultimate sanction of resignation (para 6.5).

Delegation of Responsibilities to Non-Ministerial Members of Government Departments

13.3 We are aware of the widely varying practice of Government Departments on the delegation of responsibilities to non-ministerial members of Departments. We believe that there may be a case for a more rationalised approach and recommend the Government take an early opportunity to consider this (para 7.2).

13.4 In furtherance of this general recommendation, we further recommend that a delegation contain:

(i) a precise statement of the responsibilities delegated;

(ii) a date for the termination, or formal renewal, of the delegation; and (iii) a consistent and formal procedure for seeking review of the termination, or non-renewal, of a delegation (which might well

14 C/MGD/mig reflect some of the elements of our recommended procedure for the

removal of a non-ministerial member of a Department)(para 7.3).

Departmental policy and non-ministerial members of Government Departments

13.5 We recommend that there should be a much clearer understanding of t his matter and the understanding should contain the following elements: (i) unless they have been positively excluded from the process of formulating the policy, non-ministerial members of a Department should be collectively responsible for departmental policy in the sense that they should support that policy in public; (ii) this collective responsibility for such departmental policy should extend to departmental policy as a whole, and not simply to those policy areas for which a non-ministerial member has been given delegated responsibility to act; and

(iii) this departmental collective responsibility should be subject to the same exceptions as apply to the collective responsibility of Ministers for Council of Ministers policy (para 9.2).

13.6 We would further recommend that to ensure equity and fairness, the guidelines on collective departmental responsibility prepared and approved by the Council of Ministers, would include procedures which would lead a non-ministerial member of a Department who was finding the obligations of sustaining collective responsibility for the policy of the Department acutely onerous to reasonably expect:

15 C/MGD/mlg (a) that the Minister of the Department would discuss with the non-ministerial member the reasons why the member found departmental collective responsibility so onerous;

(b) that following such discussion, the Minister would consider whether altering the scope of the formal delegation of responsibility to the non-ministerial member would serve to ameliorate the situation; and

(c) that there would be an opportunity for the non-ministerial member to discuss his or her concerns with the Chief Minister, before any other formal action were taken (para 9.3).

Government policy and non-ministerial members of Government Departments

13.7 Government policy and non-ministerial members of Government Departments

If such problems cannot be resolved within the Department, or between the Ministers of the relevant Departments, we recommend that the Council of Ministers should resolve the public expression of contrary views, as they would resolve such differing views between Ministers arising from Departmental policies which are at variance. Were the Council of Ministers to take a view on the way in which conflicting policies, or public

16 C/MGD/m1g expressions of the policies, of two or more Departments were to be resolved, it would be for the Ministers of those Departments to ensure that their non-ministerial Departmental members abided by the policy of the Council of Ministers.

Response of the Council of Ministers

13.8 Consequently, we recommend that the Council of Ministers report, no later than the October 2001 sitting, with a considered response to our recommendations at paragraphs 7.2, 7.3 and 9.1 - 9.3 (para 12).

E J Mann (Chairman) E G Lowey M R Walker May 2001

17 C/MGD/mlg

Appendix 1

Mr G T Cannell MHK 31' May 2000

Hon S C Rodan MHK Is' June 2000

Hon C M Christian MLC 13th June 2000

Mr E A Crowe MLC 14th June 2000

Hon W A Gilbey MHK 20th June 2000

Hon J A Brown MHK 27th June 2000

Hon D C Cretney MHK 28th June 2000

Hon J A Brown MHK 28th June 2000

Hon D North MHK 30th June 2000

Mr R W Henderson MHK 18th July 2000

Mrs B J Cannel! MHK 19th July 2000

Mr R E Quine MHK 8th August 2000

Hon D North MHK 3rd October 2000

Hon D J Gelling MHK 30th October 2000

LTGIST ATIVE BU1LD1N :c 1..E OF MAN IM 3 37w

Our Ref: GTC/ecw 31 May 2000 Professor T StJ N Bates Secretary to the House of Keys Legislative Buildings DOUGLAS

Dear StJohn Select Committee on Members of Government Departments The work of Members on Government Departments appears to vary considerably. My short political career has demonstrated that some Members appear to have much more to do than others. Of course, the effort individuals make within departments also differs with plenty of instances of some doing very little and others taking on far too much. For myself, I am on two departments, which keeps me more than occupied, when everything else is taken into account. I'm not complaining, but it is slightly galling when you see others receiving similar remuneration for being on one. This should be attended to — perhaps by a 50% payment for a second department. I also feel that the work of the Members within the departments is insufficiently reviewed, and there might be a case for Members to sit in on the Council of Ministers' meetings by rota, or when their Ministers are not present. Finally, I consider that the accommodation of committed Members of opposition within departments is no longer tenable. It is very difficult for departments to function correctly where confidential information is being transmitted to persons who later use it as a stick to beat the Minister with.

Cont -2-

I think the APG should not be permitted to serve as department members, though I concede that it would be difficult to have to make more of the others "double-up". There might also be problems identifying who is fully committed, and who are only sympathisers.

Yours sincerely

i G T Cannell MHK DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Rheynn Ynsee DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION Stiureyder Ynsee Murray House Ralph Cowin, BSc. Mount Havelock, Douglas isle of Man Isle of Man, IM1 2SG Government Direct Dial No: (01624) 685801 Flahr fiko. Vag: Fax: (01624) 685845 E-mail: [email protected]

Our ref SCR/GP/M165

1 June 2000

Professor T St J N Bates The Clerk of Tynwald Legislative Buildings Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PW

Dear Professor Bates

Thank you for your letter dated 24 May. There is no formal system of delegation of Ministerial functions to political members other than periodic delegations when the Minister is off Island or on vacation.

Yours sincerely

Hon S C Rodan BSc MR PharmS MHK Minister for Education

Department of Health and Social Security Rhevnn Slaynt as Shickylys Y Theav

Minister's Office From the Minister Markwell House Me of Man Market Street Government Douglas, Isle of Man 1M1 2RZ Refilys ELnn Va Telephone (01624) 685002 Fax (01624) 685130 E-Mail [email protected] Our Ref: 10-002 Your Ref: C/MGD01/mig

13th June 2000

Professor T StJ N Bates Clerk of Tynwald Legislative Buildings Douglas

Dear

Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

This responds to your letter of 24th May.

I enclose a set of formal instruments of delegation issued to the current Members of my Department.

Yours sincerely

Clare M. Christian, BSc, MLC

ACKNOWLEDGED OtR,CATED Enc. COVAMMTF 2306 00 Ili Government Departments Act 1987

Department of Health and Social Security

DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS RELATING TO

SOCIAL SECURITY

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

MRS PAMELA MAVIS CROWE, MHK

a member of the Department of Health and Social Security, until further order to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any standing orders made by the Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2 below.

Dated: 7th May 1999

Minister for Health and Social Security Schedule 1 (Description of Functions)

(1) The functions of the Department under the law of the Island relating to Social Security, including the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department arising therefrom.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) -

[a] the functions of the Department under -

(i) The Social Security Acts 1973-1997

(ii) The Pension Schemes Act 1993

(iii) The Supplementary Benefits Act 1976

(iv) The Pensions Act 1995

(v) The Jobseeker's Act 1995

(vi) The Child Support Act 1995

as those Acts of Parliament have effect in the Island

[b] the functions of the Department under -

(i) The T.V. Licence (Refunds) Scheme 1990

(ii) The Retirement Pension (Premium) Scheme 1999

(iii) The Widowed Father's Allowance Scheme 1994

(iv) The Pension Supplement Scheme 1999

(v) The Jobseeker's Enhanced Allowance Scheme 1996

[c] the functions of the Department under regulations, whether made under any enactment referred to in sub-paragraphs [a] or [b] or otherwise relating to the scheme of Social Security. (3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this Schedule refers include -

[a] power to consider or prepare proposals for amending the scope of the law referred to in paragraph (1), and

[b] power to prepare for submission to the Minister annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes resulting from the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department included in the delegated functions. Schedule 2

(Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to - [a] promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation, or lb] request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities, or

[c] implement non-legislative policy changes having financial implications beyond existing budgetary provision, or

[d] determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes, or

[e] subject to paragraph (2), increase or modify approved expenditure programmes, or

[f] dispose of land for which Treasury consent is not required by virtue of paragraph 1(4) of Schedule 1 to the Government Departments Act 1978, or

[g] increase service charges, or

[h] increase staffing establishments;

[I] make staff appointments (other than in relation to existing staff) of persons who are within 5 years of normal retirement age for the post

in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise).

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1)[d] and subject to paragraph (3) the authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall be taken to include power in exercising those functions, to approve virements not exceeding £10,000 between one sub-head and another sub-head of a main head of service. Schedule 2 (continued)

(Conditions and Limitations)

(3) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to approve virements -

[a) exceeding £10,000 between one sub-head and another sub-head of a main head of service; or

[b] between heads of service; or

[c] from any loan charges sub-head; or

[d] which will result in increased expenditure in future years; or

[e] which will result in an increase in the establishment or in the number of employees,

in relation to those functions without reference to and approval by the Minister (in addition to any other necessary approvals).

Where, in the exercise of the functions referred to in Schedule 1, it is proposed that the Member of the Department to whom this delegation applies should be absent from the Island, the Minister's approval shall be obtained prior to this absence.

For the avoidance of doubt nothing in Schedule 1 or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister.

(6) Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which has been delegated under section 3(2) of the Act to another person, save to such extent as the Minister may direct either generally or in any particular case. Government Departments Act 1987

Department of Health and Social Security

DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS RELATING TO

SOCIAL SERVICES

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by section 3 of the Government Departments Act .1987, I hereby authorise

MR GEOFFREY THORNTON CANNELL, MHK

Dated: rh May 1999

Minister for Health and Social Security Schedule 1

(Description of Functions)

(1) The functions of the Department, whether created by statute or otherwise, in connection with the provision of social services and services ancillary thereto including the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department arising therefrom.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions of the Department under

[a] section 23 of the National Health Service (Isle of Man) Act 1948;

[b] sections 82 and 83 of the Isle of Man Education Act 1949 (provision of clothing);

[c] the National Assistance (Isle of Man) Act 1951;

[d] the Child Life Protection Act 1959;

[e] section 5 of the Mental Health Act 1974;

[f] the Nurseries and Child-Minders Regulations Act 1974;

[g] sections 1 and 2 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1981;

[hi part II of the Domestic Proceedings Act 1983;

[i] the Adoption Act 1984;

the Nursing and Residential Homes Act 1988;

[k] Disabled Persons Employment Act 1946;

[1] Children and Young Persons Acts 1966-1990;

(m) Family Law Reform Act 1991; [n] any regulations, schemes, orders etc., whether made under any enactment referred to in this paragraph or otherwise, relating to the provision of social services and services ancillary thereto. Schedule 1 (continued)

(Description of Functions)

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which the Schedule refers include - [a] power to consider or prepare proposals for amending the scope of social services provision including services ancillary thereto whether within the enactments referred to in paragraph (2) or otherwise, and

[h] power to prepare annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes for submission to the Minister Schedule 2

(Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to -

[a] promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation, or

[b] request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities, or

[c] implement non-legislative policy changes having financial implications beyond existing budgetary provision, or

[d] determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes, or

[e] subject to paragraph (2), increase or modify approved expenditure programmes, or

[f] dispose of land for which Treasury consent is not required by virtue of paragraph 1(4) of Schedule 1 to the Government Departments Act 1978, or

[g] increase service charges, or

[h] increase staffing establishments; [1] make staff appointments (other than in relation to existing staff) of persons who are within 5 years of normal retirement age for the post

in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise).

(3) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to approve virements -

[a) exceeding £10,000 between one sub-head and another sub-head of a main head of service; or

[b] between heads of service; or

[c] from any loan charges sub-head; or

[d] which will result in increased expenditure in future years; or Schedule 2 (continued)

(Conditions and Limitations)

[e] which will result in an increase in the establishment or in the number of employees,

in relation to those functions without reference to and approval by the Minister (in addition to any other necessary approvals).

(4) Where, in the exercise of the functions referred to in Schedule 1, it is proposed that the Member of the Department to whom this delegation applies should be absent from the Island, the Minister's approval shall be obtained prior to this absence.

45) For the avoidance of doubt nothing in Schedule 1 or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister.

Department of Health and Social Security

DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS RELATING TO

HEALTH SERVICES

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

MR P. KARRAN M.H.K. a member of the Department of Health and Social Security, until further order to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any standing orders made by the Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2 below

Dated: 12th December 1996

Minister for Health and Social Security Schedule 1

(Description of Functions)

(1) The functions of the Department, whether created by statute or otherwise, in connection with the provision of health services and services ancillary thereto including the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department arising therefrom.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) -

(a) the functions of the Department in connection with the provision under the National Health Service (Isle of Man) Acts 1948 to 1979 (the Acts) of -

(i) Hospital and Specialist Services;

(ii) Community Services; and

(iii) General Medical and Dental Services, Pharmaceutical Services and Supplementary Ophthalmic Services;

under, respectively, Parts II, III and IV of the Acts;

(b) the functions of the Department under -

(i) the Local Government Acts 1916 to 1974 and the Local Government Act 1985;

(ii) the Nurses and Midwives Acts 1947 to 1984;

(iii) sections 78, 79 and 86 of the Isle of Man Education Act 1949; Schedule 1 (continued)

(Description of Functions)

(iv) the Ionising Radiations (Protection of Workers) Act 1968;

(v) the Mental Health Acts 1974 to 1986;

(A) the Misuse of Drugs Act 1976;

(vii) • section 10 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1981;

(viii) the Dental Act 1985;

(ix) the Human Tissue Act 1986;

(x) the Nursing and Residential Homes Act 1988 (but not in relation to Residential Care Homes);

(xi) Access to Health Records and Reports Act 1993

(xii) Human Organ Transplants Act 1993;

(xiii) Termination of Pregnancy (Medical Defences) Act 1995;

(xiv) Opticians Act 1996.

(c) any regulations, whether made under any enactment referred to in sub-paragraphs (a) or (b) or otherwise relating to the provision of health services and services ancillary thereto. Schedule 1 (continued)

(Description of Functions)

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this Schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of the provision of health services including matters ancillary thereto whether within the enactments referred to in paragraph (2) or otherwise, and

(b) power to prepare annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes in respect of the provision of health services and services ancillary thereto for submission to the Minister. Schedule 2

(Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation; or

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities; or

(d) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes; or

(e) subject to paragraph (2), increase or modify approved expenditure programmes; or

dispose of land for which Treasury consent is not required by virtue of paragraph 1(4) of Schedule 1 to the Government Departments Act 1987; or

(g) increase service charges; or

(h) increase staffing establishments; or

(i) make staff appointments (other than in relation to existing staff) of persons who are within 5 years of normal retirement age for the post;

in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise). Schedule 2 (continued)

(Conditions and Limitations)

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1)(d) and subject to paragraph (3) the authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall be taken to include power in exercising those functions, to approve virements not exceeding £10,000 between one sub-head and another sub-head of a main bead of service.

(3) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to approve virements -

(a) exceeding £10,000 between one sub-head and another sub-head of a main head of service; or

(b) between heads of service; or

(d) which will result in increased expenditure in future years; or

(e) which will result in an increase in the establishment or in the number of employees;

in relation to those functions without reference to and approval by the Minister (in addition to any other necessary approvals).

(4) Where, in exercise of the functions referred to in Schedule 1, it is proposed that the Member of the Department to whom this delegation applies should be absent from the Island, the Minister's approval shall be obtained prior to the absence. Schedule 2 (continued)

(Conditions and Limitations)

(5) For the avoidance of doubt nothing in Schedule l or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister.

Our Ref: AC /ecw

14 June 2000

Professor T StJ N Bates Clerk of Tynwald Legislative Buildings DOUGLAS

Dear Professor Bates

Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

In order to improve the present informal system, which seems to work in the majority of cases, the Committee may wish to consider a form of written contract which would embody the duties and responsibilities of the Department Member. In addition a termination clause would allow for the contract to be terminated by either party by giving whatever period of notice is agreed.

Yours sincerely

Alan Crowe MLC

6. CiFiCULATED 'XICYttti ErEN.i X306 00 TO COM M TrEE Telephone (01624) 851450 BALLACALLIN MOOAR Fax No. (01624) 852852 CROSBY e-mail: walter.gilbey®talk21.com MAROWN Web site: www.waltergilbey.co.im ISLE OF MAN IM4 2HD

Professor T.St.J. Bates, Secretary of the House of Keys, Legislative Buildings, Douglas, IMI 3PW. 20th June 2000

Dear St John,

SELECT COMMITTEE ON MEMBERS OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

I am writing further to your two letters dated 24th May regarding the above. I enclose herewith copies of the three delegations which I have given to my colleagues in DOLGE, Edgar Quine, John Houghton and Man Crowe which I hope are quite self explanatory. They are free to act within the terms and limitations of these delegations.

I should stress that we try to work together as a team and all matters of major importance and policy are discussed at regular Departmental Meetings, and Special Departmental Meetings whenever these are required. As a result, we try to reach consensus on the Department's policies and therefore everyone is able to support them, being a party to them. It is only in the rarest circumstance, which I do not think has in fact arisen, that 1 would use my power as Minister to overrule the majority consensus view. In this way we work in the same successful manner of the Treasury under the Ministerships of Donald Gelling and Richard Corkill.

If there is any further information you would like to know, I should be more than glad to attend a meeting with your Committee.

In principle I believe that the best way of running any organisation is through a united team who agree or have reached consensus on their policies.

With best wishes.

Walter Gilbey

ACKNOWLEDGED & CIRCULATED ITS' WIAMITTEE .23o600 GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS RELATING TO ESTATES AND HOUSING DIVISION

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by Section 3 of the Government

Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise Richard Edgar Quine, OBE, MIIK,

until further order to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule

l below, subject to any Standing Orders made by the Department under Section

3(4) of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2

below.

Dated this 18th day of October, 1999.

Minister for Local Government and the Environment

QADELFUNCT\DEL3RAH.DOC

SCHEDULE 2

Conditions relating to the delegation of functions

The delegation of functions in Schedule I is subject to the following conditions and limitations:-

1. In exercising the delegated functions, the person named may not:-

(1) promote new or amending primary or subordinate legislation; (ii) seek Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities; (iii) implement non-legislative policy changes having financial implications beyond approved budgetary provisions; (iv) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes; (v) increase service charges; or (vi) take any decision which would have the effect of increasing approved staffing establishments,

without the prior approval of the Minister.

2. The person named may only authorise financial expenditure in relation to those functions delegated to him and within agreed annual revenue or capital vote codes. Any proposed virements between expenditure codes or any proposed changes in agreed personnel budgets require prior Ministerial approval.

3. The person named must hold formal meetings with relevant officers in connection with their relevant areas of responsibility at least once a month. Notes of all such meetings must be taken and copies forwarded to the Minister and Chief Executive within four working days of the meeting.

4. The person named may delegate, in turn, any or all of the functions delegated to him but only, after consultation with the Chief Executive, to an officer of the Department and by a duly signed, formal authority, a copy of which must be forwarded to the Chief Executive.

Q: \DELFUNCTDEL3RAH.DOC

SCHEDULE I

Functions Delegated

1. Estates and Housing Division

Any functions exercised by the Department through its Estates and Housing Division, and, in particular, its functions under the following legislation:-

a) House Repair and Modernisation Scheme 1997; b) Roof Space Insulation Scheme 1997; c) Residential Property (Rewiring) Scheme 1997; d) Registered Buildings (Financial Assistance) Regulations 1982; e) House Purchase Assistance Scheme 1999.

2. Waste Operations Management Unit (WOMU)

Any functions requiring to be exercised by the Department in relation to the planning operation and after-care of the landfill site(s); waste reduction and recycling initiatives; waste materials subsidy schemes.

QADELFUNCTIDEL3MH.DOC GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS RELATING TO PLANNING AND BUILDING CONTROL DIVISION

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by Section 3 of the Government

Departments Act 1987, 1 hereby authorise Edward Alan Crowe, MLC, until

further order to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1

below, subject to any Standing Orders made by the Department under Section 3(4)

of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2 below.

Dated this 18th day of October, 1999.

Minister for Local Government and the Environment

-QADELFUNCI1DEL3RAH.DOC SCHEDULE I

Functions Delegated

1. Planning Division and Building Control Division

Any functions exercised by the Department through its Planning and Building Control Division.

QADELFUNCINDEL3RAH.DOC

SCHEDULE 2

Conditions relating to the delegation of functions

The delegation of functions in Schedule 1 is subject to the following conditions and limitations:-

1. In exercising the delegated functions, the person named may not:-

(i) promote new or amending primary or subordinate legislation; (ii) seek Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities; (iii) implement non-legislative policy changes having financial implications beyond approved budgetary provisions; (iv) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes; (v) increase service charges; or (vi) take any decision which would have the effect of increasing approved staffing establishments,

without the prior approval of the Minister.

QADELFUNCIVEL3RAH.DOC GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE ENVIRONMENT

DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS RELATING TO ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY & HEALTH DIVISION

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by Section 3 of the Government

Departments Act 1987, 1 hereby authorise John Ramsey Houghton, MHK, until

further order to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1

below, subject to any Standing Orders made by the Department under Section 3(4)

of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2 below.

Dated this 17th day of May, 1999.

Minister for Local Government and the Environment

QADCLFUNCINDEL3RARDOC SCHEDULE 1

Functions Delegated

1. Environment, Safety & Health Division

Any functions exercised by the Department through its Environment, Health and Safety Division, and, in particular, its functions under the following legislation:-

a) Local Government Acts 1916 to 1985; b) Housing Acts 1955 to 1990; c) Public Health Acts 1990 to 1994; d) Food Act 1996; e) Food (Emergency Provisions) Act 1986; f) Water Pollution Act 1993; g) Marine Pollution Act 1983; h) Slaughter of Animals Act 1936; i) Dogs Act 1990; j) Medicines Act 1976; k) Misuse of Drugs Act 1976; 1) Poisons Act 1979; m) Water Act 1991; n) Agriculture (Poisonous Substances) Act 1961; o) Factories and Workshops Acts 1909 to 1939; p) White Phosphorous Matches Prohibition Act 1909; q) Employment of Women, Young Persons and Children Act 1930; r) Dangerous Goods Acts 1928 and 1954; s) Boiler Act 1934; t) Mines and Quarries Regulation Act 1950; u) Ionising Radiations (Protection of Workers) Act 1968; v) Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act 1974 (an Act of Parliament) as applied to the Island;

and all Regulations and Byelaws made thereunder.

QADELFUNCINDEL3RAIIIDOC

SCHEDULE 2

Conditions relating to the delegation of functions

The delegation of functions in Schedule 1 is subject to the following conditions and limitations:-

1. In exercising the delegated functions, the person named may not:-

without the prior approval of the Minister.

4. The person named may delegate, in turn, any or all of the functions delegated to him but only, after consultation with the Chief Executive, to an officer of the Department and by a duly signed, formal authority. A copy of any such authority which must be forwarded to the Chief Executive.

Q:10ELFUNCTNDEL3RA 14. DOC O F ki-OT.JSE EYs

LEGISLATIVE BUILDINGS ISLE OF MAN 1M] 3PW

Our Ref: JAB/ejm 27 June 2000 Professor T StJ N Bates Clerk of Tynwald Legislative Buildings Douglas

7e<

Ref: Select Committee on Members of Government Departments Thank you for your letter of 24 May 2000 regarding the above matter. I am satisfied that the present system, as provided for under law, is appropriate if we are to retain an effective and meaningful ministerial system of Government. One vital component in relation to Members of Government Departments, to enable the system to work because we do not have party politics which provides a common goal, is that there is complete trust and respect for one another within a Department. In my experience, it is only where this is missing that the relationship breaks down. Not everything to do with politics can be formalised and written down, to do so is to the detriment of: (1) the flexibility of a democratic system and (2) to the politicians themselves. Yours sincerely

Hon J A Brown MIIK for Castletown

41: ACKNOWLEDGED CROW TE) -TO COMMITTEE to C100 ful3 epartment of Tourism and Leisure Rheynn Turrysid as Soccar isle of Man Government Tourism and Leisure Division ROUT; Ell= Vannin Head Office, Sea Terminal Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2RG

Professor T StJ N Bates Telephone (01624) 686801 Fax (01624) 686800 The Clerk of Tynwald E-Mail [email protected] Legislative Buildings Web Sitehttp://www.gov.imitourism DOUGLAS

28th June, 2000.

Dear Professor Bates

SELECT COMMITTEE ON MEMBERS OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

Further to your letter of 24th May regarding the above please find enclosed my Department's document 'Responsibilities and Structures' which details responsibilities delegated myself, as Minister, and Messrs Delaney, Lowey and Cannel! as Members of my Department.

Yours sincerely,

1--A-A„..-

Hon. D. C. Cretney, M.H.K., Minister.

;r.4"er7C--CC CKNOWLFOG ED di Ctt4C.4JILATTED, TO COMRIMTEE 10 a/00 this DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM AND LEISURE

RESPONSIBILITIES

AND

STRUCTURES

DEPARTMENTAL STRUCTURE

POLITICAL RESPONSIBILITIES

MINISTER

1. TT Co-ordinating Committee - Chairman

3. Events

4. Development

5. On and off-Island press and public relations

6. Island Games 2001 Bid Committee - Chairman

MR. D. F. K. DELANEY, M.LC. - Member with responsibility for:-

1. Marketing and Promotions

MR. E. G. LOWEY, M.L.C. - Member with responsibility for:-

1. Leisure Division

2. Island Games 2001 Bid Committee - Member

3. TT Co-ordinating Committee - Member

MR. G. T. CANNELL, M.H.K. - Member with responsibility for:-

1. Public Transport Division

2 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION WITH REGARD TO AREAS OF DELEGATION

TOURISM DIVISION

MARKETING & PROMOTIONS (Mr. D. Delaney M.L.C.)

Includes Tourism Marketing Database/Direct Marketing Overseas Marketing Conferences Literature Distribution Travel Trade Exhibitions Tourist Information Services Tourism Print

Excludes Event marketing/print Public Transport Division marketing/print Exhibitions relating solely or mainly to Events or Transport

DEVELOPMENT SECTION (Minister)

Includes Financial Assistance Scheme Department Development Fund Promotion of Development

Excludes Marketing Support Schemes

EVENTS SECTION (Minister)

Includes Event Organisation and Support Event Marketing and Print Event Exhibitions Jurby Race Circuit

Excludes TT Races and TT Festival TT Grandstand Site

3 TT FESTIVAL COMMITTEE (Minister)

Includes All matters relating to the TT Festival Management of the public and commercial facilities at the TT Grandstand Sponsorship/advertising TT Programme Press and results service Prize presentations

Excludes TT Races Management of the racing facilities at the TT Grandstand Events at venues covered by the Department Entertainment Complexes Committee

TT CO-ORDINATING COMMITTEE (Minister & Mr. E. Lowey M.L.C.)

Includes Organising of the TT Races Management of the racing facilities at the TT Grandstand Relationship with the ACU Relationship with the FIM Course safety Hospitality catering Press and results service Prize Presentations

4 LEISURE DIVISION

Mr. E. G. Lowey M.L.C.

Includes National Sports Centre Operations Regional Synthetic Pitches Manx Sports and Recreation Sporting Infrastructure Development Strategy Gaiety Theatre Summerland Wildlife Park Villa Marina

Excludes Villa Marina Redevelopment

Minister

Includes Villa Marina Redevelopment

5 PUBLIC TRANSPORT DIVISION

Mr. G. T. Cannel!, M.H.K.

Includes Buses and associated facilities Manx Electric Railway and associated facilities Isle of Man Steam Railway and associated facilities Public Transport Division marketing and print Transport exhibitions

6 DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM AND LEISURE

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions

In exercise of the powers conferred on the Minister for Tourism and Leisure by Section 3(2) of the Government Departments Act 1987 and of all other powers enabling me in that behalf, 1 hereby authorise the persons named below acting as a Committee, to exercise in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer or, in his absence, his Deputy the functions of the Department of Tourism and Leisure during any period of absence by me from the Island; or if, for any other reason I am prevented from exercising those functions

Mr. Dominic Francis Kevin DELANEY, M.L.C.

Mr. Edmund George LOWEY, M.L.C.

Mr. Geoffrey Thornton CANNELL, M.H.K.

This Delegation revokes any earlier Delegations relating to my temporary absence or incapacity

This 6th day of November 1998

David Clifford Cretney, M.H.K. Minister for Tourism and Leisure

7 DELEGATION

MR. D. F. K. DELANEY, M.L.C.

8 DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM AND LEISURE

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions

In exercise of the powers conferred on the Minister for Tourism and Leisure by Section 3(2) of the Government Departments Act 1987 and all other powers enabling me in that behalf, I hereby authorise the person named in column 1 of the Schedule 1 hereto to exercise the functions of the Department of Tourism and Leisure specified in Column 2 of that Schedule subject to the conditions specified in Schedule 2 hereto:

This 6th day of November 1998

David Clifford Cretney M.H.K. Minister for Tourism and Leisure

SCHEDULE 1

Column 1 Column 2 1. Dominic Francis Kevin DELANEY 1. Marketing and Promotions Member of the Legislative Council The Department's functions in regard to Marketing and Promotions

SCHEDULE 2

Conditions relating to the delegation of functions to the Members

The delegation of functions in Schedule 1 is subject to the following conditions and limitations:-

1. In exercising their delegated functions Members may not:-

I) promote new or amend primary or subordinate legislation;

ii) seek Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

iii) implement non-legislative policy changes having financial implications beyond approved budgetary provisions;

iv) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes;

v) increase service charges;

vi) increase staffing establishments;

vii) alter staff employment terms and conditions or;

viii) engage consultants;

without prior approval of the Minister.

2. Members may only authorise financial expenditure in relation to those functions delegated to them and within agreed annual revenue or capital vote codes and within the scope of strategies which have previously been approved by the Minister or have been discussed and approved at a Departmental Briefing Meeting. Any proposed virements between expenditure codes or any proposed changes in agreed personnel budgets require prior Ministerial approval.

3. All financial approvals must be formally recorded, signed and dated by the Member.

4. Members must hold formal meetings with relevant officers in connection with their relevant areas of responsibility at least once a month. Notes of all such meetings must be taken and copies forwarded (within five working days of the meeting) to the Chief Executive for immediate distribution to the Minister and Members.

5. Members may delegate, in turn, any of the functions delegated to them but only to an officer of the Department and by a formal authority, a coy of which must be forwarded to the Minister and the Chief Executive.

6. Members requiring to be absent from the Island on Departmental business must seek the approval of the Minister.

11 7. Preparation of Budget Estimates

i) It will be the responsibility of each Section/Division to prepare its proposals for the budget (both revenue and capital).

ii) the Member of the Section/Division will be responsible to ensure that the proposals are finalised in line with the guidance given by the Minister.

iii) The Section/Division will present its proposals to the Minister for determination.

MARKETING AND PROMOTIONS

1. The Member with delegated responsibility for this area will be Mr. D. F. K. Delaney, M.L.C.

2. The remit shall be to prepare, monitor and recommend a marketing strategy for the tourism industry and associated facilities of the Isle of Man, to the Department.

3. There shall be a Marketing and Promotions Partnership of the Department constituted as follows:-

i) The Member with delegated responsibility (Mr. D. F. K. Delaney, M.L.C.) as Chairman.

ii) A representative of Manx Airlines, appointed by the Minister.

iii) A representative of the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company, appointed by the Minister.

iv) A representative of the tourist accommodation sector, appointed by the Minister.

v) The Minister may appoint three other persons as Members of the Partnership.

4. In attendance at meetings of the Partnership:-

i) Chief Executive of Department/Finance Officer.

ii) Director of Tourism.

iii) Transport Executive.

iv) Events Executive.

v) Representative of Manx National Heritage.

5. There shall be a Secretary provided by the Department.

6. Minutes of all meetings shall be kept.

7. The budget for Marketing shall be determined by the Department.

8. There should be a minimum of one meeting per month, held sufficiently in advance of the Department meeting for Minutes to be circulated for consideration by Department Members.

9. The above will take effect from January 1', 1997.

13 DELEGATION

MR. E. G. LOWEY, M. LC.

14 DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM AND LEISURE

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions

In exercise of the power conferred on the Minister for Tourism and Leisure by Section 3(2) of the Government Departments Act 1987 and all other powers enabling me in that behalf, I hereby authorise the persons named in column 1 of the Schedules 1 and 2 hereto to exercise the functions of the Department of Tourism and Leisure specified in Columns 2 of that Schedule subject to the conditions specified in Schedule 2 hereto:

This day of December 1996

Minister for Tourism and Leisure

15 SCHEDULE 1

Column 1 Column 2

1. Edmund George LOWEY 1. Leisure Division Member of the Legislative Council The Department's functions in regard to the Leisure Division

2. Brian Harold PARTINGTON Executive Chairman, Isle of Man Sports Council

SCHEDULE 2

Conditions relating to the delegation of functions to the Members

The delegation of functions in Schedule 1 is subject to the following conditions and limitations:-

1. In exercising their delegated functions Members may not:-

i) promote new or amend primary or subordinate legislation;

ii) seek Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

iii) implement non-legislative policy changes having financial implications beyond approved budgetary provisions;

iv) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes;

v) increase service charges;

vi) increase staffing establishments;

vii) alter staff employment terms and conditions or;

viii) engage consultants;

without prior approval of the Minister.

3. All financial approvals must be formally recorded, signed and dated by the Member.

6. Members requiring to be absent from the Island on Departmental business must seek the approval of the Minister.

17 7. Preparation of Budget Estimates

i) It will be the responsibility of each Section/Division to prepare its proposals for the budget (both revenue and capital).

ii) the Member of the Section/Division will be responsible to ensure that the proposals are finalised in line with the guidance given by the Minister.

iii) The Section/Division will present its proposals to the Minister for determination.

LEISURE DIVISION

1. The Member with delegated responsibilities for this area will be Mr. E. G. Lowey, M.L.C.

2. The remit shall be to provide and promote access and opportunities for the Island community and visitors to participate in sport, leisure and recreation.

3. There shall be a Leisure Division Committee of the Department constituted as follows:-

i) The Member with delegated responsibility (Mr. E. G. Lowey, M.L.C.) as Chairman.

ii) The Chairman of the Isle of Man Sports Council.

iv) The Minister may appoint up to two other persons as Members of the Committee.

4. In attendance at meetings of the Committee:-

i) Chief Executive of the Department. Full meeting.

ii) Director of Leisure of Department. Full meeting.

iii) Sports Development Officer - as required.

iv) General Manager/Summerland - as required.

v) Manager/Gaiety Theatre - as required.

vi) General ManagerNVildlife Park - as required.

vii) Senior Duty Officer, NSC - as required.

5. There shall be a Secretary provided by the Department.

6. Minutes of all meetings shall be kept.

7. The budget for Leisure shall be determined by the Department.

8. There should be a minimum of one meeting per month, held sufficiently in advance of the Department meeting for Minutes to be circulated for consideration by Department Members.

19 SPORTS COUNCIL

20 CONSTITUTION, ROLE AND DUTIES OF THE SPORTS COUNCIL

1. CONSTITUTION

(a) The Council shall consist of eight members appointed in accordance with paragraph 1(b) together with the Minister for Tourism and Leisure or a Member of the Department delegated by the Minister, and the ex-officio specified in sub-paragraph (g).

(b) The eight members of the Council shall be appointed by the Council of Ministers, after consultation with the Minister for Tourism and Leisure and the Sports Council itself, and shall be persons not being Members of Tynwald , who in the opinion of the Council of Ministers, represent the interests of sports and physical recreation in the Isle of Man.

( c) The Minister or the Member of the Department delegated by him shall be the non- executive Chairman of the Council.

(d) The Vice-Chairman of the Sports Council shall be elected by the Members from amongst their own number and shall serve for a period of 2 years. He or she shall be known as the "Executive Chairman".

(e) The Vice-Chairman of the Council shall act in an executive capacity on behalf of the Chairman.

(f) The Council may from time to time co-opt such additional members as it considers appropriate. A co-opted member shall not have a vote.

(g) The Director of Education or a deputy nominated by him shall be a permanent voting member of the Sports Council.

2. TERM OF OFFICE

(a) A member of the Council, other than the Minister and the Director of Education (or member nominated to serve on their behalf) shall, subject to paragraph (b) below, serve until 30th September in the fourth year following the year in which he was appointed.

(b) A member of the Council appointed to fill a vacancy arising because another member has not completed his term of office (for any reason) shall serve only until the completion of the term of office of the former member.

( c) Nothing in paragraphs (a) or (b) shall preclude the Council of Ministers in consultation with the Minister, at any time removing and replacing a member of the Council.

21 3. ROLE

The role of the Sports Council shall be:-

(a) To act as an independent forum for the promotion and development of sports and physical recreation.

(b) To provide advice and expertise to the Minister and the Department on all matters pertaining to sports and physical recreation in the Island.

( c) To provide to the Department proposals for a strategy for the development of sports and physical recreation.

(d) To manage, on behalf of the Department, the allocation of financial resources in relation to matters expressly included in the budget head of the Sports Council, subject to such limitations as the Department may from time to time determine.

(e) To execute such other functions of the Department in relation to sports and physical recreation as may be delegated by the Minister to the Council in accordance with the Government Departments Act 1987 and accepted by the Council.

(f) In performing its functions to have due regard to the views of those persons involved in sports and physical recreation in the Island.

4. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT AND THE COUNCIL

(a) The Council will formulate policy and strategy in relation to sports and physical recreation and will submit proposals to the Department.

(b) The Council will work in partnership with the Sports Development Section of the Department to develop and support sport in the Isle of Man.

( c) The Minister will be responsible for the promotion and advancement of sports and physical recreation policy within Government.

(d) The Council will on an annual basis prepare a proposed budget for sports and physical recreation (other than in relation to the operation of facilities and the operation of the Department's Sports Development Section) and will submit such budget to the Department for consideration and incorporation (with or without modification) within the main budget of the Department.

(e) Subject to compliance with the approved budget, the Financial Regulations, and agreed policy objectives the Council shall be responsible for the management of resources allocated to its budget head by the Department. (1) The Department shall employ or allocate such staff as are considered necessary to enable the Council to perform its functions. The employment or allocation of such staff shall be made after consultation with the Council. The Council shall not employ staff.

22 (g) The Department will undertake all day to day financial management in relation to the Sports Council, on behalf of the Council on the same basis as is undertaken with the Tourism and Leisure Division of the Department. The Chief Executive of the Department shall be the Accounting Officer for the Sports Council.

(h) Whilst the Council will be responsible for the political direction of staff allocated to it (to the extent of such allocation) all staff shall be responsible in management terms to the Chief Executive of the Department through such management structures as he may determine.

(i) The Executive Chairman and the Sports Development Manager would act as the main link between the Council and the Department. co The Council will not be involved in the day to day management of sports facilities or the Department's Sports Development Section.

5. MEETINGS

The Council shall meet monthly and on such further occasions as the Chairman may determine.

23 ARTS COUNCIL

24 CONSTITUTION, ROLE AND DUTIES OF THE ARTS COUNCIL

1. DELEGATION

The Minister for Tourism and Leisure acting pursuant to Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987 has delegated the functions specified in paragraph 4 hereof to the body to be styled the Isle of Man Arts Council (hereinafter referred to as the "Arts Council") as constituted under paragraphs 2 and 3 subject to the conditions set out in paragraphs 5 and 6.

2. CONSTITUTION

(a) The Council shall consist of eight members appointed in accordance with paragraphs 2(b) and (c) together with the Minister for Tourism and Leisure or a Member of the Department delegated by the Minister, and the ex-officio member specified in sub-paragraph (h).

(b) The eight members of Council shall be appointed by the Council of Ministers, after consultation with the Minister for Tourism and Leisure and the Arts Council itself, and shall be persons not being Members of Tynwald, who in the opinion of the Council of Ministers, represent the interests of the Arts in the Isle of Man.

(d) The Minister or the Member of the Department delegated by him shall be the non executive Chairman of the Arts Council.

(e) The Vice-Chairman of the Arts Council shall be elected by the Members from amongst their own number and shall serve for a period of two years. He or she shall be known as the "Executive Chairman".

(f) The Vice-Chairman of the Council shall act in an executive capacity on behalf of the Chairman.

(g) The Arts Council may from time to time co-opt such additional members as it considers appropriate. A co-opted member shall not have a vote.

(h) The Director of Education or a deputy nominated by him shall be a permanent non-voting member of the Arts Council.

25 3. TERM OF OFFICE

(a) A member of the Council, other than the Minister (or Member of the Department) and the Director of Education (or member nominated to serve on their behalf) shall, subject to paragraph (b) below and paragraph 7, serve until 30th September in the fourth year following the year in which he/she was appointed.

(b) A member of the Council appointed to fill a vacancy arising because another member has not completed his/her term of office (for any reason) shall serve only until the completion of the term of office of the former member.

(c) Nothing in paragraphs (a) or (b) shall preclude the Council of Ministers in consultation with the Minister, at any time removing and replacing a member of the Council.

4. ROLE

The role of the Arts Council shall be:-

(a) To act as an independent forum for the promotion and development of the Arts in the Isle of Man

(b) To provide advice and expertise to the Minister and the Department on all matters pertaining to the Arts in the Island.

(d) To manage, on behalf of the Department, the allocation of financial resources in relation to matters expressly included in the budget head of the Arts Council, subject to such limitations as the Department may from time to time determine.

(e) Subject to any limitations from time to time determined by the Department to organise, promote, sponsor or otherwise assist in the organisation of the Arts or Arts events in the Isle of Man.

(f) Subject to any limitations from time to time determined by the Department to acquire, sell, borrow, loan, store and display articles of artistic interest.

(g) To execute such other functions of the Department in relation to the Arts as may be delegated by the Minister to the Council in accordance with the Government Departments Act 1987 and accepted by the Council.

(h) In performing its functions to have due regard to the views of those persons involved in and interested in the Arts in the Isle of Man.

26 5. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ARTS COUNCIL

(a) The Arts Council will advise on policy and strategy in relation to the Arts and will submit proposals to the Department.

(b) The Arts Council will work in partnership with the Arts Development Section of the Department to develop and support the Arts in the Isle of Man.

(d) The Arts Council will on an annual basis prepare a proposed budget for the Arts (other than in relation to the operation of facilities and the operation of the Department's Arts Development Section) and will submit such budget to the Department for consideration and incorporation (with or without modification) within the main budget of the Department.

(e) Subject to compliance with the approved budget, the Financial Regulations, any limitations imposed by the Department and agreed policy objectives the Arts Council shall be responsible for the management of resources allocated to its budget head by the Department.

(f) The Department shall employ or allocate such staff as are considered necessary (including a Secretary) to enable the Council to perform its functions. The employment or allocation of such staff shall be made after consultation with the Council. The Council shall not employ staff.

(g) The Department will undertake all day to day financial management in relation to the Arts Council, on behalf of the Council on the same basis as is undertaken within the Leisure Division of the Department. The Chief Executive of the Department shall be the Accounting Officer for the Arts Council. The Secretary of the Arts Council shall be the designated "Budget Holder" for the Council.

(h) Whilst the Council will be responsible for the political direction of staff allocated to it (to the extent of such allocation) all staff shall be responsible in management terms to the Director of Leisure of the Department through such management structure .as he may determine.

(i) The Executive Chairman and the Arts Development Manager of the Department would act as the main link between the Council and the Leisure Division of the Department.

(j) The Council will not be involved in the day to day management of facilities or the Department's Arts Development Section.

27 6. MEETINGS, ETC.

(a) The Council shall meet monthly and on such further occasions as the Chairman may determine.

(b) The Chief Executive of the Department and the Director of Leisure (or any deputy nominated by them) shall be entitled to attend any meeting of the Arts Council as non-voting members.

(c) The Arts Development Manager of the Department shall, as far as possible, be available to attend any meeting of the Arts Council in order to provide advice.

(d) The Arts Council may delegate any of its functions to any voting member (as an individual or as a Committee), to its Secretary or to any officer of the Department.

(e) Where a delegation has been made to any Committee sub-paragraph (b) shall apply to the Committee meetings.

(f) Copies of all Minutes of meetings and Committee meetings shall be circulated as soon as possible after the meeting for information to the Minister, the Chief Executive and the Director of Leisure.

7. TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

(a) Where any person has been appointed by Tynwald as a member of the disbanded Arts Council prior to 1 June 2000 he/she shall be deemed to have been appointed as a member of the new Arts Council pursuant to paragraph 2 with a term of office expiring on 30th September in the year in which his/her original term of office would have expired.

(b) Where prior to 1 June 2000 the disbanded Arts Council has entered into any contract or agreement in respect of the period after that date, such agreement shall become the responsibility of the new Arts Council.

(c) Any outstanding assets and liabilities of the disbanded Arts Council as at 1 June 2000 shall become assets and liabilities of the new Arts Council .

28 ISLE OF MAN ARTS COUNCIL

Whereas paragraph 2(d) of the Constitution, Role and Duties of the Isle of Man Arts Council provides that

"The Minister or the Member of the Department delegated by him shall be the non executive Chairman of the Arts Council".

I delegate

Edmund George LOWEY Member of the Legislative Council to be the non executive Chairman of the Arts Council with effect from 1' June 2000.

Given this day of May 2000

Minister for Tourism and Leisure

29 DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM AND LEISURE

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

In exercise of the power conferred on the Minister for Tourism and Leisure by Section 3(2) of the Government Departments Act 1987 and all other powers enabling me in that behalf, I hereby authorise the Isle of Man Arts Council as constituted by paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Constitution, Role and Duties of the Arts Council to exercise the functions of the Department as specified in paragraphs 4 and 5 subject to the provisions of paragraph 6 and the transitional arrangements specified in paragraph 7.

Given this day of May 2000 and operative from 1st June 2000.

Minister for Tourism and Leisure.

30 DELEGATION

MR. G. T. CANNELL, M.H.K.

31 DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM AND LEISURE

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions

In exercise of the powers conferred on the Minister for Tourism and Leisure by Section 3(2) of the Government Departments Act 1987 and all other powers enabling me in that behalf, 1 hereby authorise the person named in column 1 of the Schedule 1 hereto to exercise the functions of the Department of Tourism and Leisure specified in Column 2 of that Schedule subject to the conditions specified in Schedule 2 hereto:

This 6th day of November 1998

David Clifford Cretney M.H.K. Minister for Tourism and Leisure

SCHEDULE 1

Column 'I Column 2

1. Geoffrey Thornton CANNELL 1. Public Transport Division Member of the House of Keys The Department's functions in regard to the Public Transport Division

SCHEDULE 2

Conditions relating to the delegation of functions to the Members

The delegation of functions in Schedule 1 is subject to the following conditions and limitations:-

1. In exercising their delegated functions Members may not:-

i) promote new or amend primary or subordinate legislation;

ii) seek Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

iii) implement non-legislative policy changes having financial implications beyond approved budgetary provisions;

iv) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes;

v) increase service charges;

vi) increase staffing establishments;

vii) alter staff employment terms and conditions or;

viii) engage consultants;

without prior approval of the Minister.

3. All financial approvals must be formally recorded, signed and dated by the Member.

6. Members requiring to be absent from the Island on Departmental business must seek the approval of the Minister.

34 7. Preparation of Budget Estimates

i) It will be the responsibility of each Section/Division to prepare its proposals for the budget (both revenue and capital).

ii) the Member of the Section/Division will be responsible to ensure that the proposals are finalised in line with the guidance given by the Minister.

iii) The Section/Division will present its proposals to the Minister for determination.

35 PUBLIC TRANSPORT DIVISION

1. The Member with delegated responsibilities for this area will be Mr. G. T. Cannel!, M.H.K.

36 MINISTER'S TEMPORARY ABSENCE

1. If the Minister is temporarily absent from the Island or he is not available due to illness, all papers requiring his approval will be dealt with jointly by the three other Departmental Members acting with full Ministerial authority.

2. In the absence of both the Minister and Members all papers will be held by the Chief Executive's office pending the Minister or Members return.

3. If the Division advises that the matter cannot be so delayed then the Chief Executive's office will attempt to make contact, in the first instance with the Minister to secure verbal approval to the matter proceeding subject to formal ratification on the Minister's return. In the circumstances where the Minister cannot be contacted, the Chief Executive's office will attempt to make contact with a Member to secure verbal approval to the matter proceeding subject to his formal ratification on his return.

4. The Chief Executive's office will give as much notice as possible to advise Divisions of the occasions when the Minister, or Members will be off the Island or otherwise out of commission.

37 DEPARTMENT BRIEFING MEETINGS

38 DEPARTMENTAL BRIEFING MEETINGS

1. The Minister has determined that there will be monthly Departmental Briefing Meetings.

2. The meetings will normally be held on the last Friday in the month.

3. The meetings will start at 9.30 a.m. and will normally terminate no later than 1.00 p.m.

4. All Members of the Department are required to attend and they should endeavour to keep the dates clear.

5. The officers of the Department required to attend and report will be set out in the Agenda.

6. An agenda for the meetings will be forwarded at least four days before the meeting.

7. Notes will be taken of the meetings.

8. The objective of the briefing meeting is to ensure that the Minister and Members of the Department are briefed on the work being undertaken by the Department, and to enable the Minister and Members to discuss and raise issues affecting the Department, and when appropriate, given guidance.

9. The meetings should not be regarded as an opportunity for obtaining Ministerial approval, except if a matter is urgent, as the normal procedures should be followed.

39 AGENDA

1 The Chief Executive and each Section Head to provide a verbal report on the current matters affecting the Division, and provide statistical information where appropriate.

2. Monthly financial statement to be produced showing income and expenditure also current balances. (Both revenue and capital).

3. Chief Executive to formulate Agenda.

4. Agendas to be with Members at least four days before the meeting.

40 Department of Transport Rheynn Arraghey The Office of the Minister Sea Terminal Building sie of Man Douglas, Isle of Man Government IM I 2RF RefIlys Rai Vann Telephone (01624) 686600 Fax (01624) 686617 Professor T StJ N Bates E Mail [email protected] Clerk of Tynwald Our ref: JAB/EG Legislative Buildings Your ref: C/MGDO1/mlg DOUGLAS

Date: 28 June 2000

Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

In response to your letter of the 24th May 2000 I herewith append copies of the delegations which apply to the Members within my Department, along with other relevant papers which apply to their responsibilities.

For clarity, I can advise that the Policy and Strategy Committee is chaired by the Minister and consists of all Members of the Department. The role of the Committee is to deal with major policy and strategy issues including formulating primary legislation, to assist the Minister in making a determination. The Members of the Department are actively encouraged to participate in the discussions and appropriate officers attend such meetings; the Committee sits as and when necessary.

When Members are appointed to my. Department they are given a complete file of the papers regarding delegations and procedures of the Department.

Finally, I believe it is paramount that the matter of delegation rests with each individual Minister as all Departments differ in their structure and responsibilities and therefore the Minister must be free to politically structure his Department as he thinks best to carry out his responsibilities.

Yours sincerely,

Hon J A Brown MILIK Minister Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.2 Part 2 Strategic Manual Political Structure

2.2 Political Structure

The flow chart showing the political structure of the Department is shown below

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

POLITICAL STRUCTURE

Minister Policy Strategy Department Committee

Chief Executive

Coastguard & Territorial Sea

Properties Highway & Traffic Drainage Division Ports Division Division Portfolio

Anima( By-Products Plant Consultative Committee

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.2 - 1 Issue Date March 1999 DoT Delegation No. 12199

THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Department of Transport

Delegation of Functions relating to

HIGHWAYS AND ROAD TRAFFIC

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by section 3 of the Government Departments Act

1987 (a), I hereby authorise

MRS. HAZEL HANNAN M.H.K. a member of the Department of Transport until further order to exercise the functions of the

Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any standing orders (b) made by the

Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in

Schedule 2 below.

Dated:

Minister for Transport

(a) 1987 c.13 (b) Currently, Standing Orders No. SO 1/97.

DoT Del.no. 12/99 1 Mrs H Hannan, AH1K Schedule 1

FUNCTIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT RELATING TO HIGHWAYS AND ROAD TRAFFIC

(1) The functions of the Department, whether created by statute or otherwise, in connection with highways and road traffic including the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department arising therefrom.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions of the Department under-

Highways

(a) The Highways Act 1986;

(b) The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1985 (c.20), as respects bollards or gates in highways and parking places in highways;

(d) The Heath Burning Act 1939 (Vol XV p.236), as respects section 6(2);

Road Traffic

(e) The Road Traffic Act 1985;

(f) The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1985 (c.20);

(g) The Licensing and Registration of Vehicles Act 1985 (c.21);

(h) The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1984 (c.5), Part.I relating to removal and disposal of vehicles);

(i) The Road Races Act 1982 (c.14);

(j) The Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) Act 1964 (c.8);

(k) The Local Government Consolidation Act 1916 (Vol. X, p.57), sections 288-296 relating to local authority licensing of hackneys and hackney drivers.

(1) The Road Traffic Act 1963 (c. 21), (remaining section 113, relating to hackneys);

DoT Del.no. 12/99 2 Mrs H Hannan, MH1C (m) The Highways Act 1927 (Vol. XII p. 226), relating to powers of the Department to make bye-laws, with respect to highways, for regulating hackneys.

(n) The Road Traffic (International Agreements) Act 1974 (c.36);

(o) The Motor Vehicles (International Circulation) Act 1955 (Vol. XVIII p.518);

(p) The Carriage of Goods by Road Act 1965 (c.37);

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this Schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of highways and road traffic including matters ancillary thereto whether within the enactments referred to in paragraph (2) or otherwise, and

(b) power to prepare annual revenue and capital expenditure programmes in respect of highways and road traffic for submission to the Minister.

DoT Del.no. 12/99 3 Mrs H Hannan, MHIC Schedule 2

CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise) be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation; or

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities; or

(d) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes; or

(e) subject to paragraph (2), increase or modify approved expenditure programmes;

(1) dispose of land for which Treasury consent is not required by virtue of paragraph 1(4) of schedule 1 to the Government Departments Act 1987;

(g) increase service charges; or

(h) increase staffing establishments; or

(i) alter staff employment terms and conditions; or

(j) engage consultants.

(2) The Member may only authorise financial expenditure in relation to those functions delegated to him and within agreed annual revenue and capital vote codes. Any proposed virements between expenditure codes or any proposed changes in agreed personnel budgets require prior Ministerial approval.

(3) The Member must hold formal meetings with relevant officers in connection with his delegated areas of responsibility, such meetings being in "Highways and Road Traffic Client Team" or sub-divisions of that Team. The Member shall be chairman of the Client Team or each sub-division, and meetings shall be held not less frequently than •in accordance with the schedules for meetings agreed by the Client Team. Notes of all such meetings must be taken and copies forwarded to the Chief Executive within 10 working days of the meeting.

DoT Del.no. 12/99 4 Mrs H Hannan, MILK (4) The Member may, in turn, delegate by a formal authority any or all of the functions delegated to him but only to the Chief Executive or other officer of the Department approved by the Chief Executive or to a representative of the Chief Executive to whom the Minister has delegated his relevant functions. A copy of the formal authority must be forwarded to the Chief Executive.

(5) If the Member requires to be absent from the Island on Departmental business, he must seek the approval of the Minister.

Department of Transport: October 1999.

DoT Del.no. 12/99 5 Mrs H Hannan, MILK DoT Delegation No. 5A/00

THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Department of Transport

Delegation of Functions relating to

DRAINAGE

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by section 3 of the Government Departments Act

1987 (a), I hereby continue to authorise

MR. JOHN RAYMOND KNIVETON, M.L.C.

a member of the Department of Transport until further order (b) to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any standing orders (c) made by the

Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in

Schedule 2 below.

Dated:

Minister for Transport

(a) 1987 c.13 (b) This Delegation replaces no. 5/97(dated 10th. January 1997) which referred to Mr

Kniveton in his former capacity as MHK. (c) Currently, Standing Orders No. SO 1197.

DoT Del.no. 5A/00 1 Mr J R Kniveton, MLC Schedule 1

FUNCTIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT RELATING TO DRAINAGE (1) The functions of the Department, whether created by statute or otherwise, in connection with drainage including the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department arising therefrom.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions of the Department under -

Drainage and Sewage Treatment

(a) The Local Government Consolidation Act 1916 (X p.57) sections 42 to 79;

(b) The Douglas (Braddan and Onchan Drainage) Act 1949 (XVII p.770);

(d) The Local Government (Special Drainage Districts) Act 1959 (XVIII p.1053);

(e) The Castletown Town Act 1966 (XX p.36) Part II;

(f) The Ramsey Town Act 1978 (XXI p.432) Parts II and III;

(g) The Local Government Act 1985 (c.24) section 8, so far as it relates to expenses of drainage; and

Land Drainage

(h) The Land Drainage Acts 1934 to 1954 [for most purposes, the 1934 Act (XIV p.222) as amended by the later Acts. These are 1939 (XV p. 263), 1941 (XV p. 544), and 1954 (XVIII p. 429)).

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this Schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of drainage including matters ancillary thereto whether within the enactments referred to in paragraph (2) or otherwise, and

(b) power to prepare annual revenue and capital expenditure programmes in respect of drainage for submission to the Minister.

DoT Del.no. 5A/00 - 2 - Mr J R Kniveton, MLC Schedule 2

CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation; or

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities; or

(d) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes; or

(e) subject to paragraph (2), increase or modify approved expenditure programmes;

(f) dispose of land for which Treasury consent is not required by virtue of paragraph 1(4) of schedule 1 to the Government Departments Act 1987;

increase service charges; or

increase staffing establishments; or

alter staff employment terms and conditions; or

engage consultants.

(3) The Member must hold formal meetings with relevant officers in connection with his delegated areas of responsibility, such meetings being in "Drainage Client Team" or sub-divisions of that Team. The Member shall be chairman of the Client Team or each sub-division, and meetings shall be held not less frequently than in accordance with the schedules for meetings agreed by the respective Client Teams. Notes of all such meetings must be taken and copies forwarded to the Chief Executive within 10 working days of the meeting.

DoT Del.no. 5A/00 3 Mr JR Kniveton, MLC (4) The Member may, in turn, delegate by a formal authority any or all of the functions delegated to him but only to the Chief Executive or other officer of the Department approved by the Chief Executive or to a representative of the Chief Executive to whom the Minister has delegated his relevant functions. A copy of the formal authority must be forwarded to the Chief Executive.

(5) If the Member requires to be absent from the Island on Departmental business, he must seek the approval of the Minister.

Department of Transport: January 1997.

DoT Del.no. 5A/00 4 Mr R Kniveton, MLC DoT Delegation No. 6A/00

THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Department of Transport

Delegation of Functions relating to

PORTS

In exercise of the powers conferred to me by section 3 of the Government Departments Act

1987 (a), I hereby continue to authorise

MR. JOHN RAYMOND KNIVETON, M.L.C.

a member of the Department of Transport until further order (b) to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any standing orders (c) made by the

Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in

Schedule 2 below.

Dated:

Minister for Transport

(a) 1987 c.13 (b) This Delegation replaces no. 6/97 (dated 10th. January 1997) which referred to Mr Kniveton m his former capacity as MHK. (c) Currently, Standing Orders No. SO 1/97.

DoT Del.no. 6A/00 1 Mr J R Kniveton, MLC Schedule 1

FUNCTIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT RELATING TO PORTS

(1) The functions of the Department, whether created by statute or otherwise, in connection with ports including the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department arising therefrom, but excluding any functions in connection with the Coastguard Service or management of the Territorial Sea.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions of the Department under -

(a) With respect to Airports and Air Services

(i) The Airports and Civil Aviation Act 1987 (c.10); and

(ii) Such Acts of Parliament relative to Civil Aviation as extend to, or are applied to, the Island-

* The Carriage by Air Act 1961; * The Carriage by Air (Supplementary Provisions) Act 1962; * The Tokyo Convention Act 1967; * The Aviation Security Act 1982; * The Civil Aviation Act 1982; * The Airports Act 1986; and * The Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990; and

(b) With respect to Harbours

(i) The Dangerous Goods Act 1928 (XII p. 476);

(ii) The Local Government (Ferries) Act 1960 (MX p.73);

(iii) The Harbours (Isle of Man) Act 1961 (XDC p. 538);

(iv) The Registration of Pleasure Craft Act 1974 (c.21);

(v) The Wreck and Salvage (Ships and Aircraft) Act 1979 (c.24);

(vi) The Oil Pollution Act 1986 (c.12); and

(vii) The Maritime Security Act 1995 (c.5).

DoT Del.no. 6A/00 - 2 - Mr f R Kniveton, 111LC (3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this Schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of ports including matters ancillary thereto whether within the enactments referred to in paragraph (2) or otherwise, and

(13) power to prepare annual revenue and capital expenditure programmes in respect of ports for submission to the Minister.

DoT Del.no. 6A/00 3 - Mr J R .Kniveton, ItiLC Schedule 2 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation; or

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities; or

(d) determine annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes; or

(e) subject to paragraph (2), increase or modify approved expenditure programmes;

(0 dispose of land for which Treasury consent is not required by virtue of paragraph 1(4) of schedule 1 to the Government Departments Act 1987;

increase service charges; or

increase staffing establishments; or

alter staff employment terms and conditions; or

engage consultants; or

exercise any functions in connection with the Coastguard Service or management of the Territorial Sea.

(3) The Member must hold formal meetings with relevant officers in connection with his delegated areas of responsibility, such meetings being in "Airports Client Team" and "Harbours Client Team", or both Client Teams meeting together as "Ports Division". The Member shall be chairman of each such Client Team or Ports Division meetings and they shall be held not less frequently than in accordance with the schedules for meetings agreed by the respective Client Teams or the Ports Division as a whole. Notes of all such meetings must be taken and copies forwarded to the Chief Executive within 10 working days of the meeting.

DoT Del.no. 6A/00 - 4 Mr J R Kniveton, MLC (4) The Member may, in turn, delegate by a formal authority any or all of those functions but only to the Chief Executive or other officer of the Department approved by the Chief Executive or to a representative of the Chief Executive to whom the Minister has delegated his relevant functions. A copy of the formal authority must be forwarded to the Chief Executive.

(5) If the Member requires to be absent from the Island on Departmental business, he must seek the approval of the Minister.

Department of Transport: January 1997.

DoT Del.no. 6A/00 5 Mr J R Kniveton, MLC Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.11 Part 2 Strategic Manual Ministerial Directives

2.11.7 Guidelines for Papers

Department of Transport - Version - Issued on Part 9 - Ministerial papers

GUIDELINES FOR OFFICERS PREPARING PAPERS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE MINISTER OR MEMBERS OR COMMITTEES UNDER DELEGATED POWERS.

OBJECTIVE To enable the Minister and those to whom he has granted delegated powers to make effective decisions based upon a full understanding of the facts and in accordance with the Department's statutory obligations and powers.

GENERAL FORMAT All papers requiring a decisions should by typed on PINK paper.

BODY OF SUBMISSION The body of the submission should provide the person making the decision with a clear and concise assessment of the matter at hand. It should provide an analysis of the options available and a clear recommendation.

In addition it must provide to the person making the decision clear information on any of the following matters which may be relevant:-

non-compliance with or variance from the established Departmental policy

non-compliance with or variance from the Financial Regulations

details of the enabling powers for a decision pursuant to an Act or Scheme

details of any legal advice obtained

financial implications (including any implications in subsequent years or on other items)

virernents recommended (including an assessment on the implications for the donor code)

increase in charges proposed

changes in staffing establishment or impact upon staff terms and conditions of employment

engagement of Consultants

advice from Consultants previously engaged

potential political or public relations implications

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.11 - 10 Issue Date March 1999 Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.11 Part 2 Strategic Manual Ministerial Directives

limitations on the power of the person making the decision (eg the need for Ministerial approval or Treasury approval)

AUTHORISATION Any submission must be authorised by the Head of Division. OF SUBMISSION Any submission to the Minister must be authorised by the Chief Executive

IMPLEMENTATION Subject to any comments to the contrary, the Head of Division submitting or authorising a submission is responsible for

(a) implementing the decision once approved in full (b) ensuring that a copy is filed as appropriate (c) forwarding the original to the Chief Executive's Office (via his Personal Secretary)

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.11 - 11 Issue Date March 1999 Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.11 Part 2 Strategic Manual Ministerial Directives

2.11.6 Submission of Papers

Department of Transport - Version - Issued on Part 9 - Ministerial papers

SUBMISSION OF PAPERS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE MINISTER AND MEMBERS

1. Where there is no delegation to the Member or to a Committee and the Ministers authorisation is required, a paper must be forwarded providing adequate information from the Section/Division and it will contain the recommendation(s) from the senior officer. The paper must contain the senior officer's signature and be dated. The standard format for a submission is in Annex 1.

2. Where there is a delegation to the Member and the decision does not require further authorisation from the Minister, a paper must be forwarded to the Member providing adequate information from the Section/Division and it will contain the recommendation(s) from the senior officer. The paper must contain the senior officer's signature and be dated. The standard format for a submission is in Annex 2.

3. Where there is delegation to the Member but the decision requires further authorisation from the Minister, a paper must be forwarded providing adequate information from the Section/Division and it will contain the recorrunendation(s) from the Member with delegated responsibility. The paper must contain the Member's signature and be dated. Where for practical reasons it is not possible to obtain the Member's signature of approval before the Minister's approval is required, a note should accompany the submission explaining why it has not been possible. The standard format for a submission is in Appendix 3.

4. All papers should be forwarded to the Minister through the Chief Executive's Office.

5. The Chief Executive's office will make an appropriate record of the passing of the papers to the Minister (eg date, file number, subject matter) a copy of the paper will be kept on the Minister's file prior to returning to the appropriate Section/Division.

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.11 - 6 Issue Date March 1999 Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.11 Part 2 Strategic Manual Ministerial Directives

2.11.4 Agenda

Department of Transport - Version - Issued on Part 7 - Department Briefing Meetings

AGENDA

1. The Chief Executive and each Section Head to provide a verbal report on the current matters affecting the Division, and provide statistical information where appropriate.

2. Monthly financial statement to be produced showing income and expenditure also current balances (both revenue and capital).

3. Chief Executive to formulate agenda.

4. Agendas to be with Members at least four days before the meeting.

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.11 - 4 Issue Date March 1999 Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.11 Part 2 Strategic Manual Ministerial Directives

2.11 Ministerial Directives

2.11.1 Minister's Temporary Absence

Department of Transport - Version - Issued on Part 6 - Minister's Temporary Absence

MINISTER'S TEMPORARY ABSENCE

1. If the Minister is temporarily absent from the Island or he is not available due to illness, all papers requiring his approval will be held by the Chief Executive's Office.

2. If the Division advises that the matter cannot be so delayed then the Chief Executive's Office will attempt to make contact with the Minister to secure verbal approval to the matter proceeding, subject to formal ratification on the Minister's return.

3. If no contact can be made with the Minister by the time a decision is required, the Chief Executive's Office will advise the Member with delegated responsibility for the Division. The Member may, after receiving notification that the Minister cannot be contacted, after consultation with the Chief Executive or in his absence, his deputy, make a determination, with such decision being formally recorded and filed with the Chief Executive's Office.

4. The Chief Executive's Office will give as much notice as possible to advise Divisions of the occasions when the Minister and Members will be off the Island or otherwise out of Commission.

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.11 - 1 Issue Date March 1999 Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.11 Part 2 Strategic Manual Ministerial Directives

2.11.2 Government Department's Act - Declaration of Functions

Department of Transport - Version - Issued on Part 6 - Minister's Temporary Absence

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT'S ACT 1987

Declaration of Functions

In exercise of the powers conferred on the Minister for Transport by Section 3 (2) of the Government Departments Act 1987 and of all other powers enabling me in that behalf, I hereby authorise the persons named below, to exercise in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer, or, in his absence, his Deputy the functions of the Department of Transport during any period of absence by me from the Island.

Mr John Raymond Kniveton MLC

Mrs Hazel Hannan MHK

This day of

Minister for Transport

Amendment No 05 Page No 211 - 2 Issue Date March 1999 Volume l Department of Transport Chapter 2.3 Part 2 Strategic Manual Standing Orders

23 Standing Orders

A copy of the current standing order is reproduced below:

DoT Standing Orders No. SO 1/97

THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Department of Transport

STANDING ORDERS

STANDING ORDERS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

for the purposes of Section 3(4) of the Government Departments Act 1987 applicable to Delegation of Functions under Department of Transport Delegations Nos. 5/97, 6/97, 7/97 and 8/97.

January 1997

1. The functions of the Department are categorised as follows:

(1) The Centre:

(a) Central policy, management, finance and administration- (i) central responsibilities of the Department concerning the constitution and organisation of the Department as a whole; (ii) personnel management; (iii) policy; (iv) budgets, finance and resources; (v) administration; and (vi) statutory compliance. (b) Coastguard, and management of the Territorial Sea

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.3 - I Issue Date March 1999 Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.3 Part 2 Strategic Manual Standing Orders

(2) Service Providers:

(a) Design: (i) Highways and Traffic; (ii) Structures, Marine and Hydraulics; and (iii) Project Management; and

(b) Works: (i) Engineering and Building Works; (ii) Quarries; and (iii) Transport and Plant;

(3) Clients:

(a) Highways and Road Traffic; (i) Operations; (ii) Development and Planning; (iii) Vehicles and Safety; and (iv) Legislation.

(b) Ports: (i) Harbours; and (ii) Airport and Air Services;

(d) Properties owned or operated by the Department: (i) Department's Property and Leases; (ii) Animal By-Products Plant; (iii) Meat Plant; and (iv) Operation of the Specified Bovine-offal Plant.

Authorisation to a Member of the Department to exercise functions of the Department is given in accordance with such categories or sub-categories.

2. The functions are exercisable by an authorised Member of the Department in respect of policy issues, determining priorities, establishing objectives and setting timescales for implementation of policy and objectives.

3. The functions are exercisable by a Member in consultation with, and on the advice of, the Chief Executive and relevant Head of Division.

4. The functions are not exercisable in day-to-day management of the affairs of the Department which fall within the professional duty and managerial responsibility or financial accountability of the Chief Executive or of any Head of Division.

5. Functions are exercisable by a Member only in respect of the Departmental categories which are within his Authorisation, and that exercise of function is to be discharged primarily through:

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.3 - 2 Issue Date March 1999 Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.3 Pan 2 Strategic Manual Standing Orders

(1) Formal meetings of the relevant "Client Team" chaired by the Member; (2) Ad-hoc discussions with relevant "Client Team" Heads of Division; (3) Formal "Department" meetings with the Minister, Members, Chief Executive and other relevant staff; and (4) Ad-hoc discussions with the Minister and Chief Executive

6. Any variations to established Departmental Policy which the Member is aware of or wishes to pursue should be referred to the Minister for discussion and decision; the Minister or Chief Executive may direct that the matter be referred to the Policy Strategy Committee.

7. Financial Accountability for the Department is vested solely with the Chief Executive as the Accounting Officer. Senior officers will have delegated authority for incurring expenditure which has been approved and for which provision exists within the Department's Estimates.

8. Any expenditure in excess of a senior officer's approved financial limit is to be referred to the Chief Executive for certification where it is within the fmancial provision in the Estimates; otherwise a paper seeking authorisation must be submitted to the Minister via the Chief Executive.

9. The "Client Teams" chaired by a designated Member are:

(1) Highways and Road Traffic Division: (a) Operations; (b) Development and Planning; (c) Vehicles and Safety; and (d) Legislation.

(2) Ports Division: (a) Airport; and (b) Harbours. (3) Drainage Division: (a) Drainage and Sewage Treatment, other than IRIS; (b) IRIS (being in respect of inter-district sewage transmission and centralised sewage treatment and disposal). (c) Land Drainage;

The following "Client Team" is not chaired by a designated Member:

(4) Properties Portfolio: (a) Department's Property and Leases; (b) Animal By-Products Plant; (c) Meat Plant; and (d) Operation of the Specified Bovine-offal Plant.

10. The "Service Provider Teams" are not chaired by a designated Member.

11. Every meeting of a Client or Service Provider Team shall have a formal agenda. Notes are to be taken and kept of every such meeting and they shall be sent to the Minister via the Chief Executive within 10 working days of the meeting.

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.3 - 3 Issue Date March 1999

Volume 1 Department of Transport Chapter 2.3 Part 2 Strategic Manual Standing Orders

12. Other official standing Committees normally or occasionally chaired by Members are:

(1) (Highways and Road Traffic): Taxi Legislation Consultative Meetings (which may subsequently be superseded by a Consultative Committee);

(2) (Highways and Road Traffic): Douglas Transport Committee (when it has been constituted);

Each such standing committee is normally to be chaired by the Member who is authorised to exercise the Department functions which encompass the subject matter of the Committee.

The following standing Committee is normally to be chaired by the Chief Executive:

(3) (Properties Portfolio): Animal By-Products Plant Consultative Committee (convened in accordance with Terms of Reference dated 6.4.93).

13. Working Parties and other meetings arranged by officers for progressing their duties are for attendance only by officers.

14. Where a directive is issued by the Minister or a Member (within his authorised jurisdiction) the Head of Division of each Client or Service Provider Team shall be entirely accountable for the implementation of the directive, and for quality of work, timescales, and costs. It is a matter for the discretion of the Head of Division as to how he progresses such duties.

Dated:

Minister for Transport

Department of Transport: January 1997.

Amendment No 05 Page No 2.3 - 4 Issue Date March 1999 Department of Trade & Industry

Rheynn Dellal as Jeadys Illiam Dhone House 2 Circular Road, Douglas From the Isle of Man. British Isles Isle of Man Minister Government Retlys E5an Vannk Telephone (01624) 685673 Fax (01624) 685454 e-mail [email protected]

Our Ref Min /LKS 30th June, 2000 Your Ref

Professor T. StJ.N. Bates, The Clerk of Tynwald, Legislative Buildings, Douglas, Isle of Man, ilVil 3PW.

Dear

Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

Thank you for your letter dated 24th May, 2000, on behalf of the Select Committee, requesting information on the extent to which I have delegated functions of the Department in accordance with Section 3(2) of the Government Departments Act, 1987.

Since my appointment as Minister for Trade & Industry I have utilised the provisions of Section 3(2) as follows:

a) Political Members of the Department

It is my practice to delegate responsibility for specific aspects of the work of the Department to the political members.

By way of example, in 1996 following my appointment as Minister, I delegated specific responsibilities to each of the political members at the time as follows:

i) Mrs B. Carmen - Construction Industry - Retail Sector; ii) Mr E.A. Crowe - Natural Resources (energy, hydrocarbons, mines, minerals etc.); iii) Mrs P.M. Crowe - Manpower (including employment and training).

Copies of the 1996 delegations to the political members are attached at ANNEX A for information.

ALKNCANLEDGED 44i CIRCULATED I; tTO CaMMITTEE 260101) tuis In addition, when I am off-Island on Government business or for other reasons it is my practice to delegate my functions as Minister to one of the political members of the Department. A sample delegation is attached at ANNEX B for information.

There is also a general delegation in place to cover any absence from the Island when no specific delegation has been signed and to cover periods of illness when I may be unable to exercise my functions. A copy of this general delegation is attached at ANNEX C for information. b) Officers of the Department

When I am absent from the Island or otherwise unable to carry out my functions and there is no political member of the Department available to act I delegate my functions to the Chief Executive of the Department. A copy delegation is attached at ANNEX D for information.

There is a delegation currently in place enabling the Chief Executive of the Department to appoint persons to serve on the Control of Employment Appeal Tribunal. A copy of this delegation is attached at ANNEX E for information; c) Other Persons

A delegation is in place enabling the functions of the Department relating to the issue of work permits contained in Section 2, 3, 3A, 7 and 8 of, and paragraph 9A of Schedule 1 to the Control of Employment Acts 1975 and 1978 as amended to be undertaken by the Work Permit Committee.

A copy of this delegation is attached at ANNEX F for information.

Should you require any further information please let me know.

Yours sincerely

avid North MHK Ref:96/03/04

Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions relating to the Construction Industry

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

Mrs Brenda Cannell MHK

a member of the Department of Trade & Industry until further order to exercise

the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any

standing orders made by the Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to

the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2 below.

Minister for Trade & Industry

Dated 23rd December 1996 SCHEDULE I

Construction Industry

(1) The functions of the Department as defined in the Review of the Administration of Government's Construction Contracts published by the Council of Ministers in January 1993

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of the Construction Industry including matters ancillary thereto

(b) power to prepare annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes in respect of the Construction Industry for submission to the Minister

(Conditions and Limitations) (1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation;

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

(d) determine annual capital or revenue expenditure programmes;

(e) dispose of land

(f) alter charges or fees for services

- in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise)

(4) The Member may delegate, in turn, any or all of the delegated functions, but only to an officer of the Department and by formal authority, a copy of which must be forwarded to the Minister and the Chief Executive. (5) If the Member intends to be absent from the Island on Departmental business, the prior approval of the Minister must be sought.

(6) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Schedule 1 or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such a form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister (7) Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which has been delegated under Section 3(2) of the Act to another person, save to such extent as the Minister may direct either generally or in any particular case (8) Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to impinge upon the authority of the Chief Executive to manage the staff of the Department, nor to execute his responsibilities as Departmental Accounting Officer. Ref:96/03/07

Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions relating to the Retail Sector

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

Mrs Brenda Cannel! MILK

a member of the Department of Trade & Industry until further order to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any standing orders made by the Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2 below.

Minister for Trade & Industry

Dated 23rd December 1996 SCHEDULE 1

The Retail Sector

(1) The functions of the Department as defined in the Report of the Select Committee of Tynwald on the Ministerial Responsibility for the Retail Industry dated October 1995, and the development of those functions

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of the Retail Sector including matters ancillary thereto

(b) programmes in respect of the Retail Sector for submission to the Minister

(Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule I shall not be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation;

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

(d) determine annual capital or revenue expenditure programmes;

(e) dispose of land

(f) alter charges or fees for services

- in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise)

(2) The Member may only authorise expenditure in relation to delegated functions and within agreed annual revenue and capital votes. (3) The Member should meet with relevant officers in connection with delegated areas of responsibility at least once a month. Notes of any decisions taken at such meetings must be recorded and copies forwarded to the Minister and Chief Executive within five working days of the meeting. (4) The Member may delegate, in turn, any or all of the delegated functions, but only to an officer of the Department and by formal authority, a copy of which must be forwarded to the Minister and the Chief Executive. (5) If the Member intends to be absent from the Island on Departmental business, the prior approval , of the Minister must be sought.

(6) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Schedule 1 or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such a form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister (7) Nothing in Schedule I shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which has been delegated under Section 3(2) of the Act to another person, save to such extent as the Minister may direct either generally or in any particular case

(8) Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to impinge upon the authority of the Chief Executive to manage the staff of the Department, nor to execute his responsibilities as Departmental Accounting Officer. Ref:96/03/05

Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions relating to Natural Resources

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

Mr Edward Alan Crowe MILK

Minister for Trade & Industry

Dated 23rd December 1996 SCHEDULE 1

Natural Resources

(Energy, Hydrocarbons, Mines, Minerals etc.)

(1) The functions of the Department, whether created by statute or otherwise, in connection with Natural Resources, including the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department arising therefrom.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the functions of the Department under -

The Electricity Act 1996 The Gas Regulation Act 1995 The Water Act 1991 The Minerals Act 1986 The Petroleum Act 1986

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this schedule refer include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of Natural Resources including matters ancillary thereto whether within the enactments referred to in paragraph (2) or otherwise, and

(b) power to prepare annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes in respect of Natural Resources for submission to the Minister

(d) operational matters relating to Minerals and Hydrocarbons

Schedule 2

(Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation;

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

(d) determine annual capital or revenue expenditure programmes;

(e) dispose of land

(f) alter charges or fees for services

- in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise)

(6) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Schedule 1 or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such a form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister (7) Nothing in Schedule I shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which has been delegated under Section 3(2) of the Act to another person, save to such extent as the Minister may direct either generally or in any particular case

Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions relating to Manpower

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government

Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

Mrs Pamela Crowe MHK

Minister for Trade & Industry

Dated 23rd December 1996 SCHEDULE 1

Manpower (including Employment and Training)

(1) The operational responsibilities of the Department, whether created by statute or otherwise, related to Manpower (including Training and Employment), other than those delegated to the Control of Employment (Work Permit) Committee, including the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Department arising therefrom.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the functions of the Department under -

The Employment Act 1991 The Employment (Amendment) Act 1996 The Trade Unions Act 1991 The Control of Employment Act 1975 (other than those which have been delegated to the Work Permit Committee of the Department The Redundancy Payments Act 1990

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of Manpower, Employment and Training including matters ancillary thereto whether within the enactments referred to in paragraph (2) or otherwise, and

(b) power to prepare annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes in respect of Manpower, Employment and Training for submission to the Minister

(c) operational matters relating to Manpower, Employment and Training including the operation of the Training Division and the Job Centre Schedule 2

(Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation;

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

(d) determine annual capital or revenue expenditure programmes;

(e) dispose of land

(f) alter charges or fees for services

- in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise)

(6) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Schedule I or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such a form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister (7) Nothing in Schedule I shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which has been delegated under Section 3(2) of the Act to another person, save to such extent as the Minister may direct either generally or in any particular case

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions During Periods of Absence of the Minister

Mr•sium.M.1•11.1M.••••=1

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987,1 hereby authorise

Mrs P Crowe MEK

- a member of the Department of Trade & Industry, during the period between December 28th 1997 and January 13th 1998 when I shall be absent from the Island, to exercise the functions of the Department not otherwise delegated, provided that -

(a) this delegation shall not apply in respect of business which can, in the opinion of Mrs Crowe be deferred to await my return;

(b) a copy of the record of any decision taken in accordance with this delegation is passed to the office of the Chief Executive of the Department;

"Signed by authority of the Minister for Trade & Industry"

Signed Date Minister for Trade & industry t•N

REF No 99/05/12

Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

General Delegation of Functions During Periods of Absence of the Minister

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise that -

During any absence of myself from the Isle of Man, or in a period of illness which prevents me from carrying out my duties, the Members for the time being of the Department jointly, and in the simultaneous absence from the Isle of Man or illness of any such other Member or Members, the remaining Member or Members shall exercise the functions of the Department, provided that:

(a) this delegation shall not apply in respect of business which can, in the opinion of the Member(s) be deferred to await my return;

(b) a copy of the record of any decision taken in accordance with this delegation is passed to the office of the Chief Executive of the Department;

"Signed by authority of the Minister for Trade & industry"

Signed Date Minister for Trade & Industry

Note: This delegation is intended to allow for circumstances where the Minister may become ill, leave the Island without signing a specific delegation, or where a Member with delegated powers becomes unavailable to carry out those duties for any reason. Ref:99/05/12 Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions During Periods of Absence of the Minister and Members

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

The Chief Executive of the Department

- during any period when I and all other Members of the Department are absent from the Island, or when I and all other Members of the Department are otherwise unable to carry out the functions of the Department, to carry out those functions, provided that -

(a) this delegation shall not apply in respect of business which can, in the opinion of the Chief Executive be deferred to await my return;

(b) any order, regulation, etc., made by the Chief Executive acting in accordance with this delegation shall bear the following -

"Signed by authority of the Minister for Trade & Industry"

Signed Date Minister for Trade & industry REF No 98/06/01

Department of Trade & Industry

DELEGATION OF FUNCTION

-pursuant to Section 3(2) of the Government Departments Act 1987

Function(s) hereby delegated:

The appointment of persons to serve on the Appeal Tribunal, subject to Section 5A of the Control of Employment Act 1975

Person to whom function is delegated:

The Chief Executive for the time being of the Department

UNDER THE POWERS VESTED IN ME BY SECTION 3 (2) OF THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987, I HEREBY DELEGATE THE FUNCTIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT DESCRIBED HEREIN TO THE PERSON NAMED ABOVE.

SIGNED:

Minister

Date I— P N >e„

Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions relating to Work Permits

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

The Work Permit Committee*

- until further order to exercise the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any standing orders made by the Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2 below.

Minister for Trade & Industry

Dated 24th December 1996

• The Work Permit Committee, appointed under the terms of Schedule 3 of this Delegation, comprises: Mr Robert Quayle (Chairman), Mr Keith McArd, and Mr James Corrin SCHEDULE 1

Work Permits

(1) The functions of the Department, relating to the issue of Work Permits contained in sections 2, 3, 3A, 7 and 8 of, and paragraph 9A of Schedule 1 to the Control of Employment Acts 1975 and 1978 as amended.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the functions of the Department contained in the Control of Employment Regulations 1993, (made under Section 10 of the Act), save for the functions contained in -

(a) Paragraph 9 (Variation in Forms)

(b) Paragraph 10 (Appeals)

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this schedule refers include -

(a) The power to issue, renew and revoke permits in accordance with policies and practices agreed from time to time with the Minister

(b) The power to represent the Department in dealings with the Attorney General relating to possible prosecutions

SCHEDULE 2

(Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule l shall not be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation; or

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities; or

(d) determine annual capital or revenue expenditure programmes; or

(e) dispose of land

(f) direct staff in the exercise of their duties

(g) alter charges or fees for services

- in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise)

(2) The Committee may not authorise financial expenditure except in direct relation to the functions delegated to it, and within agreed annual revenue votes.

(3) The Committee should meet regularly with relevant officers in connection with its delegated areas of responsibility. Notes of all such meetings must be taken and copies forwarded to the Minister and Chief Executive within five working days of the meeting. Standing Orders relating to the conduct of business at meetings of the Committee are contained in Schedule 3 of this Delegation. (4) The Committee may delegate, in turn, any or all of the functions delegated to it, but only to an officer of the Department and by formal authority, a copy of which must be forwarded to the Minister and the Chief Executive.

(5) If the Committee, or any member of it, requires to be absent from the Island on business related to these delegated functions, the prior approval of the Minister must be sought.

(7) Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which has been delegated under Section 3(2) of the Act to another person, save to such extent as the Minister may direct either generally or in any particular case

Membership of the Committee

Whereas the functions of the Department relating to the issuing of Work Permits are delegated to the Work Permit Committee, the following individuals are hereby confirmed as members thereof:

Mr Robert Quayle of Mullen Beg, Patrick, (Chairman)

Mr Keith McArd of Crofton House, Ballafesson, Port St Mary

Mr James Corrin of 69 Heywood Drive, Heywood Park, Onchan

Meetings of the Committee (1) The Committee shall hold meetings for the transaction of business at such times and at such place as may be necessary for the timely and proper execution of its delegated functions. Meetings may be held at any time on the direction of the Chairman.

(2) No business shall be transacted at any meeting unless a quorum of two members be present.

(3) The Committee shall elect one of its number to be vice-chairman.

(4) The Chairman, or in the absence of the Chairman the vice-chairman, shall preside at each meeting of the Committee.

(5) The Committee shall cause minutes of its proceedings to be kept to record -

(a) the date and place of the proceedings

(b) the names of the members present

(6) Each question at a meeting shall be decided by a majority of the votes of the members present and voting on that question. In the case of equality of votes the chairman for the time being of such meeting shall have a second or casting vote.

(7) A member shall be entitled to have a vote against a decision recorded in the Minutes.

(8) The proceedings of the Committee shall not be invalidated by reason of any vacancy among the members, or by any defect in the mode of appointment of such committee or of any member thereof. (9) Subject to the above, the proceedings of the Committee may be such as the Committee may from time to time determine. LEGISLATIVE BUILDINGS ISLE OF MAN IM 13PW

Our Ref: BJC/ecw

19 July 2000

Professor T StJ N Bates MA LLM Clerk to the Select Committee on Members of Government Departments Legislative Buildings DOUGLAS

Dear Professor Bates

Re: Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

In compliance with your letter of 11th July 2000, I am happy to submit evidence in respect of my own particular circumstances, which I consider to be unfair dismissal from the Department of Trade & Industry, along with my views on the future provision for Members serving in Departments of Government.

Appointment to the Department of Trade & Industry

1 I was first informed by a telephone call from David North MHK that I had been appointed as a Member of DTI prior to Christmas 1996.

2 On 23rd December 1996 I was given full delegated responsibility for the construction and retail industries (copies of delegation enclosed).

3 No budgetary provision was in place at this time for either delegation; modest financial budgets were agreed in 1997/98.

4 Prior to my first meeting with the Employers Federation I received a letter dated 23rd January 1997 from the Secretary, Mr Parnell, (copy enclosed) outlining their deep concerns with regard to the management contract with Bovis (yet unsigned) and the contractual relationship between Bovis and the Island's construction industries who might undertake work on the construction of the new hospital at Ballamona.

Cont -2-

5 On 29th January 1997, I chaired the first meeting between the DTI and the Employers Federation where they elaborated on the above concerns. This pattern of concern persisted throughout our regular monthly meetings at which various copies of correspondence would circulate from the DHSS, DTI and the Employers Federation. Indeed, it would be true to say that the issue of the contract for the new hospital featured on every Employers Federation agenda until my dismissal from the Department on 20th April 2000.

6 All such meetings were reported to the Minister, Members, Chief Executive and departmental staff during the full DTI monthly meetings, and always in a full and frank manner. During the early part of 1997 the Department decided to hold discussions with the DHSS and Bovis in a bid to try and resolve some of the Employers Federation's concerns. A series of protracted board room meetings took place between the DTI Minister, myself and the DTI Chief Executive, along with the Minister for Health and Social Security, the Chief Executive, Bovis and all hospital project staff. These meetings took place at the DTI. During the last meeting (prior to any contracts being agreed) the DHSS Minister gave an undertaking to consider our proposed amendments to the various contracts and advised that we would meet around the table for further consideration. Alas, this meeting did not materialise save for a publication in the local newspaper, accompanied with a photograph, informing readers that a contract had been agreed and signed making Bovis the Management Contractor on the new hospital project.

7 Agreement was never officially reached between the DHSS and the DTI. What prevailed from there on was a series of paper chases between the Departments and the Employers Federation.

8 From my first day as a Member of the House of Keys I have continually asked questions of the DHSS on various issues including health, pensions, mental and physical disability and the new hospital. I have never been advised that such questioning is inappropriate, ill-founded or ill-advised. I have never used privileged information in framing the questions, and I had always consulted with my officer at the DTI first. I always chaired the meetings, under delegated powers, in a totally impartial manner. All meetings were minuted and all minutes were submitted to the monthly DTI meetings and approved. There were no occasions when the Minister or officers informed me of any impropriety on my part. Indeed, very often when the Minister was away on Government business, he would regularly delegate all the Department's functions to me which I regarded as an illustration of the trust and reliance placed in me. On no occasion did I take advantage of this situation or seek to abuse it.

Cont -3-

9 The DTI Minister always appeared satisfied with my work for the Department and on 25th June 1999, my delegation was extended considerably to take on energy, gas, water, minerals and petroleum which, in addition to construction and retail, brought my delegation up to seven different areas of responsibility which I regarded highly, further giving me the impression that the Minister must have had confidence in my abilities in my work for the DTI. The Minister had two areas of responsibility himself, namely the film and shipping industries, whilst Mrs P Crowe MHK had responsibility for employment matters.

10 I took my areas of delegation seriously, and during my time on the Department I initiated educational seminars on aspects of the construction industry, consideration of a Construction Act (particularly covering areas of dispute e.g. adjudication provision), reviewed the workings of the Island's construction industry and made improvements in their working relationship with the DTI and the Training Centre. In respect of my delegation for energy, I visited the two factories manufacturing the energy cable and secured vital information for the DTI with regard to the provision of the fibre optic cable. In addition, I reached agreement with the MEA on testing for wind energy and encouraged its inclusion in the Government Policy Document, thereby providing for a renewable energy policy etc. The retail industry experienced a 'retail health check' to ascertain the position of this vital industry which was conducted by an independent consultant whose report has yet to be published - alas my dismissal left this report unsecured for publication.

Along with regular monthly meetings with the Employers Federation, I also undertook regular meetings with the Chamber of Commerce Retail Committee and the Chief Executive of the MEA.

In addition, I was charged with responsibility for taking through the branches the Minimum Wage Bill - its delay may be partly due to my departure from the DTI.

Events leading up to my dismissal

1 On 17th February 2000, as an observer representing the DTI, I attended the creditors meeting following the financial collapse of Crowe EPH. Following this, I prepared a brief memo for the Minister and Chief Executive (copy enclosed). Later that evening, following my question on the DTI's position in respect of construction matters, I received a telephone call from the Minister. The Minister advised me to respond to the media as follows: "We at the DTI are extremely concerned at the consequences for the local construction industry due to the financial collapse of Crowe EPH, and we will be working very closely with the Employers Federation to investigate and get down to the bottom of the matter".

Cont -4-

As this was only a suggestion from the Minister, I felt intuitively that such a quote would, at this time, not be appropriate for the press as the creditors were extremely angry at their financial loss, and such a statement would put immense pressure on the DTI.

2 However, I did report on the Minister's directive to the monthly Employers Federation meeting held on 23rd February 2000 (copy enclosed). The Employers Federation were pleased to have the Department's support where the Ministers directive was agreed.

3 Two days later on 25th February 2000, prior to the commencement of the full monthly DTI meeting, the Minister telephoned me at home at 9.10am and warned me as follows: "Back off from making enquiries with the Employers Federation and work with the DHSS on this one", which I took exception to as Schedule 1, 2(c) states "liaison with the Isle of Man Employers Federation and other relevant bodies", and this did not, in my view, extend to reporting to another Government department. The Minister went on and said, "Be careful what you say at the DTI meeting this morning, remember that Pam Crowe is a Member of the DHSS". I understood this warning to mean that I should not give a full and frank report (as I was accustomed to) to the DTI meeting. To say I felt compromised is an understatement. In addition, I had already reported on the Minister's first directive to the Employers Federation two days earlier. Needless to say in making my report I was brief, merely stating, "The Federation are very unhappy over the financial collapse of Crowe EPH and the consequences for their members, some of whom are creditors, and they want a full enquiry into the matter".

4 What followed shocked and confused me, for during the Millennium Oakwood tree planting day I was verbally accosted by the DHSS Minister who insisted that I should pass all construction • information on to her Department. This occasion was witnessed by other Members of Tynwald and the DTI Minister who walked away without saying a word.

5 On 14th March 2000 I wrote to the DTI Minister seeking clarification on his original directive to me, and my delegation in respect of construction matters.

6 On 16th March 2000 I responded to an invitation from the PAC and expressed my willingness to give evidence should the DTI not do so on the issue of the financial collapse of Crowe EPH.

7 On the 17th March 2000 I received a faxed reply from the DTI Minister to my letter of 14th March 2000 (copy enclosed).

Cont -5-

8 Six days later on 23rd March 2000, I advised the Employers Federation at the monthly meeting of the Minister's change of directive, and provided them with a copy of the Minister's letter having first sought permission from the Department to circulate. Suffice it to say that the Employers Federation were extremely concerned, confused and irritated.

9 On 31st March 2000 when I attended the full monthly meeting of the DTI, I noticed that the minutes in respect of my brief report on construction matters provided at the previous DTI meeting, were incorrect.

I questioned the minutes and, in so doing, I made a requested that Mrs Pam Crowe MHK leave the meeting (as there was clearly a conflict of interest in the subject matter) in order to enable me to provide a full and frank explanation as to why a change should be made to the minutes - this request was denied. It was agreed to correct the minutes and to my knowledge this was undertaken.

During the same meeting I requested that my officer remain whilst formally moving the minutes on construction matters. This was agreed. Again I suggested that it may be appropriate for Mrs Crowe, as a Member of the DHSS, to leave this part of the meeting to enable me to give a full and frank report on construction matters. I was mindful of the Minister's warning to me of 25th February 200, but again this request was denied.

I felt I had no alternative but to provide an honest, full and frank report on what had occurred between the 17th February to date, which included the Minister's directive, change of directive, and on the request to report to the DHSS (the latter not being in compliance with my written delegated responsibilities). During this meeting, I suggested that if the Minister no longer felt happy with my holding this particular delegation, that he should remove it from me. This he did not do and the meeting ended without further discussion on the matter.

At this point the Minister did not hold any discussion with regard to my continuing, or not, to have delegated power for the construction industry, nor were any discussions held with the Chief Minister.

10 During the Tynwald sitting on 11th April 2000, a question on a possible overpayment made by the DHSS to Crowe EPH prior to their collapse, was answered by the DHSS Minister to the effect that a £380,000 overpayment had been made. This, in addition to information that Bovis had submitted a counter claim to the Liquidator in the region of £2.5 million, brought me to the conclusion that the likelihood of small creditors realising any future payments was highly unlikely given the size of the Bovis and the Government claim.

Cont -6-

No discussion took place with me in relation to this question either before or after it was put.

11 Out of concern for the DTI's position in respect of their responsibility for the construction industry, in addition to my formal delegated responsibility, I decided to oblige the press in the giving of interviews, something which they had previously pressed for.

I undertook an interview with Mark Hendry of Isle of Man Newspapers on 13th April 2000, copies of which were faxed to the DHSS Minister, myself and Bovis. I understand that this was discussed during the Council of Ministers meeting on the same date. Between the 13th April and publication of this interview on 17th April 2000, no contact was made with me by the DTI Minister, the Chief Minister or an officer of the DTI.

I subsequently obliged David Callister of Manx radio with a similar interview which was played on the morning of 17th April 2000.

12 On 18th April 2000, prior to the commencement of the sitting of the House of Keys, I asked the DTI Minister whether or not I would be given the sack from the DTI. He responded in a jocular manner, "Not this time, but if you go any further I will break your right leg". Edgar Quine MHK can bear witness to this comment.

13 On 20th April 2000, two days after the Keys sitting and three days after my interview was published, I learned - somewhat by shock — that I had been sacked.

I left my house at 8.50am on this day and returned at 11.30am to find my son on the telephone to my husband who informed me that he had had a telephone call from the Chief Minister who was desperate to speak to me before I read a letter. When enquiring of the letter, my younger son handed me an envelope which read "Hand delivered today 20th April 2000 at 9.15am". The letter (copy enclosed) was from the Chief Minister dated 19th April 2000, informing me that I had been dismissed. At 12 noon on the same day I turned on the radio to hear headline news accompanied by an interview with the Chief Minister informing the public that I had been sacked.

Neither the Chief Minister nor the DTI Minister attempted to discuss any of these events with me, and the Chief Minister has not spoken to me since. Prior to the financial collapse of Crowe EPH, or indeed following it, I have never been asked if I wished to move to another department.

Cont -7-

I have never received a warning on the way I conducted work for the Department. I have never received a complaint from the Department, the Minister or the Chief Minister on my performance as a Member of the DTI.

I did, however, receive a telephone call from the DTI Minister on 30th April 2000 at 5.55pm (10 days after my dismissal) thanking me for all the good work I had put into the Department during the three and a half years I was there.

14 On the 27th April 2000 I received a letter of regret and thanks from the Employers Federation (copy enclosed).

I must apologise for the length of this submission, but I believe it to be important that the Select Committee are provided with all the facts leading up to my dismissal from a government department.

It is hoped that some sensible guidelines are established for the future, for I would not wish any Member, either now or in the future, to be subjected to such humiliation.

I am firmly of the view that the appointment and dismissal of Members and Ministers should be subject to Tynwald approval, with a mechanism in place for dealing with insubordination and matters of a very serious nature.

In my case I was following normal procedures, I did not disclose confidential or privileged information; what I said in public was already in the public domain in Hansard. I believe that as an elected representative of the people, I acted in the best interests of the department and, indeed, the public.

I do not regard that my previous position in the DTI, with full delegated responsibility, enabled me to inform on the workings of an industry to another government department outside of my own, despite intense political pressure to so 'inform'.

Finally, a point I feel I must mention is that upon receiving my remuneration on 25th April 2000, I discovered that not only had my departmental payment been stopped, but an overpayment of over £200 had also been deducted without my knowledge or consent. In today's workplace, if an employer has made an overpayment to an employee, agreement must first be reached to their mutual satisfaction, as to how and when such an overpayment will be repaid back to the employer. Such is covered by the Island's employment legislation, in addition to a formal series of warnings prior to dismissal. Perhaps such provisions could be made for Members of the House of Keys and Members of the Legislative Council.

Cont -8-

For ease of reference I have annexed at the back a breakdown of dates and events, including supporting material.

I thank you for taking the time to read my submission and would like to state, for the record, my willingness to provide oral evidence if the Committee so wishes.

Yours sincerely

Mrs B J Carmel' MHK

Enc L.egisiative Buildings Douglas Isle of Man 1M1 3PW British isle: amok/2r ct b . Oi clint;a1644,*(Q4*-tc;tA pNpo eAdrzsaA etntamtku4v. ectmiQ autuiztrcia)

73,E €lawarcta '11 chkottrs feltbp.k16t1 tattacfewdrAget ) it I t j .RA:Qt moolkie,kattufam D +E-0,442frteAs

ItSv6. cic1 cklurtatk voku.04-5 u;ituallgek (fkiketkLiAN fet.p4.6 eAktv.4.0.4)

61./4 c ate, attakurkpie, ets26:4,ktrfr% kAkaat1/445 (tup.m.p eutivaLci6) . ( 51-ck DTI + E-64.040 few wittl4q (tAuxlittlyeadaatO

L I tvatbf iatt;D\AB6A mitteuxitur,0 f\ivItit34-t 'A-KCsuezuce0

tt 4 NiNiptsA pult)jaawaCcuectize0

1i cetabttek vtiss atxrcuratut,

tt t kteruitto tkih& Ak.ck 4420.11L% &IAA nitelfa Ccoe.y3 4 cmileird? avios432ti air Co nAt N varotou2 el/3.4A )

e)A4, Vwt3AiD.154 OpityLf (etAtimor0 . Evvoi fecIA *far tt Nave‘Qt(Queirixd, Ref:96/03/04 Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions relating to the Construction Industry

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

Mrs Brenda Cannell MEHIK

Minister for Trade & Industry Dated 23rd December 1996 SCHEDULE I

Construction Industry

(1) The functions of the Department as defined in the Review of the Administration of Government's Construction Contracts published by the Council of Ministers in January 1993

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of the Construction Industry including matters ancillary thereto (b) power to prepare annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes in respect of the Construction Industry for submission to the Minister (c) liaison with the Isle of Man Employers' Federation and other relevant bodies Schedule 2 (Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule 1 shall not be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation;

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

(d) determine annual capital or revenue expenditure programmes; (e) dispose of land (0 alter charges or fees for services

- in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise)

(2) The Member may only authorise expenditure in relation to delegated functions and within agreed annual revenue and capital votes.

(3) The Member should meet with relevant officers in connection with delegated areas of responsibility at least once a month. Notes of any decisions taken at such meetings must be recorded and copies forwarded to the Minister and Chief Executive within five working days of the meeting.

(5) If the Member intends to be absent from the Island on Departmental business, the prior approval of the Minister must be sought.

Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions relating to the Retail Sector

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

Mrs Brenda Cannell MAX

Minister for Trade & Industry

Dated 23rd December 1996 SCHEDULE 1

The Retail Sector

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this schedule refers include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of the Retail Sector including matters ancillary thereto (b) programmes in respect of the Retail Sector for submission to the Minister (c) liaison with the Isle of Man Chamber of Commerce (Retail Committee), and other relevant bodies Schedule 2 (Conditions and Limitations)

(1) The authority to exercise the functions referred to in Schedule I shall not be taken to include powers to -

(a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation;

(b) request Tynwald, Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities;

(d) determine annual capital or revenue expenditure programmes; (e) dispose of land

(f) alter charges or fees for services - in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise)

The Member may only authorise expenditure in relation to delegated functions and within agreed annual revenue and capital votes. The Member should meet with relevant officers in connection with delegated areas of responsibility at least once a month. Notes of any decisions taken at such meetings must be recorded and copies forwarded to the Minister and Chief Executive within five working days of the meeting. The Member may delegate, in turn, any or all of the delegated functions, but only to an officer of the Department and by formal authority, a copy of which must be forwarded to the Minister and the Chief Executive. If the Member intends to be absent from the Island on Departmental business, the prior approval of the Minister must be sought. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Schedule I or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such a form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which has been delegated under Section 3(2) of the Act to another person, save to such extent as the Minister may direct either generally or in any particular case

Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to impinge upon the authority of the Chief Executive to manage the staff of the Department, nor to execute his responsibilities as Departmental Accounting Officer. Isle of Man Employers' Federation

Secretary: R. Parnell, F.C.M.A. Herondene, Crossag Road, Ballasalla, Isle of Man. IM9 3DX 23rd January 1997 Tel: 01624 824454 Fax: 01624 825592

Ms. B. Cannel!, MHK, Department of Industry, Isle of Man Government, Bucks Road, Douglas, Isle of Man.

Dear Ms. Cannel!,

Hospital Construction Terms of Cantractior Works Packages

1. In response to your enquiries addressed to the Federation members, I have to advise that there are still outstanding matters regarding the intended method of procuring the construction of the proposed new hospital which deeply concerns many local construction companies.

2. It is no secret that the Federation has been consistently suspicious of the Management Contracting concept being applied to the hospital. Such forms of contracting are reputed to be exceptionally profitable for the Management Contractor whilst being very unprofitable for the works package contractors. This condition arises from typical contract documents between the parties being drawn up very much in favour of the Management Contractor to the detriment of those actually carrying out the work and taking all the risks.

Obviously the Federation had to reluctantly accept the political decision to create the new hospital by management contracting and then campaigning to have the worst offending contract clauses removed or amended. A very successful meeting with Mr. Hudson and the contract law legal advisor to the Department of Health and Social Services led to some improvements to the documentation being agreed by the Department.

However, there remains some unsatisfactory contract clauses on which common ground has not been achieved.

3. It is the feeling of the Federation members who have been concerned with the vetting of the documents that common ground has not been reached because the Management Contractor wishes to retain unto themselves excessive powers which are not equitable and which are not necessary to safeguard the commercial interests of the client (DHSS). The principle items under this heading are:-

a. Appendix F in its entirety is not considered to be an appropriate document for inclusion in a contract document for the "works packages". This appendix is a "Bovis" document that no standard form building contract normally includes. Federation policy is to advise members not to sign any contract containing this appendix.

b. The Federation objects to the details of the right of set-off clauses as noted in the Federation letter dated 12th November to which a reply is awaited.

c. Contract clauses 2.2/2.4 "Method of Working" is still objected to in spite of responses from the DHSS on this subject. This clause could easily be abused to the detriment of the Works Package Contractor and requires modifying to allow for the latter to recover proved additional costs if the Management Contractor imposes upon the works package contractor a method of working causing additional expense.

d. Clauses requiring that a works package contractor accepts by commencing work on their portion of work that all preceding work by others is acceptable is unfair. It should be the duty of the Management Contractor to oversee and ensure that the quality of all work packages are individually satisfactory. If this is not to be the case, for what is the Management Contractor being paid a fee?

e. The contractual relationship of a works package contractor is very tenuous with Government but lies through the Management Contractor's contract terms. The Federation requested sight of the draft contract between DHSS and the Management Contractor but although a copy was promised, we have still not had sight of the document.

Who, for instance would pay outstanding monies to Works Package Contractors if either the DHSS or the Management Contractor determined the contract between the two parties. Would the Works Package Contractors have full recourse to the DHSS for money owed?

4. Apart from the criticism of contract clauses, the Federation has consistently given advice on how the Works Packages might best be arranged to allow maximum participation of indigenous Manx companies. This advice appears to have been totally ignored by the designated Management Contractor to the great detriment of local industry. The Federation suggested that areas or groups of buildings be let progressively as individual contracts by competitive tender whereas the projected works packages appeared to have been layered so that the cream of the work will by its sheer size of package full into the hands of EEC, national or international contractors. This is not the way to enhance the Isle of Man economy.

5. In view of the change of Government, the Federation considers that all the correspondence between itself and the last GoVernment should be tabled for review and affirmation or rejection by the new administration.

Yours sincerely,

R. Parnell Secretary Ref:99/06/25

Department of Trade & Industry

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ACT 1987

Delegation of Functions relating to Natural Resources

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 3 of the Government Departments Act 1987, I hereby authorise

Mrs Brenda Cannel! MHK

a member of the Department of Trade & Industry until further order to exercise

the functions of the Department specified in Schedule 1 below, subject to any

standing orders made by the Department under section 3(4) of that Act and to

the conditions and limitations specified in Schedule 2 below.

'Minister for Trade & Industry

Dated 25th June 1999 SCHEDULE I

Natural Resources

(Energy, Hydrocarbons, Mines, Minerals etc.)

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the functions of the Department under -

The Electricity Act 1996 The Gas Regulation Act 1995 The Water Act 1991 The Minerals Act 1986 The Petroleum Act 1986

(3) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1) the functions to which this schedule refer include -

(a) power to consider or prepare proposals in respect of Natural Resources including matters ancillary thereto whether within the enactments referred to in paragraph (2) or otherwise, and (b) power to prepare annual revenue or capital expenditure programmes in respect of Natural Resources for submission to the Minister (c) operational matters relating to Minerals and Hydrocarbons Schedule 2

(Conditions and Limitations) (1) The authority to exercise the functions -referred to in Schedule I shall not be taken to include powers to - (a) promote new or amending primary or secondary legislation; (b) request Tynwald. Council of Ministers or Treasury authorities; (c) implement non-legislative policy changes having financial implications beyond existing budgetary provision; (d) determine annual capital or revenue expenditure programmes; (e) dispose of land (f) alter charges or fees for services

- in relation to those functions without reference to and approval from the Minister (in addition to any other approvals required by statute, rule or otherwise) (2) The Member may only authorise expenditure in relation to delegated functions and within agreed annual revenue and capital votes. (3) The Member should meet with relevant officers in connection with delegated areas of responsibility at least once a month. Notes of any decisions taken at such meetings must be recorded and copies forwarded to the Minister and Chief Executive within five working days of the meeting.

(6) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Schedule 1 or in this Schedule shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which could not have been exercised by the Minister, nor to permit the exercise of a function in such a form or manner as would not have been available to the Minister (7) Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to permit the exercise of a function which has been delegated under Section 3(2) of the Act to another person. save to such extent as the Minister may direct either generally or in any particular case (8) Nothing in Schedule 1 shall be taken to impinge upon the authority of the Chief Executive to manage the staff of the Department, nor to execute his responsibilities as Departmental Accounting Officer. ----- ,),03A-- tt,Lti

c P C(t311A

15tC17(5 '

lirof 174C 024?c,c)

‘S centotm L,e kl.ei4k(7>J2 ma/ -b:65 oteNGL4. ts,q1 ho,i,3arett ,

c,00,2)_ iLAir( uyeis eg,thii---s- t datz i_ gw,-,,Q Mc ‘sILIA( H-ealibt, vi/li,i; ,

Rjewt,4„-aa iwzArAlr„- hpzild 010>C-U,W14,7.g V)r4', pfittte- Atr'A- 4 aki‘600- v-t-r4_ 2_AAIJ, 6i& Cam' [00 t542f44 viattLoktk44 forcrub)i- eicloopi-4 , iWc ptuto uowtzd &-- oic ct, i;tocutek) &A- s clkei ---4tka. Lt.90,0 CC .cam /t 1z-74,er/rec.' b_tttulz,i4 it71, afpnr- oxiwk- ra-opk--(birfazis- awLe Ikkl- titifLe( protok- ciAuck krAAI- iil. 0.r- \D.A4,06-ig 1 ail:Lb-Li/3/14 ri-c9-4 0 rticAl ‘.1) ‘Ae tAs'u 4 )"& kiakcizt, 1 kgaiAgm Q.e7t. t14,004 v2tarvA44/4 6 tis r&\2a"Di-W5)'6ultit° -r°4- okpeetcd A (-4,c(i4A. i&A,pzek Coc-v)_Agx -• .k0,00t — 1:tt CArrt.e/elt U;1 4 A 0 01,X0 6 bid kre0- r eAxWA tkP. itt-ra 6-titPJI 0-1,4‘ i/Wtha ,---- (1,04 D *9 4DiTitol R61;0) turiLa er-A,9ed a.44,d4w mck,(AA -c6vi i , i dtcrle 0,FA4A-rAit-ttl,-zt if) L)1,1 gjo2i 14tie/tutANI • t 1 lati-/C---- The Isle of Man Employers' Federation

Employers' Federation & D.T.I

Meeting held on 23rd February 2000 Attending Stewart Clague Mrs. Cannell Malcolm Blackburn Mrs. Williams Tony Wood Mrs. Craine Jocelyn Errington

Mr. John Bailey sent his apologies as he was unable to attend.

The Minutes of the previous meeting were nor available for signing, Jocelyn advised that she would .obtain a copy and present them at the next meeting.

Mrs. Williams introduced Mrs. Ann Craine who is to be her new assistant.

APPROVED CONTRACTOR LIST

Jocelyn Errington gave an overview of the proposed changes to presentation oft the Approved Contractor List, the changes proposed were discussed and there was an agreement that it would become much more "user friendly" with a hard folder and all amendments and up-dates printed by category. The categories list would be presented in a "flyer" form with specific requirements, such as Health & Safety, noted in addition to the listings of other categories.

It was suggested that the application form should also be changed, it was agreed that this would request mobile telephone numbers, fax numbers and e-mail addresses for each application. It was confirmed that these changes would be ready for the year end mail out for April 1St 2000.

was suggested that the categories could be changed or reduced, Mrs. Cannel! was interested in the iterits of an open category to encompass many of the ancillary trades such as double glazing, it was agreed that this would be a subject for discussion at another meeting.

The situation relating to approval of contractors was discussed, it was agreed that there would be two types of approval, Site Approval only for off Island companies working on "one off' projects and Approved Contractors for those who were Isle of Man based companies and smaller businesses. It was agreed that the Employers' Federation would forward the two separate lists to the D.T.I on a by-monthly basis.

DTI WEB SITE

Mrs. Williams advised that the D.T.I were producing a web site which would carry information relating to the construction industry, press releases etc. and was expected to go "on line" within the next two months. DIE TONY WOODS REPORT

Due to pressure of work Mrs. Williams had not been able to read the Tony Woods report therefore it was agreed that it would form the main topic on the agenda of the March meeting.

ANY OTHER BUSINESS

It was noted and confirmed that the Minister of the Department of Trade & Industry had requested that Mrs. Cannel] work closely with the Employers' Federation in the investigation of the facts relating to the problems and issues regarding Crowe EPH Ltd and the New Hospital site.

The situation regarding Crowe EPH Ltd and the New Hospital Site was discussed. It was agreed that the co-operation between the Employers' Federation and the D.T.1 would continue as both parties held the same values relating to the strength of the construction industry on the Isle of Man, completion of works at the New Hospital within budget and ensuring that past mistakes with the awarding of contracts on capital projects are not repeated.

The Employers' Federation advised that they had been requested to submit evidence to the Standing Committee investigating the Crowe EPH Ltd - New Hospital issue.

The next meeting was dated for March 23rd 2000 at 2.00pm at the Depai went of Trade and Industry.

The meeting closed. LEGISLATIVE BUILDINGS ISLE OF MAN 1\11 3PW

Our Ref: BJC/ecw

14 March 2000

Hon David North MHK Minister for Trade & Industry Illiam Dhone House Circular Road DOUGLAS

Dear Minister

I would be grateful if you would reconfirm in writing your decision to grant me delegated authority to conduct enquiries with the Employers Federation into the matter of the financial collapse of Crowe EPH.

An earlY reply would be appreciated as this is such an important matter.

Yours sincerely

Mrs B j Cannel' MHK LEGISLATIVE BUILDINGS ISLE OF 1!\ I 3PW

Our Ref: BjC/ecw

16 March 2000

Mr Arthur Bawden Clerk Public Accounts Sub-committee Legislative Buildings DOUGLAS

Dear Mr Bawden

Re: Investigation into the financial collapse of Crowe EPH - New Hospital Project

I refer to the press notice issued in the local press inviting comment on the above issue.

As; you are aware. I am a Member of the Department of Trade and Industry with delegated responsibility for the construction industry. During the winter of 1996 to 1997. I was party to discussion with the Department of Health and Social Security and the Department of Trade and Industry in respect of contractual issues in relation to the construction of the new hospital.

The position of the Department of Trade and Industry in relation to evidence to the Public Accounts Committee has vet to be determined. However, having regard to the dosing date for the admission of evidence, being today 16th March 2000, 1 would like to register my willingness to give evidence on this matter particularly if no such submission be received from the Department of Trade and Industry.

Yours sincerely

Mrs B f Cannel! MHK Department of Trade & industry

Rhevnn Del/al as Jeadys [Iliam Dhone House 2 Circular Road, Douglas isle of man Isk of Man, British isles Governrriert INC IPJ FROM THE MINISTER Telephone (01624) 685673 Fax (01624) 685683 e-mail [email protected]

Liar Ref: l64 March 2000 Your Ref: diCiecw

FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL MEMO

Mrs B 1 Cannt!I MHK tve_51 Csutik.odU f.2314PAUlifF: do Legislative liJildings Douglas 620410 Isle of Man LIA r f-7 .o?.00

Dear Brenda

Thank you for your letter of le March 2000 seeking clarification of your role in relation to the Construction Industry, and the matter of Crowe EPH/ the Employers' Federation in particular.

The first thing I would wish to clarify with regard to the w:-rding in your letter is that we as a Department, and thus you as the Member with delegated resporsibility, do not have any role in conducting enquiries into matters such as this. As you know, the PAC has already begun an enquiry to report on all matters relevant to the award of contracts to Crowe EPH Ltd, and the causes for its failure to fulfil its contractual obligations.

Our role is to act in the interests of the Department in particular, and thus of the Manx Government. As part of this, it is incumbent on us to liaise with bodies such as the Employers' Fezieration, but not to sat or speak for them. If we can identify any lessons to be learned, or improvements-to procedures. arising from this matter, then we should of course seek to have them progressed. Indeed, this morning at COMIN it was decided to set up an independent working party of professionals to look into the construction industry in respect of the relationship between contractors, sub-contractors and suppliers The Crunch has directed that the Minister at the DTI take direct responsibility for this matter. In the meantime, can assure you that I understand the difficulty of your rule, in which you are of course representing Government, and the frustrations which can be involved from time to time.

Your ncerely

avid North MHK • •• •1•71. • SAACI!. . • • •A

Story Path 6 Tit!e a\tOMRCOT\REPS'tHENDRYMA\MH BRENDA-AH Story Created 13/04/2000 13:09 Story Revision 6 Word count 728

PIC BRENDA CANICELL , MARK HENDRY

THE COLLAPSE and liquidation of hospital contractor Crowe EPH could cost Manx taxpayers £4.5 million, Douglas East MHK Brenda Cannel! is warning. She has called on the Department of Health and Social Security to dismiss the hospital's management and design team. Mrs Cannell says the f112 million hospital project, at Ballamona, is lurching towards another crisis and she's accused the DHSS of failing to heed early warnings. She broke ranks to speak out about the fiasco despite intense' political pressure to keep quiet. Crowe EPII crashed in February with estimated debts of ft .5 million to government and approximately 50 private Island firms. It led to nine weeks of parliamentary questions on Crowe EPH and management contractor Bevis to Health Minister Clare Christian from Mrs Cannel' and her colleagues in the Alliance for Progressive Government. The APG is planning a lengthy submission on the affair to Tynwald's financial watchdog, the public accounts committee, which has launched an investigation. Mrs Carmen, has responsibility for construction in the Department of Trade and Industry, and regularly meets the IoM Employers' Federation. The federation helps the DTI to administer the government list of approved contractors, created in 1994 by the Council of Ministers.. Mrs: Cannel) said: 'Because of my working relationship with the. construction industry and the department I have been put under extreme pressure politically to remain quiet with regard to what is going on. 'Prior to the health minister signing the management contract with Bevis, I was privy to board meeting discussions with the minister and officials, and impressed on her the importance of not going down the management contractual route. 'Having had sight of the then property management contract I was concerned there was no provision for safeguarding local construction companies, subcontractors and suppliers. 'Neither was I content with the size of the packages being proposed as they were far too large and expensive for our own local firms to undertake. 'It's my belief this whole project has been designed to prevent local companies from participating, including quantity surveyors and architects. 'But despite my, and the DTI's reservations, the minister refused to acknowledge the concerns and went ahead and signed the contract.' In 1996 Mrs Canna warned local firms could lose out because of the works packages. A year later a bid by her to get the hospital issue examined by a five-member select committee failed by one vote. The same year the public accounts committee ruled against producing a full report on the management contract. And in .195.4E1 Chief Minister DanaId Gelling told MHEs he was 'tell:; satisfied' with the hospital project's financial control and management. Now Mrs Cannell says all the concerns raised years ago by the DTI have become reality. Mrs Carmen said: 'In Tynwald on Tuesday the health minister admitted that in fact her department had overpaid Crowe F:PH through Bovis a figure of £380,000 of taxpayers' money. 'Wnat we have to consider is if it had not been for Crewe EPH going into liquidation we would never have known of such an overpayment. 'Further, it is my understanding that Bovis. have submitted a (!ai.m to the liquidator, a figure of f2.5 million prior to the closure of claims on March. 24. 'Any claim that Bovis put in is a claim for public money. Bovis are paid with 11.1anx taxpayers' money. 'Plus there's the creditors' list. of £1.5 million. my belief we are looking at a figure in excess of £4.5 million of taxpayers' money as a result of the liquidation of Crowe EPH.' uaza.c. Mrs Cannell believes another contractor has been engaged to finish the 2,000 le:}trai-e metres of concrete work left by Crowe EPH, But she said there were concerns over alleged outstanding debts, the new company's track record and its credit status. 'It's my belief they have been engaged anyway,' said Mrs Cannel. 'The hospital is now out of the frying pan and into the fire. 'The government should get rid of the management arid design team and replace them with local professional experts - someone in quantity surveying, a good local architect and a good local main contractor. 'They could oversee the remainder of the hospital to see it is completed in time. I firmly believe it would be well within budget and there are substantial savings to be made.' Liquidator George Noble was unavailable for comment. A Bovis spokesman said a confidentiality clause in the firm's contract with the DHSS barred it from commenting.

DHSS •

7n tY^ Isle of Man Government ripysa,ntic, +Ina: THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER olle v i Arc!-sbirreisbagb Tel No: (01(324)685702 CHIEF MINISTER: Government- Office. Douglas Fax No: (01624) 685710 ion D 1 Gelling FinstSNINI. MHK Isle of Man. IM I 3PG email [email protected]

19 April 2000

Mrs B J Cannell, MHK 9 Victoria Terrace DOUGLAS Isle of Man

I write to advise you that the Governor in Council has, today, reconstituted the Department of Trade and Industry so that with immediate effect the Department will comprise the Minister, Hon David North, MHK and Mrs Pam Crowe, MHK. As a consequence of the reconstitution, your membership of the Department ceases. I enclose a copy of the Appointment of Members of Departments (No.2) Instrument 2000, which confirms the position.

I would take this opportunity of thanking you for your work within the Department but you will understand that your latest statement concerning the collapse of Crowe EPH make it impossible for you to continue in your Departmental position. Your public statements have been misleading and irresponsible and the unjustified criticism you have levelled at the Department of Health and Social Security over that Department's handling of the new hospital contract in its implementation of Tynwald policy has made your position within the Department with responsibilities for the construction industry LYRI -ble.

I have, of course, no wish to see you inhibited from expressing your opinions and hope that being relieved of your Departmental responsibilities will allow ybu to continue to comment freely on public matters.

Donald J Gelling, MHK The Isle of Man Employers' Fed0fation

Mrs. Brenda Cannell fit,OK 9 Victoria Terrace Douglas Isle of Man

27th April 2000

Dear Mrs. Cannell,

It was with regret that we heard of your removal from your roll at the Department of Trade and Industry. We were aware that you had a very keen interest in the construction industry on the Isle of Man and that you were well informed of ongoing challenges and pending changes that would affect the industry.

We, as the Federation's Executive, felt that our joint meetings were beginning to move forward many of the industry's important issues and we had great hopes of achieving our joint objectives for the year 2000.

The Isle of Man Employers' Federation offer you our sincere thanks for your past support and wish vou every success in the future.

Yours sincerely,

?John Bailey President.

Secretary: Jocelyn Erring-ton Conrhenny House Begoade Road • Onchan - Isle of Man IM4 6AS Telephone: 01624 863167 Fox: 01624 863194 [email protected] LuwAr4T-rpf--- -7)8 2000

Our Ref : RWH/ejm 18 July 2000

Professor T StJ N Bates Secretary Select Committee of Members of Government Departments Legislative Buildings Douglas

Dear Sir Select Committee : Members of Government Departments

Please find set forth below, my observations on the above.

1. Members should be encouraged to have only one Government Department in order to concentrate on the Department they are in and understand the organisation, manage an effective meaningful input, be more able to make their mark, and meet the needs of the Department.

They will not then be "spreading themselves too thin". It will mean they can devote the time necessary for an effective contribution, not just the "usual figurehead at the monthly Department meeting " situation.

2. It is unacceptable for Tynwald Members to store large amounts of Department Papers and work in their own homes. Office space must be provided together with filing storage space. It is totally impractical at the moment, having to undertake Departmental work from the Tynwald Members rooms — working from bags and briefcases, having to pack it all away every time one has to move from this shared facility, then spend valuable time setting it all out again from a bag — at some time later, and supplying all one's own filing system to store all the mountains of papers and documents. -2-

3. Members of Keys/Tynwald pay should be reviewed/restructured so that the present "responsibility payment" for Departmental work is rolled into the main Parliamentary element, so Members do not feel pressurised into joining a Department if they do not want to.

Responsibility Pay should then be on top of this, and weighted vis a vis according to Importance/Significance/Budgetary Capacity of whatever Department they are on. A further payment being made for every additional responsibility.

Chairpersons of Boards position should be reviewed — should only have this position, but more input.

Members should only take on more than one speciality if, by way of assessment it is deemed fair and reasonable, and won't "tie them down".

Members of Keys and Tynwald must be allowed enough time — based on a 40 hour week — to be able to execute their various primary functions and duties : - - Department - Parliamentary - Legislative - 50% of Constituency work

4. Members of Keys/Tynwald must be allowed evening and weekend access to the Members Room/future offices. It is acknowledging the fact that in reality, an amount of work has to be undertaken in the evening/weekends.

It is totally unacceptable and impractical to expect Members to undertake the main duties as outlined in (3) above in a home/family environment.

It is impossible! Most of all — very unprofessional.

5. Although not related — it is worth mentioning that any newly elected Members to Keys/Tynwald must have a comprehensive "working induction" "How to survive the first few weeks", and a further update "How to survive the next 6-12 months" — including practical guidance and the main Standing Orders to be aware of. This should also be reflected in Departmental Appointments, training given especially in: • How to manage meetings. • How to chair meetings. • Responsibilities/Role. • General expectations. -3- 6. Training - there is none! Practical sessions for Tynwald Members. • Handling the Press • Parliamentary /General • Legislative • Departmental • "How to nurse a Constituency/look after a Constituency. 7. There must be clear definitions of authority/responsibility for Members in Government Departments - I have all too frequently run into the senior officer's idea: "Members are just figureheads - turn up at monthly Departmental meetings and that's all they should do!" I cannot work like this and refuse to do will not gain valuable experience and an understanding of a Department and how it works, or the issues surrounding a problem that requires attention. It is vital and essential for Members to have "hands on experience" and work with senior officers when required - or be prepared to "roll their sleeves up" and "get their hands dirty", becoming involved and have an in depth understanding. The "figurehead" status model is out dated and does not meet the requirements of present day placements. A figurehead loses touch with the real roots of issues and is unable to fully grasp the reasons behind a problem or decision which is to be made - vital if it is to be a quality and effective decision addressing the issue holistically. Also, that person is totally reliant on information being fed to them by senior officers and only repeat that information like a parrot when asked. This is especially evident at Parliamentary question time. 8. Gaining Experience and Promotional Aspects • I have noticed that there is a strong "traditionalist culture" pervading in Government and Parliamentary realms which promotes the belief, "that in order for an MHK to gain experience and knowledge, they must have served many years, including fighting at least two general elections, and been in a Department for a few years performing the same set of tasks - month in, month out". This is claimed to be the only way to gain experience, understanding and to achieve personal development in the political role. This is best epitomised by Keys/Tynwald Members who have been present in either Tynwald branch for many years - who openly scoff at new Members who float out ideas, put questions or resolutions to Parliament which may be excellent and well thought out. -4- But worse still is the misconception and age old belief that in order to progress, obtain promotion, a person must perform the same set of tasks over a prolonged period of time, even though they may have acquired the relevant experience in quarter of that time. It is deemed necessary to have "years of the same thing" to build experience when this is not necessarily true. Furthermore, responsibility should be given over to Department Members at the earliest possible opportunities, at every chance, and as and when possible, given ministerial delegated responsibilities and if not, given a Departmental Portfolio to manage and have responsibility for that. These are the types of activities which must be promoted by Ministers and the Council of Ministers as the way forward for developing Departmental Members skills - not just a repetitive knowledge base. Having said that, the longer someone remains performing the same set of tasks and duties, the more likely they are to come across every type of scenario that, that particular post may "throw up" - thereby gaining experience in a very long winded way. This can be rectified and speeded up by undertaking the initiatives above which are promoted by progressive organisations elsewhere. Also, giving Departmental Political Members "acting up" experience as and when practical - not just given to one particular Member all the time, or never to some, in some cases. This is vital for junior political members positive development. Ministers should also build up a working/trustful relationship with their Political Members and delegate various duties, tasks and jobs to them, as and when they can. The Chief Minister must ensure that this practice is developed and progressed. The traditionalist view died years ago. Today, organisation at all levels are promoting "Enterprise Management", "entrepreneurial responses", succession training and progressive staff development models. With that, the old scenario of promotion is only filling dead men's shoes has also "gone out the window" - waiting for years and years for staff to retire before the "next longest in service" filled that position, has proved to be out of date and unworkable in the modem business/management environment - which equates nicely to political Members and their development and building of the appropriate types of experience.

-5- People should be allowed to develop and build their skills and experience base at every available opportunity. Promotion or career moves must be measured on a performance, skills base and to some extent, experience. But to say promotion or delegated responsibilities is solely dependent on length of service, etc, is now so out of sync with modern, progressive approaches which are fairer, give more people a chance, and recognise skills, performance and aptitude - over, years served - which does not always stack up to equal - best candidate - it is unbelievable. 9. Appointments/Dismissal for Members of Tynwald to Government Departments • MLC's - should not be Ministers under any circumstances. • Appointments must be on a negotiated and jointly agreed approach between firstly, the Chief Minister and secondly, the Minister of the Department being proposed for, for that Members candidacy. • There should be clear procedures laid down on appointments to Government Departments - a mini selection and interview process also, preceding this - it should be established where a new Member would like to work so that choices can be worked at and negotiated. Appointments should be for a minimum of three years unless the Member wishes a change/or has to "come off". This is in order to ensure the Member has got to know their way around the Department, gives a sense of security, a chance to "get stuck in", get to know the Department, build up relevant experience and make their mark. Members should be allowed to stay on an area longer, providing it is their wish and the Minister is satisfied with performance and that they are fitting in as an effective Member of the executive team. • Explanation and provision of expectations and any required performance criteria and anything that would constitute "misconduct" must be supplied on appointment. 10. Political Members removal from Government Departments This should only occur in the following instances and only under the outlined procedures. • At the Members own request. • If the Member is failing to perform adequately. -6- • If the Member is failing to fit in as an effective member of the Executive Team. • Consistently breaches any agreed procedures or protocols following support and guidance by the relevant Minister and Chief Executive. The Minister and executive team must be able to support a decision that a political Member be asked to leave a Department with the following: • The Member has been interviewed by the Minister and given reasons for dismissal and a letter confirming the same. • The Member has received a Written Warning that their input is unacceptable and if it continues, they will be asked to leave the Department. • The Member has been interviewed by the Minister explaining what is unacceptable and what is likely to happen if they continue with the course of action which is unacceptable to the Minister and Department. • At the outset, if a political Member is conducting themselves in such a manner or their input into the Department is such to give cause for concern, then this must be pointed out straight away not left. The Member must be guided and evidence must be provided to illustrate that "Executive Management" were supportive of the Member in help, assistance and guidance to assist that person in not repeating whatever was unacceptable. • There should be clear guidelines for Members on commencement of any Government Department of what constitutes unacceptable standards. • They must be aware of procedures at the outset of appointment. • The Department must demonstrate that it has acted fairly in the lead up to asking a Political Member to leave. • The Department must demonstrate that a Member being asked to leave was given proper opportunity to state their case, and appeal a decision if they wish. Appointment and dismissal procedures must adhere broadly to the principles laid out in the Isle of Man Employment Act and those adopted by the Isle of Man Whitely Council.

-7-

11. Tynwald Members/Political Departmental Members. • No outline, "Job Description/Expectations". • No Members Guidelines/Disciplinary Process, or what constitutes unacceptable behaviour/misconduct. 12. Select Committees - the traditionalist view is that Members need to serve on as many of these to build up adequate experience. • Quite often, new Members will not be picked for Select Committees because the "older hands" consider they have not got the experience - so the new Member has to be several years performing the same repetitive functions before suddenly deemed as having become enlightened and suddenly gaining the required level of experience instantly. • There must be training and guidelines. • New Members must be afforded the opportunity to sit in on Select Committees as observer status to learn. • The process of selection to Select Committees must change; the present system is antiquated and hugely time consuming - electronic voting must come in. • it is evident to me that some of the "older hands" pick others for Select Committee service - for the "hell of it" - or to "get even". This must be evident to the public - and to my mind, makes a complete mockery of the system. Z R W Henderson MHK 18 July 2000 Our Ref : REQ/ejm 8 August 2000 Professor T StJ N Bates Secretary Select Committee on Members of Government Departments Legislative Buildings DOUGLAS IMl 3PW Dear.St-felm PrikUctit. Rakik . Select Committee on Members of Government Departments The position of Members of Departments should be considered with due regard to the position of Ministers. Presently Ministers are appointed by the Lieutenant Governor on the recommendation of the Chief Minister. The practical effect is that the Chief Minister chooses his Ministers. This position should be changed: the Chief Minister should nominate Ministers who should be subject to approval by Tynwald. It follows that their transfer and removal from office also would be at the gift of Tynwald. Most Chairmanships of Statutory Boards and all Members of Departments should be subject to nomination by the Chief Minister and approval by Tynwald. However, in the event that political establishments for Departments are introduced [see subsequent paragraphs] nominations should also rest in Tynwald. Leaving aside the mechanics of appointing, transferring and removing Members of Departments from office, there should be a rational basis for the placement of Members in Departments in the first instance. To this end there should be an 'establishment' for Members of Departments which relates the demands for political input into the work of Departments. The present arrangement under which all Members of Tynwald, with the exception of Presiding Officers, are allocated to a Statutory Board or a Department is unnecessary and undesirable. Essentially Statutory Board or Departmental positions, and more particularly the remuneration, is being used to constrain Members freedom of action. -2-

Legitimate demand for Board Chairmanships/Members of Departments would give rise to an establishment of 15 Members, 20 Members if Board Chairmen and Members of Departments are to be held by separate Members. This could accommodate an enlarged Public Accounts and Expenditure Committee and obviate the neutralisation of some of its Members because of conflict of interest.

With regard to the position of Mrs Brenda Carmen MHK, her summary removal from office was, without doubt, a punishment. The Chief Minister's contention that an alternative position for Mrs Cannell could not be found is manifestly wrong. Shortly after Mrs Cannell's removal from office, I called on the Chief Minister and informed him that Members of the Alliance for Progressive Government, some of whose Members are in two Departments, were prepared to transfer or relinquish positions to accommodate Mrs Cannell's return to a Department. He undertook to consider the position and revert to me in a few days. He has not done so.

The actions of the Chief Minister/Council of Ministers in summarily removing Mrs Cannell from the DTI are tantamount to unfair dismissal. Having regard to the attendant circumstance the Select Committee may wish to reflect on the provisions of the UK Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 and the UK Freedom of Information Bill 2000. It should be noted that during the period Mrs Cannell has been 'sent to Coventry', a posting has been found for Mr Rimington, and Mr Cannel! and Mr Shimmin have been accommodated by transfers. The circumstances giving rise to the latter two postings should be investigated.

It is conceded by the Chief Minister that Mrs Cannell in bringing into the public arena issues arising from the Crowe EPH affair has infringed neither Standing Orders nor Government Regulations. Her summary removal from the Department of Trade and Industry was a political manoeuvre to protect the Department of Health and Social Security and the Council of Ministers. Arrangements for the appointment, transfer and removal of Members of Departments must be changed to prevent this occurring again.

Yours sincerely

R Administration Division The Treasury Government Office, Douglas Isle of Man, British Isles Yn Tashtey IM1 3PU Chief Financial Officer J. A. Cashen Telephone (01624) 685586 (01624) 685584 isle of Man Fax (01624) 685662 Government Administrator : Miss K. Corlett E-mail [email protected] Relys Elan 143min

Professor T.St. J.N. Bates Contact: Miss K Corlett Clerk of Tynwald Legislative Buildings Your Ref: C/MGDOI/mig Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PW Our Ref: Min/SelCom Date: 8th August 2000

Dear Prof Bates

Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

In the absence of the Minister who is on leave this week I am replying, on his behalf, to your letter dated 11th July 2000.

I enclose copies of an authorisation in favour of Mr J N Radcliffe MLC to sign any public document to be made by the Treasury and extracts from the Treasury Minutes detailing Members' Responsibilities etc.

If you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

Miss K Corlett Administrator

Enc

1ACKNOWLEDGED & CIRCULATED I TO COMMITTEE 16—‘ -50 Seitc., Me Treasury Administration Division, Government Office, Douglas, Yn TashteY Isle of Man, British Isles. IM1 3PU Chief Financial Officer Telephone: (01624) 685586 I. A. Cachen (01624) 685584 IsleolMan Acirninistraror : Miss K. Corleii Fax: (01624) 685662 Government

Government Departments Act 1987

Pursuant to paragraph 4(1) of schedule 1 to the Government Departments Act 1987 1 hereby authorise John Norman Radcliffe MLC being Vice Chairman of the Treasury to sign any public document to be made by the Treasury.

This authority revokes any previous authority.

Minister for the Treasury

Date: 18th December 1996 S..

(b) Beef Quality Headage Scheme

Treasury noted the issues in relation to this and agreed to the Department changing the headage rates in respect of the "P" classification

Treasury noted that the Department was considering changes to the above scheme and agreed that the Department should consult with the industry about its proposals.

(d) Beef and Hill Cow Subsidies - Interim Payment

Treasury concurred t e Department making an interim payment under the terms of the Beef Cow Subsidy Scheme and the Hill Cow-Silisidy Scheme of 50% of the subsidy payment.

The meeting was joined Mr Derek Pobjoy, Ms Taya Pobjoy; Mr K I Mort, Treasury Accountant; and Mr H Crellin to discuss the following:-

237/99 min Issues

Ms Pobjoy stated that the Global Market is .still f•a•.In general the market has been better than they had expected however. She made reference to various coin is gave an overview of the most successful current coin issues ...the-rrirkets and the royalties due to Treasury subs to the sale of coins.

Ms Pobjoy ga overview of the new coin programme and received the Treasury approvii in principle to the programme.

objoy expressed an interest in helping with the hospitality for the laun‘of the Manx Global Millennium Challenge and offered to make his boat available in Southampton for hospitality at the-beiinning of the race.

Representatives of Pobjoys were thanked for attending the meeting which they left.

238/99 Membership of Financial Supervision Commission

Treasury agreed to appoint Mr R P Braidwood MI-1K as Chairman of the Financial Supervision Commission and submit the appropriate motion to the June sitting of Tynwald. In view of the Commissions future responsibilities, with regard to company supervision Treasury agreed to give consideration at a future date to a Commissioner being appointed who would have appropriate experience.

239/99 Information Papers

The following pap ere circulated for information only:-

(a) t t 0 Budget: Draft Political meetings Annual Civic Service - Borough ofDouglas Barclays - National Insurance geSenre Fund - 1st Quarter 1999

.:.-••- ..- ere being no further business the meeting closed at 1.10 pm. lam

4 Minutes of the Meeting of the Minister and Members of the Treasury, held in the Third Floor Committee Room, Government Office, Douglas, on Wednesday 18th December 1996, at 9.30 a.m. Present: Mr R K Corkill MHK (Minister) Mr J N Radcliffe MLC (Vice Chairman) Mr W A Gilbey MHK Mr M R Walker MHK The Chief Financial Officer, Financial Controller and the Administrator in attendance.

The Minister stated how pleased he was that he had such a strong Treasury team to support him and that he was looking forward to the years ahead. Mr Walker stated that he was very pleased to be a member and would give the Minister all the support he could. 654196 Treasury Function The Minister agreed that Treasury would continue to operate under delegated powers in the foreseeable future. 655196 Appointment of Vice Chairman The Minister agreed to appoint Mr JN Radcliffe MLC as Vice Chairman of the Treasury. 656196 Members Responsibilities Responsibility was delegated to Members as follows:- Chairman of the Financial Supervision Commission - Mr WA Gilbey MHK; . - Chairman of the Insurance Authority - Mr JN Radcliffe MLC; Responsibility for Commercial Development Division - Mr MR Walker MHK & Mr WA Gilbey MHK; Customs & Excise Division - Mr MR Walker MHK; Income Tax Division - Mr WA Gilbey MHK; Capital Projects Unit - Mr MR Walker MHK; Information Systems Strategy Committee (ISSC) - Mr JN Radcliffe MLC; Value for Money Committee - Mr JN Radcliffe MLC; General Registry - Mr MR Walker MHK; 657/96 Appointment of Tynwald Member as a Public Lottery Trustee Treasury agreed to invite Mr John Shimmin MHK to be the Tynwald Member on the Public Lottery Trust.

658/96 Membership of Statutory Boards Treasury agreed to appoint the following to be:-

1 (a) Members of the Financial Supervision Commission

Mr WA Gilbey MHK - Chairman Mr LG Bell - Vice Chairman Mr CJ Thmmon Mr RV Penn Mr JE Noakes

(b) Members of the Insurance & Pensions Authority Mr JN Radcliffe MLC - Chairman Dr WJ Hastings Mr JT Woolhouse Mr BH Cooper Mr DV Fletcher

Treasury also determined that at the time of Mr Noakes' retirement, the policy of appointing the Chief Executives to be members of the Board should be reviewed.

059/96 Delegations The Minister signed a document authorising the Chief Financial Officer, the Financial Controller, Assistant Financial Controller (Budget & Financial Management) and Mrs C McCullough, Senior Treasury Accountant pursuant to paragraph 3(2) of the Government Departments Act 1987 to exercise the approval of the Treasury in respect of the Fishing Vessels (Financial Assistance) Scheme 1990. The Minister signed a document authorising the Chief Financial Officer for the time being, the Financial Controller for the time being, the Assistant Financial Controller (Accountancy) for the time being and the Assistant Financial Controller (Budget & Financial Management Policy) for the time being whereby pursuant to paragraph 4(1) of Schedule 1 of the Government Departments Act 1987 they were authorised to sign any document referred to in the said paragraph 4(1) to be made by the Treasury other than a public document. Authority to sign public documents Authority was given to the Vice Chairman, Mr IN Radcliffe MLC to sign any public document to be made by the Treasury pursuant to paragraph 4(1) of Schedule 1 of the Government Departments Act 1987.

Customs & Excise - Instrument of Delegation The Minister approved an Instrument of Delegation in respect of the Customs & Excise Division delegating certain functions to the Collector.

660/96 Insurance & Pensions Authority - Regulations The following regulations to be submitted to the January 1997 sitting of Tynwald were made:-

(a) Insurance (Amendment) Regulations 1996 (b) Insurance (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 1996

2 Department of Trade & industry Rheynn Dellal as Jeadys

MEMORANDUM

To . Mr T A Bawden

From : Hon David North MHK

Date : 03 October 2000

Subject : Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

For the file, please note with reference to my evidence this morning the Journalist in question was John Quirk. He faxed me Mrs Cannell's statement/press release.

sysl=r- rx.Vastroz-z7.: koS6040t4L-tNeED44 CIRCULATED 10 COMMITTEE ft.,-r- 10 - oo c, !sic of Man Government Rev Pan Vannin THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER Oik yn Ard-shirveisbagh Tel No: (01624) 685702 CHIEF MINISTER: Government Office, Douglas Fax No: (01624) 685710 Hon D J Gelling onstsmm. FlMgt. MHK Isle of Man, 1M1 3PG email: [email protected]

Our ref: CM 4

30th October, 2000

Professor T StJ N Bates MA LLM Clerk of Tynwald Legislative Buildings Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PW

re: Select Committee on Members of Government Departments

As requested, please find enclosed copies of the Press Releases and local press reports regarding the termination of Mrs Cannell's Membership of the Department of Trade and Industry.

Yours sincerely

Donald J Gelling MHK CHIEF MINISTER'S OFFICE INFORMATION TO MEMBERS

No: 10/00 Date : 28th April 2000 Ref: 100.2(1S)

DISMISSAL OF MRS CANNELL WAS NOT A MATTER OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH SAY THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS

The Council of Ministers has today issued the following statement on the removal of Mrs Brenda Cannell MEM from her position within the Department of Trade and Industry -

`There has been some public misunderstanding, compounded by a degree of miirepresentation about the decision of the Council of. Ministers to recommend that Mrs Cannell cease to be a member of the Department of Trade and Industry. Mrs Cannell's removal was about the credibility and coherence of Government and nothing to do with Tynwald Members' freedom of speech.

`It has been claimed on Mrs Cannell's behalf that removal from the Department was because of her questioning of Government Policy, her opposition to the construction of the new hospital and her determination to speak freely on Government matters. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is not and never has been the policy of the Council of Ministers to seek to inhibit Members from speaking freely on any subject. This freedom is demonstrated daily by Members commenting legitimately and often critically on a wide range of Government matters.

No responsible Member of Tynwald would tolerate any attempt by the Council of Ministers to limit their freedom of speech and for Mrs Cannell to imply that her removal was a response to her exercising freedom of speech is tantamount to an accusation on her part that all other Members are submitting to a Council of Ministers censorship which prevents them speaking out on public matters. What is at stake in this case is people working together honestly, openly and constructively within and across Departments for the good of the Island. Where a Member of a Department pursues a personal agenda, fails to co-operate with others and generates incorrect information damaging to Government on a whole, the situation has to be reviewed.

In Mrs Cannell's case she had within the Department of Trade and Industry a public responsibility for the construction industry. There was a presumption, therefore, that she spoke for her Department, with authority, on construction industry matters. In fact in relation to the new hospital her statements were often erroneous and intemperate, undermining the public credibility of the project.

It was this unwillingness to work with the Department of Health and Social Security in discussing her concerns and her continuous undermining of the hospital project which left the Council of Ministers with no realistic choice but to sever Mrs Cannell's link with the Department of Trade and Industry.

Mrs Cannel! remains free to comment on the new hospital project but without the authority and the credibility of speaking on behalf of the Department of Trade and Industry on construction matters.

The Council of Ministers remains hopeful that it will be possible to appoint Mrs Cannel to an alternative post within Government within the foreseeable future where her abilities can be put to constructive use and where her attitude to the new hospital does not conflict with her responsibilities within that post'. PRESS RELEASE CHIEF MINISTER'S OFFICE

No: 9/00 Date : 19 April 2000 Ref : 1002 (15)

CHANGES MADE TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

It is announced today from the office of the Council of Ministers that His Excellency in Council has reconstituted the Department of Education and the Department of Trade and Industry.

By virtue of the Council of Ministers Act 1990, the Speaker of the House of Keys is not eligible to serve as a Member of a Government Department. Following the election of Mr David Carman, to the position of Speaker, on Tuesday, 18 April, the Department of Education is reconstituted with the Minister, Hon Steve Rodan, MHK and the two remaining Members, Mr Bill Henderson, MHK and Dr Edgar Mann, MLC.

The Department of Trade and Industry is reconstituted with the Minister, Hon David North, MHK and one Member, Mrs Pam Crowe, MEM. Mrs Brenda Cannell, MHK ceases to be a Member of the Department

Speaking on behalf of the Council of Ministers, Chief Minister, Hon Donald Gelling, MHK stated:

"Following a full and frank discussion in respect of the Department of Trade and Industry, Mrs Cannell, MHK, had made her position within the Department with responsibilities for the construction industry untenable and it was the unanimous decision of the Council of Ministers that the recommendation be forwarded to the Lieutenant Governor.

Council has no wish to see Mrs Carmen inhibited from expressing her opinions and hopes that being relieved of her Departmental responsibilities will allow her to continue to comment freely on public matters.

I do regret that this step has been necessary. It has always been my wish to involve all Members within Government if at all possible. Unfortunately, Mrs Cannell has had a difficulty with this. She resigned some time ago from the Department of Home Affairs because of difficulties there and now she is without a Departmental position. I hope that, at some stage, it will be possible to find a new position for her, so that her energies can be constructively employed once more." OUTSPOKEN politician Bren- da Cannell has been sacked from her government job for her repeated attacks on the new hospital and the handling of the Crowe EPH saga. The 47-year-old Douglas East MHK received the bombshell in a hand-delivered letter from Chief Minister Donald Gelling yesterday (Thursday) morning. Mrs Cannel's regular outbursts on the building of the hospital have set her at odds with her bosses at the Department of Trade and Industry, where she was Brenda Carmen: Fired TURN TO PAGE 12 Brenda sacked

FROM PAGE ONE • A spokesman described the sacking as 'bully-boy tactics' and a 'sad day for freedom of the member with responsibil- speech' and said theft. would ity for construction. undoubtedly be 'a strong pub- And it seems her latest ver- lic and parliamentary reac- bal assault on government tion'. • policy in our sister newspaper, Mrs. Cannell has been no the Isle of Man Examiner, this stranger to controversy since week has finally got her fired. being elected to the House of It leaves her as the only MHK Keys as a member for the without a government post. Alternative Policy Group at Mr Gelling explained Mrs the 1996 general election. Cannel's comments made her She was handed posts in the position . within the DTI DTI and the Department of 'untenable' and said the deci- Home Affairs, and within six sion was a unanimous one months, as chairman of the within the Council of Employers' Federation, was Ministers. speaking out against the con- 'I do regret that this step tracts and packages being has been necessary,' said Mr drawn up for the new hospital. Gelling. In October 1997 she resigned 'It has always been my wish as a member of the to involve all members within Department of Home Affairs government if at all possible. over what she saw as a lack of 'Unfortunately Mrs Cannel action to combat crime. has had a difficulty with this. But it was her comments in 'She has a history of making the Examiner on Tuesday statements that cause prob- which proved to be the final lems. She has always been straw for 'Mr Gelling. someone whose style Causes. Mrs Cannel said she was problems. defying 'intense' political 'How can you have someone pressure to speak out against who has responsibility for the the contracting procedure construction industry coming employed by the DHSS for the out with comments condemn- new hospital. ing the (hospital's) design She claimed the 1112 million team? It has made her posi- project was lurching towards tion unworkable.' another crisis and accused Mrs Cannel was unavail- the DHSS and Health Minister able for comment as the Clare Christian of failing to Independent went to press, heed warnings before signing but the news outraged fellow the management contract members of the APG. with Bovis. She has a

rs history of Fv making statements j7: that cause problems says Gelling Brenda will

BRENDA Cannel! is the Only person who Can decide what path her career takes after being dumped not be gagged in the political wilderness. DAMNED and condemned Chief Minister Donald without trial. Ceiling said he didn't know That's how Mrs Cannel! sees her sack- Outburst made it what the future held for ing from the DTI Last week. Mrs Cannel!. And if firing her was an attempt by Mr •I think only she can Gelling and the Council of Ministers to impossible for her to decide what she is trying silence her, it seems to have failed. to achieve and the way in Mrs Cannel] has hit back with an which she goes about doing attack on both Mr Gelling's leadership continue — minister it,' said Mr Gelling. and the 'Tynwald hierarchy'. MRS Catmell's former boss, management contractor and the •She has a history of 'Why has the chief minister not had design team working on the new making statements that the courage to face me and call me into Trade and Industry Minister hospital was, I'm afraid, neither cause problems.. She has his office before making a decision?' David North, said her sensible nor advisable. always been someone asked Mrs Cannell. outburst last week had left 'In my opinion it would have resulted whose style causes prob- 'It's incredible. It really illustrates the her in an 'impossible' in years of legal wrangling at a lems.' weakness of the man in charge,' massive cost to the taxpayer, not to But he added: 'The Chief Minister Donald Mrs Cannel said she wouldn't be sur- situation and no longer able mention the possible delays to the Council of Ministers has no Gelling: 'The Council of prised if Mrs Christian had given the to carry out her work Project? wish to see Mrs Canneil Ministers has no wish to Council of Ministers an ultimatum — objectively. Mr North added: 'Her outburst has, inhibited from expressing see Mrs Cannel inhibit- 'either sack Mrs Cannel] or MI resign'. Mr North (pictured) said: 'Mrs in no opinion, made it impossible far her opinions and hopes ed from expressing her And she believes that given the choice Cannell's statement last week which her to continue to objectively that being relieved of her opinions and hopes that of getting rid of her or losing Mrs coiled for the dismissal of the represent all the interests of the departmental responsibili- being relieved of her Christian, the council would always construction industry in the Isle of ties will allow her to con- departmental- responsi- choose 'a Kerruish', particularly with Man. tinue to comment freely on bilities will allow her to Mrs Christian's father, Sir Charles, 'Mrs Cannel's opposition to the public [natters. continue to comment recently stepping down as President of hospital contract can now continue do regret that this step freely on public matters' Tynwald. without her being inhibited by the has been necessary'. It has 'It leaves a question mark,' said Mrs delegated duties she held at the DTI! always been my wish to public arena for the last Gannet. Meanwhile. Mrs Cannell's Douglas involve all members within two months'. 'We have a chief minister who for- East colleague Phil ttraidwoon said government if at all possi- 'We are trying to build a mally believes in consensus govern- the situation could have been avoided ble. new hospital; said Mr ment. He has provided jobs for all if it bad been 'nipped in the bud' 'Unfortunately, Mrs MHICs and MLCs somewhere. earlier. Cannell has had a difficul- 'II is a Tynwald resolu- 'But his action and the council's action Mr Braldwood believes Mr North ty with this. She resigned tion that we are working to tells me that this is a warning for other could have gone to the Council of some time ago from the for the people of the Isle of fdliKs and MLCs that if you come out Ministers and explained Mrs Department of Horne Man and that is what we and tell the truth about what is going on Cannell's conflict of interests. Affairs because of difficul- must end up doing. you could lose your job. lie said: 'My feeling is that It should ties there and now she is 'We are not saying that This is really bully-boy tactics coming have been nipped in the bud. without a departmental people should not ask ques- out here' 'They knew how strongly abe felt. position. tions and test things. But Mrs Cannel also believes the decision They could have bad a reshuffle. 1 hope that, at some they should do it within to sack her had been made the previous That would then have left her free to stage, it will be possible to government and not by Thursday — BEFORE her latest out- speak her mind. find a new position for her going out into the public spoken. comments appeared in the 'I feel she has a lot to offer to a so that her energies can be arena where people may Examiner. department. it is unfortunate that constructively employed not understand fully the She explained that the Council of she is going to be Go the outside. ft's once more.' whole situation,' Ministers, which meets every Thansday a pity that a person of Brenda's Mr Gelling said last Mr Gelling also hit back morning, hadn't met by the time she ' ability is not going to he In a week's comments from at claims by Mrs Cannel received news of her rliemissal last department. Airs Carmen sounded like that the contractual pack-. week. 'But abe was between a rock and a they had the backing of the ages drawn upiit" Use start •"It is obvious that, the' Commit- of. • chard:place, unfortunately, with the Department of Trade and of "the —projCct were Ministers is looking lb' punish me 'ler" position she was in: • • Industry. designed to •prevent Marti( telling the truth,' said Mrs Cannel. - • - But the chief minister companies from partici- 'If I was doing any other work outside tees are in what they do and say. sion based on the outcome.' denied this and insisted pating. of government I could claim the dis. '1 felt it was in the public's best inter- The sacking may have left her out in she had made the com- He said the government missal was unfair and 1 would have a ests to come out and tell them what was the political wilderness, but Mrs Cannel' ments without authorise- had wanted to give those GSM happening. The hospital is being built is adamant she will not change her thin by the DTI. companies the chance to 'The most annoying part is that there with the public's money. If that is a good ways. Mr Gelling said Mrs get some of the hospital was no attempt by the Council of reason to sack me, then that is why they She insisted: will continue to criti- Carmen's stance over the business, which he feels Ministers or the DTI to even have a chat have done it. cise when criticism is justified and ask hospital issue left her in an the figures revealed by with me about it, 'I had no warning that this was going questions when questions need to be untenable situation. Health Minister Clare 'Since the Examiner carried the aro• to come. And It has been timed when we asked and I will continue to monitor the 'How can you have some- Christian — that 36 Out of cle, he (Mr Gelling) had all day Monday, have now gone into a three week recess spending of public money. one who has responsibility the 49 contracts had gone Tuesday and Wednesday to speak to me and to really mute whatever reaction 'My first loyalty is to the people of the fur the construction indus- locally — justify. about it before he took a final decision.' the members wished to take. Isle of Man. try coming out with com- 'No one is more disap- Mrs Cannel! added: 'There will be believe it would have been prudent 'The public are not soft and they will ments condemning the pointed than I that Crowe very strong reaction from my col- to have waited for the outcome of the not be hoodwinked. They have noticed (hospital's) design team?'. EP}I walked off the joh; leagues. Public Accounts Committee iiwestige- that things have not been quite right. asked Mr Gelling. said Mr Gelling. 'I have not breached anything. I ant non into Crowe EPH because that will And now they luiow a little bit more 'It has made her position 'We do not do things not tied by collective responsibility. I do help uncover the truth to the situation. about what is going on. The people unworkable.' thinking to try and make it not have to take an oath like ministers It may have been then that they (the expect the truth and they deserve noth- Mr Gelling said claims hard for ourselves. have to. I am not restricted like minis- council) would have had to take a deci- ing less: by Mrs Cannel! that she 'The hospital is probably was under 'intense politi- the biggest project the cal pressure' riot to speak Island has ever seen. out were untrue. 'It would have been much He said the issues she easier for us to employ one spoke about in the big -contractor and say Examiner had been 'in the build us a hospital.' APG to boycott seminar in protest over sacking Gelling speaks of his dismay THE Council of Ministers will dis- d By JOHN QUIRK Meanwhile, Health Minister Clare cuss a possible return to government Christian has hit back at claims she work for Brenda Cannel!, but Chief Gelling. 'A position has to be available. threatened to resign if Mrs Cannell was- Minister Donald Gelling said a deci- 'Mr Cannell was elected and in govern- n't sacked. sion could not be rushed. ment for four or five months before he was In ow- sister paper, the Isle of Mart And he described the move by the in a position within a department. Examiner, this week, Mrs Cannell said she Alliance for Progressive Government to 'It is something we will be giving seri- wouldn't have been surprised if Mrs boycott next month's seminar on govern- ous consideration, but there is no given Christian had given the Council of ment policy as 'sad'. timescale.' Ministers an ultimatum. 'We will obviously be considering Mrs Mr Gelling added that a point people But Mrs Christian insisted: 'Mrs Connell's situation,' said Mr Gelling. seem to be missing regarding Mrs Cannell's conjecture about an ultimatum 'But it was imperative that we got the Canneli's dismissal was that the Council from me has no substance and is a con- situation regulated at the Department of of Ministers must make the decision to trivance to create a public perception of Trade and Industry first. dismiss someone from a department and the matter which is totally false. 'The decision was made, but in the press then recommend it to the Governor In 'This department, no less ,,than any we made it clear we hoped we would be Council. other, and I, no less than Mrs Cannell, able to find a position within government 'Of course, I am getting all the flak,' said have a concern to protect the interests of for Mrs Cannell. Mr Gelling. 'The chief minister has the the taxpayers, whether it be in respect of 'It dismayed me to think that I was the power to sack a minister, but not a mem- the new hospital or any other Issue' one who brought them ail (the APG) into ber of a department. That must be a deci- Mrs Cannell also questioned whether the government and now, three and a half sion of the Council of Ministers.' Council of Ministers would have risked a years down the line, we have got one mem- On the APG's boycott, Mr Gelling said: confrontation with Mrs Christian because ber who isn't in a government post. 'I find that rather sad. her father is Sir Charles Kerruish, who 'I am obviously disappointed at that, so 'The seminar is something we intro- stepped down as President of Tynwald if we can find a suitable slot I am sure duced to bring the members together earlier this month. that will be the way we are looking to go.' prior to the policy discussions so they can 'I was not asked to do this job because Hat's the way: Mona Tomlinson, winner of en Easter bonnet contest at However, Mr Gelling said he couldn't say have input into areas of concern, if they of my parentage,' said Mrs Christian. Anfield Hey Residential Home, Douglas, receives her prize from Douglas when a reinstatement would be forchcom- have any. 'Whether or not the fact tnat I continue East MHK Brenda Cannel!, who made headlines herself this week due to ig, anti used Onchan ?MX Geoff Cannell, 'It is a voluntary thing. If you don't want to undertake a difficult task which other her sacking from the Department of Trade end Industry OM who gained his seat at a by-election, as an to go along, you don't have to. It's sad that elected members would not touch with a 1.!..X.al I 'pie. we would not have the benefit of their barge pole is a reflection on my genetic 'It does not "just happen",' explained Mr input' make-up, I will leave for others to decide.' Other heads should roll —not Brenda's — says APG leader

THE APG has slammed Chief position untenable'. document being unveiled in October. Minister Donald Gelling over the But Dr Mann has hit back with a stinging The 'informal' gathering of Tynwald is a rebuke and said there was 'overwhelming' chance for all members to have their say sacking of member Brenda public support for Mrs Cannel!. on the various policies of all departments. Cannel]. and will boycott a top- He said: 'The way in which it (the sack- While a member can have input into the level government seminar in ing) was executed without personal contact policies of any department they are protest. and on the eve of a public holiday was typ- involved with, they can have no say in other Last week's decision to remove Mrs ical of the current "spin" needed to defend departments. Cannel! from her post within the the action of ministers. Dr Mann added: 'The statements of facts Department of Trade and Industry has 'dis- 'The chief minister has blatantly sacked and figures publicly referred to by Mrs gusted' the Alliance for Progressive the wrong person. Cannell have never been disputed by any Government, says chairman Dr Edgar 'The members of the APG expect the member of government or anyone in the Mann MIX. reinstatement of Mrs Carmen in govern- construction industry, which has support- He says the group is now refusing to ment and the removal of the real person or ed them. attend the annual seminar on government persons who are responsible for the pre-' 'The chief minister has further been sup- policy, which is being held at the Hilton sent unacceptable situation. plied with additional factual information Hotel on Monday, May 8. 'In the meantime, as a gesture of con- confirmed by those in the industry relating And Dr Mann warned members will 'take tempt of the actions of the chief minister, to the current situation. no part in formulating that policy' until the members of the APG will absent them- 'These facts have not been made public Douglas East MHK Mrs Cannell is rein- selves from the seminar on government by Mrs Cannell, but were supplied to Mr stated in a government post. policy and will take no part in formulating Gelling prior to her dismissal' However, he revealed more extreme that policy until the present impasse is Dr Mann insisted: 'Mrs Cannell, in pur- action, such as a mass withdrawal from resolved.' suing her responsibilities, has not failed the their government posts by the APG was Dr Mann said the group saw no reason government in any way, in common with all highly unlikely. why Mrs Cannel! couldn't be reinstated the other members of the APG. Mrs Cannel] was dismissed from her with immediate effect, and said if a new 'Those responsible for the current situa- position in charge of construction after her position for her was not forthcoming, it tion, which goes back to the (Sir Miles) repeated public criticism of the govern- would have to reconsider its stance. Walker administration, of which Mr ment over the new hospital and the collapse Next month's seminar is one of two held Gelling was part, remain in their posts in of contractor Crowe EPH. annually by the government, one prior to a vain attempt to protect this administra- Mr Gelling said her comments made her the budget and this one, prior to the policy tion!

Appendix 2

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

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF

THE SELECT COMMITTEE OF TYNWALD ON MEMBERS OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

Held in the Millennium Conference Room Legislative Buildings, Douglas on Tuesday, 3rd October 2000 at 10.00 a.m.

Members Present: Dr E J Mann MLC (Chairman) Mr E G Lowey MLC Sir Miles Walker MHK with Mr T A Bawden (Secretary)

Oral evidence was taken from: Hon D J Gelling MHK Mrs B J Cannel! MHK Hon D North MHK

Evidence of }Ion D J Gelling Now, I know that in the past this was not the case - I do not mean in the recent past; I mean in the board system. I Dr Mann: Thank you, Chief Minister, for coming in understand again members were allocated to departments this morning. I realise you have not made a submission and they got on with the job. Probably I was trying to be a but you responded to an invitation to give your views on little more considerate of their views in trying to get some of the things that we are investigating or looking everybody into a department. That was my object; the into at the moment, so I must officially welcome you here object was trying to get every member of parliament to this morning and I think perhaps it would be right if we serve in the government. gave you the opportunity of giving any views you have on We achieved that, and in doing so we had a situation the matter before this committee. where some members, due to their actual request, bridged over two departments because they wanted the experience, Mr Gelling: Well, first of all, Mr Chairman, thank you they wanted to be able to see how the Home Affairs ran for the opportunity. I can only tell you from where I was and another department that perhaps did not have delegated sitting at the time and basically, I think, looking at the remit responsibility. They wanted to get a feel and I was eager of the select committee and your introduction of it, you to actually assist them in doing so. So we ended up with a were very careful in your introduction in Tynwald to say few members on a couple of departments, in fact a couple you did not want to mention any names so I think I would of members that were on two departments and the chairman look for a little bit of guidance: are we looking at of a board, so - and this is one of the areas that is of serious generalities here or are we looking at specifics or how far concern to me - the workload of members is not by any do you actually want to go into this? Basically, is it an means even. If you were looking at the remuneration of inquest into the incident or is there a difficulty here that members on departments you will find that there are some we should address to learn from so that we can use in the members who are full-time, and when I say full-time I future? I think if I could have some guidance, please? mean full-time, and there are other members getting the same remuneration on departments when quite honestly Dr Mann: I think it would be correct to say that in the they can hold down virtually a full-time job outside of terms of the resolution, which is a generality, but as a result parliament. This does in itself create inequality which is of submissions made to us of course an individual case is of concern to other members. They feel that they are putting specifically mentioned. I do not think we are going to avoid their whole heart into it and others are not, so there is an the specifics anyway, but I think our total remit has to be area there, I believe, that again if it could be pulled out - I general, and in fact we have been at pains to look at the do not know how - it certainly would be easier for members whole scene, the whole mechanism of appointment and to accept. dismissal and the way in which an individual operates Now, having done that, having got members into all within a department. We have several issues that we will these departments, it was my wish, obviously, to have the consensus of everyone to all work together for the good of raise with you, perhaps, when - the Isle of Man and its people. Our first situation, of course, was that we had one member who wrote to their minister Right, okay. Well, first of all I would like Mr Gelling: saying that they could not work with them anymore and to start, Mr Chairman, therefore by putting on record the they left that department. I think that is an area that is worth appointment of members of departments, and no doubt also perhaps looking at, because that was just done by a you have all been well aware of this because you are more letter from the member to the minister saying, 'I don't want senior than I. 'The members of each department other than to work on the department anymore,' and they left. Now, the minister shall be appointed by the Governor in Council you see it is a case of again: was that the right procedure? and shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor I question whether it was, because it is a Governor-in- in Council.' Now, I think even in your introduction of the Council appointment, so therefore was that the right select committee you actually stated that there had been procedure? nothing incorrectly done in legal terms or whatever, but Anyway, that was the first blip, but of course that person you felt that there was something amiss or something else was still on another department so they were still in could have preceded that actual situation, so I can only government and they were still receiving the same say that, running on the Government Departments Act 1987 remuneration as they were covering two departments, so and the situation with members of departments, I at the again there is an unfairness there that the workload is not beginning of this particular term took a great deal of time equalled out, and I doubt if we could ever achieve where and effort to try and elicit from members their particular all the jobs would have the same weighting as perhaps the areas of interest and what departments they would or would civil service do with their enquiries into the weighting of not like to serve in. I also took a great deal of time to find jobs. I think you would find quite a disparity between there were many conflicts of members who were coming members' work and, I have to say, ministers' work, because to government, bringing with them a certain amount of there is a very similar situation there. baggage which would have created difficulties in them What then arose was a situation whereby I think, if I serving on certain departments, so I went into a great deal come quickly to what prompted the select committee to of detail as to what and why and where and when and how be brought about, there was a situation where a member so that I could then feed that into the Council of Ministers of a department with a responsibility for a certain section for the appointment of members. of our industries in the Island was in a situation whereby they were taking information from that industry, that recorded in the minutes of Council at the next Council industry felt that they were giving that information to meeting, so that is the format of what happened. government and I was getting representation from that Basically, in that - I am sure again you will have the industry saying, 'We're not giving this information for press releases and if you have not certainly I can let you political reasons, we're giving it because we feel it's helpful have them - I expressed the wish that in fact we would be to government because you're looking at this particular able to find another position where the member could join industry.' government and use the energy in that department which So that was the first representation I was getting. The would not come into conflict, so there was no way that we difficulty continued, the difficulty being the co-operation wanted the situation to be that we had one member out of between the two departments concerned, and on Thursday government because that certainly was not my wish to start 13th April we started our Council meeting at 9 o'clock in with and I have not changed my mind since. So that is, the morning, without officers, for two hours to 11 o'clock, from where I sit, how everything came to light. and Council convened as the full Council with officers at 11 o'clock, so what I am trying to demonstrate is that we Dr Mann: Well, thank you very much indeed. First of spent two hours on this particular area of concern, so it all can we go back to the generality first? We know what was not done flippantly or at a whim; it was a good debate the existing legislation refers to - the appointment and in which two hours were spent looking at the position. dismissal. I think there has been a question as to whether The position actually, at the end of that particular meeting, these appointments should be made by the Governor in was that the minister of the department said that, to keep Council where in fact it might be better to accept the reality my consensus and to keep all members in government, of the situation, that is that it is the Council of Ministers which was my wish, he would again continue to try to acting together that determine the appointments and the work with the member and try in fact to resolve the dismissals, so I think one of the things that we would situation, so that was on Thursday 13th April. possibly flag up is the legislation concerned with the actual On 14th April, which was the Friday following, there appointments. I know from experience you spent a long, was a press statement put out from the member of that long time trying to get everybody involved in government, department basically saying that the information that was certainly initially, and I think possibly some of the issues going to be disclosed should probably be risking her job that have arisen in general may quite unfortunately stem and so on, so that press statement came out which again from the fact that everybody now is in government, because caused concern. I addressed it on the Monday and the I think one of the very great issues here is the context of Tuesday. Unfortunately I had been at the Home Office on collective responsibility. 6th April, on that Thursday, when it had been decided at The collective responsibility in the Council of Ministers that particular meeting and had gone unnoticed by me that is well set out, well established over the years now and in we were not going to have a meeting on Thursday 18th, fact is the basis, as you know, of documents that are which was the Thursday before Good Friday, because with circulated to ministers on their appointment, and from the it being the holiday period they would not have a meeting, ministerial point of view it seems to work very well. I know because the idea was to then make a final decision on there are blips occasionally and you are very conscious of Thursday 18th; that did not happen. I then, on the them, I am sure, but when we are talking about the Wednesday and Thursday, rang around to all the ministers collective responsibility of an individual member of a explained the position and asked if they had seen the press department that member of department sees his or her release and so on, and it was a unanimous decision of all loyalty to the minister and to the department and I think the ministers that the position had become untenable and nobody within a department would argue with the therefore there was only one way that we could address it, collective responsibility that that member has to that and that was to take up the Government Departments Act department. It is when that department starts getting situation whereby the members are there - I think it states involved in a wider policy decision that may or may not as - 'during the pleasure of the Governor in Council.' emanate from the Council of Ministers that the collective So therefore on the Thursday I attempted to contact the responsibility of the member becomes tested, because you member in the morning. It is not a very nice thing to have can demand of your Council of Ministers a strict collective to do; I appreciate that and I take that on board. I could not responsibility. I do not think it is possible if you get make contact. I contacted her husband at his place of work everybody into government; it is not feasible or politically to see if I could ascertain the whereabouts. He said he possible for that collective responsibility to spread down thought the only thing it could have been was that she had to the individual members of departments, and I think here popped up to either - I just cannot remember - his mother is a question that we have got to find an answer to really: or her mother on that morning, and I asked, could he contact how much the collective responsibility of the individual her and get her to ring me back? That did not happen, so member of the department overlaps into general policy of with it being Good Friday the following day I decided to the Council of Ministers. get the letter delivered to the house by hand hoping that It does seem - I know I am trying to condense what we perhaps she might have returned. Unfortunately that was have been talking about - that an individual member of a not the case, so the letter was delivered by hand at, I think department, if he or she has a conflict with their minister, it was, about 9.15 on the Thursday morning. I did not hear would express to that minister the fact that they are either anything from then on except what I read in the papers, so unhappy or want to leave. Now, within the department that that was the position. The decision was then obviously seems to be self-contained and something that can be

2 resolved, but of course, as you pointed out, the appointment Mr Lowey: How did he inform you? This was on the was not made by the minister, and this is where we run Friday after you had had your meeting where you had come into problems because the member may or may not be to a consensus agreement, or the Council of Ministers - happy, unhappy or just want to leave, but ultimately the decision has to be made by the Council of Ministers. Mr Gelling: No, on the 13th, which was the Thursday, I did not want to go straight into discussing the when we spent two hours - individual case, but it just happens this way that the individual did not appear on the evidence that I have seen Mr Lowey: Yes, indeed, you had agreed, which was to ever to be in conflict with the minister, and the minister leave her where she was and to continue. has at no time written or otherwise seemed to have expressed conflict with the departmental member and so, Mr Gelling: Well, he said that to try to keep everybody as proof of that, not only was delegated responsibility on board he would attempt to continue and try and get the continued but actually extended. So if you take your mind relationship better - away from the Council of Ministers to the department, within the department it did not seem that there was Mr Lowey: That is fine. conflict. It was only when we.go between the department and the Council of Ministers, and this is the most difficult Mr Gelling: - in other words, to try and keep it all area of all: at what point must the minister acting as a together but then, when the statement came out on the minister and a member of the Council of Ministers express Friday, which was the following Friday, that was when to that member that what he or she is doing is contrary to the press statement came out where again condemnation the policy of the Council of Ministers? Now, that does not of everything that was going on and things that were said appear to have happened. and inaccuracies that were in that statement, that was when we discussed with all the ministers again what the situation Mr Gelling: Well, of course - was now, and it became clear that as far as -

Mr Lowey: Just to clear my mind, was the minister Mr Lowey: By phone? concerned at the Council of Ministers when you held this conference for two hours? Mr Gelling: By phone, yes, because we were not having a meeting on that Thursday, which was the Thursday before Mr Gelling: On the 13th? Yes. Good Friday, so it was done individually with all the ministers individually either personally or, as you say, by Mr Lowey: On the 13th he was there? phone.

Mr Gelling: Yes, and of course on his input into that Mr Lowey: Yes, but there was a week before that; there discussion he will be free to give his evidence. Now, he was a week's difference between your decision, and your might or might not agree with you; all I can say is that the Minister of Trade and Industry had kept you informed of conflict between the two departments, of course, came out what he had been trying to do with his member. in Council, because you had the two ministers then most disgruntled because of the problems that were being caused Mr Gelling: Yes, and agreed at that time then that he for one department that were seen to be alarming and could not obviously now, in the light of that, be able to scaremongering, and the other department was trying, continue. therefore, to do Tynwald's policy - in other words, bring Tynwald's policy, which was to build a hospital - and it Dr Mann: I hate to keep coming back to the was being very badly affected by statements that were being generalisation of the function of the member as distinct made, so the conflict, you see, then comes from the from the function of the Council of Ministers. The question department to the department and the minister to the of delegated responsibility comes into this relationship minister, and that is, of course, where the problem really between the minister and the member. Now, if a minister has arisen. becomes unhappy with the way in which his departmental member is performing a delegated responsibility, surely it Mr Lowey: Through you, chairman, could I ask the would be the responsibility of that minister to withdraw Chief Minister - at this meeting you did not tell us the the delegated responsibility and do the job outcome of that Council meeting. Your minister said he himself? would try and talk with his member and then the following day a certain thing happened, and you said then you tried Mr Gelling: And in fact to remove that member from to follow it up, but did you not ask your minister what he the department - had done to try and resolve that particular thing, either prevent it from happening or to speak to the member after Dr Mann: In the extreme, yes. that. Did you talk -? Mr Gelling: - although they had not in fact appointed Mr Gelling: He told us what he had done and who he them. It is the Governor in Council that has appointed them, had - or assigned them to that department.

3 Mr Lowey: You could make a recommendation - sorry, choosing members. Now, I probably reversed that by going again through you, chairman. to members and saying, 'Where would you like to serve?' and then going to the Council of Ministers saying, 'Now, Dr Mann: Just ignoring the personalities I am trying there is your situation, these are the members that would to work out the mechanics, and I think this is where we like to serve on your department; will you take them on have got to find an answer, because at some point it will board?' So it was slightly different to possibly the way it happen again, if we are not careful, that because, if I can was done before, but this was to try to get members go right back to the beginning - and it is just one of the interested in particular areas of government and to save things that would happen anyway but certainly as a result conflict. That was the whole idea. of everybody being in government - in certain departments an individual member who had just been elected a few Dr Mann: I must say on the whole that worked, yes. weeks before could be given a slice of ministerial responsibility for which that minister had been working Mr Gelling: But I think, if I can just follow that one for years and years to reach the situation of being given through, when you were saying about the appointment there the responsibility and, the day after, hands it to somebody are one or two areas that certainly cause problems when who may be very experienced outside but - you are trying to and you cannot - you will never achieve it - run a government like a corporate or a private company Mr Gelling: And it is the minister's judgement that that because there are politicians in the middle of it and there person has the experience to do so. are politics in the middle of it, but when you have a situation whereby there is a certain way that ministers are appointed, Dr Mann: But that delegated responsibility is given which is the Chief Minister and then the Governor appoints, freely but also it is the minister himself or herself who has then the members of the departments are the Governor in the ability to withdraw it. The Council of Ministers cannot Council, i.e. the Council of Ministers, who put to the withdraw it. Governor the suggestion that they become members; then you have got your boards where your board chairmen are Mr Gelling: Not the responsibility which has been elected by Tynwald, and yet you are trying to put the whole given to that person by the minister, because it is the of this government administration together to try to get minister who is still ultimately responsible, so if he desires people doing, as near as you can, equal work within the to give to someone else part of his responsiblities it is still government machine and you have not got control, actually, his or her head that will roll, so if they have confidence to of all the ends. That is what I am trying to say. do that that is fine. If they then lose that confidence it is up to them to remove it because it is only they that know Dr Mann: I am well aware of that. whether that person is competent. Mr Gelling: Yes, it is most frustrating because you then Dr Mann: But if we can go now back to the individual have to say, 'Well, just a minute - if that doesn't go through member of the department, if that member of department Tynwald that means that that chairman will have. . .' and is given the delegated responsibility it has never been then you are going to have to move somebody from another withdrawn and, at the same time, as the months have gone department. So it is a difficult one to address and, as I say, on, has been given at times total responsibility for the then when you come it is the old thing, just going off it department and most certainly has been given long-term slightly, to the ministerial situation of putting your ministers additional ones because one member of the department to Tynwald. Now, I have always suggested that it is most disappears, that individual member must get the impression difficult, if Tynwald appoint or confirm, not going back to that they are doing the job right and they are, within the Tynwald and saying, 'Well, we want this minister minister's view anyway, doing the job correctly. So it is removed,' because it was they that appointed them. In other when the actions of the department and the minister who words, if you give the job you also have got to be in the is responsible for the department comes in conflict with position to be able to say, 'Well, I'm sorry but I'm taking another or in conflict with the Council of Ministers that that job off you.' somehow things start getting blurred. And it is all very well to say, yes, the intervention can occur, obviously the Dr Mann: Could I just come back to the individual intervention can occur from the Council of Ministers case, although the same would apply in any other case. If because they appointed the person in law, but that person the performance within the department appeared to that could well then be dismissed without ever having an member to be quite happily working and whose minister inclination that they have actually done anything wrong. was happy in working, when there is a risk of intervention from the Council of Ministers would it not be, as they are Mr Gelling: Yes, I think, just adding to that, probably the true appointees, correct, and one or two members in at the end of the day if you go back a few steps Sir Miles their evidence have suggested if that situation started will recall clearly in his day situations were slightly arising, that the Council of Ministers should in fact indicate different whereby, when ministers were appointed, it used to that member that their performance was not as well? It to be on a sliding scale, I think, where the Treasury minister has been suggested by one or two that the individual would get first choice of the members, then it would go to member then should have the ability to either come to you DHSS, LG&E or whatever; it was more the ministers or to the Council of Ministers to explain his or her position.

4 Mr Gelling: Or, probably taking it another step further, Mr Lowey: - but these rules were not changed, were the minister of that department should be the person to they, from the time. . . but you had a different scenario: seek that member's release from that department, because you were inclusive as opposed to choosing who your team again it is putting it back into the position where they would would be as to try. . . My point is that if the rules were all obviously, I would have hoped, had conversations around right from a past scenario or for personal choice to a place the lines you are talking. Now, whether or not we get into for everybody, shouldn't the rules have been slightly altered a situation where you have something similar to this where to take note of that, and isn't it the role of somebody in a minister comes along and puts forward the case for government to have advised you or the Council about that? dismissal and the member comes along and puts forward a case for non-dismissal and the favour is given to the Mr Gelling: The rules in fact in the way ministers act member, I would suggest it would be extremely difficult and the discipline and the collective responsibility? then to have a relationship with the minister and the member for an ongoing period. I think you would still be Mr Lowey: Yes, because they are different now, because looking for somewhere to move that person into another they cannot be the same, can they? You could impose a area where perhaps there would not be conflict, because I will by saying, 'Well, if you do not like it, you are out.' think again there is this little thing about politicians and But you chose to say, 'Well, I'm going to have them in representatives of the people where we are not employing irrespective,' and don't you think with hindsight. . . these members; the members are elected to do a job within hindsight is wonderful - government and they are appointed. So in other words, to try to put in, as you would as an employer, that there are Mr Gelling: Yes, we try to give more flexibility within certain rights for the employee to have a warning and a there - written warning before dismissal, I wonder whether or not that is something that could be built into a parliamentary Mr Lowey: To the ministers. situation. Mr Gelling: - for areas of ministers representing Mr Lowey: Are they elected to serve in the government constituencies where they had a position, but it has not or are they elected to serve parliament? changed, it is still the same that if they have a political statement being made before they come in, it is accepted, Mr Gelling: Well, elected to serve parliament and then but the rules have not changed. they have the choice - Mr Lowey: All right they have not changed, but you Mr Lowey: But that does not mean serving government. have interpreted them in a more flexible way -

Mr Gelling: Oh no, no. Mr Gelling: Correct.

Mr Lowey: But, Chief Minister, isn't it the fact there is Mr Lowey: - that is it reasonable to ask members of nothing unique about the pressures that are applied first of departments then, if you have applied that to the ministers all to the Chief Minister, to a Prime Minister? He has to be more flexible, would it not be unreasonable for always got conflicting pressures from this wing of the party members of the department to say, 'Well, if you can practice or that if he is in a party of government, as we have here, that for the ministers he should be able to practice it for but you chose to be inclusive. Now, the rule book for us'? ministers was geared for when we had a system where the Chief Minister picked his team, which was not inclusive. Mr Gelling: Yes, I would say we probably have - We have changed the rules. Did anybody advise you at any time that the same set of rules applied that to that Mr Lowey: You have, except - scenario were adequate to meet the requirements of the new scenario which you had painted? Did anybody advise Mr Gelling: We have built in flexibility for members you that these rules needed to be revisited? just the same.

Mr Gelling: Yes, well, it is a fact that we are looking at Mr Lowey: Yes, okay. Would it be unreasonable then that situation all the time as these things arrive because it to say that that particular member would have helped if is a new system, and it has changed quite a lot in the period she - coming down to the specific now - was being unfairly of what? - 12 years. We had ministers being put forward treated being told that she was not to be as generously by the Chief Minister of the day to Tynwald as a group treated as maybe some of the ministers? and Tynwald voted upon them and then it was changed whereby the Chief Minister had - Mr Gelling: Well, I would suggest, in fact., that that is not the case and that it was a step too far and that was the Mr Lowey: These rules, the rules that govern situation that existed. responsibility - Sir Miles Walker: Would you agree, Chief Minister, Mr Gelling: Yes. that the general guidelines that are set out in this document

5 that Mr Lowey has just held up, although put to paper on the situation, but in fact I think, as the gentleman from 30th May 1995, are the same as they were straight after Gibraltar that spoke at one of our CPA meetings said, when the inception of the Council of Ministers, when I think you do that and you put it all on the cauldron it could all every member of Tynwald was in fact included in the blow up; well, I think that is the scenario that has happened government machine at that time, so there has been no in this particular case. fundamental change to that situation? Sir Miles Walker: And would you agree with me that Mr Gelling: Yes, that is it. trust between members and ministers, and ministers and ministers, and good working relationships and, I suppose, Sir Miles Walker: Am I also right in thinking that the a tolerance and understanding of where people come from only criticisms of Mrs Cannell's responsibilities within the is far more useful than strictly written guidelines? Department of Industry were those to do with her responsibilities for the construction industry - Mr Gelling: It is essential that you do have that relationship. Mr Gelling: Yes. Dr Mann: Could I just elaborate on one or two of those Sir Miles Walker: - and as far as the other statements? First of all, as Sir Miles has said, the particular responsibilities given to or delegated to her by the minister member in question did bring with her to the department a there was no criticism whatsoever? known position and so it should have been no surprise if in fact there may have been some difficulty in her position Mr Gelling: Not to my knowledge. and within the guidelines that would have been an accepted situation. Sir Miles Walker: And so perhaps it is not surprising when the minister came across a responsibility he wanted Mr Gelling: Yes, because it would have been obviously to delegate he in fact expanded Mrs Cannell's range of incorrect to have asked that member to go to the DHSS, responsibilities. for argument's sake, because of that, so that was why it was the Home Affairs and Industry, but of course one's Mr Gelling: Correct, because they lost a department mind at that time - if you recall, Industry was manufacturing member, you see. and development of a manufacturing base; construction was actually given to the department after that because Sir Miles Walker: Surely. Your responsibility and the construction was not represented within the government - Council of Ministers responsibility as executive in other words, they did not have a voice - so of course the government is to execute the policies that are approved by Council of Ministers or myself had no talk or debate about Tynwald? what the member was, going to be given by way of powers or Mr Gelling: Correct. Dr Mann: And here we come back to the nub of the Sir Miles Walker: And one of those policies was the problem: at what point does the responsibility within the construction of the new hospital and the type of department overlap? There is one thing, though, that I construction method that has been put into place. would seriously question, and that is, from the evidence that I have seen so far, I do not think it would be true to Mr Gelling: And that had been decided by Tynwald say - and I did the same job in a previous administration also. only a few years before so I know exactly what the pressures were and I know exactly what the situation was Sir Miles Walker: Absolutely. The member of the - there is any evidence that the Department of Trade and department who has been dismissed - her view has been Industry or the member responsible actually took up an very clear. During her parliamentary career and before, in obstructive position. fact, she did not particularly agree with government's policy as regards the hospital. Were you surprised when Mr Gelling: Within the department? she was given responsibility for the construction industry within the Department of Industry, and was there any Dr Mann: Yes. The department was not becoming discussion with you about that? obstructive to the development. It is easy enough to say that knowing the previous position of the minister but the Mr Gelling: No, there was no discussion about it, but evidence does not actually suggest at any point that it was again the minister will answer for himself why he actually obstructive. It was an attempt, and I know from experience put the member in charge of construction, and I would in the department in the previous administration that in suggest that it could very well have been because we have fact these issues were being raised then and that in fact seen before that members, once they get involved and what they were trying to do was facilitate its ultimate understand the situation, in fact can realise that there are success - other sides to the issue that cause concern, and I think it could very well have been a way of cementing together Mr Gelling Correct.

6 Dr Mann: - so I think, to be fair, one should not say have said this in a statement in Tynwald - because it really that the member was trying to be obstructive. broke what I had tried to achieve, which was everybody working for government and everybody having a job within Mr Gelling: No, I will readdress that one if I may. What government, so in other words it notched up a failure, as I was saying was, the department and the minister were far as I was concerned, that I was unable to move the supportive of the DHSS in building a hospital, but it is member or something to keep them on board. very difficult to speak to people outside who then say, `Well, why is the department member coming to the press Sir Miles Walker: Appendix 3 of this document, Chief making all these statements and condemning some of the Minister, is a letter which has been sent to the nine members of the construction industry saying they were departments and the Personnel Office by the Chief not adequate to do the job?' That is where I think the Secretary, and it refers to the relationship between ministers situation became difficult. and their departmental colleagues. You have just said hindsight is a wonderful thing and so it is, but so is Dr Mann: Became overlapping. experience, and with the experience that you have had over the last few years would you recommend any change or Mr Gelling: That is right., additions to that letter as regards the way members of departments should be removed from office, if that is the Dr Mann: Okay, well, I think we have certainly - will of either their minister or the Council? Have you considered that? Mr Lowey: Could I just fire one final question? It comes to the specific case, and at the very end. You did say, Chief Mr Gelling: Yes obviously we have been looking at Minister, that you had your meeting on Thursday 13th and that following this particular incident and comment that then the following week, because of what went in the paper, was made in Tynwald - you know, 'Wouldn't it have been you then decided after phoning round your ministers that better,' as Mr Lowey has said 'if you'd done. ..?' this, this the member had to go. In retrospect - and I think I have and this. Now, if there was that format, a little bit like, as I posed this to you in Tynwald - do you not think it would say, the employment law, it would certainly make it a lot have been better to have had the lady in face to face as easier if you had a format to follow because you would opposed to delivering a letter by hand to say, 'You are know that that was what was expected of you and that is dismissed'? what should be done, and that would give a better understanding to members as well. I have great difficulty Mr Gelling: Hindsight is a marvellous thing, but I have to say that it had not been done in any shape or form like in that it is true to say, to try to keep everybody in that before. The member that left another department had government and on board, there is a lot of talking, there is been asked to go by a minister, that was, in other words, a lot of coaxing, there is a lot of persuasion, there are all the record. A minister who I asked to step down had been kinds of things because at the end of the day the Chief addressed in exactly the same way by letter, so in other Minister, is the only person who has got no power. words it was done in exactly the same format. Although it Departments have got the power like a lot of little pyramids; is not laid down in writing, we followed exactly the same the Chief Minister can only persuade - no power. Now, route so that it could not be said that it was treated any when you are trying to make this whole thing work, that is differently, because that is what I was concerned about. extremely difficult if you have got confidential conversations with all your different members of Mr Lowey: I see. So it is your style to write a letter as parliament and, after a couple of years, they are seeing opposed to facing the person and saying, 'Your services that if they move to a certain department, whether they are no longer required' because of A, B or C? like it or not it is going to give them far less of a workload and it means that they can do other work and it starts to Mr Gelling: I would suggest I would go back further, get other members who are putting in a full day in that if the situation was such many another minister might government upset also, and I think that side has to be very well have taken the action that the Council ultimately considered as well, because there are those who have got did. In other words, I am the Chief Minister with no powers workloads that are probably five times as much as others, to appoint; I was only representing the Council of and I think that that probably is an area that certainly I Ministers. It was the Council of Ministers' decision, and would like to try to address that the weightings are different; therefore it is very difficult. As I say, we were in the holiday that is what I was trying to suggest. At the moment - and I period, it was Easter and - will not name any department - if you get appointed to that department A you certainly earn your extra £6,000 Mr Lowey: You would agree with me, though, Chief for being on a department. If you go to department F, quite Minister, that if you are a Chief Minister with no honestly you can have a full-time job as well. Now, to me responsibility for a department, there is a responsibility that does not seem fair. It is something that I think should on the Chief Minister to persuade his ministers occasionally be addressed. of the desirability of a certain course of action? Dr Mann: First of all I want to thank you for being so Mr Gelling: Yes, and I would express right from the frank about the situation. I think we all have got something beginning that it was very disappointing to me - in fact, I to learn from what went on and we have got to ensure

7 somehow that this situation can be dealt with quite Mr Gelling: think it is something that certainly would differently in the future. take out some of the flexibility, but, there again, if it makes There is one very small matter - well, I suppose the it certain and understandable by everybody I think that person who suggested it does not think it is small but it certainty would override the flexibility that you might lose, has been suggested by one person writing to us that there so I suppose the answer would be yes. should be some sort of formal contractual arrangement between a departmental member and the minister. I think Dr Mann: Well, I suppose the change would have to possibly the documentation of the delegated responsibility be that instead of being the Governor in Council it would is in my view - I may be wrong - actually more or less a state the true situation, which is the Council of Ministers. contract of working relationship and so I think the concept of the documentation of the delegated responsibility is Mr Gelling: Yes. probably crucial to the relationship. One small issue which I doubt whether you could Dr Mann: Thank you very much indeed. immediately answer but really is a matter for the minister - in this advice on collective responsibilities and function Mr Gelling: Thank you. of members, at the time every department was written to and the Department of Industry, alone out of all the departments, made a very interesting comment: 'The Evidence of Mrs B J Cannell exercise of authority by members is subject to ministerial veto in there is a time lapse built into the procedures Dr Mann: between the decision and implementation, which allows a Welcome to the committee and thank you ministerial intervention.' Now that, looking back, sounded for agreeing to attend. We have the benefit of a fairly marvellous but it obviously did not work! detailed - in fact, very detailed in points - statement from yourself as to the circumstances surrounding your removal Mr Gelling: Perhaps they have learnt from experience. from office. Now, all of that, word for word of course, will be printed as an appendix to the report and I do not think Dr Mann: I should be very interested to see what that there will be very much point in going through it word for was meant to cover and to protect him, and I believe the word. I think it is important at this stage - and you have minister at the time is sitting head down down the table, had the benefit of hearing the evidence to now - if you but it is strange that within all of government departments would like to add to your existing document and then that was the only department who actually stressed the perhaps we can seek further clarification on any points. issue, and when it happened it did not work. So over to you. Mrs Cannell: Right. Thank you, Mr Chairman, and Mr Gelling: I think, if anything, the person who sits in this seat in the future, in making a position of trying to get members of the committee. I welcome the opportunity of members involved, members of parliament into being able to come today to give oral evidence and government, as we have refined it over the years - which hopefully to be cross-examined on the same. What I would we have, it is a lot better now than it was; some may say it like to just add is points of clarification following the Chief Minister's evidence to you. He did say that it was at a is not, but anyway it does, it works well - wants to go another step, and that is, when members are being discussed meeting which was held of the Council of Ministers on in Council to go forward as suggestions to the Governor 13th April where they had a two-hour session where they in Council for appointment, in fact that is an area that discussed the merits or not of my continuing with the should - two points, I would say - is the member willing to department prior to the officers coming in at that meeting. accept delegated responsibility; and second, what particular It was at the meeting, that same meeting to which the responsiblity within the department does the minister think Chief Minister referred, the 13th April, that a copy of a they should be appointed to? That would then perhaps again draft newspaper report. . bearing in mind I had had an bring out some of the conflicts that might arise, because interview with Isle of Man Newspapers but did request again, if you look through, there are some departments the journalist to actually fax through a copy of the suggested who have delegated responsibility actually quite fully but story which would go in the following week's newspaper there are others who still operate like a board where it is a to be faxed to the DHSS, to Bovis and the liquidator in collective decision. Now, there might be some that get to respect of the financial collapse of Crowe EPH. Now, at that department and then are upset because the minister that particular meeting the health minister, as I have been does not delegate, and there are others that might go to a informed, did take a copy of the suggested draft news story department and hold their hands up in horror and say, 'Good to that meeting of the Council of Ministers and so they heavens, I've got the responsibility of all this division and had that before them. I also was faxed a copy of the same. I've only been in the Keys for four days.' So I think we So it would be true to say, I think, that they bad the can learn from this and we must do. opportunity of knowing what I had already said to the press which the press was yet to go to bed. So they discussed Dr Mann: Would you support a change in the legislation that on the Thursday. We had Friday, Saturday, Sunday to try and straighten out this appointment and dismissal before the newspaper came out on the Monday, but during procedure? the period of 13th April and the publication of the new

8 story in the Examiner the following Monday there was no promises to the Employers' Federation?' I am reliably contact made with myself from either the Minister for the informed by my officer that all questions were answered DTI, the Chief Minister or anybody else. I would have honestly and openly and that she stressed to the health thought the idea of my requesting that the newspaper send minister at the time that at all times I had been impartial, I a copy through to the relevant people involved was to give had never imposed a personal view or illustrated a conflict them an opportunity not only to respond but, if they felt in terms of my personal view over the hospital project, that I was out of order in terms of my association with the and that all meetings had been conduced in a manner to be department, that would provide an opportunity for them expected by any member with that particular delegated to bring me in and say, 'Well, we are not satisfied with responsibility and that therefore there was no reason for this. You cannot say this sort of thing because it is in concern. contravention of. . .' whatever. My biggest bone of contention, I suppose, is that I The Chief Minister also said that they could not accept enjoyed my work at the Department of Trade and Industry. the content of the newspaper article or indeed the radio I welcomed additional responsibility being given to me interview which also ran on the same day as the newspaper and looked upon it as a reward, not merely a convenience, publication because it was scaremongering. I would like as the Chief Minister suggested, as the result of a member to clarify that the statement I made to the press, both radio leaving the Department of Trade and Industry having been and newspapers, was a personal view; it was not on behalf elevated to serve on the Legislative Council, because of the Department of Trade and Industry even though, indeed, apart from myself and the minister, there was also under the delegated responsibility, I was licensed to make one other member on the Department of Trade and Industry, statements on behalf of the responsibilities which I but when it came to sharing the work out I seemed to be undertook. It was not an official DTI interview; it was my given most of it. I had seven areas of responsibility, the own personal view. What I did say was what had already minister remained with two - film and shipping - and the been said and was already in the public domain. I did not other member remained with the one, and so this is why I use any privileged information that had been brought to was under the impression that I had done a good job and my attention due to my responsibility within the DTI. therefore was being rewarded with more responsibility, The Chief Minister also said that he had members of which included energy, which of course is quite topical at the industry contact him and that his words were 'taking the time with the cable coming in et cetera, and indeed I information from that industry' and they thinking it was was sent, representing the department, to check on the going to government. Well, it was going to government manufacturer of the electric cable that is coming in. All because all information that came through the regular responsibilities one would imagine a minister doing the monthly meetings with the Employers' Federation and minister was pleased for me to take, and so I felt that I was myself representing the Department of Trade and Industry doing a good job. were reported every month regularly and a paper was also The events leading up to my dismissal were confusing, issued by the officer who would support me in those to say the least. As I previously mentioned at the Council meetings. of Ministers meeting on 13th April there was an opportunity I would just want to make a very strong point here: that then to say, 'We are not happy with what you are saying to despite the fact of my previous stand in relation to the the press' and there were three full days before it was going hospital project prior to the House of Keys election, post- to publication. Of course, it did come out on the Monday, election, and also for the last four years I have undertook as did the radio interview. We had a House of Keys sitting constant questioning of the project. I have never been the following day, which was the Tuesday, and as things brought to heel over that. My minister at the DTI had never had gone very quiet in terms of comments or dissatisfaction said to me, 'You shouldn't be saying these things. You or whatever coming from the department - there was shouldn't be asking these question. You shouldn't be nothing - so I approached the Minister for Trade and probing into this issue,' and I think it has to be stated that Industry prior to the commencement of the House of Keys any information that came to me in order to help me frame sitting on the following Tuesday to enquire whether or not such questioning that was put in the Keys and Tynwald I was going to get the sack, and in a jocular manner, which Court came to me from outside my departmental was witnessed by one or two other members of the Keys responsibilities and so, despite the alleged conflict in terms at the time he said, no, I was not going to get the sack. I of the overall concern on the project, I believe that I made other additional comments which, as I say, were of a conducted all meetings between the Employers' Federation jocular nature. And so I thought, `Well, that is good' and the Department of Trade and Industry in a manner because all has been said, as has been said, and the minister which was expected of me and I always remained impartial is still quite happy for me to continue to serve on his as the chairperson at those meetings. department holding the responsibilities that I had. Of course, that position was questioned at a point Now, that was on Tuesday, 18th April. It was 20th April running up to the series of events which I have outlined in when the letter was hand-delivered, it is quite correct, 9.15 my written evidence to you, in that the officer who serviced a.m. that morning, to my home, bearing in mind I had left those meetings with me was requested by my minister to the house at 8.50 a.m., So I was already out. When I go and meet with the health minister at Markwell House, returned home I spoke to my husband at around 11.30 a.m. where that officer was cross-examined in terms of 'How on that day and he had been contacted by the Chief does Mrs Cannel! behave? What sort of things does she Minister. So there was an attempt to speak to me but I say at the Employers' Federation, and has she made any would suggest it is a little bit late; it was after the horse

9 had bolted from the stable because the letter had been hand- me and let me crack on with the other areas of responsibility delivered at 9.15 a.m. Having read the letter and read it remaining? There would have been remaining six as over the telephone to my husband I promptly put on the opposed to seven. The minister did not respond to that radio and heard the Chief Minister issue an interview. That suggestion. was at 12 noon. So I was hardly going to approach the So it came to the crunch that I feel that I was sacrificed, Chief Minister after hearing what he had to say about my not because my minister was unhappy with my working, being sacked. I had not been given an opportunity to put not because the department found fault with my working, my case; I had not been given an opportunity to defend but I believe it comes down to one or two ministers within the personal position that I had taken in respect of my the Council of Ministers not being happy with what I said concern over the hospital project. on the issue of the new hospital project. Going back prior to my dismissal there was one attempt I suppose I would like the committee during its by my minister - there was a slightly confusing thing deliberations to perhaps reflect not only on what has because we had the financial collapse of Crowe EPH happened but to reflect on future provision to ensure that following which there was a liquidators' meeting at which this type of humiliation is not endured by another member my presence was sought. I agreed to go to that and asked of parliament in the future. There was a lack of the minister whether he was.quite happy that I did go, and communication. There was a confusion of directive from he said, 'Yes, provided you go as observer,' which I did. I the minister, the minister saying go and then saying stop. attended. I put together a very brief report with some There was no communication regarding the dissatisfaction, supporting literature that I had received at that meeting or alleged dissatisfaction, with what I had said in a public and faxed it through to both the minister for the DTI and situation, bearing in mind I had said previous things right also the department's chief executive, and so two lots of through my four years as a parliamentarian. faxes were sent and this was followed up by a phone call I would very much like to see procedures laid down for from the DTI minister on the evening following the the hiring and firing of members. When we look back to liquidators' meeting saying that he was very concerned the board system I understand that if a member was to be and that together the DTI and the Employers Federation considered to be fired from a department or committee, as should work to investigate and get down to the bottom of it was then, he or she was subject to a vote of Tynwald and the matter. That was on 17th February. The 23rd February there had to be a majority vote of Tynwald to actually was my normal monthly meeting with the Employers execute that member from his or her responsibilities. It is Federation where I announced the minister's directive in curious that as we are legislators we do not come under terms of looking into the situation. There was great concern any protection in terms of legislation. The committee and here because a lot of local industries were involved and also the Chief Minister alluded to it earlier in terms of the the impact was great, and so they were pleased to actually employment legislation, where there are set procedures if get DTI support in terms of getting down to the bottom of an employer is dissatisfied with the workmanship or the matter, and so we began to work under that directive. whatever of his or her employee. There is a series of That was on 23rd February. warnings, so that member or that employee knows at an Two days later, on 25th February, following a Council early stage that the way in which they are doing something of Ministers meeting - I can only assume pressure was is not finding satisfaction with the boss. I do not see any applied to the Minister for the DTI at that meeting - the difference here in terms of whether it is an appointment or minister phoned me and told me to back off and not to whether it is an employment. I understand and appreciate investigate the Employers Federation but instead to work it is an appointment; nevertheless, members are with the DHSS because it was all government. I was very remunerated with that appointment, so they are paid for confused at this, because on the one hand I had consulted that appointment in addition to their basic salary. the minister and said, 'Should I go to this meeting?"Yes, For a member to take on delegated responsibility written you can go but as observer.' Having reported to him, then under statute, to carry that responsibility and execute it to for him to give a directive to work down a particular road, the best of their ability and then for it to suddenly be taken this I reported to the meeting - it would have been a off in a very public situation without any form of different matter had I not had the meeting with the consultation or guidance if guidance is required, and then federation but I had had a meeting - and then to be told to for their salary automatically to be chopped again without erase all of those instructions and work to a different regime consultation, I think, is fundamentally flawed. There is and work with the DHSS. Needless to say, I was confused nowhere a member of parliament can go; there is no form and somewhat a little angry. And so at the following of appeal. It was suggested that perhaps a panel such as a Employers Federation meeting, of course, I then had to select committee could be established as an appeal try and do the directive I had informed them of the month mechanism. I think an appeal should be considered as part before and so there was a lot of confusion there. of a proper protocol for hiring and firing. I did suggest at, I think it was, the last Trade and Industry I believe the removal of moneys from a member's salary monthly meeting that I attended prior to my dismissal that without consultation in one fell swoop is fundamentally if there was a concern in respect of that particular delegated wrong. In my situation, because my dismissal happened responsibility to do with construction matters, then why just before Easter and we are paid on the 25th of each didn't the minister take that off me? He was always happy month, it turned out that I was overpaid by a sum of £200, but latterly, as I can assume from Council of Ministers and on my following month's salary that £200 was taken pressure, if he was not happy then why not take that off from me including the extra I received as a member, and

10 so from that first month's salary following my dismissal do the job.' So it is all right that they give one job to one, quite a fundamental amount of money was removed two to another and six or seven to another. That is the without my prior knowledge or consent. I am grateful that .minister's judgement, and I cannot see anything wrong I have a husband who works because, if I had a husband with that if the minister should think that that is right, or who was unemployed or not had a husband and was a one- do you think that a minister should not be able to dish out parent family, I certainly would have felt the brunt of that, in his department as he thinks his talents which he has and I think perhaps that needs to be looked into. been either given or had garnered round him? But just to finish my little bit, I do not believe that all members of a parliament should be employed in executive Mrs Cannell: I agree with you, that is the present government. I do not believe that is a democratic situation situation and the way in which departments are run. The for the Isle of Man. I believe that ministers who are charged minister is free to do what he or she likes in terms of with the responsibility of leading their departments are paid appointments or recommendation for appointment and, for that responsibility and it is the minister who should indeed, delegating responsibilities out, but if you bear in execute the responsibilities of a department and that mind the difference in remuneration that a minister receives minister should not rely upon one, two, three and as opposed to a member of parliament there is quite a sometimes four members doing the donkey-work for the variation. The minister is paid additional because of the minister. I think the buck stops with the minister, the responsibility that he is taking on. He then passes that minister is at the sharp end and the minister should be responsibility on to other members who do the research, running the department. Having said that, if a member of who do the leg-work and do organise the monthly meetings parliament has a particular expertise acquired prior to his or whatever is involved in respect of that, and then reports or her entry into politics and political life and wants to back to the minister. The minister then has to accept that share that with a department, I do not see any reason why report or not, as is in the case, and I believe that is the they should be prevented from doing so, but I do not believe section to which Mr Chairman referred to before from the that they should be remunerated by way of so much Department of Trade and Industry, there being a provision additional salary for doing that. Expenses perhaps, yes, if for the minister to veto; I believe that is where the veto expenses are incurred. Of course, I have a different comes in with the Department of Trade and Industry, that perspective on things now, being the only person out of if the minister can have a member do all the lackey work, government and looking in. I suppose my rose-tinted as I see it, and then say, 'Well, thank you very much. I will glasses are no longer worn and I see things as they really now take that because I am perfectly licensed to do that as are. I believe that if we are going to have an effective minister, now I will run with it,' you have a situation where government in the future, an effective parliament in the you have the master and the master has his team of - I will future, on the one hand you have the executive that runs not use the word 'slaves' - 'minions', perhaps, who do the the government departments and on the other hand you work for him. I believe that he as the minister should be have the parliament which tests and probes and calls to the person who is doing the work. account that executive government. If you have all members of parliament engaged within executive Mr Lowey: Can I just draw your attention to the government, in my view we do not receive or enjoy the operation of ministerial government that was approved for same tests and balances and scrutiny that should be afforded a seminar of members in 1988? The department actually to a national parliament. Thank you, Mr Chairman. say in their submission this is how we run, and I will just quote: 'The exercise of authority by members is subject to Mr Lowey: Taking your last point first, if I may, Mrs ministerial veto. . .' Were you ever vetoed at any time in Cannell, you would appreciate you put the caveat in that your department? you are the only parliamentarian at this time that was deducted money. I have been on that route myself, so I Mrs Cannel!: No. know the shock. But anyway, coming to the generalities and not your specific case - and I am glad at the end you Mr Lowey: No? `... in that there is a time lapse brought addressed the situation as it is - the situation as it is is that into the procedures between decision and implementation the ministers ultimately do take responsibility, don't they? which allows a ministerial intervention...' Were you ever Even if with the press they do. Whether they delegate or vetoed or told, 'Well, hang on. Just wait a minute. You not is immaterial. They are ultimately responsible for the department, and it was the case in your specific . . . made that decision but I am going to . . .' Were there any Although you had been delegated - what was it? - six, seven decisions ever overturned in your time? items of responsibility within the department you were doing it in the name of the minister. Your case is that you Mrs Cannell: No, none whatsoever, but equally that were given those not all in one go but they gradually veto provision also extended to when the minister took increased so therefore you were under the impression that decisions in the absence of a departmental monthly you must have been doing something right for the minister meeting. His decision, usually in terms of a grant to give you more to do. So your illusion that the ministers application, for example, would be circulated to the should be doing the job is the fact that the ministers are members of the department. doing the job but they are doing it in the way they see fit: `I have got capable people around me and I want them to Mr Lowey: As a decision?

11 Mrs Cannell: As a decision but - Mrs Cannell: I do not know what was in his mind, Mr Lowey, but being a little disturbed because of the quietness Mr Lowey: But not open to veto? that prevailed following the publication and the interview of the morning of the Monday, I tempted fate because I Mrs Cannell: Yes, it was by the members. if we had a approached the minister myself before the sitting of the problem with the decision taken by the minister, then we Keys on the Tuesday and I asked him, was Ito be sacked? could have input and possibly change, reverse or even defer His response was quite clear and he said, and I quote, 'Not the decision taken by the minister, and that, if my memory this time, but if you go any further I will break your leg. serves me right, happened on at least one occasion, possibly Ha, ha, ha, ha.' That was the jocular manner, but there was two, where a decision was deferred pending further an opportunity then, if a decision had been already been investigation because of an issue that was highlighted by taken as one would believe from the Chief Ministers' a member of the department, not the minister. So the evidence earlier this morning, for him to have taken me to opposite, in fact; it was a two-way provision. one side and said 'Well, actually you have gone too far' or whatever. 'The decision has been taken. You will probably Mr Lowey: Just one final question on the specific of get a letter.' I would have appreciated that from the minister. the dismissal, you say you were contacted at quarter past I was a little bit disappointed - well, in fact I was more nine on the Friday morning - the Thursday morning? than a little disappointed that there was no consultation, no tip-off, that a decision had been taken against me. Mrs Cannell: The Thursday morning. Mr Lowey: Thank you. Mr Lowey: The Thursday morning, and after the 14th, although the minister for the DHSS had a copy of your Dr Mann: Sir Miles? press statement, presumably your own minister had a copy too. Did he, of that press statement that was to be made on Sir Miles Walker: Yes, please. Is it wrong for me to the Monday in the Examiner, whenever? assume that when you said to your minister, 'Am I going to be sacked?' or words to that effect you rather expected Mrs Cannell: I asked Mark Hendry of Isle of Man to be after the publication of this article? Newspapers if he would fax copies to the relevant people within government so that everybody knew that I had made Mrs Cannel': Although the Chief Minister has found the interview and had had the interview and for them to fault with my style, I tend to be very outspoken, sometimes have it in good time before it went to publication. I do not to my detriment with some people who might feel offended know whether the minister for the DTI had a copy or not, but I do know that the health minister took her copy to the because I am outspoken, but I am the way I am. I considered Council of Ministers meeting on 13th April, and indeed a before I even had an interview with the Isle of Man copy of it was seen on the Chief Minister's desk later that Newspapers, who obviously followed up a question I put day when there was a Council of Ministers press in Tynwald regarding the costs and where the health conference. minister had admitted there was a greater loss of revenue than was first thought, and so the press obviously followed Mr Lowey: Would it have made any difference to you me up and said, 'Well, what do you think about this?' Now, if you had been approached by your minister over the I considered very carefully before agreeing to do that weekend? interview whether or not (a) I should do it and (b) how I should do it, and then, before taking the decision, I thought Mrs Cannell: A very hard question to answer at this that, if I put the cards on the table - and I had gone through moment in time. I do not believe I could say yes or no. and done a great deal of research, and from the first question Having not been afforded the opportunity for any I put, from the first motion I put in respect of the hospital, consultation it is very hard to judge. I certainly would have and ran right the way through covering all the questions listened to what my minister had said or indeed, if it was that had been raised and strung them all together, when the Chief Minister, whoever from the Council of Ministers, one strung them all together they made a very clear and I would have listened to what they had said and obviously quite a damming picture in terms of the public implication they would have made a case for my not running with the in terms of public money, I considered what is the worse story. There was sufficient time for me to contact Isle of scenario if I do this interview? And I considered the worse Man Newspapers had I decided, if I had been given the scenario would be that I could be dismissed from the opportunity, to say, 'Well, don't not run with this, withdraw department. And so, being aware of that, I was very careful it' or whatever. I am not saying that would have happened; I do not know what would have happened. in what I said and what I did not say during that interview, not wanting to give a reason for the department to say, Mr Lowey: Okay. Can I then say you are quite clear in 'Well, that is it, you are sacked because you are in breach your own mind that on the Tuesday when you went into of this or you are in breach of that and you have disclosed the House of Keys before your were dismissed, you are this information, you have disclosed that.' I never used quite clear in your own mind that the minister - we always privileged information that came through to me as a have the banter - it was not in his mind to ask for your member of that department when conducting department dismissal or he wanted you to go? meetings with the Employers Federation.

12 Sir Miles Walker: Fine, and as regards the interview Sir Miles Walker: I had understood that it was a press with the newspapers, am I right in thinking that it was the release from yourself which was then faxed back on request newspapers that requested the interview with you rather from the newspapers. than you issuing a press statement to the newspapers and then there was an interview following that? Mrs Cannel!: No.

Mrs Cannel!: To my memory, no, there was no press Sir Miles Walker: That is not the case? statement - Mrs Cannel!: No. This was the draft newspaper report Sir Miles Walker: To you. put together by Mark Hendry.

Mrs Cannel!: - that went before the interview. Sir Miles Walker: Fine. And you were going to okay that before it went into print? Sir Miles Walker: So it was a request from the newspapers to interview you? Not the other way round? Mrs Cannell: I asked if I could have a look at it -

Mrs Cannel!: Well, obviously what had been Sir Miles Walker: Absolutely. revealed - Mrs Cannel!: - being very conscious of the worse Sir Miles Walker: Well, I know as politicians we scenario on my mind. The last thing I wanted was to lose sometimes want to talk to the press, and what I am asking my job because I enjoyed my job. really is, did the initiative for this conversation come from yourself or from the press? Sir Miles Walker: So you were content with that as a draft and expected to see it in a similar form in the Mrs Cannel!: Well, obviously it followed from a newspapers? conversation talking about the revelation from the information given at the previous sitting, which was the Mrs Cannel!: Yes. Tynwald Court sitting, in respect of the costings and the financial loss. Sir Miles Walker: And I think you said earlier on, but perhaps you could just clarify it for me, that you were Sir Miles Walker: Did the press approach you or did making these statements on a personal basis, not as a you approach the press? I think that is what I am asking. Can you remember? Member of the department?

Mrs Cannel]: I cannot. I can go through to my written Mrs Cannel: That is right. evidence and see if there is anything in there. Over six months' water has gone under the bridge since all of this Sir Miles Walker: And yet in the article it says very and quite a bit has happened during that time. clearly 'Mrs Cannell has responsibility for construction in the Department of Trade and Industry and regularly meets Sir Miles Walker: I appreciate that. Can we perhaps with the Isle of Man Employers' Federation' a statement just move on and refer to that which, as I now understand of facts perhaps. Couldn't it lead a reader to think that - I think anyway - came back from the newspapers and here was a member of the department speaking with was circulated to yourself and others? authority from the department on the issues?

Mrs Cannel!: Yes. Mrs Cannel!: Well, it is really up to ... I do not believe that we should be interfering with the working of Sir Miles Walker: Right. When I first read it I had journalists. I think journalists have to pursue a story and understood it to be a press release from yourself to the they write it in a manner as they see fit. We as politicians newspaper - may not necessarily always agree with it.

Mrs Cannel: Oh, no. Sir Miles Walker: I would agree entirely with you on that point but it•seems to me it is something different if an Sir Miles Walker: - which was then faxed back. That article is going to arise out of an interview which may or is not the case? may not have been requested by the individual. Then it is something different, I think. Mrs Cannel: Oh, no. It is quite clear on the front cover, it has at the top - Mrs Cannel: Well, I think perhaps what might help, although I have not brought a copy of it with me here but Sir Miles Walker: Well, I know but - there is a copy circulating - there was another occasion; just 18 months after the general election when on numerous Mrs Cannel: White en bloc. 'Isle of Man Newspapers occasions the trade and industry minister went off-Island Limited editorial story information.' on business and would delegate either to myself or one

13 other department member. On one occasion about 18 Mrs Cannel!: I would agree, and there were examples months after the election there was a situation where he of that within the DTI, where one of the members had a delegated me responsible in his absence and I ran with a responsibility with a division, a board, and clearly on series of questions which it was alleged conflicted with numerous occasions the board would come in and get my delegation at that time as acting minister, and I believe confused with the department at a department meeting, the health minister took it up but of course it all felt flat but the member was constantly reminded both at ministerial because the day that the question was put in Tynwald Court, level and officer level that never the two shall meet, that which was the Tuesday, my responsibility as acting for the the meeting was to deal with DTI business, members' minister had ended the day before. So indeed in theory, responsibilities in relation to that and any other fringe when the question was put I was still free as a member of additional responsibility did not come into the equation. the department, but in association with that there was a And so the loyalty, the collective responsibility, although statement made by me as acting minister at the time which there was nothing laid down in writing, was to that caught headline news in the Isle of Man Newspapers which department, to that minister. There was no overlap. Now, I I know upset the health minister at the time but even during appreciate there must be a difficulty for the ministers that occasion I was not hauled over the coals. The DTI because on top of the department and the working of the minister did say to me, 'Be careful, there has been a rumpus department - the team work, if there is a team there - the over this. Be careful in future.' But that was the only time minister then has to go off and join another team, an I spoke out as a official member with responsibility executive team of ministers, where there could be a conflict speaking for and on behalf of the DTI. That was 18 months from one minister to the other about the workings of a into office. department. On the one hand you have a policy of a department, on the other hand you have a policy of the Sir Miles Walker: Just one other if I may, Mr Chairman. Council of Ministers, and clearly there was a conflict in You have suggested, indeed others have also suggested, respect of this one. that in the private workplace there are rules which govern dismissal. People have to give verbal warnings and written Dr Mann: But your responsibility as a member of the warnings and so on, but you would agree, wouldn't you, department does not involve that. that there is also a place in the private sector where a person can be subject to instant dismissal for certain actions? Mrs Cannell: No. Mrs Cannell: Yes, but of course you have qualified Dr Mann: And as a member of the department you that by saying 'for certain actions'. have felt all the way along until the actual point of your Sir Miles Walker: Absolutely. dismissal that you held a delegated responsibility which you had held continuously for three years and, in addition, Mrs Cannel': Obviously if somebody is going to - had more recently had that responsibility added to it. So you had every feeling within yourself that you had been Sir Miles Walker: Gross something or other. I have doing the job properly. forgotten the right wording now. Mrs Cannel!: Well, when the minister approached me Mrs Cannell: Yes. If a serious offence is going to be and asked me would I like additional responsibility, I committed or a theft or whatever. clearly said that, yes, I would, and when it was forthcoming it was forthcoming quite fast, written delegated Sir Miles Walker: Gross incompetence or responsibility, I felt rewarded for a job well done. maladministration or something. Dr Mann: As part of that collective responsibility you Mrs Cannel]: Yes, there has got to be a mechanism for also presumably realised that your previous position as that. regards the hospital construction, its location and so on should have been taken into account, that your previous Sir Miles Walker: Absolutely. stated position both before you got elected and following that would have to be taken into account in the collective Mrs Cannel!: Yes. responsibility you had within the department. Could I also suggest that it was a misfortune for which you are not Sir Miles Walker: Fine, thank you. responsible and which is just a matter of fact that the committee that you were chairing was made up of the Dr Mann: Could I just come back to the Employers Federation, and the Employers Federation generalisations? We are obviously looking at the whole maintained a list of approved contractors and those range of government in addition to the department you are approved contractors were the only list of contractors that in. Do you feel that a departmental member has a collective could have been involved in the construction of the responsibility to that department, but that when the function hospital. That is correct, is it not? the department gets involved in either clashes with other departments or clashes within the Council of Ministers, Mrs Cannel!: Yes. When you say 'could have' I would your collective responsibility does not extend to that? say 'should have'.

14 Dr Mann: Right, should have. That unfortunately of the Council of Ministers, surely he should either have placed the department and not yourself, in a position of come to you and said 'You are not doing it the right way. I having to accept the continuous arguments of the am going to do it myself' or at some point should have Employers Federation representing the approved intervened and used his veto over what you were doing. contractors, but it was your job to actually listen to this Did that ever occur? and to report it to the department. Mrs Cannell: No, it did not. Mrs Cannell: That is how I understand that responsibility extending to, yes. Dr Mann: Mr Lowey?

Dr Mann: It is a misfortune that the DTI became Mr Lowey: No, I am fine. responsible for representing those views of the approved contractors in a position where another department was in Dr Mann: Well, I would like to thank you for coming some way in conflict, but that was not of your making, here this morning and elaborating on your evidence. Is that was because of the structure of the department. Now, there anything further you wish to say? would it be true to say that, although your stated previous position was against the location and the way in which the Mrs Cannell: I think you have pretty well covered it, construction occurred, at no time did you use that position Mr Chairman, you and your members of your committee, to obstruct in any way the construction of that hospital? I and, as I said at the onset, I am grateful for being invited cannot see how you could possibly have done that. to give oral evidence and for having input. I sincerely hope that during your deliberations proper procedures will be Mrs Cannell: Not at all. It would have not been put in place so that this type of situation will not occur permitted. My officer would not have - again in the future for any other member of parliament, and I thank you. Dr Mann: In fact, the logical outcome of your listening and representing and the department then representing those views to another department is that the construction Evidence of Hon D North should have gone on in a more efficient way. Dr Mann: May I welcome you to the hearing and thank Mrs Cannell: Well, hopefully that was what . . . you for attending. I know you have submitted on behalf of the department the various documentation and statements. Dr Mann: Well, that was the intention. Perhaps first of all we would like to give you the opportunity of expressing your opinions or views on what Mrs Cannell: That was the intention at the onset. Yes, has happened. Perhaps in generality there has to be it was. something that we have got to identify - I mean, not 'got to'; there clearly is a need to identify a failure of the Dr Mann: So it would be most incorrect to suggest mechanism whatever the reason. that you obstructed in any way, or used your position to obstruct, the construction of that hospital? Mr North: I have not got any prepared statement, Mr Chairman, and in terms of generalities - and I would thank Mrs Connell: I would agree with you entirely. you for the opportunity to come here to answer oral questions from the select committee - as far as the overall Dr Mann: Now, if you as an individual member within incident it is never a happy one when things happen as a department, any department, had those responsibilities they did, and I think probably it should be said that over and, as far as you were concerned, were carrying out those three years in my department I originally had three political responsibilities correctly, would you have expected the members and it was then reduced to two and, as the hon. minister, if he was dissatisfied, to have withdrawn those member Mrs Cannell has mentioned, I reallocated the delegated responsibilities? delegations to cater for two members rather than three and I think it is obvious to most that the two political members Mrs Cannell: Yes, bearing in mind I had more than within the department that remained are diametrically one. opposed politically and certainly I would not call them the best of friends, but during their time at the department both Dr Mann: And you actually asked him? of them, I have to say, who are totally different characters, conducted themselves very professionally. I did speak to Mrs Cannel: I suggested that, if he was not dissatisfied all the members when we first formed the department and with the way in which I was operating that particular said, because I was aware of the situations, that I did not delegated responsibility in that area, he could always mind what went on outside but at meetings of the withdraw it, but there was no response to that. department we all acted as representatives and part of the department, and I have to say they did that very properly. Dr Mann: So if he then became in conflict with another We had a couple of outbursts but very infrequently and it department or in conflict with a majority of the members worked very well.

15 The problem that started - we were aware of Mrs Mr Lowey: Can I just clear my mind, minister, please? Cannell's opposition to the siting of the hospital and the You see, the Tuesday that is in my mind anyway is the building when she came to the department, but that was Tuesday after the Friday, not the Tuesday before the Friday. not a problem and from time to time she was, I think the expression would be, `skating on thin ice', chancing her Mr North: Well, at that stage, yes, if it was that arm with the minister, and I was quite happy as long as particular Tuesday then I had not had a phone call that she did not step over the mark to go along with that. Now, Mrs Cannell was - how other departments saw that - I know, and I think Mrs Cannell has mentioned, that certain other departments were Mr Lowey: Going to make a press statement. not happy with Mrs Carmen's personal outbursts, and that is a matter of fact. At the time I did not fee! that it affected Mr North: No, no, the press statement had gone out on the department at all, and so the actually working I like to the Friday after the Council of Ministers, and I am not think that I am a democrat and I will give everybody the sure whether there was not going to be a Council of opportunity at any time to explain if they do something Ministers on the Thursday or something - wrong or whatever or to have their full say on anything, and I would challenge anybody to say that I have not done Mr Lowey: Thai is right, because of the Easter. that. From the evidence that I heard Mrs Cannell giving, I think she reiterated that: that she had full delegated Mr North: Yes, I think that was what it was, yes. responsibility. As she knew, and I did say on numerous occasions, the buck stops with the minister, because when Mr Lowey: Before Good Friday, so I just want to get it anything goes wrong it is the minister that is pilloried in chronologically right_ public whether he had anything to do with it or not and that is again a fact of life. You have to stand by that if you Mr North: So it could not have been on the Tuesday are a minister. because there was not a Keys on the Tuesday after the So Mrs Cannell did learn a lot as she went along within Good Friday. the department, and unfortunately I think, if I could just cover briefly, as I remember it, the departure incident, Mr Lowey: No, it was the Tuesday before the Good certainly I quite rightly, when I spoke to her in the Keys - Friday. We are talking of the Thursday meeting of the week and I am just a little bit hazy on the dates on this so I will before the Good Friday week, and Mrs Cannell alleges, or not start mentioning dates and told her that she still had a has given in her evidence, that the Minister for Health had job and that if she did it again I would break her leg or a copy at that Council Meeting and it was on the Chief whatever, I fully expected her to stay at the department. Minister's desk, to quote Mrs Cannell, and my puzzle is: you have made a decision after your two-hour meeting There was obviously a lot of pressure building up that did without the officers being present - not agree with my acceptance that she would stay at the department, but that is at it may, and certainly, at the Mr North: Yes. Council of Ministers meeting and after that, she was still as far as I was concerned staying at the department. Mr Lowey: and you come to an agreement. It was on the day after, I think, on the Friday, that I received a phone cal! and then a fax from Mark Hendry at Mr North: And at that stage, as far as I was concerned, Isle of Man Newspapers with a statement that they had Mrs Cannell was staying in the department. received from Mrs Carmen and in that statement - I cannot just remember exactly; I think it was late Friday afternoon Mr Lowey: That is okay, but then there was a letter. and it might have been Saturday morning, because I cannot Did you get in touch with Mrs Cannell over that weekend just, to be honest, remember that one - and it clearly and, if not, why not? concerned me - and we all know that the contents were critical of some members of the construction industry and Mr North: Right, good, I heard that point and I think, that I think, basically to summarise it, the design team if one can just visualise or imagine my concern when I should be dismissed and somebody else had to go as well received the copy of this statement, having just had it - I think it was the architects, was it, or something like recognised that Mrs Cannel] to all intents and purposes that? - anyway, members of the construction industry that would be staying, really I felt, I suppose, aggrieved that were actually members of the construction industry on the before she put out the press statement she had not actually Island, and obviously others had received that and from contacted me first to read it over the phone to me or send the evidence again that I have heard this morning from me a copy or whatever, because I certainly would have Mrs Cannell, I was not, I do not think, aware at that stage advised her to amend it. Once something has gone out like that that had gone to other people. I think it started from that, well, I find it a bit strange that, if you have done a then and then, I think, the following week I actually story, to then retract it... To be waiting for a call from me received a call from the Chief Minister - and again I cannot - it should have really, in my opinion, been the other way remember the exact dates - and it was agreed that around, and I would have expected a call and I would have unfortunately because of that the statement that had gone advised her strongly not to put in the particular paragraph out, her position within the department was just no longer that caused the major problem. In hindsight I am sure she tenable, and that is as I remember it. would agree with that; at least I hope she would.

16 Mr Lowey: But you didn't contact her? Mr North: No. So I must have got the phone call on the Wednesday or whenever. I do not know when. Mr North: No, no, no. Mr Lowey: Okay, okay. Mr Lowey: Was the agreement that you made with the Council of Ministers that you would contact Mrs Cannel] Dr Mann: Anything else? and keep her 'on the straight and narrow'? I am being crude now, but you know . . . Mr Lowey: Just one other query. On the generality of the thing and the department's declared position on vetoing Mr North: No, because as far as 1 am concerned, after statements going out, after this meeting on the Thursday I the Council meeting on that Thursday Mrs Cannel] was would have said that the rules as submitted by the staying in the department. Department of Industry to this seminar, that you said `Exercise of authority by members is subject to ministerial Mr Lowey: Yes, but I am sure the ministers, when you veto in that there is a time lapse built into the procedures met on that Thursday morning - from what we have between decision and implementation' - you did not think gathered this morning, it was frank and, without going into that that could be put into operation bearing in mind - the details, and neither should we - Mr North: That is a totally different issue. What Mr North: A frank discussion! happens there, and I think Mrs Cannel! covered it very well, was that up to certain figures an officer has delegated Mr Lowey: I have known those frank discussions of powers - a chief executive up to, I think it is, £60,000. old! But I am quite sure, David, you would agree with me Over £60,000 to £100,000 the minister has delegated that part of the agreement would be 'Look, and keep a powers and what we do, again to be totally democratic closer reign on the particular member involved', would it and involve the members, is that I would sign off on a not? grant or an order, whatever, and it is then sent to the members and it is not implemented for seven days in case Mr North: Yes, but then that statement was not in they have an objection. So you could actually sign it, send evidence - or I certainly had not seen it - it to the members and it goes with a note saying 'If you have any queries - Mr Lowey: Before, during - Mr Lowey: 'A week on Monday it will come into Mr North: No. operation.'

Mr Lowey: You have got to say on the Saturday - Mr North: That is right, it will come into operation without that, and that works - Mr North: I think I either got it late Friday or on Saturday morning. Mr Lowey: On an appointed day order -

Mr Lowey: Well, whatever, David, yes, but you chose Mr North: - perfectly well within the department so not to contact Mrs Cannell? that members do have a chance. Anything under £60,000 comes to the minister and to members on the same basis, Mr North: No, because the word I have just used, I so I have seven days to read through the papers that the think, is probably correct: I was a little aggrieved that such chief executive has signed off on if I have some sort of a statement had gone out without checking with her concerns or problems - you know, questions to ask - so it minister on such a statement. And then, when I saw the is not implemented. That system actually, I think, works piece in the paper, I think there was a mention there that very well and it gives the minister delegated responsibility, she might get fired from that or something, which I think they can go ahead and the system works. she referred to this morning. I think that was in the article somewhere. Mr Lowey: My final question to you, minister, is, do you believe that sending a letter dismissing a member of Mr Lowey: Did you actually say to her on the Tuesday Tynwald from a department, delivered by hand, is the - that came out on the Monday -? correct way to do things, or do you think it should be -?

Mr North: It could not have been that Thesday because Mr North: There is not any one simple answer to that I do not think there was a Keys on that Tuesday. Was it and no one simple way of doing it. Under the after the Easter Monday? But anyway at that stage certainly circumstances, I mean, how else would you do it? It is I was not aware when I said to her that she was going to be virtually the same in terms of, as I gather from ministers leaving. going in the past.. .

Mr Lowey: You were not aware? Mr North: I do not think there is any one -

17 Mr Lowey: No bitterness. asked her because I knew she was interested in renewable energy, and certainly the MEA have been working Mr North: No, this is politics. I think, to be honest, tremendously. The board, the staff and the management that is probably the thing that came out from listening to up there in the last year or so have been working very, Mrs Cannel]: that politicians are in a different situation no very well and I wanted to make sure that I had somebody matter how you look at it. You are elected by your in there that would progress things and support thoroughly constituents and, as far as I am concerned, I represent my natural gas coming ashore and wind energy and other constituents. The work that I do for government is all things, and she was just getting into that. intertwined, but it is looked on totally differently. Sir Miles Walker: Thank you. You referred earlier to Mr Lowey: Fair enough. receiving a fax from Isle of Man Newspapers and I think you said that you read it as a statement received from Mrs Sir Miles Walker: Yes, thank you, chairman. Minister, Cannell. you have been a minister for some time now. You have had, over that career, a number of departmental colleagues, Mr North: Yes, I - and is it true to say you have never objected to any of them questioning government and being aggressive about Sir Miles Walker: Did it look like that? their way in politics as long as they are not seen to undermine the work of their own department, i.e. your own Mr North: I cannot just remember. Shall I just come department? and have a quick look at it?

Mr North: Yes, I think that is true. I cannot just Sir Miles Walker: Well, if the chairman does not mind remember any.. . I am sure it will be useful.

Sir Miles Walker: You have never thought of - Mr North: I cannot just remember exactly. . . No, that is the actual story; that is a copy of the actual story that Mr North: I am just trying to think of all of the was going in the paper, but if I understand from my members - memory, I actually received a fax from Mark Hendry, which was a copy of a statement from Mrs Cannell. Sir Miles Walker: - any reason for constraining a member in their point of view? Sir Miles Walker: So when this story appeared in the newspapers, it was your understanding that it arose from a Mr North: I have had to warn them. I am just trying to statement given to the newspapers by Mrs Cannell and think. Yes, there were certain members and some are more you have been of that view and still are? vociferous or politically active outside than others. Some work totally differently, and God forbid that it should be Mr North: I still am. I heard Mrs Cannel] this morning any other way, so you have to take that into account and, and that is why I do not want to be dogmatic on this, but as I have said earlier, certainly, up until this occasion with that is certainly that how I read the statement. Whether I the incident I have referred to, I had no major problems. I have still got a copy of it at home - I might have in my had to obviously mention to Mrs Cannell, and I know on wonderful filing system! one particular occasion I spoke to the two members before a department meeting, I think straight after Crowe EPH, Sir Miles Walker: It just seems to me, Mr Chairman, and I spoke to them both and I said, 'Now, let us not get that this is the nub of the matter. Was this story a newspaper- carried away, just keep feet on the ground at this meeting; initiated update on the questions being asked and so on or We are on a DTI department meeting', and I know Mrs was it initiated by a member of the department with Cannell, I think, some weeks afterwards - I saw red where responsibility for the construction industry? she had referred to having had heavy political pressure put on her. Well, I do not call that heavy political pressure; Mr North: Can I say, rightly or wrongly I am under I mean, basically I was just trying to make sure that things the impression that that was a story created by the member, stayed professional at the department, and the department by Mrs Cannell. I may be totally wrong in that, but certainly certainly ran very smoothly and members, as they saw it, the press statement that was faxed to me was a copy of a got on with the job. statement, I think, from Mrs Cannell. Sir Miles Walker: And would you just confirm for the record that, as far as Mrs Cannell's membership of your Dr Mann: Can I just go back to generalisations, because department is concerned, of her delegated responsibilities part of our remit is to look at the appointment and dismissal - there are seven of them, I think - it is only the one for the and the function of the member in between, as you might construction industry that you gave any cause for concern? say. Going back to the appointment, were you aware - presumably you were totally aware - that the appointments Mr North: Yes, yes, I cannot think of any others. The were made by the Council of Ministers, or rather by the various delegated responsibilities - when Mr Crowe left I Governor in Council.

18 Mr North: Yes, I was. it has got to go to the Governor on the recommendation of the Council? The fact of the matter is it is the Council of Dr Mann: Therefore did you feel you had to accept Ministers, isn't it? your members or did you have an input into whether you were happy with the composition of your department? Mr North: Yes.

Mr North: Things have changed since I first came in. I Dr Mann: And it is not the Chief Minister. can remember, I think, the first time in the departments a list was put up on the board and that was it. That was the Mr North: That is right, and, as you all know, the department you were in. Now it seems to be a sort of discussions round that table on the allocation - some political football as to 'I do not want to be in this department departments who are fairly heavily loaded in terms of work because that is a bit of a hot potato' or 'I do not want to be do need the energetic members on that department, and in this department because I do not agree with one of the that is where the problem comes in. I suppose the two members' or whatever, and it seems to have become more alternatives to me are that you let the Chief Minister do it and more complicated and and I can only see it - and I will and allocate it, having discussed it with his ministers, or not be here to see it - getting more and more complicated you let the Council of Ministers decide. I do not feel as the years go on, so I suspect, Mr Chairman, that this strongly one way of the other. I think it really depends on committee might actually look at something on those lines, the Chief Minister to a certain extent as to how he makes because otherwise it is almost going to be impossible to that work. find, and when you get a by-election and a member coming along demanding to be in one department or two or Dr Mann: Did you want to come in on that one? whatever - well, one normally - it is starting to be a little bit of the tail wagging the dog. Sir Miles Walker: I am just interested, yes. I see those two alternatives: either the Chief Minister or the Council Dr Mann: So what you are really saying is, you did of Ministers. not have any input but you were prepared to accept. Mr North: Is there another? Mr North: Yes, absolutely, and I think I am almost certain that I always have been able to, because you act as Sir Miles Walker: Well, the alternative is presumably a minister and, as I have said, my members, including Mrs the status quo, the Governor in Council, which is the Cannel!, acted very professionally and, in spite of the Council of Ministers acting - relationship that she did not have, with other members in the department. Mr North: I am sorry. I am really saying the Council of Ministers, the Governor in Council. Dr Mann: So just forget Mrs Cannel! for a moment; we are talking about any department with any minister. Sir Miles Walker: Right. Would you feel at any time that it would be an advantage if you as a minister could actually choose your own Mr North: Yes. One of the problems is having to go up departmental members? to the Governor, and I certainly think that should be removed as a matter of - Mr North: I suspect that would be a bad thing because Dr Mann: It would be removed if the Council of Ministers - Dr Mann: It would be largely impractical, wouldn't it? Mr North: Yes.

Mr North: Absolutely. I do not think it would work. Dr Mann: So having thought about it you may agree. You have to have, I think, I know it is a Governor-in- Council function and, yes, there has to be a bit of trade-in Mr North: Oh yes, yes. I think that would be a because some members do more work than others, to be streamlining and it would make life a lot more simple when blunt, and some spend a lot of time on government work and others very little, although they do claim they do a lot you are actually getting rid of somebody, because you have of work in government and in fact they do not - and I will to actually get the piece of paper, which does not really not go into any names on that - but I think to actually try achieve anything at all. and select would be just totally impractical, as you have suggested. Dr Mann: If you come back to the appointments, so you received your members and almost immediately, if Dr Mann: Would you agree that to make the not immediately, you decided to allocate certain parts of appointments by the Council of Ministers, which is in fact the department to members. what is happening, worth changing, because at the moment the legislation says it has got to be a Governor in Council, Mr North: Absolutely.

19 Dr Mann: Did you feel in any way apprehensive about Mr North: Yes, because if I - doing that? Dr Mann: And yet the Council of Ministers overrode Mr North: No, not at all. They were both two new your position and dismissed your member - members of the House of Keys that had never been in a department before and they obviously had a lot to learn as Mr North: Well, that is their - I did when I first started, and I - Dr Mann: Yes, but just looking at the evidence !cannot Dr Mann: But you were prepared to let that happen? believe that you were not aware, having sat round the Council of Ministers in successive meetings, that there had Mr North: Oh, absolutely, yes. not been aggro building up.

Dr Mann: And you were also prepared to accept the Mr North: Oh yes, but as I have said when I left that - concept of collective responsibility that somebody with a previous stated position could be accepted? Dr Mann: But shouldn't you at some point have looked at the position and said, 'Let us withdraw this delegated Mr North: Yes, provided, obviously, within certain responsibility and be responsible yourself? parameters, and it is not easy sometimes but it can work. In this particular instance I just think personally that it Mr North: I ,do not think so. I looked at that and up was just very unfortunate that Mrs Cannel], as I said in the until then, as I said, yes, Mrs Cannel] was skating on thin House of Keys, I think in hindsight went over the top. ice to a certain extent and we all do that from time to time - politically, I mean. As far as I am concerned it would Dr Mann: You mean she went beyond the parameters? have been an act of no confidence, almost, to remove her from that, and why, when there was no need to? In my Mr North: Yes. opinion, Mr Chairman, there was no need to do that.

Dr Mann: You as a minister, I would suggest, have Dr Mann: But you were losing confidence anyway and been placed in a very embarrassing position because you certainly the Council of Ministers were losing confidence. gave a delegation, you maintained the delegation and you added to the delegation. You gave every impression that Mr North: Yes, other members outside the Council of you had a member who was satisfactory. Now you are Ministers had different opinions of whether the delegated starting to build in the ifs and the buts, but the evidence powers were being carried out. I at that stage was quite suggests that that was the case. happy to retain Mrs Cannell.

Mr North: No - I do not want to destroy Mrs Cannell's Dr Mann: But if we can just - impression that it was a pat on the back for a job well done - I would not have done it if I was dissatisfied, but it was Mr North: With full delegated responsibilities. actually a practical matter, because Mrs Crowe was the Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading, she was on the Dr Mann: If we then look at the position of the member Social Services, DHSS, and also had training within the in that position with all these delegations, whatever amount DTI, and to have tried to actually give Mrs Crowe any of work goes with them, it is something different. But there more responsibility - I think she would have sunk in Port were delegations for seven responsibilities. If those were Erin Bay, quite honestly, but Mrs Cannel agreed, and I still being maintained, surely that member should have was quite happy, do not let me detract, but it was a matter assumed quite reasonably that his or her performance was of practicality that she took on the other responsibilities. acceptable, certainly within the department. Really that particular one on minerals, for instance, had to be done very quickly because there was a conflict with Mr North: I do not see why not. myself with the Department of Transport with a particular case where I had not been involved in any shape or form Dr Mann: But it is when the policy of the department went into the department whatsoever from the time I or the departmental members spills over into the policies because the case was still ongoing and Mr Crowe had had of the Council of Ministers that you get into this grey area. the responsibility, and this is something that you have to take into account because you have to be very careful, and The member sees the responsibility and collective Mrs Cannell really was the only one to take over those responsibility to the department, not to the Council of responsibilities immediately, and as soon as Mr Crowe left Ministers. she had to take over, which she readily agreed to do. Mr North: Yes, that is right. Dr Mann: When I come back to you saying you were embarrassed I come back to the point that I was trying to Dr Mann: And it just seems from the evidence on paper make: that those delegations were maintained up until the that at some point you should have accepted that something last meeting of the Council of Ministers. was wrong and you should have intervened.

20 Mr North: No, I do not feel that at all. As far as the job any hard and fast rules for that, Mr Chairman. Some people was there, yes, I had queried and, as Mrs Cannel] herself will feel it was wrong and some will not. It is . . said. . . although she did say I had changed my mind; I do not think that is quite as I saw it, because she went down Dr Mann: The fact remains that on paper there is no to the liquidation meeting of Crowe EPH and fed back. I evidence of any misdeed. It is all verbal. think maybe she was under the misapprehension of why she went down there. She really went down there as an Mr North: Well, it depends whether you regard the observer and obviously picked up quite a lot of papers and press release that went out and the wording on that that I information when she was there. As far as I am concerned certainly read as being over the top and I - she obviously thinks otherwise. I did not change my mind; all I had to make sure was to just keep mentioning to her, Mr Lowey: Yes, but through you, Mr Chairman, you `Just be careful that you do not step over the mark,' which did not query the member on that statement because you she had not up until that stage, in my opinion, done. were aggrieved that you had not -

Dr Mann: I occupied the same job as Mrs Cannell in Mr North: I was aggrieved that I had not actually been the past so I know exactly the stresses. It was a sheer consulted beforehand. misfortune, in a way, that one government department was the receiver of representations from the contractors, as you Mr Lowey: Yes, but the decision then to remove Mrs might say, and another department was trying to act in a Cannell was not taken, that was over the weekend; she different relationship. I think it is a misfortune of history was not removed until a week had gone by, and I can understand your anger at the time, but then we get over more than anything else, but as a result it appeared, because our anger, we usually sleep on it and then we still have of a previous stated position, that the member may well have used the position to, in some way, obstruct and I do these unpleasant things to do, but you did not think, even considering that you had had a meeting of the Council of not think that is possibly true. Do you know of any evidence Ministers on the Thursday for two hours to clear the air, it that there was any obstruction to the progress of this was reasonable to take Mrs Cannel] . if for no other contract? reason to go to your colleagues on the Council of Ministers to say, 'Well, look, I have spoken with Mrs Cannell again Mr North: Not that I am aware of. As I said, and I on this latest thing and I am afraid I have to agree that she repeat, because it is the best expression - and I know it is a must go,' but you did not think that was a necessary caveat cliche - actually I think she was skating on thin ice to say to your fellow ministers 'I have spoken with her'? politically at the time on numerous occasions, but she did not step over the line up until this last incident. • Mr North: No, once you put out a statement like that - and it was pretty clear - I just do not think there is any . Dr Mann: But you had at no time used some ministerial As I say, it should be the other way round, in my opinion. veto or intervention? Mr Lowey: But it may very well be that you should Mr North: No. Ministerial veto? I had mentioned to have done, but as she had not and you had received it - and her, as she remarked, to be careful, as any minister, I would I can understand the anger, the hurt and all the other hope, would if he felt that his member was stepping emotions - dangerously for falling through the ice. Mr North: It was not anger, as I say, it was frustration. Dr Mann: It has been suggested in evidence from other members, other than the member concerned, that if this Mr Lowey: Frustration, well, whatever the adjective is situation arose in other departments a member would to fit that, you just still did not think it was incumbent appreciate either some advance knowledge of the position upon you? of the Council of Ministers, that they were in some way in conflict with the policy of the Council of Ministers and Mr North: No, no. that they should have been given some opportunity for explaining their position. Mr Lowey: Fair enough. That is all right.

Mr North: I do not think so. If what I have said - and I Mr North: I felt it should be the other way round. believe it - is true, I do not think that situation arises. Sir Miles Walker: Can I just seek some clarification Dr Mann: Would you say it would be common decency on a point you raised, chairman, with the minister, and in removing somebody that at least either yourself or the that was on the appointment of members to the department Chief Minister should have had a face-to-face with the in the first instance. If I am right in my recollection, individual concerned? minister, you suggested that you did not have an input or you did not have a choice? Mr North: Not necessarily. As I said before, I think it depends on the individual case. It does not happen, and in Mr North: Well, you have a discussion - politics, it certainly does not happen. It just depends on the individual incident. I do not think you can lay down Sir Miles Walker: Absolutely.

21 Mr North: as you know, round the table and you try to going to be on a department when they come in, or they come to - should not do, and most of the members that I can remember from the last election were saying they were Sir Miles Walker: I was just going to clarify that point; going to be full-time working politicians. Now, you and I it is a decision of the - all know that is not true but the public think it is. They think that they are full-time politicians and they are not, Mr North: It is like throwing bones in the middle, and that probably needs highlighting in a different place, seeing which way they fall! but anyway, how you separate is, you get a 30 per cent enhancement certainly for a member, and the minister gets Sir Miles Walker: - Governor in Council, and you are a 50 per cent enhancement, so he gets 20 per cent more. a member of Council, and during that general discussion From my own experience generally - and I am not just you would have had your opportunity to say yes or no or talking about now, over the years - the minister by far earns `I favour that person' or 'I do not favour that person.' that extra 20 per cent, well over that, because the chairmen of the statutory boards, for instance, receive an extra 10, I Mr North: Yes, or somebody would have already said think it is. But I have never looked at it in terms of the they would like to come to. that particular department. I money; I look at it in terms of the responsibility, and I can think Mr Crowe, for instance, had indicated he would like remember, Sir Miles, when you were Chief Minister, saying to do that. to you, I jumped at the opportunity of going to another department to learn some more experience, and that is what Sir Miles Walker: Fine, absolutely, and that is taken I find. That is what life is all about, isn't it - learning, getting into account during the discussion, and I can certainly from more and more experience as soon as you can? I think the past support the comment you made that you are willing certainly, the more members can get experience on a range to work with any member. I mean, you have always of departments. . . and I think perhaps that would be expressed that. something worth looking at. Some members get very comfortable in one department, and I think to have a Mr North: And also, if I am asked, as I was when I change, possibly, for experience purposes, would be a very was a member, to go on a department by the Chief Minister, good thing because once you have been in a department I would go on it. and you see how it works, Mr Chairman, I am sure, as you remarked earlier, you can understand some of the decisions Mr Lowey: You have never said no yet. and the implications that are made there, whereas there are some departments that one has never been in, so you Mr North: But I have never said 'no' and certainly, do not really know. So I think in terms of members perhaps when I first came in, I was on the DHPP, responsible for there should be something where members could be moved the airport, which was pretty busy because we were starting around perhaps a little bit more, although there is on the the full development of the airport, and I was on the other side, balancing the scales, you get in there and it Department of Education with Victor Kneale at the time takes you a year, two years, before you start realising a lot and it was pretty hectic, as well as doing constituency work. that is going on, particularly if you are a new member to Some members - I do not know - seem to want to say no, the Keys, and a minister is no different. but I think if a member is asked by the Chief Minister.. . because the Chief Minister if he has considered that that Dr Mann: I was interested in your saying you had never member should go somewhere - and he would normally said no. Somebody might suggest that this might be one have discussed it at Council of Ministers - and he believes of the opportunities when you should have said no! that that member should go there and he asks that member to go there, they should go. All this `No, I do not want to Mr North: But at what stage? go there because . . all sorts of reasons, I think is a nonsense. Dr Mann: And as for the comments about experience in departments, I was told when I first came into the Keys Sir Miles Walker: And finally I wonder if the minister by a very respected politician, 'Under no circumstances had a view on the remuneration packages that there are in will you ever be in the Department of Health', and 20 years place now which remunerate members of departments in afterwards I never have! (Laughter) a different way to those people who choose not to be members of departments, and some members of Mr North: That, I hasten to add, is probably a mistake, departments are members of more than one department a big mistake! and some obviously put more energy into their work, or their work demands more energy, than other departments. Dr Mann: Anyway, thank you very much. Do you think there is a fairer way? A big question, I know, but are you satisfied with the present situation? I think Mr North: Thank you, Mr Chairman. that is what I am asking. Dr Mann: That draws an end then to the public session. Mr North: Well, every member in the House of Keys Thank you all for coming. and Council receives a basic salary and that is enough too, and all members that come in cannot assume that they are

Parliamentary Copyright available from: The Tynwald Library Legislative Buildings DOUGLAS Isle of Man IM1 3PW British Isles May 2001 Tel: 01624 685520 Fax: 01624 685522 e-mail [email protected] Price: £8.00