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

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF COURT

Douglas, Wednesday, 17th February 1999 at 10.30 a.m.

Present: Harbours (Isle of Man) Act 1961 - The (the Hon Sir Charles Harbour Dues (Fishing Vessels and Tugs) Kerruish OBE LLD (he) CP). In the Council: The Lord Regulations 1999 [SD No 19/99] Bishop (the Rt Rev Noel Debroy Jones), the Harbour Dues (Pleasure Vessels and House Boats) Attorney-General (Mr W J H Corlett), Hon C M Christian, Regulations 1999 [SDNo 20/99] Messrs E A Crowe, D F K Delaney, E G Lowey, Hon E J Mann, Messrs J N Radcliffe and G H Waft, with Inland Fisheries Act 1976 - Mr T A Bawden, Clerk of the Council. Inland Fisheries (Duties) Regulations 1998 [SDNo 708/98] In the Keys: The Speaker (the Hon N Q Cringle) Inland Fisheries (Amendment) Regulations 1998 (Rushen); Mr L I Singer and Hon A R Bell (Ramsey); [SDNo 707/98] Hon R E Quine OBE (Ayre); Mr J D Q Cannan (Michael); Hon H Hannan (Peel); Mr W A Gilbey (Glenfaba); Merchant Shipping Act 1985 - Mr S C Rodan (Garff); Hon D North (Middle); Merchant Shipping Act 1995 (Application) Order Mr P Karran, Hon R K Corkill and Mr G T Cannell 1999 [SD No 23/99] (Onchan); Mr J R Houghton and R W Henderson (Douglas North); Hon D C Cretney and Mr A C Duggan Mineral Workings (Offshore Installations) (Isle of Man) (Douglas South); Mr R P Braidwood and Mrs B J Cannell (Douglas East); Messrs J P Shimmin and A F Downie Act 1974- (Douglas West); Hon J A Brown (Castletown); Offshore Installations (Reporting of Injuries, Hon D J Gelling (Malew and Santon); Sir Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences) Regulations CBE LLD (he) and Mrs P M Crowe (Rushen); with 1999 [SD No 25/99] Prof T StJ N Bates, Clerk of Tynwald. Road Traffic Act 1985 - Driving Licences (Amendment) Regulations 1999 The Lord Bishop took the prayers. [SD No 36/99]

Apologies for Absence Customs and Excise Act 1993 - Customs and Excise Acts (Application) The President: Hon. members, this morning we have (Amendment) Order 1999 [SD No 10/99] apologies for absence from the hon. member of the Council, Mr Kniveton, who is off the Island having a medical check- Financial Supervision Act 1988 - up. Financial Supervision (Gateways) Order 1999 [SD No 8/99]

Procedural Social Security Act 1982 - Social Security Legislation (Application) Order The President: Now, turning to order paper no. 1, with 1999 [SD No 26/99] the Court’s agreement item 3 will be taken immediately Social Security (Application) (No. 2) Order 1999 after lunch; item 16 will not be moved. [SDNo 27/99]

Pension Schemes Act 1995 - Papers Laid before the Court Pension Schemes Legislation (Application) Order 1999 [SD No 28/99] The President: Now, I call upon the learned Clerk to lay papers. Supplementary Benefits Act 1976 - Supplementary Benefit (Resources) Amendment The Clerk: I lay before the Court: Regulations 1999 [SD No 30/99]

Apologies for Absence Procedural Papers Laid before the Court T494 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

Licensing Act 1995 - Mr Crowe: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to Drinking in Public Places (Designated Places) (Peel) ask the Chief Minister: Order 1999 [SD No 21/99] On 9th July 1998 you announced the establishment Shops Act 1985 - of a Council of Ministers subcommittee and a strategy team Shops Act (Temporary Exemption) Order 1999 [SD in order to introduce a five-year anti-drugs strategy for No 18/99] the Isle of Man; has the committee concluded its deliberations, and when do you propose to provide Tynwald Student Awards Scheme - with details of the strategy? Student Awards Scheme 1999 [GC No 38/98] The President: The Chief Minister to reply. Pension Supplement Scheme - Pension Supplement Scheme 1999 [GC No 2/99] Mr Gelling: Yes, Mr President, I can confirm that the strategy committee of the Council of Ministers have agreed Retirement Pension (Premium) Scheme - a final form of the five-year strategy and, pending the Retirement Pension (Premium) Scheme 1999 [GC concurrence of Treasury, this will indeed be submitted to No 3/99] the March sitting of this Court, sir. Reports - Mr Crowe: Mr President, I would just like to thank the Council of Ministers’ Report on the First Phase Chief Minister for his reply and to look forward to the Feasibility Study into the Establishment of a TT Museum strategy document and the debate in the March Tynwald. Final Report of the Select Committee of Tynwald Thank you. on a Minimum Wage with Memorandum of Dissent Interim Report of the Select Committee of Tynwald on the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company Residence Bill - Introduction - Estimated Population - Customs and Excise Management Act 1986 - Excise Duty Point (External and Internal Question by Mr Delaney Community Transit Procedure) (Amendment) Regulations 1999 [SDNo 9/99] The President: Item 2, the hon. member of the Council, Mr Delaney. Currency Act 1992 - Currency (Platina Coins) Order 1999 [SD No 706/ Mr Delaney: I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister: 98] (1) When was a Residency Bill first proposed as United Nations - government policy; Iraq and Kuwait (United Nations Sanctions) (Amendment) Order 1998 [SI 1998 No 3163] (2) when do you expect the Bill to be introduced; and

Appointed Day Orders - (3) what is the estimated population of the Isle of Man Road Traffic Act 1999 (Appointed Day) Order 1999 in the year 2000? [SD No 34/99] Road Traffic (Amendment) Act 1996 (Appointed The President: The Chief Minister to reply. Day) (No.l) Order 1999 [SD No 32/99] Mr Gelling: Mr President, to the first part of the Report - question, the Residence Bill was first proposed as Thirty-first Report of the Criminal Injuries government policy in the 1990 Policy Report. Compensation Tribunal for the year ended 31st A revised version of the original Residence Bill is March 1998. included in the legislative programme for 1998-99. However, this Bill has been the subject of a recent European Communities - consultation exercise and, following the comments European Communities Instruments circulated received in response, a substantive review of the draft Bill during November 1998 [GC No 1/99] and is currently being undertaken, and I am advised that it is December 1998 [GC No 4/99] now unlikely that this will be completed in time to allow the Bill to be introduced in this legislative session. And the third part of the question: in regard to the Anti-Drugs Strategy - Progress of estimated population of the Isle of Man in the year 2000,1 Subcommittee - Question by Mr Crowe can advise that, based on the central planning assumptions, this is projected as 74,114. The President: Item 2, questions, I call upon the hon. member of the Council, Mr Crowe, to ask the question Mr Delaney: Mr President, I thank the Chief Minister standing in his name. for answering those parts (1), (2) and (3) of the question.

Anti-Drugs Strategy - Progress of Subcommittee - Question by Mr Crowe Residence Bill - Introduction - Estimated Population - Question by Mr Delaney TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T495

Could I ask the following supplementaries? Although it reflection, but I can assure the hon. member, at that time, was 1990 when we first saw light of this proposition to that I said that it would be under 70,000 and it was under bring a Residency Bill in, a decade ago I asked a question 70,000, because there are an awful lot of numbers on GP in this hon. Court in reference to this and I was informed registers of people who either have moved off the Island by your predecessor that, subject to the qualifications from and their records have not been forwarded and there are a Europe - and I am sure, looking at the previous Chief lot of transactions between GPs. So the census did in fact Minister, he will agree with me - that it would be ratify the figure at that time, and I can only say to hon. introduced. Does the Chief Minister think it acceptable, members, on the best available figures that we have - people on such an important item as the residency of this Island, take into consideration just about everything from the which will affect all those on the Island at this moment, registers of GPs to the number of bottles of milk and the that 10 years is the length of time it has taken to introduce connections of telephones; you name it - the figure we such an important Bill? Secondly, what is the estimated have got is just over 74,000, sir. population of the Isle of Man? I asked, and you answered, as is laid down in the 1976 report, 74,000. Bearing the The Speaker: Mr President, bearing in mind that a figures in mind from the social security and work permits, Tynwald committee established a figure of 75,000 by the would the Chief Minister not agree with me that the year 2000, does the Chief Minister intend to set a further population is now already closer, bearing in mind some target figure for, say, 2010? 30 per cent of the people are now on work permits in the Isle of Man and therefore could not have been here more Mr Delaney: A good question. than five years to qualify, to 80,000 than the 74,000 projected for next year? Mr Gelling: Mr President, the government has not identified an optimum population figure. That is something M r Gelling: Yes, first of all, Mr President, I can say we have not done. We have not projected that any further. that the length of time has been, as the questioner has in It is not something that we have done in the past, although fact stated, that there was an interruption awaiting the I know figures have emerged because people have stated outcome of the European Court of Justice which had such them in such places as Tynwald Court, and that then is a bearing on that legislation. Then, of course, when that focused upon and people use that, but indeed, in answer to was over it was relooked at again, but what I can say to the the hon. Mr Speaker, we have not projected a figure to hon. member is, there is absolutely one hundred per cent 2010. commitment by this government for the introduction of this, and I can assure him that when this consultation is Mr Delaney: Once again I would thank the Chief finished, that Bill will be brought forward into the Minister for the information he has given out. I have a legislative programme. supplementary. I cannot, under standing orders, ask Now, the population - 1 well recall an hon. member of questions of the committee which is sitting on this the a little while ago saying that our important matter, probably one of the most important population must have been somewhere around 80,000 at matters for the Isle of Man - that time and when the census came out it was 71,000. Now, I know the buzz about the place and the statistics The President: But will you ask your supplementary, that the hon. questioner has posed would lead us to believe sir? that, but certainly on the best information we have available to us the figure is, as I have quoted, just over 74,000, sir. Mr Delaney: I would like to ask you, Chief Minister, bearing in mind the information from one of your ministers Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, can the Chief Minister then lately in relation to the Data Protection Act, when even explain why the last time we had an issue over the amount the police of the Isle of Man cannot find out the position of population, his departments were claiming 69,000 and of the criminal records of people applying for work permits, yet we were paying 73,000-plus for people on GPs’ could you give us some assurance that, when this Data registers, and would that not show that his whole figures Protection Act is brought forward, at least the people who for the true population on this Island are completely fraud are coming and this Bill will cover to know whether the as far as the true figures are on the Island, and could he people coming in are already on criminal records in the also inform this hon. Court, when was the first motion UK? placed down to get a Residency Bill or residency mechanism on this Island, and doesn’t he feel he should Mr Gelling: Again, Mr President, the Data Protection come clean and admit that his government has no stomach Act, of course, and the data protection people are there to to address the issue of residency and they will make sure protect people and they are there to protect their they bring a Bill forward that is not workable? information. Now, I know that the ruling at the moment is quite right: the situation is that we cannot get that Mr Gelling: In reverse order, Mr President, first of all information but certainly, as people come into the Island, I can say that without any doubt there is commitment. First I think I heard the Chairman of the Work Permits of all this actually emerged out of a report of 1989; that Committee say that, one or two may just very well get was where it first appeared. Once again, on figures, the work permits that do have records, but that is something hon. member is saying that the GPs’ registers are a better that they have to discuss within that committee, sir.

Residence Bill - Introduction - Estimated Population - Question by Mr Delaney T496 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

Mr Cannan: One question: Chief Minister, you said the flow of Bills and I am indeed expecting some that you were unaware of any projected population for the improvement. However, it is clear that we are not going to year 2010. Are there not forward planning assumptions in be able to deliver this year the sort of programme that we government as to what the populadon is likely to be in the have planned. next 10 years or are there no forward planning assumptions and the government has got not idea what the population Mr Lowey: Would the Chief Minister not agree that to might be in 10 years? Perhaps you could inform us? have a programme that is half-completed cannot be good for government and the image of government and for the Mr Gelling: Mr President, I was not saying that we machinery that operates? The Bills were introduced to have not got an idea of what we think the population might actually implement government policy, therefore it must be. What I was saying was we have not declared an be affecting government. Is the Chief Minister aware that optimum figure to which we will gauge everything to the last administration had a sub-committee that vetted actually hit that figure, but we could project the figures, as Bills, and is this an area which he would like to revisit to I have just given today, with what we have available to us, actually expedite it? Exhortation is not, obviously, working. that would give us a figure for 2010. Mr Gelling: Yes, I would agree with the hon. questioner. Mr Cannan: Mr President, a further supplementary: It does not look good. It is not producing the Bills into the will the Chief Minister give that assumed figure then, legislative programme that we would wish. This, of course, please? was changed a few years ago when the driving force was moved from the Attorney-General’s office to the Mr Gelling: I have not got it, Mr President, but I will departments of government. In other words, the departments of government became responsible for driving circulate it. that legislation forward. Now, this is something we have discussed of recent times, because certainly there has been a slow-down and that driving force, as I have already said, Bills - Number in Legislative Programme - could very well be that their time is being diverted to other Delay in Introduction - priorities within the department, but it is something Question by Mr Lowey certainly that we are addressing and, as I have said, I would hope that we will get some improvement, sir. The President: Question 3, the hon. member of the Mr Lowey: I thank the Chief Minister for his reply. Council, Mr Lowey.

Mr Lowey: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister: Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal - Complaints Received - (1) How many Bills in the legislative programme of the Question by Mrs Cannell government for (a) 1997-98 and (b) 1998-99 have yet to be introduced into the branches; The President: Question 4, the hon. member for Douglas East, Mrs Cannell. (2) what are the reasons for the delay in introducing these Bills; and Mrs Cannell: Mr President, I beg leave to ask HM Attorney-General: (3) what proposals do you have to rectify the situation ? (1) How many complaints were received by the The President: The Chief Minister to reply. Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal during the five years to 31st December 1998; Mr Gelling: Yes, M r President, in answer to part (1), the answer to the first part of that question for 1997-98 is (2) how many of these complaints were - 13 and for 1998-99 is 24. In answer to the second part of the question, the reasons (a) substantiated, why Bills do not come forward as rapidly as programmed (b) unsubstantiated, are indeed varied. Snags of one sort or another occur, (c) outstanding at the end of the period; and additional consultation may be required, there may be limited drafting resources available or departmental (3) is legal aid available to those submitting complaints resources may become diverted to other priorities, and there to the Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal and, if so, is then slippage in the programme. Now, our legislative how many cases were granted legal aid? programme is always ambitious, perhaps, I would suggest, over-ambitious, but I would be the first to agree that we The President: The learned Attorney-General to reply. are not maintaining the momentum that we would like. In answer to the third part of the question, I have been The Attorney-General: Mr President, as to part (1) of exhorting my ministerial colleagues to try and maintain the question, I am advised that during the five years to

Bill - Number in Legislative Programme - Delay in Introduction - Question by Mr Lowey Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal - Complaints Received - Question by Mrs Cannell TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T497

31st December 1998, 52 complaints were received by the concerned, the Act, I do not think, gives us the answer to clerk to the Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal, of which 46 that. I would imagine that it would be for the Governor to subsequently progressed to a hearing. procure that there be a rotation, but perhaps I can undertake As to part (2), of those complaints 14 were found proven to research that and let the hon. member know. after hearing, 25 were dismissed after hearing and seven In so far as an advocate sitting on a tribunal who in fact were outstanding at the end of the period. Of those seven, is involved in some way in the complaint, I cannot imagine four cannot be progressed until court proceedings have that that would be permitted. Clearly there would be a very been finally disposed of. obvious conflict of interest and I am quite certain that the As to part (3) of the question, legal aid is not available member of the tribunal would dissociate himself from the to those submitting complaints to the tribunal. proceedings.

Mrs Cannell: Mr President, can I ask the Attorney- Mr Singer: Mr President, if I could ask the learned General, what is the composition of the Advocates Attorney, how many complaints have to be substantiated Disciplinary Tribunal, who appoints and who are those before an advocate is struck off? Is there any single offence persons presently serving, and is there a rotation in that warrants a striking off? Has a Manx advocate ever membership and, if so, how often does rotation occur? been removed from the register? And finally, am I correct that the maximum fine is £2,000 and, if so, is that not rather The Attorney-General: Mr President, the composition derisory in these days of charges amounting to £150 or so of the tribunal is set out in section 15A of the Advocates an hour, especially when the tribunal cannot order damages Act 1976 as amended, and the chairman of the tribunal is against an advocate? Thank you, Mr President. to be an advocate or a barrister or a solicitor of not less than 10 years’ standing who is appointed by the Governor. The Attorney-General: Mr President, the position is There are then two persons who are nominated by the that complaints are ordinarily dealt with by the tribunal. It Council of the Isle of Man Law Society and then there are is only when there is a matter of particular severity that two persons who are not members of Tynwald who are the matter is then referred to the Governor, who sits with nominated by the Isle of Man Office of Fair Trading. the two deemsters. Now, in so far as the powers of the tribunal, as it were, Mr Henderson: Mr President, a further supplementary. at first instance are concerned, there are certain powers If a complaint is unsubstantiated, what resource is open to which are set out in the Act, and if the complaint is proved the complainant, and has there ever been a case where the to the satisfaction of the tribunal, the tribunal may tribunal is undecided and, if so, can you advise on what reprimand the advocate or order the advocate to pay to the resource there is for the complainant in that circumstance, Treasury a penalty not exceeding £5,000. If the tribunal sir? considers that its powers are not adequate in the circumstances, in other words that the tribunal’s power to The Attorney-General: Mr President, if the complaint reprimand or the fine of £5,000 is not adequate, then the is unsubstantiated the complaint is dismissed by the tribunal tribunal has the power to remit it to the higher court which, and it would then be open to the aggrieved party to take as I say, is composed of the Governor and the two such advice as he or she thought was appropriate to see if deemsters, and in those circumstances the tribunal then there was a claim available in the civil courts. has a power again to order a reprimand but also to order the payment of a penalty not exceeding £25,000. The Mr Houghton: Mr President, may I ask the hon. learned Governor may also, however, direct that the advocate be Attorney-General, what happens to the moneys accrued suspended from practice for such period as may be from fines imposed on those advocates found wanting in specified in the order or that the advocate’s commission their dealings with the public by that tribunal, sir? be cancelled. So these powers are indeed severe. I must say I am not aware that those ultimate powers have been The Attorney-General: Mr President, the Act provides exercised in the recent past but again, if I can undertake to that penalties are recoverable by the Treasury, are payable research that. therefore to the Treasury and are in fact recoverable as a civil debt due to the Treasury by the advocate.

Mrs Cannell: Mr President, if I may, I did ask before Advocates - Arrangements for Complaints in my first supplementary question, is there a rotation in Against - Question by Mrs Cannell membership and, if so, how often does the rotation occur. Can I also ask him, regarding the quorum, what is the The President: Question 5, the hon. member for quorum required for a case to be heard by the tribunal and Douglas East, Mrs Cannell. what is the procedure in the event of a complaint being heard by the tribunal against an advocate who sits on the Mrs Cannell: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to tribunal, and can he indicate on how may occasions has ask HM Attorney-General: such a situation arisen, say, during the last five years? Are you satisfied that the present arrangements for The Attorney-General: Mr President, the Act provides considering complaints against advocates are equitable that the quorum shall be three. In so far as rotation is and effective?

Advocates - Arrangements for Complaints Against - Question by Mrs Cannell T498 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

The President: The learned Attorney-General to reply. The President: The Minister for the Treasury to reply.

The Attorney-General: Thank you, Mr President. In Mr Corkill: Thank you, Mr President. I am pleased to answer to the question from the hon. member, I have no report that work on the new corporate service providers reason to doubt that the present arrangements for legislation is now well in hand. Hon. members may recall considering complaints against advocates are indeed that the Financial Supervision Commission issued a equitable and effective. detailed consultative document on the issue in November 1997 and, as a result, some 70 detailed submissions were Mrs Cannell: Mr President, is the Attorney-General received from the industry. The commission is very grateful satisfied that the system that we have in the Island conforms to all those who contributed to its deliberations in this with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human matter as the information provided has proved invaluable Rights - that is to say, that every individual shall have a in finalising the proposals. The commission issued a fair and impartial hearing regarding litigation? detailed response to these submissions in December 1998 summarising all the issues raised and the commission’s The Attorney-General: Mr President, I am satisfied. I stance in relation to each one. The legislative draftsman is took the precaution of asking the clerk of the tribunal to currently preparing the primary legislation and in view of inquire of the chairman of the tribunal and the members of the wide-ranging effects of the proposals upon the the tribunal whether they were satisfied that hearings were commercial sector in the Island, it will be necessary to conducted in an equitable and effective manner, and I am consult with the public on the draft legislation in order to satisfied from what I have been told - eliminate any major difficulties prior to the Bill being introduced to the House of Keys. We expect that the Bill Mr Delaney: They would say that, wouldn’t they! will be introduced to the legislature in October 1999.

The Attorney-General: - that everything is in order, Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the Treasury minister Mr President. agree that he told us last April there would be widespread support for the introduction of corporate service providers Mrs Cannell: Mr President, can I ask the learned legislation? Why then has it taken so long actually to bring Attorney-General whether he is satisfied with the present this Bill forward? The Treasury have been consulting on number of those advocates who do in fact undertake legal this matter since February 1995; does he feel that there is aid work in the Isle of Man, and can he see a way in which the need for more speed within his department in order to more advocates could be encouraged to undertake legal react to the pressures and needs in this important sector of aid work? Is he satisfied of the smallness of the number our economy? that presently serve the public under the legal aid system? Mr Corkill: Mr President, I think the hon. member is The Attorney-General: Well, I think, Mr President, saying he wishes to see the legislation sooner rather than that that question does wander outside the remit of the later. There is a way forward. As I have just said, the question on the order paper. However, it is an important legislation hopefully will be before the branches in October. matter. I know that there are advocates within the Isle of I think it is very important that the proper consultative Man Law Society who perform a sterling task, so far as I process is gone through with such a detailed and am aware, in the very difficult area of legal aid. It is complicated situation which will have major impact for regrettable, perhaps, that there are not more advocates who the business of this Island. At the same time as preparing are committed to legal aid work but, nonetheless, I am the primary legislation, the commission will also be satisfied within the present numbers of the society that they are doing their very best. continuing to work with regard to a code of conduct as well. So it is not just the primary legislation but the whole package which is being worked upon, Mr President, and I will be endeavouring to bring it to the branches as soon as Corporate Service Providers - Licensing possible. and Regulation - Introduction of Bill - Question by Mr Karran Non-Resident Company Duty Act 1986 - The President: Question 6, the hon. member for Onchan, Mr Karran. Recommendations of Treasury Working Party - Question by Mr Karran Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I beg to ask the Minister for the Treasury: The President: Question 7, the hon. member for Onchan, Mr Karran. When do you expect to introduce a Bill providing for the licensing and regulation of corporate service Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I beg to ask the Minister for providers? the Treasury:

Corporate Service Providers - Licensing and Regulation - Introduction of Bill - Question by Mr Karran Non-Resident Company Duty Act 1986 - Recommendations of Treasury Working Party - Question by Mr Karran TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T499

Has the relevant Treasury working party made any resident duty companies, the bad perception of the recommendations with regard to the repeal or otherwise media in the UK covering this item, is that it is the of the Non-Resident Company Duty Act 1986? UK which is creating this pressure. I did ask the hon. member to be patient. It will not be long before The President: The Minister for the Treasury to reply. members of this Court will be able to fully debate the issue, but I would put the point that there needs Mr Corkill: Mr President, as hon. members will recall, to be a balance, because there is a number of quite it was agreed in July last year, in response to a legitimate uses for non-resident companies, non­ recommendation of the working party on the regulation resident duty companies, on this Island and a number and supervision of companies, that the company section of international corporates and individuals use them of the General Registry and responsibility for company quite appropriately in a number of ways. Balanced supervision be transferred to the Financial Supervision against that - the hon. member is quite right - the Commission. The current legislative programme contains perception about non-resident duty companies in the provision for a Companies (Transfer of Functions) Bill in adjacent islands is a very bad perception, and hon. this session to give effect to that proposal. I expect the Bill members will have to make up their mind as to how to be introduced before the summer recess. That Bill, when we deal with that issue, but perhaps the issue of enacted, will enable the Financial Supervision Commission companies across the spectrum is more of an issue to become more proactive with regard to supervision of rather than focusing just on one type. all companies. In addition, the proposed corporate service providers legislation will include a requirement for such Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the Treasury minister providers to know their customer and so limit the possibility then agree that there are simple ways around this proposal of abuse by beneficial owners of such companies. In the such as the proposal that was given by the hon. member review of the Island’s regulatory systems by Mr Edwards, for Middle as far as a free transfer to exempt our he noted that we are reviewing the future of locally international status companies, and why is there such an incorporated non-resident companies who have no tax intransigence in order to cut this one small section within liability but pay only the flat rate non-resident duty, the financial business of the Island when it has the potential currently at £750 a year. He further noted that the future of to do so much damage to the Island? Would the Treasury these companies is an issue as part of an ongoing initiative minister not agree that the amount of money that comes to update company regulation. from this form of company formation is less than what Our responses to the Edwards review, together with would cause to the Island if we ended up with another recommendations on this specific issue and other issues scandal through people using the Island for ill-gotten gains? identified by Mr Edwards, will soon be brought to Tynwald for full consideration. I would ask the hon. member to be Mr Corkill: Mr President, it is not intransigence. As I patient until then when he will have our response. In the said, a number of people use non-resident companies in a meantime I can remind the Court of what I said in the proper legitimate fashion. I think the hon. member is naive budget yesterday, and that was, ‘The future of non-resident if he thinks that the (Mr Cannan: He is naive.) national duty companies is being considered very carefully indeed. media of the UK will go away once the blood has been If they are to continue, then they must become more cast on the floor over non-resident duty companies. They accountable to the supervisory authorities. If they are to will merely find something else (A Member: Hear, hear.) be discontinued, then it must be done in an orderly and and I think that is something to bear in mind. Having said realistic manner to ensure that international business continues to be introduced to the Island and additional that I do not wish to pre-empt the report which will be opportunities are provided.’ coming to this hon. Court shortly.

Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, a supplementary. Does the Mr Rodan: Mr President, could the problem of the non­ Treasury minister not agree that out of all the various tax resident duty company not be easily solved by a structures, the non-resident duty companies is the least requirement that all Manx incorporated companies should defensible and it would make the job of the Chief Minister have at least one Island director resident, thus closing the a lot easier to rebuff a lot of the criticism levelled at our accountability loophole? Would he not further agree that country and our financial sector by the UK, the EU and the inordinate time that Treasury has been obliged to spend the OECD and others if we were to repeal this legislation on this issue, which is basically a simple one, has meant sooner rather than later and would the Treasury minister that it has had less resources available to defend the not also agree, why do we have to act like some sort of defensible, which is the quality business that does exist on subservient, forelock-touching individuals to the United the Island like the fund management sector, which is under Kingdom? We know there is a problem here. We should severe pressure at this time? be doing it without waiting for a report on the imperialist government’s situation. Mr Corkill: There are a number of solutions, Mr President, and I do not think it would be helpful to go Mr Corkill: Mr President, I find it curious that the hon. through those different answers at this point. There are member refers to pressures from the UK and us following solutions available to Treasury to the legislation on this in the coat-tails of the UK when the perception about non­ Island.

Non-Resident Company Duty Act 1986 - Recommendations of Treasury Working Party - Question by Mr Karran T500 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

With regard to non-resident duty companies, which is Are you in a position to advise local authorities of the fundamental aspect of this question, I would say that the likely level of charges for use of the proposed new there are legitimate users of these, but we also know that incinerator? they are open to abuse, and the suggestion put forward by the hon. member for Garff is part of a solution. Also, we The President: The Minister for Local Government and are very much hopeful that the corporate service providers the Environment to reply. legislation will start to see improved control over companies and company formation and we will see how Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. I thank the hon. that works. I reiterate again, it is one of the member, sir, for this question because it gives me an recommendations within the Edwards review and, along opportunity to speak on the ‘user pays’ principle to which this question relates. Hon. members will, of course, with other measures suggested, there will be the recollect that the Department of Local Government and opportunity for a full explanation shortly. the Environment briefed hon. members on this matter in July 1998. The ‘user pays’ principle is embodied in the waste Noble’s Park - Alleged Acquisition of Land - management strategy, which has been before this Court Question by Mr Henderson on a number of occasions. The view has been taken that it is not unreasonable for companies and persons who create The President: Question 8, the hon. member for waste to have some responsibility to pay for its disposal. Douglas North, Mr Henderson. The application of this principle must take into account the ability of parties to pay for such service. The key issue Mr Henderson: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave is what proportion of the cost of disposing of waste should to ask the Minister for Tourism and Leisure: be borne by the taxpayer and what proportion by the ratepayer. Until the early 1980s the cost in whole or part fell on the ratepayer. Ultimately one or the other will have Is your department proposing to acquire land within to pay, as only so much can be placed on the taxpayer Noble’s Park on which to establish a permanent amenity? without undermining the Island’s ability to compete in the market place. The President: The Minister for Tourism and Leisure The issue will be subject to greater scrutiny when the to reply. Public Health (Amendment) Bill is examined by the branches of this legislature. Should the Bill find favour Mr Cretney: Yes, thank you, Mr President. The simple with the branches it will then be for Tynwald to determine answer to the question is no. I have to admit to being a what, if any, part of the cost of waste disposal is placed on little surprised to see the question down on the agenda the ratepayer. paper as I knew absolutely nothing about it. However, when The claim made by certain parties that the ‘user pays’ I read my Isle of Man Examiner and heard Manx Radio I principle arises from the adoption of incineration as a key was able to be informed that what was being spoken of feature of the waste management strategy is erroneous. It here was the potential of a permanent car park, or a rumour is also untrue, as some are contending, that the cost of to that effect. I have to say, Mr President, my department waste disposal will be substantially greater because of the is not the department which, if such a facility were to be acceptance of incineration as opposed to landfill. There is put in place, would be providing a permanent car park, but little if any difference between the cost of incineration and it is not the case to the best of my knowledge anyway and, landfill as has been demonstrated to hon. members at if the hon. member or any other hon. member wishes to briefings. clarify any rumours they may hear in relation to my The present cost of waste disposal, through landfill at department, please just pick up the phone. Wright’s Pit East, is in the order of £55 per tonne, which is met by the taxpayer. The future cost of landfill, if designed Mr Henderson: Mr President, I thank the hon. minister to current environmental standards and assuming that for his comprehensive reply and his assurances for the future landfill sites can be found, is likely to be about £78 safety of Noble’s Park. Thank you, sir. per tonne. Disposal through incineration is estimated to cost in the region of £85 per tonne. These figures exclude the historic costs of waste disposal which, are considerable, Incinerator - Local Authority Charges - which under the ‘user pays’ principle, would remain with Question by Mr Cannell the taxpayer. Given the high probability that any future municipal waste sites would have to be engineered to a The President: Question 9, the hon. member for higher environmental standard than that at Wright’s Pit Onchan, Mr Cannell. East, there would be little if any difference in cost between incineration and landfill. For those local authorities close Mr Canneil: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to to the incinerator the reduced cost of transportation would ask the Minister for Local Government and the almost certainly make incineration the more financially Environment: attractive option.

Noble’s Park - Alleged Acquisition of Land - Question by Mr Henderson Incinerator - Local Authority Charges - Question by Mr Cannell TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T501

It will be for Tynwald to decide what, if any, part of the they had to do the same thing and reverted to that, the cost cost of waste disposal should fall on the ratepayer and, if of the modem techniques required for them to substantiate it was accepted that the ratepayer should make a the landfill site or any other side of it would be far more contribution, there would be due regard to the ability of costly than what we are undertaking? users to pay. Additionally, it would be open to the local authorities to become involved in recycling waste Mr Quine: Well, I would not care to speculate on those materials, if economically viable, to offset the cost of waste figures, but I can confirm - indeed, I have confirmed in disposal by incineration. An enabling provision to the principle part of my answer - that until the early 1980s accommodate this latter feature is, of course, embodied in the cost of both transportation and waste disposal fell in the Public Health (Amendment) Bill. whole or part on local authorities.

M r Cannell: Mr President, could the hon. minister, Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, a supplementary. Would the notwithstanding the comprehensive reply he has just given, minister not agree that it has been a long-held policy, long confirm that the estimated costs of through charges for the before the minister was a member of the Council of incinerator are presently in the region of £3.7 million and Ministers, to put any charges on to the rates, so it is no that that, if passed on in full, would represent an average great revelation as far as that is concerned? And will his rate increase of £72 per annum per three-bedroom department put pressure on the Council of Ministers so household? And further, is the hon. minister prepared to that we can see some sort of rate rebate scheme in order to request the Treasury to re-examine the principle of protect the weak within our society? establishing an all-island rate as part of the funding of any new local government structure? Mr Quine: Without turning to the specifics of whether we are dealing with a rate rebate system or some other Mr Quine: First of all the question of the costs, sir. method, sir, again I have intimated in my answer that one Those costs are figures which I have given are relative to of the prime considerations would be the ability of the households, not to all waste going to municipal waste, sites user to pay. It has to be reasonable if that is the path which so those figures are common knowledge. As I said, it Tynwald wishes to pursue, but if it does not pursue that remains to be seen what part, if any, of those costs would path and we are minded to put all of this on to the taxpayer, be passed on to ratepayers.That is a matter for discussion. then quite frankly we have to take account of the First of all we will have to confront the issues in debating implications of that. I would have thought, having regard the Bill itself, but it is certainly the waste management to some of the comments that were made yesterday, that strategy which has been adopted by this Court. That has we should be concentrating on the ability to take a few already Tynwald approval. pence off the rate, not to put a few pence on the rate. In terms of an all-Island rate, I think most hon. members will recollect that the concept of an all-island rate was Mr Lowey: Would the minister not agree that a landfill considered some years ago in the broader context of local tax is applied in the United Kingdom to all waste disposed government as a whole and it was not followed through. If at the moment? Is it not an idea that the government should one looks at the reports that were produced, I think you be building up a reserve fund now by charging those attacks would conclude that it was felt that an all-island rate would on all landfill material? be to substitute one inequitable arrangement, by another inequitable arrangement and for that reason amongst others Mr Quine: Yes, I can confirm. . . well, there are two it has not been pursued. points, I think, there really. First of all the responsibility I think, if the hon. member will just reflect, sir, there is does very broadly fall upon the shoulders of the local an obvious relationship between the quantity of waste authorities in the United Kingdom and there is a landfill arisings and economic activity in any particular area and tax in place, and indeed I think in very recent times that hence, of course, the rateable value and the income to that landfill tax has been increased to provide a further incentive area. I think this demonstrates but one difficulty in trying to reclamation and recycling. to bring in an Island rate, because you are going to create an inequitable burden on one area, vis-à-vis the other, but, Mrs Cannell: Mr President, can the minister advise on in addition to that, sir, if we are going to bring about, as I whether or not he is going to consult with the local think most hon. members wish to see, a meaningful authorities prior to when this amended Bill, as he referred reclamation of waste and recycling of waste, then we have to earlier on, comes in? Is he going to have proper to have accountability in relation to the areas where that consultation with him and is he aware that some of the waste is generated, and that is part and parcel of the concept local authorities are under the impression that he is merely and enabling provisions are embodied in the amended going to railroad through this Bill without any consultation? legislation which should come forward. Mr Quine: Well, first of all the Bill, of course, is out M r Delaney: Could the minister clarify in member’s for consultation now, the Bill itself, but in addition to the minds that, prior to the central government taking over Bill I met with representatives of the local authority within the total responsibility for the disposal of waste, local the last two weeks, and this is a matter which was dealt authorities carried the charges in their own areas for getting with in that briefing. The point was made then that there rid of the waste, and am I right in assuming that, if today will be further consultation with the local authorities.

Incinerator - Local Authority Charges - Question by Mr Cannell T502 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

Incinerator - Capital Costs and Running Will you request Douglas Corporation and other Costs - Question by Mr Duggan local authorities to consider selectively extending the operation of street lights after midnight? The President: Question 10, the hon. member for The President: The Minister for Home Affairs to reply. Douglas South, Mr Duggan. Mr Bell: Mr President, I believe that extending the Mr Duggan: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to operation of street lighting into the early hours of the ask the Minister for Local Government and the morning would indeed make a valuable contribution to Environment: the fight against crime (Mr Houghton: Hear, hear.) and I have had informal talks with a number of local authorities Is it your intention to burden the Island’s ratepayers already on this issue, so I am very happy to support the with - hon. questioner’s request and will pass the hon. member’s suggestion to Douglas Corporation and other local (a) the capital costs of the incinerator at Richmond authorities. Hill; and Mr Delaney: Mr President, since placing the question (b) its high running costs? it has come to my attention that through forward thinking your own authority, Ramsey, have put the lights on early The President: The Minister for Local Government and in the morning in the winter to aid people walking to work the Environment to reply. or to school et cetera. Could I also ask for that to be brought up when you meet Douglas Corporation and others? Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. I would refer the hon. member to the information which I have just provided Mr Bell: Yes, Mr President, I am quite happy to include in relation to the previous question and in short just reiterate that in my discussions with the local authorities. My that it would be for Tynwald ultimately to decide to what department, though, I have to point out, have no direct extent the burden of the cost for the disposal of refuse, by responsibility for lighting. We can only suggest these whatever means we should be disposing of our refuse, is measures to the appropriate local authorities at the time, passed on and, if so, to what extent it would be passed on but I do understand. Certainly I was involved in the to the ratepayers. extension of the lighting hours in Ramsey. I have had discussions with one or two other local authorities where Mr Duggan: A supplementary, Mr President. Would the hours of the operation of the lights have been extended the minister agree that die costs of building and operating and they believe this to be very successful, not only to an incinerator have soared in the last 18 months, and is the stop petty crime and vandalism, but also to give the figure of £37.7 million adequate still at this time, sir? And residents of the area a greater feeling of security generally as the minister has sought the support of local authorities and safety. throughout the Island, has he kept them informed throughout about these soaring costs and the possible Mr Delaney: I thank the minister for his reply. impact on the rates? Mr Henderson: Mr President, a further supplementary, Mr Quine: Mr President, all capital projects are sir. I thank the hon. minister for his replies and his increasing in costs. The incinerator no doubt is exactly assurances for this scheme, but could he give a further within the same bracket. This again was touched upon assurance that, in progressing these ideas, cognisance will yesterday, so I have no doubt that the cost of incineration, be taken of residential areas so they will not be unduly lit as indeed would be the cost of present-day landfill or throughout the hours of darkness and cause the residents landfill to new standards, the future standards, will all be some sort of light intrusion on their own homes? Could he over and above those that we are speaking of today and give that assurance? have spoken of, and that is something we have to live with. When I brought forward to this hon. Court the motion to Mr Bell: Yes that certainly has been considered as part get approval for the indicative cost, the point was made of the discussions, Mr President, and it has to be said it is that that was subject to those fluctuations. a moot point really as to how far you can extend street lighting. If people want secure neighbourhoods and feel there is benefit from having the lights on later into the evening, then I have to say there has to be an acceptance Douglas Street Lighting - Extended of a certain amount of light pollution as a result of that. It Operation - Question by Mr Delaney is not possible to have it both ways, but obviously a balance has to be struck and I think the local authorities which The President: Question 11, the hon. member of the have considered this issue to date have been very Council, Mr Delaney. responsible in their distribution of this extension of lighting hours and I am sure all the local authorities, if they take Mr Delaney: I beg leave to ask the Minister for Home our suggestions on board, will be equally mindful, Mr Affairs: President.

Incinerator - Capital Costs and Running Costs - Question by Mr Duggan Douglas Street Lighting - Extended Operation - Question by Mr Delaney TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T503

The President: The hon. Mr Speaker. implication of the press release that my hon. colleague misinformed the House of Keys in another place when The Speaker: Mr President, the previous answering a question on this issue. He reported, in the terms supplementary has covered the question. of the question, the facts as recorded in my department’s records.

Mrs Cannell: Mr President, can the minister advise as Meningitis - Hospital Admissions - to why there appears to be a discrepancy in the figures Number of Suspected Cases - that she has just submitted to this hon. Court, in that the Question by Mrs Cannell minister has advised us that in 1996 there were three cases confirmed by laboratory tests of meningococcal The President: Question 12, the hon. member for meningitis - Douglas East, Mrs Cannell. Mrs Christian: No, Mr President. Mrs Cannell: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to ask the Minister for Health and Social Security: A Member: Nonsense.

In each of the years 1996 to 1999 - Mrs Cannell: Unconfirmed, that is correct; there were three unconfirmed. In other words, there were none (a) how many persons under 18 years of age were confirmed. Can the minister still advise as to why the admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of Manchester laboratory that tests all blood samples et cetera suspected meningitis; and sent from the Isle of Man with regard to reportable diseases such as meningitis have indicated to me that there were (b) how many of these diagnoses were laboratory five so cases confirmed? Is she aware that there was one confirmed? on 6th January, 1996, C-strain; one on 6th February 1996, which was classed as B-strain; one on 25th May 1996, The President: The Minister for Health and Social classed as B-strain; one on 20th August classed as C-strain; Security to reply. and finally one on 28th November 1996, classed as C- strain? Mrs Christian: Mr President, hospital patient Mrs Christian: Mr President, the hon. member is administration systems here and, I would stress, also in referring to meningococcal meningitis. Her question asks the UK record diagnosis on discharge rather than on about suspected meningitis. There is more than one source admission. This is for the obvious reason that the diagnosis for meningitis; in fact, meningitis can be of the may well not be established with any certainty upon meningococcal strain or it can be caused by other causative admission. I am therefore unable to provide the information agents. There is a viral strain and there is a bacteriological sought at part (a) of the question as to do so would require strain, and the figures I have reported to the hon. Court are a very considerable manual exercise to examine the hospital the records kept of notifications to my department under records of every individual under 18 who was admitted to the regulations in the Isle of Man. I cannot comment on hospital. I can confirm, however, the number of infectious the information which the hon. member has received from disease notification from all sources, i.e. hospital and GP another source, sir. practices, relating to suspected meningitis in under-18s made to the Island’s public health director in each of the Mr Singer: Mr President, could I ask the hon. minister, years referred to. These were: 1996, three, none of which does the department use the available inoculation for those were confirmed by laboratory tests; 1997, five, three of who have been in contact with C-strain meningitis and which were so confirmed by laboratory tests; there was who are over 18 months of age? And are you planning to also in that year a case of meningococcal septicaemia, but authorise the administration of the new C-vaccine with that is not meningitis; in 1998, three, two of which were the routine child inoculations when the trials are completed confirmed; and 1999 to date one, which has been and the vaccine is available? confirmed. In answering the question, Mr President, I would like Mrs Christian: Mr President, as the hon. member, to express my concern about the press release which has being a pharmacist, will probably be aware, there are been issued on the part of the APG in relation to this issue. certain strains of meningitis which may be effectively (Members: Hear, hear.) I note with interest the leader of offered a prophylactic vaccination in relation to them. The the APG yesterday, in his own press releases on another A-strains and the C-strains may be effectively immunised issue, has stressed that the public are entitled to accuracy against in relation to meningococcal meningitis. Such an and objectivity when issues of importance are being immunisation is not appropriate for the B-strain. As debated, and I would ask that the APG apply the same majority cases of the B-strain, it would be clinically principles to their own press releases in future. (A reckless to embark upon a course of immunisation unless M em ber: Hear, hear,) The hon. member had the we are clear what the strain is, Mr President. As far as my opportunity to discuss this issue with our own chief medical advice is concerned, when there is a need for prophylactic adviser and has been given the facts. I also deplore the treatment of close family members, it is undertaken.

Meningitis - Hospital Admissions - Number of Suspected Cases - Question by Mrs Cannell T504 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

Mr Singer: Mr President, can I say that I never that cannot already be dealt with by the clinicians who are mentioned the word B-strain; I was particularly asking there looking at the patient. about C-strain, and I would appreciate an answer on the present use of the C-strain that is available and whether the future C-strain which is now undergoing final tests will Private Residential Homes - be used when it is available? Fees - Question by Mr Lowey Mrs Christian: Mr President, when there is a case of The President: Hon. members, we move onto question C-strain identified in the Isle of Man, prophylactic treatment will be offered. With regard to the new C-strain 13, the hon. member for the Council, Mr Lowey. I will obtain advice as and when that material is available and will act upon the medical advice I am given at that M r Lowey: I beg leave to ask the Minister for Health and Social Security: time, sir. (1) What were the increases in fees paid by your A M em ber: Hear, hear. department to private residential homes for each of M r Singer: Thank you for the answer. the last three financial years?

M r Henderson: Mr President, a further supplementary. (2) what consultation takes place and what control has Is the minister aware that strict new guidelines and protocol your department over such fees; and to hospitals and intensive care units have just been issued in the UK when dealing with meningitis, and could she (3) how do such costs relate to those for residential confirm that her department will look into these and homes operated by your department? whether they will then be applied to our Island’s hospitals? The President: The Minister for Health and Social Mrs Christian: Mr President, the Island has a very Security to reply. active group dealing with contagious disease, and I am quite sure that in the protocols which have recently been Mrs Christian: Mr President, so far as part 1 of the publicised and issued at a meeting which was held at the question is concerned I have to advise the hon. member Postgraduate Medical Centre recently, up-to-date protocols that the department does not pay fees to private residential will be in place. However, I will take advice as to whether homes. I would confirm, however, that the supplementary the recently issued protocols issued in the United Kingdom benefit scheme provides that, where an individual has have anything which could usefully be added to our own prescribed requirements which exceed his resources, protocols. benefit covering the excess may be payable. For the purpose of assessing a claim to supplementary benefit from Mrs Cannell: Mr President, my final supplementary. a person living in a private residential home the total of Does the minister not agree with me that the clinical weekly prescribed requirements in each of the last three diagnosis in respect of meningitis is equally as important years has been, 1996-97, £199.50; 1997-98, £204.90; and as the laboratory confirmed diagnosis and that the 1998-99, £210.40. For the coming financial year the Meningitis Research Foundation does keep statistics on corresponding figure will be £219.50. In determining the these particular cases? Does she agree with me on that? resources of such a resident no account is taken of any Does she further agree that the inability to track diagnosis attendance allowance or disability living allowance payable on admission at Nobles is perhaps due to the lack of to the individual. In addition to any other resources they resources in the computer area? Does she not agree with may have, including any award of supplementary benefit, me there? And would she agree that if the necessary this means they may have up to a further £51.30 available resources are found, then we will have a much better to meet their outgoings. reporting system than there is at present? In answer to part (2) the department has no powers or responsibilities in relation to the fees charged by private Mrs Christian: Mr President, I am not quite sure what residential care home providers. the hon. member seeks to get from the computer systems. In answer to part (3) the fee charged by the department Certainly the department is aware that its computer systems to an individual accommodated and cared for in any one can in the future be updated and we will be able to have a of its four residential care homes for the elderly is currently much greater array of information which can be used to £205.94. For the coming year that is being increased to direct the strategy for health. Where a person comes into £219.94. Relating our level of charges to those applying the hospital with a clinical diagnosis of meningitis, then in the private sector is difficult. As the law currently stands clearly a course of prophylactic treatment may be started. we are obliged to charge a standard rate regardless of the Indeed, I am sure that is what does happen in the hospital, care needs of an individual resident or of the operational but in terms of confirming by way of a vaccination one costs of a particular home. Private sector providers are not needs to know what the strain is and so one has to wait for so constrained and they can and do contract individually some laboratory results in further treatment. So I am not with their residents. The present taxpayers subsidy in the quite sure what the hon. member seeks to do by computer operation of our four homes excluding central

Private Residential Homes - Fees - Question by Mr Lowey TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T505

administration is about £600,000 per annum or about £50 Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, two questions. Is his per resident per week. The department is taking steps to department sure that the MEA’s consumers will get the address that, but the figures I have given are those which best value out of this company and what mechanism does are currently applicable. he have in order to make sure that the consumers are not being put on with extra charges? And could the hon. M r Lowey: I thank the minister for her comprehensive minister inform this hon. Court, what was the thinking reply. behind having National Grid as an Isle of Man company? Was this in order that if anything did go wrong there would M r Cannell: Mr President, a supplementary question, be no liability on the mother company in the adjacent isle? if I may? Would the hon. minister note that rates for nursing care are higher than those for residential care, as she has M r North: Mr President, the answer to the first question outlined, but confirm that the department is considering about the consumers is yes, and as for the local company, moving towards a scale that reflects the dependency of the normal thing would be to have it owned on the Island individual clients, because the current distinction between and National Grid (Isle of Man) Limited is a wholly owned residential and nursing care is not sophisticated enough to subsidiary of the National Grid pic. recognise the variations in people’s actual levels of dependence? M r Downie: I would like to ask the minister, when the cable company was being set up was an opportunity taken M rs Christian: Yes, Mr President, I would confirm that. to put this together on some sort of tender basis and invite I think the department and the division in particular are other people who have been involved in cable companies concerned that people should as far as possible stay in one and the provision of cables to other islands and other home and not have to move, because their condition offshore destinations to get involved, and could the minister deteriorates, from a residential home to a nursing home. It either confirm or deny that in a recent newspaper article would be the wish of the department to work up a scheme appearing in the Examiner it stated that the MEA will be whereby dependency is assessed and charges relating to paying £304,000 per year for the provisions of this Manx dependency will be introduced. The proposals would then Cable Company? allow people who need a higher degree of care, perhaps, to stay in what are now defined as our residential homes. Mr North: Mr President, the process of using the National Grid - the National Grid were chosen as the preferred partners for the MEA and the cable, the provision Manx Cable Company Limited - of that, then went out to tender to, I think originally, four or five people who did tender for that work. And the Shareholdings - Financing of Operations - £304,000 that the hon. member is referring to - 1 have not Question by Mr Karran seen that figure in the newspaper but the company will be responsible for its own costs. The main part of those costs The President: Question 14, the hon. member for will be insurance on the cable and these will be paid out of Onchan, Mr Karran. the rental which it receives, and the administration costs are likely to be minimal. M r Karran: Eaghtyrane, I beg to ask the Minister for Trade and Industry: Mr Henderson: Mr President, a supplementary, sir. When this issue was raised by another question at another (1) What are the shareholdings in Manx Cable time the hon. minister confirmed that the Chief Executive Company Limited; and of the Manx Electricity Authority was also on the board of the Manx Cable Company. He gave an undertaking to this (2) how are its operations to be financed? Court to investigate as to whether this person on the board was also in receipt of any monetary gains and, if he was, The President: The Minister for Trade and Industry to what sort of monetary gains they may be. I am just reply. wondering if he could confirm or otherwise what his investigations into those matters have led him to uncover. M r North: Mr President, the nominal share capital of Thank you. the Manx Cable Company Limited is £2,000. Half of the shares are owned by the Manx Electricity Authority and M r N orth: Yes, Mr President, I did check on that fact, the other half by National Grid (Isle of Man) Limited. As and certainly one thing that I have found and was not aware explained to all hon. members in the department’s report of - and it will change this next year - is that directors’ to Tynwald last November, the sole purpose of the company fees for the MEA will appear in the MEA’s annual report, is to install the sub-sea electric interconnector and then to and I think that is right and proper, the same as any other own it and lease it to the Manx Electricity Authority. The company. The fees for the Manx Cable Company, any project is to be financed by an equal injection of equity by directors or members of that board, will appear in that the two partners and by long-term secure private finance. annual report. As announced by the MEA in December, Midland Bank were appointed as financiers to the project following an M r Cannell: So can the hon. member, Mr President, open bidding process. assure this Court that he is satisfied that no individual

Manx Cable Company Limited - Shareholdings - Financing of Operations - Question by Mr Karran T506 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 employee of the MEA involved in the cable project will think the relationship that we will have and have with the stand to become a so-called ‘fat cat’ indirectly on the back National Grid within the United Kingdom will benefit the of the need for the electricity supply of this Island? Island greatly.

Mr North: Yes, Mr President, I can assure the hon. The President: A final supplementary on this question, member that there will be nothing like that and I have every the hon. member for Douglas North. confidence in the board of the MEA that will make sure that that does not happen. Mr Henderson: Thank you, Mr President. Notwithstanding the hon. minister’s reply earlier indicating Mr Waft: Mr President, I wonder, minister, if you could that any monetary rewards for an executive on the cable clarify the position with regard to particularly the company would be published in the annual report, could ownership of the fibre-optic cable. The ownership of the he give an undertaking to this Court, sir, that he will fibre-optic cable will, I would presume, be 50 per cent the circulate to members what those monetary rewards, gains MEA and 50 per cent the National Grid. Now, the benefit or otherwise, might be. derived from that fibre-optic cable - would that benefit go directly to the consumers of the electricity or would it go Mr North: Mr President, I have already said, those to some other direction? Has he any information on that? figures will be in the MEA’s annual report. Thank you, Mr President.

Mr North: Mr President, details relating to control and Hosepipes - Weekend Restrictions - use of the fibre-optic cable have yet to be finalised, but Question by Mr Singer what I can say is that the intention is, as I have said before, to ensure that government has the final say on the use of The President: Question 15, the hon. member for this particular element of the project and that we will benefit Ramsey, Mr Singer. from that. Mr Singer: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to Mr Lowey: Could the minister clarify an earlier reply? ask the Chairman of the Water Authority: He said that the fees for the directors of the Manx Cable Company would be published in their annual report. Isn’t Will you lift the restrictions on the use of hosepipes this a private company and therefore their public accounts on Saturdays and Sundays? are not made public, and therefore who will they be made public to? The President: The Chairman of the Water Authority to reply. Mr North: Mr President, it is the directors of the MEA on the MCC board that receive director’s fees, which will Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I thank the hon. member for be published in the MEA report and, as far as I am his question and presume he is referring to the restrictions concerned, employees of the MEA will not receive those placed on the use of hosepipes during the summer months. directors’ fees. I should make it clear that there are no restrictions during the winter months. The need for restrictions relates to the Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, would the minister not agree capacity of the old water treatment works, which are that there is a danger as far as this company is concerned, working well over their design capacity, most having been as far as abuse is concerned and also would he also not built over 50 years ago. The present treatment works cannot agree that it highlights the situation of being out of touch cope with today’s demands without jeopardising water with the wishes of Tynwald, and would his department quality and the possibility of endangering public health. consider putting one of his members of his department on The restriction is not in place because of the shortage of the board of this company so that there is some sort of raw water. In most summers there is normally a plentiful representation for the consumers of this Island? supply from our reservoirs. It is a well-known fact that a hosepipe, when running Mr N orth: Mr President, the Manx Electricity full bore, can use as much water in an hour as an average Authority, in my opinion, operates perfectly adequately. family of four would use in a day. Garden watering during In fact, they operate a very efficient company and I will the summer months is notorious for creating peaks in not at this stage consider putting anybody from my demands, and that includes on Saturdays and Sundays. The department on that board. As far as the MEA is concerned, peaks in demands for the water also has implications for we have information and I talk to, on a regular basis, the the distribution system, which has to be built to bigger Chairman of the MEA and his board who are doing a superb sizes to make water available for the consumer’s tap. The job, absolutely superb. The work that has gone on with restrictions are therefore likely to be essential until such this Manx Cable Company. . . and there are innuendoes time as the authority’s plans for a new water treatment from the hon. member for Onchan and I have to assure works and new service reservoirs have come to fruition. him that I understand that the Public Accounts Committee have themselves independently investigated this Mr Singer: Mr President, I thank the hon. member for establishment of the cable and are more than satisfied. I his answer. Could he confirm to me, therefore, what he

Hosepipes - Weekend Restrictions - Question by Mr Singer TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T507

said, that there were no restrictions on the use of hosepipes What will be the situation in the Isle of Man in the winter and, if so, could he explain to me which following the EJJ Environmental Council ban on the sale months are considered to be winter as opposed to summer? of leaded petrol which is to take effect from 1st January 2000? Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I would answer the hon. member that there will be notification within the press The President: The Chairman of the Office of Fair when we would regard summer to be here (Laughter) and, Trading to reply. as summer is something of a luxury, I could not honestly tell the hon. member when specifically we would class Mrs Crowe: Thank you, Mr President. I am grateful to when summer is, but we would put an article in the the hon. member for Douglas West for giving me this newspaper to inform the hon. member when the Water opportunity to explain to the hon. Court that with effect Authority thinks the summer has begun. (Laughter) from 1st January 2000 supplies of leaded petrol, what we know as 4-star petrol, will no longer be available to the Mr Singer: A further supplementary, having seen an general public. This is due to European Union legislation advert from the Water Authority, ‘Here Comes Summer’, being introduced to protect the environment and the public and accepting what the hon. member said, that it is not a from the pollution caused by burning fuels containing high shortage of water that is the problem but a shortage of the levels of lead. treatment of water, would he not be prepared to ease the My officers have been in contact with the oil companies restrictions at weekends on an experimental basis in the past months to ascertain what strategy we will adopt explaining clearly to the public that the onus would be on in the run-up to January 1st to provide alternative fuels to them to keep the use of hosepipes to a minimum in order replace the 4-star petrol. It is likely that towards the end of to prevent an over-demand on the treatment processes and this year the companies will introduce a new higher octane that, if it did not work, then that experiment would be unleaded petrol which is known as ‘lead replacement finished? petrol’. This should be available at most filling stations and will be dispensed through the petrol pumps currently Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, the situation is that at the used for 4-star petrol, but they will be clearly labelled ‘Lead moment there is not a restriction. We are not in summer at replacement petrol’. As they have wide nozzles that will the present time; I can assure the hon. member of that! As not fit the fuel filters on cars equipped with catalytic converters, this will ensure that no damage to the catalytic far as the issue as far as peak demands are concerned, we converters will occur from using the wrong fuel. have studied it at length in order to justify our capital Some petrol stations may decide not to offer LRP; They programme in the near future in order to do the work that may instead offer anti-wear additives. Now, this will be has needed to be done for the last 50 years, but at the present the same as we used to have - a shot of Redex, as it were. time we would only bring in the water restrictions on So there will be a syringe-type container and these additives hosepipes when we feel we are in a position where we are will be available on the forecourts or in motor accessory endangering water quality, and I am sure the hon. member shops as an additive to petrol. would appreciate that we do not bring in restrictions unless We are informed that the research in use of both LRP there are real reasons for doing so. and AWA in other countries has been shown to provide adequate protection for engines under normal driving Mr Cretney: Could I ask the Chairman of the Water conditions. Now, if you do spend a great deal of time Authority whether the Water Authority would be prepared driving at high speed or you regularly tow a trailer it may to liaise with the Department of Tourism and Leisure so be necessary that you have your car engine modified. There that we could both mutually agree when summer is here? will be inevitably some cars where the engines have to (Laughter) have hardened valve seats fitted. These will not need the protection of lead or anti-wear additives, and I am informed Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I would like to say to the hon. that at least one engineering company on the Island has member that, as far as the Water Authority is concerned, it carried out this type of work on more than 15 engines in actually does go from 1st April to 30th September and I the past year - classic vehicles and other vehicles. Now, do hope the Tourist Board can actually extend the summer our advice to anyone currently using 4-star in their vehicle season to that period as well as the Water Authority! is to consult the vehicle’s handbook or contact the local dealer for that particular make. You will be able, then, to ascertain whether the vehicle can run on unleaded petrol before spending any money on any modification. We will Leaded Petrol - Effects of Future Ban - have leaflets available at the Office of Fair Trading and Question by Mr Downie we would like to stress that before making any costly modifications to vehicles we would like you either to The President: Question 16, the hon. member for consult us or the motor vehicle trade. Douglas West, Mr Downie. I understand that the hon. member is concerned that the Island has many classic car enthusiasts and as a result many Mr Downie: Thank you, Mr President. I beg leave to more vehicles are likely to be affected by the removal of ask the Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading: 4-star from the marketplace. With effect from 1st January

Leaded Petrol - Effects of Future Ban - Question by Mr Downie T508 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

no more than 5 per cent of all petrol sales may be of leaded Mr Cannell: Mr President, a further supplementary on petrol and this will be for special interest groups such as this item, if I may. Is the hon. Chairman of the Office of classic car clubs, but with such a small volume of this petrol Fair Trading aware in New Zealand it has been found that being available it is unlikely that any petrol filling station the so-called benefits of unleaded fuel have actually been will be prepared to stop this fuel. Now, from our discussions found to impose greater problems for the environment than with the oil companies we are confident that supplies of 4- for 4-star leaded, so the Isle of Man should, if possible, star petrol will still be available and can be brought to the avoid being rushed into the enduring extra costs of adopting Island in the same way that the aviation gasoline and super this ban, particularly in view of the potential damage to unleaded petrol are currently imported in small quantities car and motor-cycle engines? for the motor-cycle races. In recognition of the importance of the motor-cycle Mrs Crowe: As you know, we regulate the sales and racing and classic car racing, these stocks are stored behind the grandstand in a specially constructed installation which the safety of all petrol on the Island, and it has been a fact is controlled by the Department of Tourism and Leisure, that one of our inspectors has long thought that the and it may be necessary for that installation to be extended reintroduction of leaded fuel might be the best idea and to stock 4-star petrol. The Department of Tourism and anyone then driving around - what is it, Fort North Leisure are currently consulting with interested parties to roundabout? - would then just have to brush up the lead ascertain what the demand will be for classic car racing that fell onto the floor rather than have it drifting into the and the like. Thank you, Mr President. air, which happens at the moment from the use of catalytic converters that really do not get warm enough on long Mr Downie: Mr President, first of all I would like to journeys to burn out this lead. thank the member for the very comprehensive reply and ask her, is she aware that currently 30 per cent of petrol Mr Singer: Can I ask the hon. Chairman of the Office sold in the Isle of Man at this present time is leaded? And of Fair Trading, in view of the previous question, where it is she aware that there is not a current British standard for says it appears to have been proved that unleaded petrol is lead replacement petrol and that on tests carried out in more dangerous than leaded petrol and the fact that the Scandinavia and Europe there have been lots of problems emissions from diesel fuel put the PM 10s into the with the introduction of lead replacement petrol, and will atmosphere which are dangerous to health and therefore the member give this Court an undertaking that she will logically all petrol should be banned, would the chairman do her best to secure a supply of leaded petrol for older support a Department of Transport initiative in promoting vehicles particularly in line with current UK policy, and travel by stagecoach and rickshaw? (Laughter) that by 1 st January 2000 we will not have a situation in the Isle of Man where a tremendous amount of vehicle users, The President: The hon. member may or may not reply particularly older vehicle users, will be severely to that. disadvantaged by the implementation of this European legislation? Mrs Crowe: Mr President, yes, certainly in Ramsey I think that would be a very good idea, travel by rickshaw, M rs Crowe: Mr President, as you know, at the Office but what I would suggest is the Department of Transport of Fair Trading we encompass the trading standards service join with the Department of Tourism and Leisure and look for the Isle of Man, and of course naturally we are looking at improving the train services so we can have all-island for a British standard to be introduced for this kind of fuel, train services. (Interjections) Thank you. but that may well be many years away, I am afraid to say. But we have ascertained that we think less than one per cent of the vehicles on the Island would be affected, that The President: Hon. members, with the remaining the lead replacement petrol will enable these cars to work questions down for written answer and those answers properly. There have been some problems found but, as circulated and in your possession, that concludes our all fuels are developed, these problems have been ironed scrutiny of the question paper. out. Thank you, Mr President.

Mr Waft: Mr President, just a point of clarification. Collective Investment Schemes - With the first answer, with effect from 1st January no more Number and Value - than 0.5, not 5, per cent, of all petrol sales may be of leaded Question by Mr Rodan for Written Answer petrol and this will be for special interest groups. Thank you, Mr President. Question 17 Mrs Crowe: Yes, that is correct, Mr President. I am afraid the technicalities of petrol are beyond me, a little in The hon. member for Garff, Mr Rodan, to ask the the way that when a classic car enthusiast I spoke to and I Minister for the the Treasury: was expressing the concerns expressed to me by the hon. member said, ‘Well, actually, they will damage the car as (1) What was the total number and total value of Isle much as you driving in the wrong gear for part of the time of Man authorised and restricted collective will do.’ investment schemes as at -

Collective Investment Schemes - Number and Value - Question by Mr Rodan for Written Answer TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T509

(a) 31st December 1996; division of the Treasury, an appointment which took effect (b) 31st December 1997; and from 28th January 1999. Chris, as an acknowledged expert (c) 31st December 1998; in the field, will be specialising in the area of funds, concentrating on the City of London. He will be attending (2) is the position expected to improve or deteriorate the Global Offshore Funds Forum in London with John during the first six months of 1999; and Bourbon, the Financial Supervision Commission’s head of supervision on 15th and 16th March 1999, where they (3) what proposals are currently under discussion will both be seeking to actively promote the interests of between Treasury and the fund industry which will the Island. Chris was the supervisor of the collective enhance the attraction of the Island as a location investment schemes between 1988 and 1993, and has for international fund management operations? subsequently worked in the private sector. During 1996 and 1997 he was Chairman of the Isle of Man Fund Answer Management Association.

(1) The details of the total number and value of Isle of The international services division is currently Man authorised and restricted collective investment overseeing the production of a new funds brochure which schemes as at 31 st December 1996,1997 and 1998 was as is expected to be available by June of this year. It reflects follows: the Island’s new corporate approach and although it is £ billions primarily designed for marketing purposes, it will include a pocket at the rear to contain detailed regulatory and other Dec 1996 Dec 1997 Dec 1998 technical information.

Authorised Value 0.8 0.9 1.0 Both the 1998 roadshows in Hong Kong and South Africa featured speakers who incorporated funds Number 15 15 16 presentations in their talks. Great interest was demonstrated in funds in Hong Kong with 137 delegates attending the Restricted Value 3.8 4.8 4.8 funds module. Equal interest was shown at the South African roadshow. Number 78 85 80 Immediately prior to the South African roadshow there (2) As with all investment markets, it is extremely was an excellent example of close co-operation with the difficult to predict performance from one day to the next, FSC clearing the way for the promotion of Isle of Man let alone in the first six months of 1999. Clearly the overall restricted schemes in the face of significantly enhanced value of all of the Island’s collective investment schemes regulatory requirements within South Africa under their will rise or fall, both in line with the various investment Unit Trust Control Amendment Act 1998. markets around the world, currency movements and any funds which may relocate from or to the Island. Finally, today’s budget announced an important strategic review for the finance sector. The future direction for The Island continues to attract a steady flow of international fund management operations on the Island applications both for new funds from existing licence will be a major focus of this review. In summary, Treasury holders and also applications for completely new licence and the funds industry continue to co-operate in the holders. development of initiatives designed to enhance the attraction of the Island as a location for international fund (3) It will be recalled from a question in Tynwald in management operations. November 1997, that the Manx schemes working party, under the chairmanship of the Chief Financial Officer, was set up in order to focus the approach from both Treasury and the industry to the further development of the fund Local Authorities - industry. This working party continues to meet and provides Report on Structural Reform - an essential platform for the industry and government to Question by Mr Henderson continue to develop a symbiotic relationship. for Written Answer Very recently we have of course seen the publication of the Edwards report. The schemes working party is working Question 18 closely with all parties to ensure that the maximum benefit can be obtained from the report, which was complimentary The hon. member for Douglas North, Mr Henderson, of the regulatory environment and will assist in our efforts to ask the Minister for Local Government and the to develop this particular sector. Environment:

Chris Edmunds has recently been appointed as a contract (1) When will your department publish a report on the marketing consultant with the international services structural reform of local authorities; and

Local Authorities - Report on Structural Reform - Question by Mr Henderson for Written Answer T510 TYNWALD COURT WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

(2) will the report include proposals for rate reform? I have referred, is the question of funding for any new local government structure. This could have implications Answer for the rating system and, if so, the issue may have to be revisited. Hon. members are aware that this issue has been under consideration by this department and other parties for several years. I trust it will suffice if I recount developments Incinerator - Estimated Rates Increase - during the lifetime of the present legislature. Question by Mr Henderson This department published a consultative report under for Written Answer the title Securing a Future for Local Government in October 1997. That report was in the nature of an overview setting Question 19 out the position which had been reached at the time when the present department came into office following the last The hon. member for Douglas North, Mr Henderson, general election. The document did not attempt to go into to ask the Minister for Local Government and the matters of detail but sought to establish a way forward Environment: after a careful examination of the various Time for Change proposals. (1) What is the estimated average increase in the rates to meet the capital and running costs of the The consultation on the ‘Securing a Future’ document incinerator at Richmond Hill; and took about six months, during which time the department held two seminars to ensure that representatives of local (2) what is the estimated average increase in rates for authorities on the Island understood the key issues and each household in the Borough o f Douglas to meet were then better able to formulate their views. these costs?

The department then considered all the views received Answer and concluded that the consultation document was viewed by those local authorities representing the majority of Hon. members will recollect that in July 1998 the Island residents as a positive and significant step forward. department hosted a presentation to Tynwald members in However, in the course of that consultation, a possible relation to the integrated incinerator (energy from waste) alternative approach emerged. The department took the facility, the current costs of landfill, the projected costs of view that this should be properly examined to assess its disposal of refuse through incineration and continued viability before a final decision was taken on the manner landfill, and the introduction of the ‘user pays’ principle. in which local government should be reformed. It is not unreasonable that companies and persons who The current situation is that a working party has been create waste should have some responsibility to pay for its established by the department under my chairmanship disposal. The real issue is what proportion of the costs of comprising a number of clerks and former clerks of local disposing of waste generated within the Island should be authorities, both urban and rural, and this working party borne by the taxpayer and what proportion by the ratepayer. has already met on three occasions. I am pleased to say Ultimately one or the other will have to pay and only so the the working party is operating in a very constructive much can be placed on the taxpayer without undermining fashion in carrying out an objective assessment of all the the Island’s ability to compete in the market-place. Until issues in order to identify practical, workable solutions. I the early 1980s waste disposal was, in whole or part, paid am most grateful for the time and commitment which the for by local authorities. members of the working group are devoting to this important issue. The concept of ‘user pays’ has been accepted by Tynwald for a number of years, and the assertion that the I return to the hon. member’s question of time scale principle arises from the adoption of incineration as a key and here the department has charged the working party feature of the waste management strategy is misleading. It with producing its conclusions by the end of March 1999. is also untrue, as some are contending, that the cost of These will then be considered by the department and, waste disposal will be substantially greater because of the subject to a viable alternative structure being identified, acceptance of incineration as opposed to landfill. There is the local authorities will be further consulted. I would hope little, if any, difference between the cost of incineration to report to the Council of Ministers before the end of May and landfill. 1999. The present cost of waste disposal through landfill at With regard to the second part of the hon. member’s Wright’s Pit East costs £55 per tonne which is met by the question, I have to say that reform of the rating system is a taxpayer. However, the future cost of landfill (developed matter for the Treasury and not for the Department of Local to current environmental standards and assuming future Government and the Environment. However, one of the landfill sites can be found') is likely to be about £78 per key issues being examined by the working party, to which tonne. Disposal through incineration is estimated to cost

Incinerator - Estimated Rates Increase - Question by Mr Henderson for Written Answer TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T511

in the region of £85 per tonne. These figures exclude the the Minister for Transport to move the resolution standing historic cost of waste disposal, which, under the ‘user pays’, in his name. would remain with the taxpayer. Mr Brown: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to move: Given the inevitability that any future municipal waste sites would have to be engineered to a higher environmental That the Harbour Dues (Fishing Vessels and Tugs) standard that that at Wright’s Pit East there would be little, Regulations 1999 [SD No 19/99] be approved. if any, difference in cost between incineration and landfill. For those local authorities close to the incinerator, the The regulations provide rates of vessel dues in respect reduced cost of transport would almost certainly make of fishing vessels and tugs. The previous increase in these incineration the more financially attractive option. harbour dues occurred two years ago, effective from 1 st April 1997. There was no increase in fishing vessels and It will be for Tynwald to decide what, if any, part of the tugs dues in 1998. The new rate will come into force, if cost of waste disposal should fall on the ratepayer and if it approved by this hon. Court, on 1st April 1999.1 beg to was accepted that the ratepayer should make a contribution move the motion standing in my name. there would be due regard to the ability of users to pay. Additionally, it would be open to the local authority to Mr Singer: I beg to second, Mr President. become involved in economic recycling initiatives to offset waste disposal by incineration. The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution set out at item 4 on the order paper. Will those in favour As part of the IIF project definition, this department please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes commissioned a waste arisings’ study which showed that have it. of the 66,800 tonnes of refuse produced per annum, 57,500 tonnes are incinerable and 48,400 tonnes (72 per cent) emanate from domestic properties. The design of the Harbour Dues (Pleasure Vessels and House proposed energy from waste facility is based on 60,000 tonnes per annum incinerable arisings, of which 43,500 Boats) Regulations 1999 - Approved tonnes (72 per cent) are MSW and chargeable to local authorities. The President: Item 5, the Minister for Transport.

Assuming a gate charge of £85 per tonne, the total sum Mr Brown: Mr President, I beg to move: to be recovered through charges for MSW would be in the region of £3.7 million and if such were to be recovered That the Harbour Dues (Pleasure Vessels and House through the rates would represent a 60p rate. This Boats) Regulations 1999 [SD No 20/99] be approved. department’s officers advise that an average rateable value for a 3-bedroomed house is in the region of £120 per This motion is relative to the harbour dues regulations annum. The imposidon of a 60p rate on such property applying to pleasure vessels and houseboats. The harbour would have the effect of increasing the rates’ bill for that dues on these vessels were last increased in April 1998 household by £72 per annum. These figures illustrate the and it is proposed to increase them by 3 per cent with effect situation where the total cost of MSW disposal would be from 1st April 1999 if this Court approves the regulations passed on to the householder through the rates. This would before them. The department informed the Manx Yachting not arise in many cases. Association of the proposed increase and their representatives have accepted the proposals. I beg to move It is reiterated that it is for Tynwald to determine whether the motion standing in my name. any cost should be placed on the ratepayer and, if so, what part of such cost. Mr Singer: Mr President, I beg to second.

The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution Announcement of Royal Assent set out at item 5 on the order paper. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes The President: I have to tell you that, having been have it. signed by a quorum of each branch, Royal Assent was granted to the Sewerage Act of 1999 on 16th February. Inland Fisheries (Duties) Regulations 1998 - Approved Harbour Dues (Fishing Vessels and Tugs) Regulations 1999 - Approved The President: Item 6, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. The President: Now, hon. members, in keeping with our decision earlier, we now turn to item 4 and I call on Mrs Hannan: Eaghtyrane, I beg to move:

Announcement of Royal Assent Harbour Dues (Fishing Vessels and Tugs) Regulations 1999 - Approved Harbour Dues (Pleasure Vessels and House Boats) Regulations 1999 - Approved Inland Fisheries (Duties) Regulations 1998 - Approved T512 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

That the Inland Fisheries (Duties) Regulations 1998 now where there is an increase required and I would ask [SD No 708/98] be approved. the minister to take cognisance, when she works out her fishing licences, of a similar situation: you could compare I am well aware that an increase of 10 per cent in the a season’s fishing with with membership of a golf club cost of angling licences is bound to attract some comment. and, if you look at the £85 for the reservoir fishing season However, I will outline the reasons for this. and £28 for a junior, one could say that really they are, in Angling licence duties were, up to a few years ago, set my opinion, getting good value for money. It is over £200- every second year. In practice, the result was generally for £250 to be a member of a golf club and the juniors’ fees only a single year’s inflation to be taken into account rather are much more than £28. than two years’. So the reladve cost of angling licences As far as the rivers go, there too I think, if you ask the was eroded compared with angling opportunities. An learned Attorney what he pays for a day or a week’s fishing increase ahead of inflation will help to redress this erosion. in Scotland, there is absolutely no comparison. I would, The quality of angling has attracted favourable comment however, ask the minister if her department could be more for many years and I would draw the hon. members’ diligent with regard to this issue of salmon poaching and attention to very complimentary articles which have indeed there would appear on occasions to be people appeared in angling magazines for the past few years. In fishing in the rivers and reservoirs and people taking more recent years there have been further improvements in fabric than their limit. They could do with a lot more supervision and husbandry at the department’s hatchery, leading to with regard to poaching. It does spoil the breeding stock more fish of the larger size being stocked out. Members in the rivers. The salmon are very much in decline now may be well aware of the increased interest caused by the and I think, despite the stocking regime that the department enhanced angling available in the last few seasons. Anglers has recently introduced, it is a very, very difficult job to are not being asked to pay for the same but for better. maintain any sort of level of fishing our rivers and then, The increase will also help to offset the deficit caused when you think when they get to the small stage and they by extending the junior licence provisions. The range of migrate and all the problems that they have to face out in junior licence-holders is being extended, particularly in the open sea and all these other environments, it is a wonder the 16 to 18-year-old age range involved in full-time we have any migratory fish in our rivers at all. education or vocational training, but it also recognises that That being said, I would just ask the minister, if the even those in employment are at the bottom end of the pay Court agrees to the prices today - and I am sure they will - scales. Extension of a concessionary licence fee to the disabled that her department will give some consideration to increasing the river watchers and the resources that she and to pensioners has been suggested but my department always gives serious considerations to matter such as this has available within her own department and if a way can when considering the cost of angling licences. However, be found to even providing more young fish to be put into in reaching a decision my view has been that in the case of the rivers on a regular basis. Thank you. pensioners particularly, (hey have more time and can bring a lifetime of expertise to the sport. A concession on the Mr Shimmin: Mr President, if I can just follow up some cost, which already compared very favourably with angling of the comments from my colleague for West Douglas as facilities elsewhere, was not justified. However, I can the member responsible for fisheries, the inland fisheries assure hon. members that the matter will continue to be division is a very successful and thriving area at present reviewed in the light of more comprehensive background and we are in a healthy position with regard to the stocking. information and particularly with information gained from However, an ongoing battle has been the level of poaching my department’s questionnaire. It is possible that an which takes place both with those exceeding their catch increase in licence fees generally may be used to offset limits but also the more sinister level of actual poaching the cost of introducing further concessions in future. both on the foreshore and in the rivers. It is one where the Also, the Inland Fisheries (Amendment) Regulations department is attempting to restructure the staffing levels include an added definition of ‘private fishery’ which has at the hatchery in order to try and facilitate greater levels been amended together with the licensing requirements of prosecution and protection of the waters. There are river for anglers using such a facility. A private fishery is covered watchers who do a phenomenally good job for the by a licence applicable to waters other than a reservoir. A department at opportunities both in day-time and night­ day licence to fish at a reservoir has been available for a time where they do police the stretches of water and number of years. As a private fishery may offer angling reservoirs. facilities to visitors who may want a brief taste of angling It is a difficult area because unfortunately there is a during their time in the Island a day licence is made market for the stolen poached fish. We are aware of certain available for the first time to enable them to avail areas where the poached fish are being marketed and we themselves of the facility on that basis. I beg to move the are working with the police and consulting with other areas duties. Thank you. of government to try and make it more difficult to actually sell this stolen or poached fish. We will be getting involved Mr Shimmin: I beg to second and reserve my remarks, with an advertising campaign in order to try and educate Mr President. hotels and restaurants with regard to their legal obligations and also publicising for members of the public, both on Mr Downie: Mr President, I often like to talk on this the salmon fishing but also on the lobster sections within particular issue, and I accept that the minister is in a position restaurants where we are aware that there are rules being

Inland Fisheries (Duties) Regulations 1998 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T513

broken and we are in the process of updating extremely in terms of their breaking strain rather than their diameter, out-of-date legislation. Thank you. and it is quite possible for manufacturers to produce extremely strong lines with a very small diameter. The 1983 The President: Reply, minister. regulations covering the sport of angling chose to define the diameter of the fishing line which had about a 101b Mr Downie: I like lemon with mine when it is poached. breaking strain. A line of that diameter these days could be very much stronger and quite inappropriate for sport Mrs Hannan: I think I have very little to reply to, angling in rivers and reservoirs. The regulations introduce Eaghtyrane. I think Mr Shimmin has said it all, so I beg to an amendment to define lines in terms of their breaking move. strain to a maximum of lOlbs. Spinning is a popular type of angling, but some anglers Several Members: Hear, hear. use marine spinners, which are not appropriate for our inland waters because of their sheer size. They can be cast The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution further into areas where fish might otherwise be given an set out at item 6 on the order paper. Will those in favour opportunity to rest undisturbed. They create a lot of please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes disturbance when entering the water and also when being have it. reeled back in, deterring fish and spoiling opportunities for other anglers. The amendment regulations provide for a maximum size of spinner, both in terms of length and Inland Fisheries (Amendment) Regulations weight, which may be used in a reservoir and a slightly 1998 - Approved larger one for use in rivers. I beg to move the amendments. Mr Shimmin: I beg to second and reserve my remarks. The President: Item 7, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution set out at item 7 on the order paper. Will those in favour Mrs Hannan: Thank you, Eaghtyrane. I beg to move: please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. That the Inland Fisheries (Amendment) Regulations 1998 [SD No 707/98] be approved.

These regulations make some amendments arising from Merchant Shipping Act 1995 (Application) how a private fishery is defined. When it first came in it Order 1999 - Approved was in respect of a particular situation and the definition was framed with that in mind. That situation has changed The President: Item 8, the Minister for Trade and and a more general definition is required to encompass Industry. further developments. With that change came some others associated with it in respect of licensing and the daily limit Mr North: Mr President, I beg to move: to the number of fish a person can catch. I am pleased to say that we have the highest category of That the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 (Application) health in terms of fish health, and my department backs Order 1999 [SD No 23/99] be approved. that up with regular testing of fish farms. One of the important requirements of the health regime is to know The purpose of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 what fish are going where. An amendment in these (Application) Order 1999 is to apply to the Isle of Man regulations ensures that the department will keep fully various provisions of the United Kingdom Merchant aware of all movements of fish. This could be vital Shipping Act 1995. The memorandum to hon. members information for keeping track of and putting an end to the details the effect of each of the provisions applied. The spread of disease if something unfortunately ever did get United Kingdom Merchant Shipping Act 1995 into the Island. consolidated the extant United Kingdom Merchant Sport fishing etiquette requires anglers to use landing Shipping legislation. A number of provisions originally nets to bring fish in and a majority of anglers already do. contained in the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 to 1988 of They are particularly aware of how my department’s the UK Parliament had effect in the Isle of Man either hatchery is now able to stock out bigger fish into the because they applied to British ships in the dependencies reservoirs, so using a landing net at a reservoir has become in general or because they were extended to the Island by a must. Hon. members will have seen the publicity and orders in council. interest arising from some of the large fish caught by The application order brings Manx legislation up to date anglers in reservoirs in recent seasons. The use of landing by adopting the latest United Kingdom provisions. It also nets to land the larger salmon and migratory trout in rivers brings the convention on hazardous and noxious substances is also covered. into Manx law and will enable effect to be given to that The regulations also bring in a number of amendments convention when it comes into operation internationally to the technical aspect of angling. Fishing lines are defined in due course.

Inland Fisheries (Amendment) Regulations 1998 - Approved Merchant Shipping Act 1995 (Application) Order 1999 - Approved T514 TYNWALD COURT WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

The order makes a number of consequential That the Offshore Installations (Reporting of amendments and revocations to Manx legislation, and the Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences) orders in council which originally extended the legislation Regulations 1999 [SD No 25/99] be approved. now superseded by the 1995 Act and this order will be revoked in due course by a separate United Kingdom order Mr Crowe: Mr President, I beg to second and reserve in council. my remarks. The order has been drafted in consultation with the locally based ship-management companies, the seafarers’ The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution unions, the harbour division of the Department of set out at item 9 on the order paper. Will those in favour Transport, the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes United Kingdom Maritime and Coastguard Agency. Where have it. relevant comments received have been incorporated into the final draft. It is now my pleasure to move this motion standing in my name. Driving Licences (Amendment) Regulations Mr Crowe: Mr President, I beg to second and reserve 1999 - Approved my remarks. The President: Item 10, the Minister for Transport. Mr Gilbey: Mr President, I do not wish to speak on the Mr Brown: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to move: contents of the orders but on the very interesting points made regarding these orders by the learned Clerk of That the Driving Licences (Amendment) Tynwald, and I hope that some arrangement can be made Regulations 1999 [SD No 36/99] be approved. where his points on the drafting of these orders can be considered. I certainly would not expect the hon. minister The proposed Driving Licences (Amendment) to be able to come to a decision, nor would I think it Regulations 1999 are the regulations relating to the appropriate for this hon. Court to set about a debate on requirement for newly-qualified drivers to display R-plates these matters, but he has raised very valid points and I on a vehicle and for such restricted drivers and learner wondered whether it could be arranged that either the drivers to be limited to a speed not exceeding 50 miles an Tynwald Standing Orders Committee or the learned hour. By virtue of the provisions in scheduled to the Road Attorney-General would sit down and really consider the Traffic Act of 1985 itself, the 50-mile-an-hour speed limit points that have been raised, because they do seem to me will also apply to any other driver of a vehicle on which L to have considerable merit. It would be quite wrong for or R-plates are displayed. The regulations are introduced these points to have been raised and then no-one to do as an additional road safety measure aimed at first-time anything about them and them just be overlooked. drivers, particularly those who have passed a test to drive a motor vehicle or motorcycle on which there is no general The President: Reply, sir. speed limit. Newly qualified drivers will for a year after being issued with a full licence have to display the R-plates and will be limited to a 50-mile-an-hour speed limit. Also, Mr North: Yes, thank you, Mr President. Yes, I would as a road safety measure the 50-mile-an-hour speed limit tend to agree with the hon. member for Glenfaba. I think will apply to learner drivers. there are certain items where the higher plain of In earlier discussions about the provisions which became constitutional law appears to be at difference, and I enacted in the Road Traffic (Amendment) Act of 1996, it certainly think it should be looked at because it certainly became clear that the police felt that the speed limit would would save a lot of time and explanation between this hon. be difficult to enforce unless it applied to a vehicle which Court and the various departments. I beg to move. displayed the L-plates or R-plates even if the driver was fully qualified and experienced. The Road Traffic Act of The President: Hon. members, may I put the resolution 1985 therefore now includes the provision that it will be set out at item 8 on the order paper. Will those in favour an offence for any driver to exceed 50 miles an hour if the please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes vehicle in which he or she is driving is displaying an L- have it. plate or an R-plate. It will be an offence for a newly-qualified driver to fail to display the R-plates unless he or the vehicle which he is Offshore Installations (Reporting Of driving is included in one of the exempted categories set out in the regulations. I beg to move the motion standing Injuries, Diseases And Dangerous in my name. Occurrences) Regulations 1999 - Approved Mr Singer: Mr President, I beg to second and reserve The President: Item 9, the Minister for Trade and my remarks. Industry. Mr Houghton: Mr President, I rise to wholeheartedly Mr North: Mr President, I beg to move: support and commend the hon. minister and his department

Offshore Installations (Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences) Regulations 1999 - Approved Driving Licences (Amendment) Regulations 1999 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T515

for bringing forward this order today. I am absolutely scooters are being ridden around the towns. They appear certain that it will further safety measures on the roads. It to be proliferating. Good luck to them for having these should have been done many years ago, and very well done! vehicles. It is nice to see the lads, and girls in some cases, Thank you. having their own independent transport but clearly they are on the edge of safety, so I would like an assurance that M r Crowe: Mr President, I would just draw members’ they are actually included in this and will be covered. attention to this problem, I think, which is going to occur Further on in the regulations, I note that there are where any driver in a vehicle with L-plates or R-plates exemptions for a number of groups which I presume, but can be prosecuted if that car exceeds 50 miles an hour. will ask to get the assurance that that is so, are covered by Now, I think we cannot do anything but pass this order as HGV or PSV licences, because I do not see any reason it stands because the legislation has been passed already, other than that for covering why police officers driving but I think there has to be some way of informing vehicles for police purposes and fire brigade personnel provisional drivers and restricted drivers at the point when driving vehicles for fire brigade purposes should be the provisional driver takes out a provisional licence and exempt. As we have seen, there have been a number of when the driver passes his test. There must be a leaflet accidents involving police vehicles being driven at high prepared by the Department of Transport or by the licensing speed and not always for justifiable reasons of having to division of Treasury, because I can see people are going to reach a major scene of an accident. Frequently police fall into a trap that they will be driving a car their son or vehicles are driven at exceptionally high speed through daughter or a friend might have L-plates or R-plates on villages with absolutely no need for them to reach what and find they have been prosecuted unknowingly or turns out to be a minor incident. Fair enough, they may unwittingly for going above 50 miles an hour. Now, I think not know it is a minor incident at the time but they certainly there must be some way that people are made aware of do risk going at tremendous speed. That might not be this problem or perceived, potential problem. Thank you. directly associated with this. All I am saying is that I do not see why police officers and fire brigade and indeed M r Cannell: Mr President, I had identified that as a military personnel in military vehicles, which can also go difficulty as well. Often enough we come across vehicles quite quickly if they are of a certain type, and ambulance with L-plates on clearly being driven by people who have service drivers as w ell... But I presume before you get to been fully qualified by passing their test and surviving the the wheel of these vehicles you have actually gone through necessary qualifications which come on to that. So I think all the qualifications, including taking an HGV licence. that is a fair point because it would tend to be that anybody The final point I would like to make is concerning the looking to prosecute would go after a vehicle with these actual plates themselves. My understanding of the plates, plates on if they were found to be exceeding 50 miles an for their very admirable use which has been launched in hour quite legally. So that is something of a difficulty. Northern Ireland for quite some time, is that these plates Perhaps it is not such a difficulty because obviously a driver were green. Well, the plates were white with a green letter, stopped with these plates on who could prove that they and they seem to be pretty accepted there, and I do not see were outside of the exemption would be all right - if, in why we should be different by going for red or orange-red other words, they could produce a full licence properly on a white ground when Northern Ireland have led the qualified to travel at more than 50 miles an hour and it way quite admirably and seem to have adopted a standard. was in an area where that was permitted. Mr Henderson: Mr President, I rise to support this M r Crowe: No, they are not. order. I think it is a very good idea, it is excellent and probably been too long in coming, I would say, and also I M r Cannell: Another small difficulty I perceive on this: take cognisance of members’ concerns with regards to the as we have heard already you can only either vote this for order, but really I think these will be the first issues that or against rather than an amendment, but at paragraph 4 the department will have taken into consideration and the second paragraph of regulation 4 says: ‘The restrictions possible problems with it, and certainly anything which are also to be observed by a previously qualified driver for encourages or assists young drivers recently through their a period of 12 months from the return to him or her of his test to build up their experience level and to cause them to or her licence by reason of he or she having passed a test.’ drive with care and to build up their level of expertise on I do not know whether it is me that has misread this or not, the roads you can do nothing but commend really, and for but I would think they had already passed a test and had adding it to our repertory of road safety I think it is a valid later been disqualified, so I would have preferred the instrument that we should be using, and I will support the wording to read ‘by reason of he or she having passed a order. second or subsequent test as required by a court following a conviction.’ Mr Downie: Mr President, I am going to speak in Further on, I would like to have an assurance that the support of this particular order, but I would urge a note of groups which are mentioned as ‘motor-bicycle, tricycle, caution here. We already have a raft of legislation in place moped et cetera’ do include motor-scooters. I have no wish which deals with speed limits. There is supposed to be a whatever to be a spoilsport to the two-wheel fraternity and speed limit for small light commercial vans and some of probably, in days gone by, I was just as madcap as they the larger commercial vehicles, and in fact it is being are, but I am extremely concerned at the way some of these enforced in such a way now that you will see brand-new

Driving Licences (Amendment) Regulations 1999-Approved T516 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

commercial vehicles on the road, and they do not even off. I always understood that you should take L-plates off bother to put the indicator on the rear that a speed limit a car if you were an experienced driver driving it, because applies to them. It is common practice to be out on the otherwise you are totally misleading other people on the road and have some of these vehicles pass you at 70 or 80 road who out of courtesy and consideration may - and I miles an hour. They are supposed to be restricted to either hope often do - give precedence to and consideration to 40 or 50 miles an hour, depending on the size, and I wonder people with L-plates on their cars. So I hope that the what dialogue there has been with the police about minister will confirm that that is the intention and that he enforcing some of these issues. As I say, I am all in favour will not be swayed from it. of bringing in legislation which is meaningful and can be The other point which I think is even more important is properly applied, but we seem to have this raft of legislation the very good point made by the hon. member for West in place which people seem to be totally oblivious of. You Douglas, Mr Downie, because I have taken this matter up hardly ever see any reference of it made in the court, there and it frankly is quite appalling that we have speed limits has hardly been an appearance in the court and in fact it for heavy goods vehicles and light goods vehicles and they would be interesting to see in the last 12 months how many are not enforced, as far as I can make out. I would agree people were brought before a court for breaking the law with him entirely about this. How many cases do you read by exceeding the speed limit in these commercial vehicles. of heavy goods vehicles being prosecuted for exceeding I hardly know of a case at all since in fact the legislation the speed limit or light goods vehicles? You do not read of has been brought in. So it would be interesting to hear any. And I am sure that if anyone goes to the Cronk-y- from the minister whether he is going to have some Voddy straight, for example, they will find plenty of dialogue with the police and to see if all these areas can be vehicles that do this. So I would support the hon. member addressed. And if bringing this system in, these R-plates, for West Douglas and I do hope that the minister will talk which I fully support, and putting restrictions on learner to the police about this being enforced much more rigidly. drivers is going to be implemented and then we are in a I know there will be all kinds of arguments that it is very situation where we say, ‘Well, we have not got the officers difficult for one reason and another and that they are fully to police it’, I think it is just a waste of time and we are taken up with speed controls in restricted areas. But I do only really paying lip service to road safety. I know that is think it is something that does require action and I hope not what the minister intends. I just hope today that he can the minister may be kind enough to take some action give us an undertaking as to what he is going to do to regarding it. (Mr Duggan interjecting) address these already existing problems, which just seem to be getting worse. Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I am glad to see this here today because I think it is long overdue. I think what we have Mrs Christian: Mr President, I support the principle, got to remember are the days when we got our first car. I as will many parents who find quite often that young men know my first car was an A35, built in 1959, and could do in particular tend to increase their speed after they have 0 to 60 mph in five seconds if I missed a corner on the passed their driving test, as insurance records will indicate. Marine Drive. (Laughter) Today we are putting these My only concern about it is the point commented on by youngsters in those cars - the hon. member for Onchan, Mr Cannell, and I think I have to disagree with him here in his interpretation. There Mr Quine: You are a young fellow. is nothing in here which allows a person who is fully qualified to drive with an R-plate up at over 50 miles an Mr Karran: I might be to you, sir. hour. It would only be by the grace of the policeman that they may be let off. They will be in breach of the law. (Mr Mr Brown: All are to him! (Laughter) Brown: Hear, hear.) Now, whether or not that represents a practical position I do not know. My only concern about it Mr Karran: But I think the point is that today times is that in those circumstances where it is the family car have changed. In my hon. colleague’s time, when he was and different people are using it from time to time, there a youngster, they more likely had a push bike - if they may be a temptation not to put the R-plate up, and that is were discovered. (Laughter and interjections) And where we may run into difficulties, but nevertheless the naturally the situation was that there would be the usual principle of allowing people to get a bit of experience at banter of a youth, posing in front of the girls with little or modest speeds is one that we should all endorse, I believe. no danger on his push bike. But the fact of the matter is today we put our youngsters in very powerful vehicles as Mr Gilbey: Mr President, could I say that I quite agree soon as they have passed their test, and I think this is a with what is proposed in the order, that anyone driving reflection on the times that we need to do something to while these plates are up should have to keep to the speed, help them because of the peer pressure that we have all because it seems to me absolutely ridiculous that if you been under when we were at that age, wanting to be seen have passed your test, you should then get into a car with as cool. these L-plates or R-plates on and go at any speed you like. I totally agree with the proposal today. I am just a little The whole purpose of the plates is to warn other drivers bit saddened, i know that it takes a while for the that the vehicle is being driven by either a learner driver government to take on my legislation, and I am glad that or by someone who has recently passed their test, and the hon. minister is not the member for health, because if frankly those who have passed their test should take them he had his finger on the pulse, it would be on a corpse as

Driving Licences (Amendment) Regulations 1999 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T517

far as this proposal today is concerned. This was something breaking the law if they exceed 50 miles an hour, and they I raised 10 years ago and 10 years ago it was an will commit an offence which is liable to a fine of up to impossibility, and I am so glad today that we are seeing £1,000 and three penalty points. It is very unlikely that the this thing here, because I think it will help the young people police are going to just warn them. They will be committing because there is that lanket of saying, ‘Well, you are a traffic offence as if they were speeding in a town area breaking the law’, and I think it is a reflection on our times with a 30 mph speed limit on - no difference whatsoever. and I must commend the minister for doing this. I am only So members have to keep that in mind and consider that sorry it did not come in years ago when it should have when they decide whether or not to support this measure. come in, because the pressure is on our youngsters today, It is impractical for us to say that a person like myself, not like it was on us. As I say, I had an A35 but today they who has been driving for over 20 years, if I have a car and have these powerful vehicles and I think we need the force my daughter has just passed her test, should not be covered of law to try and put some sort of rick on them. I am not by this restriction, and the reason is that the police then going to say it will work every time, but if it works half would be stopping people and saying, ‘Oh, I am sorry, I the time, it might cut down the unnecessary injuries and have got a full licence’ and ‘Oh, right, sorry to disturb deaths that are on our roads. So I do support the hon. you’, and it would go on and on and it would therefore, I member and I am glad to see the Council of Ministers are believe, devalue the whole system. enacting a piece of legisladon which I wanted in a decade or so ago. Mr Downie: Quite right.

The President: Reply, minister. Members: Hear, hear.

Mr Brown: Yes, thank you, Mr President. I thank all Mr Brown: The system has to be that when a police the hon. members for their indication of support on this officer is following a vehicle or is doing speed checks and matter, albeit that there are a number of concerns and sees a vehicle with an L-plate or an R-plate on and it is questions. If I can just answer the last speaker first, the exceeding 50 mph, whoever is driving is committing an hon. member for Onchan, Mr Karran, and just make the offence. To do anything else will make it impractical. So point that I am also disappointed that this secondary therefore I hope members will support that. legislation has taken so long to get here before this Court. Now, the hon. member Mr Crowe, member of the I have also been consistent in my support and promotion Council, was concerned about the displaying of the plates of primary legislation to introduce R-plates into the Isle of and also whether or not people are going to be advised. Man and therefore, as I have only been minister of this Can I say that the department is very conscious of this. We department since 1996 and we had to also amend primary have a programme of publicity, posters and small leaflets legislation to enable this legislation to be brought before which are ready to go if this Court approves the order today, this Court, then I can just confirm to the hon. member it and there will be posters distributed round the Island to would have been here earlier only for that change that had local authorities and to other places, to anywhere else that to be made. So there is no lack of commitment on my side wishes them - post offices et cetera; we are undertaking a and I think that there has been some reluctance as to press advertising campaign through the papers to advise whether or not it is in fact a practical measure. people, and I would say that it will be one of those situations I take the view that anything within reason that can help where every so often it will be revived just to give a give guidance to people who get behind a vehicle - whether reminder. And every young person - and I keep using the it is a car or a motorbike - which potentially has the ability term ‘young person’, but of course first-time drivers may to go at excessive speeds should be something we should not be young people - every person who passes their test support and welcome, and I think the view round the Court will be given a small leaflet, when they pass their test, to is that, yes, we should. advise them that they are going to be restricted to an R- We should recognise that many first-time drivers in fact plate, and that if they exceed the speed limit they will be drive sensibly. The problem is there are a few, a number liable to a fine of up to £1000 and three penalty points and who do not, and of course they do cause problems at times in fact could be disqualified. So all that will be covered both within speed limit areas and of course, very when they pass their test. importantly, where there are no speed limits restricting the The one thing which I will check on which I had not speed on part of the highway. Approximately 10 per cent asked about, and clearly we should do it, is that when a last year of all accidents were drivers with one year or less person applies for a provisional licence, the similar leaflet, experience; Of those, three were fatal, so the numbers are. although it should refer to an L-plate, should be given out quite important to keep in mind. The view that I and my to anybody who does that, and I will check to make sure department have taken is that anything that we can do to that that is made available. So from a publicity point of improve this we would welcome. view we will do what we can to ensure people very much A number of concerns were expressed about persons in the early stages are advised of the new restrictions, and who are already qualified. Although it is clear in the it is something we will have to be careful of. exploratory memorandum, let me make it absolutely clear. Mr Cannell raised a few points with regards to ‘any Anybody, anyone at all, it does not matter how long they driver’; I think I have answered that quite clearly. As far have been driving - if they drive a vehicle with either an as motor scooters and whether they are included, I think L-plate displayed or an R-plate displayed, they will be they are included in group 3, which is motorcycles, but I

Driving Licences (Amendment) Regulations 1999 - Approved T518 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

will make absolutely sure again on that and, if there is giving guidance to newly qualified drivers and those anything different, then clearly I will be back here with an learning to drive, to say ‘Be careful, do not exceed this amendment to the regulations to make sure that scooters speed limit’, and if there is abuse then the courts can deal are covered, but I am pretty confident that in fact they are with it effectively. I beg to move the motion standing in under that group 3. my name. We did look very carefully at exemptions, because of course it is quite a difficult one; why should you exempt? The President: Hon. members, I will now put the And again I think we came down to the practicalities of it. resolution set out at item 10 on the order paper. Will those Where you are talking of emergency services, most of them in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. have special training anyway, which means most drivers The ayes have it. are well past their 12 months of passing their initial test anyway and there is a management issue there. However, we did feel that at this stage we should follow what is Customs and Excise Acts (Application) done elsewhere, where such plates are included, which is to exclude those areas that we have included in here. In (Amendment) Order 1999 - Approved fact, we have added the one of the ambulance service, but they have special training, because it would be unfortunate The President: Item 11, the Minister for the Treasury. if a person who was responding to an emergency was in fact then prosecuted for not displaying the plates. It is a Mr Corkill: Mr President, I beg to move: practical thing of trying to be sensible about the whole issue. If it is a problem, then my department would certainly That the Customs and Excise Acts (Application) look to change the law in that area. (Amendment) Order 1999 [SD No 10/99] be approved. Mr Cannell raised the point about why we have not got the green R-plate as they have in Ireland, and why have Mr Radcliffe: I beg to second, sir. we gone for a red one? Again, we have looked at this practically and we have got a mock of the type of plates The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution that are going to be available if Tynwald passes this, and set out at item 11 on the order paper. Will those in favour of course the advantage of having it red - or the red/orange please say aye; against, no. Tlie ayes have it. The ayes as they call it, and I will just show it here for those who have it. want to see - is of course that on one side it is the R and on the other side it is the L, and therefore people do not have to purchase two lots unless they really want to. And as Financial Supervision (Gateways) Order soon as they pass their test they can just turn that over, put 1999 - Approved the R-plate up and they can drive the car legally, because of course the problem would be that somebody who has The President: Item 12, the Minister for the Treasury. passed their test, if they have not got the R-plate ready - which I am sure they would do - could then be committing Mr Corkill: Mr President, I beg to move: an offence immediately on passing their test. And we have just taken the view that we feel that the red R-plate is That the Financial Supervision (Gateways) Order acceptable and the colour is clear and distinctive for people 1999 [SD No 8/99] be approved. who are driving normally, and I hope that normal drivers, those who have passed their test, will in fact acknowledge Section 23 of the Financial Supervision Act 1988 that a person displaying an R-plate is like a person provides that any information obtained by the Financial displaying an L-plate and they have relatively recently Supervision Commission whilst exercising its functions passed their test and hopefully will allow for that. should remain confidential and must not be disclosed to The other thing that came through was the concern about third parties. Section 24 of the Financial Supervision Act enforcement. Anything we do, anything we pass, whether then provides a list of exceptions to this general rule and it be this or any other legislation, does require a level of sets out circumstances when information can be passed to enforcement. The degree of that enforcement clearly in third parties without breaching section 23, and these are this situation is a matter for the Isle of Man Constabulary known as gateways. The effect of this order is to extend and especially the traffic police. My department has regular these statutory gateways to permit the commission to pass meetings at officer level with officers of the constabulary information to the Insurance and Pensions Authority and and they discuss different measures at different times. These issues about wagons speeding, not displaying plates, the Isle of Man Office of Fair Trading in certain people speeding generally, are regularly raised and we have circumstances. I beg to move that the Financial Supervision to allow the police to put their resources where they believe, Act 1988 (Gateways) Order 1999 be approved. based on information provided, they will be most effective, and if there is a concern, then clearly the police, I am sure, Mr Radcliffe: I beg to second, Mr President. will respond to that. I thank members for what they have said. I hope that The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution this provision will go some way, albeit a small way, to set out at item 12 on the order paper. Will those in favour

Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) Order 1999 - Approved Financial Supervision (Gateways) Order 1999 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T519 please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution have it. set out at item 13 on the order paper. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Social Security (Application) Order 1999 - Approved Social Security (Application) (No. 2) Order The President: Item 13, the Minister for Health and 1999-Approved Social Security. The President: Item 14, the Minister for Health and Mrs Christian: Mr President, I beg to move: Social Security.

That the Social Security Legislation (Application) Mrs Christian: Mr President, I beg to move: Order 1999 [SD No 26/99] be approved. That the Social Security (Application) (No. 2) Order This order makes the necessary amendments to 1999 [SD No 27/99] be approved. regulations to enable attendance allowance and the care component of disability living allowance to be paid to This order makes a technical amendment to the order residents of Glenside, Southlands, Reayrt ny Baie or that applied the Social Security (Contributions) Regulations Cummal Mooar. 1979 to the Island. The amendment is concerned with the Up to now, attendance allowance or the care component circumstances in which a person entitled to automatic of disability living allowance have not been payable to the credits of contribution on reaching age 60 may nevertheless residents of these homes or have only been payable for the have the right to pay class three contributions and, as has first 28 days of residence if it was in payment when they been explained in the memorandum which was circulated entered the home. This is because the benefit is intended to hon. members, that would entitle them then to the to help with the extra costs associated with being disabled. pension supplement in due course. I beg to move. Whilst a person is in one of these homes, those extra costs are being met in part by the department because up to now Mr Cannell: I beg to second. there has been a subsidy in the charging provision. However, the extent of that subsidy, which is currently The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution running at about £250,000 per year excluding loan debt, set out at item 14 on the order paper. Will those in favour and certain central maintenance and administrative costs, please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes is something which we feel should be brought under control have it. through the annual revision of charges. Whether it can be entirely eliminated remains to be seen, but the changes proposed by this order are an essential component of that Pension Schemes Legislation (Application) policy in that they ensure that those who are not supported by supplementary benefit in meeting their residential Order 1999 - Approved charges will have beneficial access to those non-income- The President: Item 15, the Minister for Health and related benefits aimed at helping people with extra costs Social Security. of their disabilities. The main benefit for people who develop disabilities Mrs Christian: Mr President, I beg to move: after the age of 65 is attendance allowance, which is currently payable at one of two rates: either £51.30 or That the Pension Schemes Legislation (Application) £34.30 a week, depending upon the extent of the attendance Order 1999 [SD No 28/99] be approved. needs. In theory, all of the 200 or so residents in our four homes will be brought within the scope of the attendance This order applies to the Island two items of subsidiary allowance by this order, and although just over half of them legislation of the UK Parliament concerned with are already supported by supplementary benefit in meeting occupational pension schemes. The purpose of the order their charges, the remaining 90 or so who are meeting their has been explained in detail in the memorandum which charges out of their own resources may well qualify for has been circulated to hon. members. The legislation for the payment of attendance allowance. This order also has the most part falls within the terms of the reciprocal the consequence of bringing the residents of our homes agreement and needs to be applied to the Island to keep into line with the residents of private residential and nursing the relevant legislation of the Island in line with that of the homes in terms of their access to attendance allowances UK. I beg to move. or the care component of disability living allowance. I beg to move. Mr Cannell: I beg to second, Mr President.

Mr Cannell: I beg to second, Mr President, and reserve The President: I will put the resolution, hon. members, my remarks. set out at item 15 on the order paper. Will those in favour

Social Security (Application) Order 1999 - Approved Social Security (Application) (No. 2) Order 1999 - Approved Pension Schemes Legislation (Application) Order 1999 - Approved T520 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. have it. The ayes have it. I think, hon. members, an appropriate time to adjourn and the adjournment will be until 2.30. At 2.30 we will have the Sulby plan. Drinking in Public Places (Designated Places) (Peel) Order 1999 - Approved The Court adjourned at 1.01 p.m.

The President: Item 17, the Minister for Home Affairs. Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Mr Bell: Mr President, I beg to move: Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried That the Drinking in Public Places (Designated Places) (Peel) Order 1999 [SD No 21/99] be approved. The President: Hon. members, we now turn to item 3 which is the resumption of the debate on the Sulby Local This order is made under powers provided under section Plan which was adjourned at the November 1998 sitting. 76 of the Licensing Act of 1995. It designates four areas At that sitting Mr Downie moved the motion, which was of Peel as being places where drinking liquor in public seconded by Mr Braidwood who reserved his remarks. We will be an offence once the individual concerned has been then moved immediately into the adjournment debate. All requested by a police officer not to do so. The areas in members are therefore entitled to speak to the motion today. question are: Castle Street play area; St Peter’s Church Hon. members, section 14 of the Town and Country grounds, Market Place; West View play area; and the Planning Act of 1936 provides that in respect to orders shelters in Market Place. The request for these areas to be under the Act, such as the one referred to in this item, any designated has come from the Peel Town Commissioners local authority or interested person may appear at the bar working with the police to address a problem that is causing of Tynwald when such order is being considered and may increasing concern within the town. I beg to move. oppose the approval of such order. Standing Order 8.1 (2) requires such persons to give three days’ notice of intention Mr Gelling: I beg to second, Mr President. to appear. It is for the Court to decide when and in what way Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I have no problems with this objections will be heard. If hon. members agree, I will order. I just hope that it will be policed. I was disappointed, invite any persons who have given notice of their wish to when bringing legislation in to give the police power to address the Court to come to the bar of the Court and make take alcohol off juniors in public places, that it was never themselves known. The objectors can be heard and used, and I do hope that his efforts will be policed, more questioned in the usual way before debate takes place. than the efforts of me trying to change the law to give the I now invite any persons who have given notice of their police the power as far as taking alcohol off juniors in the wish to address the Court to come to the bar of the Court first place. But apart from that, I have no problem with the and make themselves known. Please state who you are order. But I do hope that we will see that these orders will and whether you are appearing on behalf of any other be enforced, Eaghtyrane. person.

The President: Reply, minister. M r A L G ough: Mr President, Alan Gough, representing Mr Arthur Radcliffe, who is with me today in M r Bell: Mr President, the hon. member is talking about opposition to this plan. a quite separate issue altogether. It is an offence for a juvenile to consume alcohol, regardless of where that The President: Do you agree to hear Mr Gough, hon. consumption takes place, and the police do actively round members? up these under-age drinkers from time to time and they have confiscated the alcohol. This particular order Members: Agreed. designates specific areas within Peel where any consumption of alcohol in future will be illegal. The President: Thank you. Would you proceed, sir. The regulations themselves are fairly new; there are only a couple of other places on the Island where these Mr A Radcliffe: Mr President, Arthur Radcliffe, restrictions actually apply. To my knowledge, they have appearing with Mr Gough on behalf of myself. enabled the police on a number of occasions to remove problems from those areas, and I believe it is a further step The President: Thank you. forward in rounding up undesirable drinking in public places, and I would urge members to support the motion Mr Gough: Mr President and hon. members, the before us. background to this matter is largely as follows. We are concerned firstly only with that part of the plan which The President: Hon. members, I will now put the dezones what was known as area 1, which is the field to resolution set out at item 17 on the order paper. Will those the north-west of the Sulby Bridge comer. This is part of

Drinking in Public Places (Designated Places) (Peel) Order 1999 - Approved Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T521

Kella Farm, farmed for many years by Mr Radcliffe with passage through the democratic statutory process is open his family before him. It dezones this land for residential to criticism. purposes and it zones it for the first time for agricultural As a statement of planning policy the plan is bad and it purposes. In the history of zoning this land has never been is bad because all appraisals of this area over 25 years zoned for anything other than residential purposes. It was have been ignored by the plan. There is no explanation noted as such on the draft development plan in 1971 as whatsoever of the department’s U-turn in October 1995 residential purposes; it was confirmed for that use in the which eventually culminated in the plan being produced 1982 all-island order; it was unaltered in that categorisation in September 1996. The plan reveals no changes in social, in the 1991 north-east sector plan and it was reconfirmed economic or environmental circumstances which justified in that designation in an Issues and Options document it. produced by the department itself in May 1995, when The Bexson report - that was the public inquiry - is consideration was first being given to a local plan for Sulby. irrational. It gives as one of its reasons public opinion, but The development has up until recent times been at the relevant time the public opinion voiced at the inquiry supported by the Lezayre Parish Commissioners. The represented - or that voice in opposition to the development Issues and Options document, which was produced by the of area 1 - represented only 3.5 per cent of the inhabitants department was the result of extensive consultation and in Sulby. when it was produced it reflected - and I quote - ‘the The Sulby plan is now recognised as being tainted and policies, proposals and recommendations of the unsafe, and the reason it is recognised now as being such department’ and included a development brief for this is because of the findings of planning inspector Crowe, as specific land. That, as I say, was produced in May 1995. endorsed by acting minister Mr Delaney, in the recent So far as we are aware, no further professional reports, decision on Mr Radcliffe’s planning application in detail environmental studies or other appraisals after that have for development of the western part of the field. After an taken place which would justify or even suggest a reason exhaustive examination of the facts at an all-day hearing, for any major departure from that recommendation. when all relevant parties were heard and all relevant It may be - we do not know - that some letters were arguments were put forward, the inspector stated that he - received from residents in the area but the result of it all I quote - ‘can see no present objection in principle to the was that at a meeting of the department on 9th October residential development of the appeal site to the limited 1995, that meeting being chaired by the then minister Mr extent proposed’. It is true that he turned down the planning Groves, a decision was taken to dezone the land for application on three, we say, relatively minor matters of residential purposes. As a consequence, a draft Sulby plan detail. It was a detailed application. In principle he could was first produced in September 1996. It was signed by find no objection at all. Mr Groves and it completely reversed the Therefore as a statement of planning policy the plan is recommendations of the Issues and Options document so flawed. The Issues and Options document proposed far as area 1 was concerned and it zoned for residential retaining area 1 for residential purposes. Now the planning purposes an area at the other, the western end of Sulby inspector’s report confirms it is suitable for residential straight, known as area 2 at that time, which land had never purposes. At the time this plan was developed, in the middle previously enjoyed this type of zoning and it already having of it all, it was for a period deemed to be not suitable for been designated as an area of high landscape value and residential purposes. scenic significance, and for the avoidance of any doubt, The Issues and Options document was supported by Mr Radcliffe’s land has never been designated as such. the commissioners. Before that document was produced The proposed dezoning of area 1 provided, we say, the in May 1995 there were meetings between Mr Radcliffe bandwagon onto which the residents could jump and they and his advisers at the time and officers of the department, did. Consequently there was some change of local mood as a result of which the development of the whole field, at the public inquiry which took place in November 1996, originally proposed, was abandoned in favour of the at which the commissioners still supported a residential western part of the field. This left open space views from scheme for area 1, although it is true they had certain Sulby Bridge. reservations. Remarkably, in the plan area 1 was sacrificed to area 2. Mr Bexson was the appointed person to conduct the Area 2 is an area designated, as I have said, as an area of inquiry and he produced his report and recommended high landscape value and scenic significance. Now it is dezoning of the land because of, first, visual impact, and proposed for housing - and I quote from Bexson’s report - we wonder why there was not visual impact previously; ‘to provide for the long-term growth needs and also to very substantial local opposition, which we say was totally offset redesignation of area 1’. So all that the plan does is overstated by him; a change to the character and appearance take the development out of area 1 and put it into area 2. of the village, which is obvious; a loss of agricultural land, Mr Radcliffe, we say, has a legitimate expectation that which we say is minimal, and some drainage difficulties the land would remain zoned until it was ready for which we say are easily overcome. development or until there was a change of circumstances. Mr Radcliffe’s case is this: it is the role of Tynwald to He has not applied previously for planning approval approve good plans; to reject plans which are bad, ill- - because he thought the land was safe and he took into conceived or which are tainted; so to scrutinise the benefit account there was still continuing development at Carrick of plans as against the detriment which may result in grave Park nearby. So it is only recently that he has lodged his injustice to any relevant person, and to reject plans whose planning applications. We say that he took the approach

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T522 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

of a responsible landowner, not a developer there to make in question has been effectively zoned for residential a quick buck. He was waiting until there was demand and development for 20 years? If you have any thought at all an opportunity to develop the land, and the circumstances for the reputation of this Court and government I would of the 1982 order, the long-term proposals contained urge you to reject this new Sulby village plan out of hand. therein, were such to encourage him to do that. If I may briefly recap, Mr President, the land now Area 1 would accommodate 35 dwellings at most. Areas proposed for dezoning has been zoned for residential 2, 4 and 5 would accommodate 27. development for over 20 years. In May 1995 after public The Sulby plan as a precedent renders doubtful the effect consultation an Issues and Options document was produced of the all-island plan of 1982. Mr Vannan, in his evidence by DoLGE planning officers, suggesting that the field retain to the Bexson inquiry on behalf of the department, its residential zoning. This document was then discussed considered that the 1982 plan was obsolete. Has the public at political level by the Department of Local Government, been told? Mr Radcliffe was not told. It is still the then consisting of the member for Garff, Mr Rodan; the predominant document upon which the public rely on member for West Douglas, Mr Downie; the then minister, planning matters. the member for Ramsey, Mr Terry Groves. Mr Groves was I have to say something about the role of Mr Groves at that time my next-door neighbour and lived 100 to 150 and it is this. Mr Groves should have been advised by those metres from the land suggested for development in the responsible for advising him to distance himself from the Issues and Options document. matter in the same way that the present minister has In September 1996 the draft village plan was produced, correctly handed over the matter of Mr Radcliffe’s planning signed by Mr Groves, proposing that my land, nine acres appeal to acting minister Mr Delaney. A minister in these at Sulby Bridge, be dezoned for agricultural use and that circumstances - and Mr Groves at the time lived hundred development should take place in two fields at Sulby Glen, yards from the site - is in the same position as a judge or a consisting in total of approximately seven acres. I would planning inspector and there need not be bias or an suggest this was a totally irrational and scandalous decision. improper motive, only the perception that this is how it I would indeed challenge anybody to defend it on planning could look to the public. grounds. There is no question about it any more, it is not a matter There is no doubt that Mr Groves should have declared that is being debated. All the time we see in the appeal an interest and taken no further part in the matter. It is also court in England the courts quashing decisions that are quite clear that Mr Rodan and Mr Downie must have been tainted. All the time we see politicians being forced to totally aware of the situation and did absolutely nothing resign because of undisclosed interests. The reasons are about it. This is the sort of thing, I regret to say, that one sound. It is right that they do so and it is now what the expects to find in a Third World banana republic, but not public expects. in a society which promotes itself as being stable, Mr Radcliffe took the usual course and applied for democratic and above all ethical. compensation for the dezoning of his land and that was It is a well-established principle in all civilised countries rejected. that justice is not only done but seen to be done. I would You may be aware of an objectors’ petition which has refer, as Mr Gough has, to the recent House of Lords ruling been circulated. We say about that it is too late in the day, on unfortunate Lord Hoffman in the Pinochet affair. I would it has a lot of signatures to it but the wrong question was suggest that the same principle is applied to planning asked, and it really is not admissible because it is not in procedures, which have not only to be scrupulously fair objection to this plan, it is only in support. but be seen to be fair in the eyes of the general public. Mr President and hon. members, Tynwald is not a There is another worrying aspect to this whole sorry rubber-stamp for the department. It has to balance fairness, business. It has taken me over two years to find out who democratic principles and impartiality on the one hand with actually sat on the committee which recommended the political efficiency and getting the job done on the other. dezoning of my land and to find out whether or not any Also it has to be seen to do so. I would urge you that this member did indeed declare an interest. At the end of last plan is bad and you should not accept it and should return October, being no further ahead in this matter, I again it to the department. phoned Mr Vannan of the planning department, who was Mr President, Mr Radcliffe has expressed a wish to say very helpful and promised me all the details I required, a few words of his own and with your permission he would including copies of the relevant minutes. After two weeks like to do so. nothing was forthcoming but on 13th October 19981 sent a letter by recorded delivery to Mr Vannan. After three The President: Thank you, hon. Mr Gough. Mr weeks nothing more was heard and it took the intervention Radcliffe. Proceed, sir. of three of the most senior members of this government and a letter to the Attorney-General before I received a Mr A Radcliffe: Mr President, Lord Bishop, hon. letter from the chief executive of DLGE with the members, what sort of society do we live in, what sort of information I required, only a few days before the Sulby government have we, when a minister with responsibility plan was to come before Tynwald at the last sitting. This is for local government and planning can recommend to an after two years. inspector dezoning land practically adjacent to his own If I may, Mr President, I will read you the relevant house, when that house has in fact been on the market for paragraph from this letter: ‘As regards your most recent some time for a price of over £400,000 and when the land enquiry, I can only restate that it is government policy not

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T523

to release copies of departmental minutes. Having said that, out that the whole basis of my argument is that the you asked me specifically about a meeting of this inspector, in making his report, must have put considerable department held on October 9th 1995 and I can confirm weight on the views of the department and Mr Groves, that it was at this meeting, chaired by the then minister Mr and that is the whole basis of my argument. The whole T R A Groves, that the Responses and Issues documents plan is completely flawed. dated May 1995 were discussed and it was decided at that meeting to designate area 1, field 0079, as open space rather Mr Downie: Would you not accept, Mr Radcliffe, that than residential.’ when the department made the decision to further the plan It will, no doubt, be argued by those wishing to extricate Mr Groves was no longer a member of the department? themselves from this - 1 was going to say ‘sordid’, but let us say ‘unfortunate’ thing - that this was in theory only a Mr A Radcliffe: I am more aware of that than you are. recommendation to an independent planning inspector. I would maintain that the inspector must have placed Mr Downie: I understand you are a member of Lezayre considerable weight on the recommendation of the Commissioners. Is that correct? department and the minister, and because of Mr Groves’ involvement this completely invalidates the proposed Mr A Radcliffe: No, it is not, Mr President. I am not village plan. now. I was. The Manx people expect their representatives to be men and women with independent minds who vote according Mr Downie: You were at the time. And during the time to their conscience on the merits of each issue brought you were a member of the Lezayre Commissioners, were before them. Members should not be railroaded into you involved in the consultative process working up the decisions by the concept of collective responsibility or Sulby plan? party political affiliations. TTiere are two aspects of this matter to be considered Mr Radcliffe: If I could, Mr President, I will outline when voting on this village plan. Firstly, as demonstrated my position on this. I was totally aware, when the village by Mr Gough, there are no planning grounds for dezoning plan came up for consultation, I was in a difficult position, this land. In fact in turning down my recent appeal on the so I consulted all the members of the then commissioners consideration of detailed design, as Mr Gough has pointed who were quite happy with the situation. I referred to then out, the planning inspector stated quite clearly, ‘I can see no present objection in principle to the residential the clerk, Mr Ian Corkill, who contacted DoLGE to ask what my position was. We were told that I was able to development of the field site to the limited extent proposed.’ Secondly, if this village plan is adopted, who attend the meetings as long as I declared an interest and in their right mind, either on or off the Island, would have took no part in the actual discussion when my land was any confidence in a government that approves or even involved, and that is exactly what I did. I was aware that I condones the sort of practices involved in the formulation had to be seen completely apart from this, and that is the of this plan? The most sensible, indeed the only option, is procedure I followed. to reject the Sulby village plan as proposed out of hand and start afresh. Thank you, Mr President, hon. members. Mr Downie: And can you confirm whether your interest has been declared in a proper manner - The President: Would the hon. members of Tynwald please take their seats. Now, does any hon. member wish Mr A Radcliffe: It is in the minutes. to address questions to either of the two hon. gentlemen who have appeared at the bar? The hon. Mr Downie. Mr Downie: - and you have withdrawn from discussions involving your land? Mr Downie: Thank you. I would like to address a question to Mr Radcliffe, if I may. It is with regard your Mr A Radcliffe: It is all minuted and you can have a quite strong allegation towards the former minister Mr look at Lezayre Parish Commissioners’ minutes. Groves, and you indicate you felt that he had some part to play in the designation of your land. Are you aware that Mr Downie: Thank you. the recommendations in the inspector’s report were actually deferred until after the November 1996 election? In other Mr A Radcliffe: No problem. I am quite happy. words the department felt that the determination of the contents of the Sulby plan was a matter which should be Mr Rodan: Mr President, I have a question to Mr left for consideration by the new department appointed Gough. Mr Gough, you referred several times to the Issues following the general election. The newly constituted and Options document as making recommendations department considered the independent inspector’s report regarding your client’s land for residential purposes. Would at several meetings and the finalised contents were agreed you accept that the inclusion of a proposal and development at a meeting held on 8th September 1997. Now, were you brief for this land in the Issues and Options document does aware of that, Mr Radcliffe? not in fact amount to a recommendation, but it is just that, an issue and option included in the document in order to Mr A Radcliffe: Mr President, I am aware. I would stimulate debate and give the public something to focus suggest that makes the matter even worse and I pointed on as one of several options, to give people something on

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T524 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

which to comment, and that being so, an Issues and Options Mr Radcliffe: Mr President, I did not withdraw from document issued for the public for facilitating public the room. I stayed there but did not take part in the discussion is not in itself a document that makes specific discussions. recommendations and it is only following the consideration of views, following the Issues and Options document, that Mr Singer: Could I ask Mr Gough? Obviously it is a the department is then in a position to make a draft plan very serious accusation that you are making, you are both which contains recommendations for the public inquiry? making, about Mr Groves using his personal interest, as you say, in influencing the dezoning and rezoning. Mr Gough: I agree entirely, Mr President, that is what Whatever the public perception is, do you believe that it should do, but that is not what it did. The contents page happened, because it is important to this Court, I believe, of the Issues and Options document, section 3: ‘Options because Mr Groves is not here today to defend his action? for Sulby with policies, proposals and recommendations’. I read into that ‘of the department’. I cannot see who else Mr Gough: If that question is to me, I have not accused it could be. And contained in the document at paragraph 3, Mr Groves of anything. I was careful in what I said. I think options for Sulby with its proposals and recommendations, Mr Radcliffe went further. What my position is as it sets out the development options with regard to Mr representing Mr Radcliffe is clearly this. Mr Groves should Radcliffe’s land, there is a summary of the situation there. have been advised what is patently obvious to any right- There is a development brief which starts off, ‘It is thinking person: to distance himself from this matter. If recommended that the development of this area be anyone thinks that he should not have distanced himself undertaken in accordance with the following brief’ and on this matter it would be a strange view for an intelligent then there are nine or 10 points as to exactly how it should person to think. That is all I am saying. Judges do it, be developed. That is a recommendation so far as I know. planning inspectors do it, it is done in every walk of life. Whoever advises ministers on these matters should have stepped in immediately. M r Rodan: Could I put it this way, Mr Gough? The Issues and Options document is precisely that. It is a Mr Singer: Can I ask one more question, please? document issued as part of the public consultation process and in order to facilitate public discussion, proposals are The President: Certainly. included in an Issues and Options document which are then capable of amendment or reversal following views Mr A Radcliffe: Mr President. Could I come in that received from the public, and it is that consideration which please, Mr President? took place in October 1995 for the production of the draft plan which went to the inquiry, not the Issues and Options The President: No, sir. The question was addressed to document which was tested at public inquiry. It was the M r Gough. document produced following the Issues and Options document which informed public opinion. Mr A Radcliffe: Oh.

Mr Gough: Yes, that is quite easy. The Issues and Mr Singer: I am quite happy if Mr Radcliffe wants to Options document was produced after consultation with answer that question as well. I could put the question to 50 people and bodies. That consultation resulted in the him. production of this document. Between this document, which was produced in May 1995, and the production of The President: In that case, address the question to Mr the draft plan in September 1996, or perhaps more Radcliffe then. importantly, October 1995 when the decision to dezone was made, I do not know what happened. I asked at the Mr Singer: Mr Radcliffe, could you possibly enlarge planning appeal inquiry what happened that was so on my previous question to Mr Gough? dramatic in that period to reverse the recommendations in this document. I could not get a satisfactory answer. Mr A Radcliffe: Yes, I would pleased to, M r President, members. The question is not whether Mr Groves actually Mr Braidwood: A question to Mr Gough, sir. Mr allowed his situation to influence them. The whole matter Gough, was your client aware that in the 1991 north-east is he should not have allowed himself to get in that position. strategic plan it was made clear that your client’s land I am not suggesting Mr Groves took it into account, but would be considered for rezoning from residential in any what I am saying is that in any walk of life the process has future Sulby village plan? got to be seen to be totally untainted. You have only got to against the Pinochet affair. Nobody suggested Lord Mr Gough: Yes. Hoffman ever -

Mr Singer: Could I ask Mr Radcliffe? When the matter The President: Stay at Sulby. (Laughter) was discussed in Lezayre Commissioners you said you did not take any part in the discussion. Did you in fact Mr A Radcliffe: But basically what I am saying is the withdraw from the room or did you sit there whilst the procedure was wrong and I am quite happy to leave it at discussion took place? that.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T525

Mr Singer: One more question, Mr President. The Speaker: Yes, Mr President, I have listened carefully to the evidence which has been presented to the The President: Certainly. Court this afternoon, as I trust each hon. member of this Court has done similarly, and I have got no intention Mr Singer: Mr Radcliffe, can I ask you, is your land in whatsoever of getting embroiled in an argument of the potential flooding area and did the recent floods have personality or in fact in an argument of detail in relation to any effect on the land? one particular area of land vis-à-vis another piece of area of land in the Sulby village. But I think Mr Gough, in his Mr A Radcliffe: Mr President, that land was not in the submission to us from the commencement of our discussion flooded area. It has never been. Sulby has had problems this afternoon, spelt out quite plainly the manner in which with flooding in certain areas over the years. That land this particular land has been treated from the very first has never been flooded by Sulby River in anybody’s tíme that we had, in effect, zoned land on the Isle of Man, lifetime. The inspector pointed out in his report that he and his comment was that we reached a position in 1996 had no difficulty with the drainage. when for the first time this particular piece of land had been dezoned. It had never been put on the plan from day Mr Singer: Thank you, Mr President. 1 as being an area of high landscape value. Mr Gough reminded this hon. Court, we members Mr Quine: Mr President, if I could ask. I think Mr assembled, that it is the duty of Tynwald here to make its Radcliffe could probably answer this one for me. The draft decision and it has to make its decision with the benefit of plan on which the public inquiry was held - did that plan the petitioner being allowed to make their case at the bar reflect the omission of your area and the inclusion of area of this Court and not just on the paperwork which we 2? ofttimes have given to us in abundance. He reminded us that it is the role of Tynwald to, in effect, Mr A Radcliffe: Yes. ditch bad plans. We can make a judgement on those plans whether or not a petitioner appears at the bar of this Court. Mr Quine: Right, and at the inquiry you were But equally, and in my view and with certainly more represented at that inquiry, at the public inquiry? weight placed upon it, he made the case that Tynwald Court should see to it that there is no grave injustice. We have to Mr A Radcliffe: Yes. make that final decision, and having listened to the evidence which has been put in front of us from the bar Mr Quine: And you made full representations in regard this afternoon, I am concerned seriously as to the injustice to the merits of area 1 and area 2 and so on at the inquiry? which the petitioner feels. In the planning application appeal which we have had Mr A Radcliffe: Yes. circulated to us, the conclusions - granted I just have the conclusions - in paragraph 77 it says, ‘There can be no Mr Quine: So Mr Bexson had all that information doubt that at the present time the operative development before him when he took his decision in relation to the plan is the 1982 plan and that the proposed development local plan? is in accordance with the provisions of this plan. That is not to say, however, that the proposal should automatically Mr A Radcliffe: Yes. be approved’, and, hon. members, that is where Tynwald Court comes in: it is not to be automatically approved. Mr Quine: Thank you. There are other considerations relative to the issue of the principle of the development and then there are the The President: Are there any further questions from considerations presented by the appealed application being the floor, hon. members? If not, I thank both witnesses for one of detail. The application was in detail. In paragraph appearing before the Court this afternoon and for being so 78 it says, ‘Although the draft local plan has been the helpful in their responses to the questions posed from the subject of local consultation, in which it has attracted much floor. Thank you, gentlemen. support and so far as the appeal site is concerned has been blessed with a favourable report following an inquiry into Now, we return to the debate. Does any hon. member objections, it cannot be said with any degree of security wish to speak to the resolution? Mr Downie, do you wish that as an amending order it will attract the approval of to make a further presentation? Tynwald.’ Not much weight, therefore, in my opinion should be attached to its proposal to redesignate the site to Mr Downie: Do I have the opportunity to sum up, Mr a non-development purpose, and we heard that this is the President? first time that this land would be zoned for a non­ development purpose, and as Mr Gough reminded us and The President: I will permit you to do so if you wish. I think also Mr Radcliffe in his submission repeated on two occasions, in paragraph 92 it says, ‘To summarise, I Mr Downie: Thank you. see no present objection in principle to the residential development of the appeal site to the limited extent The President: The hon. Mr Speaker. proposed.’ Now, that is a point and a very strong point

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T526 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 which Mr Gough has made at the bar of this Court today. debate as the elected member for the area and not as the Even at this stage of the appeal, at this stage of an appeal, Minister for Local Government and the Environment. there is no objection to the development on the site. It is in fact objection in a detail of the plans, a minor detail I think Mr Cannan: Therefore there is no collective Mr Gough said, a minor detail, which I am sure by responsibility. architects and co-operation could in one form or another be altered. Mr Quine: Well, we will get the odd stupid remark Now, hon. members, bearing in mind with the best will from my right, but as has been explained, the position is in the world the historical recall from the first time of quite clear. For reasons of planning procedures I took a zoning, as has been spelt out this afternoon, to the result decision to distance myself from this application and I think of the appeal hearing which we would not have had had Mr Gough has conceded that that was the correct procedure. we not had this adjourned debate and that appeal hearing So I make my contribution here today as the local saying in paragraph 92, ‘I see no present objection in representative. principle to the residential development of the appeal site’, In recognition, I believe, of the inevitable conflicts of can we this afternoon honourably and injustice say that in interests arising from the planning processes, be they this case this plan should stand? Hon. members, I do not development planning particular to an application or be think we should and I will certainly be voting against the they strategic planning such as we are dealing with with a Sulby plan. local plan, I think the recognition of that conflict is such that we have built into both procedures an independent Mr Braidwood: Mr President, time stands still for no element. In relation to development planning we have, person and that has happened in this case with the Sulby within the appeal stage, the independent inspector and we Village Local Plan. It has been mentioned that it was zoned have within the strategic development, of course, the before the 1982 plan for residential but Mr Radcliffe has inspector who conducts a local inquiry and takes on board never developed the site. He had the opportunity in those the evidence from all the parties, and I think we should previous years and planning permissions were only start out in judging this matter, having recognition to those submitted when the Sulby Village Local Plan Issues and procedures. options document process was going through the May I also ask hon. members to bear in mind that we procedures. are not here today to discuss a planning application, past The current planning policy is set down in the 1982 or present. Different criteria attach to the judgement of a Development Plan Order and the Sulby Village Local Plan development planning process than attach to a strategic has been prepared in response to the 1991 North-east Sector planning process. We are here to look at strategic planning. Strategic Plan. The north-east sector strategic plan Strategic planning, by its very nature, takes us into the emphasised the essential rural character of the area and medium/long term and brings into play that term which I that the local plan should indicate where limited infill is think we are all very familiar with and that is sustainable appropriate within the present fabric. development. It is not a question of what is appropriate The 1991 strategic plan also made it clear that the today judged against a plan that may be in position today. residential notation for area 1 would be recommended for A local plan is looking forward to what should be the reconsideration, which has subsequently happened. There direction that one follows in terms of strategic planning has been a public inquiry. Mr Radcliffe submitted his for a number of years, a good number of years, and I think, evidence. Other residents have put their case. The inspector looking to the present situation in Sulby is a good example has weighed up all the submissions and has recommended of that because if we ignore sustainable development in that the Sulby village plan, as drafted, be approved, which the context of what could happen within Sulby, I think it is now the substantive document we are debating today. would be to our detriment and I say that because I would The inspector took into consideration the very substantial suggest to members, and I know hon. members are quite opposition to area 1 remaining as residential, and this has familiar with Sulby, we have Sulby which is strung out been vindicated by a petition of the inhabitants of the along a considerable section of roadway. I think that is a village of Sulby which has been previously circulated to good example of what should not happen in the process of members. the strategic, sustainable form of development. So I would We have to take into consideration that nothing is set in ask members also to bear in mind the desirability and the stone. In five years’ time when the Sulby Village Local need not to perpetuate past mistakes in terms of either Plan will be reconsidered once again there may be a case strategic planning or development planning. again for rezoning. Mr Radcliffe has had time enough to The central issue is the abandonment, as has been put develop his land, and times have changed. People’s to us, of area 1 and that is the area owned by Mr Radcliffe, attitudes and perceptions to the environment they live in and again in favour of area 2 which is a smaller area of have become more important than it was in latter days. land at the Sulby crossroads. I hope the members of this hon. Court will support the Now, the inspector, as part of the local, the strategic, motion in front of them and agree to the Sulby Village planning process, the local plan process, has considered Local Plan. the evidence, has assessed all that evidence and has made a recommendation which hon. members are well aware Mr Quine: Mr President, I would like to point out first of. Mr Radcliffe does not agree with that, and that is fine and foremost that I am making my contribution to this and he is here today to represent his views to this hon.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T527

Court. But that is what he is doing: he is representing his Without doubt a nine-acre housing development would views. But it is an expression of view against the backdrop have a serious adverse visual impact on a small village of a very democratic, comprehensive, detailed process such as Sulby, a village of high scenic value. Such a which has allowed full input of his views in relation to the development, a development of those dimensions, views of residents, the views of professional planners. That accepting that we are talking here of a proposition that has all been taken on board and judged by an experienced would take in 35 properties, but there is still an area of professional. land which could be the subject of further applications at Now, we can sit here with a few papers in front of us. another point in time, so accepting that that is the situation, Mr Speaker, his own views on planning generally and such a development would be out of all proportion to the he is entitled to them, but that would not be doing justice existing village. A strong case, based on local need, perhaps to the case either. The way for justice to be done is to adhere could go some way to counter that suggestion, but that and to take account and for us to listen to the statutory local need does not exist. procedures which are in place. We have gone through those Whether you consider the centre of the village to be statutory procedures and we have a recommendation before Sulby Mill, for argument’s sake, and I certainly do not us which has been translated into the order that is before consider Sulby Mill to be the centre of the village, or the you today. Sulby Glen crossroads, area 1 would constitute a The planning inspector makes his case in his report and disproportionate development in relation to Sulby village I believe he makes his case well. He contends that area 1 as a whole and to my mind an extravagant intrusion and a should revert from residential to agricultural for three good harmful intrusion into the countryside. It would also reasons: firstly, that area 1, if developed, would have a represent a continuation of what could be described as serious and significant negative impact in the locality. Now, ribbon development which in itself is objectionable and in terms of the visual impact, that is conceded by counsel which is part and parcel of what we are suffering today in for Mr Radcliffe. The second point is that such relation to the parameters of Sulby village. development would run counter to the need to preserve Now, we have had arguments of course raised by the the rural character of the area. Again I would suggest to owner of area 1 that area 2 is not currently on mains hon. members that that is transparent. And, thirdly, there sewerage. Perfectly true: it is not currently on the mains is strong local opinion against the development of this area for the sewerage system. And we have had as part of this for housing, and that is beyond dispute. exchange, this dialogue, problems raised in relation to But let me just go into a little more depth on each of surface water in relation to area 1, but they are secondary these three points, if I may. Firstly, if I could deal with the to the basic issue of whether or not this land, in terms of latter point, this issue of local opinion, unquestionably there strategic planning, should or should not at a point in time is strong local opinion against the development of area 1. be developed for housing. That is what we are talking I represent these people, I live amongst these people. I about. know their views on this proposition and I have no axe to Mr Bexson, I think, set this in its proper context, not as grind, but I know their views. I am well placed, very well a block or an obstacle. You will note that - and I quote placed, to judge local opinion and unquestionably there is from Mr Bexson’s report - he said that no matter whether wide and strong local opinion against the development of there is sewerage there or whether there is not sewerage area 1. there for area 2, ‘It is a challenge for those concerned to Now, I accept that local opinion is but one consideration, overcome the problem at the relevant time.’ It is not an but it is a very important consideration. There are other obstacle, it is something that has to be addressed if at a considerations. National considerations, I think, would be point in time there is a serious intent to develop area 2 or a good example where sometimes local opinion has to be any other area that would be subject to these sorts of laid off against those national considerations, but that is constraints. not the case here. That is not the case in this situation. I said earlier that I have no axe to grind in this matter - Now, reverting to the two more substantive matters, it in terms of the localities of these sites area 2 would be has been recognised here today, notwithstanding the more likely to affect me than area 1 - but I am just trying expression which has been used by counsel that Mr to put across what I believe to be a balanced perspective Radcliffe thought the land was safe, notwithstanding that, and what I know to be the very widely held view of those it has been recognised that this area should be reviewed as persons living in Sulby. It is a question of taking into view to its suitability for residential use. That was part of a the community perspective and if you take into view the recommendation contained in the 1991 plan. That was community perspective, there is strong opposition to area there. Mr Radcliffe has not been taken by surprise, hon. 1. members: that recommendation was contained in that Regarding this issue of whether or not the zoning of document. It was recommended in circular 10 of 1991 that area 1 would be disproportionate to the Sulby village and the designation of area 1 should be reviewed, and it should the Sulby setting, for area 1, even if we just take it on the be noted, I think, hon. members, that notwithstanding this basis of the present planning application, we are talking marker being put down, no planning application was of 35 units. It could be, as I said, more units, depending submitted until 1996, some time after the procedures to upon whatever applications could follow. Area 2 is review the plan had been activated, and the current basically half that number, 21 units. So in terms of size application apart, there have been other applications post- and relativity to Sulby village it is much more acceptable 1996 and they have been unsuccessful. and compatible, and its acceptability of course is reflected

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T528 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

in the support for the local plan by the local residents. But I have tried to steer clear of the recent planning further than that, I think anybody who knows Sulby well application because, as I said at the beginning, to my mind would see that area 2 de facto is the centre of the village. It strategic planning is quite a different issue and we assess is adjacent and close by church, chapel, community hall, it on largely different criteria, but reference has been made school, shop, post office, public house. What is there down by counsel for Mr Radcliffe and by Mr Speaker to the at the bottom end in terms of community support for a reference made by Mr Crowe, the inspector, in regard to development? Sulby Mill, producing some white whiskey? that application where he said there was no present That is hardly the nerve centre of a village. objection. How quickly they passed over that very There are of course traffic implications for both important little word, ‘present’ objection, and if you go propositions, but again, I think if we had an unbiased back in the report and read the report on the planning assessment we would be looking and we would consider application where Mr Crowe was debating the question of it far easier to accommodate traffic movement arising out the reliance that he should put on the existing plan or the of area 2 than out of area 1. emerging plan, you will see that Mr Crowe - and different Then there is this issue of the need for housing, and inspectors approach this differently and strike the balance bearing in mind that in Isle of Man terms Sulby is differently - took the view that he was going to put reliance somewhat removed from the area of demand, I do not think on the existing plan to a far greater extent. Hence, in my that could be disputed, I think it would be quite wrong to view, the inclusion of that important word, ‘present’, try to justify need on the basis of a dormitory being created ‘present’ in the context of the document that he was putting so remote from the main centres and conurbations. Need the weight on and that was the existing plan, and he made in local terms is very limited. Even if you extend it to that quite clear in his report, in my view. include the northern parishes and Ramsey it is very limited. Sol would not suggest for one moment that Mr Speaker We have dealt with the Ramsey plan and we are satisfied is trying to mislead anybody, that is certainly not the case, that we have adequate provision made there for what we but I would draw hon. members’ attention to the inclusion need in terms of housing. of that important word, no ‘present’ objection, and that Now, if we revert to the Sulby plan and take areas 2, 3, takes me again to this important distinction between 4, and 5 we are going to have 28, 30 housing units development planning and strategic planning, and what accommodated. That, I would suggest, is more than we are discussing today is strategic planning. adequate for any local need in relation to Sulby and over No grave injustice - I certainly maintain from the and above that additional need, bearing in mind that a evidence that is before us that there is no evidence of any marker has been put down in the local plan, the draft local grave injustice. Mr Speaker asserts that that may be the plan you have before you, to look at the question of area 7 case. What evidence have we got? We have a statement which would bring into play or could bring into play an made by counsel, a statement made by Mr Radcliffe that extension to Ballabrooie housing estate. Mr Groves was allegedly present at a meeting long before If we consider bringing in area 1 as well, well that would these matters went to the public inquiry. But we are talking cast a totally different image of Sulby village to what I of perceptions even by way of questions from the hon. and others have been aware of and I am sure hon. members member for Ramsey, Mr Singer. There is no allegation are aware of. It would distort the whole face of Sulby made. It is a perception we are talking about and village because we are talking about many, many more perceptions can be important, but they can also be housing units provision, probably double the number that misleading. The perception of Mr Radcliffe being present I have referred to in relation to areas 2, 3,4 and 5. at a commissioners’ meeting also could be misconstrued, Counsel for Mr Radcliffe has raised this question of Mr but I am not making that assertion. He has explained why Groves’ involvement, Mr Groves alleged involvement in he was there, he has explained that the other commissioners this matter. I have no first-hand knowledge of that and it is did not object to that, and I am happy to accept that. But not my place, as I am not acting as minister in relation to this matter between perception and actual is important. this matter, but what I do say is this. The document that We should be concerned with the evidence, not perception, went to the local plan inquiry did not include area 1, but it evidence. was not overlooked for that reason. It became the centre, I believe that the Sulby Local Plan has been subject to the main issue, in the inquiry and Mr Radcliffe was what you might call due process. It has had more than represented at that inquiry through counsel and had a full ample exposure to the public, more than ample exposure opportunity to make his case and did make his case. He by way of input, rather, from the other interested parties, has assured us today that he did make his case at that including Mr Radcliffe, and from the professionals. That inquiry. Mr Bexson took on board, as I said, all that has all come together into a public process conducted by evidence and he came to his decision. an experienced professional, and the issue before us is very So to my mind it is largely irrelevant as to what simple as I see it. Do you accept that inspector’s assessment happened prior to the document being drawn up which of the situation? Has he got it right? I believe that he has went to the inquiry, because that is a different document, got it right. The great majority of people in Sulby believe and what took place during the inquiry, because that is he has got it right. A small percentage perhaps feel what matters. There was ample opportunity for the case to somewhat different. be made for area 1, that opportunity was exercised and the I believe that due process has been entered into. I believe inspector that heard the inquiry, having taken all that on it has been properly executed and it is not for us to act on board, said, no, area 1 should not be developed. perceptions or suggestions but to work on the evidence

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T529

that is before us and the evidence before us tells us one account the views of the few or the one person who may thing and one thing only and that is that this plan should be being injured. be supported and I would ask hon. members to do so. Anyway, we are in this position and we have the plan in front of us and we are asked to approve on area number The President: Does any other hon. member wish to 5 two dwellings. As part of this it has not been the centre speak? The hon. member for Rushen, Sir Miles Walker, of attention but I raise it because to me there are some followed by the hon. member for Onchan, Mr Cannell. interesting principles there. That land in 1982 was designated as an area of woodland and high landscape Sir Miles Walker: Thank you, Mr President. Can I just value. Now, the thing that has changed is the pub has been start by beating an old drum in saying that I find the position sold off and somebody has applied for planning permission we are being put in with this resolution quite difficult. We for two dwellings and that has been approved and so we are in fact being asked in a way to work as a Planning are asked in this document whether we think that is right Committee, to decide whether or not two residences are or that is wrong. Now, the arguments to substantiate the appropriate alongside the Ginger Hall Hotel, whether or case to me seem a bit thin, but those are the sorts of not we should have three on area 3 and so on. I have to say decisions we are being asked to make. That is the area 5. I find that sort of detail being asked of members of this Area 7 seems quite straightforward. Area 3 I do not know hon. Court to be quite difficult. I know Sulby. I go to at all, so I am advised to accept the expert evidence that Ramsey not very often but occasionally. we are presented with on that particular area. Then we come to the two main areas of contention, area Mr Cannell: Watch it now. number 2 on the plan which is in the centre of the village. I know there is some debate about which is the centre of Sir Miles Walker: I tend to go through Sulby. I know the village, but I accept that Sulby probably grew up around Sulby as a passer-by and I have colleagues there and I the crossroads and to me that is the centre of the village. It have been to do’s there. But I do not know area 3, for also raises to me an issue of planning. Do we want the centres of our villages - instance, and we have evidence and the minister, the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, said we should Mrs Crowe: Cluttered. consider the evidence in front of us and the evidence from the inspector says that area 3 is okay for three dwellings. Sir Miles Walker: - to be built up, cluttered, my hon. So we just sit here and say, ‘Well, okay, if he says that, colleague says, but to be built up with quite dense that is the evidence, we should agree it.’ That does not development? Now, I know it suggests in here that an area seem to me to be a very thorough examination of a situation of open space should be left for a playground or a public that we are being asked to vote on. open space. I would suggest that that area in due course, if So I do think the difficulties that we get into with these it is not developed, will become much more important to local plans are something that ought to be considered by the village and in fact it should be the centre of the the department and in fact perhaps considered by this hon. community and it should be developed for community use, Court at some stage to see whether or not the process is a and I say this because my village is going through this correct one. same process and in due course we are going to have a Now then, Mr President, as you may recall and some development plan for it, and I am troubled by the thought other members, I was the one who was responsible for that here is an area of land in the middle of the village and putting the 1982 development plan in front of this hon. because it is the middle of the village it should be Court and it was a plan that had broad-brush treatment, developed. I think more likely area 2 is suggested for and that was a conscious decision because it then left the development because it is not very likely to happen because Planning Committee to go into the detail of applications it is not on the main sewers and there is quite a capital that could be applied for in the different areas. It also, and scheme to be put to it, so perhaps it will not happen anyway, I think we accepted, designated probably more land than and there is simply less objection to it than there is to area was required for all the different purposes and the process 1. we are going through now appears to me to be one of My colleague on my left says, ‘Oh, dear.’ That is what reducing the amount of land and so we are bound to cause the documentation in front of us says and the thing that injury to certain landowners. I think Mr Radcliffe has stated has really changed in the 20-odd years that this land has his case very clearly, but I would suggest that he is one of been designated is that more people have gone to live at probably a large number of people who are going to find that end of the village and so more people do not want themselves in this same situation and I think it is beholden development opposite them at their end of the village and on us all to think very seriously about the sort of question they would prefer to have it somewhere else. That is the that is in front of us today. So that is the general point I logical conclusion that I come to and I have to say it would wish to make. troubles me, and I have been through the documentation We have also heard that this has been a very democratic and I cannot find any other reasoning. We have always exercise, and I just wonder what people mean when they known since 1982, all those years this land has been say that. Do they mean we have listened to all the people designated, that it is going to have an impact on that road and we have accepted the views of the majority of them? frontage. That is not a new situation that has happened. Is that democracy? I question it if that is what has been That is not something that has just been discovered. That suggested. In a democracy it is also important to take into situation has been there for everybody to see.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T530 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

I would be interested if somebody from the Department forward to do his development. He had not bothered before. of Local Government or somebody from the Department I would respectfully suggest that that is Mr Radcliffe or of Transport would give some indication on whether or anybody else’s prerogative. (Mrs Crowe: Hear, hear.) He not we are likely to see mains drainage to this area number can decide when he wants to do the development, and why 2 because we know, and I think we sometimes question he did it is no concern of ours. It would be quite possible but we are guided by the very firm opinion of the to have a scheme in being, not necessarily the development Department of Transport, that they do not want stand-alone of land - maybe the doing-up of a classic car or something plants and certainly down in the south of the Isle of Man of that nature - and you sit on these schemes for a we have had debate after debate about isolated pockets. considerable time, usually because you have not got the Only yesterday during the budget debate the minister for money to do it, but Mr Radcliffe is in the position of the department was making the very valid point that there deciding when he can make his development, having got are areas of land, and Ballasalla was the case in point, permission to do so, and we heard earlier on about the designated for development but without mains drainage Island’s changing needs. It is a case of opportunism. If and so please can’t we do something about the drainage you have an asset and you see a market for it you put it and get drainage in there, and here we find the opposite forward at the best possible time. If you have a house which situation happening: a piece of land which is adjacent to you wish to sell, you do not sell it in a declining market, mains drainage which can be drained being changed for a you sell it when the prices are high, as they are now. It is a piece down the road that has not got mains drainage and iree-market enterprise. that a scheme will have to be worked up. Now, I do not My hon. colleague Mr Braidwood said that times are know whether that scheme will be worked up or not, but it changing. Indeed they are. Who would have thought that seems to me we have a contradiction. the Isle of Man would have changed as much as it has in The hon. member Mr Quine, when he was on his feet, that period? That is exactly what is happening. There is a said we are talking about strategic planning rather than greater demand for housing because, as we heard as development planning, the development process, and I recently as yesterday, we are in the extremely fortunate rather question that in the case of the Sulby plan. It seems position of having full employment, no public debt, good to me if we are talking about three houses there and two living standards and high standards of public services, so houses there and a small group of local government housing much we had a record-busting budget presented to this in the middle there that there is not very much strategic hon. Court only yesterday. So, yes, times are changing and thinking in that. It is very much a matter of development that is probably, though it is not for me to say, why Mr control and development processing. Radcliffe and many other similar people have come I am concerned about the situation we get into with these forward with developments at this time, and you can only plans, I am concerned about the detail of this one and I am see developments even in my constituency where the concerned that it is going to be a precedent for a number homes are not lying empty, they are being snapped up of others when they come forward to make a fundamental before the brickwork is complete and indeed inhabited, change to zoning which affects, let us face it, people’s assets and good luck to those who do it too. to a substantial extent, and we should also bear in mind - 1 Now, we have also heard allegations of Mr Groves’ do not suppose it is the case with this and if it had been we involvement, and I do take the point that Mr Groves is not would probably have been told - that if somebody had some here to answer, but it was alleged at the bar of the Court securement on this land with a bank or whatever and we that his own proximity of his building which he was trying would be taking it away, that could be quite serious as to sell might have coloured his judgement in regard to Mr well. I am sure and I hope that we would have been told Radcliife’s field. It might. I think we can ignore that, though had that been the case. nevertheless some damage is done by making that These are all points that I think are very important and allegation. It crosses the mind and in the manner in which I know that planning is not meant to look into the ownership people sometimes address juries outside of their remit, the of land and all the rest of it - there is some sense in that - mark is presented to the jury and the judge saying, ‘Ignore but when we are asked to make a decision, not the Planning that’, is just not physically possible. But we can leave that Committee, but when Tynwald Court is asked to make a aside, I would respectfully suggest, though it does smell decision which affects fundamentally the valuation of a just a little bit. So what was it? Was there a genuine move piece of land like this, then I think we need to think very, to protect an area of scenic beauty near Sulby Bridge? very hard about it. Maybe. We have heard evidence of the petitioners who oppose it that that is so and there has got to be some Mr Cannell: Mr President, I agree with the preceding sympathy for that. Any field is better looking empty than speaker that it is somewhat difficult to remember that the built upon. I do not think there has ever been a building subject before the Court is the Sulby plan as a whole rather which enhances an empty field unless it is absolute than one particular aspect of it, but I imagine that that is scrubland perhaps which is certainly not the case in this inevitable with this controversy which surrounds that instance. I have been out there and I have looked at it - 1 particular area. knew it anyway - and that field to me does not have We have here, to go to that point, then, regarding area outstanding scenic beauty other than the fact that it is an 1, a field - for that is what it is - which was okay for empty field and you could have some grazing on it and it development between 1971 and 1996, as we have heard would be better for the people sitting on the hedge to watch and we have heard, that Mr Radcliffe has suddenly come theTT.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T531

But the notion that an area elsewhere in Sulby Village the laudable course of distancing himself from this comes about through changing times because it is better, particular application. for the reasons which Sir Miles Walker has recently Local opinion is talked about and is supposed to be taken enlightened us upon, just simply does not stand up. It is on board in great swathes, as advocated by the hon. not a better place to have this intended development. In Minister for Local Government. I did not see too much fact it is technically inferior. There are fewer numbers of evidence of this when in my constituency permission was properties, though you might argue of course that is better, given to go ahead at Groudle Glen. Local opinion was but nevertheless it is not a replacement. It does, apparently, totally against that scheme and to a minor degree at a lesser favour more with the Sulby residents, but that is not the development at Furman Close which also was opposed by point. It is not swapping something better, it is swapping the local population. I was not present at the debate on the something slightly inferior and that slightly might be in Sulby plan which we are talking about now until the final inverted commas if indeed the drainage scheme and the 10 minutes because on that very day I was actually sewerage schemes are needed to support that rather than attempting to oppose the Furman Close plan, though the scheme as it is. unsuccessfully, I am afraid. Now, we have heard about strategic planning. The hon. We have a 25-year history of approval for this, but it is Minister for Local Government says what we are doing potentially thwarted by its acceptance. If this development here is strategic planning. Well, I do not know what is is permitted to move further back up the village and Mr more of a strategic plan than something lying for 20 years Radcliffe’s plans for the area are thwarted, then the very and being resurrected. As far as I am concerned that is the least that natural justice must say is he must be best sort of strategic planning. It certainly stood up for the compensated for that loss. He had permission. I talked the 20 years, so why should it suddenly be turned on its head same argument, so it is not new, I spoke of the same in a couple of years, and who knows anyway what the argument over those who will be in a difficult position Island’s needs will be? We can only forecast in this sort of when the incinerator is built at the bottom of the Richmond case an immediate look at it. As I mentioned, 20 years ago Hill, and we are talking of a few dwellings there, and I who would have thought the Island would have gone shall remain of the same point of view. But what is wrong through the period that it has done where the Manx people with putting in a planning application for development now are, perhaps let us not joke about it, but it is an ethnic when the new plan begins to be talked about? I cannot minority to be Manx now. We do not mind, most of us, think of any better time to put in your development if you because we see we are able to produce a budget as good as hear that things are beginning to wake up, and the reason that yesterday with 1 per cent unemployment, and as I for that of course is you will recognise that perhaps you alluded to yesterday, many of us here have known times will lose that permission, so you get in before you do. It is most different to that. the obvious thing to do and that is just a case of people Nor do attempts to cash in by saying this area is no saying, ‘I’d better watch my step here or I may actually longer suitable. I think it was a bit below the belt to start get thwarted by some quirk in the development’, which saying, ‘It is liable to flooding.’ This was just trading on not many people would have thought would happen, but the back of a most recent unfortunate development which what has happened? Exactly that: it has been thwarted. came about in Sulby, the cause of which of course we are But that is the time to get in, if there is any suggestion, and still looking into, but where people from the other side of many development areas in the Isle of Man as a whole, all the TT circuit were in great difficulty with their flooding around the Isle of Man, when these plans are coming up problems, but as we have heard evidence at the bar of the people are waking up to the fact that standing permission Court, that certainly did not affect this particular scheme which is 20 years old and more may actually be overridden, which we are talking about as part of the Sulby plan. We may. are considering the plan. This is a part of it. If evidence of need does not enter into this - little What worries me, though, more than anything is that evidence of need was taken, for instance, public demand there remains a suggestion that there was intervention by for a scheme which we are about to embark upon at the a member of the Planning Committee, indeed of course, famous Lake Road development. Has there been a study as we have heard, the minister, but whether there was or of whether we need to impose on the Isle of Man an not, the suggestion remains, as I have said, that there could extremely large supermarket down at Lake Road? Has there have been. been evidence of need properly researched and properly The present Minister for Local Government says strong undertaken, not least to say with regard to the difficulties local opinion is against the development of area 1, the field with traffic? But the need for such: does the Isle of Man at Sulby Bridge, but I have here a letter on 1st February need it? We like of course, because we have always felt 1995 where the same gentleman says, ‘Development in slightly inferior, to see the household names, but have we Sulby Village should be permitted in the field 0079, bound by the railway line, Kella Road, Main Road and St Jude’s thought of whether we are going to protect the existing Road.’ That was on 1st February 1995, but mysteriously outlets both small and large in the Isle of Man? Do we by 7th July 1995 the same gentleman says, ‘I do not support wish to see those sacrificed on the altar of one big name the zoning of the nine acres north-west of Sulby Bridge.’ because, make no mistake, that is what is going to happen So not only was there a change of opinion there but there at Lake Road. You can wave goodbye to your comer shops. was a change of opinion in the present minister’s stance You can wave goodbye to the smaller supermarkets. What on it too, though I do acknowledge here that he has taken the Co-Op proposed for there -

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T532 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

Mr Downie: Not in Sulby. believe it would be absolutely wrong. If people want to have compensation for the change in zoning which is Mr Cannell: - is nothing whatever to do with - adverse to an owner they should then bring in a betterment levy for changes that are favourable to an owner, and I am Mr Henderson: We are in Sulby. sure the majority of landowners would not want that, and there are other areas in this Island where people hope, many Mr Cannell: I am giving evidence, Mr President, of people hope, as the officers sitting at the bar well know, the need for such development. Now, the need has been that the zonings that were made in 1982 will be rezoned in proven. Mr Radcliffe has proven that, that there is a need the current local plans, there is no doubt about that at all, for the development there. It is undoubtedly and the idea that zoning should be frozen for ever while unchallengeable. So if everybody wanted Mr Radcliffe’s everything else in our society changes is, I believe, totally field, if it suddenly became an issue of national heritage absurd. There is no right for anybody’s land to retain its or it was a wonderful view that had suddenly sprung up or zoning. Now, this may at times be hard, very hard, on there had been some change perhaps back to the position individual landowners, but I am quite sure that it is correct which it used to be where in actual fact it was on the shore, in the public interest. because Primrose Hill in fact, as I recall, was the My third point of principle is that this plan, as with all promontory fort area for the original shoreline there, the other recent local plans, has been the subject of quite nothing of that has happened, nothing has changed. The enormous public consultation and I should like to take this old field is still lying there exactly as it was. The only opportunity of praising the officers of the department for development that has happened is a few bungalows the wonderful job they do in trying to produce plans that alongside the Old Railway Station at Sulby, but if someone really do meet the wishes of the majority of people in the wanted it, if suddenly everybody felt the Sulby field should areas concerned, not just one or two landowners who may be retained for the Manx public as it is, Mr Radcliffe, not benefit financially, but the vast majority of people living particularly because it is Mr Radcliffe, it could have been in these areas. I have seen this, in the case of two plans, at anybody, should receive compensation for it. very close hand and I have nothing but praise for the efforts I call upon this Court to remedy this natural injustice, that have been made to try and find plans the people in the to right it either by agreeing that Mr Radcliffe would have areas really want. a valid claim for compensation or leaving the plan as it is Now, this plan, as with all the others, has been and he be permitted to develop on that area, as is his natural considered by numerous officers, not just one officer, it right of justice, and reject the Sulby plan. has been discussed by various political members of the Department of Local Government - I should think if we M r Gilbey: Mr President, I do not want to become counted up we would find about half a dozen political emotional and talk about anyone really by name, though I members in all - and I do not believe that those politicians may have to mention one person. I think what is much would have come to any different opinion if Mr Groves more important is the points of principle arising out of had not been one of them for a time, and I believe that it is this, and first is the position of landowners. All of us must just a very unfortunate, and if I might say so, unworthy sympathise with anyone whose land is dezoned in a way attempt to frighten us into approving the plan by suggesting that leads to it losing value, and when we talk of losing something peculiar because he was the minister at one time. value we are talking of tens of thousands of pounds, of No-one has suggested he influenced it improperly. More hundreds of thousands or millions and obviously for those important, he was just one, as I have said, of the many people it is very serious, but I do not believe we should people involved. decide on grounds of sympathy for them but on grounds But forget about the officers and the politicians in the of principle of what is right for the Isle of Man as a whole, department. There has been enormous local consultation and that brings us to the principle of the ability of the and I happen to be one of those who believe that the views government to dezone land or change the zoning of it. of the local people are probably what should matter more Zoning is given by the government. It is not something than virtually anything else and in this case they have that automatically goes with all land and, like the stones clearly expressed their views. You will never get unanimity. in the land, will be there for ever. It is something that is I know this perfectly well in my own area. There will given by the government and can, I believe, and should, I always be one or two people who do not agree. But you believe, be removed by the government in the national have to try and find out what the wishes of the majority interest. are. Then there has been an inquiry before an independent People gain fortuitously if land of theirs is zoned in a inspector who recommended the rezoning for three good way that makes it more valuable. Equally they may lose reasons which the hon. minister has clearly explained to fortuitously if land has its zoning changed in a way which us, and from all this detailed consultation over, not many reduces the value. months, but several years, we have the proposals before Now, if there was a betterment levy for the enhancement us, and I believe it will be quite wrong for us not to accept of the value of land you could well argue that there should them. You will never get anyone to agree on everything. be compensation for dezoning, but we have no betterment As every politician knows, you can never please all the levy, and quite rightly so, and as we have no betterment people all the time. But I think those who together have levy, I believe most strongly there should never be any worked on this plan have done their best to get the view of question of compensation for the change of zoning. I the majority and produce something that has the support

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T533

of the majority and I believe on that basis we should accept give, as the previous speaker Mr Gilbey has said, also have it. the ability to take away, as is the proposal specifically today looking at field 1. Mr Shimmin: Mr President, I do not wish to speak for I regret that Mr Radcliffe is finding himself in this long. The previous three speakers have covered a number position. He is the one person in the Sulby village plan of the areas I was going to comment upon. who appears to have an enormous amount to lose. It may The previous speaker for Onchan, my friend Mr Cannell, well be that, as Sir Miles has previously stated, there will identified just how much of a minefield anything to do be other individuals who will lose, maybe not as with planning can be. Now, here in Douglas we are substantially or significantly as in this case, but there will sufficiently far away from Sulby not to get the fall-out too be beneficiaries and people who lose whenever we come much from this issue, but having taken a picnic up there to to change plans and developments for local villages. the area in order to try and find for myself on the rare Regrettably the area on compensation and betterment has occasions I visit Sulby, I too was concerned about the visual been discussed and there does not appear to be a fair way impact were this field to be built upon, but that is with of adequately compensating those people without setting very limited experience and knowledge of the planning a precedent which would be undesirable and economically process. very damaging to the taxpayers of the Isle of Man. I believe that one of the comments made by a previous I therefore reluctantly have to go along with the minister speaker actually sets a very poor precedent when it comes for DoLGE when he talks about the independent inquiry, to areas of land designated for residential which are not the due process. The wishes of the local residents were developed. I think if that message goes wider, then every taken into account. The previous speaker, Mr Gilbey, makes time any area of land is designated, immediately those areas great play of that. I am afraid I do not share that. I believe are going to be developed. Now, I think Mr Gough made if we bow to the wishes of local inhabitants on all occasions, it quite clear in his presentation that one of the main reasons then we can fall into a trap that does us no credit. However, why Mr Radcliffe did not develop this area of land was on this occasion I believe that with the balance of the because of other developments going on in that area which independent inquiry, taking that along with other issues meant that at that time there was neither the call, need or and barring any major changes in the debate, I shall have desirability of expanding onto this area. With hindsight I to go along reluctantly with the motion for the Sulby village am sure now he would have considered immediately plan. Thank you, Mr President. banging in applications for development whilst he had that designation, and that might have been inappropriate and Mr Rodan: Mr President, since my name has been to the long-term detriment of the Sulby village. I therefore linked with that of Mr Groves I wish to put it on record do not think that we can criticise either Mr Radcliffe or that my experience of Mr Groves was nothing other than others for not immediately taking advantage of a honourable conduct and the highest level of probity on his designation of their land. part within the department in my experience and I can say However, it is not an exact science and we have all seen that without fear of contradiction. I think it is important to that plans change to suit the needs of the Island and the state that. local population. I was very struck by the comments of Sir The hon. member for Onchan, Mr Cannell, has Miles when he pointed out that many of the opponents to confirmed my suspicions that there are in the Isle of Man this development may well be the ones who have already 72,000 experts on planning. now purchased and moved into land which has recently been developed on the other side of the road. I think it Mr Cannan: And you are one of them. does behold us to take into account where the criticism comes from. Mr Rodan: I do not consider myself an expert on But mistakes are made. Things change, attitudes change planning, and this is precisely the point. Planning is an and having been in Sulby, personally I feel the development inexact science. It is a best effort and a genuine effort, and on this field would be something I would not choose, but the colleague on my right goes ‘Hm!’ All of us have had we have a department who has the responsibility. We have bad experiences as a result of ‘the planners’. There is a a whole process and legal statutes to go through for well rooted prejudice about ‘the planners’, and all we can investigating these types of plans, and we are all familiar hope to do is to seek to achieve at the end of the day with the fact that the planning division has the ability to consistent decision-making based on sound, democratically blight lives, and we are doing that on a number of occasions arrived at policy, and that is what we are here about today: around the Island. Nobody could deny that the incinerator the basis of policy. is an unpopular neighbour; recent discussions on the prison. Now, one of the things Mr Cannell said was that there It is obvious that wherever some of these undesirable was a standing permission of 20 years or more for this. developments take place we will have a blighting effect This is what he said. At another point he said, ‘a 25-’ - on people’s lives. well, forget the exact number of years - ‘a 25-year approval Plans also have the ability to reap great financial for this’. There has been no such thing. In 1982 there was rewards, as we have seen in the farms surrounding Douglas a designation made in favour of residential development. in recent years. Millionaires have been made, not through In 1991 or 1990 there was issued a public document called any ability, but purely by the fortuitous nature of their land the north-east sector plan which had this to say, and this is being in an area suitable for development, and those who in respect of land generally, not specific to any area that

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T534 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

we might be considering this afternoon. ‘Paragraph 5.11. what we are being asked to do in a sense is to acknowledge Any land which has previously been allocated for that the work has already gone into that detail, but I do residential development and for which a detailed planning sympathise with the principle and perhaps we should look approval has not been given during the life of this plan, at the procedure and we are being invited to do so, but i.e. the north-east sector plan, considered to have a five- what I would say also is that that level of detail arrived at year life, should have its allocation for development by the democratic consultative process is the policy base reconsidered at the end of that period. ’ Now, that is a fairly which the Planning Committee requires to implement common statement that was made in all the sector plans, policy that is likely to have the widest acceptance because and this was known in Sulby and in the north of the Island it has been through a process of consultation. It is too late, and it is perhaps the most important statement within that when planning applications are made, for the public to start north-east sector plan because whilst certainly the five- arguing against the principle that this green field should year period had not expired when the Sulby plan was not be developed when they did not in fact inform the public started, the consideration was commenced, the principle inquiry which was the appropriate time when considering stated that any land which had not detailed planning the zoning. approval before the five-year life of the sector plan had I would also say that while the local plan is the essential expired should have its allocation for development policy base with which the Planning Committee operates, reconsidered, and this was flagged up in 1991. There should nothing in the plan, whether as policy or as a particular be no surprise, therefore, that in 1995 when the process of zoning notation, is any more than a material consideration considering the Sulby plan commenced, the basis of that to which the Planning Committee must pay regard. It is plan, it took as one of its central themes the question of one of several considerations to which it must pay regard, reconsidering existing zoning and reallocating land for not be slavishly bound by, and we have had this debate alternative purposes where appropriate, and this is exactly before about the flexibility within plans. If a sufficient case what happened. is made to overcome the basic consideration of a zoning Bear in mind, hon. members, that this afternoon we are notation, for example, being one way, then that case will at the culmination of a four-year process, a four-year public be listened to if the evidence is sufficiently persuasive, process of consultation, with the commissioners, with the and this is the way it has to be and this is not something public, during the Issues and Options document, with the that I have just made up. It is a statement of the law. That commissioners again, with the draft local plan, with the is what the law says has to happen. The 1982 development public again at the local inquiry, and that draft plan which order says this quite clearly. One of the material went to the local inquiry was informed as a result of the considerations for which the Planning Committee shall public input and the consultation that had taken place and have regard is the zoning notations in a local plan. which the department considered best reflected the views I am not going to repeat what others have said, but at submitted over the period of consultation. That plan was any one time when considering town and country planning tested at public inquiry by an independent inspector. It was and development in its widest sense there are always two not something picked out of the air that the department processes going on at any one time, two processes going thought might be a good idea - ‘Oh, this sounds good: let’s on. The first process is that of development planning, i.e. do this.’ There had been rigorous public consultation which the local plan formation, within the context of strategic was rigorously tested at public inquiry in an independent planning as the hon. member for Ayre put it. Creating the setting. And then of course what we are being asked to do policy basis on which the Planning Committee makes its this afternoon, following that inquiry which informed the decisions, bases its decisions, and at any one time a local plan and the order that is before us, is for us then, not to plan will either be enforced or the public consultation will rubber-stamp, certainly not, but to give the final sanction have started for its renewal over a period or the planning to this process of consultation. officers will only be starting to consult the local authority Now, this Court is quite at liberty to throw out the plan. about introducing a plan or renewing a plan, and that is It is quite at liberty to do that but I would say to any hon. going on all the time, as I say, and what we are doing this member contemplating that, please do not do that lightly. afternoon is the culmination of a four-year process in the Please consider the lengthy democratic process that has case of Sulby. taken place, that has actually produced the plan and The other thing that is going on of course is the making consider the work and the input both from the public, both of planning applications. Planning applications carry on from politicians, both local and national, and from regardless and that is the development control system and professional planning officers that have produced this. by necessity the development control must be subsidiary Think hard before considering discarding all that and all to development planning. That is the way round it must be the input that has got in. Having said that, I do have sympathy with the views of and we have received already legal advice confirming that the hon. member for Rushen, Sir Miles, when he points this is the case. out the difficulty he has, and which is shared, I am sure, So the status or the determination of any planning by members of this Court, at having to determine, I think application should not be used to determine the outcome as he put it, the level of detail contained in this plan. But of a development plan, a local plan, a decision being made what I would say to him is that this Court is not the public this afternoon. They are two separate processes and the inquiry. That detail was the end result of a public inquiry development planning process culminating in a local plan which was informed by the public and the planners and which has been through four years of consultation -

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T535

The President: Hon. member, we are getting into the And then we have heard the allegations that perhaps realms of repetition. these decisions were slightly tainted. Even the slightest taint, as we have had in another country on an adjacent Mr Rodan: - must, I suggest, Mr President, be island, as it is known, where a Law Lord was party to a considered objectively and acknowledging the work that decision and then his own peers said that in the interests has gone into it. of probity and the public perception the matter should be judged again. Mr Cannan: Mr President, I will be brief, but we have I am not going in, like the Speaker, into the pros and heard a lot this afternoon of principles, principles here and cons of what should or should not happen at Sulby. What principles there, and firstly I congratulate the member for I am going into is the precedent that we are now saying Ayre as the constituent member putting up a tremendous that if you do not get your planning in tout de suite case for the plan as he sees it and representing the people immediately, you have been designated in a village plan, a that oppose this permission to have houses in area 1. He town plan, an area sector plan, then tough: it will be taken has done a tremendous job and I would not expect less of away. Is that the sort of message to go out? Is that the sort him as the member for that constituency, but I suggest that of stability? I do not believe it is. he then cannot have it both ways and call in collective Just finally, and I know I said I was not going to agree responsibility to back his arguments and his support. Either to it, but the planning inspector who has just reported on he is speaking as the member for that constituency, and this plan - quite rightly so, and he then must step aside as the minister, and I would ask later on for the Chief Minister to advise Mr Downie: Planning application. us whether this particular plan has been not judged this afternoon, but collective responsibility of the Council of Mr Cannan: - on this application, I mean, sorry - for Ministers, it has been judged in the Council of Ministers area 1 says in paragraph 92, and I will repeat what is and they are coming here this afternoon to support it, written, and you have all had a copy, I understand: ‘To because I believe that a fundamental principle, and we have summarise, I see no present objection in principle to the heard principles of everybody, is here. residential development of the appeal site to the limited extent proposed and I consider that the drainage objections The President: Hon. member, let us get this one could be met by conditions. There is, however, justifiable straight. You are dealing with a resolution before the Court objection on layout and access grounds.’ That is detail, and the questions you are proposing to pose are not related layout and access. How many plans have been refused on to this resolution in my view, (Members: Hear, hear.) so layout and access? You go and you put a new plan in with please deal with the resolution. the proper layout and access and it is approved. It is not turning it down in principle - ‘and in the absence of a Mr Cannan: I am dealing with the resolution, sir, in comprehensive plan covering the whole site.’ Those are that it should be judged as Tynwald Court. We have heard technical details time and time again and I am sure hon. this as a Court and it is Tynwald Court, and learned counsel members have had constituents showing them the same has come in defence, if you like, in defence of his client wording. They have readjusted the plan and got permission. who perceives that he has had an injustice, and we are It has not been turned down in principle that no residential here as 33 jurors to vote and what I am asking hon. development should take place on that land. members is to vote on the case of the member of the I believe that there is an injustice here and I believe as community, a resident in the area, who says with his a court of 33 jurors we should look at it fairly and properly counsel, he has had an injustice, Mr President. He has had and if there is an injustice, say so, because a lot depends in planning permission there for 20-odd years which we have the Isle of Man as we are seen outside and it is important, heard. If the case goes against him, then the signal will go it is very, very important to everybody who has land, how out throughout the Island, ‘The moment your land is it is designated and whether it can suddenly be taken away. designated, get your planning permission in now’ and then The Speaker has spoken in this vein, the previous Chief the planners will say it is premature. Well, how can it be Minister has spoken in this vein. I ask members to give premature if they are going to allocate your land and then deep consideration to what has been said and turn down take it away? this plan so that justice can not only be done but be seen to Then there is the case of the hon. member for Glenfaba be done. saying it is the public, we must all judge the planning applications on public opinion. If that is the case, quite Mr Radcliffe: Mr President, I will be fairly brief, but rightly so, then in Kirk Michael where there is a very strong there are one or two things which really need to be said to feeling that opposes any further village expansion, then I put the record straight in this whole debate. hope the Planning Committee will turn that down, because The hon. member for Ayre, my successor as member we are in this afternoon on the principle of taking area 1 for Ayre, has been talking about the village area and that away from one man and giving planing permission to the centre of the village is now at the Sulby Glen. It never another owner on area 2. Now, I can go along with taking was and never will be, I do not think, either. What you had the planning permission away from area 1, if that is it, if in the old village was a post office, two shops, a mill, all that is the end of it, but to take it from one man and give it of which the village centred round. It so happened that the to another, now is that justice, is that fairness? person who ran the post office passed on to another post

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T536 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

office somewhere in the sky, I suppose, and I know, as the landowner, but very interested to hear the remarks of the representative at that time, we had to plead with the man landowners, or at least three of them in this hon. Court, or at the corner, at the top end of the village, to take the post possibly four, today. office on, he really did not want it, and the other shops I have to say that the comments that came from the which have closed over that time have closed because of member for Glenfaba I agreed with, I agreed with in total, old age and people just not wanting to be bothered, so it and I am very pleased that he gave a very balanced has put it all in the way of that main shop, which, I would contribution to this debate given that he too is a landowner say, was created to catch people in the old days, going and he too of course is fully aware of the implications such from Sulby Glen railway station up to Tholt y Will and a redesignation of land would pose for a landowner and a that was the purpose of that shop when it was opened there, possible loss of valuable money. But I think the Court has was to catch the passing traffic. So I do not think the Court heard enough of the landowners’ arguments and what does should be misled by thinking that that area of Sulby is the surprise me is that those who represent or come from a centre of the village. As I say, it never was. farming background here today are the ones who have been Mention has been made of the flooding and the potential quick on their feet to say that the Sulby plan should be dangers of flooding at the bottom end of the village, but thrown out, and I find that quite remarkable given that we again I would remind hon. members that flooding always have an overall shortage of agricultural land and more was a regular occurrence on the Carrick Park side of Sulby agricultural land is being gobbled up for development Bridge, not on the northern side, but certainly on the bottom Island-wide. This seems to be a concern from the farming side, and I can well remember the people who were in the fraternity and yet we have the opposite argument put here well-named Claddagh Farm used to open the two doors of today by those with interests in farming matters. the house to let the water through, they lived with it, and But I do have to say that the real reason I have got to quite frankly the planners who gave permission for Carrick my feet here today is because we were all circulated with Park and the Mill Race to be developed the way they have a letter and petition from the residents of Sulby and they were totally wrong, there is no doubt about it, the danger made mention to a particular gentleman in that particular was always there, and I think the inquiry which is petition who is a chartered surveyor and I was drawn to supposedly going on at the moment will verify what I have my feet because of this. This particular gentleman is a said. constituent of mine and in fact is my next-door neighbour. But I do want to say a little bit more on the petition, the I have sat for some considerable time over this last four to local opposition, and again the member for Ayre has made five weeks talking to him about the Sulby plan, talking to great play and other members have indeed made great play him about his concerns in relation to the land drains, the of that, but the hon. member for Rushen, the man from the natural land drains, the problem with the retention of other end of the Island, asked a very good question there rainwater and the potential for flooding if development and he said there is strong opposition, but where does it were to take place, as would be the case if we were to come from? Over 50 per cent of the leaders of the throw out this particular plan here today, and they are very opposition look onto that field, onto area 1, an uninterrupted view from either the north or the south, and that is where genuine concerns. the strength of the opposition has come from, and I would Now, this particular individual does have high regard further say that I too talk to the people of Sulby. Just and carries much respect in terms of his judgement on because I am not a member of the Keys does not mean matters such as this, and I do know that he has been at that I have lost touch with them altogether and I have talked meetings with the Department of Local Government and to people whose names are on the petition and I said, ‘Well, the Environment and has also asked that perhaps in future, I see you’ve signed the petition.’ ‘Yes, yes, we’ve signed whilst considering strategic plans for the Isle of Man, first the petition. No more houses in Sulby, we don’t want more of all identification is made of such areas that do have a houses in Sulby.’ But I said the plan is to transfer from potential for flooding and perhaps rule them out of any area 1 to area 2 and put 20 or 30 houses up that end. ‘Oh, consideration for whatever development in the future and my God, I wouldn’t have signed the petition!’ They were merely concentrate on those areas that would not pose a under a misapprehension and the wording is here at the problem. top of the petition ‘That we are going with the declared Of course the last problem that springs to my mind, intent to avoid a major housing development’, and that is closer to my constituency, is the Governor’s Hill estate what people were signing, under the illusion that there where, through the proliferation of accommodation built would be no development either in area 1 or area 2, and there over the last few years, it has interfered with natural those are the people I talked to, the people who are at land drains and has caused tremendous flooding problems. ground level and whose feet are firmly on the ground. They Now, I do know the department are addressing that and were misled, I would suggest to say, on this whole thing. they are investing in encountering those problems, but I think the hon. Court here today should resist the nevertheless the problems have been there and were exhortations of the mover of the resolution before us and I overlooked at the time perhaps when planning permission would suggest that the Department of Local Government was given for residential development. and the Environment should go back to square one and Finally, I would just like to say that I can appreciate the have a proper look at what should be going on in Sulby. comments from the hon. member for Rushen, Sir Miles, when he says that he feels uncomfortable with having to Mrs Cannell: Mr President, I shall be very brief. I do take a decision here today. I have sympathy for him. not represent the countryside and I am certainly not a However, I do not feel uncomfortable in making a decision

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T537

here today on this particular plan. We are here to be asked with the insinuations and slights that we have heard today, to judge the merits of the local plan, whether we agree to everybody has had the opportunity at a public inquiry to it or we do not agree to it. The very fact is that the ancient make their case. It is absolutely clear in the report that Mr right of any person to petition the bar of Tynwald and to Radcliffe, through his legal representation, was also at that be heard, which we have heard today, is to my mind inquiry, objecting to the land being removed, the dezoning something quite natural that could quite happily flow on of the land. So it is absolutely clear that the opportunity at from a consideration of a local plan and it is to be expected a public inquiry was exercised. in nine times out of 10. That does not make me feel The question for us then is only quite a simple one and uncomfortable. I am pleased that such representations are that is, is the result and recommendations of the planning made because it does help to broaden the argument and inspector and the decision of the department, which has broaden the perspective and the judgement that we are resulted in the order that is before us, the correct decision? being asked to deliver upon today. You either say yes or you say no. The nitty-gritty in getting But I am quite happy that everything has been catered down to all the little detail, and some bits I do not like for in terms of people’s opinions, not only in this hon. Court about the way it has changed, really is irrelevant to our today, but within the village and community of Sulby and decision today. I can argue over whether or not it is I am quite happy to support the plan before us. appropriate to have a section of land and say there should be four houses there and three there. I think that is Mr Brown: Mr President, I really stand to just put a absolutely stupid, because that is irrelevant in planning view in from certainly myself on a situation that has been terms. It is the zoning of the land. It is for residential use hinted at that maybe the ministers themselves have not or it is not for residential use. The quantity of what is on given this any thought and are just going to go along with there is a matter for the Planning Committee to make its it or whatever. decision on when the application goes before them, and Can I say I think that from our point of view, from my we are being dragged into that situation. point of view anyway, clearly we all take planning very So quite clearly, whether we like to make a decision or seriously and I think history has shown in this hon. court not today, we have to make a decision and the decision that dealing with these local plans is a nightmare for that members have to make is they either support it or they Tynwald Court and the sooner the situation is resolved the reject it and the majority decision will stand and therefore better. It is not, I do not believe, in anyone’s interest to whatever happens then will happen. It is interesting that have a procedure that we now have where Tynwald is the local authority who demonstrated in the report their thrown into this situation of trying to judge who is right support for the zoning of that land are not here today and who is wrong on matters that directly affect individuals objecting also that it has been taken out of the zoning. in this way, because all it does is tear Tynwald apart and I There is also, I think, a misconception that because the also believe it causes frustration, upset, concern for those land has been zoned for 20 years or thereabouts, as of right who are affected in whatever way they are affected, it should stay there. That is not the way it works. Whether whether it be because land is being zoned, that it should I like it or not, that is not the way it works. The zoning is not stay, or land is being added to which other people do clearly what it is. It has been identified at some stages not like. So I do think that that is a situation we are through the past and maybe reaffirmed that that zoning is conscious of. It has been raised now for a number of years, appropriate and for whatever reasons, which might well that this is a concern that Tynwald Court has, and I do reflect the community as a whole, the zoning has been think it is a matter that has to be resolved sooner than later. changed. I have listened with interest to the points that have been The one thing we need to be careful about is not getting made by the two gentlemen at the bar and of course Mr drawn in to the local objections because again if you are Radcliffe who has a direct interest in it and rightly has going to allow purely the people to decide on that basis exercised his rights, and I have also listened to the points what is right, you should have a compulsory referendum made by members in the Court today and one thing which in that area and let the people decide. But we are here to is obvious is that Tynwald Court has been dragged in to represent the Isle of Man and, whatever we do, our becoming a Planning Committee today because members responsibility is to ensure that there is adequate and are talking about the individuality of what is going on, appropriately zoned land for residential use in and around and the difficulty is that the process encourages us to do our towns and villages of the Island to meet the future that. development needs. That is the only job we have. Whatever I think what we have to do, though, is to try and divorce we think, that is the job we have, and if we make a decision ourselves from those individual aspects and really look at on that, that is fine. whether or not the planning procedure and where we are What you must do is make the decision you believe is today has gone through the correct procedure and if you right and all the other aspects of getting dragged into the read the inspector’s report, which we did not have the last very local issue, to some degree is not the job for us here time this matter was before Tynwald Court, which I have today. That will happen when the Planning Committee gets to say in my opinion should always be available to Tynwald an application, whether or not the land is zoned for Court while it has to make such a decision, the full report residential, because do not forget that the point that a land of any planning inquiry, if we look at that it is absolutely is not zoned for residential does not stop somebody putting clear that those people who had views on the proposed an application in to try and get a development, and the Sulby plan, whatever and however it was formulated and hon. member for Garff was saying from the Planning

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T538 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

Committee point of view that they have to take cognisance The President: May I call on the mover to reply? Thank of the zoning. I absolutely agree. I have to say that a trend you, hon. members. The hon. mover. that is starting to annoy people is that on many applications now one of the only reasons for refusal is because it is not Mr Downie: Thank you, Mr President. It has been a zoned on the plan, and people are objecting to that because very, very interesting debate, as of course we knew it they are saying the Planning Committee are not considering would. I am very pleased that so many people have taken their application they are just hanging their hat on the plan the opportunity to take part and to make comment. and what is being said is they are hanging their hat on the First of all I would just like to go back to the session plan and letting the inspector make the decision, and that that we had when Mr Gough and Mr Radcliffe addressed is not the way to go forward. That is what is happening the Court and deal with this issue with regard to Mr Groves, outside. and reference was made to it later on in the debate when So I would say to hon. members the matter before us is Mr Rodan, my hon. colleague and member for Garff, said quite straightforward and I hope members will make the that at all times in the department he thought that Mr Groves decision they believe it right for the order here today. had always behaved honourably. I too would like to endorse that statement and as far as I am concerned, I am of the Mrs Christian: Mr President, I think that the matter is opinion that there has been no collusion at all which has a question for the Court to decide, but what must concern taken place and the department actually bent over anybody who submits a planning application and indeed backwards that when the election came along the decision members of this Court is the way in which the plan is dealt of the planning inspector was placed in the safe and it was with by the Planning Committee and so on, and that has not until the new department took over that that particular been alluded to by the hon. member for Castletown to some item was resurrected. I am not aware that any politician degree. connected with the department actually saw the decision. We find ourselves in a situation where, when a new The chief executive of the day was given the task of looking plan is coming forward, that is taken into consideration by after that and the issue was out of the way until the new the inspector or by the committee to some degree and they department was formed. So I just want to put that to rest, are entitled, as we are advised, to take that into if I can. consideration. But what I do find rather strange is that I would like to say the same about the allocation of the whilst we are moving forward in that way, you can take land for development in the first place, but that is an issue into consideration something that is coming up, but once that happened a long time ago. It was not done with any Tynwald has voted on it here you do not very often hear consultation process or a public inquiry. My understanding that people have taken into consideration which has just is that regarding the Chairman of the Local Government gone the day before and yet we know that the Planning Board of that day you could apply the same sort of criticism Committee has the ability to do that, and in this particular as we have heard right throughout this particular issue. So case we see a statement that there is no present objecdon one thing counterbalances the other as far as I am to the principle to the residential development on the appeal concerned. But as I say, I am happy that there has been no site, but there are detailed matters of layout and access collusion or no involvement with different people as far and a comprehensive plan and so on. Those are details. as this land goes. The principle to the development on that site is not rejected Now, Mr Speaker said it was the right of a petitioner to by the inspector and so I suppose the only hope we could come to Tynwald Court and the Court should see that there offer to any person in a situation where they find that the should be no injustice. Well, I am entirely satisfied that conditions of the plan have changed is to go back and argue there has not been any injustice. There has been a laid- strongly that what today is acceptable in terms of a planning down procedure which is based on the 1982 development principle should still apply tomorrow on the grounds that orders, there has been a public inquiry held, there have the Planning Committee still has the ability to look at any been all the different avenues pursued with regard to individual application notwithstanding the designation on consultation, a full process taken on board. The decision the plan. That, I think, is where it falls down because it was then taken following the inquiry by the independent appears that the Planning Committee do not do that. inspector and then following that, the decision reaches the department and then there is a recommendation made for us today. Mrs Crowe: I was just going to support what the hon. A lot of the debate that has taken place within the Court member of the Council said. Why do we have these plans has been with regard to what we perceive might be the before us today? Why do we need these plans to be statutory loss to Mr Radcliffe, and I accept that he feels quite badly plans? Other jurisdictions do not have local plans as about it, and in fact the planning inspector, when he statutory plans and I suggest that the reason that our produced his conclusions, said, and I will just read some Department of Local Government and the Environment of them: ‘The weight of evidence is such that I have to want these plans to be statutory is they want us to endorse recommend that the allocation of area 1 should return to these plans so when someone puts in planning for a house agriculture or open space, disappointing though this will or whatever, they can add weight to their refusal by saying, be to Mr Radcliffe. I would summarise my reasons as Tynwald Court endorsed these plans and that’s how it will follows’. Then he goes on to indicate the visual impact be’, and that, I think, is what happens in practice. Thank which would result from such a substantial project, very you, Mr President. substantial local opposition from residents, the significant

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T539

change to the character and appearance of the village should this area, a dormitory area in Sulby, people who have no the development of area 1 for housing take place - and let connection with the village, new people coming in, us be honest, if we were looking at this area fresh today, changing its whole identity, and this is why there is this would we allow a large development to take place in that opposition out in the hinterland of the Island. People do area? I do not think so - loss of good, level agricultural not want these great changes. As has been said in this Court space, open space land. These were the comments that the before, we want evolution, not revolution. inspector made. ow, somebody else during the debate today said that M r Cannell: There is no need at Sulby Bridge, but there the planning moves in two ways really. In this particular is need 50 yards up the road. instance we are looking at an area of land which has quite a substantial valuation, but if, let us say for argument’s M r Downie: You should have been at the public inquiry sake, the roles were reversed and Mr Radcliffe’s and you would have heard what the people said. agricultural land today was to be zoned for housing, who Mr Quine went on to say that he was not aware of any is the beneficiary there? It is Mr Radcliffe. Now, involvement with Mr Groves and that ample opportunity unfortunately this is the way our present planning system had been given to Mr Radcliffe at the planning inquiry, works and rather than turn round and say, ‘That’s it for and when I circulated the planning inspector’s findings to ever’, like some people are saying today - ‘It has been all members, you can see the amount of evidence that was zoned for 20 years: why can’t he build on it?’ or 25 years presented by all the different people involved in the village, - within the next two or three years there will be an and if we are going to have a system which encourages opportunity to revisit that land and shortly there will be a local involvement you have to have regard for what these revision of the Sulby plan and who knows, four or five people say, that is die whole purpose behind it, and I hope years down the Une from now that land could be rezoned some of those members who have been critical today will again. So this is why there is not this requirement now for take the time when their own local plans come up and they compensation, and this has been the situation in the United will have the opportunity to attend and listen and Kingdom for a great number of years, and part of our understand what the revision process is all about and, if problem in the Island is that part of our planning law and possible, have their input. the area dealing with these particular issues goes back to Sir Miles said he was beating the old drum or we were the 1930s, and some members, I feel, although they take beating the old drum: the local plan process should be an interest in what is going on in planning, behind the actual examined by this Court. I understand that part of the planning process there is a great raft of quite complicated planning process is being dealt with and will be dealt with areas of legislation which are difficult to understand. by the acceptance of the new Town and Country Planning I will try and run through the list of the people who Act. That will clarify some of the present anomalies in the made a contribution and see if I can answer some of the system. questions that were raised. The reluctance to pay any sort of injury to landowners I thank Mr Braidwood for his support. He and I have - 1 accept that, but in our planning process, as I said, five spent many an hour deliberating over this particular matter or six years down the line that land could be rezoned again, and trying to address it, and I think perhaps members will and what are we going to do if we pay compensation? Are realise now how much work there is involved in a local we going to ask for the money back? plan and how much time it takes up within a department A democratic exercise - it has been questioned. Sir Miles and perhaps give some thought to that when these local said was this a democratic exercise? I hope he took the plans are progressed in the future, and there is a whole opportunity recently to go and attend the Arbory and East range of them to come before this Court in the not-too- Rushen review and see what took place there and whether distant future. We are just starting now a major revision of he is still of the opinion or whether he feels that that all these local plans and I hope that, although this has been particular exercise has not been democratic. a difficult day today, we will reach the right decision and Views of the one person injured are also important. I we will get a much better understanding of how the process would suggest, hon. members, that they are of paramount works. importance and it was no easy task for my hon. colleague Mr Quine we all know has a direct involvement with Mr Braidwood to have to come and listen to the petitioner’s the department, but quite rightly very early on he did appeal, as it were, to us for injurious affection. It is not an identify there was a conflict of interest as far as he was easy thing to do and to try and explain really the purposes concerned. He was here to represent his local people today behind the local plan because it is not clear to people, and and he quite clearly said that in his opinion the development I think that if one thing is coming out of all of these local of area 1 would have a detrimental effect on the village plans it is the requirement to have better advice and people and the local need for these additional houses just does to be better informed of what takes place when there is a not exist and that the whole issue was a strategic planning local plan. Perhaps that is something that we can do as a issue. department to try and promote. If you look at the local plan, the removal of area 1 was The hon. member for Rushen, Sir Miles Walker, went an area which included 35-plus housing units. If the local on to discuss area 5, the land at the rear of the public house, plan is approved today in its present form it will still allow two dwellings, and generally approached the issue from 29 additional new dwellings in areas 2, 3,4 and 5, and at what I thought was more an individual planning application the public inquiry concern was expressed about creating process than what we are trying to do which is to create a

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T540 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

strategic plan, but when you are looking at an area like when he finished his deliberations was he felt that the Sulby where there are small pockets you have to identify application should be refused and the decision of the areas where you think two or three or more houses might Planning Committee be upheld. That is what Mr Crow said. sit firmly within the local population and try and reduce So he has actually refused it. So it is all right to cherry- the overall impact that major development of one area pick certain lines here. could do. The hon. member for Onchan, Mr Cannell, also went Mr Cannell appeared to me to believe that from 1971 on to say that Mr Radcliffe had proved his need. I do not to 1996 anything should go down there, it was all right for see that at all. If there was a need for development there I development. Could I say that it was not until the latter think it would have happened nine, 10 years ago, and I part of the end of the ’90s that the petitioner actually made think what has happened, rightly or wrongly, is that Mr a planning application and we have seen the outcome of Radcliffe has sat on it, he perhaps has not been as quick that this last few days. Even though the land may be zoned off the mark as he may have been, he has realised at a late for development it does not necessarily mean that what stage there is a local plan revision, and what is becoming you put in for you get, and that is another area within the more and more prevalent throughout the Island is there is planning criteria that people have to have much more this continual opposition to development in the countryside, regard for. Neither, should I say, is the door closed firmly and that is the same no matter where you go, and while we in his face now because under our present system there have a planning situation which is based on and openly will be an opportunity in the not-too-distant future for him encourages public opinion you will always get that sort of to apply for this land to be rezoned again when the review message coming back from people in rural areas. takes place. Mr Cannell: It is okay up the road, though. M r North: Can we have the Marown and Braddan plan first? Mr Downie: There was reference made to Quiggin’s Yard. I have tried to explain to the hon. member before M r Downie: Can you have the what? (Interjections) that that land has been zoned and continues to be zoned He thought that area 1 was good, a good site for housing, for large-scale commercial development. It was acquired other areas not so suitable, in his opinion. Likewise, if he on the basis and people, I understand, were encouraged to had attended the public inquiry he would have heard first­ buy parcels of land in that area for large commercial hand what the view was of the local authority who indeed development in order to make one of these superstores supported the department. They did not want development happen. Now, you cannot at this stage just turn round and in area 1 either, nor did the majority of people living in the say, ‘No, we’re not going to allow that to happen.’ We village, and that view was endorsed by the inspector and have not got the mechanism to do that and I am sure that. that view is one that has been endorsed by the department and identified in the local plan. Mr Cannell: That is what you are doing here. He made reference to a letter dated 1st February 1995 which indicated that our present minister was in favour of Mr Downie: Well, if what we are doing is wrong here development. That is a matter, I would suggest, for the I am sure that this whole issue will finish up either as a minister as the representative of the area. At that particular petition of doleance or in some other place to determine. time he had no connections whatsoever with DoLGE. In All I want to try and do today is to progress the Sulby plan fact he used to blow lumps out of us on a fairly regular which in my opinion has been worked on for a long number basis. He was in opposition then so he had his own views of years and all the different procedures have been and was entitled to his own view at that time. observed. Mr Cannell also went on to say there was a 25-year Mr Gilbey made reference to points of principle. He history here and if there was any natural justice there should gave a very good résumé of the planning system together be compensation. Well, the department considered the with the local plan revisions and the cycles. He explained compensation issue and in our opinion there is not a case the aspects of our particular system. He explained about for compensation and the reason for that is that within the planning gain and betterment and no compensation, which life of the next plan that land could be rezoned again for is the best way forward in the interest of the public. At the development. end of the day if we do award compensation it is not our money, it is the taxpayer’s money that we are giving away. A Member: Go on with you. He made a comment about Mr Groves’ influence which he thought was unworthy. M r Downie: Well, you are saying, ‘Go on.’ He also He also went on to say what will, I suppose, be the said what is wrong with putting in a planning application catch-phrase of today or the soundbite: you will never get when it is coming up for a local plan revision? Nothing at unanimity in planning. My word, he is right. all, people do it all the time, but what we should not be Mr Shimmin said that we were looking at a planning confusing the issue with today is we are looking at local minefield. He was concerned about the visual impact, as plans, not individual planning applications, and in fact if was the inspector, was concerned about Mr Radcliffe and you look at what Mr Crow said - and I am glad some the request to develop his land in his own time. members have made reference to it - all right, he said (a), Development on this field is something he would not (b) and (c) could be possible, but the last thing he said choose. He went on to talk about planning blight and

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T541

planning decisions where people can be made millionaires Mr Duggan: It is getting late, Alex! virtually overnight if their land is rezoned and by the same move people can lose significant amounts of money Mr Downie: It has been a long day! She said we were overnight by redesignation, and it is not a fair way to here to judge the merits of the local plan and she was compensate when money comes from the public purse. I satisfied that everything had been catered for by the process must agree with him. He said he was happy to go along and by the subsequent public inquiry. with the Sulby plan. Mr Brown, the hon. member for Castletown, gave a Mr Rodan, who has considerable experience in the very interesting perspective as a former minister and a planning field - 1 was grateful for the comments he made, person who has had to be highly involved with planning particularly about the decision-making arrived at and based issues, and he said that Tynwald Court should not be on sound policy, and he gave an explanation of the planning involved in these procedures. He listened with interest and procedures in zoning and outlined the culmination of the he felt that Tynwald was being dragged into becoming a four-year process which we have with us before Tynwald planning committee. We had to look at the inspector’s today and which we are hoping to get final sanction for. report. It was quite clear. I have given you extracts and I He has sympathy with Sir Miles and the level of detail have given you copies of the inspector’s report, and the on the plan but he reiterated that this Court is not the public department’s position is acceptable, and what we have got inquiry. He also went on to say that not enough regard is to look at is the decision that we are making today. had by the public to the public inquiry process, and the Mrs Christian made reference to the planning process 1982 development order pointed out what regard has to be and perhaps an opportunity to look afresh at some issues. had to meet certain criteria, and they are the messages that Mrs Crowe’s comments were based on the present we need to get off to the public and to people who are planning criteria and our basis for where we are at this involved in local plans. particular time in planning. Mr Cannan quoted something about principles and he I just want to finish off, hon. members. I know you have congratulated the hon. member for Ayre, Mr Quine, in been here a long time. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) I supporting his constituents in opposing the plan. just want to cover some of the basic points that I feel are He said we are here as jurors to hear Mr Radcliffe’s necessary to cover and ask members to consider that this case. Well, I am sorry, I cannot agree with that and I do not is the first time the department has sought to determine a think when some of these big planning issues finish up in local plan for Sulby. The order before the hon. Court today another place in the United Kingdom they have the opinion represents a culmination of several years’ study into the that they are judges and juries over particular issues. All appropriate future and land use planning terms for Sulby we are here today for, in my opinion, hon. members, is to village. determine the Sulby plan, end of story. The first land use planning document which was adopted Reference was also made that the issue should be judged again and quoted a recent planning application decision. I by Tynwald with respect to Sulby was the Isle of Man would suggest, hon. members, that if this plan is rejected Planning Scheme Development Order 1982. The 1982 today and we go back to basics, have the public inquiry order included an Island-wide map which set out the and we submit public opinion, in my opinion we could be various land use designations considered appropriate for well having the same argument three years down the line the Island including Sulby at that time. Two significant but picking up even more opposition to the other pockets areas were introduced as being suitable for new residential that we have identified for development within the village. development. The first was on the land on the southern The whole top and bottom is, people out in the country do side of Sulby Bridge which subsequently was developed not want development. and is known as Carrick Park; the other was some nine acres of agricultural land at the north-west of the bridge M r Cannell: They did not want it at Groudle either. which has remained undeveloped in 1982. In 1991 the department adopted a series of sector plans, which added Mr Brown: Hear, hear. further policies to the land uses contained in the 1982 order. These referred specifically to the areas which had been Mr Downie: Well, Mr Radcliffe, the hon. member for zoned for development and recommended back in 1991 Council, gave us a brief history of the local village that individual studies be undertaken into the major including the flooding and the signification of the focal settlements. In the northern sector plans Sulby was one point of Sulby Stores, and he said it was wrong to give the such settlement recommended for an individual study. So Mill Race area planning. The local petition - strong right back in 1991 it was laid out then that that particular opposition - where has it come from? People who look out area was going to be looked at and the whole area zoned onto area 1. Well, it was ever thus, hon. members, and for residential was to be revisited. unfortunately where you want to develop anywhere these The sector plan referring to Sulby is sector plan B, issued days you can always find plenty of people to oppose it. He as planning circular 10/91. It made reference specifically suggests that we go back to square 1, have a fresh look, a to the land at the north-west of Sulby Bridge and new inquiry. I would need to be convinced that if we go recommended in paragraph 5.3 that this allocation be back to square 1 we are going to finish up in exactly the reconsidered in the preparation of the local plan for Sulby. same place as we are today. The plan also commented in paragraph 5.5 that Mrs Cannell - she agreed with Mrs Gilbey, the hon. recommendations have been received from the Lezayre member for ... (Laughter) Mr Gilbey. Parish Commissioners that an area to the west of Sulby

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried T542 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

village should be allocated for residential development. order. A public notice inviting representations in this regard The process to establish the local plan for Sulby began in was published by the department in two local newspapers December 1994, when officers of the department met with on 9th and 11th December 1997. the Lezayre Parish Commissioners to discuss the One claim was received from Mr A D Radcliffe, who procedures to be followed in initiating a local plan for Sulby claimed injurious affection because area 1, field 0079, was village. included in the draft scheme order as zoned for open space In January 1995 various persons and bodies both within rather than residential, which had been its previous zoning. and outside of government were invited by the Office of A special department meeting was held on 5th June 1998 Planning to submit their views on a range of topics so that when myself and the hon. member for Douglas East, Mr their comments could be taken into account in producing Braidwood, acting jointly, considered the claim for an issues and options document for Sulby village. A small compensation for injurious affection. Mr Radcliffe attended leaflet was delivered to residents in the area inviting their that meeting with his advocate, having previously made comments. Over 50 responses were received and an issues written representations, and gave oral amplification of his and options document was published by the department in claim. The department is aware that the land which was May 1995. This was prepared by the Office of Planning as previously designated for development but which is now a provisional document and it showed area 1, field 0079, rezoned to open space has been zoned for some 14 years Mr Radcliffe’s land, zoned for residential purposes in with no applications ever having been submitted prior to accordance with the then existing zoning for that land. the formulation of the Sulby village study. Views were requested from the public and interested bodies The scheme order before hon. members today makes on the issues and options document, and this consultation provision for development on some 10 acres compared process ran through until about August 1995 when the with provision for a similar amount in the 1982 order, albeit department issued a press notice indicating that the next in different parts of the village. The department is of the stage in the process would be to produce a draft local plan opinion that the land use designations as proposed would for further public comment before arranging a public effectively bring the village together to become inquiry. The department met on 9th October 1995 to geographically more balanced and improve the overall area examine the views received, and it was at that meeting of the settlement. This compares with the present situation that the content of the draft local plan was provisionally where there is a preponderance of residential development agreed. in the east, whereas a local shop, school, community hall The legislation governing the making of planning and churches are all in the west. The department has scheme orders requires the department to meet with the resolved to redesignate the nine acres of land to the north­ local authority. This statutory meeting with the Lezayre west of Sulby Bridge as open space because it believes Parish Commissioners was held on 12th September 1996 that development of such a large area in such a prominent for the purposes of discussing the draft local plan and position would have a drastic effect on the appearance and seeking further views from them. This meeting was character of the village. On the other hand, development attended by the hon. member for Garff, Mr Rodan, as a in the area shown zoned for residential purposes would department representative. The outcome of those largely be hidden from general view by significant existing discussions was further considered by the department at a vegetation which surrounds these sites. Whilst some of meeting held on 23rd September, when the content of the the sites zoned are not currently accessible to the public draft plan for submission to the public inquiry was sewer, this is not insurmountable in that it is perfectly finalised. The department then gave notice that the public possible to extend the sewer to these sites, and not inquiry would be held on 1 st November 1996 in the Sulby necessarily at the cost of the public, which may have knock- village hall. It was conducted by Peter Bexson, a chartered on benefits eventually to other property. This was a point surveyor and independent planning inspector. He that was commented on by the independent planning subsequently submitted his report dated 22nd November inspector. 1996 to the department, and I have provided hon. members The department believes that the Sulby local plan order with a copy of it. The department decided that consideration represents a sensitive and balanced approach to of the comments, conclusions and recommendations in the development in the village which provides opportunities independent inspector’s report should be deferred until after for local growth and housing whilst also providing the November 1996 general election. In other words, the protection for those parts of the village which require it. department felt that the determination of the contents of Hon. members will have noticed that the date on the the Sulby plan was a matter which should be left for Sulby local plan order before the Court today indicates its consideration by the new department appointed following the general election. operative date to be 1st December 1998. I confirm, The newly constituted department considered the therefore, that the department has given notice that it independent inspector’s report at several meetings during proposes to make an amending 1999 order, and this is 1997 and finalised the contents of the scheme order at a currently the subject of consultation. The effect of that order meeting held on 8th September 1997. The department is as presently drafted and subject to the approval of the required under the Town and Country Planning Act 1934 motion appearing at item 3 on today’s order paper will be to give consideration to whether provision should be made to change the operative date from 1st December 1998 to in a scheme order for compensation in respect of properties 1st April 1999. Mr President, I beg to move the motion which might be injuriously affected by the making of such standing in my name.

Isle of Man Planning Scheme (Sulby Local Plan) (No. 2) Order 1998 - Objectors Heard - Debate Resumed - Motion Carried TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T543

Members: Hurray! That the Shops Act (Temporary Exemption) Order 1999 be approved. A Member: April Fool’s Day! (Laughter) This temporary exemption order is necessary to The President: Hon. members, the motion is set out at maintain the status quo. It seeks to provide an equitable item 3 on the order paper. Will those in favour of that trading arena for a small category of traders, namely motion please say aye; against, no. The noes have it. retailers whose principal trade is the trade of sports goods, footwear and clothing, to open on Sundays from Easter A division was called for and voting resulted as follows: Sunday to the last Sunday in October. The Shops Bill 1999 is currently with the Attorney- In the Keys - General and, after consultation with the Council of Ministers, we hope to introduce the Bill in a matter of For: Messrs Gilbey, Quine, Rodan, North, Brown, weeks. Thank you, Mr President. I beg to move. Houghton, Henderson, Cretney, Braidwood, Mrs Cannell, Messrs Shimmin, Downie, Mrs Hannan, Mr Waft: I beg to second, Mr President, and reserve Messrs Singer, Bell, Corkill and Gelling -17 my remarks.

Against: M r Cannan, Sir Miles Walker, Mrs Crowe, Messrs The Lord Bishop: Mr President, I am delighted to hear Duggan, Karran, Cannell and the Speaker - 7 that the Bill is being progressed. (Interjections and laughter) I seem to have looked in the direction of Sir Miles The Speaker: Mr President, the motion carries in the when he was Chief Minister and it was promised that it House with 17 votes cast for and 7 against, sir. would be produced and I am still waiting, and I think that really it does change the complexion of this comment that In the Council - I want to make. I feel I am being a politician at the moment because I For: The Lord Bishop, Mr Waft, Dr Mann, Mrs Christian sympathise with what Mrs Crowe is saying but, on a matter and M r Crowe - 5 of principle, I shall vote against this because it is still an unfair and unjust situation. People often say to me, ‘Just Against: Messrs Lowey and Radcliffe - 2 look at the Hansard for last year and you will get the situation.’ Well, it has changed, actually, and the change The President: In the Council, hon. members, 5 votes has come about with the advent of the big shops, the have been cast in favour of the resolution, 2 votes against; supermarkets and the garage forecourts, who now seem to I declare the resolution carried. me to sell everything at all times, and I see the injustice to the smaller traders to whom this order refers. But I do feel The Court will now take a break and we will resume at that we have lost sight of the real invidious situation where 6 o’clock by the Court clock. Thank you, hon. members. these bigger shops seem to disobey regulations. They start off by saying that they sell essential goods, but also many The Court adjourned at 5.43 p.m. of them sell other goods as well and the whole thing is what in the Navy we would call a ‘pot mess’ and I really feel it is time we addressed it. I do not know whether the Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading was aware that Procedural Marks and Spencer, for example, on the Sunday after Christmas started its winter sale in the morning - on a The President: Now, before turning to item 18, hon. Sunday morning. You cannot tell me that a Marks and members, would you agree we persevere with the agenda Spencer sale is only for essential goods, and I just wonder for, say, another hour-and-a-half or two hours? if any comment was made to that department store in a blatant disregard for the law, and I really feel that it is time Members: Agreed. we did something about it. I am not just making a plea for keeping Sunday special. The President: See how far we get and then look at I will want to do that when the Bill comes in, because that alternative provisions if needs be. will then address the real issue, which is trading on a Sunday, but at the moment I want to just voice my dismay that we are taking so long with this legislation. I want to Shops Act (Temporary Exemption) Order ask this Tynwald Court, is it not worried about the supermarkets and other big stores which seem to disregard 1999 - Approved the current Shops Act and therefore create more injustice to the small traders, and I just want to say as a matter of The President: Very well. Item 18, the hon. member principle I shall oppose this order, although I have great for Rushen, Mrs Crowe. sympathy with the smaller traders who must sit on their thumbs until 2 o’clock watching the big boys sell Mrs Crowe: Mr President, I beg to move: everything they should not sell.

Procedural Shops Act (Temporary Exemption) Order 1999 - Approved T544 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

A Member: Hear, hear. that, so be it, but it is a deliberate attempt to get around about the law as it presently is and really we should throw Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I will be opposing this order, this out, we should stick to what we have got, we should not because I have seen the light (Laughter) - force my hon. colleague to bring the Bill back to the House of Keys. The House of Keys should argue it out on the The Lord Bishop: It is about time! floor politically, come to some decision on what the new law will be, and personally I would like to see that as a Mr Karran: - but simply because, as I have done over reduction of hours rather than an extension of hours. the years - Mr Singer: Mr President, I will not be voting against Mr Delaney: It means that he is awake! (Laughter) this particular proposal, which is an established annual summer proposal to aid the tourist industry as such, but Mr Karran: - there has not been the proper employment the Bishop has pointed quite clearly to the anomalies that protection for workers on Sundays, in my opinion, and I are there at present but it is not the answer to allow a free- feel that we have a situation where people are having to for-all. The anomalies can be tackled, the anomalies should work on Sundays as a normal working day in the week, be tackled, but it is not an answer to make Sunday and I think that is basically wrong, and that is why I have indistinguishable from any other trading day. consistently voted with His Grace as far as this is concerned, because in my opinion the legislation is not Mr Brown: Mr President, I welcome the indication there to protect people in work and this is why I have always from the Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading that the gone against the hon. member for Ramsey when he has long-awaited Shop Hours Bill is on its way and I have been wanting a free-for-all on licensing hours. It is all right listened with interest to the points that members have said and, as far as this order is concerned, I have expressed this us propping up the bar on one side of the counter; it is concern now ever since they started bringing the order in, those that are having to serve on the other side and, because which is that the order works against many of the local of this Court’s refusal to address the issue of making sure traders simply because it is very specific and quite clearly there is adequate protection, Sunday is special, and I think it was actually basically picked out of a hat, the ones that that if we want people to work on a Sunday then we should were put into it, because they were the people who tended recognise that they work on a Sunday and we should pay to lobby. them accordingly for working on a Sunday, but all I see I have to say I wonder why people get so het up about with these ever increasing shops being opened on a Sunday shop hours. The same people in this hon. Court and outside is more abuse leading to more people being forced to work do not worry about the pubs being open, (A Member: when it should be valuable time with their families. Hear, hear.) they do not worry about cafes being open, I will not have a go at the hon. mover of this proposal they do not worry about anything else being open, but for in this role, but later on in the agenda paper I think we will some reason there is a worry about shops being open and see that the issue is more important on that issue and I all I can say is that the Shop Hours Act of 1985 is think hon. members should support the hon. Lord Bishop discriminating against local small businesses on this Island as far as this is concerned. We should have an unholy because of the way it is worded. We warned about that in alliance (Laughter) and throw this order out until we get 1985 but could not get it sorted out and I have to say I proper employment protection for the workers, because really do worry as to whether or not the garages that are there is not any at the present time. I know we are out of open all hours and literally all day Sunday, and the law the Stone Age; it took us a long time to get out of the says where their principal trade is a garage. . . that is not Stone Age but we are still not far enough, and until we get the case. Their principal trade is no longer a garage. They some proper legislation we should not encourage any more are a convenience store with a garage on the side (Mr shops to be open on a Sunday. Houghton: Hear, hear. That is correct.) and I wonder why no action has been taken against diem when other shops The Speaker: Briefly, Mr President, if members will have to be closed. (A Member: Hear, hear.) turn to the back of their order they will see in the I will support the order because I think it at least is a explanatory note that it says ‘At present all shops may way forward at this stage to help in a few areas, but I do open for business on a Sunday between 2.00 p.m. and 5.30 think the sooner we tackle the legislation the better. p.m.’ and this hon. Court should realise that that was a The hon. member for Onchan, Mr Karran, made a point compromise in itself. It was a compromise to allow shops where he said he was against it because there was no to open because the current situation, at that time where protection for employees of retailers. I have to say that is limited shops were open, was being fiddled and so the the only area that there is specific legislation to protect (A committee came up with a compromise, and the Lord Member: Hear, hear.) - the choice of the employee. There Bishop is absolutely right this evening that what has is no protection in any other area. As I say, pubs and cafes happened since the time of that compromise being reached and all these can open and there is no problem in that. is that ‘the big boys’ and the retail trade are fiddling their way around the law. They are deliberately and without any Mr Delaney: Pubs are covered. doubt trying to find a way around the times in which they can open; and if you like to take the forecourts of the Mr Brown: But the Shops Act is quite specific in terms garages and the major supermarkets as your example of that it says ‘An employee can say ‘No, I do not want to,’

Shops Act (Temporary Exemption) Order 1999 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T545

and the view is then, ‘Oh, well, it does not work.’ I can tell as we can. If we had unlimited resources from Treasury, you it does work, because on a number of occasions I have we would be able to perhaps go in, do a full audit of a actually made representation to the industrial relations garage and find out exactly to the penny. Are we looking officer over the years where people were told ‘You have for the profit? Are we looking for the turnover? How do got to work’ and then of course the IRO has got involved we determine the principal trade? Is it by the amount of and the employer has backed down. petrol sold? A very difficult position to be in. As I say, the The whole thing is a mess. What is happening is we are anomalies that exist at the present time are ridiculous. allowing the multi-nationals to dominate the Island. We As for Mr Singer, who says . . . (Laughter and are distorting our retailing sector and, unless we do interjections) I know the anomalies that can be addressed. something about it, we will have a real problem if we do The Office of Fair Trading prior to my time, as everyone not get this law sorted out. At the moment we have got no in this Court will tell you, have been working for the last choice but to support the order. 19 years to try and bring forward legislation that would eliminate all the anomalies and I am not sure that the Mr Duggan: Mr President, every year we have this legislation that we are going to bring forward will do that debate and the Bishop gets up and threatens us with all either. There will always be some anomalies to this, but it sorts. (Laughter and interjections) Anyway, as Mr Brown is not just a sweeping statement to say we could address from Castletown has pointed out to Mr Karran, in the the anomalies in another way. That is not true. The legislation there was protection there to protect people who legislation we are bringing forward we feel will be the work in shops. We spent a lot of time over that when we only way to protect the small Manx traders on this Island had the Bill at committee stage. As Mr Speaker said, it is a (Members: Hear, hear.) and these are the people that are compromise. My personal view, hon. members, is freedom being damaged at present by the legislation that is in place. of choice both for the visitors and also the locals especially The large multi-nationals can open. There is some variance during the summer months. I support the resolution. in when they can open. If you do not sell food you cannot open. If you sell food you can open and sell clothes, toys, The President: Reply, hon. member, please. flowers, anything you want to do. We are going to address all those, Mr President, and, as I say, I am just ashamed Mrs Crowe: Thank you, Mr President. There is no-one that I have to stand here today and that the legislation is more ashamed today having to bring this temporary not in the other House. exemption order to this Court than me. I have worked from the day I went into the Office of Fair Trading to bring Mr Duggan: Phil had the same problem. (Other forward the legislation. (A Member: Hear, hear.) The interjections) legislation, as the Attorney-General will support me, has been to the Attorney-General, it has been to the DTI, we The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution have looked at employment legislation; it is not an easy set out at item 18 on the order paper. Will those in favour matter. As Mr Brown commented, when the 1985 Shops please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes Act was brought in we are seeing the results of all the have it. anomalies in that legislation. There was a comment made from the Lord Bishop about Mr Lowey: See you next year, Pam. (Laughter) essential goods. The term in the Act is actually ‘the principal trade of that business ’, and we have been very Mrs Crowe: No! closely watching the principal trade of some of our major retailers, because if the principal trade is no longer foodstuffs then they would not be allowed to open on Students Awards Scheme 1999 - Approved Sunday, and the Sunday that the Lord Bishop refers to - not only was there no room in any car park in Douglas The President: Item 19, the Minister for Education. because the town was full, the shops, I believe, no-one could actually move in, so we did check. They were within Dr Mann: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to move: the terms of the law as it stands. Mr Karran mentions employment protection. The That the Student Awards Scheme 1999 [GC No 38/ majority of the new Bill that will be coming before you is 98] be approved. employment protection and we did recognise that this had to be the case, although on saying that I will tell you, from all the major employers on the Island there is no problem Every year we have to bring forward the student awards at all getting people to work on Sundays. Now, that is scheme. This particular document in your hands does not possibly that there are enhanced wages on Sunday, but have an explanatory note because the structure of the possibly that is the only day perhaps people can work, but awards scheme has not changed since last year. The only I do know that that is the one day in which we could provide thing that has changed is the inflationary increases to the employees for all the employers on the Island. That does allowances and grants. not go for the weekdays. Having said that, I cannot move this without reference Mr Speaker - compromise and petrol stations to 6V2 pages of explanatory notes about the scheme. These disregarding the law. Once again, we can only do as much are constantly referring explanatory notes, and I take the

Students Awards Scheme 1999 - Approved T546 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

member for Glenfaba’s suggestion that at some point we and unfortunately there is is no means by which the ought to have a mechanism for dealing with the explanatory Department of Health and Social Security can support in a notes. All I can say is that this scheme was agreed and similar way in the holiday periods. However, we have drafted by the Government’s legal draftsmen some years powers of discretion, as has been pointed out to deal with back and has been amended in minor detail each year.The very difficult, genuine cases, and I can assure the hon. main revision has been in the changing of parental support member that if his one student is still, a year on, in the tables and the value of the support offered, as the fees have same situation, perhaps he could suggest that the student changed over the years. The scheme is a regulation of the makes a reapplication and we will see if there is a genuine Education Act of 1949. A similar regulation, which will case for support, in which case a discretion will be used. be a new regulation, relating to student awards will be part The hon. member for Onchan - 1 hope we are not mixing of the new Education Act which is planned for introduction up the fees and maintenance. The fees are, of course, given in the next legislative year. I beg to move. 100 per cent whatever the income.

Mr Brown: I beg to second and reserve my remarks. Mr Cannell: Yes, the grant.

Mr Braidwood: Mr President. I do not think the Dr Mann: The maintenance grant is means-tested. Minister of Education will be surprised that I am on my Certainly we will take that back and have a look to see if feet, sir, because I am going to raise the same question as there is some alteration, because there will have to be a I raised last year, and that is over the student who is based new scheme related to the new Education Act anyway when in the Isle of Man and goes to the Isle of Man College, it comes in. but, because it is assumed that this person, this student will be living at home, there is no allowance for a person Mr Cannell: It is the grant. who is separated from the family and wants to go back to college, but unfortunately all the money they can get is on The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution this basic amount. They cannot get any benefit from the set out at item 19 on the order paper. Will those in favour DHSS at all, and I am just wondering if the Minister for please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes Educadon will take this back, look at the situation and have it. come forward, hopefully next year in schedule 2, and where there is a genuine case of a student who is separated from her family and wants to go to college but cannot afford it Pension Supplement Scheme 1999 - because she has to pay rent for her flat and for food and therefore she just has to keep working and cannot get a Approved further educadon, I would rather it to be seen or to be put on the schedule and then there will be no problem at all. The President: Item 20, the Minister for Health and Thank you, Mr President. Social Security.

Mr Cannell: Mr President, just a small point on Mrs Christian: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to paragraph 16.2, ‘Means Testing of Maintenance Grant,’ move: which provides that a grant shall not be paid in any case unless the student and every person who is a contributor That the Pension Supplement Scheme 1999 [GC No in respect of the student have made full declarations of 2/99] be approved. their financial circumstances. No quibble whatever with that, but I would say that I would prefer, having recently The pension supplement scheme makes provision for a been involved with a project of this nature - as a father, I supplement to be paid with certain benefits provided 10 hasten to add, rather than a student - that the means-tesdng years’ contributions have been paid or credited to the Manx where it takes place - and I have no difficulty with means- national insurance fund. The department is aware that under tesdng in virtually every entitlement to benefit - should certain circumstances a person can become entitled to the for this purpose be based on gross incomes received by supplement even though no contributions have been paid those who are seeking the benefit rather then their net at all in the Isle of Man. An example has been given to income - in other words, that the gross income be hon. members in a memorandum which has been considered before national insurance and taxation is circulated, and we believe that this is contrary to the considered. intentions of the scheme. The scheme which we are proposing today ensures that only persons who have The President: Reply, sir. actually paid 10 years’ contributions into the Manx NI fund or had paid a minimum of five years Class 1 or Class 2 Dr Mann: Thank you, Mr President, I take note of the contributions into the Manx fund immediately before an hon. member for East Douglas when he says ‘the student’; award of long-term incapacity benefit should be entitled I believe it is only one student that he is referring to. We to the supplement, though there is provision for credits of have looked at this in detail since last year. Unfortunately, up to 13 weeks to be treated as paid contributions in any the legal position remains unaltered. Our responsibility - one year. The scheme also contains a saving provision to in fact we are limited to supporting only during term time allow relevant contributions paid or credited under the

Pension Supplement Scheme 1999 - Approved TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T547 provisions of the previous scheme prior to 6th April 1999 homeland, able to get the benefits of his community. I to count as relevant contributions for the purposes of the would like it clear today that that will be the case. 1999 scheme. It also introduces a minimum age of entitlement for 45 years. The cases which have been set The President: The minister to reply. out in the memorandum, Mr President, do indicate that there is a potential here for a growing problem in the future, Mrs Christian: Mr President, Tynwald Court decided particularly as our pension supplement will develop over after due consideration when they introduced this scheme the years, and I hope that hon. members feel that, given that a payment of 10 years’ contributions out of a working the case we have set out, they can support this item on the lifetime was the basis on which entitlement to the pension order paper. I beg to move. supplement should be granted. Now, the hon. members Mr Rodan and my hon. colleague, Mr Delaney, have raised Mr Cannell: I beg to second, Mr President, and reserve the issue, which has been raised with the department before, my remarks. in respect of one particular case where a person was in the forces and was conscripted in the first instance, but M r Rodan: Mr President, I am brought to my feet, throughout the rest of his working life chose for the most really, because I note in the new scheme that the criteria part not to be in the Isle of Man, chose to work somewhere have been changed to a degree for the qualification period else, and when Tynwald introduced the scheme, that person of having paid national insurance contributions and a new had returned but did not meet the 10-year criteria. part has been added whereby in certain circumstances it is So far as a person who has a Manx national insurance five years. I understand that and I am not disputing that record is concerned, if they have a Manx record in the first that is a good move. My point really relates to, in giving place when they join the forces, then their service period further consideration to a new scheme, was any account will be taken into consideration in calculating the 10 years taken of the anomalous situations which have been to qualify for the pension supplement. identified to her department whereby somebody falls just Now the hon. member Mr Rodan is implying that we short of the 10-year rule, i.e. not having made contributions are changing the rules here somewhat, and we are; we are to the national insurance fund in the Isle of Man for periods doing it in this way: first of all, we have seen this anomaly which total 10 years in aggregate or continuous 10 years? where we feel that it is not appropriate for people who One particular situation I am thinking about is when a Manx come to the Island and are, for one reason or another, resident was conscripted into the national services to do entitled to credits, can qualify for a pension supplement national service straight from school, let us say, and, not having paid absolutely nothing into the Isle of Man scheme, having started a national insurance account in the Isle of and we do not believe that is what was intended. We felt Man, was nonetheless a resident of the Isle of Man while that contributions were the essential element here. Now, doing the national service. The national insurance account we have made some allowance to allow for the fact that that was opened for that person was, of course, in the UK, people can be ill over short periods of time, all of us can, and contributions being made in the UK, even though they and there is in this, as there is in other benefit rules, a were conscripted from the Isle of Man as an Isle of Man provision that 13 weeks in any period can be treated as resident, do not qualify for the 10 years’ contributions. paid-up contributions in a year. Credits can be given for Now, I am aware and I know the minister has had this 13 weeks. We did consider that if a person came here with brought to her attention, of instances where somebody a view to working for a long period of time in the Isle of would have spent the majority of their working life in Man, it would be unfortunate if they, for example, paid England, come to the Isle of Man to resume their career, five years and then were hit by long-term incapacity and retired here and found that having, say, made eight years should then not be able to qualify because there is nothing contributions in the Isle of Man and having been in the to say that they were going to leave the Isle of Man, and position of having been conscripted from the Isle of Man we believe that it was not inappropriate to put into this into national service at the start of their working career, scheme that provision, that if they have paid five years those initial years are not taken into account in the 10-year and are then hit by long-term incapacity we should allow aggregate. Now, there seems to be an injustice here and I the supplement to be paid if they get up to 10 years in the really reiterate it again today because some flexibility Island. appears to have been applied to the scheme, and I just The danger in not introducing this provision is one for wonder whether instances, particularly for national the future. The statistics, which we did show, were that servicemen, were considered by the department in this new many of the recent recipients have not paid anything at all scheme. into our scheme and in fact there is an indication that some of these are quite young people and we also felt if was Mr Delaney: Yes, Mr Rodan is well ahead of the game appropriate not to put into this scheme a benefit trap, which on this one. I just want it clarified that there is movement would prevent a young person moving from a disability - there is no such thing as conscription now, thank God, benefit perhaps back into a work situation with support but there are people who still want to take it up as a career and help, and we did not want to construct a scheme which in military services, and I want to make sure that although would make that unattractive to them, and that is why we even on the rules today they will retire prior to 65 in most have introduced the 45 age limit. cases, anyone who does decide to stay outside the Isle of The department has in the past considered the case put Man and carry on with working life having spent a long by Mr Rodan, a number of times and still feels that it is time in the services would still be, if he returns to his not appropriate in those circumstances to change the rules.

Pension Supplement Scheme 1999 - Approved T548 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution please say aye, against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes set out at item 20 on the order paper. Will those in favour have it. please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received Retirement Pension (Premium) Scheme 1999 - Approved The President: Item 22, the Minister for Tourism and Leisure. The President: Item 21, the Minister for Health and Social Security. Mr Cretney: Thank you, Mr President, I beg to move.

Mrs Christian: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to That: move: (i) The Council of Ministers Report on the First That the Retirement Pension (Premium) Scheme Phase Feasibility Study into the Establishment 1999 [GC No 3/99] be approved. of a TT Museum be received and its recommendations be approved, and The purpose of the retirement pension (premium) scheme was originally to direct additional pension on a (ii) that Tynwald authorises the Department of universal basis to those too old to benefit under SERPS. It Tourism and Leisure to expend a sum not is awarded from age 75 and took effect from October 1990, exceeding £298,900 to meet the costs of and it was always recognised that with the maturing of completion of the feasibility study in accordance SERPS and increasing entitlement under contracted-out with the Council of Ministers recommendations. occupational pension schemes, the need for retirement pension (premium) awards would diminish over time. At the December 1997 sitting of Tynwald the TT The department recently reviewed the scheme and is Museum Committee appointed by the Council of Ministers concerned about the number of actual and potential reported on its investigations into the practicalities of qualifiers for the premium with the UK national insurance establishing an Isle of Man TT races and associated accounts. It is of the opinion that as the premium is an Isle memorabilia museum. This report was presented and of Man initiative there is little justification, again in this endorsed by Tynwald and authority to spend £40,000 to case, in the award of the benefit to people who have meet the cost of the first phase of the feasibility study contributed little if anything to the Isle of Man national granted. At that time an undertaking was also given to insurance scheme. Furthermore it should not be payable report back to Tynwald on the results of the feasibility study in circumstances which were not provided for by the in due course. SERPS scheme. The full text of the committee’s report forms part of the The 1999 scheme provides, therefore, that to be entitled document before us today. Members will see that two types to the premium a minimum of 10 years’ class 1 contribution of survey were undertaken, the first being the visitor survey must have actually been paid into the Manx national piloted at the end of April 1998, the second a residents’ insurance fund, though to allow for temporary interruptions questionnaire which was mailed to 37,000 households on of employment during a year a maximum of 13 credits per the Island requesting views on the various aspects of a TT year is to be allowed. Other changes to the scheme are as museum proposal. The TT museum residents’ survey set out in the memorandum which has been circulated to indicated overwhelming support for the concept, with 88 members, and I would particularly draw the attention of per cent of responses saying they would welcome a TT members to paragraph 7.8 regarding the removal of the museum and 42 per cent indicating they had no preference contentious provisions of the existing scheme, which as to site location. With regard to visitor’s surveys, 55.2 required that excess relevant benefits of a husband or wife per cent of all visitors surveyed stated they would visit the could be offset against the other spouse’s entitlement to TT museum and 10 per cent indicated - the premium. Removal of this provision, which was sound in principle, was not easily understood and led to a degree The President: Hon. members, I am not going to have of resentment from those people who were affected by it. a Council debate going on in this wing while the hon. We have decided on that basis to remove that provision. member is addressing the Court. Proceed, sir. This will add about £90,000 to the scheme’s cost in the next financial year. I beg to move. Mr Cretney: Thank you, sir. And 10 per cent indicated that such a museum would make a return visit more likely. Mr Cannell: I beg to second, Mr President, and reserve The TT Museum Committee, of which I am chairman, has my remarks. highlighted its recommendations on pages 6 and 7 of the report. Included in the recommendations is the view that The President: Hon. members, I will put the resolution the full feasibility study for this project should now be set out at item 21 on the order paper. Will those in favour funded and completed.

Retirement Pension (Premium) Scheme 1999 - Approved TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T549

To develop the TT museum concept onto the next stage are not all likely to start from the same basic tenet. Now, will require substantial work and funds. Members will see with the greatest respect to the admirable personalities who on page 30 of the report that the completion of a full are members of this committee, it is comprised of four feasibility study over a two-year period is anticipated to extremely well-known and leading motorcycle enthusiasts cost £298,900. Pages 33 to 36 provide the detailed analysis and Mr Stephen Harrison, the director of Manx National of those costs and the preparatory work required. I am Heritage, who has a great, indeed I say a lifelong - and no pleased to report the Council of Ministers has responded criticism of this - interest in extending our museum positively to die committee’s recommendations and agreed heritage. In retrospect it is, to my mind, unfortunate that to support further work on the project. However, it is the the committee did not contain at least some people with Council of Ministers’ view that die Department of Tourism less or no enthusiasm for the project, who would have and Leisure rather than Manx National Heritage should questioned every assumption and proposal. As it is, I lead the further work in developing the proposed TT believe that the report is carried away by enthusiasm for museum. Having said that, it is Council’s expectation that the project. Indeed, seldom have I seen the advantages of the department will continue to work in full co-operation any proposals set out in so many different ways and so with Manx National Heritage in carrying the project many times over. Furthermore - (Interjection) Well, they forward and the TT Museum Committee will also continue perhaps believe in what Guinness did - that if you say to be involved. Guinness is good for you long enough everyone will With regard to the estimated cost for the full feasibility believe it. of the project, it has been agreed that the Department of Tourism and Leisure, as the lead department for the A Member: Hear, hear. development of this project, will report back to the Council of Ministers at appropriate interim stages throughout the Mr Delaney: Not like Gilbey’s gin! (Laughter) feasibility study, thus allowing the Council of Ministers the opportunity to comment prior to the study reaching an Mr Gilbey: Furthermore, the report seems to either advanced stage. It is envisaged that the first of these reports ignore or ride roughshod over any information in it which will be made upon completion of the appraisal of the could put a question mark over the project, and I would options, including the recommendation on the preferred like to draw hon. members’ attention to some of these. option. Subject to the findings of such a report, the On page 17, the table at the top of the page shows that remaining stages of the feasibility study could be of the visits to heritage products in England, the vast progressed or otherwise. majority were made in the London and south of England I am personally encouraged by the initial responses to areas and only a very small percentage in the north of the research work undertaken. There is clearly a will that England. This surely does not bode well for a centre which this project should proceed to the next stage and I therefore is even more difficult to get at than it is to get to the north have pleasure in moving item 22 on our agenda paper today. of England and the rest of the adjacent isles. I beg to move, Mr President. On page 18 under 5.5 we are shown the Manx National Heritage Society attendances in 1995, 1996 and 1997 and Mr Cannell: I beg to second and reserve my remarks, these show tremendous growth in total, but if you take Mr President. away the figures for the new House of Manannan they do not show very great growth, in fact a growth of just over M r Gilbey: Mr President, this matter was approved and 10 per cent in total over four years. Furthermore, some of given concurrence by the Treasury as a resolution and the them actually show a decrease and the museum itself - Treasury members agreed that they should have freedom that is, the museum almost next door to us here - only to speak as they thought appropriate and vote as they shows an increase of about 4 per cent over the period. thought appropriate on it. Now, because one raises points On page 19 in the second paragraph of 6.1 we are told, on it or may even in the end vote against it, it does not and I quote: ‘Research indicates that if a large-scale mean the person is against the TT. I myself think the TT is “modern museum” range of facilities were provided, an a magnificent Manx tradition and long may it continue, admission charge of up to £5.50 would be acceptable for a but we must remember that it has lasted for nearly a project of this nature at 1998 prices’. Now, I find this very hundred years without needing the support of a museum, surprising considering that the prices shown in appendix so no-one can say a museum is necessary for the TT. H as being charged by a resume, as it is called, of Again, it is certainly very impressive - and I looked at motorcycle attractions are far below this level and in some these figures several times over - that 85 per cent of those cases are only a couple of pounds. Indeed, the National participating in the residents’ survey stated that they would Motorcycle Museum at Solihull, which presumably is the visit a TT museum and that 56 per cent of the total visitors best of them all with some 650 British machines, we are who provided a definite answer said they would also visit told charges £4.50 for adults and £3.50 for children. How one. There is no doubt at all that that is very impressive, then is a charge of £5.50 justified for our museum? but I think there are various points that at least we should Again, on page 19 under 6.2 we are told that the motor- query before just agreeing to this. sport-only attraction with the largest number of visitors in Firstly, I think some of the best and most balanced the UK is the National Motorcycle Museum in Solihull committee reports are produced by committees which which I have just mentioned, and how many visitors does contain a balance of members of different views and who that get a year? About 200,000. However, we are told that

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received T550 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 it should be noted that that particular occasion includes million in total additional national tax revenue.’ Now, that visitors attending functions, i.e. seminars and conferences. calculation is on the basis that every one of the 10 per cent Now, this seems to me a very low figure for the main who said that a return visit would be more likely to be motorcycle centre in the British Isles which is so well made on account of such a museum would return on geographically placed - you could hardly have anywhere account of it, but everyone will realise that just is an better-placed than the middle of England around impossibility. A large proportion might, 50 per cent might, Birmingham - and it could only get 200,000 visitors. How but to make a statement to make people think that the whole then can we be confident of getting any worthwhile lot would I am afraid is living in cloud-cuckoo-land and numbers specifically to our museum? sadly, to my mind, is rather typical of the exaggerations On page 23, 9.2, it is submitted, and I quote: ‘There is contained in the report. growing competition in the field of heritage tourism with Under the feasibility study on page 33 and onwards I new destinations offering products based on heritage and can see no mention of an economic appraisal to show the culture, while other established destinations are also return on the capital involved in terms of either profit or increasingly seeking to use heritage to compete in the world loss. Obviously I appreciate they would have to work out market.’ Now, up to now our expansion in the field of what the building would be and contain first, but there is heritage and cultural tourism has been in relation to our no talk of anyone then doing an economic appraisal such own Manx national heritage, and our own Manx national as certainly was done for the House of Manannan and very heritage is a unique selling proposition which no-one else efficiently. However, on page 35,6,1 see that there is going has got: No-one else can say they have got Manx culture, to be a collection co-ordinator. This, of course, raises the no-one else a Manx country. But when you come to point that the collection of worthwhile exhibits could cost motorcycles it is quite clear from appendix H there are a a great deal of money quite apart from the building in so whole mass of museums and exhibits in respect of them. far as the exhibits would have to be bought in and were Then, on page 27, 10.3, I find the claim that the not all going to be loaned. I am also very surprised to see development of this project would help to create a more there is no mention of someone in this project’s team whose mixed economy for the Isle of Man. Surely this is prime duty would be to get sponsorship, as I am certain somewhat of an exaggeration, to put it mildly! The number that the whole project would be made much more attractive of people employed would surely be quite de minimis and if a very large part of it was going to be sponsored - say, amount only to a few dozen at the most, and this compares whole halls by different firms. (Mr Crowe: Hear, hear.) with the whole of the cultural industries employing On page 38 amongst the potential risks are shown hundreds of people which between them only represent external regulations and controls on the TT races but of about 1 per cent of our gross national product. How, then, course, as I have said, I do not think that the two necessarily can a claim be made that this would represent a move go hand-in-hand because the museum certainly would not towards a more mixed economy? be wanting to bring the majority of its visitors in TT time; I also find the statement on the same page and under the idea would be for them to come the rest of the year. the same number that the project would create more work I think we have to finally bear in mind the more and employment projects in die construction industry, at a important calls which would be made against our capital time when other currently planned major projects are budgets in respect of schools and many other necessary nearing completion, to be plucking at straws. I am certain and not just desirable facilities. I think we also have to that at that time there will be far more important remember a point that I have made in this hon. Court developments required such as new schools, medical previously, and that is the absolutely enormous amounts facilities - you name them, departments will be wanting in relation to the size of our community that have already them. been spent on cultural tourism and culture by Manx Then on page 28, 11.3, it is not statistically right to try National Heritage. There must surely be a time when one to argue that the number of non-respondents to the survey, just has to say enough is enough. whilst being indifferent to the proposal, are likely to be Finally, I have little doubt that if we decide to authorise positively swayed once the project is complete. There is this expenditure today, the scheme is very likely to go ahead no evidence for this at all. There are still people - and they and most unlikely to be stopped. Therefore I personally certainly do not include me because I have always favoured feel that this is a time of virtually final decision and that it - who originally objected to the House of Manannan and hon. members should bear in mind all the arguments and still do not support it. You cannot say that because people not only the points in favour but the points of questioning objected to something or did not support it initially, a large before deciding. proportion of them are going to swing round. Some may but many may not. Mr Cannell: Mr President, we have just listened to a Then on page 29, 11.7, there is an even more false litany of doom and gloom there from the hon. member of economic presumption. It says, and I quote: ‘Nearly 10% the Treasury, and he says that this is virtually a vote to (18,143) of visitors stated that a new TT museum build this museum. Certainly the committee do not view it presentadon would make a return visit more likely. On the that way. The committee is quite happy to endorse a basis of the Economic Advisor’s 1994 calculation that each feasibility study, and if it does show that it is not a starter, visitor is worth £90 to taxation revenue, (this refers to they will be perfectly happy to accede to that and this indirect and direct tax revenue generated from expenditure project will not go ahead. I would say, however, that I think of. . . tourists) this could equate to approximately £1.64 that that is exceedingly unlikely. I think the feasibility study,

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T551

if passed today, will come out in favour of it and we will A £5.50 charge to get into the National Motorcycle have a very fine project in completion for the 100 years of Museum of the Isle of Man compared with £4.50 with the the TT, which of course will be in 2007. As the hon. NEC at Birmingham - we are not matching like with like. member for Glenfabahas said, there have only be 100 years The only common denominator is motorcycles. It is a of the TT. It appears to imply that we need to wait another selection of road motorcycles of Britain and around the 900 years before we can build a TT museum to parallel world there. We are talking TT here, the Isle of Man TT, the one in Peel which we have to commemorate the the only one the world now has, and I say that as a dyed- Vikings. I do not think we can do that. in-the-wool enthusiast, of course. I think it is a very fine time to do it. I know many people Of course the old one came out - ‘we do not need to are jumping on the bandwagon of millennium projects. build a TT museum, we could put 49 skylights in the We are talking here of the 100th anniversary of the most primary schools, we could have half a new nurse, we could famous road races in the world (Mr Duggan: Hear, hear.), do all sorts of things’ - the old one. It is a question of the last of the great road races. Yes, there is Dundrod and, priorities. We are talking tourism here. We are talking of yes, there are a few other strays, but this is the last of the resurrecting the tourism market and hanging on to a very great road races and the remark made about the possibility valuable heritage. as outlined in 14.3, page 38, the external regulations and Worthwhile exhibits - people are queueing up to lend controls on the TT races, even if the worst was to come to them. Myself and Mr Downie and Mr Duke and various the worst and the TT races were banned, I think that would other people have been written to and people want to bring enhance a TT museum (Mr Crowe: Hear, hear.) because their exhibits; they would be proud to have them on show then people would come to see what used to take place in this museum, and I am sure we can reach an agreement because there would be no other way of bringing it to to convey them to the Island on similar generous terms to attention. Okay, there may be a few Vikings left in Glenfaba previously mentioned. So we do not have any problem but they are gone a long time, so far as I know, from the with that. We can rotate our exhibits. We are not going to rest of the Island but people still flock to find out about go down the rather silly line as has been proposed where them and that is what would happen if the TT was to stop. we might actually have a virtual TT and things like that. The museum might even accelerate its interest! There may be scientific exhibitions in it, but this will not But we have no problem with this. We have got a very also be just a collection of old junk bikes of the past. It good committee and I am on it as well, and . . . (Laughter) will be properly done and it will be properly mounted, No, seriously, we do have a very rounded committee on it marketed and maintained. who took a lot of trouble to bring it to this stage. We have recommendations set out and we have not shied from them. We have the second recommendation, which I have On page 38, as I say, the potential risks are identified. It highlighted here, which is number 8 on page 7. It says: would have been easy to lose that and just not include it at ‘. .. neither location or “distance to travel” were particular all, but we do recognise, like everything else, there are issues’ and we have already heard of a very generous offer snags to any project: possible negative impact on other made by Ramsey Town Commissioners. That will clearly Island attractions - well, it is bound to draw . . . People be a reasonable front-runner in consideration of location. only have a certain amount of disposable income and they I remember the wrangling that went on in this very Court may choose to go to the TT museum at the expense of over where to site the NSC. Should it be at Quarterbridge? others. I doubt it somehow but they may do, but what we Should it be Ramsey, Peel, Port Erin, Calf of Man, St John’s need here is attractions of this sort until we can actually or whatever? But it is there now. The location probably guarantee that, as was stated earlier on, the summer season will prove difficult but we do have in stock - and this is no actually manages to run all the year round now rather than hint - a very, very generous offer to have this at Ramsey, just from April to the end of October, which is better than which would link very firmly with one of the public it has been for a few years, I must say transport undertakings that I happen to be responsible for Turning then to the recommendations, in number 2 it is as well, the MER. It would be very, very fine to link those recognised that current members of the committee could two. It would be a natural link with a vintage transport play an important role in the development of this project. system. Certainly they can, and the inhibition placed on us by the We come on to recommendation 10, the final one then, Council of Ministers that Manx National Heritage should on page 7: ‘. . . the view of the committee that the Island not lead the project will not make any difference for us to should continue to develop and innovate the heritage consult the very fine team that they have which brought product’ - exactly what is our best marketing point for this the House of Manannan to fruition, and we also have some Isle of Man. We have scenery but we do not have it when experts there, ex-riders et cetera, so there is plenty of it is raining. Well, we do when it is raining, but we evidence there that the committee are on the pace, as it desperately need attractions, and anybody who has been were. down to the Sefton Hotel’s new atrium - that is not a tourist Mr Gilbey says it is difficult to get to the Isle of Man, attraction in itself, but you can see the way accommodation but I am sure that he forgot, of course, that now everybody is going as well, where people can sit in comfort despite is confident that with the problems which have been the bad weather. pointed out to the Steam Packet Company and their So I commend this report to you. We do not shirk from reassurances that there will be a much better service than the difficulties that there are. ‘Specific marketing required there has been hitherto, that difficulty will be mainly to overcome limited interest for the non-enthusiast’ - how removed. many people have been to things in which they are not

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received T552 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

remotely interested if they are presented correctly? I have the TT are, will there be sufficient capacity to get the people certainly been to loads of things that I am not particularly to the Isle of Man? Will they be that depressed waiting on interested in and you see the way they are marketed and it the other side, trying to get on a boat? actually develops and kindles your interest in those projects, and you go away saying ‘That was very, very Mr Cannan: Well, ask Walter. good. I wasn’t going to go in but I’m certainly glad I did.’ Potential seasonality of use - I do not think that is a Mr Karran: Will they be able to get accommodation problem either. There are many, many people coming to when they get here if they get on a boat to start off with? the Isle of Man now for short breaks in the winter and they will be most delighted to have a museum open. An Mr Cannan: Well, are there any boats, Walter? experiment has been tried recently leaving the course furniture up, the milestones et cetera, and that has enabled Mr Karran: A third thing - if they get on a boat and people to find their way round. Much more could be done they are lucky enough to get accommodation, will they be in that regard and will be addressed. able to afford the transport costs to get on to the boat in the Lack of private sector support - that is acknowledged first place to have the problem with the accommodation? and will be addressed. We are always in the market for The fourth problem I would say, if I was looking at the sponsorship. TT and it survival, would be looking at the events, and I The Isle of Man and worldwide economic situation - think the tourist department has done some excellent events we only need to look to yesterday for that to show the over the last couple of years but that is something that uncertainty of that. No-one could pinpoint anything better could . .. That is the next thing. than that. Now, if we go to the fifth problem, if we are talking Finally, planning approval - well, always tricky, as we about the survival of the TT, in my opinion, if we have a have spent three hours this afternoon discussing planning couple of years of the TT with atrocious weather with the approval. I do not foresee a difficulty with the siting of lack of accommodation and people stuck out in tents, then, this providing it is actually tastefully done. (Laughter) - I have to be honest with you - 1 have got my finger on the notin Jurby, I regret to say! (Mr Cannon interjecting) Well, pulse of the unbiased committee here (Laughter) - a TT perhaps we may even end up with it at Jurby. Who knows, museum will be some use, because if I was coming to the stranger things have happened. If ever we knew the way Isle of Man and I had two or three kids and it rained all to find the place I am sure we would have a look at it. week I would say that our hon. colleague here (M r (Laughter) Houghton interecting) should become St Geoffrey of the So, hon. members, not to be too flippant, this is a call TT, because then I could say, yes, it is a priority. But I am for £300,000 of taxpayers’ money. We do not regard it sorry, I want to support this motion here before us today lightly whatever, but we do urge that it will be money well (A Member: Are you sure?) because I am in trouble if I spent. do not support this motion today with my beloved colleague, but I have to be honest, there has to be some Mr Karran: Eaghtyrane, I am very interested to see realism here. If we are looking at the long-term survival this well-balanced committee here! (Laughter) This is the of the TT, this government and the tourist department have sort of committee that is normally put up when I am trying got to re-examine what we are going to do about off-Island to get improvement in employment legislation! I cannot transport. In the reply today from the hon. mover with being go along with the hon. member. I like his enthusiasm and tourist minister, the biggest problem will be actually getdng I sympathise with the points that he says about the hon. people to the Island at TT. That is going to be the biggest member for Glenfaba as far as the lack of vision is problem. concerned but I think it is wrong for him to say that it is The point is this: I do not believe that people are going j ust £300,000; it is six or seven million pounds. That is the to come to the Isle of Man just to see a TT museum, and if bottom line we will end up having to pay on it and I think you believe that, it is like the nonsense we had over the we should be honest about it. I am very concerned about it Peel heritage centre: ‘Oh, they will come to the Isle of - you know, £5.50 to go in a museum? Man to the Peel heritage centre.’ They come to the Isle of Man for the Island’s beauty and that and that is a facet of A Member: Exactly. any tourist promodon, but at the end of the day you want reliable, effective, cheap, off-Island transport to this Mrs Crowe: It should be free. country. If you do not have that it does not matter what you do. Mr Karran: I just cannot see it. Can you see your I do feel that the issue is well meaning, well motivated, constituents spending £5.50 to go in a museum? and I would agree with my hon. colleague for Onchan when he says we have the Luddites, the people who have the Mr Delaney: To see Geoff Cannell stuffed! lack of vision as far as this is concerned, namely from the Treasury, but at the end of the day, even I, who try to see Mr Karran: Maybe that is an imbalance. I am as keen the options, cannot honestly see how this is going to be a as anyone for a diversified economy. Tourism is vital as major issue regarding the saving of the TT, a major issue part of that diversified economy, but when we look at the as far as tourism is concerned, because it is not. If they TT, what are the problems with the TT? The problems with want this, then let us come clean and say we want it,

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T553

because we want it but do not try and make out that we are M r Cannan: That was before you took over! (Laughter) going to end up solving our tourist problems because our tourist problems to this country are much more M r Bell: A hundred years ago we used to have people fundamental than building bricks and mortar anywhere on with vision on the Isle of Man who saw potential in the the Isle of Man. It is to do with off-Island transport, and I developing tourist industry, they knew trends in tourism do hope that the government does consider that it looks at and were not afraid to give commitment to that vision and that issue, because if we are ever to see tourism back on develop an industry which in effect kept the Isle of Man’s this Island we have got to see a more effective and efficient economy going for the best part of that hundred years system to the Island for off-Island transport. I know there almost singlehandedly. If any of those individuals happened have been improvements and we should thank Emerald to be sitting in listening to this debate today they would be Airways for that improvement; that is the only reason we in total despair by now after listening to the comments, have got improvement, because this Court and the Council the hon. member for Onchan excepted. of Ministers are impotent at the present time to have any This has been the perennial problem that Manx tourism, effect over the off-Island transport and there is no political certainly from a government perspective, has run into time will to address that issue. I cannot say - 1 have to be honest and time and time again: a hundred reasons why you cannot with you - that if you give somebody £298,900 for a do anything before you sit down and look at the possibility feasibility study it will be used, and I am wicky-wacky- that something may move ahead and there may be some woo (Laughter), we will be told what a wonderful idea it benefit in it. I have to say the most negative speech I have is and we will be snowballed down to six or seven million heard from any member for a very long time was presented pounds. If I was looking from the Chief Minister’s priorities to us by the hon. member for Glenfaba. (M r Crowe: Hear, I would be looking at maybe some sort of conference centre hear.) Not a glimmer of vision, of hope, of innovation, of that could promote the Island for business, for commerce recognition that the Isle of Man now has an ability to cash and for other things, not just the TT. in regardless of his interpretation of it on an absolutely unique event, something which the Isle of Man is known M r Cannell: It is included, if you read it. worldwide for, and if you ask most people what their knowledge of the Isle of Man is, usually it is motorbikes M r Karran: But I do feel it is not the way to address and Manx cats and it does not go much beyond that. So to the issues to protect the TT. You are not doing a service to say that it is of no interest to anyone, it will not attract the people who are dependent on the tourist industry. There anyone here, it has no value, is complete and utter nonsense. are more fundamental issues that need to be addressed than building a museum. The issue itself, I believe - although there is obviously still a lot more work to be done on this by the committee, Mrs Crowe: Well, Mr President, I must say I have a I think they have made a good first step forward and the tendency to agree with the hon. member for Onchan, but it funding that they are looking for now, I believe, should be was the hon. member of the unbiased committee that given and given with some enthusiasm by way of mentioned diversification of the economy. It was also recognising that there is a great opportunity here to mentioned by the hon. member for Glenfaba, Mr Gilbey. capitalise on our most famous event. Now, we are constantly being chided at the DTI about This is not an issue which has just been drawn out of a economic diversification of industry here, there and hat. There has been consideration given to the possibility everywhere, and yet here we have yet another museum. of a motor-cycle orTT museum for quite a number of years. We are shortly going to have a museum in every village in Certainly it was looked at, from memory, on at least two the Isle of Man - that is, unless we have not already occasions while I was Minister for Tourism. At the time achieved that aim. I am not quite sure whether we have or we were involved with the NSC and other major capital not. expenditures and the time was not considered right to go ahead with it. So this is not something which has just been M r Cannan: Not in Kirk Michael yet, but it is on the pulled out of the air. It is something which has been agenda. considered as having benefit to Manx tourism for quite some time. Mrs Crowe: Yes. I am not against the museum in The hon. member says that as we have survived for 90 principle and I do firmly believe that they have missed a years without a TT museum we no longer need one. You point when they have not mentioned commercial could argue on that basis for almost any museum. Why do sponsorship in this report. I do think that Mr Gilbey had anything of that nature? got a very valid point there. But what I would like to ask The hon. member also alleges that there would be no the Minister for Tourism is whether any effort is being demand for it and made some considerable issue of that made by the Council of Ministers at all in diversifying the whilst almost in the same breath saying, ‘Well, if it attracted economy and providing perhaps a marina in Port St Mary private sponsorship it would be a far more attractive (Members: Oh!), or would we indeed be best in bidding proposition.’ Well, if there is no demand for it if for a museum of yachting at our sail training school? government is building it, how is there going to be a Perhaps that way we would get some funding. Thank you. demand for it if the private sector is building it? Surely it is the same customers we are drawing from. Mr Bell: Mr President, once upon a time the Isle of The nature of Manx tourism has changed dramatically Man used to have a very dynamic tourist industry. over the last few years. We are now moving to a higher-

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received T554 TYNWALD COURT WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

spending, more discerning market. We are succeeding in inclination towards the offer that has been made by Ramsey that market. As the hon. member for Onchan has said, we Town Commissioners, which quite objectively, I think, is have seen the developments in the Sefton only recently, an offer which should be looked at, because it has a lot of which is only the latest of a reflection of the upgrading potential, it is a very good site, is almost on theTT course and improvement of our tourist accommodation. Many of in itself and would undoubtedly give a stimulus to the our facilities have improved beyond recognition in the last economy of Ramsey as a result of it. So I hope very much 10 years. We should be pursuing the trend which we that, when the feasibility is carried out, that will be given successfully started a few years ago by moving on now to serious consideration. our most famous product and doing something about this Just finally, we have had mocking comments about an particular museum. The comments so far have totally failed unbiased committee, hinting that it is biased in favour of to recognise the new trends in tourism. It is 52-week-a- the TT project. I agree entirely that when this sort of project year tourism now. We are not just talking about two weeks is carried out it needs a balance of view, but isn’t it time in the summer. It also fails totally to recognise that that we had a bias towards enthusiasm (Members: Hear, motorcycling is a growth sport again at the moment. Sales hear.), a bias towards actually achieving something positive of motorcycles in the United Kingdom have increased and for the Isle of Man which could bring tangible benefits in are continuing to increase. Therefore our potential market the years ahead rather than this moaning and groaning and in that particular narrow market is growing all the time. negativity which we get churned out time and time again The usual comments have been churned out about not whenever any positive project is put on the floor for debate? being able to get people to the Island, the lack of transport, We have an opportunity to seize this issue today, to take it they will not come just for a TT museum. We have heard forward a stage further, to assess its potential in a couple this argument on every single project that the government of years’ time when the feasibility is finished and then has been involved in: they will not come to the Peel consider what the implications may be after that, but I think Heritage Centre, they will not come to the Manx Museum, we would be failing in our duty if we turned down this they will not come for the NSC, and it is absolutely right, opportunity today and give in to the doom-and-gloom they will not come, as a rule, for one single item, but what merchants who still, sadly, tend to pull us back from we have tried to promote over the past few years has been success. a rounded holiday package so that when people do come here they have something to occupy them, they have The President: Hon. members, a moment please. Prior something to spend their money on and they will taste all to the hon. Mrs Cannell’s amendment being tabled I aspects of the Manx way of life and go away with a fulfilled accepted a rota of speakers: Mr Speaker, Mr Downie and feeling from their holiday which will encourage both them Mr Cannan. I wonder if they would be prepared to give and their friends to come back in future times, and that I way to enable this amendment to be tabled so it is before believe we have started to achieve and I strongly believe the whole Court for discussion? Is that agreeable to you, that this proposal for a TT motorcycle museum is a further hon. members? (Members: Agreed.) Thank you. The hon. extension of that policy. Mrs Cannell. I think it is foolish at this stage to speculate on admission charges and indeed even what the overall cost of this project Mrs Cannell: Thank you, Mr President. I thank the will be. We are nowhere near that stage yet to know what Court for their indulgence in relation to this. I shall be just the contents of the museum will be to in any way be able very brief. I am not going to labour on because I think to identify what the overall cost ultimately may be, or much has been said by the previous speaker. indeed if we should go forward from the next stage to I did support the feasibility, the looking into this, because initiating the actual construction of it. So I think these are I believe that tourism is an important industry, continues red herrings which are being dragged through this debate to be important and we should be looking at ways of and are encouraging people perhaps to miss the enhancing it and making it stronger than what it is. With fundamental point that we have a great opportunity here, that in mind, I was very pleased at the recommendations with the centenary coming up of the TT races, to mark the that start on page 6 of the report and in particular number fact that these races have put the Isle of Man on the map 2, which I think is very important and reads, ‘The internationally; they are known worldwide; they have Committee unanimously recommends that the full Design brought tremendous financial benefit to the Isle of Man Team feasibility study should be led by Manx National over the years. We should recognise that fact and capitalise Heritage as the government’s statutory agency for museums on the goodwill which undoubtedly exists for the idea of a and in view of this organisation’s expertise in this field museum now not only within the Island but, as the hon. and international award-winning reputation.’ Now, I will member for Onchan has said, amongst owners of TT not go on any further than that, but I think that particular memorabilia as well who are more than anxious to join quote that I have lifted from 2 on page 6 is relevant, that with us to ensure the success of this. we do have such an organisation. It has provided us with There is, as one member has said, of course, the added some wonderful examples of heritage for the Isle of Man opportunity here to use the development of such a museum which has attracted numerous visitors to the Isle of Man for the stimulation of the regional economies. We did that and through its doors by local people. I believe that Manx specifically in Peel. It has been a success in Peel; it has National Heritage is the right body to be pursuing such a brought more business to Peel; it has helped to stimulate feasibility study and I think that, given that the trade through the town. Obviously I have a slight recommendations submitted for our approval by the

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T555

Council of Ministers recognise that to a degree by paying feasibility study in accordance with mention to the fact that they should continue to be recommendations of the report, as modified by consulted, it is a little bit of an insult to MNH. I think, if this resolution they are at the helm, then we can be assured of a proper feasibility study and probable success at being able to M r Henderson: I beg to second, sir, and reserve my establish such a facility in the foreseeable future. remarks. Their record is second to none and that is illustrated on page 18, where it shows the site attendances at all the Manx The President: Thank you. The hon. Mr Speaker. Nadonal Heritage Museums, Castle Rushen, the Grammar School, Cregneash and so on. Now, in 1997, of course, The Speaker: Yes, Mr President. I intended to be brief between May and December we had a total of 344,228 earlier. I think I will be even briefer now. It is always visitors. If members cast their eyes back to the figures for difficult, is it not, to fight off enthusiasm, and I enjoy 1996 and 1995 you will see that there has been a steady listening to an enthusiast. It is part of your own make-up I increase in the amount of visitors going to these suppose; you are either an optimist or you are a pessimist, professionally run sites, and of course they have a projected and if you are prepared to look forward you tend to be an figure which exceeds the one for 1997. optimist and always have a good go, as it were, so it is I believe that Manx Nadonal Heritage should be leading nice to have the enthusiasm coming forward. But it is the full design team feasibility study. I believe they are equally fair to say that the hon. member for Glenfaba has best placed to be able to engage those necessary people, done a service to this hon. Court today in his consideration the contacts with relation to architecture and everything of the committee’s report, because he has put in front of else. They are in touch with these people every day. They this Court, for record if for no other purpose, salient points know who to go to, who are the crème de la crème in this which he has consciously picked out which could very field. Now, that is not to say that the Department of Tourism well be part of any feasibility study, and that is what you - although in the recommendation by the Council of are being invited to put money up for at the present time. Ministers it should be the Department of Tourism that leads The hon. member for Onchan in his contribution to the here - are not equipped to lead. I believe they are equipped debate ultimately said, ‘If you want it, vote for it’. I think to lead in certain directions, but in relation to this particular that was the ultimate of his submission. facility which calls for particular expertise I do not think To cut out all reference to the particular debate I wish the department is well placed to be leading and so therefore to put on record the concern of the trustees of the Manx I would like to move an amendment to revert back to the Museum and National Trust prior to this amendment hitting recommendations by the team that was drawn up through the floor. That is why I had attempted to catch your eye to the Council of Ministers to undertake the initial look at speak. There was a concern at our trust meeting that the this project. I feel their recommendations hold much merit recommendation of the committee had in effect been and I think that they should be endorsed by this hon. Court. overturned. There was a concern that at that particular I would like to move the amendment and I would like stage, if the Manx Museum and National Trust were to members to seriously consider that if you are going to make lead it up and Tynwald were of the mind that we were an investment of this nature then I do not believe we should going forward with a TT museum and Manx Museum and be throwing this amount of money to a project that perhaps National Trust were given that job, so be it, but the concern is a non-starter. You have to have the right people at the was that up to that stage the trust itself had had in effect no top, at the helm, steering this one from concept to fruition or very little involvement, and to check and to cross-check and I believe the best people are the Manx National that, the trust actually asked that the position of Mr Stephen Heritage people. Thank you, Mr President. I beg to Harrison, the director of the Manx Museum and National move: Trust, should be cleared, and the answer came back, of course, that he was invited to serve on the committee in In paragraph (i) after “recommendations" insert - his personal right and not as a director. He himself is a long-time motorcyclist and a long time fan of motorcycling. ", other than the recommendation at paragraph 6(2), ” So that was actually cleared by the trust in the first instance. and delete "and”; The question that arises in the trust’s mind is ultimately who would be responsible for the TT museum long-term after paragraph (i) insert - and the question which the trustees were facing was, if there is none or very little input from the trust itself formally “(ii) the full design team feasibility study be led by and then they were invited to take it over, you will see the Manx Museum and National Trust, in automatically that there could be a conflict if something consultation with the Department of Tourism and was not right or there was unhappiness in the scenario Leisure and the TT Museum Committee; and"; which goes round it; to give you one small example, it is known already at the museum, at the national trust, that if for paragraph (ii) substitute - you are going to seek to bring to a museum a TT museum on the Isle of Man, the chances of having museum artifacts “(iii) the Manx Museum and National Trust be from other museums or from major manufacturers are slim authorised to expend a sum not exceeding if they are not being presented to ‘a recognised museum’. £298,000 to meet the costs of completion of the That is something which the trustees were aware of at day

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received T556 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

1. It could be overcome, and all I wished to do was to flag potential of these museums and they are taking them all up the concern on behalf of the trustees so that Tynwald in, and of course some members might have been Court was aware, in a similar manner as I would suggest privileged to see the new Honda museum on video. That the hon. member for Glenfaba has flagged up his concern is absolutely out of this world. That was built to celebrate in relation to the financial aspect. their 50 years, and I am sure that these people, given the fact that we set ourselves up here properly in a well- Mr Downie: Mr President, I am on my feet today really organised manner, will make exhibits available to us and to support the progression of the recommendation that the of course vice versa. There is another quite famous TT full design team feasibility study get underway as quickly museum coming up for sale next month in an auction, a as possible. I too, like the previous speaker, am a member 1920s Royal Enfield, which took part in theTT. Now, what of Manx National Heritage - 1 am the Keys representative worries me is that we might be only talking £25,000 or - and when I received the report initially I was concerned £30,000 here but somebody should be authorising in either that the committee of very, very able and capable people the Department of Tourism or MNH to go and try and find came up with a recommendation that they felt MNH should these things and get them bought, because by 2007 they take it on, they should lead it as government’s statutory will not be available. It is important that if we are going to agency for museums. Now, I accept the Council of be committed to this we start to seek the exhibits out that Ministers have a right to overturn a decision of one of their we want and we start to put them away, as it were. own committees, and for whatever reason they have Reference was made early on to the National Motorcycle overturned that decision. Now, I am happy to live with Museum in Birmingham. I do not know whether any that in order to get this scheme progressed because I think members of this Court has ever visited it. (A Member: it is vitally important that we must get moving on this, but Yes.) I have, and to me it resembles an elephant’s I still think, and I am going to put it down on record today graveyard. I have never been in such a miserable museum based on similar comments made by Mr Speaker, that in my life, where there are rows and rows of machines eventually, to progress this and get the right sort and there and it does nothing to exploit the freedom that you standard of international exhibits on a loan basis, there get with a motorcycle on the open road, and I am absolutely will have to be either a separate trust set up or the TT certain it is not what we want in the Isle of Man. We have a marvellous story to tell about the TT, absolutely unique. museum will have to have a much greater in-depth Mr Bell was quite right: I could go along with Ramsey involvement with MNH because all of these articles which and in case he does not know - he was not there at the time go from country to country are covered by all these - the Gordon Bennett trials, which were part of the conventions relating to museums and insurance purposes forerunner to the TT, actually started at the foot of May and all the rest of it, and I know that I have already been Hill within the sight of the area where the Plaza Cinema is promised exhibits from Italy on a loan basis and on an now, and I am told that part of the frontage of the Plaza exchange basis but, knowing the way the Italian Cinema was used to put petrol in the vehicles and prepare Government work, they are considered as works of art and them for their run back in 1904. they would not let them out of the country until they were given confirmation that they were going to a recognised The President: That was the Palace, sir. body, and of course MNH is one of those recognised bodies that the Speaker referred to. Mr Downie: The Palace? Right.(Laughter) I was no So I am happy that the scheme is being progressed. I idea you were there, sir! (Laughter) All these things are hope that in making this decision no offence has been unique to the Isle of Man and I think that, instead of implied, or taken by Stephen Harrison. I think he is an bickering and carping and wondering whether we can excellent worker, he is a keen motorcyclist and, as Mr afford it, let us get the feasibility study done, let us get on Speaker said, he is there in his own right but, at the end of with the job and let us hope that the minister here can get the day, the committee itself is made up of a broad spectrum his team whipped into shape and come back to us quite of motorcycle enthusiasts and without doubt the asset, the quickly with exactly what it is we are going to do, who jewel in the crown, must be the expertise and the will be involved in it and how it all pans out. Thank you, connections that ex-world champion Geoff Duke has. He Mr President. is still very active in motor sport, highly respected all over the world and there is hardly a month goes by when some Mr Cannan: Mr President, I will be very, very brief. I international magazine does not include a feature just want to add my support to all this. I think this is an highlighting his expertise in the sport. opportunity for Tynwald to show commitment and vision One thing that does concern me is the amount of time and initiative, and let us get this done because it would be all this is taking. The year 2007 - all right it does not seem strange indeed if here, the home of the TT, in years to come far away but, just to bring it to members’ attention, in the there was no museum, no recollection of the past. It must last three to four months we have seen the opening of happen, it must be done properly, and I concur with what Ducatti’s new museum in Bologna. It only has 27 machines has been said by the Speaker and by Mr Downie that Manx in it, it is shaped like a motorcycle helmet but is absolutely National Heritage should be very closely involved, because out of this world. It is a must for people in Italy to go and it must become a recognised museum for all the reasons see that factory. A new museum of motorcycle motion that have been given. which has opened in Milan recently includes all the top I also support the principle that if you are going to do Italian bikes. There is somebody there now realising the this and we are going to have the museum, then start

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T557

collecting your items now and, as they come on the market, study. We are going to hand this over, £300,000, to an bid for them and get them. It is no use having your museum architect to spend in the first year and he is going to be up and then nothing to put inside. looking for sites and he is going to come up with various Finally, we have over the years in putting these options. I would like to think this Court could get in behind developments which enhance tourism. . . if you are the thought of a TT museum in Ramsey. There is an offer promoting tourism, and I have been around the world to a made. Why don’t we do that? Why don’t we say, ‘We certain extent (Interjection), you have to have something believe Ramsey is the place. Architects, get out there, look there - 1 came back to see you! - not just to say ‘Go to at this site, See what you can do with this site, how it can Singapore’ or ‘Go to Penang’ or somewhere, you have to be developed,’ rather than say to them, ‘Go and find half a have an attraction there for the people to go and to see, dozen sites, which may include Ramsey, and come back and we are putting up these attractions whether it is the and we will give it further consideration’? I would rather Laxey Mill and the heritage at Laxey, the Marina at like us to be site-specific on this one. Ramsey, Cregneash, Castle Rushen in Castletown, Rushen I do believe the hon. member for Onchan, Mr Cannell, Abbey in the Chief Minister’s constituency, in Peel the alluded to the possibility that perhaps it could be a House of Mannanan and - yes, I am coming to it - there is conference centre as well. I think, if it is going to be a nothing between Peel and Ramsey on the north-west of conference centre as well, then the place for it is in Douglas the Island. (Interjection) You do have Jurby. A lot of motor- because it has got to be near where the accommodation is. racing takes place there. Members may not realise it - Geoff If we are talking about a small theatre sort of conference Cannell does, he has been out there often enough - but establishment that could be connected to the museum, there is the Andreas road racing, the track on Jurby airfield, perhaps it could be in Ramsey, but I do not think we should the Jurby road races on the outside, at TT race time the be thinking in terms of a major conference centre associated bikes are all tested on the roadways at Jurby. It is a centre with the TT museum because then, to my way of thinking that has plenty of government land, free parking, easy anyway, I get directed back to Douglas with that thought access, and if it was to go there I am absolutely certain and the Villa Marina or Summerland or all those other there would be no planning objections. The commissioners issues that are there and waiting for a solution. If we are have written in requesting that support be given. I hope talking about a TT museum, then I would have thought if that the TT museum, when it comes, is not sent to yet we could go to Ramsey; there is an offer of a site. And another place to enhance an economy which they already £300,000, in anybody else but government’s terms, would have. almost see the establishment of a museum on that site and somehow we have got to try and get some more realistic Sir Miles Walker: Mr President, I would like to support thinking. the concept of a TT-related museum and I do so, not So I would like to support the concept. I do support the thinking that the future of the TT races depends on it or concept. I would like to see it in Ramsey because I think it that it is going to make anybody else come back to the is Ramsey’s turn, quite honestly, and I support that. I want Island for a second or third time, but there is no doubt at an assurance from the minister that this is his priority in all in my mind that a properly developed TT museum could terms of tourism and I hope we can have that . . . add to a person’s holiday experience (Members: Hear, (Interjections) Here we have the dilemmas. A £300,000 hear.) whether they be TT enthusiasts or other tourists to feasibility seems to m e ... We should minimise the amount the Island. I think my concern is that we are into one issue that is being spent on the feasibility and put the rest of that of politics. Somebody has thought this a good idea, they into getting the thing up and off the ground. have brought it to the floor of this Court, they have got My final problem is with the recommendation that the support to set up a committee to look at it, we have a TT museum scheme should be allocated a provisional place committee of enthusiasts - and I like enthusiasm, I enjoyed in the final year of government’s five-year capital the contribution by the hon. member - but we then get to programme, but we should do that now. How much is being think that this is the most important issue of all, and I would suggested to insert into that capital programme? That is like a very clear view, if I may, from the minister, when he the question that Treasury will have to consider when is responding, that he believes that this the important issue, looking at committed future capital expenditure, and you the important project for tourism. Now, I do not know how put a round figure in and, if it is too low, we will be accused much we are going to spend on it and that is another of going over budget even though it is only a guesstimate concern I have, and it may be £2 million, it may be £6 now, and if it is too high, then of course the professionals million, and I suspect it may be £10 million. Is this the will build up to that figure? So I would suggest to this best way the £10 million, £6 million, whatever it is, should hon. Court that we should not insert a figure into the capital be invested in this Island to support and encourage what I programme at this stage until this next part of the feasibility think is a particularly important industry, and that is is done and we have a better idea of what it may cost tourism? I believe tourism has got a future but I believe because, given that better idea, it may alter somebody’s we ought to be thinking about where we should make this idea of priorities for this expenditure, but I support the investment. scheme, sir. Now then, £300,000 - and that is what we are talking about for a feasibility study - is a heck of a lot of money. It Mr Crowe: Mr President, I rise obviously to support is more than a quarter of a million; it is almost a third of a this scheme. I raised it as an issue in the 1991 general million pounds which we are going to spend on a feasibility election as a TT museum and exhibition centre which I

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received T558 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 believe should have been built at or near the grandstand, than perhaps the rail systems, but put together the complete and I am still convinced that it should be built in the vicinity package of attractions from Cregneash in the south to of the grandstand because that is the start of the TT races Ramsey Pier in the north, and it is the overall number of and I would hold that and would have to be convinced Isle of Man attractions that will attract the range of visitors otherwise that it would go elsewhere. that we desire. I support the continuation of the I will be brief but I do want to echo the remarks of the investigations. I hope they will prove positive. The Island Speaker and Mr Downie. I am a trustee of the Manx needs this diversification and we must face the challenge Museum representing the Legislative Council and I feel in a positive manner. that the Manx Museum and staff should be involved as I am pleased that the committee took an extremely much as possible in this project, and I do hope the Court positive view of the generous and enthusiastic offer from approve the feasibility study today and that the work Ramsey Town Commissioners. The local authority will progresses a bit further. appreciate Mr Cannell’s comments and certainly the In regard to Mr Gilbey’s point, I think he has overlooked comments of Sir Miles Walker, the next freeman of that the TT is unique to the Isle of Man. Other members Ramsey! (Laughter) have mentioned this. I think it is a concept that no other country, no other place in the world has the TT and MGP, Mr Lowey: Don’t go through Sulby! and I think we should capitalise on that. I have spoken in previous debates, when this has come before the House, Sir Miles Walker: The price is the Ramsey Pier, though! that sponsorship would be very valuable. I think all major motorcycle manufacturers both past and present would be Mr Singer: I hope that the next stage will produce a delighted to give sponsorship in the way of providing either clear and positive indication to go ahead. If it does not, facilities or . . . I imagine you would have a Honda hall then so be it, but we will have rightly attempted to progress and a Suzuki exhibition. Anybody who goes to Disneyland the Island as a greater attraction for visitors. We are here or Disneyworld, the major manufacturers of products in to support the development of the Island in all aspects; yes, in a suitable manner but not to shy against progress the USA sponsor plazas and pavilions at these places and even when there is a possible risk. I think we have got to have vision and I think even the I support the amendments. I believe Manx National word ‘museum’ tends to put people off. I think what we Heritage should be the lead department in this proposal, are having is not a museum with dusty corridors, cobwebs as a museum is their strength and therefore that this should over the place and a curator at the end of the door charging be their responsibility, and I believe that the comments of £5.50 to get in; what we are going to have, or what I would Mr Downie indicate that the sooner they take the lead the like to see, is not only the exhibits of the motorcycles better. Therefore I would hope that they will be given the themselves, you will have all of the history of every opportunity to take the lead and that all the interested motorcycle that ever raced, photographs, you will have committees and departments would work together in a video, you will have films, you will have a complete . . . positive manner. You only have to open up your mind to this; it could even be connected to the internet as well, and I think we have Mr Delaney: I was not going to speak on this. I was an opportunity at this stage to support this venture and I getting as far away in the department from this, because if do hope it gets the continued support. you read what it is and what it says, it has come from the There is just a point, a legal issue, that I would like the Council of Ministers down to my minister, but I had to get minister to comment on, and again it was something I raised on my feet because the minister I work for has been asked in TT week when there was a display at the Manx Museum a question which I feel is so unfair and unjust by you, Sir and it is on page 3 of the report, that ‘The committee has Miles Walker, because to ask him what he would do, ‘is recommended that immediate legal protection should be this the priority?’ without him having a chance to talk to obtained for the income-generating aspects of the TT the Treasury about, if they were going to give him this Museum concept.’ Now, we have to be aware that the money, whether he would spend it on this or something copyright aspects, the trademark aspects, are so vitally else, is totally unfair to him at this time, because in the important. I think you can see, even from the trademark scheme we are working with a budget that is given to us Harley Davidson, where they sell more clothes than they and if any particular proposal comes forward, and we did do motorbikes, they make more money out of sponsorship, not bring this proposal forward as our idea, it has come and I think we have to really be sure that our copyrights from the Council of Ministers, as it says, and therefore to are protected and, if they have not been done yet, that they ask us if this is what we want as the big thing for tourism, should be done as quickly as possible. So in conclusion I it is a sales aid. The department’s section which I am would just say that I do hope that members give this full responsible for in the cold tight of day - and Mr Lowey, I support and I will certainly be supporting it. hope, would agree with me - is that we have a job to sell the Isle of Man per se and this museum, like all the other Mr Singer: Mr President, I welcome this initial and museums that have been mentioned and the success stories, factual report with its survey results. The hon. member for is all part of a selling package that will or will not help the Glenfaba has voiced concerns and I also think that they person decide to come to the Isle of Man or enjoy the Isle should be considered in future deliberations, for the TT of Man while they are here. But it is not the panacea of museum in itself will not dramatically improve tourism. solving all the problems of tourism which has been talked Neither does any other one attraction on the Island, other about.

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T559

What I would like to say also is that if you think about priority and, by the way, is £300,000 the right amount?’ tourism and you think about motorcycling, motorcycling because I do genuinely believe myself that it is unfair. probably has done more, in historic terms, to put heads on Enthusiasts? Well, I am enthusiastic because I see the beds in the Island than any other one issue, and what we TT and what it has done for the Island, through the good are not saying is this would do well for the Isle of Man in dmes and the bad times, and just for my friend, the other bringing people here just to see what happened here a member for Onchan, Mr Karran, he may have forgotten hundred years ago; it would not do that, but there are people but in the last two years tourism is on the up. Numbers are who would still continue to come to spend their money on increasing. They are getting through and the destination is the Island, whether it be the Grand Prix or the TT; it would . . . but that does not deny us the right or the duty to invest be an added attraction for them and, as some members in facilities that people will want to come back, new have said, for others who have no interest in motorcycling generations come and they are not accepting what their but while they are here, if the weather suits them, whether forebears were able to do. I believe it is an exciting one, I it is fine or bad, they will have something to do in that believe the enthusiasm of this committee is infectious, I couple of hours, be it a morning or an afternoon, to enjoy think it should be harnessed and I think it will be harnessed. the dme they spend on the Island, and that is what I want But can I just point out to my good friend Mr Gilbey, I to see voted on - whether or not it is wanted for the history am reminded of his invaluable support to me when I was of the Isle of Man, to enhance the Isle of Man and not ask Minister for Tourism and I actually had the audacity to at this moment if it is going to solve any sort of problem ask for half a million pounds to build the grandstand, or or go any way to solve all the problems of tourism. It will redesign, or redevelop the grandstand site. Mr Gilbey was not do that. true to form; he said ‘The TT riders came and enjoyed the Mr Gilbey, I can put on record - the things he asks are TT from sitting on the banks round the course, on the the things I have asked myself, and what I have to come hedges,’ and as far as he was concerned - and you will not down to is the decision as to whether the money being be surprised - he was not in favour of the grandstand either. spent, the £300,000, will help us towards getting to So you can imagine the position we would be in this coming somewhere, be it Ramsey which is a great idea as far as I year, in June, when we have invited Mr Zirbi, the ruler of am concerned, that would be fine, but it has to be done in the FIM, to come to the Isle of Man, ‘Come Mr Zirbi and the light that it is not going to make millions of pounds in sit on our hedge and watch the TT races.’ (Interjections) It attracting tourists per se just to see the motorcycle museum. might be quaint, it might be exciting but really, in this day It will never do that and I hope, when it is designed, in and age, is that the image we want to project? We do not case it does not bring anybody or it does not pay or times want to project that image. I believe a feasibility study in get hard, the building itself can be put to some other use if the present form is an expensive exercise but it is demanded it does not work because you might take the business away of us by the Treasury. I do not care who leads it, I am sure but the building will still be there for the Manx people. my minister will not care who leads it and again I would urge the Court to keep their eye on the rabbit. Again, I M r Lowey: Mr President, really it is strange because must say a word of support for Mr Gilbey on this, the hon. Mr Delaney has taken the theme that I was going to do in member for Glenfaba: if, like the hon. member for Onchan tackling Sir Miles’ direct answer. It will not worry my said, after we have spent £300,000 it does not add up then minister who takes the lead in this particular development, I will vote against it. I will put that down as an investment because I would have thought Mr Harrison is capable of and I will say no to it. I have got a feeling somehow that I exerting enough influence from within whether he is the am being encouraged that this is a good investment. I think lead man or whether he is second, third or fourth or fifth it will work and I think it is wanted, I think it is needed in the team. It is a team effort and I am quite sure that is and I think we will be surprised just how popular it will why I believe that the amendment is totally unnecessary be. but could I just say, is this our number one priority? That is a bit like saying, ‘Are the railways your number one The President: I have noticed the new Manx coin has priority?’ or ‘is the sport facilities your number one the Chinese rabbit and I am just wondering if that priority?’ ‘Is the Gaiety your number one priority?’ It is influences Mr Lowey! (Laughter) The hon. member for heritage. We are selling it, but then to be said £300,000 is Castletown. a lot of money for a feasibility study - the Treasury know my view on feasibility studies. I spelt it out to them when M r Brown: Thank you, Mr President. It is interesting we went there at our Treasury meeting. It is an enormous that every time, since I have been in this hon. House, that amount of money, but who actually insists on a feasibility we look to invest money in either the history or tourism, study? (Mr Downie:The Treasury.) The Treasury. Now, there is always a thing that we cannot afford it. We can to me it is a cottage industry. I said so. I am using the never really afford it and yet, as government and as words I used to the Treasury when I met them. Some Tynwald, we invest millions and millions and millions of cottage! Some industry! Now, I am quite sure the pounds, rightly, in providing services, facilities, schools, committee, if they can get away without spending £300,000 hospitals, all these things. We cannot ignore this side of it on a feasibility study, will do just that because, like Sir because this side is the other side of how you make the Miles, I too thought £300,000 was going to put the Island work. Sir Miles made the point about it is the Isle foundadon and the first floor in, but I do not think it is fair of Man holiday experience, you come here and it is part of to say to my minister today, ‘Is this your number one a component, and that has been argued time and time again,

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received T560 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

and how many of us remember the sceptics and the people of UK attractions charge up to £5.50. When I was Chairman who lobbied us about the House of Manannan, how that of the Government Properties Trustees and we undertook was a waste of money, how we should not do that, it should modernising the Laxey Wheel area and opening that up to not happen? All I can say is that since it has opened the the public, I can remember arguing to say about doing that amount of people who have changed their mind and said, and Treasury saying to me, ‘But how are you going to get ‘We think it is wonderful. How proud it is has made us’ the money in? You are only charging 40 pence for people and so on, and there are always different views, but to go and see it,’ and I said, ‘We will charge £2, £2.50,’ generally the reaction has been very positive, and it has and they said, ‘You will never get it.’ I said, ‘Of course been positive because people were not sure what was going you will get it, because people will pay for quality. They to be created. It just seemed that it was going to cost a lot will pay,’ and that is what happened. We charged £2 and, of money, and it was, and what was it really going to do? ever since then - you look at the figures - Laxey Wheel What it was going to do was provide something as part of has increased in numbers, people have more to see because the experience. we invested in it. I think we have now got to move on to the TT Now, the other thing is that people are saying about the experience. That is what we are talking about. We have cost of the feasibility study, and we all have a concern the TT. If you want to see anything about the TT, the vast when you are saying we need to spend, let us say, £300,000 majority of the artifacts of the TT, whether they be as it is in this case, and we spend that money and it might certificates, motorbikes, trophies, whatever they are, are not happen, but it is a fact of life for government that you not on the Isle of Man. They are all off the Isle of Man. I have to do that sort of thing, because you have too many was away with my family down in the Midlands, we went people outside saying, ‘Why are you spending the money?’ into a museum there which was a motor museum, and I But also, if you are going to do something like this right, saw certificates I had never seen in my life before, which you have to examine how to do it, to do the presentation were beautiful certificates of winners from the Isle of Man right. We can all build a hut and put motorbikes in it. That TT and they are done, signed by the Governor of the day, is dead easy. That is how our castles used to be; that is presented by the to the winner of how our other facilities used to be. We have only started the TT. Big things they were - never seen them, did not to improve the situation and generate more income and even know they existed before, and I am a TT fan, I hope, more interest since we have lifted the quality and provided I was and still am, and we have got a situation where that a good quality. I hope the TT experience, as I will call it, sort of thing just is not here. will be fun, not just motorbikes but places for people to go So from my point of view we should be looking at this. and have fun, because the one thing that was always in the The timing in fact is actually right, because if you look at surveys we did when I was at tourism, and I am sure it is what has happened, we have provided other leisure the same now, was that the one thing people want when facilities, we have provided the likes of the House of they are on holiday is fun. They want to enjoy themselves, Manannan. You look at our estimates; everything else in and it all right having the museums but they have got to be our estimates is providing the necessities of life - in other attractive. So I am all in favour; I think it is great. words, the schools, the hospitals, housing and so on. There Site-wise, I very much take the point that Sir Miles has is nothing else we are looking to invest in in terms of made. I think, if you take the site and you take what Mr attractions or anything, so the timing must be about right Crowe said, he said - and I know he has been of this view because it is time we were slotting a few more in. We are for some time - he would like to see it at the grandstand, working on things in my department - the marina at Port and I think generally we all would say yes, that is where St Mary, believe it or not - and I think it is right. we would like to see it, but it can be impractical because We have a situation where there is - I do not know if the grandstand is so congested at the TT period that you ‘argument’ is the right word but there is an argument to would actually add to the congestion and it causes another some degree of who should lead this. I think at this stage, problem. I think the site in Ramsey is actually a very good rightly in my opinion, that it should be the Department of site. It is off the TT course but it is right as one of the main Tourism because we are talking only about the feasibility centres and I think it could be an ideal site. It is already study. The museum will be involved. Once we get further owned by local government. Government has already information it might well be that it should be under the invested some money into it and therefore it is a free site. control of Manx National Heritage, it might well be that Why buy another one? I would love to see it in Castletown you say, yes, it is a museum and they are the ones who but we cannot even get houses; there is not much chance should control it, but my starting point is that it is a tourist of us getting a museum. So, Mr President, as far as I am attraction because it is different than reflecting the other concerned I think they should get on with it. side of our history, which was very much about the Celts, The only thing I would do is encourage the minister to the Vikings and all that side of it. So it is something reduce the projected timescale; I think it is wrong and I different. suspect the committee said, ‘2007 is the centenary; let’s Now, the hon. member for Glenfaba who has been get it so that we can get it for that date,’ and I think they mentioned a number of occasions on this mentioned the have worked back. I say, ‘Do not do that. Start today, work point about the charge in the UK; in the report it says about forward and get it as quick as possible.’ Get it sorted out, the charge of £5.50, and he said people are not going to get on with the job and if you can - and I think it could be pay that, or something like that, I think he said. Well, can possible, it would be open by the year 2004. The other I say what it actually says is the report is that 65 per cent thing that is important is that we must look for sponsors

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T561

because there is no doubt they will become involved, and funded by government to date, shows the bonuses and the especially Honda, Kawasaki and Suzuki, and, I suspect, rewards which are capable with the correct investment. Norton. The other thing we must do is, I believe, buy External sponsors were raised. Now, clearly I think what exhibits now while they come on the market and get on is required here, once government shows its commitment, with doing it. We have bought one motorbike so far. We which I believe it will do today via Tynwald, our have got a number of other bits but, as the hon. member parliament, and we take things along to the next stage, for West Douglas, Mr Downie, said, ‘If you do not buy then the external sponsors who, as you all know, are waiting them when the opportunity comes up they will be gone in the side lines will become more committed, and I forever, or gone, certainly, for a long, long time.’ So, Mr welcome in particular Mr Downie and others who have President, I look forward to seeing it built, because I believe indicated that if the final development is one which is a it will be built and I believe it will be a tremendous Manx National Heritage development, which I think will investment, and all I say to the minister is to just push this clearly be the case - there is no doubt about that in my along as quickly as possible. mind - once we get to the final stage this will be a Manx National Heritage scheme, and I am pleased to say in that The President: May I call on the minister to reply? regard that Mr Speaker did refer to a meeting of the trustees in January and Mr Harrison and I had an exchange of Members: Hear, hear. correspondence following on from that; I made it quite clear to Mr Harrison how much I valued his contribution The President: Hon. minister. and in return he made it quite clear, he advised me of his personal commitment to this project. So I think that we Mr Cretney: Thank you, Mr President. I will try and are talking about issues that really are not issues. I think push this along as quickly as I can, in a wicky-wacky way! that the working together element has already taken place (Laughter) First, if I raise two or three points and then and will continue to take place, but it is just providing for perhaps go through the individual contributions, the the Council of Ministers that comfort in terms of a report committee was established at the July 1997 sitting and the back along the way, and I think that is the critical element, Council of Ministers were required to appoint a committee myself. of five persons with specialist knowledge to investigate Also, Sir Miles, amongst others, spoke about Ramsey. the practicalities et cetera, so from day one it was going to Now, we have been lucky in this respect in as much as, be a committee of people who were keen about it. Now, unlike so many other capital projects which government whether we, individually, have any particular specialist speaks about which are necessary, obviously, people do knowledge. . . but I think collectively we have today want this in their backyard and we have had offers from brought things forward, but the Tynwald resolution the Creg ny Baa, from Jurby from Mr Cannan, from required that and that is why it is. Ramsey, and obviously the original one Mr Crowe and The economics of the thing I would like to look at next. others spoke about is the grandstand. I think it would be Now, what I am asking for here is an amount of up to useful - we cannot do it today - at a very early date that we £298,900 and the way the report has been set out, the do see if it is possible to crystallise our thoughts and to feasibility is constructed in exactly the same way as the come to one site to avoid unnecessary expenditure. I have House of Manannan feasibility work was carried out and, got no problem with that. If I can avoid unnecessary with regard to financial aspects which Mr Gilbey raised expenditure you have my assurance that that will happen, amongst others, we were fortunate indeed to have Mr but I do believe that the critical point is that tourism, unlike Harrison, who carried out the work at the House of some other elements of government, has the potential to Manannan, and so the figures which Mr Gilbey has looked assist other parts of the Island where we have had the at are ones which have been tested before in regard to the developments which have gone on in Douglas but we see Manx National Heritage development. The difference is what happened in Peel and I think we could see the same that with this scheme there will be a report-back procedure happening in other places and we can see that those towns to the Council of Ministers along the way, and it was felt and villages can benefit from this industry. Also I would by the Council of Ministers that that would be a useful not want to be seen by Mrs Crowe or any others to be anti discipline in order that I, or anybody else, did not get carried the Port St Mary marina. I am glad that the Minister for away with our enthusiasm, that this report-back procedure Transport did mention that, because I do believe that we was in place and this is the mechanism which it is felt the do need to get on with those schemes also. Department of Tourism is the most appropriate body to Now, if I go to some of the individual comments which do. have been made - and I am trying to be as quick as I can - In terms of the other parts of the economics, obviously Mr Karran I would like to thank for his support and I would tourism into the future is a very competitive business. I like to thank Mr Gilbey for his support. I think they have think the investment which has taken place to date in terms been answered. (Laughter) Mr Karran looked at the of all-weather facilities is catching up from years of neglect problems of the TT. I would like to be more positive and in that regard. We need to have all-weather facilities. We look at the plus points of the TT. All right, we acknowledge do not want to see people dragging their families through that there are difficulties in terms of getting people here the streets when it is raining, just in and out of shops. We and accommodating them and one thing and another. I need to have things for them to do and I think the would like to say that the Steam Packet, for example, is investment in Manx National Heritage, which has been putting on a lot of additional sailings, and so those things

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received T562 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999

have to be recognised. We have to work with our partners He said about the site-specific at Ramsey. Well, I went in the private sector to make sure that we have the capacity round and visited the site with Geoff Quayle and Richard and, again, the same applies to Homestay where we need Radcliffe, the commissioners from Ramsey, who took me so many people who have accommodation who are round and showed me the site at Ramsey I think that is a prepared to work with us in regard to that, because there is very good site but, as I say, I think the best thing to do a difficulty in terms of the amount of accommodation would be after, hopefully, we make progress today we make available, and so I am grateful to the Treasury for the an early decision if it is possible to be site-specific, and assistance they gave in terms of upping the level of obviously that would need to be reported to Tynwald, I Homestay yesterday. Obviously we asked for more but we think, if we did make that decision. He also referred to got a little bit. I am grateful to them for that, but I would how much is in the five-year programme at the end of this like to look at the positive points, and there are lots of feasibility, how much we would want to have in the five- positive points; let us emphasise them rather than looking year programme, and Mr Brown also referred to that in as at the negatives all the time, because only by working much as it would be nice to have it by 2007, but why don’t together can you make any progress. we get on with it as quickly as possible? I think the situation Mrs Crowe said, ‘Yet another museum.’ Well, I would we need to look at is, we started off in July 1997 with like to say I do not believe that in concept this will be yet nothing at all in the five-year forward plans. We have got another museum. As the hon. member for Castletown has to the position we have now thanks to goodwill from said, this is more like a TT experience which will be much various parties and I think we can take things forward, but more exciting, although I have to say that the developments I would not want to say necessarily that we will bring things in terms of heritage in the last several years have, in before 2007. That all depends on a range of other things. I themselves, got away from what people used to imagine think it is best to be realistic and you can only determine museums were in terms of dusty old corridors, and so I do how much your final budget is going to be once we have not think that this will be yet another museum. It is a very taken the initial stages of the feasibility, but obviously, exciting possibility as long as we can make the progress. again, that needs to be something which is reported to hon. Mrs Cannell has moved the amendment to Manx members. National Heritage. I have tried to explain why the Council Mr Crowe said that it should be built at the grandstand. of Ministers made their decision. This was also referred to Well, I note his comments and they have been in part by Mr Speaker and I have referred to the exchange of answered. Obviously we will consider that alongside all goodwill correspondence which I have had with Mr the others. The Manx National Heritage co-operation - he Harrison since then, I would suggest. spoke of that and I think I have addressed that. And Mr Downie referred to exhibits and the need to acquire sponsorship - as I say, I think sponsors external will become exhibits along the way. I would obviously endorse that. more involved once they see that we have the commitment There has already been co-operation between the following this Tynwald resolution. department, Treasury and Manx National Heritage over I do not believe ‘museum’ is the right word. I believe it the acquisition of the Mike Hailwood Suzuki, which is TT experience and, in terms of the legal protection which obviously Mr Downie brought to our attention in the first the hon. member raised in a question some time ago and instance and I am grateful to him for that. We also examined has raised privately as well, yes, work is taking place with another potential purchase but we pulled back because one regard to protecting the trademark and copyright, and we of the important things is that any machines that are in the are receiving advice and working on that at this time, so I museum - we need to make sure that their authenticity is understand the importance of that and I think the example one hundred per cent and we do not want to just fill the used of Harley Davidson was perhaps the most appropriate thing with machines; we want to have quality rather than example one could use, because I think the amount of goods quantity, but I think the goodwill already exists there in they have under their copyright and tradename shows what terms of looking along the way to see if we can get exhibits. can be done, and I think there is a great value worldwide Sir Miles would like to support, and I am very grateful in terms of the TT name, because others have tried to copy for that, and I hope he will support at the end of the day, it and tried to pick on it in the past. but he wanted to know whether this is the important issue Mr Singer said this would add to the overall range of for tourism. As Mr Delaney has hinted and as I hinted to attractions. I agree with him entirely. Just as I supported Sir Miles, I do not know that I can say that this is the the House of Manannan, not in itself but because it added important issue for tourism. For a long time we have been to the overall package, I think this is exactly the same. discussing what might happen with Summerland, what I would like to thank Mr Delaney and Mr Lowey for might happen with the Villa Marina, and I would not want their support. I do not want to embarrass them because I to take those kinds of considerations off the agenda either. will feel bit like Dr Mann did yesterday where the members We need to do something. Now, I do not know; obviously were all being nice to each other and he ended up going the Minister for Local Government and the Environment is, together with myself, going to take recommendations very red! (Laughter) of the Council of Ministers in that regard, but I would not I would like to thank the general support. I hope I have want to say that because we are going to now progress the assured members on points, in particular in relation to the TT museum, and the corporation are talking about what financial discipline which you can be assured, if it is taken they might like to do we now move away, because I do not forward in the manner I suggest, will be exercised, and I think we are in a position to do that. beg to move.

TT Museum - Feasibility Study - Council of Ministers Report Received TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 17th FEBRUARY 1999 T563

The President: Hon. members, the resolution is set out as a solution to all hon. members we could just proceed at item 22 on the order paper. To that resolution we have with the agenda. Is that an acceptable solution? the amendment tabled in the name of the hon. member for Douglas East, Mrs Cannell, which has been circulated to Members: Agreed. all hon. members on a white paper. If everyone is clear about the amendment I will put the question that the The President: Thank you, hon. members. Then the amendment do stand part of the resolution. Those in favour adjournment will be until next Tuesday at 2.30 in this please say aye; against, no. The noes have it. chamber. Thank you all very much.

A division was called for and voting resulted as follows : The Council withdrew.

In the Keys - HOUSE OF KEYS For: Messrs Houghton, Henderson, Duggan, Mrs Cannell and Mr Singer - 5 The Speaker: Hon. members, the House will stand adjourned until Tuesday next at 10 a.m. in our own Against: Messrs Gilbey, Cannan, Quine, Rodan, North, chamber. Thank you, hon. members. Sir Miles Walker, Mrs Crowe, Messrs Brown, Cretney, Braidwood, Shimmin, Downie, Mrs Hannan, Messrs The House adjourned at 8.30 p.m. Bell, Karran, Corkill, Cannell, Gelling and the Speaker -1 9

The Speaker: Mr President, the amendment fails to carry in the House, 19 votes cast against, 5 for, sir.

In the Council -

For: Mr Crowe -1

Against: The Lord Bishop, Messrs Lowey, Waft, Dr Mann, Mr Radcliffe, Mrs Christian and Mr Delaney - 7

The President: In the Council, hon. members, 1 vote has been cast in favour of the amendment, 7 votes against. The amendment fails to carry. I will now put the resolution as printed on the order paper. Those in favour of that resolution please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.

Procedural

The President: Now, hon. members, the moment of truth, and when I say where do we go from here, do not answer home! Not quite yet! We have several items and we have several possibilities. Two hon. members in charge of resolutions have indicated their willingness to hold them over until the next sitting of Tynwald, and that is Mrs Crowe and Mr Houghton. We have four items to deal with. There are alternatives: we could sit tomorrow and, after consultation with Mr Speaker, it is possible we could sit next Tuesday afternoon if you were willing to do so.

Mr Duggan: Could we not finish today, sir?

Mr Delaney: No, Tuesday afternoon.

Mr Houghton: Next Tuesday afternoon.

The President: Yes, after the sitting of the House of Keys and Council, in the afternoon. If that was acceptable

Procedural House of Keys r

y

i

C

í