Printed (by Authority) by Nelson Press Co. Ltd., St. George's Street, Douglas, Isle of Man
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF TYVAWALD COURT
Douglas, Tuesday, October 13, 1981 at 10.30 a.m.
Present: The Governor (Rear Admiral Sir Nigel Cecil, K.B.E., C.B.). In the Council: The President of the Council (the Hon. J. C. Nivison, C.B.E.), the Lord Bishop (the Rt. Rev. Vernon Nicholls), the Attorney-General (Mr. T. W. Cain), Messrs. G. T. Crellin, R. E. S. Kerruish, G. V. H. Kneale, R. MacDonald, W. A. Moore, A. H. Simcocks, M.B.E., with Mr. T. A. Bawden, Clerk of the Council. In the Keys: The Speaker (the Hon. Sir Charles Kerruish, O.B.E.), Messrs. R. J. G. Anderson, W. K. Quirk, J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Mrs. C. M. Christian, Dr. E. J. Mann, Messrs. A. A. Callin, R. L. Watterson, E. G. Lowey, M. R. Walker, N. Q. Cringle, Mrs. E. C. Quayle, Messrs. G. A. Quinney, M.B.E., E. M. Ward, B.E.M., P. A. Craine, D. F. K. Delaney, E. C. Irving, C.B.E., Mrs. B. Q. Hanson, Mr. T. E. Kermeen, I.S.O., Dr. D. L. Moore, Messrs. J. J. Christian, G. C. Swales, with Mr. R. B. M. Quayle, Clerk of Tynwald.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE. The Governor: Hon. members, I have apologies for absence from the hon. member of Council, Mr. Radcliffe, and the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Creer, who are both representing the Island at the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Conference in Fiji.
MRS. NICHOLLS, WIFE OF THE LORD BISHOP—GOOD WISHES FOR RETURN TO FULL HEALTH. The Governor: I am sure hon. members will wish to join me in expressing our pleasure that Mrs. Nicholls, the wife of our Lord Bishop, is back with us on the Island, and we wish her a very speedy return to full health. Members: Hear, hear.
CRIMINAL APPEAL — SUB JUDICE RULE — GUIDANCE TO MEMBERS. The Governor: Hon. members, in the light of certain comments which have been widely publicised by the media about the conduct of the hearing of a certain recent criminal appeal in the Appeal Court at Castletown last week, and because of the possible connection drawn between certain items on the Agenda before this Court today, and that case which is still before the courts, I believe it would be helpful to give some guidance to this hon. Court as to how I would interpret Standing Orders. Statements by members of Tynwald are privileged. However, it is a matter in which Tynwald regulates
Apologies for Absence. — Mrs. Nicholls, Wife of the Lord Bishop—Good Wishes for Return to Full Health. — Criminal Appeal —Sub Judice Rule—Guidance to Members. T2 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 itself by its own Standing Orders, procedures and standards. The Standing Orders of Tynwald are silent on the issue of matters sub judice, but the custom has always been for this Court to avoid debate on matters before the courts. Whilst, therefore, members are not legally debarred from making any comment on any case awaiting adjudication in the courts, hon. members would, I am sure, agree that it would ill-befit the good reputation of this hon. Court for members to interfere or be thought to be interfering in any way in a matter which, although of considerable public interest, is still before the courts. Accordingly, I would urge hon. members to exercise their customary prudence and responsibility, and since the proceedings relating to the matter which was the subject of the appeal have not been concluded, ask them to avoid comment in this Court on the case heard in the Appeal Court at Castletown last week, except in terms of broad principles. I am in no way seeking to stifle free debate conducted in accordance with Standing Orders and accepted standards, but as President of this Court I am asking members to accept, as I am sure they do, that privilege carries with it responsibility, and whilst members are afforded the protection of parliamentary privilege to enable them to carry out their duties, they must exercise that privilege with a sense of respon- sibility worthy of the established standards of this Ancient Court. Members: Hear, hear. The Speaker: Your Excellency, your statement, I am sure, has been listened to with great interest, but in order that members of the Lower House may not be inhibited in relation to a debate which will take place, or any debate which may take place later today, would Your Excellency assure the Court that the debate will be conducted not only within perimeters defined by Standing Orders, but also those defined in Erskine May which permits reference to certain aspects of legal hearings; and in view of the fact that reference has been made to the position of myself and my hon. colleagues in this Legislature by judges in recent cases, there will be no inhibition placed by you, sir, other than the inhibitions that are placed by Erskine May on debate. The Governor: It may be of interest to hon. members to learn of a ruling given in the House of Commons and quoted in Erskine May in a certain case where "Mr. Speaker ruled that it can be argued that the judge has made a mistake, that he was wrong, and the reasons given for those contentions can be given, within certain limits; but reflection of a judge's character or motives cannot be made except on a motion, nor can any charge of a personal nature be made except on a motion. Any suggestion that a judge should be dismissed can only be made on a motion." I can assure the hon. Mr. Speaker I take his point and, as I have said, I am in no way trying to inhibit proper debate. I am merely seeking the normal responsibilities of this Court. The Speaker: Thank you, sir.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF ROYAL ASSENT. The Governor: 1 have to announce that in accordance with the, terms of section 2 of the Acts of Tynwald (Emergency Promulgation) Act 1916, the Royal Assent was given to the following Acts on 31st July 1981:— Administration of Justice Act 1981; Board of Consumer Affairs Act 1981; Highway (Unadopted Roads) (Amendment) Act 1981;
Announcement of Royal Assent. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T3
Employment Agencies (Amendment) Act 1981; Forestry, Mines and Lands Board (Con- stitution) Act 1981; Fatal Accidents Act 1981; Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1981; Animals Act 1981.
BILLS FOR SIGNATURE. The Governor: Hon. members, we have a considerable number of Bills for signature so I will not read them out as they are set out on your Agenda Paper. The Bills for signature are as follows:— Law Reform (Mercantile Guarantee) Bill; Carriage of Goods by Sea (Amendment) Bill; Local Authorities (Election) (Amendment) Bill; Employer's Liability (Defective Equipment) Bill: Income Tax Bill; Control of Advertising Bill; Breeding of Dogs and Cats Bill; Torts (Interference with Goods) Bill; Housing (Rent Control) Bill; Public Lotteries Bill; Contracts of Employment Bill; Food and Drugs (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill; Limitation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill; Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Bill; Statute Law Revision Bill; Home Affairs Board Bill. The Governor: There are two further Bills for signature not on the Agenda, namely the Companies Bill and the Constitution (Amendment) Bill. If hon. members agree we will continue with our business while these Bills are signed. It was agreed.
PAPERS LAID BEFORE THE COURT. The Governor: 1 call upon the Clerk to lay papers. The Clerk: I lay before the Court:— Customs and Excise Acts (Application) Act 1975-- Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 5) Order 1981. Control of Movement of Goods Regulations 1981 (Application) Order 1981. Aircraft and Ship Regulations (Application) Order 1981. Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment No. 2) Order 1981. Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment No. 3) Order 1981. Value Added Tax and Car Tax— Value Added Tax and Car Tax (No. 2) Order 1981. Car Tax (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 1981. Value Added Tax (Terminal Markets) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 1981.
Bills for Signature. — Papers Laid Before the Court. T4 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Common Market— Final Report of the Common Market Select Committee.
Former Railway Track— Report of the Government Property Trustees.
Wireless Telegraphy Act 1967— Radiotelephonic Transmitters (Control of Manufacture) Order 1981. Administration of Estates Act 1960 to 1973 — Administration of Estates (Variation) Order 1981. Representation of the People Acts 1951 to 1976— Representation of the People (Table of Fees) Order 1981. Police (Isle of Man) Act 1962— Isle of Man Police Pay and Allowances Determination 1981. Teachers' Superannuation Act 1975— Teachers' Superannuation Regulations (Application) Order 1981. Horticultural Industry— Horticultural Industry (Temporary Support) Scheme 1981 -- Sheep— Sheep Variable Premium (No. 2) Scheme 1981. Beef— Beef Premium (No. 2) Scheme 1981. Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act 1975— Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs (Subsidiary Legislation) (Application No. 2) Order 1981. Sea Fisheries Act 1971— Sea Fisheries Bye-Laws 1981. Inland Fisheries Act 1976— Inland Fisheries Regulations 1981— Fishing Vessels (Safety Provisions) (Isle of Man) Act 1974— Fishing Vessels (Safety Provisions) Subsidiary Legislation (Amendment No. 2) Rules 1981. Merchant Shipping— Merchant Shipping (Masters and Seamen) (Application) (Fees) Order 1981. Weights and Measures Acts 1971 and 1978— Weights and Measures (Wood Fuel) Order 1981. Consumer Protection (Isle of Man) Act 1965— Upholstered Furniture (Safety) Regulations 1981, Weights and Measures Acts 1971 and 1978— Weights and Measures (Egg Grading Machines) (Amendment) Regulations 1981. Road Traffic Act 1963— Motor Vehicles (Third Party Risks) (Amendment) Regulations 1981. Social Security— Social Security Legislation (Application) Order 1981.
Papers Laid Before the Court. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T5
Social Security Subsidiary Legislation (Application) Order 1981. Family Income Supplements (Isle of Man) (Computation) Regulations 1981. Social Security Subsidiary Legislation (Application) (Up-Rating) Order 1981. Social Security Subsidiary Legislation (Application) (Supplementary Benefits) (Up- Rating) Order 1981. Social Security Subsidiary Legislation (Application) (Child Benefit) (Up-Rating) Order 1981. Pensioners' Lump Sum Payments Order 1981. Tourist Premises— Tourist Premises (Provision and Improvement) Scheme 1981. Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act 1977— Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act and Enforcing Authority (Application) Order 1980 (Amendment) Order 1981. Health and Safety (Improvement and Prohibition Notices and Licences Appeals to Industrial Tribunal) Rules 1981. Health and Safety (Improvement and Prohibition Notices and Licences Appeals to Industrial Tribunal) Regulations 1981. Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act and Enforcing Authority (Application) Order 1980 (Appointed Day) Order 1981. Orders in Council — 1st April 1981 to 30th June 1981— Notice is hereby given, in accordance with paragraph 15 of the Final Report of the Select Committee on Governor's Powers and Duties, that there were no Orders in Council affecting the Isle of Man during the above period. European Communities— Applicable European Communities Secondary Legislation June, July and August 1981 Legislation on Trade in Agricultural Products. Public Authorities (Acquisition of Land) Act 1923— Public Authorities (Acquisition of Land) (Amendment) Rules 1981. Post Office— Isle of Man Post Office Authority (Overseas Parcel Post) (Amendment) (No. 3) Regu- lations 1981. Whitley Council Agreement— Isle of Man Civil Service — Amendment of Civil Service Salary Scales (Public Notice No. 102/81). Destructive Insects and Pests Act 1919— Dutch Elm Disease Order 1981. Fatstock- Report of the Commission on the Certification Standards of Cattle and Sheep. Annual Reports— Annual Reports of the Isle of Man Local War Pensions Committee for the years ended 31st March 1980 and 31st March 1981. Annual Report of the Government Analyst's Laboratory for the year ended 31st December 1980.
Papers Laid Before the Court. T6 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Annual Report of the Forestry, Mines and Lands Board for the year ended 31st March 1980. Annual Report of the Manx Museum and National Trust for the year ended 31st March 1981. Sixteenth Report of the Road Traffic Commissioners for the year ended 31st March 1980. Eighth Report of the Isle of Man Post Office Authority for the period 1st April 1980 to 31st March 1981. Accounts— Accounts for the year ended 31st March 1980 unless stated (together with the Report of the Public Auditors) of— Isle of Man Board of Agriculture and Fisheries. Isle of Man Assessment Board. Isle of Man Board of Education. Isle of Man Broadcasting Commission. Isle of Man Electricity Board. Isle of Man Forestry, Mines and Lands Board. Isle of Man Harbour Board. Isle of Man Health Services Board, Hospital Administration Committee and Trust Accounts. Isle of Man Highway and Transport Board. Manx Electric Railway Board. Isle of Man Board of Social Security. Isle of Man Local Government Board Fire Services. Isle of Man Gas Authority (year ended 31st March 1979). Report of the Public Auditors on Accounts of— Borough of Douglas. Castletown Town Commissioners. Peel Town Commissioners. Ramsey Town Commissioners (year ended 31st March 1978). Village Districts of Laxey, Michael, Onchan, Port Erin and Port St. Mary. Parish Districts. Peel and Western District Housing Committee. Marashen Crescent Housing Committee. Northern Parishes Refuse Collection Board. Malew Elderly Persons Housing Committee. Southern Authorities Swimming Pool. Local Government Board's Approval to Petition -- Approval dated 21st August 1981 to the following Petition— Petition of the Ramsey Town Commissioners for authority to borrow a sum not exceeding £4,000, to be repayable within a period 20 years from the date of borrowing, for the purpose of renewing electrical wiring in six houses at Queen's Pier Road and three flats at Albert Street, Ramsey, together with fire safety installations in the latter properties — Subject to the reduction of the repayment period from 20 years to 10 years.
Papers Laid Before the Court. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T7
EXTENSION OF TERRITORIAL WATERS — ROYAL ASSENT — QUESTION BY THE SPEAKER.
The Governor: We will now turn to the Question Paper. Question number 1. I call upon the hon. Mr. Speaker.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, I beg to ask:— Whereas at the sitting of Tynwald on 16th June (T1272), Your Excellency, inter alia, informed the Court that an extension of the territorial waters of the Isle of Man to 12 miles would shortly become possible, and than an Order in Council would be made "in the very near future" for the delegation of Royal Assent to Isle of Man legislation by the Lieutenant-Governor. And whereas no confirmatory communication has been received from the Home Office by either of the Committees referred to in your statement as having responsibility in these matters. Will you, in order to avoid any misunderstanding or ambiguity in the interpretation of your statement— (a) arrange for an appropriate written confirmation from H.M. Govern- ment embodying the relevant dates of application, for the records of both Committees; and (b) arrange for circulating such confirmation to all members prior to the dissolution of the House of Keys?
The Governor: I am very conscious of the understandable interest of the hon. Mr. Speaker, indeed all members, in the subject of the extension of territorial waters and the delegation of Royal Assent. If I may deal with the territorial waters issue first, to put the record straight hon. members will recall that in my statement on 16th June I did not say an extension would "shortly become possible", I referred to an announce- ment made by the United Kingdom Government on 12th June: "That it intends to introduce legislation to extend its territorial sea from three miles to 12 miles. The United Kingdom Government hopes it will be possible to introduce this legislation in the context of results emerging from the United Nations Conference on the Laws of the Sea." Hon. members may be interested in the answer given by the Lord Privy Seal to a question in the House of Commons on 15th June, and I quote: "The Government supports the provision in the draft Convention of the Law of the Sea which envisages an extension of the territorial seas up to 12 nautical miles. The Government have set in hand the necessary preparation of the United Kingdom legislation for such an extension. It is hoped that it will be possible to introduce this legislation into the context of the results emerging from the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea." Hon. members will therefore appreciate that the United Kingdom Government plans to introduce legislation in the context of decisions taken by the United Nations Conference. My latest information is that owing to the international complexities which involve lengthy negotiating processes surrounding this Conference, it is unlikely that progress will be such as to enable legislation to be introduced before the 1982/83 session. The next session of the Conference is in the spring of 1982 in New York, and I understand it is hoped that this will be a definitive session. If, in spite of all the international complexities, this is realised, formal agreements could, I understand, be attained by the autumn of 1982, leading to consequential national legislation in the time scale to which I have referred. As and when such legislation is introduced it is fully recognised that the way will be open for similar legislation to be made in respect of the waters adjacent to the Isle of Man. That is the latest position and I do not consider there is any other useful information that can be circulated at the present time. In regard to
Extension of Territorial Waters—Royal Assent—Question by The Speaker. T8 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 the question of the delegation of Royal Assent by Her Majesty to the Lieutenant- Governor in certain circumstances, I have with me a copy of an Order in Council dated 23rd September which I think would be of interest to members if I read. It has not been circulated because it has not yet been printed, but as soon as it is printed it will, of course, be made available. This Order in Council made at Buckingham Palace on the 23rd day of September 1981 states: "Whereas immediately prior to the making of this Order in Council the power of Tynwald to make laws has been exercised by Bills passed by Tynwald and assented to by Her Majesty, and whereas it is expedient that laws passed by Tynwald and wholly relating to the internal affairs of the Isle of Man should normally be assented to by the Lieutenant-Governor of the Isle of Man on behalf of Her Majesty. Now therefore Her Majesty, by virtue and in exercise of all the powers enabling her in that behalf, is pleased by and with the advice of her Privy Council, to order, and it is hereby ordered as follows:— Article 1. This Order of Council may be cited as the Royal Assent to Legislation (Isle of Man) Order 1981, and shall come into operation on the 1st November 1981. Article 2. Subject to the provisions of Articles 3 and 4, any Bill passed by Tynwald which would, before the coming into operation of this Order in Council, have been submitted for the assent of Her Majesty in Council, may be submitted to the Lieutenant-Governor who may assent to the Bill on behalf of Her Majesty. Article 3. The Lieutenant-Governor shall reserve for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure any Bill which he considers should be so reserved, or which he is directed to reserve by the Secretary of State, and should consult the Secretary of State about the reservation of any Bill which, in the opinion of the Lieutenant-Governor, (1) deals wholly or partly with defence, international relations, nationality and citizenship, the powers and remuneration of the Lieutenant-Governor or the constitutional relationship between the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man, or (2) affects the Royal Prerogative or the rights of Her Majesty in her private capacity. Article 4. Before the Lieutenant-Governor assents to any Bill he shall satisfy himself that the Secretary of State has decided that he should not give direction to the Lieutenant- Governor under Article 3." — which is what I have just read out to you. Hon. members, this is an important milestone in the constitutional development of the Island, and I would like to place on record my gratitude for the endeavours of all concerned in both the Isle of Man and the United Kingdom Governments who have worked to the end that this Order might be made before the dissolution of the present House. The Speaker: Thank you, Your Excellency.
WORKING PARTIES — SECURITY — QUESTION BY MR. CALLIN. The Governor: Question number 2. I call upon the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Callin. Mr. Callin: Your Excellency, I beg to ask Her Majesty's Attorney-General:— In the light of the recent escape from H.M. Prison of prisoners on outside working parties, one of whom had served only 23 days of a three-year sentence for robbery and violence— (a) what criteria detemine the suitability of a prisoner for inclusion in an outside working party; (b) what steps are taken to supervise such working parties, particularly when prisoners with records of violence are involved; (c) notwithstanding the value of such
Working Parties—Security – Question by Mr. Callin TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T9
working parties, are you satisfied that they do not detract from the principal object of custodial sentences, namely, the punishment of offenders? The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, before answering the specific points raised in the question, I would like to comment on the statements in the preamble to the question. The hon. member for Middle refers to one of the prisoners who escaped from an outside working party as having served only 23 days of a three-year sentence for robbery and violence. In fact, this particular individual had been in custody for some 45 days before the escape, as he had already been in custody for 22 days awaiting trial before his sentence was imposed. The legal framework relating to the conduct of Her Majesty's Prison is contained in the Prison Rules 1965, which were made by the Lieutenant-Governor in pursuance of the provisions of the Prison Act 1965, and which were approved by Tynwald on 19th May 1965. Rule 28 provides that "A convicted prisoner shall be required to do useful work for not more than 10 hours a day, and arrangements shall be made to allow prisoners to work, where possible, outside the cells and in association with one another." Rule 28 also provides that no prisoner shall be set to do work of a kind not authorised by the Governor, and that prisoners may be paid for their work at rates approved by the Governor. Unfortunately, the facilities at the prison are such that the only work available inside the prison is kitchen and cleaning work. In order that Rule 28 should be complied with there is no alternative but to provide work for some convicted prisoners outside the prison. At the present time convicted prisoners are paid for their work at rates varying between f1.40 per week and £2 per week. Extensive work has been carried out on Government property by prisoners, including work at Ballamona and Knockaloe Farms, fencing and ditching of land owned by Government Boards, including former railway land, maintenance work at the Laxey Wheel and various sewage plants, and also at Jurby Airport. Community work has also been carried out by prisoners on the Salvation Army Citadel in Douglas and at the Laxey Community Centre. The erection of the stands for the Tynwald Ceremony each year is also carried out by prison labour. Approximately 15,000 hours work per year is carried out by prison labour for Government departments, and approximately 5,000 hours work per year is carried out by prison labour on community projects. In answer to part (a) of the question, every prisoner is assessed on arrival at the prison by the prison staff, and reports are made to the Chief Gaoler who decides whether a prisoner is suitable for work outside the prison. All prisoners are placed into one of four security categories following the practice in the United Kingdom prisons. Only the prisoners in the low risk and very low risk categories are suitable for outside work. The Chief Gaoler assesses, firstly, whether there is any risk to the public involved in the prisoner working outside the prison; secondly, he assesses the behaviour of the prisoner towards prison officers; and thirdly, he takes into consideration the prisoner's past record. The past record of a prisoner alone, however, may not be a sure guide to his behaviour in prison. If, for example, a prisoner's criminal record is closely connected with the use of drugs or alcohol it may be that when these influences are removed the prisoner's behaviour may be more reliable in prison than his past record would suggest. At any one time it is likely that less than 50 per cent. of convicted prisoners in the prison will have been considered suitable for outside work. Ultimately it is a matter for the Chief Gaoler's professional judgment and experience which prisoners are suitable for work outside the prison. In answer to part (b) of the question, outside working parties are always super- vised by one prison officer, supervising up to seven prisoners. A party of between seven
Working Parties—Security—Question by Mr. Callin T10 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 and 14 prisoners is supervised by two prison officers. The prison officer concerned not only has responsibilities for the security of the prisoners in his charge, but also has responsibility for exercising general supervision of the work being undertaken. Part (c) of the question asks, in effect, for an expression of opinion on whether, in principle, outside working parties are appropriate for a person serving a sentence of imprisonment. I am conscious that this part of the question tends to go beyond what is permitted by Standing Orders, but I will attempt to make a brief comment. For some types of prisoners serving long sentences, in my view working outside a prison may assist with the prisoner's rehabilitation. However, I would entirely agree that for certain types of younger offenders, what may be far more appropriate is some form of more rigorous discipline than one would associate with outside working parties. As regards young prisoners aged between 17 and 21 years, advice was given by the prison inspectors as long ago as 1975 that a disciplined regime for this class of offenders should be instituted at the prison. In July 1980, the report of the feasibility study at the prison recommended that a male young offenders' wing be created at the prison. In my view it is important that a male young offenders' wing be established at the prison as soon as finance can be made available for the purpose. I would add that His Excellency has received a report from the Prison Visiting Committee on the recent escapes from the prison, and that Committee made four recommendations which were, in summary: (1) that finance be made available in order that a male young offenders' wing at the prison can be established; (2) that finance be made available for the introduction into the prison of useful work so that convicted prisoners can be given useful work within the prison; (3) that the staff of the prison be increased in order that each working party can be supervised by at least two prison officers; and (4) that consideration be given to the erection of a security fence around the prison gardens. Your Excellency, 1 would like to remind the hon. member that the Home Affairs Board Bill will transfer the functions of the Lieutenant-Governor under the Prison Act 1965 to the new Home Affairs Board, and it will be up to that Board to determine whether the recommendations which have been made concerning the prison are put into effect, subject, of course, to the required finances being available. Mr. Callin: A supplementary, Your Excellency? I would like to ask the learned Attorney-General, in view of his answer to question (a), why was it considered that a prisoner so recently convicted of robbery with violence was considered fit for an outside working party? And, secondly, I am given to understand that a typical working day for prisoners in outside working parties is: 9.30 a.m., arrive for work; 10 a.m., break for tea; 10.30 a.m., recommence work; 11.40 a.m., stop work for mid-day meal; 1.30 p.m., arrive back for work; 3 p.m., break for afternoon tea; 3.15 p.m., recommence work; and 4 p.m., stop work for the day— a total of something like a fraction over four hours! These are, as has been indicated, much better working conditions and working hours than one enjoys outside prison. Prison has been described to me by an ex-prisoner as a holiday home! If we are to be denied the use of corporal punishment and prison conditions are like this, what deterrents are we left with for the maintenance of law and order? The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, the first point I would make is this. That the responsibility is going to be transferred to the Home Affairs Board of Tynwald, and in the new session it will be up to that Board to take whatever steps it deems to be necessary to alter the regime within the prison in the light of the recommendations
Working Parties—Security— Question by Mr. Callin TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T11
which have been made. That is the first thing, and I hope that members appreciate, therefore, the very significant change in this regard which the Home Affiairs Board Bill achieves. It places responsibility for the administration of the prison fairly and squarely on a Board appointed by this Court. Now I mentioned that the Chief Gaoler will take into account his assessment, and in assessement of the prisoner, include not only his past record but his attitude towards the prison officers and the likelihood of his being of any danger to the public. It is futile for me to speculate on whether or not the Chief Gaoler erred in this particular case. As I said, it is a matter of professional judgment and experience. Inevitably in such a field mistakes will be made. I am not saying that a mistake was made in this case, but quite clearly mistakes can be made and it is possible that this was a mistake, I do not know. One of the things which is quite clear is that if, in fact, there is to be greater supervision of outside working parties there must be more prison staff, and that, of course, requires more finance. Unfortunately, I think it is clear from the comments which I made in answer to the original question that many of the improvements in the prison, which I think we would all like to see, depend on the availability of finance, and until that finance is available there are many improvements which I think will not be possible. Mr. Kermeen: One supplementary, Your Excellency? The learned Attorney-General has mentioned two things. Firstly, the Prison Rules which are now 15 years old and which, in my view, require a certain amount of review and amendment, and, secondly, the inception of the Home Affairs Board. Would he not consider it appropriate that one of the principal and first priorities of the new Board would be the examination of the prison system—and I am not wholly agreeing with the idea that necessarily more finance would solve the problem of custodial services—but also as to what is the role of the visiting justices? I would also wonder, in view of the special circumstances obtaining in the Isle of Man as against those obtaining in the prison system of the United Kingdom, it is again not necessarily appropriate to adopt all the measures which are considered right and proper in the United Kingdom. The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, I am happy to express my complete agreement with the hon. member. It is quite clear that the Home Affairs Board will have a responsibility, and an important responsibility, to review the Prison Rules and determine what changes should be made. I commenced my answer to the hon. member's question with a reference to the Prison Rules because, quite clearly, the Chief Gaoler and his staff work within those rules, and it is because of a requirement of those rules, that work shall be provided for the convicted prisoners, that work outside the prison has to be provided. So I agree entirely that a consideration of whether any amendments should be adopted to the Prison Rules will be a priority for the new Board. The Speaker: A supplementary, Your Excellency? In replying to the question you indicated support for a pattern of punishment already, shall I say, suspect in the United Kingdom, and as that pattern may not be acceptable to members of Tynwald will you take every action to advance the pattern that has already been endorsed by this Court, namely, community service for young offenders? The Attorney-General: Yes, I fully accept that. That is one of the other changes in legislation which has been passed during this session, and I am quite sure that community service for young offenders will be an extremely valuable weapon in the armoury of the courts for certain types of person.
Working Parties—Security—Question by Mr. Catlin T12 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
MEMBERS OF LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SEEKING ELECTION TO HOUSE OF KEYS — QUESTION BY THE SPEAKER. The Governor: Question number 3. I call upon the hon. Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the learned Attorney-General:- - Whereas His Excellency has given clear details of the procedure to be followed with regard to the dissolution of the House of Keys, and the subsequent General Election, for the guidance of candidates. And whereas a member of the House of Keys who is elected to the Legislative Council ceases, ipso facto, to be a member of the House. And whereas a member of the Legislative Council must give one month's written notice of resignation from the Council. Will you confirm— (1) that, because of an ambiguity in the law, there is no legal obligation on a member of the Legislative Council to resign before seeking election to the House of Keys; (2) that regardless of any overriding moral responsibility upon such a member to resign before offering himself for election, there is nothing at law to prevent such a member retaining his seat in Tynwald, whether or not he is successful at the ballot box; (3) that a returning officer, faced with a situation where a sitting member of Council is a successful candidate in a General Election to the House of Keys, will have no option but to declare such a candidate duly elected, notwith- standing that the candidate will thereby be a member of both Branches at the same time? The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, firstly, 1 confirm that a member of the Legislative Council is not disqualified from standing as a candidate for and being elected to the House of Keys, provided that he is not disqualified from standing for some other reason. Section 53 of the Representation of the People Act 1951, as amended, deals with the qualification of candidates for election to the House of Keys. Secondly, I confirm that if a member of the Legislative Council stands as a candidate for the House of Keys but is not elected, his membership of the Legislative Council is not affected. If, on the other hand, a member of the Legislative Council is elected to the House of Keys but does not thereafter resign his membership of the Legislative Council, his seat on the Council would become vacant automatically if he was thereafter absent from meetings of the Council for a continuous period of six months without the consent of the President of the Legislative Council. That is by virtue of section 18 of the Isle of Man Constitution (Amendment) Act 1919. Thirdly, I confirm that if a member of the Legislative Council is a successful candidate in the General Election to the House of Keys, the returning officer has a legal duty to declare the candidate duly elected, notwithstanding that he is at the moment still a member of the Legislative Council. The Speaker: I am grateful to the learned Attorney-General, Your Excellency, for his most helpful reply. I would ask him will he take steps to ensure that the law in this respect is changed? Mr. Kneale: Your Excellency, just in case this question is referring to me--(laughter) -- will Your Excellency confirm that some three months ago I notified you of my intention to resign from the Legislative Council as from 19th November 1981 in order to offer myself as a candidate at the forthcoming General Election to the House of Keys? The Governor: Hon. members, I can confirm that that information was passed to me in confidence, and the hon. member of Council, Mr. Kneale, has informed me that he
Members of Legislative Council Seeking Election to House of Keys - -Question by The Speaker. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T13
would like me to make this public at this last sitting of Tynwald before the dissolution of the present House of Keys. He further informed me that he would like me to announce at this time that in the event that he is elected to the next House of Keys, he would not be prepared to let his name be considered for election to the Legislative Council. (Laughter.) The Speaker: Your Excellency, my question in no way relates to any member of the Legislative Council — (laughter) — and I would like to see them all in the House of Keys, Your Excellency — but it does relate to a very serious deficiency in the law, and I would ask the learned Attorney-General again if he will take steps to alter the law? The Attorney-General: Yes, Your Excellency, this is clearly a matter which has been drawn to my attention in a forcible way, and at a suitable opportunity a suitable amend- ment will be introduced into the Isle of Man Constitution (Amendment) Act 1919. The Speaker: Thank you.
AMICUS CURIAE — FUNCTIONS, ETC. — QUESTION BY MRS. QUAYLE. The Governor: Question number 4. 1 call upon the hon. member for Castletown, Mrs. Quayle.
Mrs. Quayle: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the learned Attorney-General: (1) What is the function of an amicus curiae? (2) Who is responsible for his appointment? The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, the expression "amicus curiae" means simply "friend of the court". It is the name given to any person, usually an advocate, who is not engaged in the case before the court on behalf of any party to the proceedings who gives assistance to the court. It is a matter entirely for the court whether to seek the assistance of an amicus curiae, and it is the court who calls upon and appoints a person to act as amicus curiae in any particular case. The procedure, however, is not common. Mrs. Quayle: Your Excellency, may 1 ask a supplementary? Wharton's Law Lexicon, which I looked up, defines an amicus curiae as being the person who informs a court of any fact. In the recent Appeal Court case in Castletown, the amicus curiae expressed the opinion, and I quote: "It is clear that the justices had this judgment in mind right from the beginning." He also expressed the opinion that it was highly illogical for the people of the Island to think that the retention of the birch was imperative. As these and other sentiments expressed by the amicus curiae were his personal opinions, do the court rules allow the expression of opinions? The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, I do not think it is proper for me to comment on what was or was not said by the amicus curiae in the court at Castletown. I have not got a transcript of what was said and I do not think I can usefully comment on what was said in answer to questions which were put to him. Clearly, if he was asked questions it would be his proper course to answer them. I do not think I can add more to that. Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, a supplementary question, short and brief. The hon. member's initial question, is it a fact then, if what is stated is correct, that the actual
Amicus Curiae—Functions, etc.—Question by Mrs. Quayle. T14 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 appeal might be null and void, has it taken into consideration the actual functions of the gentleman described in the question? The Attorney-General: I am not quite sure what the question is. Mr. Delaney: The question is that the court took notice outside jurisprudence of the situation that was actually laid down by law, and the opinions expressed should not have been heard at that time. The Attorney-General: Well, I am afraid I do not take the point, Your Excellency. I am not aware of any irregularity which took place in regard to the amicus curiae in the recent case in Castletown. Mr. Delaney: Well, would you re-study the case sir, and find out if the facts are true and therefore the case might be null and void. Mrs. Quayle: My question was are opinions allowable in the Court of Appeal? I do not know, I do not know the rules of a Court of Appeal. The Attorney-General: Well, quite clearly, Your Excellency, if, in fact, an advocate is asked a question he would normally answer that question. I cannot answer more than that.
FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH UNITED KINGDOM — QUESTION BY THE SPEAKER. The Governor: Question number 5. 1 call upon the hon. Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of Executive Council:— Will you confirm that recent approaches on the part of the United Kingdom Government indicate the development of a deliberate policy designed to sap this Island's financial strength, and inhibit its freedom of action by— (1) seeking to extract massive increases in financial contributions; (2) threatening to terminate payment of revenues under the Continental Shelf Agreement should this Government decide to determine the rates of both its direct and indirect taxation; (3) withholding, on a narrow legal interpretation, revenue from the Continental Shelf to which the Island is morally entitled? Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, the short answer to the hon. Mr. Speaker's question is no, sir, I have found no evidence whatsoever that the United Kingdom Government have embarked on a deliberate policy designed to sap the Island's financial strength. I would have thought even the United Kingdom Government would be aware that it was not in their interests to sap the financial strength of the Isle of Man. However, the hon. Mr. Speaker mentions three points in the question; firstly, seeking to extract massive increases in financial contributions. There is no doubt that the United Kingdom Govern- ment has, on one or two occasions recently, sought increased financial contributions, an increased contribution in relation to the defence contribution and, of course, an increased contribution from the Isle of Man in relation to higher education in the United Kingdom. Of course, the United Kingdom Government has increased its charges for higher education to non-residents of the United Kingdom for some time. However, in the case of the charges for higher education, negotiations are still taking place, and I
Financial Relationship with United Kingdom—Question by The Speaker. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T15
hope that any unfair demands for increases will be resisted very strongly indeed. The hon. member mentions the threat to terminate payment of revenues under the Con- tinental Shelf Agreement should we decide to abrogate the Common Purse Agreement. This is something that was mentioned in this Court in 1966 when the hon. Mr. Speaker put the Agreement forward, and we know it is contained in the Agreement that should there be any substantial change in the present general financial arrangements between the two Governments, there is provision, as I say, that payment would not automatically be continued by Her Majesty's Government in that event, in the event of any substantial change in the present financial arrangements. I am not aware, sir, that the United Kingdom Government has at any time threatened to terminate payment of revenues under the Continental Shelf Agreement, but I am, of course, aware that hon. members may feel that in the case of a particularly substantial change such as abrogating the Common Purse Agreement, they might do so. Now as for part (3), "withholding, on a narrow legal interpretation, revenue from the Continental Shelf to which the Island is morally entitled," we have had several meetings in London, Your Excellency, in connection with Continental Shelf revenue. It is stated in the Agreement itself, and this may well be what the hon. Mr. Speaker considers a narrow legal interpretation, that the Isle of Man Government will receive a proportion of the receipts from royalties and licence fees and this is the end of the Agreement, that is the full extent of the Agree- ment and the final say in the matter. Now many of us feel that the United Kingdom Government are being most unfair in this connection. They have not increased royalties and licence fees substantially, producing more revenue for the Isle of Man, they have indeed introduced a petroleum revenue tax, and they claim that the Isle of Man Govern- ment is not entitled to any payment from the petroleum revenue tax or the new tax which they have in mind at the moment. Now we who have been to London feel, and have told the various members we have met there from the United Kingdom Govern- ment, that we think this might possibly be considered legal interpretation on their part but we think it is unfair, and we are determined to press for a fair allocation of the other revenues in respect of the Continental Shelf Agreement. So Mr. Speaker, to my mind, has certain matters in this question which are perfectly true, that we are being required to ask for increased contributions and we are not getting what we believe is our share of the Continental Shelf Agreement, but I would deny, and, as I say, I have no evidence whatsoever that they are setting out on a deliberate policy designed to sap the Island's financial strength. I think this is pitching it too high.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, I am indebted to the hon. member for his reply. Sir, may I ask, Your Excellency, you use the expression "unfair" in relation to the United Kingdom attitude in respect of two parts of the question. Would you confirm that you believe, personally, that 100 per cent. increase demanded, I understand, by the United Kingdom, is an unfair demand? Would you also agree that it is being posed as a matter of urgency? Would you also agree that there is a possibility that you will find in Manx Government files references to veiled threats, and will you make the files available to members of the Court and the public?
Mr. MacDonald: Your Excellency, could I ask two small supplementaries? Would the Chairman of Executive Council not agree that possibly one of the reasons for our apparently, or so it is said, unhappy state in relations with the United Kingdom Govern- ment, which as we all know is a Conservative Government which this Court, in the
Financial Relationship with United Kingdom —Question by The Speaker. T16 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 main, hailed at the time of their election, possibly lies in the attitude being adopted by certain of our delegates to discussions with Her Majesty's Ministers? Secondly, Your Excellency, when one considers what has always been a very happy family relationship between the United Kingdom Parliament and Tynwald, and one hears talk of moral rights by a member of a delegation who himself was party to the legal Agreement in regard to the Continental Shelf, would the Chairman of Executive Council not agree, as most thinking persons would, that it is a sign of failure on the part of those who negotiated on behalf of the Manx people, rather than the other party to the Agreement, that we did not get more than we now have a legal right to represent? Moral issues do not come into the legal argument. The Governor: Hon. members, I do not wish this to become a debate, but the Chairman of Executive Council may wish to answer that one. Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, in relation to a question posed by the hon. Mr. Speaker, whether or not 100 per cent. increase would be a fair increase, I assume that the hon. member is referring to a request — I do not think it can be called a demand — a request from the United Kingdom Government that the defence contribution, which I now believe is at the rate of 24. per cent., should be restored to the five per cent. in the past. At one time five per cent. of the Common Purse receipts was paid as a defence contribu- tion. Certainly at the time of great expenditure on the Liverpool landing stage, that was one reason put to the United Kingdom Government that we thought our contribution should be 24. per cent. They are now seeking, I believe, to return to the five per cent., but I would make it clear that our defence contribution is entirely voluntary. (Interruptions.) Mr. Crellin: He is talking about the 100 per cent. increase in education. The Speaker: I am talking about the Common Purse.
Mr. Irving: I am not aware that the increase in relation to higher education charges payable to the United Kingdom is exactly 100 per cent., but I am aware that the demand — in this case, demand — made by the United Kingdom Government in relation to higher charges for higher education is too much and should be strongly resisted. I believe it is now being resisted in meetings, joint meetings with the Channel Islands, by the Board of Education, and has been resisted very strongly at recent meetings. I am very sorry, indeed, I have forgotten the rest of the hon. Mr. Speaker's question.
The Governor: Would you like, Mr. Speaker, to refresh the Chairman of Executive Council's mind on what you wished to have answered?
The Speaker: Yes, Your Excellency. I would like the hon. Chairman, really, to assure me that there is nothing in Government files relating to what I would regard as a suggestion of veiled threats. I would like him to make the files available to members of the Court and the public so that they may know the position that exists in respect of this relationship.
Mr. Irving: Certainly, sir, I can give no undertaking whatsoever that certain files will be made public. These files contain reports of meetings, shall we say, at the Home Office, meetings where persons have expressed an opinion in the belief that those things will at
Financial Relationship with United Kingdom—Question by The Speaker. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T17
least remain confidential. Now when the hon. member talks about veiled threats, it has been suggested, and some hon. members might take them as veiled threats, that if we abrogate the Common Purse Agreement this is a substantial change and somebody somewhere in the United Kingdom Government will say that in that case that abrogates the Continental Shelf Agreement too. Now with regard to the question of the hon. member of Council, Mr. MacDonald, I am afraid I would need notice of that question. I would need to do a fair amount of research before I could assure the hon. member whether I agreed with him or not, but I have noted his remarks. Dr. Mann: Would the Chairman of Executive Council agree that steps which increase our independence, in fact, decrease our dependence and, therefore, costs are to some extent bound to rise, and we should be proud of this to some extent, not grumbling that we were taken to task over these extras? Mr. Irving: I believe the hon. member is suggesting that achieving a greater degree of independence for the Isle of Man costs money. It does cost money. What we must ensure is that the cost is reasonable. Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, may 1 ask a supplementary question? As the higher cost of further education has been referred to, would the hon. Chairman of Executive Council confirm that previously our Board of Education was charged the United King- dom rate of fees for students and now we have been asked to pay the overseas rates for students, which will be an increase of over £1 million to the Isle of Man Government. Mr. Irving: I would agree that in the past students from the Isle of Man have been charged the United Kingdom rate. The hon. member says now that students will be charged the overseas rate. They will certainly be charged more than the United Kingdom rate, and from memory of reading the minutes of meetings which were held, joint meetings between the Islands, the rate would not necessarily be the full overseas rate, but it is a considerable amount of money, sir. Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, could the Chairman of Executive Council tell the Court, or refresh the Court's memory, how long have the Continental Shelf re-negotia- tions been going on and, secondly, could he tell the Court, is it the Island's position that morally we expect services at less than cost price from those people who are providing those services for us? Mr. Irving: I cannot say exactly how long the negotiations have been going on for a variation in the Common Purse Agreement — I would say certainly for the life of this Court. In the last five years there have been meetings and approaches to the United Kingdom Government asking for a fairer share of Continental Shelf revenue. Now when the hon. member asks whether we expect services for less than the cost, that is a very wide statement. We expect certain services from the United Kingdom Government and we provide reciprocal services in the Isle of Man, so that the question of cost really does not come into it. I am not suggesting for one moment that the Manx Government is looking to the United Kingdom Government for something for nothing, we are not.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, I would merely ask the hon. member to confirm that in respect of the items referred to in this question there is no suggestion that we are going to get or, indeed, evade any payment for services which we should make to the
Financial Relationship with United Kingdom —Question by The Speaker. T18 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
United Kingdom at all; that, in fact, every one of them relates to a position established which does not increase the Island's independence, but rather submerges it. Mr. Kneale: Your Excellency, could the Chairman of Executive Council remind the members of the Court what services are actually covered by the expression "common services"? Mr. Irving: Your Excellency has said that this should not develop into a debate. We are not evading payment for services but if we are going to talk this morning about the hon. member's question too of "common services", we have got a lot of things to talk about. "Common services" obviously means when we talk in terms of defence contribu- tions, the defence of the Isle of Man; common services such as fisheries protection, which I believe is a very prominent and expensive one, and other services performed by various departments of the United Kingdom Government. A Member: When they do it. Mr. Irving: As the hon. member says, when they do it.
UNEMPLOYMENT — ACTION BY EXECUTIVE COUNCIL — QUESTION BY THE SPEAKER. The Governor: Question number 6. I call upon the hon. Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of Executive Council:— In view of the concern expressed by this Government during the past five years over the increasing level of unemployment, and the recommendations made by various Com- mittees, both of Tynwald and the House of Keys, on means of combating this trend, what steps have Executive Council taken, or do they propose to take, acting on Tynwald's behalf, to control the deteriorating employment situation? Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, in question 6 Mr. Speaker refers to the past five years. I feel that my answer must be in fairly general terms if we are talking about a five-year period. If Mr. Speaker wishes to question me further in relation to more current events I would respectfully suggest that it might well be done under the job creation programme which follows on the Agenda. I think it might save time if I stuck to a brief which I have been given in relation to this question. In general terms, sir, most Government expenditure provides employment, either directly, and I would like to remind hon. members of this, through the number of its employees and purchases of goods and services, or indirectly through the economic, political and legal framework provided. In the past five years Government expenditure totalled £245 million — £182 million in net revenue payments and £63 million in capital payments. The part the Govern- ment plays in the current operation and development of the seven major economic sectors is illustrated by the amount of economic support given to such sectors. Such expenditure has increased by over three times in the past five years. Financial support given to the economic sectors, the sectors in our economy, has increased by over three times in the past five years. Without this support it is unlikely that these sectors would be the size they are. The policy of the Government has been to promote investment and employment by providing a low tax area, incentives to invest, and support for the Island's old-established industries. In particular, attention has been paid to encouraging
Unemployment—Action by Executive Council—Question by The Speaker. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T19
the sound development of the manufacturing and financial sectors of the economy and this has had a beneficial effect, directly and indirectly, obviously, on local employment, not only in terms of quantity of employment but also in terms of quality of employment. The financial assistance given to the manufacturing industry has more than doubled over the last five years. In this connection and in connection with the recommendation of the Select Committee of Tynwald on Unemployment regarding additional stimuli to the manufacturing sector and the small businesses, meetings have taken place and are still taking place between the Industrial Advisory Council and the Finance Board on the subject, and all the proposals of the Select Committee on Unemployment have been considered. Final papers have been prepared and are presently before the Industrial Advisory Council and Finance Board for approval, after which it is anticipated that the combined view of the Industrial Advisory Council and the Finance Board will be forwarded to the Select Committee on Unemployment, detailing action which it is proposed to take. The Government provides educational facilities and a number of apprentice training schemes in manufacturing, in construction and in agriculture, as part of a policy to create more skilled labour within the work force and hence reduce the need to import skills. There is an office of training services in operation and financial assistance is available to employers. Winter work schemes have operated as temporary measures to alleviate unemployment. Such schemes, as with support to declining and non-productive industries, are no substitute for the pursuit of policies which encourage sound and profitable enterprises providing lasting job opportunities. I believe it is the policy of the Government to pursue vigorously policies which will encourage sound and profitable enterprises to expand on the Island and to provide these job opportunities. Executive Council intend to monitor the unemployment situation as the winter proceeds and will also be pursuing the policies which I referred to which will encourage the creation of permanent employment. In the past, a winter work scheme, or as we call it, job creation programme, has started pretty late in the year. Executive Council decided this year, as £150,000 was available, that instead of waiting to debate what we would do with it in Tynwald, the £150,000 should be allocated to provide jobs at the beginning of October. Executive Council has decided to monitor the situation and we have, indeed, decided to come forward today and ask for another £150,000, and whoever is here in my place at the next meeting of Tynwald, I hope they will ask for a considerable amount of money to provide even more jobs, and particularly jobs for the many young people who will be out of work. The Speaker: A supplementary please, Your Excellency? Would the hon. member agree that his reply indicates an extremely disappointing performance in respect of a most important issue to this Court, with a record showing that no fewer than six out of nine of the recommendations made by the Unemployment Committee in April 1980 in respect of unemployment are still on paper and not one of them implemented, and here we are facing a new season's unemployment with this sort of performance.
Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, the hon. Chairman of Executive Council has already stated, just almost in passing, the problem of unemployment facing the young people, that is, the 16 and 17 years age group. It is one of paramount concern. Could I ask, is Executive Council taking any steps to deal with this? He has already talked about job creation, but are they taking any steps to deal with this age group in particular, for example, by encouraging youth opportunity or similar programmes so that by having
Unemployment—Action by Executive Council—Question by The Speaker. T20 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 to turn up at a particular place at a particular time these young people will at least get into the habit of work, although it may not be very satisfying work which will come out of it. Would the hon. Chairman further agree with me that unless we get on with doing something about this particular age group we could have in a few years' time a very troublesome and frustrated group of 19, 20 and 21 -year-olds? Mr. Irving: May I answer that first, sir? To reply to the hon. member for Ayre, Mr. Radcliffe, I would certainly agree that unless we do something really worthwhile for young people we are going to have the sort of trouble that the hon. member referred to, but I am not considering in a few years' time. My main concern is that we are going to have these disgruntled, unhappy people this winter, let alone talking about years to come, and I hope the hon. member will bear with me for a few minutes and perhaps we can go into that more fully when we deal with the job creation programme. The hon. Mr. Speaker has said, would I agree that the plan indicates an extremely dis- appointing performance. I would agree nothing of the kind, sir. Now the hon. member referred to the nine recommendations of the Select Committee on Unemployment. There were eight not nine. I have them in front of me: That continuous efforts be made to stimulate the tourist sector and the Tourist Board should plan for 1982/83 season-- the Tourist Board is already doing that. We have committed ourselves to various matters in relation to the 1982/83 season. The second one is that Executive Council place proposals for short-term winter employment schemes before Tynwald at its October sitting. We have done better than that, we have the schemes in operation and we have come to the October Tynwald asking for more. And so it goes on here. I have already referred to the question of the Finance Board and the Industrial Advisory Council having tax holidays for new industries, bank loan guarantees, tax relief for new business investment, encouragement of development agencies, these things are going on. That licence fees payable by certain non-resident traders be increased — we have legislation to do that. 1 hope that legislation will soon be through and that there will be very large increases indeed. Then Mr. Speaker referred, or indeed the Committee, of which he is Chairman, referred to the placing of Government contracts in the construction industry. I would have thought the suggestions here have been taken to heart by those people who are involved in the construction industry. 1 am sure the Harbour Board has and I am sure the Local Government Board has. Now I appreciate that hon. members, faced with 1,400 or 1,395 unemployed in the Isle of Man, want to see some action. The main objective must surely be the pursuit of policies to create permanent employment — that is the main objective. Now the secondary objective is to provide work now on a temporary basis for those people who are unemployed, but we must never lose sight of the main worthwhile objective which is to create the conditions in the economic sectors in the Isle of Man to provide permanent employment for people. These I believe we are doing. I am sorry that I am here today and unable to show any startling develop- ments. There are no startling developments possible, but what hon. members must do is keep their eye on the main target and at the same time, and I am happy to do it, let us spend a lot of money creating jobs for the people this winter, particularly for young people.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, may I ask a further supplementary? With your permission, Your Excellency, may I ask the hon. Chairman to make it clear that in his reply he has referred to the three recommendations of the Unemployment Committee
Unemployment—Action by Executive Council —Question by The Speaker. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T21 which have been recommended and accepted by Government. These have been dealt with and implemented. He has not touched on the Government monitoring the work load of the building trade and having a suitable bank of projects available to draw on or needed to maintain the building industry at an acceptable level — that has not been done. He has not, would he agree, touched on the fact that the licence fees payable by certain non-resident traders should be increased — again not done. Mr. Irving: You were not listening, I did touch on it. The Speaker: You said, sir, three things have been done, and I am saying that of the other three, I would ask the hon. Chairman to confirm that the licence fees have not been dealt with, that Government contracts entered into by Manx registered com- panies, the requirement there has not been dealt with, that the Finance Board and the Industrial Advisory Council in the next recommendation which relates to tax holidays, bank loan guarantees, tax relief for new businesses, the encouragement of development agencies, none of these have been dealt with to date. Would he also agree that the next recommendation about the Board of Social Security assisting certain unemployed to retrain themselves has not been done to date and, finally, that the last recommendation of the Committee about the Manx training centre, that has not been done to date? In other words, in six out of nine, would you confirm that nothing has been done.
Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, there are not nine for a start. The hon. member really should learn to count. There are eight recommendations here. Now the hon. member says that stimulation for the tourist industry, number one . . . (Interruption.)
The Governor: We are getting back to the tennis court again, hon. members.
Mr. Irving: But it is quite unfair for the hon. member to say that no action has been taken. (Interruptions.) I am not going to answer questions in relation to the building trade without having notice of the question and without having an opportunity to discuss the matter with the Local Government Board first. I am not prepared to come to this Court and make up answers to questions which are not 100 per cent. true. For the hon. member to say that nothing has been done about these is quite wrong. Now on the question of training, and I will be talking about this later, we are establishing a training centre at Hills Meadow for a start. We have persuaded the Board of Education to extend the pre-apprenticeship training at the College of Further Education. We are encouraging manufacturers to take advantage of the scheme which the Industrial Advisory Council has to pay towards the training of people in industry. These things, Your Excellency, are being done.
Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, the hon. Chairman has partly answered what I was going to ask. Perhaps he would confirm that, in fact, Executive Council consulted with Finance Board and the Director of the Board of Education to get a scheme which would take an extra 16 who would have probably gone on the unemployment register and put them in a training scheme, and that was done within one meeting. Would he also confirm that Executive Council, together with our Board and the Tourist Board, have been negotiating with Pontins on a scheme which we hope will get off the ground very soon, giving extensive temporary employment and, hopefully, help the economy of the Isle of Man in the future?
Unemployment—Action by Executive Council—Question by The Speaker. T22 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Mr. Irving: Yes, Your Excellency, I will confirm everything the hon. member said and 1 would add that there is an election on 19th November. (Laughter.) Mrs. Hanson: May I ask a supplementary question? Was it not on the instigation of the Board of Education that this matter was raised in Executive Council in the first place, to have another class, but we did not have the money to establish it? Mr. Irving: The hon. member may be quite right. (Interruption.) The hon. member for Glenfaba raised the matter at Executive Council. He may well have been informed of the situation and prompted by the Chairman of the Board of Education who sits behind me and also will be active on 19th November. Mrs. Hanson: It was at my instigation. Mr. Irving: Yes, all right. Mr. Ward: Yes, we got that, it was at her instigation. (Laughter.) Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, I am sorely tempted to join in, but I will resist the temptation. Could 1 come back, Your Excellency, to something that the Chairman of Executive Council said? It is very nice to talk of £150,000 already being spent. Is it not true that this £150,000 has created, in effect, 50 jobs for 20 weeks, and if the £150,000 that we are going to be asked to vote for later on today does no more than that it will create another 50, and would the Chairman not agree that that is less than half of the increase in unemployed each week that we have had over the last six weeks, and does he honestly believe that that is seeking urgently and dealing diligently with this human problem that we all wish to deal with? Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, the hon. member says that the £150,000 has created 50 jobs for 20 weeks. I think that is quite wrong, sir. I think the £150,000 has created 90-odd jobs, about 90 jobs, for 12 weeks. (Interruptions.) I know it is not much but later when we get to the job creation scheme I want the support of hon. members to let us get more money and let us create more jobs. I am pleased the hon. member gives us this encouragement. Now it is about 90 jobs, I believe, for 12 weeks. Now this £150,000 which I am going to ask for later, I am hoping hon. members will give Executive Council some of their views on how that should be expended and at the same time ask for more, but I want hon. members to give us some indication of the sort of jobs they want. Mr. Delaney: We have done it and you turned it down. Mr. Irving: It is all very well saying that Boards have submitted proposals to Government. We have not turned them down. We had £150,000 to spend and not £14- million. We have spent the money we were given, we are now asking for more, and I hope that eventually it will be possible to get even more. Mr. Lowey: I would like to thank the hon. Chairman, Your Excellency, and I hope that he does not become a statistic. Mr. MacDonald: Very quickly, Your Excellency, is it not a fact that the main crux of the problem is money? Now would he also agree that on the Agenda today there is a lot of money being given away, some to individuals, and would Executive Council
Unemployment—Action by Executive Council—Question by The Speaker. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T23
look at this and see is this not the time to stop handing out so much money to indi- viduals and ensure that the money is used for what the people think it should be used for, providing work at a very difficult time, which is not of your creation, sir, it is not of the House's creation nor the Court's creation, this is a general situation that you have got in the whole of Europe. We are faced with it, it is difficult, it will take a long-term plan which somebody is going to have to work on to always have this ready, and the only final solution is more 52-week-in-the-year productive industries set up in the Isle of Man, and if he believes that the old industries cannot provide this sort of constant work then we have got to think again about the whole industrial base of the Isle of Man. Mr. Quinney: A supplementary, Your Excellency? Part of what 1 was going to raise has already been raised by the hon. member for Rushen. However, it is what the Chair- man of Executive Council has said, that £150,000 has already been used for 90 jobs for 12 weeks. Go back in history. I recall 20 years ago the Employment Advisory Committee had £100,000 and it kept increasing it, and then he talks about later in this Tynwald we are going to ask for another £150,000. We know the long-term policy is the answer, full employment is what we want, but I do ask him to face up to reality, and his Executive Council, and look at what has been put forward by the various Government Boards on schemes to relieve the present situation. It is little consolation to those people Who are unemployed and they are looking to us and looking to you for something realistic in the short term, because nothing is more devastating than for people to be unemployed. Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, the hon. member is quite right and I thank him for his support in this matter, and it is support. I have used the argument myself that 20 years ago winter work schemes were allocated £100,000, and I hope the hon. member will help us to get more financial resources to be used for job creation this winter. The Governor: Hon. members, I am going to move on to question 7 now. I have allowed that question to virtually become a debate because I recognise it as of great public interest but I do ask members for the rest of our Question Paper, as we are limited by time, to stick to Standing Orders as closely as possible.
ATTENDANCE ALLOWANCE — QUALIFYING PERIOD — QUESTION BY MR. QUIRK. The Governor: Question number 7. I call on the hon. member for Glenfaba, Mr. Quirk. Mr. Quirk: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Board of Social Security:— As the six months minimum qualifying period for claiming attendance allowance for care of an invalid or elderly relative is seen as a disincentive for any person considering termination of their employment for this purpose, and bearing in mind the burden being placed on hospital and community services as a result, will you consider a revision or complete elimination of this qualifying period? Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, I think to start the answer to the question we should give some background to the attendance allowance and, in fact, the public concern
Attendance Allowance—Qualifying Period—Question by Mr. Quirk. T24 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 which influenced the introduction of attendance allowance, and that public concern was about people with illness or disablement in the long term, and it is this long-term intensive care which lays a heavy burden on both the sufferer and the family. Thus, the attendance allowance is a means out of that need of providing a little relief. Intensive care in the short term, however, is a different category and although not a pleasant matter, something that most families cope with or even, in fact, expect to have to cope with at some time. Account also has to be taken of the fact that it takes time to obtain the medical evidence required with any claim and it must be borne in mind that there are two principal benefits paid by the Social Security — attendance and mobility— which are paid at rates specifically designed and specifically according to the professional advice of the doctors. If the attendance need was short-lived it could be very difficult to establish. Bearing this in mind, six months seemed to be reasonable as a measurement of what is long term. Indeed, it is the measurement used in connection with the transition from earnings-related sickness benefit to a flat rate sickness benefit as an example. A prognosis requiring in all cases a medical forecast of whether the duration test would be satisfied in place of a medical judgment that it had been satisfied is open to two obvious objections. One, it would present the doctors with a very difficult problem and, two, and more seriously, in relation to the conditions which are or seem to be acute rather than chronic, the forecast of the duration could be alarming to the sick person, the applicant, and particularly if that applicant was elderly. Payment of the allowance retrospectively once the six months has elapsed might be suggested. This would involve, of course, substantial lump sums, and apart from the financial implication, there is the objection in principle in that the attendance allowance is designed as a weekly payment. It has to be kept in mind in connection with this benefit, as with all others, that there are numerous points at which a case can be made for relaxation or improvement. Any change designed, for example, to bring in claims for temporary illnesses, which most short-term illnesses are, would, in fact, be a very costly service. Now I am aware that the hon. questioner is asking in the hope that it will effectively save the Health Services finance, by paying attendance allowance and allow people to remain home to look after their elderly. Bearing that in mind, I will certainly bring it to my next Board meeting for their full discussion, and I will give the hon. member that assurance, and we will place it on record so that the new Board will make it one of their early priorities to consider. Mr. Delaney: I would like to ask the hon. member a supplementary, Your Excellency, to clarify this. Before the sitting of this Court I made the Chairman aware of documents which have come into my possession in relation to attendance allowances at the Glen- crutchery School. Would the Chairman make himself aware of all the information I have supplied him with and investigate how it is that the chief executive can send a letter dated 6th May 1981 to Mr. Davies of the Board of Education which reads as follows: "Thank you for your letter of 30th April explaining the difficulties you are having with children at the junior and senior hostels at Glencrutchery Special School regarding the payment of attendance allowances. I think, perhaps, it would help if the Board would disregard the day of admission and the day of discharge from the hostels, that only when a child was resident for three days or more would any reduction in the allowance be made." Would the Chairman then answer, after getting that letter Mr. Hoskinson sent a letter to the parents laying out this letter and explaining that no reduction would be made, and consequent to that now the parents have been asked to
Attendance Allowance—Qualifying Period—Question by Mr. Quirk. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T25 pay for the days that they were actually told they did not have to pay for, to reduce their attendance allowance. Would he answer how it is possible for two Government departments to have different interpretations of a letter which is crystal clear and in the Queen's English is perfect? Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, as the hon. member has rightly said, he did show me that letter briefly before the Court started. Of course, it is incumbent upon any depart- ment to make sure, in fact, that the two bodies do not pay out of public funds the same benefit, and the object of my Administrator's letter which the hon. member has read out was, in fact, to clarify for the Board of Education's sake that if the child is being kept at school, at Glencrutchery, and therefore in attendance at school, the attendance allowance is exactly what it says. It is for attendance and, therefore, if the child is being kept by the Board of Education for three days, really, the Board of Social Security, you could argue, should be paying the attendance allowance to the Board of Education and, in fact, that letter did say, trying to be helpful to those people who are in receipt of attendance, that we were disregarding the day of entry. A Member: And the day of discharge? Mr. Cringle: We did this so that it would go with the child and the parent rather than the Board of Education. Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, 1 would ask a supplementary again. Can the Chair- man explain how a letter which was sent by the Administrator of the Board of Social Security can be taken in the wrong context a week later after the parents of these children have been told about that letter and now they are told they made a mistake and they will have to pay — and you have seen the letter — pay for the day of admission and the day of discharge? Mr. Cringle: I will certainly take the point up, Your Excellency, and follow it through with the hon. member.
INTERNATIONAL FINANCE AND TRUST CORPORATION LTD. — SECURITY OF DEPOSITS — QUESTION BY MR. CALLIN. The Governor: Question number 8, the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Callin. Mr. CAM: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Vice-Chairman of the Finance Board:— Will you make a statement as to the position of International Finance and Trust Corporation Limited, with particular reference to the security of deposits? Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, hon. members will be aware that this private bank has ceased trading, and that discussions have taken place in confidence during the last month and, indeed, are continuing, on the future of the company. Such discussions are at a very sensitive stage, and their serious import is, of course, of deep concern to the Finance Board and to the Manx Government. Bearing in mind the anxiety engendered by this event and expressed by the hon. member, 1 wish to state that action is being taken under the procedures available to the Treasury to obtain an authoritative report
International Finance and Trust Corporation Ltd.—Security of Deposits—Question by Mr. Callin. T26 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
on the company, it being considered of the utmost importance to safeguard the reputation and integrity of banking institutions in the Island. It will be the intention of the Board to acquaint hon. members of developments as soon as possible and, accordingly, I ask that Tynwald will accept that, at this juncture, it will be in the public interest that I add nothing further to this statement. I shall, of course, defer to Your Excellency's ruling under Standing Order 41 in this regard.
Mr. Ca Your Excellency, a supplementary, if 1 may? As this is a very important matter to a great many people, would the hon. Vice-Chairman of the Finance Board please explain what inquiries were made before the licence was issued to this company, and why was it not realised earlier that they were in difficulty?
Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, the customary inquiries as to any bank which sets up here and granted a licence, I can assure the hon. member were made. Again I must reiterate that things are not only very sensitive but very fluid at the moment and again I feel it is very seriously in the interests of the Treasury officials who are acting very much in a catalyst manner in relation to this company, that we do not pursue the matter at this stage. I think a lot of harm could well be done. I can see the point that was made and hindsight, of course, is something which we would all have. Nevertheless, we are doing our best in this matter and I hope the hon. member will realise that all the Finance Board and all the Treasury are, in fact, using all their good offices to resolve this unhappy situation.
Mr. Catlin: I appreciate the position that the hon. Vice-Chairman is in, Your Excellency, and I would like to thank him for his reply.
SALMON POACHING — QUESTION BY MR. CRELLIN.
The Governor: Question number 9. I call upon the hon. and gallant member of Council, Mr. Crellin.
Mr. Crellin: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries:— In view of the serious decline in salmon stocks in Manx rivers due to intensive poaching, what steps, if any, are your Board prepared to take to improve the extremely poor rate of apprehension of poachers evidenced over the last four years by only one person convicted following apprehension by your Freshwater Fisheries Inspector, one by the police, and three by your four river watchers, as compared with five by a part-time unpaid private water bailiff appointed by the Douglas and District Angling Club?
Dr. Mann: Your Excellency, whilst the hon. member of Council refers in his question to a serious decline in salmon stocks as a direct result of intensive poaching, the Board considers that the reasons for the present reduced levels are much more complex. Firstly. the salmon stocks rise and fall in natural cycles and although it must be accepted that in all probability the present decline in stocks cannot simply be the result of a natural cycle, it does appear that this is a major contributory factor. Obviously the number of salmon returning in subsequent years will depend very much on the number of salmon reaching the spawning grounds. In order to achieve this the salmon have to defeat three principal enemies, the licensed salmon netsman, at the moment about an average of
Salmon Poaching--Question by Mr. Crellin. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T27
11 a year, the licensed angler, and the illegal poacher, although the questioner may well like us to reverse the order, and any decline in real terms of the salmon stocks must be viewed in term of all these activities. The Board and its Fisheries Committee have considered the problem at very great length and at this sitting Tynwald will be asked to approve the Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1981 and the Sea Fisheries Bye-Laws 1981 which will in future years shorten the fishing season for both anglers and netsmen and, hopefully, the apprehension of the poacher will be made much easier. Since 1978, 14 persons have been convicted of offences under the Inland Fisheries Act 1976, five as a direct result of action by the Board's staff, four as a result of action by the police and five as a result of action by the private water bailiffs. The hon. member of Council suggests that the comparison between the number of convictions attributable to the Board's staff and the private water bailiffs shows the former to be ineffective. However, whilst like the private water bailiffs, the river watchers' duties are part-time only, their primary function being the operation of the freshwater fish hatchery at Cornaa, it must be remembered that the five Board staff have to look after the whole Island whereas the Douglas and District Angling Club's two bailiffs have only a short stretch of one river to patrol and regulate. I understand at the moment there are a further six out- standing cases, four to be brought by the Board's staff and two further ones by the private water bailiffs. At present the Board is deploying, in addition to the freshwater fisheries inspector and four river watchers, two additional members of staff seconded from other duties and two honorary river watchers nominated by the Isle of Man Angling Association. In addition, the Board is pleased to be able to report that it is receiving and, indeed, has always received excellent co-operation from the police in relation to poachers. In conclusion 1 would add that the Board is satisfied that whilst it would be possible to improve enforcement by employing more staff, the existing staff are carrying out their difficult duties in a conscientious and workmanlike manner. Within the financial constraints imposed upon it the Board is satisfied that the enforcement of the inland fisheries legislation is reasonable. Mr. Crellin: Your Excellency, I would like to ask one or two supplementaries. 1 must say that I am extremely disappointed in the reply which I have had from the Chairman of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries in this matter because when the Inland Fisheries Act was produced it was supposed to be a charter for war to be made upon the poachers and, in fact, it has been a charter for licence, and would the hon. Chairman agree that if there has been a boast made of 730 salmon caught in the season by one poacher, it shows you the extent. At least this may be an exaggeration because, naturally, in angling circles exaggerations are legion, but it shows that there has been a tremendous number of salmon poached and this is a very bad thing. Would he not agree that the matter is so serious that it requires some more urgent attention being given to it than is, in fact, being given? Is he aware of the fact also that it has been reported that explosives are being used? Does he not think it requires more urgent action than it has been getting at the moment? Is he satisfied with the co-operation he is receiving from Her Majesty's police force who appear to be singularly missing when there is trouble around so far as the rivers are concerned? All I would ask is that he betrays, if he likes to call it that, a little bit more urgency with this matter.
Mr. Catlin: Your Excellency, I would like to ask a supplementary question. The hon. Chairman will recall that Mr. George Hull and myself, in our capacity as officials
Salmon Poaching—Question by Mr. Crellin. T28 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
of the Douglas Angling Club, had a meeting with him and his Fisheries Sub-Committee on 19th August. At that meeting we expressed deep concern because it did appear that little was being done to prevent salmon poaching despite the responsibilities of his Board to protect inland fisheries and the powers to do so as contained in the Fisheries Act of 1976. Despite assurances given by the hon. Chairman at that meeting, I am reliably informed that salmon poaching has continued on a very high scale. Why is the Inland Fisheries Act of 1976 not functioning as it should, and what can be done to ensure that it does function as intended?
Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, may I ask a supplementary? Since the subject is the serious decline in the salmon stocks, would the hon. member give us an assurance that he will consider the banning of offshore netting of salmon?
Dr. Mann: Your Excellency, we do have some trouble here in determining what is fact and what is gossip and the hon. questioner is quite correct in saying that fishermen themselves are notorious for enlarging stories of the size of the fish and the problem. But in saying this I think it is not correct to say that the Board has not taken steps to try and improve the management of salmon fisheries. We have had considerable co- operation from the angling clubs and a series of meetings between the Fisheries Com- mittee and these clubs have taken place in the last few months. In particular, we have gone through the various legislation and the ability of the Board to take swift action and the only way in which the Board can take any immediate action is to alter the regu- lations which will come before this hon. Court during this sitting. There are other steps which can be taken, and I take the point of the hon. member of Council that, in fact, this Act, which was put forward as the answer, has not proved to be the answer, and in one or two vital respects there were omissions from that Act of 1976 which have weakened rather than strengthened the ability of the Board to deal with the problem of poaching. It is the intention of the Board to introduce amending legislation as soon as possible to block these loopholes in the present Act, and I thought the hon. member was aware of this course of action. I certainly thought the hon. member for Middle was aware of it. So there are two steps that can be taken in co-operation with the angling associations. One is to be presented to this Court at this sitting and the second will have to be introduced as legislation in the new House.
Mr. Watterson: May I ask one more supplementary, Your Excellency? Would the hon. Chairman give an undertaking that his Board in future will withhold salmon licences from those people who are known to be convicted poachers? I am led to understand that licences have been issued recently to certain individuals, one of whom has 16 convictions for poaching, including explosives, use of wet suits, using chain saws to chop the trees down to put nets across, lamps at night and a 100lb. line, and I understand that these licences have been granted to the people on the grounds that salmon fishing is their livelihood. (Laughter.) On the presumption, Your Excellency, that on that basis a bank robber could be entitled to a licence to crack safes because it is his livelihood, would the hon. Chairman please assure us that in future, from now on, convicted salmon poachers do not receive a licence to fish salmon?
The Governor: Did the Chairman of Executive Council wish to ask a supplementary question?
Salmon Poaching—Question by Mr. Crellin. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T29
Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, I wonder if the hon. member would consider the banning of offshore netting of salmon?
Dr. Mann: Your Excellency, it sounds as if there is guerilla warfare on the Island as well, and there are most violent accusations, most of which are not true. We do have absolute co-operation from the constabulary and we, as a Board, have no criticism of their actions. Indeed, the police have been very ready to support our own staff. I am not aware of explosives being used. As far as the netting of salmon at sea is concerned, we have had two meetings with the licensed fishermen and they, in turn, have had meetings with the angling associations to try and come to some agreement between the two as to how future licences should be issued. I think there has got to be a slow reduction in the number of licensed fishermen for salmon netting. We cannot just over- night, I think, deprive one or two genuine people of the income that they should have.
Mr. Watterson: Your Excellency, could the hon. Chairman please answer the question that I asked, which was simply this. Would the Board undertake in future not to issue salmon fishing licences to those people known to be and convicted of previous poaching offences?
Dr. Mann: Yes, I am sorry, 1 did not answer that correctly. Unfortunately at the moment there is a discretion on the part of the courts to either forbid the further issue of licences or not. The proposal of the amending legislation will be that it will contain a necessity to stop the further licensing if on a conviction and 1 hope this will form part of the future legislation.
HORTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME — QUESTION BY MRS. QUAYLE.
The Governor: Question number 10. I call upon the hon. member for Castletown, Mrs. Quayle.
Mrs. Quayle: As this is the last question I shall ask in this hon. Court, you will be glad to see, Your Excellency, that it is short and innocent. (Laughter.) I beg to ask the Chairman of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries:— Can you advise the Court when a new Horticultural Development Scheme will be placed before Tynwald for consideration?
Dr. Mann: Your Excellency, I have always known that the hon. member for Castle- town asks short questions, but I have yet to remain convinced that they are always innocent. (Laughter.) The Board has, since the beginning of the year, been considering, in consultation with the Finance Board, the introduction of a horticultural development scheme to provide enhanced rates of grant assistance to horticulturists. To that end a scheme which was primarily energy orientated so as to produce an economic climate to encourage the development of the horticultural industry, has been drafted in no less than six variations and it was hoped that a scheme could be placed before this hon. Court for consideration today. Regrettably, the Finance Board, whilst originally agreeing
• Horticultural Development Scheme—Question by Mrs. Quayle. T30 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 the principle of such a support measure, has not agreed to the enhanced rates of assistance contained in the scheme and, indeed, has not accepted that the Board has properly justified the principle of enhanced assistance to the horticultural industry. The Horti- cultural Development Scheme will now probably be the subject of further discussion between the Board and the Finance Board, although it is not known when or, indeed, if the scheme will be submitted to Tynwald for approval. I can say that the Board is extremely disappointed by our failure to reach agreement on a scheme accept- able to the Finance Board that could be placed before hon. members today, and we on the Board remain convinced that we have in horticulture an endogenous industry capable of considerable expansion with available markets for such production. I hope that the future Board of Agriculture and Fisheries will give urgent consideration to this matter in the next session.
Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, may 1 ask a supplementary question? In case the hon. member has given a wrong impression of the attitude of the Finance Board, will he confirm, in fact, that great sympathy has been shown to the project and the only difficulty has been that possibly we have not agreed to every jot and tittle of what the Board of Agriculture have put forward.
Dr. Mann: In answer to that, Your Excellency, I cannot agree totally with the questioner. Six different variations hardly create a lack of ability of this Board to reach agreement. We see horticulture as the equivalent of a light industry, endogenous, Island- based, seeking its raw materials from the Island with a great export potential. We cannot alter that view and we will in future, and I hope the future Board, will also try to secure agreement in this matter.
SCHEMES FOR ASSISTANCE TO AGRICULTURE — APPLICATIONS AND PAYMENTS — QUESTION BY MR. J. N. RADCLIFFE.
The Governor: Question number 11. I call upon the hon. member for Ayre, Mr. Norman Radcliffe.
Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries:— Can you inform this hon. Court as to the current situation regarding applications and payments to persons applying for financial assistance under the terms of your Board's various schemes of assistance to agriculture with particular reference to applications under the Agricultural Holdings Loan Scheme 1980?
Dr. Mann: Your Excellency, whilst it appears likely that at present levels of appli- cation and expenditure the Board's votes for the current financial year for expenditure under the various schemes of grant assistance to the agricultural industry will be just about sufficient, and there should not be any serious curtailment of approvals or payments thereunder, this will certainly not be the situation in relation to loans. Later today this hon. Court will be asked to approve supplementary votes in respect of both the Agricul- tural Credits Act and the Agricultural Holdings (Loans) Scheme although in both cases,
Schemes for Assistance to Agriculture—Applications and Payments—Question by Mr. J. N. Radcliffe. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T31
even assuming the supplementary votes will be approved, it is unlikely that the Board will be able to approve all the applications and at the levels it might wish to were adequate funds available, particularly in relation to loans under the Agricultural Holdings (Loans) Scheme which relates to the purchase of agricultural land. In relation to the Agricultural Credits Act, the Board originally requested a vote of £500,000, although this was subsequently reduced by Finance Board to the £200,000 allocated in the Budget. The Board requested a supplementary vote of £100,000 which, having regard to the present and anticipated level of applications, it considered adequate, but regrettably the Finance Board approved only £50,000. The originally requested vote for the Agricultural Holdings (Loans) Scheme 1980 was £600,000, although again this was cut back by the Finance Board, a sum of £400,000 being allocated in the Budget. It is now anticipated that expenditure during the current financial year could, unless there is severe curtailment of approvals, be close to £1 million. The Board requested the approval of the Finance Board to the submission of a resolution seeking a supplementary vote of £500,000, making a total value of £900,000, although the Finance Board has finally agreed to only £250,000. It is obvious that unless further supplementary votes are forth- coming, applications under these support measures will have to be subject to a more rigorous examination and the Board will have to share the available funds as best it can, having regard to the respective merits of the applicants and the schemes. This will naturally result in some applications being refused and in some being approved but in sums less than the maximum provided.
Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, could 1 just ask the hon. Chairman, is it a fact then that the Board would seem to be interpreting the terms and rules of this particular scheme too generously and two widely because it is a very hard thing for a young person who is a first-time buyer and has a chance to pick up a holding, and he cannot say to the prospective seller, "Look, wait six months or nine months and 1 will have my money then." The prospective seller wants the money shortly and it is, at the moment, mitigating badly against those who are first-time buyers if they have no credit to offer to a bank to tide them over until they can get the Government loan.
Dr. Mann: Your Excellency, in answer to the hon. member for Ayre, we are very conscious of the fact that this scheme was originally approved by this hon. Court to enable first-time buyers to enter agriculture. We are aware that as a result of many applications we now have the problem of family purchases, that is, the purchase by another member of the family of an existing farm. I would say that we have tried quite constructively with the Finance Board to see how we can resolve this problem of demand on this scheme. It is possible to alter the interest rates at the discretion of the Finance Board which brings the interest rate more in line with the commercial rate, and it is possible, as I have already said, to reduce the amount of the contribution under the scheme. Neither of these are really satisfactory if we take into account the original concept of the scheme. Either we fulfil the scheme to 100 per cent. or I think we have got to accept in the future that some limitation will have to be placed on "in family" purchases because these certainly have featured more and more in the applications we receive.
Schemes for Assistance to Agriculture—Applications and Payments—Question by Mr. J. N. Radcliffe. T32 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
TOURIST PREMISES — AID TO PONTINS — QUESTION BY MR. CALLIN.
The Governor: Hon. members, we have 40 minutes left for questions. Those not completed by one o'clock will be for written answer. Question number 12. I call upon the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Callin.
Mr. Callin: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Local Government Board:— Will any aid be given to Pontins, either by grant or loan, which is not usually available to other persons developing or improving tourist premises?
Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, the short answer to the hon. member's question is no. The assistance which has been offered to Pontins is well within the limits possible under the Provision and Improvement of Tourist Accommodation Scheme 1975 for large tourist developments. It is well within this.
Mr. Catlin: A supplementary, Your Excellency, if I may? Could 1 ask the hon. Chairman, when considering the application from Pontins for either a grant or loan, was any consideration given to the effect, if any, that this development would have on the owners of tourist premises already established on the Island and who are at present going through a very difficult period?
Mr. Anderson: Yes, Your Excellency, and we are very satisfied that it is a different clientele entirely from that which comes to the Island. These are people who follow a circuit. The advertising that the Island would have as a result of this would be phenomenal and the result of that advertising, as I say, has been illustrated in Jersey, not only a spin-off for the particular development but also for tourism in this sector within that island we are confident that this will happen and, hopefully, that this will go forward early in the New Year.
INSULATION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD OR LOCAL AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY — COST TO TENANTS — QUESTION BY MR. QUINNEY. The Governor: Question number 13. I call upon the hon. member for North Douglas, Mr. Quinney.
Mr. Quinney: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Local Government Board:— With regard to the insulation of residential property in the ownership of either your Board or local authorities, and the indefinite imposition of two rent points in respect of all houses and flats benefiting from insulation, has your Board reviewed its decision to make such an imposition? If not— (I) why are local authority tenants dis- criminated against? (2) what is the position of two, three or four-storey flats where insulation is bound to cost less per unit? (3) has consultation taken place between your Board and the Finance Board? (4) were the Housing Advisory Committee consulted?
Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, the Local Government Board had reconsidered the decision to impose two additional points on the rent of all housing authority dwellings which had been thermally insulated. The Board felt that although all tenants would
Tourist Premises -Aid to Pontins -Question by Mr. Callin. -- Insulation of Local Government Board or Local Authority Residential Property—Cost to Tenants— Question by Mr. Quinney. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T33
benefit from the thermal insulation work carried out, it was perhaps rather unfair to expect the tenants of flats, particularly those not occupying a top storey, to pay the same additional rents as those occupying houses. In February of this year, therefore, the Board approached the Finance Board with the proposal that the rents of flats which had been thermally insulated should be increased by only one point instead of two. The Finance Board, however, did not concur with the Board's proposal.
Mr. Quinney: A supplementary, Your Excellency? The situation, as I understand it, is that local authorities have asked that when the cost of the insulation has been recovered, could not the two units be removed?
Mr. Anderson: I would hope, Your Excellency, that that would be done.
DOUBLE PRICING OF GOODS — QUESTION BY MRS. HANSON.
The Governor: Question number 14. I call upon the hon. member for West Douglas, Mrs. Hanson.
Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, 1 beg to ask the Chairman of the Consumer Council:— (1) In the light of the present day economic situation, does the Consumer Council realise that double pricing of goods is taking place in some retail shops? (2) Could the Chairman of the Consumer Council explain to this hon. Court what is the legal requirement regarding double price and, further, is there any legislation being brought before this Court in the near future covering this point? (3) Further, is the Chairman aware that in some premises items of food are being charged differently depending on the position within the premises? For example, goods placed near the entrance are sometimes of a higher price than those on the inside shelves.
Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, in reply to the hon. member, Mrs. Hanson, the answer to part (1) of the question is yes. However, the Consumer Council have, in fact, received few complaints concerning double pricing from members of the public. In the last six months we have dealt with five, and when one considers that there are hundreds and thousands of transactions monthly taking place in the Isle of Man the problem, while irritating, is not of major proportions. Part (2) of the question, 1 should point out that the hon. lady already raised this question at a previous sitting of Tynwald on 19th February 1980 as a supplementary, and the answer I gave at that time is still relevant today. The over price tagging of goods is illegal in the United Kingdom. However, it is legal in the Isle of Man, and the reason why it is legal in the Isle of Man is that when the 1976 Price Marking Act was introduced one section only, section 4, was adopted in the Manx Act. The section relating to double price marking was section 2 and was excluded deliberately at the time. As well as double price marking, section 2 related to subsidies that were being paid on food stocks in the United Kingdom and were not being paid on food in the Isle of Man. However, following your previous question in Tynwald, I did give an assurance to the hon. member that the Consumer Council would reconsider the matter with a view to introducing an order under the 1976 Price Marking Act. In our review the Council first considered the effects that the legislation was having in the United Kingdom which, when it was first introduced, resulted in many shop keepers removing goods from the shelves and re-labelling them elsewhere in the
Double Pricing of Goods—Question by Mrs. Hanson. T34 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 establishment. This practice is illegal but, as you will be aware, it is very difficult for the enforcement authority to account for, particularly when items are not coded. Since the introduction of price marking of goods, the habit of marking the individual item has been replaced almost totally by shelf-edge marking, price lists in stores, or hanging signs which could, and are, altered daily without legal infringement; if you like, making a mockery of the Act. There are other release clauses which permit them to double price mark certain goods. You will appreciate, I am sure, the difficulties involved in the legislation covering double pricing, and in view of the information provided by those who operate the law elsewhere, plus the advent of new technology of marking goods — and I am sure the hon. lady will be aware that most articles now have markings which cannot be deciphered by laymen or lay-women but are readily understood by the computers which most supermarkets, for example, have to deal with their goods, and these are the types of marks that I am referring to, which I am sure members of the public will see increasingly on many, many goods — because of these facts my Council considered that no order should be recommended to control double marking at this particular time. However, we did decide to contact the Isle of Man Chamber of Trade, Commerce and Industry informing them of the concern expressed by members of this Court and the Council's own opposition to the practice, the irritating practice, of double prices on goods. I can say I believe, as I said at the start, that because we have had a reduced flow of complaints, that body has honoured its word to us that they would do something about it, and we believe that this is a better way of attempting to get rid of the irritation than introducing new legislation. The hon. member also raised the point that items of food are being charged differently depending on their proximity to the entrance of the shop. "For example, goods placed near the entrance are sometimes at a higher price than those on the inside shelves." I presume that this means the same brand rather than type of goods, and if that is so I would have thought the lower price would have been on display at the entrance to encourage people into your store. High prices at the entrance would tend to keep people away. However, to the best of my knowledge there have been no complaints reported to my Council or my officers of this happening. We would appreciate any information from the hon. member about this alleged practice.
Mrs. Hanson: I thank the hon. member for his reply.
ROAD SAFETY — HEDGES — OVERALL SPEED LIMIT — QUESTION BY MR. ANDERSON.
The Governor: Question number 15. I call upon the hon. member for Glenfaba, Mr. Anderson.
Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Highway and Transport Board:— In the light of the danger to pedestrians and other road users from vehicles driven at high speeds on roads where visibility is impeded on corners by high hedges, will your Board— (1) ensure that the hedges on main roads are more drastically cut back, and at regular intervals; (2) consider the introduction of an overall 50 m.p.h. limit on Island roads?
Road Safety—Hedges—Overall Speed Limit—Question by Mr. Anderson. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T35
Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, in the first instance let me say that the High- way Board takes the view that the vast majority of motorists have sufficient common sense to drive in accordance with the dictates of the road traversed and not in the manner implied, that is, high speeds where visibility is impeded, and so on. As regards the first part of the question, Your Excellency, hon. members may be interested to know that legally the owner of a hedge is responsible for ensuring that the condition of the hedge does not interfere with the road. However, the practicality of enforcing the law in this respect is such that for road safety reasons the Board has undertaken this work for decades. The hedge trimming programme enables the hedges in question to be cut once a year, which is considered sufficient for safety purposes, and the Board consider that apart from aesthetic consideration, any additional cutting is not necessary. As an agriculturalist, I would say that I, too, like to see neat and well trimmed hedges, but really we are in enough hot water with the conservationists without raising the temperature still further. As to part (2) of the question, the request for the Board to consider a 50 m.p.h. maximum speed limit, this will not be done because we feel and know that the limit could not be enforced and I would assure this hon. Court that the Highway Board will never be a party to making unenforceable laws. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, could I ask the hon. member, is he aware that the United States with all their vast roadways, they have got a speed limit of 50 m.p.h.? Is he aware that there is a concern in certain areas where elderly people really cannot get across the roads. I draw his Board's attention particularly to the Greeba area where in fact, it is difficult to see round corners where trees ought to be trimmed back, and I would also ask them to take into consideration that I appreciate there is a speed limit, a special speed limit on the French Kier vehicles, but is he aware, in fact, that at the moment there is grave concern because not just occasionally but very often there are great boulders rolling on to the road which it is felt could cause a serious accident. Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, in answer to the supplementaries, the only comment I would make is that we are all very aware that there are speed limits in the United States, United Kingdom, Jersey and elsewhere, but the question is all of enforcement and we feel and know here that one can quite easily make laws but the actual enforcing of them is a different matter altogether. As to the French Kier vehicles, I will make inquiries as to what is the position there.
DOUGLAS — ROAD MAINTENANCE — QUESTION BY MRS. HANSON. The Governor: Question number 16. I call upon the hon. member for West Douglas, Mrs. Hanson. Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Highway and Transport Board:— Will you inform this hon. Court of the present state of negotiations between your Board and Douglas Corporation for the assumption by your Board of financial responsibility for road maintenance within the area of Douglas? Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I will be fairly brief on this one. Negotiations commenced with Douglas Corporation on 3rd July last when a sub-committee of the
Douglas—Road Maintenance—Question by Mrs. Hanson. T36 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Corporation's Works Committee met the Highway Board for discussions on the terms for vesting the Borough roads in the Board under the provisions of the Highways (Trans- fer) Act. At the conclusion of that meeting the sub-committee undertook to report back to its full Committee. Subsequently, the Board were informed that for some reason or other the Town Council had resolved not to vest or hand over control of the Borough classified roads to the Board. But I am pleased, however, to inform this hon. Court that the Town Council had a change of heart and they have now approved that negotiations be reopened on the matter and a meeting is scheduled for this coming Friday, 16th October, between representatives of the Corporation and the Board for further discus- sions, or should I say a recommencement of discussions.
CHILDREN IN CARE — COST — QUESTION BY MR. ANDERSON. The Governor: Question number 17. 1 call upon the hon. member for Glenfaba, Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Board of Education: - - What is the detailed weekly cost to your Board of maintaining a child in care? Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, before 1 give details requested by the hon. member for Glenfaba, I wish to draw the Court's attention to the fact that the children and young persons who come into care fall into two separate and distinct categories; firstly, those children who have committed crimes and who have, in consequence, been made the subjects of care orders by the courts and, secondly, those who through no fault of their own require care in the true sense of that term, namely, orphaned children or children whose parents have consistently ill-treated or neglected them. The Board is required by law to arrange for the placement in community homes in the United Kingdom of children or young persons who have been made the subject of care orders. The cost to the Board in respect of the six young persons currently in community homes is as follows: We have two girls, costing the Board £541.66 per week; four boys costing £722.61 per week. It can be assumed that the average cost of keeping a child in a community home is in the region of £11,000 per year. Before a community home placement is made, the young person spends some time at an assessment centre at an average cost for boys of £31.46 per day or £220 per week, and for girls £474.60 per week, and the usual stay in an assessment centre is of six weeks' duration. The total average weekly cost of a com- munity home placement varies according to the institution, but as hon. members will see, Your Excellency, it can be as high as £350 per week. With regard to children received into care on the grounds of ill-treatment or neglect, the majority of these children are placed with foster parents and it is the policy of the Board to place as many children with foster parents as possible, or in a children's home on the Island. At present 27 children, 13 girls and 14 boys, are accommodated at Dalmeny, the children's home in Ramsey, at a cost of £123.20 per week per child. A further 11 children, five girls and six boys, are accommodated at Knottfield, our children's home in Douglas, at a cost of £80.35 per child per week, and a further 21 children have been placed with foster parents at an average weekly cost to the Board of £675. The total average weekly cost of keeping children in this category is £4,925. There are other children in care, mainly between the ages of 16 and 18, who are supported in various ways by the Board,
Children in Care —Cost --Question by Mr. Anderson. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T37
Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, I thank the hon. Chairman for her reply which is very startling, I think, to the Court, but I would ask one supplementary. Would the hon. Chairman tell us how much pocket money children in care are allowed? Mrs. Hanson: 1 am afraid I would need to have notice of that question. I would not like to say how much pocket money they are allowed. I know it is according to age. Mr. Anderson: Could it be as much as £5 per week? Mrs. Hanson: If they are 17 or 18 I think it is possible, but if the hon. member would ,like to contact me later I will confirm the actual costs. But it is according to their age. Mrs. Christian: A supplementary question, Your Excellency? Would the hon. Chair- man of the Board of Education consider that it might be a wise policy to follow in the future that children who are presently placed in care might be better placed in a similar situation in the Isle of Man and that we should be making provision for this to be done?
Mrs. Hanson: Absolutely, Your Excellency, absolutely, I totally agree with that.
Mr. Quirk: Would the hon. Chairman please clarify the amount that is paid to the foster parents in the Isle of Man? I did not quite gather that, Your Excellency.
Mrs. Hanson: The cost per week for our children in foster care is £675. Now this also varies according to age.
A Member: Per year?
Mrs. Hanson: Per year? Well, if you multiply £675 by 52 you will get the answer. (Interruptions.) The question was per year, I think that was what the hon. member asked. That is the cost per week. Now it does vary according to age. The average cost per week per child, it depends on the age. It also depends if there are handicapped children or problem children, but the average cost per week for a child in a foster home would be £32 — that is for one child.
WHITE HOE HOSPITAL — SPECIAL BUS SERVICE — QUESTION BY MRS. HANSON.
The Governor: Question number 18. I call upon the hon. member for West Douglas, Mrs. Hanson.
Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the National Bus Company:— Since the existing bus services via the Castletown Road are inconvenient for visitors to the White Hoe Hospital, will your company consider the provision of a special service for the White Hoe Hospital to coincide with visiting hours?
Mr. Christian: Your Excellency, if the hon. member for West Douglas will accept a reply from the Chairman of Isle of Man National Transport Limited, I shall be pleased to answer it. There is no such thing as the National Bus Company.
Mrs. Hanson: I am sorry.
White Hoe Hospjital—Special Bus Service—Question by Mrs. Hanson. T38 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Mr. Christian: About 1970 when the buses were in private ownership, Your Excel- lency, the Isle of Man Road Services Limited introduced an afternoon service to the White Hoe Hospital but this was discontinued after a short period through lack of support. The present service on the Old Castletown Road passing the White Hoe entrance is a 2.15 p.m. bus from the bus station for Port Soderick which arrives at the White Hoe entrance at 2.21 p.m. The return bus is at 4.49 p.m. That is the school bus returning to Douglas. The afternoon times of visiting hours are 2 p.m. until 4 p.m. and it might be possible to consider altering the times to fit in with the times of the buses. This is something we would be only too happy to go into. Since the formation of Isle of Man National Transport Limited in April 1976, no requests have been received for additional facilities on this route until now. Along with the question asked by the hon. member, we also received a letter from the secretary of the Noble's Hospital Administra- tion Committee raising the same point and we will be happy to have discussions with them. During the period June to August, additional services are operated to Port Soderick and inquiries to members of our staff show that only an odd passenger is occasionally picked up or set down at the White Hoe. The present staff schedules for Saturday and Sunday do not allow for the operation of any additional services at the times necessary to meet the visiting hours of 2 p.m. until 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. An additional driver/conductor would have to be brought on duty on Saturday and Sunday to operate these services at an estimated cost of £40 per day. As the single fare to the White Hoe is 25p single, 13p for a senior citizen, it would require a full 40-seater on each journey of 25p to break even. The introduction of further facilities to the White Hoe can only lead to an increase in the operating deficit of Isle of Man National Transport Limited, but if the Health Services Board, of which I think the hon. questioner is a member, feel that this is a facility which should be provided, and they are prepared to subsidise it, then National Transport Limited will be only too pleased to lay on the service.
Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, a supplementary question? It is the return time that is wrong. The bus leaving Douglas at approximately 2 p.m. is all right. It is the return journey where people have to wait in the pouring rain or in the cold — there is no shelter — for 35 minutes to pick up a bus. Where the hon. Chairman says they only have 40-seater buses, have you no smaller buses where only a driver could be used? Has it got to be a 40-seater bus?
Mr. Christian: There are no small buses which would be suitable for just a handful of people, but we will be only too prepared to go into it with the Hospital Administra- tion Committee or with the Health Services Board and if they can show there is a demand for it and they are prepared to guarantee National Transport Limited against loss, but if this has to be subsidised it should be subsidised by the Health Services Board, not by National Transport. We have been directed, and we entirely agree with the direction from the Finance Board, that the carriage of children to school, for example, has to be treated by National Transport Limited as a commercial undertaking and if it has to be subsidised it should be subsidised by the Board of Education. And in the same way, if a service is to be provided to the White Hoe and it has to be subsidised, this is something which would have to be subsidised by the Health Services Board, and if they are prepared to do so and show a demand we would be only too pleased to provide the service.
White Hoe Hospital—Special Bus Service—Question by Mrs. Hanson. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T39
Mr. Kneale: A supplementary, Your Excellency? Will you examine your time-tables to ensure that buses operating within the town of Douglas arrive at the bus station in time to make connections with buses leaving for out of town destinations, including the White Hoe Hospital? Mr. Christian: Of course we try to do this already, Your Excellency, as far as possible. We have meetings all round the Island — in Douglas, in the south, the west, the north — and we asked people to come along and a number of people did come to the meetings and they raised various questions of this kind and all of those which we could deal with we have done. If it can be shown that an alteration in the time-table could be effected which would have this result we would be only too pleased to do it. Mr. Kneale: I am informed that buses on the Ballabrooie route arrive about 10 minutes after buses leaving for out-town destinations. Would you look at that one please? Mr. Christian: We will look at all services, but if the hon. member of Council had indicated in advance that he was going to raise this point then we could have provided the information to say whether he is right or wrong, but just off the cuff I could not say whether it is right or wrong. The Governor: This question refers to the White Hoe Hospital in particular, to which questions should be addressed. Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, I would ask a supplementary question on the same lines as the hon. member of Council, and that is, as the hon. member knows, when Douglas Corporation Transport Department was taken over and, indeed, the Isle of Man Road Services were taken over, there was an amalgamation of services and an integration of the rural and urban services. Would the hon. member consider the reintroduction of a more intensive urban bus service which not necessarily would be more expensive than the present service run Island-wide by your company? Mr. Christian: Your Excellency, we would be only too pleased to consider anything where it can be shown that the service could be improved, provided — and I like the wording of the hon. member for West Douglas — provided no additional financial burden was imposed. If he and the Finance Board wish us to run our services more regularly, we will do so. I might mention, Your Excellency, while we are discussing this, that we have introduced a 10p fare recently and that seems at the present time to be very successful. Dr. Moore: Would the hon. Chairman, Your Excellency, agree that a better long- term solution to the problem could be overtaken by providing additional non-acute nursing facilities locally in the Island? Mr. Christian: I wonder if the hon. questioner will tell me what non-acute is, in the first place? Dr. Moore: Routine nursing, like the White Hoe. Mr. Christian: I can only repeat what I said before, Your Excellency, if it can be shown that services can be improved in any way we will be only too pleased to do so. We want to provide the best service we can but, of course, the governing factor all the time is finance.
White Hoe Hospital—Special Bus Service—Question by Mrs. Hanson. T40 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
The Governor: I am sorry that you were addressed on the Agenda with the wrong title, and I am sorry you put Mrs. Hanson on the wrong bus. (Laughter.)
UNEMPLOYED PERSONS — REVIEW OF SYSTEM FOR SIGNING ON AND RECEIVING BENEFIT — QUESTION BY MR. WATTERSON.
The Governor: Question number 19. I call upon the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Watterson.
Mr. Watterson: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Isle of Man Board of Social Security:— In the light of the degrading treatment recently experienced by unemployed persons at the Douglas Labour Exchange and the growing number of unemployed, will your Board undertake to review immediately its policy and system for signing on and receiving benefit in order that— (a) all persons sign on once a week only; (b) those signing on only and not seeking benefit or employment may do so by post; (c) certain categories of people, whilst available for employment but by the nature of their qualifications may find it difficult to gain work, should be allowed to be paid by cheque or at a post office, and so that any such alterations to the system could come into effect before the end of October 1981?
Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, firstly, 1 do not agree that there has been any degrading treatment at any time of the unemployed persons at the Douglas Labour Exchange, as has been expressed by the hon. member in the question, but I will say that it is our intention to introduce an appointments system in November. We have already split the men and the women into two halves; the men in the morning, the ladies in the afternoon. The appointments system should commence in November and we believe that this should help to avoid queues forming. Incidentally, they usually form early in the morning before the staff are on duty or at lunch-time. All the variations expressed in the question have been considered, and although unable to give the hon. member the undertaking that he asks for in the question, I will keep the position under review.
ELECTRICITY PAYMENTS — PREPAYMENT METERS — QUESTION BY MR. J. N. RADCLIFFE.
The Governor: Question number 20. 1 call upon the hon. member for Ayre, Mr. J. N. Radcliffe.
Mr. .1. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Electricity Board:— In view of the fact that some time ago your Board decided to discontinue the system of prepayment meters in domestic premises in favour of the quarterly account system, and having regard to the fact that an increasing number of consumers, unused to budgeting for this type of payment, are getting themselves into difficulties over paying
Unemployed Persons—Review of System for Signing On and Receiving Benefit—Question by Mr. Watterson. Electricity Payments--Prepayment Meters—Question by Mr. J. N. Radcliffe. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T4I
these accounts, can you inform this hon. Court as to whether your Board will be reconsidering this decision? Mr. Moore: Your Excellency, in reply to the question raised by the hon. member for Ayre, Mr. Norman Radcliffe, the straightforward answer is that my Board will not be reconsidering its attitude on the installation of prepayment meters. The decision taken by the previous Board in 1975 was the subject at that time of some criticism, as a result of which, as an alternative to the quarterly account system, with its obvious advantages, I should say, we allowed some of our consumers to retain the coin in the slot procedure but they were allowed an open meter system which allowed a sort of money box arrangement. These consumers were issued with cards so that they could pay by instalments into the nearest showroom at suitable intervals. This was a system purely and simply for those people who did find it a considerable disadvantage to find a large amount of money at one specific time, and it was felt that by leading them into a system of this sort the best way we could do it was to say to them, "Well, you can retain these meters, your light will go off when your coin runs out and you will put another coin in. At intervals then if you take that money and pay it in, the bill is paid in advance." It was a simple system by which we felt we were helping the consumers. One of the things that has happened, of course, is that out of well over 2,000 consumers who took advantage of that system five years ago, this particular procedure has now been reduced to under 1,000 consumers. I think the best way to explain the answer that I have given, Your Excellency, is to show the disadvantages of prepayment meters, which are fairly obvious, but I should spell out some of the facts. Meter readers in a rural area can read between 80 to 100 meters per day. A meter reader/collector who collects, counts the cash and issues a receipt is working an average of 15 per day. So you can imagine the extra staff that we would have to employ in order to bring in a meter reader/collector system and — particularly, incidentally, in view of some of the productivity agreements which we have been forced into recently by action of members of this Court — and we are now in a situation where this particular system would probably cost us somewhere in the region of £5,000 a year just for that particular issue. On top of that the estimated staff cost of something like £17,000 would be increased further because one extra van would be required, fairly obviously, with the very large area of rural distribution that we have. One extra van would be required to transport and service the additional staff and this would bring us up to somewhere in the region of £22,000 to go back to meters, on a commercial Board. One of the other things which is very, very important, and I would like to call hon. members' attention to this point, is that due to the change in social patterns over the past few years it is becoming more difficult to gain access to domestic • premises, and I do not need to spell out the reasons. You all know too well that the modern day trend is that both mum and dad are out working to keep body and soul together. It does not present any problem with quarterly account meters because a card can be left for completion by the consumer, and obviously if you are out working all day and you pop the card in, your bill can be assessed on that line. If, however, and this is the important point, if, by the absence from the house during the normal visit of the collector, and the full coin box situation arises, which comes round very often these days because of how much you get for 10p, if it is a coin box situation your electricity is cut off and if this happens over the weekend, I have already spelt out to this hon. Court what it would cost you to bring out a service engineer to have your box emptied at awkward times. Now these are the important points, you see. Meter reading is a
Electricity Payments—Prepayment Meters—Question by Mr. J. N. Radcliffe. T42 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 simple, straightforward system which has saved a considerable amount of consumers' money. The consumer is the only person who pays it in a commercial Board. It has saved a considerable amount of consumers' money. Now over and above all I have said, what we are at present doing in order to alleviate the situation which is brought to our notice once again by the hon. member for Ayre, we are now reaching an agreement through the Board of Education's Children's Committee to go one stage further. We have said, yes, we realise that there are problem families who cannot look after their own accounts. If we bring in meter reader/collectors it is going to cost a lot of money, so what have we done? In consultation with the Board of Education's Children's Committee we are now reaching agreement where we have said in the case of these problem families, call them problem families for want of a more descriptive term, in the case of these families we will install a meter, we will lock the meter, and the Board of Education has said that the Child Care Officer who is visiting the house regularly will empty the meter and pay the money in on behalf of those families. These are the • sort of things that we try to do to help these particular consumers. But I can assure you, sir, and I can assure this hon. Court that the meter reader system is well in advance of anything we did on the meter reader/collector basis. For obvious reasons I stand by the fact that we will not be reconsidering.
Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, a supplementary, if I may? I am disappointed to hear the hon. member's answer because I would have thought that meter reader/ collectors would have been an obvious thing in any productivity deal where you get the two jobs done for one. I am very pleased to hear of an arrangement with the Board of Education regarding emptying certain meters, but could I ask the hon. member, would it interest him to hear and to know that during the course of an exercise which I am presently undertaking, which means that I am meeting very many people in their own homes, there is without doubt a considerable amount of concern and worry about what seems to be the uncontrolled escalation of prices of electric power, and a lot of worry and concern about the people's ability to be able to meet their commitments? And would it interest the hon. Chairman to know that there is, without doubt, a demand for the reinstatement of the prepaid meter system, because the hon. Chairman must agree that when the power goes off there is an immediate situation for this consumer and he can always find 50p to put into the meter and reinstate it, but he finds it very, very hard to find up to £200 which a quarterly bill can run up, and this in some very ordinary working-class homes. I wonder, sir, could the hon. Chairman confirm, as I have been told unofficially, that the Isle of Man Electricity Board had much less of a problem regarding outstanding accounts, or outstanding moneys, when prepayment meters were in use? In fact, they had no problems chasing and bothering dozens or almost hundreds of people for their money when, in fact, in the prepayment meter days they did have the money there, it was there ready for them.
Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, could I ask a supplementary? May I ask the hon. Chairman, has this decision which you have indicated already been communicated to the Board, because my understanding is that a meeting is to be held between myself and your Board and representatives of our Children Committee to go into this whole problem. I am not aware that a decision has been communicated by your Board regarding the slot meters. May I say that this is a matter of great concern to my Board. We have no
Electricity Payments--Prepayment Meters—Question by Mr. J. N. Radcliffe. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T43
problems with our parents in Douglas because there are meters in Douglas. The problem only arises in the country areas served by your Board.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the hon. Chairman has informed the Court of the arrangement between his Board and the Board of Education, and certainly the Board of Education Children's Committee are aware of that arrangement, but the trouble is that that arrangement comes into play when a problem arises and the problem is usually that somebody has not paid their electricity bill and arrears are piling up, so would not the Chairman agree with me that it would be much better to prevent a consumer getting into arrears by making prepayment meters available on demand and calibrate them in such a way that the extra cost of these meters is paid for by the persons who need them? Could I just say, Your Excellency, that the meeting to which the hon. Chairman of the Board of Education has referred is being arranged to try and make that possible.
Mrs. Christian: A supplementary, Your Excellency? Is it not a fact that in some parts there are meters which are not calibrated to cover the actual cost of the electricity used and this, in fact, creates as many problems as not having a meter at all? And would your Board give consideration to giving much greater publicity to price increases because there are many people who are anxious and willing to budget to meet their expenditure as far as electricity goes, but find that in spite of the fact that they are trying very hard to control their usage of this commodity they are not sufficiently aware of the frequent price increases which take place and they then find themselves in arrears?
Mr. Moore: One questioner is answering the other here, Your Excellency. One of the things that we take very great care of is the question of calibration of the meters but this, in itself, is such a tremendous problem. You will realise, I am sure I have told members of this hon. Court so many times, we have had nine increases within 18 months; nine increases in your tariff in 18 months. Now calibration of a meter means that every time that increase goes on the meters must be calibrated. We would need an army of engineers to go round every time any increase came on and all the meters would have to be altered. Can you imagine 1,600 meters getting this procedure? This is one of the problems we have got. The way to get round it, of course, is that when we do it the way we are doing it now with a simple reading of the meter the answer is automatic. You are charged for the units you use and it is a simple, straightforward accountancy job, not a matter for an army of engineers to go round and alter every meter. I can warn this hon. Court, as I have already said, that the question of putting meters back into a property brings about the very question that was raised by the hon. member for Ayre, Mrs. Christian — calibration of meters, nine in 12 months, 1,600 meters. How many engineers do we have to go round and do these adjustments? This is the sort of problem we have. The basic problem that we come back to is, what is the best system? Now we know what is the best system. I appreciate as much as anybody in this hon. Court the question of how the price of our electricity is going. I am the first to confess that we are probably the most expensive part of the United Kingdom with regard to the price of electricity.
The Speaker: We need a marine cable.
Electricity Payments—Prepayment Meters—Question by Mr. J. N. Radcliffe. T44 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Mr. Moore: Now at the present time with our distribution system, and 1 have spelt this out so many times that people must be fed up hearing it, with our distribution system it is perfectly obvious that we are more expensive than, for instance, the Douglas Corporation which has been quoted. We produce electricity, we generate electricity, at precisely the same cost as the Douglas Corporation, there is no argument about that. It is nothing to do with meters. (Interruptions.) The question has been answered by members. The question has been asked of me about why there is the difference between Douglas Corporation. All I am saying is that as far as I am concerned, the meter system is the only workable system without putting further cost on to the consumer. If you go back to any other system, I can only say £22,000 is a rough estimate of the actual cost of going back to meters and £7,000 is the cost of bringing in one more van to collect from the meters. Now this arrangement which was brought up about why do you not have meter reader/collectors, meter reader/collectors are, of course, on a different band scale. Here again, if a meter reader becomes a meter reader and collector he goes on to a different band of payment and, therefore, it is going to cost the consumer more. All these points have been raised under productivity and I think people who are doing the job now know what they have to do and are prepared to do it.
Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Just one point, Your Excellency. The hon. member has attempted to further his argument by stating that there would be 16,000 meters to attend to, to recalibrate. Surely to goodness he would not expect the Court to believe that every electricity consumer is going to use a prepayment meter? Mr. Moore: 1 will tell you one thing, Your Excellency. If we said again we will go back to prepayment meters, I can tell you that every area in the country would have some members who would want to go back to prepayment meters and, therefore, all of our collectors would have to be put into the next band scale of meter reader/collectors. They would all have to bring in the money from the different areas and the problem would remain in all areas. We are not talking about half a dozen people who possibly at one particular point in the Island would like to go on a meter. We are talking about the overall situation of the whole of the Isle of Man. I repeat the point that it is a very expensive programme and we are not prepared to go into it.
LINKSPAN, DOUGLAS HARBOUR — REASONS FOR FAILURE OF EQUIPMENT — QUESTION BY MR. CALLIN. The Governor: Hon. members, under Standing Order 31(4), if I might refresh your minds, as it is a new Standing Order: "Unless the Governor shall direct by notice set out on the Question Paper, no question shall be taken after one o'clock in the afternoon on the first day of the sitting of Tynwald, save that any question not so answered shall receive a written answer." Therefore, questions 21, 22 and 23 will be for written answer. Question:— The hon. member for Middle, Mr. Callin, to ask the Chairman of the Harbour Board:— At a sitting of this hon. Court on 12th December 1978 (Debates p.T310), you gave an assurance that members of Tynwald and the public would be informed of the reasons for the failure of certain equipment on the linkspan in Douglas
Linkspan, Douglas Harbour—Reasons for Failure of Equipment—Question by Mr. Callin. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T45
harbour. (1) Why has this information not been given to date? (2) What were the reasons for this failure? Answer:— The hon. member will recall that he asked a similar question at the sitting of Tynwald of 20th March 1979, and on 10th July 1979 the hon. member for Castletown, Mrs. Quayle, also asked for similar details. The undertaking given at 12th December 1978 still stands, and it is the intention of the Board to acquaint members of Tynwald Court and the public of the reasons for the failure of the previous owners' linkspan on 1st December 1978. It will be recalled that in answer to the questions in both March and July 1979, I advised that settlement of this matter may be achieved through litigation, and this is now a fact in that action has been commenced against the designers of the linkspan unit. In such circumstances it would be grossly improper to attempt to attribute any blame, as such liability may only be positively established through the court action which has already been commenced. Notwithstanding my inability to comment on the reasons for the failure, I would once again repeat that all damage to the harbour estate has long been completed, and no expense whatsoever of such repairs fell upon the tax- payer. Finally, I am informed that the latest position is that the insurers for MacGregor International have opened negotiations to settle the various claims of other parties, and my Board hope this matter will be settled by them all out of court and thus complete the saga.
KEWAIGUE SCHOOL — REDUCTION IN LORRY TRAFFIC — QUESTION BY MR. WATTERSON.
Question:— The hon. member for Middle, Mr. Watterson, to ask the Chairman of the Harbour Board: Would your Board please request French Kier Manx, the contractors for the extension of the Douglas Harbour breakwater extension, to re- schedule the lorries from the breakwater and the Foxdale Quarry in the mornings so that the excessive amount of traffic past Kewaigue School at arrival time is reduced?
Answer: The vehicles used on the breakwater project, in common with all other vehicles using the highways of the Island, are required by law to conform to certain standards, such as speed limits, and it has been ascertained through the constant observation of this traffic by the police that all legal speed limits are being adhered to. In addition, the contractors, French Kier, have imposed their own speed limits on haulage contractors, and observation confirms that these limits are being observed by the drivers engaged in the project. A speed limit imposed by French Kier of 20 m.p.h. past the Kewaigue School in both directions has been the subject of particular scrutiny by the Isle of Man Constabulary, and no cases have been observed where this speed limit has been exceeded. The Board and their contractors are well aware of difficulties which could arise at certain points of the haul route, particularly in the vicinity of Kewaigue School, and on 30th June last the Board wrote to the Chairman of the Board of Education setting out the measures which had been taken by the contractor in this particular area. The letter was copied to the headmaster of the school and embodied an invitation to him to contact the Board if difficulty should arise. As recently as 7th August a letter was received from the Director of Education reading "The Head Teacher of the school reported (to the Finance and Executive Committee) that he was satisfied
Kewaigue School—Reduction in Lorry Traffic—Question by Mr. Watterson. T46 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 with the arrangements made and with the operation of the project's traffic to date in so far as it affects his school." In addition, the Road Safety Officer has had a similar invitation and to date no adverse comment has been received. Since the haulage portion of the operation commenced the Board have been in regular contact with the insular police authorities whose reports indicate their complete satisfaction with the manner in which this operation is being conducted, and the degree of control over drivers involved, which is exercised by the contractor, is such that the entire haulage operation is subject to comprehensive observation at all times. Dealing with the specific question asked by the hon. member for Middle, the answer must be that the Board could request the contractor to suspend operations at certain times of the day, but members of the Court will be only too well aware of the consequences of interfering with the execution of a contract, and in conversation with the contractor on this general subject is abundantly clear that if he were requested to deviate from his present highly co-ordinated programme by the suspension of the continuous haulage necessary for the project, the additional costs falling on the Board and, in turn, the taxpayer, would run into many hundreds of thousands of pounds. Considering hon. members' interest in ensuring that as much haulage work as possible went to local contractors — and my Board had insisted on this in the contracting documents — who, in the main, had not a lot of experience in this high pressure haulage work (the notional delivery rate of one truck every five minutes has to be maintained) because of the restrictions in the operational times placed on the contractor by the planning authority and the very costly delay already imposed on the taxpayer by the long, drawn-out planning process, it would not be in the public interest to further restrict the operating times. Members will, I think, agree that with only three incidents since June along the entire haulage route, the drivers and the haulage contractors deserve congratulations. One of these incidents was due to a failure of a braking system on a sub-contractor's truck where the driver's outstanding ability certainly prevented a serious accident to him and his vehicle. One was near the Braaid when a sub-contractor's truck had cause, due to an oncoming vehicle, to put his wheels on to a verge which sank, and the remaining incident was a slight collision between two trucks which arose from general traffic congestion caused by a private vehicle being parked on double yellow lines on a bend in the road. I would finally like to say that we have not received, nor have the consulting engineers received, any signs of dissatis- faction on the part of the Highway Board, the Police or the Road Safety Officer to the operations being carried out by the hauliers who are very closely supervised and who themselves are fully aware of the importance of extreme care on both approaches to the school area. However, the contractors' management regularly get complaints from their drivers about the driving by members of the general public on the haulage route, which is very clearly marked and has speed limit signs clearly displayed. Only this morning, 13th October, an unannounced check was carried out by the Board's staff on the route passing the Kewaigue School between 0840 and 0905 hours (25 minutes). The number of vehicles recorded were:— (1) French Kier hauliers. Loaded vehicles en route to the breakwater, 5; unloaded vehicles en route to the quarry, 9. Total, 14. (2) Private cars/ vans. Both directions, 164. (3) Cars stopping to deliver children at school, 25 It was noted that the French Kier hauliers were all within their self-imposed 20 m.p.h. limit. However, almost 50 per cent. of the private vehicles were above the legal speed limit of 40 m.p.h., whilst three cars were being driven by maniacs. As this is the situation, my Board are to seek a meeting with the headmaster of Kewaigue School and
Kewaigue School—Reduction in Lorry Traffic —Question by Mr. Watterson. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T47
his staff, and with the Parent/Teacher Association at the school, and with the Island Constabulary and the Road Safety Officer.
FORESTRY INDUSTRY — QUESTION BY MR. QUIRK. Question:— The hon. member for Glenfaba to ask the Chairman of the Forestry, Mines and Lands Board: As your Board is now committed to running its forestry operation on a purely commercial basis, will you advise this hon. Court— (a) the acreage needed to maintain a viable industry; (b) the acreage planted during this current year; (c) the quantity and value of all plants, trees and shrubs imported by your Board during '/ft the past 12 months? Answer:— It is not strictly true to say that the Board "is now committed to running its forestry operation on a purely commercial basis," as stated in the question, as the Board's management objectives in relation to forestry are as follows: (1) to obtain the maximum sustained financial return by sound sylviculture practices. (2) To secure good land use by effective integration with agriculture. (3) To secure environmental benefits both to landscape and wildlife. (4) To provide opportunity for recreation. (5) To safe- guard items of archaeological interest. (6) To produce a regular yield of timber to support a local wood using industry. (7) To commit to broadleaf production approxi- mately 10 per cent. of the existing woodland area. The answers to the three questions are as follows:— (a) The optimum scale and management methods of an insular forestry operation are related to market requirements. Consideration is currently being given to the question of potential viability of different timber-based industries. (b) The planting season has not yet commenced for this financial year, but the projected programme covers 74 hectares (183 acres) consisting of restocking failed plantations and replanting felled areas. (c) Tree stocks to be imported during the current financial year are: Forest trees 230,000 valued at £13,526; shrubs and ornamental trees, estimated value, £5,000. The quantity of shrubs and ornamental stock to be imported this financial year is yet to be determined within the above-mentioned budget.
BILLS FOR SIGNATURE — REQUISITE SIGNATURES OBTAINED. The Governor: I have to announce that the Bills for signature have all been signed by a quorum of both Branches. We will adjourn for lunch until 2.30 p.m. The Court adjourned for lunch. UNEMPLOYMENT — STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN OF ISLE OF MAN BOARD OF SOCIAL SECURITY. The Governor: Hon. members, we now return to the main Agenda. We will hear the Petition at 4.30 p.m. I call upon the Chairman of the Board of Social Security to take item number 5 on the Agenda.
Forestry Industry—Question by Mr. Quirk. — Bills for Signature—Requisite Signatures Obtained. — Unemployment—Statement by Chairman of Isle of Man Board of Social Security. T48 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, as members will be aware, it is my duty on behalf of the Employment Committee of the Board of Social Security to report twice yearly to Tynwald on the employment position in the Island. Since I last reported in May 1981, the number of men registering as unemployed during the months of June, July, August and September has averaged about 335 more than for the corresponding period last year and 426 more than for the corresponding period of 1979. On 30th September 1981 — a date convenient to the preparation of this statement — the number of men registering was 901 compared with 414 for the corresponding week of 1980 and 286 for the corresponding week of 1979. The number of women registering as unemployed since May 1981 has averaged around 141 more than for the corresponding period of last year and 179 more than the corresponding period in 1979. On 30th September 1981 the number of women registering was 430 compared with 192 for the corresponding week of 1980 and 117 for the corresponding week of 1979 — a considerable increase in both. Regrettably, these figures do reveal a steady continual rise in the numbers of unem- ployed, a trend which has persisted over the past 18 months to two years. As I have said before, this trend, which closely follows the trend in the United Kingdom, confirms how closely the Island is influenced by events and circumstances in the United Kingdom. The problems of the United Kingdom and worldwide recession, resulting in a slowing down of the economy, has seen several firms on the Island forced into short-time working and redundancies. This was the situation when I last reported and continues to be the case. Without markets for their products, these firms cannot produce and, consequently, do not need to retain their workforce and the numbers of the unemployed rise as a consequence. The position of the Island relative to the United Kingdom is illustrated in a table which is set out below, giving the percentage unemployed rate as at 13th August 1981, being the last date for which United Kingdom figures are available. The table is set out and I do not propose to comment on every item or give every figure, but it is interesting to see that at a comparative date the Isle of Man figure of 3.8 per cent. is by far the lowest out of any area in the United Kingdom, so it must be noted that if you take the position in the Isle of Man on 30th September 1981, we have risen to 6.3 per cent. of the working population, a considerable increase in our terms which has yet risen further, but it is still below any other comparative area in the United Kingdom.
Numbers of Unemployed Expressed as a Percentage of the Numbers of Employees (Employed and Unemployed) Area Men Women Total Isle of Man 4.6 2'5 3'8 United Kingdom South East 10 .8 5'9 8'8 Greater London 10'5 5. 8 8'6 East Anglia 11'2 6.8 9.5 South West 12'2 7'5 10'3 West Midlands 17.4 10.8 14. 8 East Midlands ... 13.1 7'9 11 .0 Yorkshire and Humberside 15.5 9'6 13.1 North West 17.6 10.8 14.8 North ... 186 120 160
Unemployment -Statement by Chairman of Isle of Man Board of Social Security. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T49
Numbers of Unemployed Expressed as a Percentage of the Numbers of Employees (Employed and Unemployed) Wales ... 17.6 11.6 15 3 Scotland 16.7 11.2 14.4 Great Britain ... 14.3 8'7 12.0 Northern Ireland 23.1 13'3 18'9 United Kingdom as a whole ... 14.5 8.8 12.2 The position in the Isle of Man on 30th September 1981 was ... 7.0 5.2 6.3 The Committee, who monitor the fluctuating numbers of unemployed, are very anxious about the continuing increase in these numbers and are concerned about the immediate future, which in terms of a regeneration of industry is not at all certain, and which in terms of manpower requirements and manning levels generally is unpromising because the search for greater competitiveness in world markets is likely to result in the exploita- tion of advanced technology to increase efficiency, the quality of the sold product and the reduction of cost. The likely consequence will be very much lower manning levels in all forms of business than has been the case in the past. Given the depressed state of the economy in the United Kingdom, it will be very surprising if the 1981 summer tourist season in the Island was economically satisfactory. Informal feed-back from the industry suggests that it has not been good. Unfortunately, the prosperity of the tourist industry is important to the prosperity of an extensive infrastructure of services and supplies to this industry and problems in tourism will have reprecus- sions elsewhere in local commerce. Labour intensive work schemes have been authorised again for this winter, and, as has been commented on by the Chairman of Executive Council, have commenced. These schemes which are very expensive to operate and, in fact, absorb only relatively small numbers, are important as an expression of the real concern felt by Government for the plight of so many of our community. The schemes are no remedy for unemployment. This will only come from a significant and sustained regeneration in the national economy. At this point I think it is worth saying that all the appropriate branches of Government on the Island are constantly looking for overall improvement in our situation. It is equally important for every individual in our community to make his or her own effort and I must say that it angers me very much to hear of Isle of Man workers, in particular, who will neither help them- selves nor be helped by the Employment Exchange and Job Centre staff into available employment. In the prevailing climate of recession and high unemployment, such people demonstrate an irresponsible lack of awareness and, of course, a lack of real motivation. The services of the training officer continue to be widely used. His support and assistance to local business and industry must be of value. An extension of the training services available, in the form of a training centre for craft apprentices, is advancing and will reach fruition early next year. This again was commented on this morning and, in fact, the negotiations for the lease are about completed and the staffing matter is in the hands of the Civil Service Commission at this very moment. It is certainly hoped that by early next year it will be on stream and actually working. The level of work permit applications has gradually been falling and may well reflect the general level of activity. Very many employers show a very high degree of social conscience in trying to recruit local labour wherever possible and their co-operation is very much appreciated. These good intentions and the efforts of the control of employment administration have
Unemployment—Statement by Chairman of Isle of Man Board of Social Security. T50 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 to be matched by a much more motivated and determined attitude in Isle of Man workers needing employment; otherwise employers inevitably seek work permits and employment opportunities are lost to permit holders. The control of employment legislation has been under active discussion at committee and officer level and will be the subject of careful review after the forthcoming General Election to the House of Keys.
BOARDS' RESPONSIBILITIES — STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON BOARDS' RESPONSIBILITIES.
The Governor: Item number 6. I call on the Chairman of the Select Committee on Boards' responsibilities, the President of the Legislative Council.
The President of the Council: Your Excellency, hon. members will be aware that at the Tynwald sitting on 14th July last I did not seek the suspension of Standing Orders to permit me to move the reception of the Interim Report of the Select Committee on Boards' Responsibilities and the adoption of the recommendations it contains, which are intended to relieve the Local Government Board of some of its many functions. During the intervening period, my Committee has met the Local Government Board and its senior officials and representatives of each town and village and parish authority throughout the Island and has listened with great interest to their comments and observations on the report. We have had their general agreement to all the proposals contained in the report except those on town and country planning and housing. It was clear to us, however, that a number of misconceptions had arisen. My Committee wishes to stress, therefore, that whilst it intends to reaffirm all its decisions in principle, its object in doing so is to bring about devolution from the Local Government Board to local and other authorities and thus strengthen local government and lessen the central control on planning and housing. We consider that the Local Government Board must be relieved of its present duties in respect of local, as opposed to national, planning. We emphasise, therefore, that we do not intend to do away with the reference of planning applications to local authorities. In this regard I may add that we intend to look again at the question of the review stage in the light of the very forceful representations that were made to us, that it was a most useful stage in the procedures and that its loss could lead to inconveniences. In the light of the apprehension voiced by local communities' representa- tives, further consideration will be given to the limiting of the operation of the call-in procedure. The Committee also considers that the provision and allocation of publicly- owned housing, at present generally administered by the Local Government Board and known as Local Government Board houses, should be transferred to local authorities. We are well aware, however, that a number of our smaller authorities would be unable to carry out these functions effectively without support and for this reason we have suggested that they be grouped together on a geographical basis. That basis will be subsequently reported to Tynwald. A notice of motion in respect of the Interim Report will be placed on the Agenda for debate in Tynwald at a very early sitting.
Boards' Responsibilities—Statement by Chairman of Select Committee on Boards' Responsibilities. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T51
CUSTOMS AND EXCISE ACTS (APPLICATION) (AMENDMENT) (No. 5) ORDER 1981; CONTROL OF MOVEMENT OF GOODS REGULATIONS 1981 (APPLICA- TION) ORDER 1981; AIRCRAFT AND SHIP REGULATIONS (APPLICATION) ORDER 1981; EXPORT OF GOODS (CONTROL) (AMENDMENT No. 2) ORDER 1981; EXPORT OF GOODS (CONTROL) (AMENDMENT No. 3) ORDER 1981 - APPROVED.
The Governor: Item number 7. I call on the Vice-Chairman of the Finance Board, the hon. member for West Douglas, Mr. Kermeen.
Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, I beg to move: - That— (a) the Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 5) Order 1981; (b) The Control of Movement of Goods Regulations 1981 (Application) Order 1981; (c) the Aircraft and Ship Regulations (Application) Order 1981; (d) the Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment) No. 2) Order 1981; and (e) the Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment) (No. 3) Order 1981, made by the Finance Board on the 16th and 23rd September, 1981, be and the same are hereby approved. The Finance Act 1981 of Parliament made certain changes in United Kingdom law necessary to implement two European Economic Community directives on harmonisation of Customs procedures, procedural changes relating to control at distillery and wine and spirit warehouses, and amendments to the provisions prescribing minimum claim levels for repayment of Excise duty on hydrocarbon oil. The Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 5) Order 1981, which is the first and major order listed in the resolution before this hon. Court for approval, introduces similar changes in Manx Customs and Excise legislation which, as you are all aware, the Isle of Man Government is obliged to do in order to fulfil its obligations under the European Economic Com- munity Treaty and the 1979 Customs and Excise Agreement. The main changes relate to import and export procedures and, as far as importation is concerned, deal with the time at which a Customs entry may be accepted and the time at which rates of duty are determined. Other changes of a more detailed nature are also involved. Perhaps it is sufficient to say that the amendments implement what is known as the "Free Circulation Directive", which is designed to remove the differences that exist within the Community in the rules of procedure applied by Member States, which concern not only the form and manner of entering imported goods for Customs purposes, but also the operative date for determining the rate of duty and rules concerning the examination of goods. The changes in export provisions rectify deficiencies in existing arrangements for collection of trading statistics, bring procedures into conformity with the European Economic Community Directive on the Harmonisation of Export Procedures, provide
Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 5) Order 1981; Control of Movement of Goods Regulations 1981 (Application) Order 1981; Aircraft and Ship Regulations (Application) Order 1981; Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment No. 2) Order 1981; Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment No. 3) Order 1981—Approved. T52 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
new facilitation procedures for exporters and enhance tariff protection by the improved application of Community transit procedures to eliminate deficiencies in Customs controls now in force. The amendments to the Alcoholic Liquor Duties Act 1979 follow the recommendations of the Rayner Review of Distilleries and Associated Warehouses and proposals made by the Commissioners of Customs and Excise. The aim of both sets of proposals is to make revenue control more reliant on records and procedures established by traders and to monitor and check these. The precise requirements will be established according to the circumstances at individual premises. Finally, the amend- ments to the Hydrocarbon Oil Duties Act 1979 remove from the enactment the minimum claim levels for repayment of Excise duty on heavy oil used by horticultural producers, fuel used for ships in home waters and fuel used in fishing boats. Minimum claim levels will, in future, be prescribed in regulations. The next two orders listed in the resolution, the Control of Movement of Goods Regulations 1981 (Application) Order 1981, and the Aircraft and Ship Regulations (Application) Order 1981, re-introduce existing regula- tions, modified where necessary to take account of the revised procedures introduced by the Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 5) Order 1981, on which I have just spoken. The remaining two orders amend the Export of Goods (Control) Order 1981, as applied to the Island. The effect of the Amendment No. 2 Order is to extend the control of certain goods mentioned in the applied order to all destinations, whilst the Amendment No. 3 Order removes the requirement to obtain a licence to export animals from the scope of Customs and Excise legislation, as this requirement is now governed by animal health legislation. All of these orders are necessary by virtue of the Island's obligations under the European Economic Community Treaty. I beg to move.
Mr. Crellin: I beg to second, Your Excellency, and in doing so 1 would like to say that I cannot reserve my remarks because the brief which the hon. member, the Vice- Chairman of the Board, has read, is exactly all that we know. We have studied this thing, we have accepted this brief, and we believe that this is all there is to be said about it and, therefore, I have pleasure in seconding.
Mr. Watterson: Your Excellency, I am aware of the obligations of the Island under the Customs and Excise Agreement of 1979 and, in fact, have mentioned it many times, especially the section that obliges us to keep our import and export prohibitions in line with the United Kingdom. However, in this last session of this House I cannot leave the opportunity to say again that I do believe that orders like this are now going beyond the wildest expectations and dreams of this House when we actually went into the Customs and Excise arrangement, and it is bringing in restrictive legislation, which although quite proper for officials in other countries, whether it is the United Kingdom and the European Economic Community, to protect the interests of those countries, we are now, by sheer nature that we are enforced to keep in line with whatever is done there, we are forced to bring the same regulations and legislation in here, and I do believe the time is coming now where those restrictions, whilst they may be to the advantage of other countries, may not be necessarily to the advantage of our trade, our business and our community. By reason of the Agreement we are obliged to do likewise
Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 5) Order 1981; Control of Movement of Goods Regulations 1981 (Application) Order 1981; Aircraft and Ship Regulations (Application) Order 1981; Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment No. 2) Order 1981; Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment No. 3) Order 1981—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T53
and, as I say, the same measures may not be in our interests. I do believe, Your Excel- lency that orders like this are setting a very dangerous precedent, whilst accepting the obligation that we are under, we are accepting a very dangerous precedent in allowing the administration and, if necessary, high civil servants of the United Kingdom, for instance, such as the Commissioners of Customs and Excise, to do something which is perfectly proper and perfectly correct for them in their territory but which could have a detrimental effect on our territory due to our obligation to keep in line. This is a dangerous precedent, Your Excellency. Transport by sea and air is of additional importance to an Island community such as ours and by these orders, whilst accepting the hon. mover's assurances that the Finance Board have undoubtedly looked into them in the best ways that they can, I do believe that we are setting a dangerous precedent because for the first time we are now accepting the principle that movements of goods necessary to our economy in and out of this Island can be regulated by orders elsewhere, on which we are automatically required to step in line. Whilst I am prepared to accept that these particular orders may not be in accurate detail as dangerous as that, I do feel that we are now treading on very dangerous ground for the future if this process continues.
Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, I know that Customs and Excise is a very complicated matter, it is to me anyway, but I would like some information because I understand that on imports from outside the European Economic Community, say, from Japan, a tax has to be paid by the importer when goods are imported into the United Kingdom and this tax goes into a central fund belonging to the European Economic Community. Now the Isle of Man traders import into the Island cars, household appliances, toys, televisions, all made in Japan. The tax that is paid by the importer in the United Kingdom is reflected in the price that we have to pay for those commodities in the Isle of Man, and what I want to know is, does the Isle of Man Government get any return from the central fund of the European Economic Community to reflect the extra cost to pay for our commodities coming in here? Perhaps he could explain that to me.
Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, in reply first of all to the hon. member for Middle, I take his point of view, and he has voiced it before, but I would mention that these are orders which follow the obligations of the Customs Union. I would suggest to him that if he seeks variations in the Agreement, that alone would satisfy his wish regarding the order. Now my hon. colleague from West Douglas, on the question of tax. To use her expression this morning, I would like due notice of that question because the complica- tions of import tax is a matter which is concerning Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom at the moment, the question of the imposition of import controls on Japanese products. I think this matter can be resolved if it requires to be resolved by further negotiations with Her Majesty's Government but I, personally, think that we are not in a position to deal with this at the moment. The tariff is something which we have to impose by virtue of our obligations under the Customs Agreement.
The Governor: Hon. members, I will put the motion. Those in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it.
Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 5) Order 1981; Control of Movement of Goods Regulations 1981 (Application) Order 1981; Aircraft and Ship Regulations (Application) Order 1981; Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment No. 2) Order 1981; Export of Goods (Control) (Amendment No. 3) Order 1981—Approved. T54 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
VALUE ADDED TAX AND CAR TAX (No. 2) ORDER 1981 — APPROVED. The Governor: Item number 8. I call on the Vice-Chairman of the Finance Board. Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— That the Value Added Tax and Car Tax (No. 2) Order 1981 made by the Finance Board on 16th September 1981 be and the same is hereby approved. A Member: I beg to second. The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed.
JOB CREATION PROGRAMME — SUPPLEMENTARY VOTE OF £150,000 — APPROVED.
The Governor: Item number 9. 1 call on the Chairman of Executive Council. Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— That Tynwald authorises the Treasurer of the Isle of Man to apply from the General Revenue during the year ending 31st March 1982 a sum not exceeding' £150,000 for the purposes of the Job Creation Programme. (This sum to be in addition to the sum of £150,000 approved by Tynwald in the Budget on 19th May 1981.) Your Excellency, Executive Council has discussed plans for the alleviation of unemploy- ment during the coming winter and has given consideration to the most effective use of the amount of £150,000 for this purpose which was provided by Tynwald in this year's Budget. Whilst continuing to encourage measures to improve the economy and create greater opportunities for permanent employment, Council is nevertheless aware of the need for Government to assist in the provision of productive employment in the winter months, bearing in mind not only those who are seasonally employed but also those whose employment has been affected by the present recession, and I would stress in particular young persons with no immediate prospects. In this latter connection arrangements for the establishment of a Government training centre are now well advanced and it should be open very soon now and a further announcement in con- nection with this training centre will be made in the very near future. It is anticipated that the centre will give an opportunity for training or retraining in the basic skills of engineering to both unskilled youths and, in the main, young people. I am sure it has been decided that in the main persons attending this training centre will be young people up to the age of 20 and also, of course, to a certain extent, those workers who have lost jobs in the declining sectors of the economy. In addition, the Board of Social Security, in association with the Industrial Advisory Council, recognise the importance of industrial training and the services of the training officer at the Job Centre in Well Road Hill are available to provide information on training assistance for unemployed persons, apprentices, and the further training of craftsmen and apprentices. I think it is most important that we ought to take the opportunity now of carrying out extensive training, particularly for young people in the Island, that they may be able to get skilled jobs
Value Added Tax and Car Tax (No. 2) Order 1981—Approved. — Job Creation Programme— Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T55
and, of course, perhaps enjoy a higher standard of living than they would if they were unskilled. At the instigation of the Chairman of the Board of Education, the Board of Education has also arranged an additional pre-apprenticeship engineering course, as I mentioned this morning, and a further number of young people are able to take part in that. Executive Council has recommended that a number of employment schemes on the lists submitted by Government Boards should be authorised to commence on 1st October or as soon as possible thereafter. As I have said, these schemes are being introduced this year, certainly three months earlier than has been the practice in the past, and we have taken the view in Executive Council that if we spend the £150,000 we were given for this in the three months then we will have to get more money for the following three months. But we have, I believe, gone even further than that now and realised that this £150,000 to begin with and perhaps another £150,000 for the beginning of next year is not enough, and if approval is given today for a further £150,000 I am IS certainly not giving any guarantee that it will not be spent until 1st January next year. These schemes, the ones that have been approved, should normally be completed during the three months period up to 31st December. (Interruption.) I can assure hon. members that Executive Council will be monitoring the situation in the meantime and will take appropriate action with regard to employment after 31st December. The approved schemes in the first £150,000 relate to work to be undertaken by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, the Board of Education, the Government Property Trustees, the Highway and Transport Board, the Local Government Board and the Railways Board, and they will provide in total approximately 1,000 man weeks of employment. My hon. colleague said that certain schemes were turned down. Some obviously have been. I believe my hon. colleague is referring particularly to the Tourist Board. Executive Council have not considered any schemes from the Tourist Board — I do not know what has happened in between — save one, and that was for the employment of a small number of young ladies to deal with guide applications, which I must be honest and say is done every year and should not be regarded as an abnormal job creation programme. But the hon. member is quite right, that many schemes ... Mr. Delaney: On a point of clarification, Your Excellency, the hon. member does not mean it, I am sure, but it was not my suggestion for the putting in of guides. I put constructive suggestions to the Board which were not implemented. Mr. Irving: I am not suggesting for one moment that my hon colleague put this scheme forward, but somebody did. S Mr. Delaney: Rephrase it then.
Mr. Irving: I will not rephrase it. I am saying that I never intended to suggest that you, personally, put that scheme forward and, of course, it is not of great significance. I notice that we have had complaints, say, from the Harbour Board that their scheme has not been taken up. The information we got from the Harbour Board was not very full. It did say that 40 unskilled workers could be used at some time during the winter on ducting and various other jobs, 10 of them could be young people, but as yet they were unable to give us any details of the cost of labour or the cost of materials and, indeed, the overall cost, so we now have asked the Harbour Board for further details so that we can consider it in relation to the £150,000 which I hope we are going to get today. Now if that is allocated, further consideration will be given, as I have said, to
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. T56 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
various schemes submitted by local authorities. We have also had schemes put forward by local authorities for which Government financial assistance is being requested, and also the suitability, and we are giving it consideration, the suitability of implementing in the Isle of Man certain aspects of schemes for the alleviation of unemployment recently announced in the United Kingdom. In this connection, to assist the private sector, consideration is being given to the introduction of a job study scheme which has been tried before, as hon. members will know, a scheme which would mean a percentage sharing of wage costs between the private employer and the Government. I believe it is important, as I have said earlier, that particular attention should be paid to young people who are unemployed, and this attention should be given to providing work for them and to train them, and I hope that a certain substantial amount of the £150,000 will be used for this purpose. But Executive Council would appreciate any suggestions that hon. members may offer as to the order of priority, and the type of schemes that should be put in hand to assist in relieving unemployment. It is difficult to find schemes which have a high labour content and a small material content which are really pro- ductive. We have had many schemes put forward which were almost digging holes in the roads and filling them in again. We would like, if possible, to avoid that, but I would appreciate any support hon. members can give to this application for £150,000. and if any hon. members say it is not enough I certainly would not quarrel with them. but would appreciate support of that nature.
Mr. Crellin: All you can get at the moment and you will come back.
Mr. Irving: We certainly will come back. I know it is all we can get at the moment, but it is not all that we necessarily want at the moment. I know it is not a bottomless purse, sir, but I do hope that hon. members will support proposals to spend a substantial sum of money in providing jobs for this winter. Your Excellency, I beg to move.
Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, I beg to second, and would underline what the hon. Chairman of Executive Council has said in relation to the manner in which the schemes were chosen. It was important to get as many jobs as it was possible with the £150,000 allocated. Therefore, those jobs with a very high cost of materials were ruled out at this stage, and that must be emphasised because in so doing we were able to give more job opportunities in that way. Now, again it is important that we use the moneys that are available and the resources that are available to reap something at the end of the day, and this is one of the reasons why we are phasing the requests to Finance Board. We are asking for another £150,000 now, we are using up probably prior to Christmas the £150,000 already voted and, hopefully, I would venture to say that we will have a project in the Santon area somewhere early in January, a project which I hope will be of long-lasting benefit to the Isle of Man; a project where, again, like other projects which are supported by Government, we are laying down that those people who are involved have to look at and give opportunity to tradesmen in the Island and business people in the Island that they can compete for all the jobs and all the materials supplied. So I am hopeful that in that area we will have something worthwhile in the job oppor- tunities. Hon. members are shaking their heads, but I am in a position to know that this is probably going to materialise. I appreciate that it is in the early stages, there will be a lot of machinery, a lot of clearing of the site, but there will be, hopefully, 18 months of job opportunities in that region which will help us through this difficulty
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T57 in which we find ourselves today. I share the views of the hon. members who are concerned for the people who want to work because, to me, there is no more demoralising situation for somebody who by nature is a worker, who gets up prepared to go to do a job and finds there is no job to go to. I know it is easy to read off statistics and say, well, percentage-wise we are the best in the British Isles, but if you happen to be the person unemployed that does not help that matter. And t share that view with anybody in this hon. Court who holds that point of view. I believe we should, as far as humanly possible, make as many job opportunities available in the near future. But we must not squander this money, we must look at ways in which it is done purposefully and to the benefit of the Island and the benefit of the locality in which it is done. I believe this is a step in the right direction. It is only one step. Hopefully before the end of the year somebody will be coming forward with another proposal for further moneys. I believe it was important to use up the moneys in the way in which we have done, giving the most job opportunities possible. It may be that some of the other jobs which have been suggested which will have a bigger material content can be dealt with at a later date. I beg to second. Mr. Swales: Your Excellency, I am supporting the resolution. It will set to work, perhaps, 80 or 90 men at a cost of £11 million for the period October to March. But if I may quote, perhaps, one or two points from the statement that has been made by the Chairman of the Board of Social Security, I think we all agree that the Island's unemployment figures are continuing to rise. They have been doing this for two years and, as this report says, our situation is closely related to that in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom has a high level of unemployment, three million and still rising, and I fear that we, here in the Isle of Man, must begin to plan in the next five years on the understanding that there will be no fall away in unemployment to any great extent in the United Kingdom. And by that I must come back now to the report of the Select Committee on Unemployment which we accepted in the spring of this year, and I would presume that in the new Tynwald, when Boards submit their revenue and capital estimates next year, they will take cognizance of the fact that we are going to move ahead on capital schemes, on housing or schools or roads and sewer works which will take labour, if you like, from the slack in the private sector into the public sector. I realise that this is going to cost money, but we may well have to set aside £1+ million or some other such figure to grapple with a figure like 1,000 people out of work. I would just like to say this. Again, and I think we are all in the same cart here, I think that we tend as departments too readily to overspend in the year. Once we have received our allocation of funds in the Budget we should more or less stick by these because the Finance Board then would have a reserve of money to utilise on occasions such as these. If I may just quote the next resolution. I am supporting item number 10, the Agricultural Holdings (Loans) Scheme, seeking a sum of £250,000, but the Board of Agriculture indented for £600,000 in the Green Book of Estimates, and when they go to the Finance Board there is an agreement to reduce that to £400,000, and it is £400,000 that appears in the budget figures, and within three months they have a case to come forward and ask for, really, what they wanted in March, anyway. The Board of Agricul- • ture are not different from other Boards. I would hope, if this is possible, that we would keep within our budget figures. I know there are occasions when we cannot do this - there may be a national emergency or some kind of an emergency — but unless we do this and tighten our belts we are not going to provide the funds that we do need
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. T58 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
for unemployment, and it is not going to be £1 million, unfortunately, it is going to be something far in excess of this on, as I say, public work schemes. We will have to make the loan charges and pay the loan charges, but the wages and salaries, as I have said before, and the profits that will be taxed will add to the income of the Isle of Man's Treasury anyway to help pay for these. Whilst I am supporting this resolution, I do believe that we must, in the New Year, follow — and I am certain we will do - the advice of the Select Committee of Tynwald on Unemployment, which has a long- term application as distinct from a short term. 1 am sure that the Boards will do this. I would like to think that when the Boards prepare their Green Book of Estimates in March next year they will be taking cognizance of this and putting forward schemes of a labour content, and these will be the ones that, hopefully, the Finance Board will agree to and, possibly, turn out other schemes of less importance. Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, this is probably the most important item on the Agenda because this is going to be the picture for the next three or four years. This is going to be the subject that Tynwald is going to have to discuss for the next four or five years. I want to make one point immediately, sir. My Chairman, and I refer to the Chairman of the Tourist Board, a Board of which I am a member, has pointed out to me that it was put to certain Government departments that the suggestion from the Tourist Board was that they employ eight to 10 typist/packers for 10 or 12 weeks in January. As a member of that Board I would inform my Chairman that somebody is running the Board and we are not, because I have looked at the minutes and I cannot find any reference made that that has been a constructive suggestion from the Tourist Board. So somebody is either feeding information to other Government departments that we are not dealing with, or the wool is being pulled over our eyes, and I think the latter might be the case. The suggestions that we put forward, as the Tourist Board, were constructive and they actually fall into line with the statement made by the Chairman of the Committee responsible for employment in the Isle of Man. If members will turn to the page dealing with employment, in the second paragraph, even the message has got through to that particular Board. "Given the distressed state of the economy in the United Kingdom, it will be very surprising if the 1981 summer tourist season in the Island was economically satisfactory." What a late stage for someone in such a high office to realise that! And he goes on to say — and this is what amazes me and it must amaze the public — "informal feedback". Is he living in a different place from us? They are 300 yards away from the Tourist Board. Is it not possible for the Administrator to get his head together with the Director of Tourism and find out the exact figures for the tourist season? "Informal feedback" from a Government depart- ment? Are they not capable of picking up the telephone and getting the intial, true figures? He is not going to tell anybody who does not want to hear. "Informal feedback" in a subject as important as unemployment in the tourist industry. They could not even get down and find out what the true state of affairs was. It shows, sir, that there is too big a gap between the departments of this Government, and it is time they stopped running these Governments as little dynasties and started running them as a Govern- ment. If we are talking about constructive employment for the people of the Isle of Man, and with what has been said even by the Board of Social Security, the importance has obviously got to be stressed and stressed again. The tourist industry and the engi- neering, the light industry of the Isle of Man, are the two things that will hold us together. Take any one of those two away and we have got problems. And I can assure
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T59 the hon. members here who think this problem is going to go away at the end of the winter that it is not, because the next summer season is going to be a really difficult one for us, and whereas you might have a large proportional drop in the number of visitors this year, which results in an increase on the unemployment figures quicker than normally because people will get rid of their staff quicker, people will be holding on to the pennies they have got for next season and next year we might be looking at a worse season.
Mr. Anderson: Oh no, do not say that.
Mr. Delaney: I am sorry, it is about time somebody said it because we seem to be thinking that it is all going to go away. It will be looked at by the next House of Keys but they will not be in office until January. It is too late to plan the tourist season next January. People have made up their minds where they are going for their holidays. And as far as employment is concerned, what we are saying to them in this statement is, and in two references made, those partly responsible are the unemployed. It is there in black and white. "It angers me very much" — and I am quoting the Chairman —"to hear of Isle of Man workers, in particular, who will neither help themselves nor be helped by the Employment Exchange." How many is he talking about? A handful out of 1,400? Are we blaming the 1,400 for the 1,400 unemployed? What a negative attitude. Of course there are people who will not work — the sick, the lame and the lazy — but do not blame it on them. It is our job to create employment in the Isle of Man and to bring industry to the Isle of Man. We cannot turn round and blame the unemployed for being unemployed. And this statement of two pages on a subject which is so important. We would do better if we were to cancel the rest of this Agenda and spend the rest of the day talking and getting groups of these Boards of Government together in different departments of this building, and getting their heads together and start working on it. I think it has gone past the Employment Committee of the Board of Social Security, the unemployment of the Isle of Man. I am sure that by January — and Mr. Anderson looks across and says, "Tell them the good news" — there is no good news. Let us be honest about it, we are talking about 1,700 unemployed by January.
Mr. Anderson: Do not talk like that, talk it down.
Mr. Delaney: We cannot talk it down. Either we have got the jobs or we have not. If you look at the rest of the Agenda you will see we are pouring out all sorts of money. I asked a question three months ago — how many people were employed in agriculture in the Isle of Man? The answer came back from the Chairman, probably a conservative answer, 500 directly and indirectly in agriculture. We are doing something about that, we are putting £250,00 on one scheme, another £150,000 on another, and it goes on. Yet we consider we are doing well, we are putting £150,000 plus £150,000 to helping 1,300 people — over twice the number of people employed in agriculture. That is not the answer and cannot be. I am all for the agricultural sector, good luck to them, but let us also make sure that we do not pretend that there is not money there to help the 1,300 people with families. Let us not pretend that we are doing them a favour with £150,000. It will not do us any good at all at the end of the day to pretend that we have done a good job with £150,000. But it does not matter, 90 people, it will still leave nearly 1,300 unemployed, and by the end of the year, 1,700. We should be talking in schemes that are constructive, and the ones that we have put forward from
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. T60 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 the Tourist Board are constructive. One, to do something immediately to boost next season and the seasons that follow it. How, you say. The young people — the thing that people need when they are on holiday with their families. Just a small idea, but it would do something to boost the morale of the young people. Let them build adven- ture playgrounds, two sites, one at the far end of Villa Marina which lies dormant at the moment. Give the visitors when they come here something for nothing, and some- think they would look forward to when they get their own places. That would keep people employed immediately, young people, and something constructive because they are using their hands and will see something for their work. The Sulby reservoir —1 was never so disappointed, ever, to hear that we have no plans to do anything with the rest of the reservoir, and we are spending how many millions? We are talking about £150,000 but nobody can tell us how many millions we are spending on Sulby reservoir. A large expanse of water with Forestry Board land round it. The Forestry Board have been prepared to give the Tourist Board land to use for tourist amenities. So let us do something with it now, not wait until next year or the year after. Let us put the effort in now while we have the unemployed and do something for the future in the same way as our great-grandparents did. But no, we will sit here, fiddling. about with a hundred men when there are 1,300 still unemployed. I say, go back to the Finance Board and tell them we want more than £150,000. This Court is not prepared to sit back and see 1,500 or 1,600 people with families unemployed. Let us go back and do something constructive for a change.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, I was delighted to hear the comments of the last speaker because, really, I think they reflect the common sense thinking that this Court hopes will dominate the situation that is, in fact, facing us in respect of unemployment. The one thing about today's discussions on unemployment that I have found dis- heartening has been the fact that although Tynwald, after three resolutions, has made clear its stance, when it comes to implementing the proposals that Tynwald wish to see implemented, we find there has been a battle going on between Executive Council and the Finance Board. Our wishes do not matter. We are told that financial control must exert itself to a level where £150,000 is available at this moment, and perhaps some more, if we dictate in that direction, will be made available. Now, to me, this is very half- hearted stuff indeed, and this particular resolution does not go nearly as far as I would have hoped it would have gone after our earlier debates, and for the same reason, perhaps, that the hon. member, Mr. Delaney, has put forward. I had hoped that when notice had been given to Executive Council in this direction there would have been constructive proposals at the end of the day to take up men into employment, and at the same time improve the Island's setting in the many ways it can be improved. We have here, I think, another instance of what can happen to money which I believe the Court has voted believing it is going to get maximum benefit from it, and not getting the results that it really should get. I am referring to another recommendation now which we made in the Unemployment Committee, endorsed by this Court, and that was to provide £400,000 for tourism. We provided that money for tourism for boosting last season, and at the end of the day 1, for one, cannot find any evidence in the tourist setting of any special effort that was made with £400,000 to get results. In other words, our agency, in my opinion, squandered it ineffectively, and that is just what we are doing here now. We are saying to Boards, will you take 10 men, will you take five men? And the Boards say, of course we will oblige, we will take these men and they will
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000--Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T61
be helpful to us. But, hon. members, I want to see constructive proposals. I had hoped to see the reopening of the Marine Drive — that is one thing on my particular list. I had hoped to see the preparation of infill areas in the Isle of Man take us away from the expenditure of some £5 million on an incineration plant that is already condemned in every part of Britain. I want to see that sort of thinking, the thinking that would have led to the consolidation of forest roads and made them suitable roads for transport to meet the need of an ever-increasing number of visiting motorists. I believe this can be done and meet both requirements. I believe, like the hon. member, that there is a great potential in the reservoir area at the top of Sulby valley. These are all practical things we could be getting on with. We are not indulging in the sort of thinking that our forebears here, faced with the same problem, indulged in so many years ago when they extended water supplies, extended electricity supplies, and got on with the needs of the future. We have not been thinking in that way and it is time we did. I feel that while we have to spend more money to meet the present demand, we must also spend it constructively, and I think this is extremely important. I will support the resolution today, it is the best we have, but it is not good enough yet.
Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I am not going to carry on too much about this one. Naturally I support the resolution, but being the time of the year it is when it is the harvest season, I am going to try, as they say in some of the sermons, to sow some seed in the hope that it will not fall on stony ground! Following on my remarks this morning regarding young people, young school leavers and their problems in obtaining a job of any sort, I agree and feel for these people that it must be a terrible thing just to be a statistic and nothing else. I expressed my fears this morning regarding what may happen with these young people in a few years' time. They do not qualify, some of them, for dole because they have not any contributions to their credit, they may receive a bit of assistance either from their parents or from the Board of Social Security, but I say again that in a situation such as that one can only see trouble in the future. The hon. mover of the resolution made mention that young persons would be pointed towards the Government training centre, and he mentioned specifically the basic skills of engineering, and I wonder why not think much further than that? Why not skills in metal work, in woodwork, in leather work, in all kinds of work? There is, I feel quite sure, some scope for hand-made, souvenir-type articles for sale in the tourist season, although one member has said there will be no tourist season. I feel there will be some tourist season.
Mr. Delaney: I did not say there will not be a tourist season, I said it will be a hard one!
Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: It will be a hard one, fair enough. There will be some tourists here, and these days one of the things which tourists do go for is the hand-made article, and it is a fact that under training and supervision young people can turn out good quality articles. We see them coming from school even at the moment, stools, trays, tables of all sorts, all that type of work, and metal work as well. And even if Govern- ment has to underwrite the exercise initially, and perhaps even assist in the marketing of the articles, I feel sure that this could be a worthwhile project. I could see, as I said, quality articles being introduced, and more important still, and again as I said this morning, it would get young people into what is the habit of work, and that is one of
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. T62 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 the main things in life. And in the making of these articles there would be a job satisfaction, or certainly a satisfaction of some sort. I feel that if Government were to tackle this problem properly and give these young people confidence in their own abilities — and the ability is there and the energy and drive are there — given the con- fidence, it could lead, I think, in quite a few cases to the establishment of home industries, cottage industries or whatever, aimed at the souvenir-type market, and I think that in all if the problem was tackled it would be good for the Island in general because there is a tremendous amount of money going out of this Island on what are purely souvenir-type articles, and I am quite sure they could be made here on the Island, with encouragement.
Mr. Quirk: Your Excellency, 1, too, want to follow on the lines of the last three speakers. A lot of words have been passed over here today; there will be a lot again tomorrow. But the time for words has gone past, the time is now for action.
Members: Hear, hear.
Mr. Quirk: I think the constructive ideas that we have heard from the last three speakers are the ones that we want to pursue in the future. 1 take the line, too, of education where I, myself, and probably some of you too have attended careers exhibitions. Now this is one way in which I believe our young people can be guided into the right sort of area to find employment. And I am sorry to say that on the last occasion I attended a careers exhibition there were so few people there that it really was spoilt on that occasion. But there were some there, and the jobs that were offered on that particular occasion, I am sure there were not enough people there to fill them. We, at Ballamona, had representation there, and we, even at this present time, need 11 nurses. There were other areas too, particularly in that careers exhibition, and even the B.B.C. were looking for young people of character and intelligence to do jobs for them, and they were willing to take them on. I hope and trust that this is the sort of pattern that the Board of Education will proceed with more and more in the coming times. I, too, would like to put an idea forward for the Board of Education. We do have coming into the Isle of Man a lot of correspondence courses where persons can take degrees in certain subjects, and 1 think this should be pursued at further education level where people can be trained and educated in the Isle of Man, and possibly take their degree across the water. Because it is that type of person who is going to get the job in the future. I did ask a question this morning, and we are talking about the practical application of this unemployment situation, and I got an answer from the hon. Chairman of the Forestry Board, and for once it is not marked "Confidential". (Interruption and laughter.) One of the questions which I did ask — and I do not suppose any of you have even bothered to look at it — when those five people were fighting for their jobs some six months ago, only two or three of the Court rose to say, no, this must not be done. Was anybody interested? And, consequently, five people were thrown out of their jobs just like that, and some of these people were not what you would call 100 per cent. either. So the answer I have got here which is applicable to this situation is that the number of forest trees imported into the Island last year was 230,000, valued at £14,526. There were also imported into the Island £5,000 worth in value of shrubs, trees, et cetera. And that is only the Forestry Board. There are other industries, garden centres, who import also, and I think it was tragic to read in the
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T63
paper not so long ago that visitors come over here and buy our beautiful shrubs. "Ha, ha! They were imported from England." This is the sort of comment you get and, to me, this is totally wrong. There is an opportunity here for industries to practice and forward this sort of idea. In conclusion, I have just been reminded by my colleague here today that the cost of foodstuffs, animal foodstuffs, is going to be something like £20 per ton higher than it can be imported. Now this is a tragedy too because you have got to get a balance of profit and loss within your industry somewhere along the line. But there again we are faced with this situation. You have got a productive situation, you have a position where you employ probably 60 or 70 men, and if this is going to be productive you may be in a position where you have got to declare your labour redundant. And this is the tragic situation that we are going to be situated with as well. I hope, too, that this can be got over because if the cost of animal feeding is going up to 20 per cent. over that of local, we are not going to get a demand for that product which is so essential, to use our own feeding stuff and our own barley, et cetera, in the Isle of Man. As far as the rest is concerned, all I have to say is that I am sorry that the Highway Board is presented with such a tremendous job in the future by the damage that has been done over the Isle of Man. This is going to cost a lot of money. I know it will employ a lot of people but it is money that we can ill afford at the present time, and I hope and trust that we will not see this sort of situation again. Dr. Mann: Your Excellency, first of all, I thought the previous speaker was a member of the Board of Agriculture, but we will welcome you back at the next meeting! Firstly, I would like to say in support of the Chairman of Executive Council that it must be no secret now that we have had to spend many meetings almost entirely devoted to the problem of unemployment and how it could be dealt with and where we could get the money from. And what the Chairman is putting forward today is really the best that could be achieved within the limits that we had at the disposal of Executive Council until this resolution appeared on the Paper. But why are we in this situation? I think it is not quite as simple as it is being made out. It is just automatically assumed that we are in this situation because the United Kingdom is in the situation they are in, and Europe is in the situation that it is in. But that is not necessarily true, and I am certain that in the long term we have got to look at our industrial strategy or our employment strategy in the long term. Our present industrial strategy, with respect to the Industrial Advisory Council, who have done an immense amount of work on this, I am sure is not right. That is not a direct criticism of what has been done by the Industrial Advisory Council because over the years they have, without any doubt at all, established a lot of new industries on the Island and created a lot of additional employment. But, unfortunately, it is employment that is subject to the whims of the economy of the United Kingdom, and as we found out when we investigated the relationship between the European Economic Community and ourselves, large industrial units, or the largest industrial units on the Island are so closely connected with United Kingdom economy that some of them import almost 100 per cent. of their raw materials from the United Kingdom, and the only content of the industry is the actual labour of Manx people in work here, and the product immediately goes back into the United Kingdom again. Well now, that sort of activity is very satisfactory when things are running smoothly but it is the first thing that is dropped when things go wrong because obviously if the United Kingdom has a large labour resource available they are not going to necessarily employ people here to do work on materials that originated from the United Kingdom and will
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. T64 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 eventually be sold in it. And so many other industries which are set up are almost entirely dependent on buyers in the United Kingdom. This, once again, is all very well while everything is going right, and is the result of a policy of attraction for tax holidays, these wonderful things that are brought out of the hat that are going to solve everything. It is now fairly obvious throughout both the United Kingdom and on a wider scale throughout Europe and even the world, that all that development here is doing is attracting industries from A to B and back again according to who offers the best terms at any one particular time, and we are going to be in great danger if we are not careful of attracting industries in the few years that you are giving them the relief, who will pull up the roots and go somewhere else immediately the reliefs are discontinued, or are time limited. So, really, I know I am going to be criticised for what we are asking for agriculture, and I know at this moment that very few people would appear to be employed in agriculture and fishing, but it really does make common sense to start your economy at the resource bases that you have got, and the only resource bases we have got are the land and the sea and the forests, and all three are capable of a vast expansion of production, and these products could be sold. So I offer no excuse or apology for asking for support for basic industries because I am sure that we should start by maximising our own resources to produce both employment and an exportable product in the future. Once you have established the maximum amount of resources of your own, then start your small highly technical industries that can fill gaps elsewhere, and not just in the United Kingdom but throughout Europe and further afield. So one is faced with the immediate problem of large numbers of people wanting jobs, and so one firstly must seek labour intensive activity to try and absorb as many people as possible as quickly as possible, and this is fine if it is going to be followed by some constructive alteration in our employment patterns in the years to come. If it is just seen in that context only then we are asking for far too little money. I know the Chairman, in his view, would have asked for at least Li million or more, and I think most members of Executive Council would have started at £1 million or more because only by very large sums of money could you ever take up the immediate number of unemployed. But it is no good doing this or spending this sort of money unless we are going to ensure that there is going to be an improvement in employment in general. In seeking what schemes one should be putting the unemployed into, I think there is no doubt it is improving the facilities, or this horrible word "infrastructure" which means public facilities, communications, and as I know the Chairman of the Industrial Advisory Council is very strongly in favour of, the building of bases or even actual small new factories, even if at this moment there is nobody to occupy them, and to train a labour force capable of doing highly technical engineering or light engineering work in the future. Certainly these techniques and this training could never be lost and I fully support the Chairman of the Industrial Advisory Council who I know is devoted to this facility of training and providing the facilities, the so-called infrastructure, ready for some change or expansion in the industries of the Island. Unfortunately, many of the schemes put forward by various Boards are really parts of their original estimates which were cut out by the Finance Board and they are just as guilty in coming back with them as I am in coming back with the next resolution on the Order Paper, but in saying that I think we ought to be selective and once again go for the facilities that will build a possible future when we can stimulate employment again.
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000 —Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T65
The President of the Council: Your Excellency, this is not the first October Tynwald that I have sat in and listened to a debate on unemployment. Years ago, something like 20 years ago, it used to be a similar vote to this only very much larger proportionately in order that the Highway Board could take on an extra 100 men, the Forestry Board an extra 100, the Harbour Board 100 men, anybody at all that could use men take them on. These things failed miserably in the long term and the solution was not improved until such times as your predecessor, Sir Ambrose Flux Dundas, organised the reception to the people who are coming over to create employment in the Island. Hitherto they used to go from pillar to post and got worn out and eventually went away not being able to get all the information. He set up a department whereby people could come over and they could get all the information regarding taxes, regarding energy, regarding everything, and regarding what help should be available to the prospective employers in industry, and some improvement was brought about by the introduction of the Martin- S Baker factory, or the Ronaldsway Aircraft factory as we know it, at Ronaldsway, and by the various factories in Hills Meadow and various factories throughout the Island, a great contribution. At that time, Your Excellency, the people of the Isle of Man seemed to realise that the Isle of Man, although it was a tourist resort and hitherto they were satisfied that it was necessary for half the population to be idle during the winter-time because we need the people in the summer-time, they changed their minds, and many of the local people said they were leaving the tourist industry and going into all the year round employment and they preferred that and they were encouraged. The tourist industry was encouraged to bring in people then from outside and subsequently they were brought in on permits and asked to go out as time went along. Now another very great improvement came along when the Island decided to stabilise its taxes, to abolish surtax, not to introduce some of the taxes that were introduced in the other islands, capital gains tax and a whole series of taxes of this kind, and created a financial climate which attracted the financial sector. The financial sector came slowly. They did not have to be paid to come here, the climate was satisfactory to them and they came and they started to build premises, they started to improve premises, and you would see evidence all over the place of what they did and created a lot of employment in the building industry. Also, not only did they create employment in that way but the people who were to be employed, the job opportunities were greater, and from something less than 100 who were engaged hitherto in the financial sector, something almost in the 500 mark are now engaged in this kind of industry. And people did give more encouragement to young people to stay at home and work in these kinds of jobs. I believe, Your Excellency, that whereas these palliatives, this £150,000, this short term immediate thing, whilst it is necessary in the long term, it is not the solution. I am supporting this and I sympathise with the Executive Council in their desire to do what I am trying to say, but we have to do something immediately too. I believe there are other industries too which, if you create the climate for them to prosper, for the industries themselves to prosper, they will. All these other things will be added and they will engage more people in their particular industry; as banking did, as the building industry did when the building was going on well, and as light industry did. In the tourist industry, for example, recently we had over from Holland some people and we were trying to influence them to come across to the Isle of Man and they visited many places. They were very satisfied with some of the places they saw but their general observation on other places was that the place was shabby. Now this is in this modern time, this is in 1981. I believe, myself,
lob Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. T66 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 we should create an atmosphere, and I am not going to spell out what this atmosphere should be, this climate should be. Some would say it might be as attractive as Tenerife is when people go there and they can buy things very much cheaper than they can buy them in other places. Some might say it is various associated things. 1 have no need to spell it out. If we had the climate that would satisfy the tourists then the industry would prosper and then they, in turn, would engage the people concerned. I believe this is most important. I would also suggest this as far as agriculture and agricultural products are concerned. I have always said, and I will repeat it today, that we should not have limitations on our production. We should produce the maximum amount that we can that is most suitable and we should have a climate that would allow the producers of these articles a fair return and be able to export these goods so that we then would get new money by that means. New money sometimes has to be bought. Many countries in the world find that they are able to sell their products in many parts of the world for a lower cost than the actual producer gets for those goods. I believe, myself, we should create the climate, not only in the financial sector, which has worked. Incidentally, it cost us money in those days. People said, "If you are going to abolish this particular tax and that particular tax we will not have that revenue, we need that revenue." If a person was to say today that we must abolish value added tax, we cannot do without that revenue, but it might bring three times as much revenue in, it may well do. Creating the climate that will bring the revenue in is the important thing, bearing in mind that we have in the Isle of Man a control system whereby we have control of employment and we are interested in providing employment for our own people. We have a control of employment which they have not got in the United Kingdom, which they have not got in many countries. We could provide the El Dorado in the Isle of Man if we wished to do it. I would support this particlular resolution. Recently I had the pleasure of meeting Sir Ronald Garvey, a former Governor of the Isle of Man, Your Excellency, as you know so well, and I reminded him of a time when we in the tourist industry were feeling somewhat depressed. There was a bit of a depression and I would say that that might prevail today. I am not wanting to over-emphasise the point. People might say that might prevail today. And what did he do? He, Your Excellency, was the Chancellor of the Exchequer in those days. We were not blessed, if that is the right word, with a Finance Board in those days. (Laughter.) His Excellency was the Chancellor of the Exchequer and he released money willingly on the introduction by Tynwald Court to assist the tourist industry to lift itself up, and schemes were presented whereby people who were carrying out alterations to their premises, decorating their premises, doing things internally and externally, whereby half of the money for that purpose was paid for by Government and the people themselves made provision for the other half. This is a kind of way. It was felt at that time that it was labour intensive. It was a palliative, it was just for the time being, just during the time. We did find there were mistakes and there will be in any scheme that is brought forward. But I do say this, and I address my remarks to the Chairman of Executive Council when he seeks, as we all do, schemes whereby we could assist in spending the money most effectively, and it could well be that in order for people to improve their premises they may well get some kind of contribution. They make a contribution themselves and they may get some contribution. be it half, be it a quarter, be it three-quarters, or whatever it should be, in order to help them do it. I do say, Your Excellency, finally, that I believe the solution to the employ- ment situation, as we have had the lessons in industry, we had the lessons in the financial
Job Creation Programme —Supplementary Vote of £l50.000—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T67
sector, if the climate is prepared and the climate is right, the industries, whether they are tourist people, whether they are agricultural people, whether they are merchants, if the climate is right they, in turn, will prosper and by their prosperity the rest of the community will also prosper.
Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, hon. members of Tynwald Court, I am glad it is not turning out to be a Dutch auction on who can offer sympathy to the unemployed. History, and the President of the Council will forgive me if I seem to be a little critical of his last remarks, history is fine and very interesting but of no relevance unless we learn by it.
The President of the Council: That was my message.
Mr. Lowey: And I just wonder sometimes whether we have learned by it. 1 am also I a great believer in the theory that history goes in cycles. I have no doubt that this Court has been in this position before, and in my lifetime, sir, and I wonder, I do not question the concern of Executive Council for the unemployed and the problems we face but I must say I do question their application to resolve the problem. That is what we are here for, not to itemise them and to shout them to the heavens. We are here to do something about it, and I do question their application. Mention has been made by the hon. member for East Douglas about agriculture. Now I will be supporting some of the agricultural things that are being placed before us later today. I do not blame for one second the Board of Agriculture going to the Finance Board and asking for extra money, that is their job, but when you see that as a Government this afternoon we will be paying four times extra — not in total, extra — to the agricultural industry than is being spent on relieving unemployment—relieving it, not solving it, relieving it—because that is why I am not so blasé or so bleary eyed that I do not know that we are not solving the underlying problem, but relieving it by £150,000 plus £150,000. My objection to Executive Council is that they have gone and asked for too little, they have accepted too little, and it is no defence here to be told that they will go back next month. They should not have come away from the table this month. Having said that, I appreciate also that the Government has a duty ...
Mr. Irving: You are using Executive Council as a whipping boy.
Mr. Lowey: I am not using Executive Council, I am going to give you some answers in a moment, because at Budget time we had f4+ million surplus. Let me remind you what the Chairman of the Finance Board said at that time. "The Finance Board did consider for a long time whether some of that balance should be transferred to finance capital expenditure because we undoubtedly saved the taxpayers millions of pounds by our past policies, of financing some of our capital expenditure from revenue. We felt unable, however, to assume that the economy is suddenly going to expand and we are concerned about the employment prospects during the coming winter, 1981-82. We took the view that this year we would increase our balances, which are still extremely small in relation to the spending of Government, so that we are in a better position to with- stand any adverse economic conditions that may arise during the next winter."
Mr. Crellin: Statesmanlike.
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved.
T68 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Mr. Lowey: Absolutely, and what we are doing, we are not even spending the interest on that £42 million in relieving unemployment, that is my point, and Govern- ment is about priorities or it is about nothing at all, that is the point I am making. We are talking about 1,400 people, and as we talk it could very well be 1,500 people. The first stage which we made play of, I made this morning — 50 people for 20 weeks. 1 was told 90 people for 12 weeks — (interruption) — all right, the same difference says the Chairman of the Board of Social Security, the same difference, but what it does mean is that those men who are to be taken on in October will be paid off before Christmas. What relief of a problem is that? As 1 say, I honestly believe Executive Council, I do not doubt for a second their concern, I do not, and when I was shaking my head to my good friend, Mr. Anderson, when he was speaking —I am sorry if I in him off -- and I accept his premise about the Pontins holiday development and investment for this Island because that is what it is, it is an investment for this Island, and 1 support him 100 per cent. and I do not want to be misconstrued in any way and it S will relieve unemployment by a substantial number in the meantime. What I am saying, of course, is that the steps we are taking now as a Government have been described to me very aptly by one of those unemployed who said, ''The efforts of the Manx Government are like trying to irrigate the Sahara with a water pistol." Now that was one of the unemployed. He can laugh about it but he has been unemployed for three months, his wife is expecting a baby in two months, and he was after a job - any job. All right, it is said by the Chairman of Executive Council that he would like ideas, and Executive Council would like ideas about how to relieve it. Let me give him three, and I am going to be parochial, but I believe they are the sort of things which we can usefully put people to and see lasting benefit to the Isle of Man. A car park at the Sound, not major, but the Sound, if anything at all. is one of the beauty spots of the Isle of Man. Have you looked at the car park or what goes for a car park there? Positive steps could be taken there, I am sure, to make something of this beauty spot in the Isle of Man. We have talked, and I have pursued this not just this year but for the last six years, about an all-Island footpath, with special emphasis in the last live years, I may add, for the particular paths in Port St. Mary and Port Erin, and 1 have been assured time after time, in fact, I think six months ago, that we were in trouble with one of the landowners and we were about to compulsorily purchase, it need be, to get the thing done. We are still talking about it. This is not machine inten- sive, this sort of work, it would be labour intensive and would be an asset long term to the Isle of Man. My final scheme would be to fill in the open sewer, now my friends in Castletown will forgive me, the open sore — sewer is too strong a word — the open sore of the millrace which has been giving all of us problems, particularly the folk who live in Hope Street. This is the sort of positive scheme. There are schemes and that is in the south of the Island and we have not come over the Fairy Bridge yet. There are schemes that can be usefully done. I am saying, I am not doubting the concern but 1 am concerned about the attitude of Executive Council. We have touched on young people, rightly so. When I shook my head and complained about Executive Council, they are a little bit like Trappist monks — (laughter) — because when they sat and decided, the first I knew as a member of the Harbour Board that we were not even included in the scheme was to read it in the weekend paper — the weekend paper, a member of Government—and in that release to the press it did not say that the schemes which had been submitted would be reconsidered or would be reconsidered later on, it
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T69 mentioned local authorities' work schemes but nothing about Government schemes. We have a scheme on the Harbour Board for 40 men, 25 men and 15 school leavers, if you like. (Interruption.) Yes, and the figure, including materials, would be £45,300. I have got the papers here. So again, that is no joy to the people who are unemployed to hear of the squabbles between inter-departmental and Government. Mr. Irving: You talk of a Dutch auction in this Court and you are doing very well. Mr. Lowey: Well, Dutch auction or not, I am trying to he practical and I think I have got to put some alternatives up and I believe I am putting forward an alternative. Mr. Delaney: You have your clogs on the right feet, anyway. Mr. Lowey: However, I do believe, Your Excellency, I said about young people, and this is for 15 young people as well as 25 older people. I am afraid I have got to admit that I have not got any scheme, but we do have an unemployment problem with women. No scheme at all is being prepared by Government for the relief of unemploy- ment for women. Mr. Irving: I can tell you how you can help that. (Laughter.) Mr. Lowey: I will stick to my time honoured answer and say that as long as I can have them as a winter works scheme I might consider it. (Laughter.) I do believe, Your Excellency, to coin a phrase, that we know the price of everything but the value of nothing. The one thing I do know is the value of the Manx people and I share 100 per cent. the sentiments ably expressed by Mr. Anderson. There is no more degrading form of punishment, if you like, to any human being than to be denied the right to support his or her family. Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, I am actually very concerned indeed with the unemployment situation for our young people under the age of 18. Last July I went to Portsmouth and I visited several job opportunity centres and I obtained quite a lot of information which might perhaps be interesting to the hon. Court. To get on a job opportunities scheme a young person has to be 16 and has to be unemployed for nine weeks before they get the chance of a place. They are assessed by assessors as to what particular craft would be suitable to them. They arc then allocated to a centre and they are paid £26 per week, out of which they pay their bus fares, and they are given a free midday meal. I visited centres which taught the basic skill of upholstery and on enquiry I found out that hotels were sending in furniture to be reupholstered. They had two instructors there teaching a group of 20 boys and girls the craft of upholstery. I also visited one where they were doing welding and making wrought ironwork for hotels and for business houses— some fancy wrought ironwork and some special orders. even saw a special chair which had been made out of steel, specially for a mental home where a young woman had broken 20 chairs, and this chair had been designed to withstand anything and they reckoned she would not be able to break this particular chair, and this chair was shown to me. I also visited a centre where they were learning to make spring interior mattresses, basically. Now these young people do six months in this centre. I spoke to a lot of these young people who were very, very appreciative of being given a chance of learning a basic craft and they told me that they realised the only way to get a job in a firm was to go to one of these job opportunity centres
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. T70 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 and learn a basic craft for six months. Representatives of firms were coming along and choosing a work force from these job opportunity centres. Later, I discussed this problem with the Chairman of one of the City Councils in the Midlands and I asked him what they were doing in the Midlands for their young unemployed and, as you will appreciate, they have a tremendous amount, and he told me a rather interesting thing. He said that they were establishing centres and bringing in retired craftsmen to teach these young people basic crafts. Now, I would urge that more money is allocated to establish these centres to give our young people a chance to learn a basic craft.
Mr. Kerruish: Your Excellency, it is rather unfortunate, coming towards the end of the present House of Keys, that there has been a rather pessimistic note from various members of this hon. Assembly, because I feel to go to the hustings on a pessimistic note is not altogether the right approach. I think it would be wrong because I believe the present House of Keys and, of course, the rest of Tynwald Court, can look back on what I think has been a very fruitful five years, despite the fact that at the present point of time the Island is suffering from the results of not only a United Kingdom deep depression, but a worldwide depression, and it would be impossible to believe that we in this small island, particularly at present, could be immune from the effects of this very deep recession. But we have made some very real progress and until the events of the last one or two years affected us, I think we could look upon a very marked expansion in the financial sector, and whatever our views might be on that, there is no doubt about it that it does make a very significant contribution to our gross national product. And in the manufacturing sector, I am happy to say that there has been ccntinual expansion there. Of course we are getting the results of the set of conditions in the United Kingdom but, by and large, I think we can look back on quite a fruitful few years as far as the Isle of Man's economy is concerned. In one particular regard, I think it has been most important. We have retained our image as a stable political commmunity and that is most important in a world where stability is perhaps a com- modity which is in diminishing quantities. We want to continue in that particular line. There again, during the last five years we have continually encroached upon the burden of direct taxotion. It has been reduced, albeit slightly, but it has been reduced in a small way. So I think we can look back on quite a useful five years of solid work by the Island's Legislature. I think on one point we can take full marks. After all, during the lifetime of the present House of Keys the Island has embarked on two of the largest schemes it has ever embarked upon, namely, the new reservoir which is going to take care of the Island's requirements for water for the next 100 years, and as an offset advantage we are going to have linked to it a small hydro-electric scheme, and, additionally, the refurbishment and extension of the Harbour Board's breakwater. These two schemes between them mean that we are expending £20 million, marking our confidence in the Island in the future, and I am happy to learn, Your Excellency, from the hon. Chairman of the respective Boards who sit on my immediate right, that at the present time both of those schemes are enabling those Boards each to employ 100 men —200 men employed on those two projects — so although certain misgivings were expressed by certain people at the time it is rather fortuitous that we did embark upon really worthwhile long-term projects at that time. They are certainly coming in very useful as far as the take-up of labour is concerned at the moment. Now, sir, as far as the immediate item on the Agenda is concerned, 1 think the hon. Chairman of
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T71
the Executive Council made it quite clear that this is a temporary vote, and I was glad to hear an aside from the hon. member of the Finance Board, Major Crellin, that if more money is required, and for my part I am almost certain it will be required, then Execu- tive Council will not hesitate to ask for it. and I believe if the need is proven that will be forthcoming from the Finance Board. Mr. Crellin: I still have to speak on that. Mr. Kerruish: Well, maybe you will, but that is my view and I am expressing my view and I am expressing my particular views at the moment, and you are quite free to express yours, sir. So this is an expedient and it is brought forward in the full know- ledge that a long-term policy must be directed towards broadening and strengthening the whole of the Island's economy. I would not quibble for one moment with the hon. Chairman of the Board of Agriculture that he must do everything possible to strengthen our indigenous industries, agriculture and fisheries, but we have to face the fact that our top priorities in one regard must be directed towards the financial sector, the manu- facturing sector and the tourist sector. They are the great contributors to our gross national product, and it is simple enough to explain. The gross national product con- sists, I am told by economists, of the profits that are made within the certain industry plus the salaries and wages paid within it, and it simply adds up to that, that being in the financial sector is much more profitable than being in farming, as with the manu- facturing sector, but these are necessary in order that Government can devise ways and means in which we can have the money to build our schools, build more public housing, housing for our public sector, to go on with all the worthwhile works that are necessary to make a better Island for the people who live here. But, sir, as well as giving top priority for preserving and, where possible, expanding our fishing. agriculture and horticultural industries, we must not forget the other big contributor to our economy, tourism. I am delighted to know that here, at the last sitting of this particular House of Keys, the hon. Chairman of the Local Government Board expressed confidence that one of the greatest tourist amenity projects is likely to get off the ground in the not far distant future. It has always been a source of concern to me that despite the fact that for a very long number of years the Island has been offering a 40 per cent. grant towards the building of new tourist accommodation, and for a £1 million project conforming to the necessary criteria there would be a grant, a gift, so to speak, of £400,000, there have been very few takers indeed, so despite the fact that we are in rather difficult times at the moment, let us hope that in this particular sector, this all important sector, that this is perhaps an indication of better times ahead. For my part, and perhaps I may regard myself as a countryman, I have always been—as I believe most countrymen have always been — 100 per cent. behind a flourishing tourist industry, and I am delighted to hear of this very big project which could perhaps prove to be a watershed as far as our visiting industry is concerned. As far as the particular sector I am closely involved in is concerned, namely, the manufacturing sector, I would like to take this opportunity of saying that we do appreciate that present conditions may present difficulties for certain concerns. I know it is public knowledge that certain com- panies have had to curtail their activities and in an odd case maybe to relinquish them completely, but I would like to spell out that the Industrial Advisory Council, in close consultation with the Finance Board, are most anxious to help any of our manufacturing concerns where they run into particular difficulties, where we think we can help. I may
Job Creation Programme—Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. T72 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 say, and I am riot going to go into details as far as companies are concerned for one moment, and not even as far as the means are concerned, but even thus far there have been certain ways in which we have been able to help certain manufacturing concerns who have encountered difficulties as a result of present conditions. We are very depen- dent upon the United Kingdom market, it is the main market for most of our exports, and where difficulties have been encountered we are most anxious to know of them and where we can help, well, we will certainly go into the matter most closely. As far as the comments of certain hon. members are concerned, relating to suggestions made in the Employment Committee's report, these suggestions and many others have been the subject of close consideration between the Finance Board and the Industrial Advisory Council and a further meeting is scheduled for the very near future. 1 am hoping that over the next coming months certain improvements will be made that will make even more attractive the incentives we offer, not only to incoming industries but to existing industries because we believe that one of our main priorities is to maintain the virility and activity of our existing industries and companies within the Island. We know their track records and we are most anxious that they shall remain viable and offering as much all-the-year-round employment as they can to our people. There are certain new directions in which we have assisted since the presentation of the Employment Com- mittee's report. One of the areas that presents certain difficulties for given undertakings is the cost of electricity and my hon. friend, the Chairman of the Electricity Board, never conceals the fact that in certain cases these burdens are heavy. We are most anxious to reduce the cost of energy to manufacturing industries and we are now offering assistance as far as energy-saving projects are concerned. One of the largest undertakings in the Isle of Man has already taken advantage of our particular scheme. We have circulated most manufacturers telling them we are anxious to assist and give grants towards energy- conserving measures, and I am hoping this will be a meaningful way in which we can assist. Another area in which we are most anxious to help is the examination of projects with regard to the use of more sophisticated equipment in Island factories. Where the concern can put before us a proposition where they are going to carry out investigations as to the profitability or otherwise of up to date machinery, we can assist them in going forward with an exercise in this direction. Similarly, and this touches on a point made by the hon. member for Ayre, not in this immediate context but in a broader context, there is the question of marketing. We believe that one of the most important areas to which any industrialists can address themselves is the question of marketing, but where marketing research exercises are being indulged in, or the whole product in relation to improving and expanding marketing as far as the Island industrialists are concerned, we are happy to consider any proposition put before us with a view to giving them assistance by way of grant in that particular direction. Finally, sir, let me say that it has been a matter of great satisfaction to me to note the issue quite recently of the report on the training under the auspices of the Isle of Man Board of Social Security. This was touched on, I think, by a previous speaker. One of the areas to which I have tried to devote my modest efforts over the years during which I have been a member of the industrial Advisory Council, is the improving of the Island's training facilities. I think up to a year or two ago we were falling short in this particular direction, but anyone who has taken the trouble to read this particular report will find that we got a fairly comprehensive approach to this most important subject, because I believe one of the big problems, one of the big social as well as economic problems of the immediate
Job Creation Programme Supplementary Vote of £150,000—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T73 years in the future, will be to ensure that our young people, the citizens of the future, are provided with a worthwhile opportunity of training, if not employment. That is one of the areas with which I am greatly concerned and I am sure all members are. The overall question in the development of industry is one to which the Council is devoting its efforts continually. We are concerned, as the hon. member for Garff, Dr. Mann, has said, with the possibility of more advanced building, of having throughout the Island land banks where we can offer to existing or incoming industrialists agreeable sites, attractive sites, with all the services available, where undertakings can be established and, where possible, to have units available that can be offered to anybody who would be prepared to commence operations immediately. This is one of the sectors which my Council accept as being highly important in the Island's requirement in the future, and sincerely hope that the efforts of those concerned will mean that in the long term we will continue to make a very significant contribution to providing the all-important all- the-year-round employment for our people.
The Governor: Hon. members, there is one thing that is constant in all forms of employment and that is one stops for a cup of tea. We will therefore adjourn for 20 minutes. We will hear the Petition in 20 minutes' time. The order of speaking to start with will be the hon. member for South. Douglas, Mr. Ward, followed by the hon. and gallant member of Council, Major Crellin.
The Court adjourned for tea.
PETITION OF MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND BURGESSES OF BOROUGH OF DOUGLAS — CLOSURE OF WOODVILLE TERRACE LANE — ADJOURNED UNTIL PRODUCTION BY DOUGLAS CORPORATION OF PLANS FOR WHOLE AREA.
The Governor: Hon. members, for your guidance, I propose that we conclude this evening at 6 o'clock. We turn to item number 59 and 1 call upon the hon. member of Council, Mr. Moore, to move.
Mr. Moore: Your Excellency, in respect of the Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Douglas for approval to the closure of a section of Woodville Terrace Lane in the said Borough, I beg to move:— That the Prayer of the Petition he and the same is hereby granted. This Petition was withdrawn in this hon. Court on 17th March 1981, and I beg to move it be now approved.
Mr. Kneale: I beg to second.
The Governor: I understand that counsel is present. Is it agreed that counsel be heard?
It was agreed.
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. T74 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Mr. N. C. Teare (Advocate) appeared on behalf of Douglas Corporation. Mr. Teare: Your Excellency, this Petition first came before the Court on 17th March when the hon. member of Council, Mr. Moore, proceeded to move the Prayer of the Petition which was that the section of lane on the southern-most part of Woodville Terrace down to Castle Mona steps should be closed. At that sitting I recall there was a constitutional crisis in as much as the Council voted against the Keys and the upshot of it was that Mr Moore withdrew his motion that the Prayer be granted and the Petition was left on the table before Tynwald. In the meantime, a report has been given by a Select Committee of the House of Keys concerning this matter, and this report is dated 5th May 1981. In the report the Surveyor General gives his opinion as to the condition of the lane and I would suggest that it is apparent from the report that the land upon which the lane lies and the adjoining land is relatively unstable, and it is for this reason that the Corporation wish to pursue the Petition for closure. I think the Surveyor General's comments, and certainly the opinion of the Borough Engineer and Surveyor have been borne out by the events of the last two weeks where in Castle Mona Avenue there was quite some subsidence of land adjoining, or at least very near by this lane. I feel, Your Excellency, this is all I can say on this subject at the moment but, of course, 1 shall be pleased to answer any questions which may be put to me. The Governor: Have hon. members any questions to ask of learned counsel? Mr. Delaney: Yes, sir, with apologies to the Court because of the amount of work we have to get through, but this matter, to me and to my constituents, is of the utmost worry and I would actually submit to the representatives of the Douglas Corporation that the recent subsidence of land in Castle Mona Avenue actually proved the contrary. It proved the argument put forward by myself and the people in Woodville Terrace Lane, and I may add, the people in Castle Mona Avenue, that actually covering up the problem does not cure the problem. I would submit to the representatives of the Corporation that the subsidence was partly due, if not wholly due, to the lack of the cleansing of the water pipes that go down the lane, therefore causing the water to run over the embank- ment, carrying with it the top soil that finished up in the back yard of one of my constituents, a resident in Castle Mona Avenue. If the Douglas Corporation intend to carry out what they have been wanting to do, to close it off and pretend it has gone away, the problem will not go away with it, sir. That piece of land is dangerous, we admit that, the residents admit it, but they arc not prepared to stay down there with this piece of land overlooking them which at any time, and it was proved recently, could come down on to their property. It has been argued by the Corporation and by the mover of the Petition that the responsibility for this piece of land rests with the residents and the owners of Castle Mona Avenue. That may be true in theory, sir, it may be true in law, but in reality it is the responsibility of the Douglas Corporation and the Government to make sure that the residents of any particular area are safe and secure in their own homes. It would be impossible for the people in Castle Mona Avenue to be able to put forward the amount of money that is necessary to stabilise this piece of land because they just have not got the money, so what do we do to them? Do we say, close the lane off, and pray that it does not happen to you, that it does not happen again? Is that what we are going to do? The hon. member for South Douglas, Mr. Ward, and those members who can recollect what he said on the two occasions when we have spoken on this
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area.
TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T75
matter before, particularly members of the Keys, will remember that he pointed out that this could happen, that this piece of land was unstable and it could finish up in the back of Castle Mona Avenue and, unfortunately, how right he has been. If we close off this section of land, you are not denying access to people who wish to have access to it because the number of places you can get into Castle Mona Avenue has been proved by the work already carried out by the Corporation where they have closed off the top half of the lane. People are still using the top half of the lane, children can still gain access to that laneway from Castle Mona Avenue and from the top end by Little Switzerland. It has not stopped any of this, sir. The only thing it has done is cause more danger to those people who do get into the laneway to use it by having to go round this silly little gate they have put up with a lock on it. They just walk round the gate, so we have not stopped the access to Woodville Terrace Lane. All we have done is put an extra hazard in the way. I would like to ask this, sir. If this does go forward, what is S the intention of the Corporation and the method to be used to block off the front of Woodville Terrace? Are they going to put a 10 feet fence that the people who have guest houses, 11 in all, in Castle Mona Avenue are going to have to look out on to, so denying them their view that they actually have at the moment of Douglas bay? Are we saying that? It is not amusing, Mr. Anderson, I am afraid. It is very important. Like you, these people are in business, they have a living to make, and it is very difficult in the circumstances in these years, and 1 want to know what is going to happen. Are we just going to put up a silly little fence at the end and say, this lane is now closed, or are we going to spend some money on construction to actually properly close it off and do something to stop the hazard of any landfalls at the back of Castle Mona Avenue? This is what wants to be in front of us today, what is going to be spent to stabilise the rock face at the back of Castle Mona Avenue, what sort of fencing they are going to put up, are they going to keep the fences in good order once they have been put up, because they have not kept any of the services in that laneway going, as far as I can see. It is irregularly cleaned because, obviously, it is a difficult area to clean. They have to chase up and, good enough, the Corporation do send someone up to clean the lane when they are chased. It has been neglect that has caused this problem, sir, not the people of Woodville Terrace or the people of Castle Mona Avenue. It has been neglect, because this lane is a byway and now, because it has been neglected, the same people who neglected it are saying, close it. They have thrown away their responsibility over the past years and now they want to get rid of it altogether by putting a gate or a fence or something up. But I think before the members vote on this this afternoon they should know the long-term consequences, because the last time any danger occurred to the people in Castle Mona Avenue, it might be a long time to us but it is not a long time in the life of this Island, and in 1936 a large tree and piece of the embankment came into the back of Castle Mona Avenue, so last week was not the first time this had happened. But they did not close the lane then, they did something about it. Are we going to do any less? I hope that members will decide this afternoon to do what is one of the recommendations of the report of the Committee of the House of Keys on the engineer's report, to do something about the fencing up there and to close it off from the bottom of Woodville Terrace, not right through, from the bottom up to what they have closed off already, and leave an access to Woodville Terrace and do something to clean up and stabilise the cliff face at the back of Castle Mona Avenue.
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas--Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. T76 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
The Governor: If that was meant to be a question to counsel, as opposed to a member speaking, would you reply to that?
Mr. Teare: 1 understood that there were three questions. Firstly, what is the Corpora- tion going to do in relation to the existing obstruction of that part of the lane which is presently closed. I believe there was reference to children getting on to the lane. Secondly, what is the method to be used to block off the section of lane directly in front of Woodville Terrace Lane and, thirdly, are the fences to be kept in good order. Those are the three questions which I understood you put to me.
Mr. Delaney: There was a further question, sir. What are you going to do for the safety of the people in Castle Mona Avenue?
Mr. Teare: Your Excellency, the first question was, what is the Corporation to do in relation to the existing obstructions for that part of the lane that is already closed? The Borough Engineer and Surveyor is here with me today and he tells me that this is the first time he has been advised of children getting on to this lane, and he advises me and instructs me to tell the Court that an effective and proper obstruction will be placed at both ends of that section of the lane that is presently closed off which will prevent children getting on to the lane. The second question was, what is the method to be used to block off the part of the lane directly in front of Woodville Terrace? There is reference to this, I think, in the report of the Select Committee and it is anticipated that there will be a fence, a chain link fence some 8 feet high, with concrete posts. The third question was, are the fences to be kept in good order? I am instructed to give that assurance to the Court. The fourth question was, what is proposed to be done to preserve the interests of the adjoining land owners? The Corporation, as yet, has formulated no plans in that respect and I am not able to advise further, 1 regret, today.
Mr. Ward: My only purpose for rising, Your Excellency, is that, fair enough, I was one of the ones who was as anxious as possible to meet the wishes of the people in that particular area for business reasons and for other reasons. 1 did say at the time that the closing of the lane was not the finish of it, even had it happened at that time. I get no joy out of the fact that perhaps something has happened which could have been extremely dangerous. I think one has to be realistic in the light of what has happened and the state of the lane and the great dangers of subsidence. I have always said that as far as I am concerned, and I agree with the hon. member for East Douglas, we must see that if the lane is to be closed, and that is the decision of this Court, that the Corporation do make a proper and a reasonable and a safe job of the lane because it is quite true, whether counsel knew of it before, but there is no doubt about it that the closing of the top half of the lane, which I think was consented to by this Court in 1977, has been an abject failure and, of course, it is just as big a pimp's paradise and an obscenity today as it was in those days. I think, as a responsible Court, if we arc just going to agree to the closing of the second half of this lane, we have got to sec that two things are honoured. We have got to see that the lane is closed safely and effectively from anybody using the lane. The Douglas Corporation, I suppose, has the responsibility for it and they have got to see that it does not become a tip and there are not the obscenities that I have mentioned before, a pimp's paradise or whatever you want to call it. They are
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T77
hard words but this, nevertheless, is what the district was in years gone by. Added to that, of course, I do not think the Corporation is in a situation to say, well, they can forget it, because obviously what has happened in recent weeks has proved, to some extent, that we are not only talking about maybe the collapse of the lane but if the situation is as serious as the engineers and surveyors seem to think, somebody has got to do something— whether Central Government is brought into it or someone else - but somebody has got to go in there and do a real job of sustaining that cliff face, because we are not only talking about Castle Mona Avenue or the lane in question, if it escalates to any great degree we are talking about, of course, a portion of Victoria Road. So I do agree so much with what Mr. Delaney has said. Simply closing the lane and hoping it will go away or forgetting about it is not the answer. I think the Cor- poration has got to go on from there and devise a scheme to make the whole area safe, but I certainly think it is a time to be realistic and I think, for the safety of the people in both areas, the lane has come to the situation where it has got to be closed while they sort out what they are going to do about it. The Governor: Does any other member wish to speak? As a clarification, you are not proposing any amendments to the Prayer? Mr. Delaney: Yes, but I was waiting for the hon. members to question counsel on any queries they might have, and some queries have been raised by the hon. member for South Douglas. But, of course, it would be my intention, sir, to move the following amendment:— That, consideration of the Petition he adjourned until the Douglas Corporation produce constructive plans for the whole area bounded by Woodville Lane and Castle Mona Avenue. The Governor: Well, we now have an amendment which needs to be seconded. Mr. J. J. Radcliffe: If you wish to have a seconder to that amendment, sir, I have great pleasure in seconding that. I am sure this is the correct procedure to adopt. I was a member of the Committee that this hon. Court appointed to look into the Wood- ville Lane problem, and although I have every sympathy with the Douglas Corporation in their difficulty and dilemma, I do feel that some constructive approach is needed, and if they were coming forward today with a scheme to put this matter right and seeking closure in order to carry out the work, they would find a sympathetic audience here. If, however, they are merely seeking to close it, I do not think that sympathy will be present. I have great pleasure in seconding the amendment.
Mrs. Quayle: Your Excellency, I find this very extraordinary because the Douglas Corporation employ professional men to assess this job and I find it extraordinary that we should be discussing this sort of thing here because surely the Douglas Corporation have the professional advice in front of them and they know that they are liable if any- thing happens. Surely this is their business?
Mr. Delaney: A point of clarification, sir, for the hon. member for Castletown. The Douglas Corporation will assume no liability for a landslip because they contend that the land belongs to the adjacent landowners in the same way that you questioned the
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. T78 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 laying of the drains down in your constituency, Castletown, when they were laid round that new building down there. Mr. Swales: Your Excellency, on a point of clarification here, if I may go back to the conclusions the Committee reached, rightly or wrongly, and we did this after we had received a report from the Surveyor General, incidentally, in which he said, and I quote: He personally favoured "the complete closure of the lane which was certain to drop eventually, though it might last as long as 20 years. There would always be a risk to users of the lane." And the Douglas Corporation would be liable. But we had other evidence as well and our conclusions were in three parts. "Firstly," we said, "having taken into consideration all the evidence submitted to us, we are satisfied that it is only a matter of time until there can be no question of keeping any portion of the lane open. It is progressively becoming less safe, a process which cannot be halted or even slowed without the expenditure of a sum of money wholly out of proportion to the limited value obtained." Secondly, we said, "We believe, however," — and this was after taking all the evidence — "that there is a case for keeping open a section for as long as is consistent with the dictates of safety and economy." And this portion, from memory, although this is going back to last April, was from the Broadway side to the southern end of Woodville Terrace. Thirdly we said, "We are satisfied that the section in front of the Terrace" — right in front — "can no longer be kept open because it is dangerous." So today, Your Excellency, I would presume that the Court is either going to agree with the Petition presented by the Douglas Corporation, which is suggesting its whole closure, or the Court is going to accept the report of the Committee you invited to investigate and report. A Member: It has already accepted that one. Mr. Swales: I do not know, 1 am not certain in my own mind. Mr. Quinney: Your Excellency, 1 can understand certain of the members who have spoken on this matter. I understood that following the acceptance of the report by this hon. Court, and let me say it was presented to the Douglas Corporation, that they rejected that part of the report to do temporary measures, so now I can understand the hon member for East Douglas asking what steps are going to be taken to ensure it is being made safe even if the closure is made, even this section of the railing that is in front of Woodville Terrace. So the point is, if they have already said they will not spend any money, that no more money was going to come from them, then I can understand the amendment. (Interruption.) Yes, at a cost, but we have not had an assurance from learned counsel that the Corporation will carry out this work and the cost of it. The Governor: Before I ask the mover to reply, has any other member got a question to ask of learned counsel? The Speaker: May I ask learned counsel what will happen if this lane is not closed? Who will be at risk? Mr. Teare: Your Excellency, if this lane is not closed then those at risk will be the users of the lane. At the moment, as no proposals have been formulated for the drainage of this land, or whatever steps are necessary to achieve stability of the land, then it
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane--Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T79
would appear that the adjoining owners would also be at risk, but as has been stressed, firstly by Mr. Delaney and, secondly, by Mr. Quinney, they will be at risk whether the lane is closed or not until such time as plans are formulated. I trust that answers your question.
The Speaker: Is there any financial risk to the Corporation?
Mr. Teare: In as much as a person might perhaps claim damages for injuries sustained?
The Speaker: Yes.
Mr. Teare: That is a moot point because the law in the Isle of Man, as opposed to that in England, is quite different. The law in the Island is that the Corporation or any road authority — and I am sure the learned Attorney-General will correct me on this if I am wrong — a road authority is liable for misfeasance as opposed to nonfeasance. Now nonfeasance means accepting the situation, doing nothing about it, while misfea- sance is where one does something about the situation but perhaps does it negligently or wrongly, such as, if the Corporation or a road authority were to dig a hole in the road and leave the debris on the road unlit, then if a person were to trip over that the Corporation or road authority would be liable; that is, if the Corporation had done something to the road and behaved negligently. But here in this particular case the Corporation at the moment are doing nothing about the lane, they have not attempted to deal with it, and thus it may well be that the Corporation would not be liable for any accident that would happen on the lane. It is a very difficult point, drawing the line between nonfeasance and misfeasance, and every case would have to be considered on its own merits in the particular circumstances. I am sorry to be so technical, sir.
Mr. Kermeen: May I ask three questions? How long has the lane been in existence, how many people have suffered injury, and how long has the Douglas Corporation considered that there is a hazard there which requires removal?
Mr. Teare: The questions were: How long has the lane been in existence, how many people have been injured, and how long has the Corporation been of the view that the lane constitutes a hazard? In answer to the first question, I believe the lane is shown on the first ordnance survey maps of Douglas and I believe that these were drawn up some- where in the region of the 1860's, so it has been in existence at least that long. How many people have been injured? The Corporation has not been advised of any injuries sustained on the lane. How long has the Corporation been aware that the lane constitutes a hazard? The Corporation came to this view prior to the presentation of the first Petition to Tynwald which, as Mr. Ward has said, was in 1977.
Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, may I ask, is there any doubt at all as to the ownership of the lane, or in whose hands does it actually lie?
Mr. Teare: Your Excellency, the Corporation considers that the lane vests in them, in the Corporation; that is the surface soil or tarmacadam or whatever material of the
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. T80 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 roadway, if I can call it that However, the Corporation considers that the soil under- neath the lane vests in the owners of the adjoining property, in as much as, say, the owners of the Castle Mona Avenue properties own the subsoil up to one half of the way across the lane and the owners of the properties on the other side own the other half.
Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, could I ask the learned Attorney-General a question? Does this then mean that the owner of any road for which the Highway Board have a responsibility, does this mean that the owners of the adjacent properties own half way out in the road?
The Attorney-General: Yes, Your Excellency. It is not really relevant to this particular Petition, but the answer is yes.
Mr. Cringle: It is relevant because I think it was asked by either the member for East Douglas or the member for South Douglas, who earlier this afternon did question possibly the ownership and the situation as to the ownership, and I think that really if this is on a slope and the ownership is in doubt as to who is going to be the responsible party, then I think there is a matter for concern.
Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, could I ask learned counsel if he could confirm that the Corporation only wanted to close this lane after the residents of the area asked the Corporation to clear the drains and to keep the lane in a safe condition?
Mr. Teare: Your Excellency, the Corporation was made aware of complaints from local owners as to the state of the fences. There was no complaint until fairly recently as to the stale of the drains and it was in consequence of the state of the fences and the Corporation's own fears as to the stability of the lane that the decision was taken in 1977 to apply to the Court for closure, and then subsequently, in 1981, earlier this year, so there were certainly no complaints initially about the drains; it was about the fences initially.
Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, you learn something every day, and I think that is true. Could I ask learned counsel, are there any services under the ground in this lane?
Mr. Teare: No, Your Excellency.
Mr. Delaney: In that case, sir, may I ask a further question on that? Where is the surface water carried away from the laneway, your laneway?
Mr. Teare: The surface water drains down the natural slope in the area.
Mr. Delaney: Well, sir, someone should go and have a look at the lane. There are grids in the middle of the lane, half-way down.
Mr. Teare: I cannot answer that point. I, personally, was not aware that there were drains.
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T81
Mr. Delaney: Well, I think someone should look before we start closing off public pathways. Mr. Cringle: If, in fact, Your Excellency, there are grids in the lane and, therefore, there are services in the lane, they will presumably be laid at subsoil level. At what depth do the Douglas Corporation say they relinquish all responsibility? The Governor: If any of these questions require some research, I would not wish you to be put in a position of answering questions unreasonably. Mr. Teare: That last point would take research, Your Excellency, and I would be grateful for the opportunity of looking into Mr. Cringle's question. The Governor: If there are some of these questions, and this, I know, is a matter of great importance to certain people, I am prepared to adjourn this Petition while you find out all the information that is being poured at you. We will adjourn it until after another item on the Agenda if that is the wish of some of these people asking these questions. Mr. Delaney: I would be happy to adjourn it until the next sitting of the new House. The Governor: I am sure you would. (Laughter.) Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, could it be adjourned until this time tomorrow? The Speaker: We would have another hour on it then. The Governor: Learned counsel, how long do you require to find out these answers? Mr. Teare: My difficulty, Your Excellency, is that I am due to appear before Deemster Corrin in a contested hearing case in Peel Courthouse tomorrow afternoon. The Governor: Can you acquire this deep knowledge in about 20 minutes? Mr. Teare: I doubt it, Your Excellency. The Governor: One hour? Mr. Teare: I will do my best in one hour, but I cannot promise that I will come up with the correct answers. Mr. Ward: Could I ask learned counsel, Your Excellency, would it possibly be the position where the Corporation would accept an adjournment in the light of so many uncertainties and things that have cropped up even in the debate this afternoon? Will they accept an adjournment and come forward with some sort of concrete proposals as to what is needed? I do that to try to resolve the matter. The Governor: Learned counsel, hon. members, you will be aware that there is an amendment by Mr. Delaney for adjourning this Petition. If hon. members agree I suggest that we ask the mover, the hon. member of Council, to reply, and then I will put the amendment. If that amendment does not carry then we will debate again about when we adjourn, if that sounds fair to hon members. Is that agreed? It was agreed.
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane —Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. T82 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
Mr. Moore: As I have indicated, 1 have no firm objection to a deferment of this for one month, Your Excellency, but I feel that I should say that we did adjourn this, more or less adjourned it, I withdrew this Petition last May so that it could go to a Committee which was set up by the House of Keys, and which did an excellent job in bringing back the report, that this procedure should be carried out. This was six months ago. Now the report was fairly simple and straightforward. The report said in its conclusion that there were three options open to us: (a) to close the remaining portion of the lane; (b) to keep open the remaining portion of the lane. Those are two fair options one way or the other. The other one, of course, was to close a section of the lane in front of Woodville Terrace and to keep open the section at the southern end of Woodville Terrace. Now in (c) we are talking about things which should not even have been considered because what we were speaking about was the closing of the lane from the southern end of Woodville Terrace to the bottom. The other part had already been closed by a previous order. It was not even in front of us. The order which was put by my hon. friend was to close the lane from the top right down to the southern end of Woodville Terrace. That has already been agreed by Tynwald. If it has not been carried out that way that is a different thing, but the resolution which had already been received by this Court in 1977 was to close it right down to the southern end of Woodville Terrace. Now I do not want to go into all the details of it. Somebody has found a drain there and the Borough Surveyor does not know anything about it. We are talking about a right of way which is causing trouble by subsidence. The subsidence has not actually crept under the road yet. I can report, and I think it is possibly common knowledge that 30 cubic yards of the bank fell into the back of number 30 Woodville Terrace, while we have been ruminating about the situation at this length, during the recent storms. Mr. Irving: Do you mean Woodville Terrace or Castle Mona Avenue? Mr. Moore: It fell into the houses. I am sorry, 30 Castle Mona Avenue. Thirty cubic yards is quite a lot of soil and stones to drop into the road. Now it has not got into the lane yet. All the Corporation are saying is that it is becoming dangerous and it is dangerous on a public right of way to the Corporation if anybody is walking along that lane at the time when any subsidence occurs. It is dangerous to the Corporation in that situation. It is going to be dangerous to the people who bought the houses under the cliff in the same way as it is dangerous to some of the people out in the Ayres with subsidence from the sea. It is going to be dangerous and it is going to be a very expensive business. The closing or keeping open of this lane will not alter that situation one iota. If it is going to happen, it will happen, and we will not do anything about it by legislation. The Corporation has said, and if I may be permitted, sir, I will read the resolution of the Council which sat after they had taken into consideration the points which our Committee looked at. Now one of the suggestions which came out from the Highway Board's surveyor's office was that one of the ways in which we could protect the public was by the erection of a 10 feet high chain link fence. Douglas Corporation meeting, after this was discussed on 10th June resolved: "1 That particulars of the report" — and we are talking about the report of my colleagues in the House of Keys - "be noted on the minutes in order that the frontage of Woodville Terrace does not become unattractive to visitors and residents; the cranked concrete post and chain link fence suggested by the Committee of Tynwald be not erected." So they rejected one
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T83
proposal which was put by the surveyor for the obvious reason that they did not want Woodville Terrace to look like Belsen camp with _a 10 feet high chain link fence. I assume that the 24 good men and true in the Douglas Corporation felt that they would reject that idea. "2. That as there can be no indication or guarantee of the length of time that the path will remain passable, the Committee does not erect a fence costing £5,000." The Corporation, the same as ourselves, have problems with their finances, and with a 115p rate in the £ they felt that £5,000 spent in this way would not achieve very much. "3. That in order that visitors and residents are not subjected to any risk, the Corporation proceeds with the Petition to Tynwald to close the remaining portions of the lane in the interests of safety to the general public, including visitors to Woodville Terrace and the inhabitants of Castle Mona Avenue." Mr. Delaney: How are they going to stop them getting into the lane without a fence? Mr. Moore: Now that comes to a point where the Corporation are now seeking permission to close the lane and you will presumably instruct them, or you will be back in this Court very shortly if they cannot close the lane to your satisfaction, but being the Douglas Corporation and having 24 good men and true, three of them, presumably, representing that area, I am sure that when we tell them to close the lane it will be closed in such a way as to achieve what we are looking for — the safety of people who walk down that public path when it is in its present condition. Now I am not going to argue. I am quite prepared to have it deferred for another month, quite happy, and not worried about it, but I feel I should spell out that note was taken of your Committee's suggestions. They were rejected by the Corporation and 24 members of the Corporation said, "We still feel the lane wants doing." If you want to do their job for them, by all means defer it again and come back with something else. Mr. Delaney: There was a split vote on that, Your Excellency. The Governor: Hon. members, before I put the amendment or the substantive motion to the vote, members should be aware that the first Agenda that this could possibly be on if it was deferred would be at the earliest December because of the parliamentary processes following the General Election. I am now going to put the amendment standing in the name of the hon. member for East Douglas, Mr. Delaney, "That consideration of the Petition be adjourned until the Douglas Corporation produce constructive plans for the whole area bounded by Woodville Lane and Castle Mona Avenue." Those in favour please say aye; against, no. A division was called for and voting resulted as follows:— In the Keys— For: Messrs: J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Watterson, Lowey, Walker, Quinney, Ward, Craine, Delaney, Irving, Mrs. Hanson, Messrs. Kermeen, Christian, Swales and the Speaker — 16. Against: Messrs. Anderson, Quirk, Mrs. Christian, Messrs. Callin, Cringle, Mrs. Quayle, and Dr. Moore — 7. The Speaker: Your Excellency, the resolution carries in the House of Keys, 16 votes being cast in favour and seven votes against.
Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas—Closure of Wood- ville Terrace Lane—Adjourned Until Production by Douglas Corporation of Plans for Whole Area. T84 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
In the Council— For: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Crellin, Moore, Kerruish, MacDonald and the President of the Council — 6. Against: Messrs. Kneale and Simcocks — 2. The Governor: In the Council, six votes in favour and two against. The amendment therefore carries. The substantive motion is, therefore, that consideration of the Petition be adjourned until the Douglas Corporation produce constructive plans for the whole area bounded by Woodville Lane and Castle Mona Avenue. Those in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The learned Attorney-General should possibly have announced a vested interest in this subject in that I understand his great grandfather built the road. (Laughter.) Thank you, learned counsel.
JOB CREATION PROGRAMME — DEBATE CONCLUDED.
The Governor: Hon. members, we will now revert to item number 9 and I call upon the hon. member for South Douglas, Mr. Ward, followed by the hon. and gallant member of Council, Major Crellin. Mr. Ward: Your Excellency, at this late hour it would not be my intention or to presume even to go over a lot of the ground and the very good suggestions and the very good debate that there has been on this particular subject. I am quite sure in my mind that a lot of lads standing up on the car park tomorrow would have been very interested to have heard the debate this afternoon. Having said that, I feel, myself, that my only intention at the beginning of this debate was to get up and support the motion simply because, to my mind, the situation seems to be at the moment that if we do not support it we are going to be in the rotten and invidious position where so many of those lads who have got a job now and are going to work are going to be in the terrible situation where, quite possibly, they could be back on the dole by New Year's Day, and for that simple reason I would vote for this motion. The thing that grieves me most about this, and my mind was brought back a great deal by what the President of the Council said, if we have to, God forbid, if we have to resort to, through our own fault, in my opinion, day to day and winter to winter solutions to solve this problem, if we had the time and if you were sitting comfortably enough I could give you a first-hand history of what winter work schemes used to be like and I could not agree more with what the President of the Council said, they were an abject failure. This is what brings me to my feet today because 1 think we have failed miserably to get together a pro- gramme to fortify ourselves against the situation that we find ourselves in. I was interested in what the member for Ramsey, Mr. Swales, said. We should have been thinking about it, we should still be thinking about it. Not thinking about it but getting on with the job of putting together a programme to solve the unemployment problem in the Isle of Man. One of the things about the failure of the old winter work schemes - and I am talking of before the war and after the war — was that the total result of it was, when the boom did come to the Isle of Man, it produced the fact that we were producing the labourers and the handrags for the things that have happened in the last 10 or 12 years. I want to see that one of the first duties of the new House is to get together a programme by apprenticeship, by training of our young people, by interest
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T85
and every encouragement to private enterprise and by Government works. We have got to see that our unemployed and our young people are trained in a proper constructive way to carry out the trades that we were always so very proud of as a Manx nation. Our tradesmen and our craftsmen were in demand all over the world because they were craftsmen of a like that was not often found on the mainland. I think, sadly, to some degree this has slipped away from us. I think we have got to get back on the track of producing a nation of craftsmen so that if we are lucky enough and get a second chance and a boom comes along to the Isle of Man, we are producing the key men and we are producing the foremen and we are producing the people who are going to run the job, and we do not have to be constantly bringing in other people to tell us how to do it, or to supervise our people in doing it, because I believe we have the material, we have the brains and we have the people who can do the job, but this has got to be an all out S effort. I have never been one, and I may be an outsider in this Court to some degree, because I have never been one to accept the concept that because they were having it rough in the United Kingdom, that it had to come here, that it had to be a direct result; that because there are nearly three million people on the dole across the water, it is going to be reflected here, it has got to be here. I do not accept that. One of the things also which I do not accept is, and I have never been able to accept as an ordinary layman who never had more than a few shillings to reckon up in his life, for the last seven or eight years, certainly since I have been in this Court, we have shouted from the hilltops, we have shouted through the media, through the television, through the newspapers and everywhere possible that our economy was something that was marvellous and some- thing which those over on the other side in the United Kingdom should be coming over here to copy. "Come over here, Joe, and learn how to do it." What has surprised me and horrified me, to some degree, and it was quite evident in May when a lot of us were going forward with our estimates, is that at the first hurdle, at the first sign of trouble, what did we get told? "We are on the floor, we have no money to do this, we have no money to do that." Now I submit, hon. members, that getting back to a state of full employment for our people in the Isle of Man is of paramount importance, and I do not mean that particularly as any kind of election gimmick, because it is realistic, and I have been one of them. Now if we need further finance, and I do not accept the fact that the Finance Board should be the beginning and the end, and we are not making them any particular whipping boys, but I really do believe that in times when things are tough, an ordinary family has to call on its reserves, and if our finance to get our people back on a proper footing of full employment and getting back to the Isle of Man some sort of status, whether it be tourism or whatever, if we have got to open the piggy bank to some degree, Warburgs' piggy bank, I think if it is necessary we have got to face up to the fact that we have got to do it, and 1 think that until we get back to some realistic stage either with finance or something else we are always going to be trying to rescue. When we come to the back-end of the summer we are going to slip back into what we were before the war. If you were lucky you could pick a card out of the hat and you might finish up at Slieau Lhost or you might find yourself in Santon quarry. I know all about it. I could tell you the whole history about it. But unless we are very careful, and if this recession holds on for very much longer this is the situation that the Isle of Man is going to get back to. And when we are talking about "spuds and herring" there will not even be any herring to get. But I really do believe that the first duty of the next House is to get back to the construction and putting together of a proper programme, a five-year plan, or whatever it is, to get our people back on the right track.
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. T86 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
do not want to see a situation which has been maintained during the last seven or eight years where we were supplying the labourers and we had to send to get the key men from the other side. I think we have got to see that that never happens in the Isle of Man again.
Mr. Crellin: Your Excellency, I am a little disturbed by some of the later remarks of our good friend, Mr. Ward, the hon. member for South Douglas. I would just like to make a couple of points on it. The first one is, of course, that it is no good just talking airily about Warburgs. The question of the funds which are managed by Warburgs, they are very, very circumscribed. They are not things that the Government of the Isle of Man can put their hands on and just take up and use for anything. They are connected with the National Insurance Fund, the reserve fund ... (Interruptions.) Well yes, but you have got to have the money. This was a remark which was made also by Mr. Lowey earlier on when he said, and he is quite right, of course, about the reserves which you carry forward. It will be interesting to members to know that before today we had already spent £1,400,000 of that reserve and in this Tynwald alone we are spending another million, and this is only on revenue. But if you look at items 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, and so on, you will see that each one of those has got big revenue considerations. Now, I interjected this morning that we thought it was quite statesmanlike for us to carry these balances forward in order to be sure, because we envisaged that we were going to have this unemployment situation and we thought it far better to have the money than to place ourselves in the position, which we might find ourselves in yet, when we have to borrow for revenue. And if we have to borrow for revenue this would be the most retrograde step that has been taken in the Isle of Man for the past 50 years. I do not intend to see it and I hope and I pray that it will not happen, but I do not think this hon. Court has to get it into its head that the revenue finances of the Isle of Man are a bottomless pit, because they are not. Money which we have got in revenue has got to be earned in revenue and it has got to come in by direct taxation or indirect taxation in the main. Now last year I spoke about this at this time and I spoke about it the year before at this time, and I asked Boards of Tynwald to be extremely circumspect in the demands on the revenue of this country which they were putting in. You see, Your Excellency, when we talk about the extension to the Douglas breakwater and the Sulby dam, these are tremendous capital schemes and they have a tremendous revenue spin-off. There are great amounts of revenue expenditure which are being committed by these very schemes and we have got to be sure that we have got this revenue. It would be imprudent of us, and it would be completely false to Tynwald, if we were to go ahead and say at the start of the financial year, "Yes, we will put aside now the sum of X thousand pounds for schemes we do not know about." So we immediately made a provision, with the concurrence of Executive Council, and I am sorry to hear the hon. Mr. Speaker say that he felt that there had been a conflict between the Finance Board ...
Mr. Irving: What provision?
The Speaker: It seems there is one.
Mr. Crellin: Well, it just seems that there is not one, there has not been. What I am saying is this, and everybody knows it if they have read their Agenda at all, that there are many of these schemes coming forward which we have concurred with, which swallow up revenue and swallow it up at an alarming rate, but they are going to do the
J ob Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T87 very thing that we are interested in doing, and that is providing more employment. Many of these schemes will do just that and so, therefore, we have not been obstructive in this matter. We have been very, very provident and I trust we will continue to be so.
Mr. Irving: Have you £41 million, as suggested?
Mr. Crellin: How can we have when I have already told you that we have spent £11 million of it today?
Mr. Irving: How much is left?
Mr. Crellin: Well, I will tell you what, I will give you a piece of paper and you can work it out. Take £11 million from £4,300,000. (Laughter.) Now, much of that is still to be committed in other schemes, revenue schemes, which are coming forward and we cannot just go from day to day, we have to be provident about this. I was delighted to hear when the hon. member of Council, Mr. Kerruish, was speaking, the confidence which always goes with the speeches he makes, instead of the pessimism and the black- guarding which goes with some other speeches. I thought his speech was excellent because it does show that the Island has got a future and can say to the world, "Come here, the Island is a good place to live. It is a good place for tourism, it is a good place for industry." We are prepared to do everything we can to assist. This is why this month we are spending £750,000 for the Isle of Man Tourist Board. This is why we are spending more money on other big projects, purely and simply to get this confidence to the outside world, but at the same time we have got to be prudent in what we do, and this is all we ask for. We are not talking about conflict, we have had no arguments and no rows about this. So what 1 say to the hon. member of the Council is — and yes, I did say it, and I do mean it —if this £150,000 proves to be insufficient we are prepared to talk again, but we will be talking in the light of the context of the expenditure which is being put in by Government at this time. Finally, sir, coming back to what Mr. Ward said, quite right, what he is saying is that one of the first priorities of the new House, and this is a terrible indictment on the presetn House . . . A Member: But it is real. Mr. Crellin: It may be but it is a terrible indictment because the Estimates will have gone in for next year's expenditure before the new House is established in this hon. Court. And so it is up to members of the Boards who are leaving to make sure that their house is in order, so that their demands are not excessive, and whatever Board comes in to take over from us as the Finance Board, can be as provident as we have tried to be in the past. Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, I make no apology for emphasising and underlining what my hon. colleague who has just resumed his seat has said. This debate reflects the critical situation which affects the United Kingdom and other western countries on the gainful employment of a labour force, created partly by the world recession, arising from the cost and supply of oil, but also from the impact of automation and the new technology which replaces the manual worker. Now, the availability of money in the short-term is the subject of this resolution and I think it has got to be recognised that Finance Board concurred in its submission to this hon. Court, realising the present problem. I can appreciate his concern. I hope he will accept that that concern is shared
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. T88 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
by me. What he has said, however, is something which is a recipe, in my mind, for bankruptcy — "When you are in financial difficulties, raid the piggy-bank." That is the road to the pit. On behalf of the Finance Board, therefore, which is handing over responsibility, which in all modesty we can claim to have observed over the last five years scrupulously, may I point out, and again say with my hon. colleagues how demands on our financial resources are in inverse proportion to the funds which are becoming available to meet such demands. It would, indeed, be poetic justice if the hon. member for Garff, Dr. Mann, in the new House was required to take on the duties and functions of Finance Board membership. Mr. Crellin: Hear, hear. (Laughter.) Mr. Kermeen: Amounts such as £4- million, million, all these figures have been mentioned. And I defer to no one in seeking to alleviate the effects particularly on school leavers having no jobs to go to. It happened in the early 1930's to my own generation and, faced with the same problem, the Government at that time ventured, in times so like our own, to cope with such projects as the Summerhill. Glen, for fifty years a permanent asset for Douglas. When the Estimates are submitted next year, and the Budget prepared, the Finance Board at that time will be subjected to more pressure than we, happily, have had to endure. I do not condemn any member for voicing his opinion and his concern. This will be their main pre-occupation. I believe that they will stick through thick and thin with our low taxation system. But what deeply perturbs me, as it does the hon. member of Council, Mr. Crellin, is the disastrous policy of supporting revenue by borrowing. At that time it would, indeed, as I have mentioned before, be the road to the pit. Far better it is to strive with every endeavour to attract the growth industry wherever it manifests itself, be it finance, tourism, manufacturing, but for heaven's sake when that growth industry does show itself, please do not knock it. The Governor: Hon. members, with your agreement I propose we go on with this particular item until it is finished and then adjourn. It was agreed. Mr. Walker: Quite briefly, Your Excellency, 1 would support what has been said by the last two speakers. I think we need to be prudent and we need to show to the outside world that this Government is not one that is going to be panicked into any action. But after saying that, we have a problem of unemployment and the problem has been related often enough this afternoon for me not to have to repeat it. I would support this £150,000 for winter work schemes because it will take 90 men off the register until Christmas. That is all, and we should not pretend it is going to do anything else. Let us hope that in January we can do the same again for another 90 men. The truth of the matter is that however much money was available there would be the inability of Government to transfer that money into jobs for this winter. I think that that is fact. It is next springtime, in fact, in January next year, we have got to be starting to look at the problem, or somebody has to start to look at the problem for the following winter, because this is a problem that we are not going to get over in the very near future, there is no question about that at all. I would certainly support Government trying to fund jobs in the private sector. I think those are probably more worthwhile than Government funding jobs with picks and shovels for 12 weeks at a time in the winter. So I will support that. We must not forget that we are in the age of the J.C.B..
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T89 and they can dig holes far better than 20 men can, and far faster. We are in the age where each hotel room has a plastic kettle so they do not have to employ chambermaids. It is great for one section, it is bad for another section. (Interruption and laughter.) It is factual. It is a problem that we are going to have to wrestle with, that every indus- trialised country in the world is going to have to wrestle with, for the next decade, and probably then not find a solution. I have got confidence in the Isle of Man. A Member: Hear, hear. Mr. Walker: I think we can make it work. We have got a tourist industry that needs a new lease of life. Mr. Delaney: Hear, hear. Mr. Walker: I think by scrapping the Common Purse Agreement, by probably knocking down Douglas promenade, because it is impossible with old buildings to try and make them conform to modern standards. 1 would not go and stay in them, I would not like an hotel where you walk along a corridor, down two steps, along a bit further, up three steps into the next building. I think the day has gone and we must recognise it. If we try and just keep the facade we will have problems because window heights are wrong, and to put a modern building behind the old facade, we would find floors coming across the middle of windows. I think we have got to look at this anew. 1 think the tourist industry themselves have got to change their policy about not wanting self- catering accommodation on Douglas promenade. (Interruptions.) Far better to have full accommodation of one sort than empty boarding-houses and nobody wanting to stay in them. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Walker: I would like to see our construction industry, which is at a low at the moment, revitalised by more aid to individuals who want to own their own houses to do that. I think that would be money well spent and I feel certain that we will never get houses cheaper than they could be built for today. Engineering certainly has got a future in the Isle of Man, but there is no doubt about it, it is no use producing goods until you can sell them, and while the markets are at a down, like they are at the moment, engineering is going to have a slow increase in development. But certainly in the future there is a basis there for more development. I would agree with the hon. Chairman of the Industrial Advisory Council, let us build nursery units. There are lots of individuals who would like a start, and I see very worthwhile efforts being put into those. I also think that legislation needs to be changed to allow Government to take from the resources of social security money to finance jobs — it is fine. Individuals contribute towards unemployment pay. Why should not those funds be used to create work? I do not see anything wrong in that, I think we ought to look at that legislation. I would finally say, sir, that we have to beware of over-manning. We are talking about getting over an unemployment problem but we have got to beware of over-manning in the private sector and we have got to beware of over-manning in the public sector, because if we do not we are living in a fool's paradise and we will find ourselves in a terrible situation in a few years from now. Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, I welcome this debate today and, in fact, I think, along with the hon. member for South Douglas, that it has been a good and reasonable debate.
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. T90 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
I feel at times that possibly the tone of the debate has been born, if you like, somewhat out of frustration, the frustration we all feel when there are unemployed on the Isle of Man, because we all would dearly like to see 100 per cent, every person, in employment. That must be what we would be aiming for. But at the same time, although we may feel frustrated that our numbers of unemployed are growing, I do feel that we should not knock ourselves too much because, in fact, for Government policy, if you like, of the Isle of Man we should be reasonably proud that we have a lower percentage unemployed than any other area round about us. And that has only come about by virtue of Government policy on the Isle of Man over the last 10 years, not just this last year. It is an on-going policy which has left us with a better position than our neigh- bours. That does not mean to say that in any respect we should be in any way complacent because, in fact, we do know that our figures are rising, and we are going to have to come up with a policy, not only for this next winter or the winter after. And I, before, have said that I think the next House when it comes in should have the equivalent of a Queen's speech after six months for a five-year period. I think we are going to be faced with setting a policy, whoever is back here in the next year or two, for the next 10 years in order that the Isle of Man can properly prosper, as the two members of the Finance Board have cautioned us that we should this afternoon. 1 go along 100 per cent. with the hon. member for East Douglas who set the tone, if you like, of trying to fight out for something to happen, and we are all going to vote 100 per cent. for this resolution on the Agenda this afternoon. We are all realistic enough to know, in fact, that in the terms of trying to solve the immediate needs of unemployment, putting men into jobs, frankly, it is peanuts, because really that is what it is. We have said, as my hon. colleagues have said, that £150,000 which we are putting in means 90 men for 12 weeks or 50 men for 20 weeks. It is immaterial. Another £150,000 will only do likewise. But the hon. member for East Douglas made two comments on my state- ment. I would point out to members that this is a statutory statement which has to be made by the Board of Social Security twice a year. It is, in fact, something which has gone on for a considerable number of years now in May and October, and it is actually just a statement to give you the picture as of that given time. But the comment of the hon. member for East Douglas, Mr. Delaney, was to some extent a bit of a knock that two departments of Government in the Isle of Man could not get together, for example. the Tourist Board, and we could not get the figures. In fact, what this statement does say is that the summer tourist season in the Island was economically satisfactory. Informal feedback from the industry suggests that it has not been good. Now, frankly. I agree with him 100 per cent. Numbers do help, but even yet, I would suggest, the Tourist Board do not know whether the season on the front has been economically viable for those in business. The feedback that we have got is that it is not. Now, had they had full boarding-houses we would have been assuming that they had had a jolly good year. The fact that they had less numbers through does not necessarily mean that they, as individuals, have made less profit. So economically those boarding-houses may not be poorer off. (Interruption.) They may very well have been able to cut their cloth, and trim, as it were, so that their financial position at the end of the season was no worse. I am not saying that. In fact, we are saying that the feedback is that it is in a poor state. Just the numbers alone do not give the economic viability of the tourist trade. And, of course, the question was also raised about the motivation of our Isle of Man workers and why I put the words in this statement that I feel some anger at times. Can
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T91
1 just give the hon. Court one example? I am loath to do it but, nevertheless, I have been asked. Why I try, if you like, from time to time to make it public that we should try to have some motivation, well, a fortnight ago, three weeks ago, we were approached at the Job Centre by an employer who wished to employ a person in, albeit, a labouring capacity. So it was felt at that stage from the Job Centre that as an exercise we would send from the unemployment register to the employer, in fact, a number from the unemployment register. In fact, 22 people who were signing on were given cards to go to this job, so 22 were told, "Please go down the road, here is your card, there is the address on it, go to the employer, there is a job there." It was then up to the employer to make his choice. In actual fact, we have been told that out of the 22 who were told to go to the employer with a card, eight actually appeared in front of the employer. Now that business angers me from time to time when we try to set up a Job Centre which is trying to help. It is very difficult to put round pegs into round holes and, of course, the employer ultimately has to make the choice but, nevertheless, I do feel that those people who are unemployed, when there is the opportunity of a job, they should at'least try to make themselves available to get that opportunity. So that is why that object is in the statement as to motivation. We had a comment earlier this afternoon also about various schemes which could be put up and carried out. The hon. member for East Douglas, again, mentioned the reservoir and the new reservoir in Sulby Glen. I am 150 per cent. behind him, more so. I have said from the outset that, in fact, the leisure use of that should be of paramount importance. In fact, if he cares to turn up minutes of the Tourist Board — and I was a member of the Tourist Board for two years in advance of him being a member I very well remember a previous Tourist Board trying to persuade people in that particular area that self-catering accommodation would be a good thing, and that we should be going ahead at that stage. What went wrong? The natives, if you like, beat it back and, in fact, it was defeated. But I still am of the same opinion that now that reservoir is there, like the hon. member for East Douglas, it will be a grave shame if the Isle of Man, having spent a lot of capital, is not prepared to make use of the capital resources which we have spent—and fully exploited. And if that means that we set up a few cabins, nicely hid, on Forestry Board land at the top end of Sulby Glen, and we use the reservoir for leisure, well then, I am 100 per cent. behind tourism in that context. Other schemes have been put forward. My hon. colleague suggested, for example, the car park at the Sound, and Mr. Speaker suggested the reopening of the Marine Drive. Well, frankly, both of those schemes are capital intensive rather than labour intensive. Those are just two which have been immediately put up. They are not labour intensive. My hon. colleague, Mr. Walker, who has just resumed his seat, said we are in the age of the J.C.B. I remember in the 1950's when the sewer went through Ballabeg—I was a mere schoolboy running round—I have watched the men literally dig their way through Ballabeg to lay the sewer pipes through the village, through to Colby. It was done with a pick and spade and there were gangs of men, it was actually literally hand dug. This year the Local Government Board put out to tender a by-pass scheme from Ballabeg to Colby. That scheme employed originally hundreds of men for a couple of years. This scheme went out to tender. As I understand it, it is now complete, or as good as. I think two men carried out that scheme in about five weeks with a J.C.B. That is the context of the employment situation which has changed from the 1950's to the 1980's, and will change again from the 1980's to the year 2,000, and that is what we have to look at, and that is the context of the unemployment
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. T92 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981
which we are foreseeing, not this winter, but for the next 10, 20 years ahead, and possibly even longer than that. I would go so far as to say that we should not only be looking at how we can solve the immediate, but we should, in fact, stand back some- times, take a thinking hour off and consider what are going to be the social consequences for the future years. And, quite genuinely, I believe that some Government is going to be faced with a brand new system. We can no longer go along patching up an odd system here and paying out, out of an insurance fund, as my colleague suggests, some sort of stop-gap scheme. I do not think the Isle of Man can afford that, I do not think, in fact, that the countries immediately around us can afford that, and 1 am equally certain there is going to be within the next 20 years massive change. I would suggest that one possible way — and I, personally, agree that it certainly needs very careful scrutiny — is the idea which has been loosely talked about in this Court before, of some form of negative income tax. You may wonder why negative income tax gets involved in unemployment, but it is a complete change of system. We have a system in the Isle of Man at the present time and the hon. member for West Douglas, the Chairman of the Board of Education, was explaining it to you in some detail this morning, where, in fact, because of our system, if you like, children getting taken into care cost astronomical sums. It is born out of our current system. We are building into society a two-tier system at the present time which is worse than ever that last system was of years ago; we are currently building that in. We are building it in by virtue of the fact that we have some families, professional people, if you like, bringing two huge salaries into that household, and those same families complaining that their school-leavers cannot get employment, and down the road there is a gentleman trying to support his wife and family who has no income. Now, that may be male chauvinism, or, in fact, it could be the other way round, but it is a change which ultimately, somewhere along the line, we have got to build into society. As the President of the Council said, we can only create a new climate to get advancement. Now we know that in this new climate we are going to be faced with the J.C.B.'s which are going to dig the holes. We know, therefore ,that there is going to be considerable leisure time available to man in the future. It may be that even just being at leisure becomes work in the future. It may be that people are going to be paid for their leisure. I do not know. That is a change, a complete change in society. We are going to have to go along that road. There is no doubt that we will go along the road of shorter working weeks, that is inevitable. Hours will lessen. It is possible that we are going to have to consider a lower retirement age. All these things will have to be taken into consideration. It is a new climate, it is a new system. I would just ask, Your Excellency, that sometimes members take an hour off for, as I said, thinking time and consider long-term. It is fine to go along with these stop-gap measures, but we all know, as many members have said, that we are paying lip service when we are effectively putting £150,000, as voted by this resolution this afternoon, to solving the unemployment. We know it is a short-term stop-gap measure. Mr. Simcocks: Your Excellency, 1 do not think any of us are in any doubt about the fact that £150,000 is nothing more or less than a palliative, and 1 think we would all agree with the hon. President of the Council when he said that the real duty of Govern- ment is not to make work so that people can dig holes and fill them in again; the job of Government is the creation of the right climate in which to encourage real work. The way in which this climate can be created is done in two ways, both of which are based on confidence. First of all, there is the stability of our financial situation and, secondly,
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T93
there is the stability of our political situation. I believe, myself, that the Agenda which we have before us today in some ways may be regarded as undermining, to some extent, the confidence which entrepreneurs and merchants have in the Island. The Island has always appeared to be a place where we conserve our money. We have been very suc- cessful in keeping taxation down, our labour relations are good, our political systems are stable. But when I was reading the Agenda for today's meeting I was horrified at the amount of money which it is proposed we should spend just today. The climate of prosperity, the climate of employment, the climate of success, the climate of confidence, will never come to us if we appear as a Court to be a Court of spendthrifts. I am sure that we cannot, of course, afford to wait whilst a policy of confidence and the correct economic policy bear fruit. We must, I am sure, whilst we are reorganising our attitudes, whilst we are re-establishing confidence, we must, I think, do what is necessary to provide the palliative which is all this £150,000 is. We are all going to vote for it, but I do hope that the Agenda which we have before us today is going to be remembered because in future there will be no more like it. I am sure that we cannot expect con- fidence in us as an Island if we appear to be spending money and appear to be reaching the stage when shortly we will be running out of money. Let us, therefore, decide that prudence is to be our watchword. Let us help those who need help in the meantime, but build up the right economic climate whilst we are doing that. Mr. Christian: Your Excellency, 1 would like to get away from the 21st century, although I agree with everything that has been said about it, and get back to the wording of this resolution. Personally, I have to admit that I am very disappointed with the limited extent of it. I wonder whether it shows that we are, perhaps, getting our priorities wrong. You see, it is all right talking, and all the fine speeches we have heard, very fine, but you try telling that to one of the 1,395 people who are unemployed. They will not think it is a very fine Island to live in because we have financial stability, and we have merchant banks, and we have all the rest of it, if at the end of the day we cannot even manage to provide employment for the people. Let us look at the people who are now listed on 7th October. This is the unemployment list on 7th October. There are 287 unemployed skilled males — 287 skilled men are out of work; 286 semi-skilled. So we are not talking here about the sort of people who may be, to some extent, unemployable. We do know we have a limited number of them. We also have a limited number of people — and I was sorry that the Chairman of the Board of Social Security emphasised it because I thought it was a bit unfair — we have a limited number of people who do not want to work, but they are a very small percentage, a very small percentage indeed. And when you look at the provision which is being made under this resolution it is such a paltry ...
A Member: Peanuts! Mr. Christian: I would say so, peanuts. By the way, the amount of money, it was stated to us originally that the first £150,000 would provide 12 weeks' employment for 73 men. (Interruption.) Yes, that was what came through originally from the Executive Council minutes, and this is what was stated. It works out at 73 men. If you analyse the total number of man hours by 12 you get 73, so now it has been doubled that will mean we are going to be providing employment for 12 weeks up until the middle of December, up to pre-Christmas, for 144 men. If you take off the people who require work permits, and you take off the people who sign on the register, not because they
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. T94 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 wish to be necessarily treated as unemployed but because they wish to receive the credit contribution for national insurance, if you take them off, and you take off the 144, you are still going to have 513 men on the unemployment register and 257 women. That is the situation. It is no use talking in general politics and about what a wonderful Island, and everything else, to these people. Surely we can manage to do something better. I do find the resolution before us today very disappointing. I do not think we have made many mistakes in the last five years, but I do think one we have made was not to do something about getting a body, and it was proposed when I proposed an emergency resolution on unemployment five years for January, January 1977, and one of the recommendations — Mr. Speaker was the Chairman of the Committee — and one of its recommendations was that a separate body should be set up to deal with employment and unemployment. I hope the next House will do this because we were talked out of it, because the Chairman of the Board of Social Security said, in effect, "That is my patch, get off. We are already responsible, the Board of Social Security, for dealing with employment and unemployment. There is no point in setting up any other body." Well, between the Board of Social Security and Executive Council and Finance Board and everybody else, the situation has not improved in any way in five years. This is not something which has suddenly come upon us which was not expected. The recession in the world in general, in the United Kingdom, and was eventually bound to come to the Isle of Man, has been going on now for what — two years? And this is the best we can do at the present time, in the last Tynwald, when there has not been a Tynwald since July and this is put before us after three months' recession, we come in October and this is the best we can do? There will not be another Tynwald until 15th December, and are they then going to be able to put schemes straight through and into immediate effect at that time so that there will be provision to see these people over Christmas and over the beginning of the year? I do not think, with all due respect to my hon. friend in front of me here, that we can say that Pontins are going to take everybody up. Well, you know, this is pie-in-the-sky. I hope it comes off. I would welcome Pontins or any more of them that come, this is just what we want. But there has been so much pie-in- the-sky about people coming to the Island over the last five years, and I will believe it when they are actually here and established, when they have actually dug the first sod and committed themselves and have got on with it. But I do think that when you look at the whole set-up of unemployment and what we propose to do about it, and it is so divided, as I said, between the Board of Social Security, between Executive Council now who are dealing with it, and so on, that there is a need for the new House at least not to make the same mistake we made, but to appoint a body to look after unemployment, which should be one of the primary responsibilities of every member of this Court. I do think that on the industrial side we do very well, I am sure every effort is made, but then it needs more extensive treatment than that, very much more. And there are so many things in the Island where money could usefully be spent. Take my own town of Ramsey. The state of the pavements in Ramsey is deplorable. (Interruption.) I think the whole Island, probably, is the same. Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Wait until the Highway Board take them over! Mr. Christian: Well, let the Highway Board take the responsibility and get on with it now. We do not want jam tomorrow, and I am sure the unemployed do not want jam tomorrow, they want jam today. This is the unfortunate thing — how are they going to manage now when there will not be another Tynwald until December? I do not see
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 T95 that we have any alternative but to vote for this although I am sure a number of other members, like myself, feel that it is not nearly adequate. But let us at least register our protest so that perhaps the next Tynwald will not make the same mistake. The Governor: The hon. member of Council, Mr. Moore, and the hon. and gallant member of Council, Mr. MacDonald, wish to speak for one minute each. Mr. Moore: Your Excellency, I only want to make one very quick comment. I think it has all been said, really, but I think we should remind ourselves, you see, that we are talking about this question now of 90 men for 12 weeks. Let us give them all £100 a week, which is about what it would work out between them in these days of employment, and let us subtract the sum of the 90 men for 12 weeks receiving their unemployment pay. We are talking really in terms of an amount less than £100,000 that it is going to cost this Government. And if this is not a pathetic effort at the unemployment problem, 1 just do not know what is. But we must speak in relation to this at all times on the question of unemployment. When you are employing a man, deduct the sum that you are already paying him for the degrading position that he feels in doing nothing, and putting him into some productive work, and if you work it out on those terms I would assume that instead of talking about the £150,000, we are probably talking nearer some- thing between £60,000 and £80,000. Mr. MacDonald: Your Excellency, very quickly, I am afraid, like the hon. member for Ramsey, Mr. Christian, that I do not like what we have done today. We have talked of all sorts of pie-in-the-sky and schemes for the future, from roads running round the Island, to this, to that, to the other. But the 1,400 men and women who are on the dole at the moment will not thank us for talking all afternoon, they will not thank us one little bit. We have done nothing, absolutely nothing. We have accepted salary rises for everybody under the sun. We have a situation in the Isle of Man where you can earn £20,000 a week and your wife work for the Government and earn £12,000 a week. Mr. Shncocks: A year, surely? Mr. MacDonald: A year, rather, yes, a year. (Interruption.) Only the Chief Constable, yes! You can have people, both working for Government on colossal salaries, whilst other people are very lucky to be picking up £3,000 a year and trying to bring up children. The other thing I think we have got to remember in this day and age is that prior to the War a man worked and got a salary in the Isle of Man, a very low salary, but he could live on it. Today it needs the man's salary and the wife's salary to bring up a group of children, three or four children. So somebody is getting two workers for the price of one, and this is happening today. As for the tourist industry. I agree entirely with what the member for Rushen said. I have been abroad this year for a holiday, Tynwald sent me on another one, and there is no doubt about it in my mind — (inter- ruption) — well, it was hard work, the second one, but there is no doubt about it, I saw an aircraft go out from Ronaldsway Airport the same morning I left packed with Manx people, not going to Blackpool, not going to Scunthorpe or Scarborough, but all going to the sunny Mediterranean. These were all local people who had just shut their boarding-houses. Mr. Shncocks: With a sigh of relief! Mr. MacDonald: When you get there (a) it is cheaper; (b) the accommodation is far better; and (c) the Government does not support it. They are standing on their own two
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded. T96 TYNWALD COURT, OCTOBER 13, 1981 feet. They borrow their money from the banks, not from the taxpayer, because what worries me about the whole situation is, everybody has now got an idea that any job he is in at all, or any business he is running, the taxpayer will support him, the taxpayer will give him money. In fact it is getting so bad, 1 am told that if you are a father and you want to sell your property to your son, the son can borrow the money from the Government to buy from the father at a low rate of interest. Now when these sort of nonsenses occur, do you think the ordinary working man is going to sit back and say, "What a wonderful House, what a wonderful world, what a wonderful Isle of Man!"? A man came to see me last week, he is now 58, no, 59. He went through the last war and had a rough war. He came to see me and he said, "Is this what 1 went through it for?" At the age of 59 the builder he has been working for for 12 years has said, "You are out my friend, I do not need you any more." Finished — no compensation, no redundancy pay, no anything. He said, "I would be better off living in England, and I fought for the Isle of Man." The Governor: The Chairman of Executive Council to reply. Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, it has been a long debate and 1 have made a lot of notes that I have no intention of using at this time because I do not think they will have the slightest influence on what 1 say. I hope hon. members will support the motion for £150,000 now, and I hope at the next Tynwald, which will be the December Tynwald, that the Finance Board might allow us a lot more money. The hon. member of Council, Major Crellin, said there had been no conflict between the rest of Executive Council and the Finance Board. I do not know what he means by conflict. There certainly had been a disagreement on the amount of money which has been put forward today, so let us not pretend that all members of Executive Council — we stick together, of course, sir, — but not all members of Executive Council are thrilled with coming forward to this Court for £150,000. As far as I am concerned, I will do my best to see that it is spent before the beginning of the New Year and that we come back for more for the three months of January, February and March. I hope the hon. member for South Douglas will not be afraid that everybody is going to be paid off at Christmas. At least this year we are starting well before Christmas. Certain members have said that it has been an excellent debate, and having talked so much about unemployment today maybe we are not in the best of moods this afternoon to appreciate this debate. I do not want to suggest it is the proximity of the General Election, but many of the speeches today sounded as if hon. members were merely extracting the old stuff from either their current manifesto or the last one. "We must create employment, we must make greater efforts to attract industry, we must be prudent"— all these generalities. I am disappointed that we have not had more guidance to Executive Council for carrying out this winter work thing - concrete proposals. I am afraid the debate, to me, has merely seemed generalities, platitudes, clichés, bromides and belly-aches, but I beg to move, sir. The Governor: Hon. members, I will put the motion. Those in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. Hon. members, we will adjourn until 10.30 a.m. tomorrow. The Court adjourned.
Job Creation Programme—Debate Concluded.