Printed (by Authority) by CORRIE Ltd., 48 Bucks Road, Douglas, Isle of Man.
REPORT OF PR SCEEDINGS OF T YNWALD COURT
Douglas, Tuesday, 20 March 1990 at 10.30 a.m.
Present: The Lieutenant-Governor (His Excellency Major General Sir Laurence New, CB, CBE). In the Council: The President of the Council (the Hon. R.J.G. Anderson), the Lord Bishop (the Rt. Rev. Noel Debroy Jones), the Attorney-General (Mr. T.W. Cain, QC), Mr. B. Barton, Hon. A.A. Callin, Hon. E.G. Lowey, His Honour A.C. Luft, CBE, Messrs. W.K. Quirk and J.N. Radcliffe, with Mr. T.A. Bawden, Clerk of the Council.
In the Keys: The Speaker (the Hon. Sir Charles Kerruish, OBE) (Garff); Hon. A.R. Bell and Brig. N.A. Butler, CBE (Ramsey); Mr. R.E. Quine (Ayre); Mr. J.D.Q. Cannan (Michael); Mrs. H. Hannan (Peel); Mr. W.A. Gilbey (Glenfaba); Hon. D. North (Middle); Messrs. P. Karran, R.C. Leventhorpe and L.R. Cretney (Onchan); Hon. B. May and Mrs. J. Delaney (Douglas North); Messrs. A.C. Duggan and D.C. Cretney (Douglas South); Messrs. D.F.K. Delaney and P.W. Kermode (Douglas East); Hon. J.C. Cain and Hon. G.V.H. Kneale, CBE (Douglas West); Hon. J.A. Brown (Castletown); Hon. D.J. Gelling (Malew and Santon); Hon. M.R. Walker, Dr. J.R. Orme and Mr. J. Corrin (Rushen); with Prof. T. SU. N. Bates, Clerk of Tynwald.
The Lord Bishop took the prayers.
WELCOME TO RE-ELECTED COUNCIL MEMBERS
The Governor: Hon. members, may I on your behalf welcome back to our numbers the hon. members of Council who were elected to the Council during the past few days: Mr. Cailin, Mr. Radcliffe and Mr. Quirk.
PAPERS LAID BEFORE THE COURT
The Governor: l call on the Clerk to lay papers.
Welcome to Re-Elected Council Members Papers Laid Before the Court T1104 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
The Clerk: I lay before the Court:
Estimates 1990/91 - Book of Estimates of Government Departments and Statutory Boards, 1990/91.
Harbour Dues - Harbour Dues Regulations 1990.
Coroners Act 1983 - Coroners' Fees Order 1990.
Financial Supervision Act 1988 - Financial Supervision (Restricted Schemes) Regulations 1990. Collective Investment Scheme (Periodical Fees) Regulations 1990. Financial Supervision (Prescribed Countries and Territories) Regulations 1990. Collective Investment Scheme (Application Fees) Regulations 1990.
Income Tax Act 1970 - Income Tax (Car Benefits) Order 1990.
Jurors - Jurors (Supplementary Payments) Scheme 1990.
Provision of Basic Slag - Provision of Basic Slag Scheme 1990.
Social Security - Social Security Legislation (Application) Order 1990. Social Security Legislation (Application) (No. 2) Order 1990. Social Fund Maternity and Funeral Expenses (General) (Isle of Man) (Amendment) Regulations 1990. Family Income Supplements (Computation) Regulations 1990. Supplementary Benefit (Requirements, Respurces and Single Payments) (Amendment) Regulations 1990. Social Security Legislation (Application) (No. 3) Order 1990.
Road Traffic Act 1985 - Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) (Amendment) Regulations 1990.
Licensing and Registration of Vehicles Act 1985 - Designated Vehicles (Licences) (Amendment) Regulations 1990.
Public Service Vehicles (Inspection) Act 1928 - Hackney Motor Vehicles (Inspection and Condition of Fitness) (Amendment) Regulations 1990. Public Service Vehicles (Motor Cycles) (Inspection) (Amendment)
Papers Laid Before the Court TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1105
Regulations 1990. Hackney Horse-Drawn Vehicles (Inspection) (Amendment) Regulations 1990.
Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) Act 1964 - Public Service Vehicles (Licence and Certificates) (Amendment) Regulations 1990.
Misuse of Drugs Act 1976 - Misuse of Drugs Act 1976 (Amendment) Order 1990.
Charities Registration Act 1989 - Charities (General) Regulations 1990.
Merchant Shipping (Masters and Seamen) Act 1979 - Merchant Shipping (Masters and Seamen) (Appliction) Order 1990.
National Health Service (Isle of Man) Act 1948 - National Health Service (Supplementary Ophthalmic Services) (Isle of Man) (Amendment) Regulations 1990.
Education Act 1986 - Education (Functions) (Amendment) Order 1990. Education (Committees) (Amendment) Order 1990.
Government Departments Act 1987 - Transfer of Functions (Child Care) Order 1990. Transfer of Functions (Employment) Order 1990.
Highways Act 1986 - Highway Closure (Douglas) (No. 1) Order 1990.
Government Purchasing Arrangements - Report by Executive Council on Government Purchasing Arrangements.
Value Added Tax - Value Added Tax (Interest on Tax) (Prescribed Rate) Order 1990.
Banking Acts 1975 to 1986 - Banking Act (Exemptions) (Amendment) Order 1990. Financial Supervision (Restricted Schemes) (Advertising) Regulations 1990. Financial Advertising Licence (Amendment) Regulations 1990.
Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act 1968 - Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act (Prescribed Persons) Regulations 1990.
Stock Transfer Act 1965 -
Papers Laid Before the Court T1106 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Stock Transfer (Substitution of Forms) Order 1990. Summary Jurisdiction Rules 1990.
Medicines Act 1976 - Medicines (Pharmacies) (Registration Fees) Regulations 1990.
Merchant Shipping Act 1985 - Merchant Shipping (Provisions and Water) Regulations 1990.
Social Security - Social Security (Isle of Man) (No. 2) Order 1989 (S.I. 1989 No. 2001).
Broadcasting: Cable Programme Services - Broadcasting Act 1981 (Isle of Man) Order 1989 (S.I. 1989 No. 2403).
European Communities - Applicable European Communities Legislation for January 1990.
Appointed Day Orders - Income Tax Act 1989 (Appointed Day) (No. 2) Order 1990. Financial Supervision Act 1988 (Appointed Day) (No. 2) Order 1990. Criminal Justice Act 1990 (Appointed Day) Order 1990.
Report - Report by the Isle of Man Delegation to the Conference of the Peripheral and Maritime Regions of the E.E.C. 1989.
Accounts - Statement of Accounts of the Isle of Man Post Office Authority for the year ended 29th March 1989.
CONSTITUTION BILL GRANTING OF ROYAL ASSENT — QUESTION BY MR. CANNAN
The Governor: Hon. members, we turn to the Question Paper, and I call upon the hon. member for Michael, Mr. Cannan, to ask the question standing in his name.
Mr. Carman: Your Excellency, I beg to ask Your Excellency —
When is it anticipated that Royal Assent will be given to the Constitution Bill which was signed last month in Tynwald?
The Governor: In accordance with Standing Order 37, I direct that the Chief Minister answer this question.
Mr. Walker: Thank you, Your Excellency. It is anticipated that Your Excellency
Constitution Bill — Granting of Royal Assent — Question by Mr. Cannan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1107
will be in a position to announce that the Royal Assent has been given to the Constitution Bill at the May sitting of Tynwald.
Mr. Cannon: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Are we in danger... Is the Chief Minister... agree with me that we are in danger of believing our own propaganda in that we are able to have Royal Assent passed on Acts in the Island by His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor on completion of signature in this hon. House? And secondly, why is this Bill being delayed for three months from signature in February?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I am sure the hon. member is aware of the Royal Assent to Legislation (Isle of Man) Order 1981, and in that order it makes it very •clear that any Bill that affects the Royal Prerogative should be reserved for signification at Her Majesty's pleasure under the terms of the Royal Assent of Legislation Order. The Bill that we are talking about, in fact, is one such Bill; it has been sent to the Home Office for submission to Privy Council for the granting of Royal Assent. It is anticipated that by May it will be in position to be announced that that has happened in this hon. Court.
UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE — QUESTION BY THE SPEAKER
The Governor: Question number 2. The hon. Mr. Speaker.
The Speaker: Sir, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister -
Is it the policy of your Government to support the introduction of a unicameral legislature?
The Governor: I turn to the Chief Minister to reply.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the possibility of the Island having a unicameral legislature has not been discussed by Executive Council in recent times.
The Speaker: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Is it the policy of your Government to support the maintenance, then, of a bicameral legislature retaining the electoral procedures whereby the House of Keys acts as an electoral college?
Mr. Walker: Can I say and repeat again, Your Excellency, that this particular principle has not been discussed by Executive Council in recent times. It has not been discussed in Executive Council since I have been Chief Minister. What happened before that, sir, I am not equipped to say, but we have not discussed the principles Mr. Speaker is referring to.
The Speaker: What is your policy in respect of the legislature, then?
Mr. Walker: If Mr. Speaker wants my view —
Unicameral Legislature — Question by The Speaker T1108 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
The Speaker: No, the Government's view.
Mr. Walker: The Government have not discussed it, Mr. Speaker, and if you are referring to the Bill that is being proposed by the hon. member, Mr. Kneale, who gave notice of —
The Speaker: No, I am not referring to it at all.
Mr. Walker: Then we are not aware of the contents of that Bill and we have not discussed it, sir.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, a supplementary. Whereas it is obvious, Your Excellency, the Government has no policy in respect of the constitution of the legislature, could I ask the Chief Minister, what would be your Government's reactions if in future elections to the Legislative Council members were to deliberately spoil voting papers in order to condemn the procedures and seek alternative means of election?
Mr. Walker: I can say, Your Excellency, and be quite clear on the last matter that Mr. Speaker referred to, I think it is just plain stupid that hon. members used that process. Now, I do not know who those hon. members were that tend to spoil papers in the election; I would have thought that it was quite a simple thing to do and I do believe that that election should have been carried out in a proper way and a conclusion reached a couple of weeks ago. As far as the policy is concerned of whether or not we should change our system of Government or the system of Government that obtains in Tynwald, can I just say, Your Excellency, that as this was not one of the measures that was put down by the Government as an intended piece of legislature, as far as I am concerned, we did not propose any change.
LINKSPANS — NEGOTIATIONS FOR PURCHASE OF — QUESTION BY MR. DELANEY
The Governor: Thank you. Question 3. The hon. member, for Douglas East, Mr. Delaney.
Mr. Delaney: I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
What is the current state of negotiations with the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company Limited regarding the purchase of linkspans in accordance with the Tynwald resolution?
The Governor: I refer again to the Chief Minister.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the current state of negotiation with the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company Limited regarding the purchase of linkspans can only
Linkspans — Negotiations for Purchase of — Question by Mr. Delaney TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1109 be described as ongoing. These negotiations are taking longer than we would have wished and we do believe it is more important that we get the future operating regime right than that we should act with excessive speed. We shall, of course, report back to Tynwald just as soon as we are able to do so, sir.
Mr. Delaney: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Is it significant that amounts for the possible purchase of such linkspans is not included in figures?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the principle of the resolution that was approved by Tynwald was that the Government should be the owner of the harbour installations and, Your Excellency, one of the ways suggested and certainly I put to Tynwald was that the linkspan should be purchased from the Steam Packet, either negotiated or by compulsory purchase if that is necessary. If there is another way round which avoids a particular purchase then I think we are right in looking at it. But can I say, Your Excellency, that these negotiations are ongoing; we are talking to the Steam Packet at this time.
Mr. Delaney: I thank the Chief Minister for his reply, sir.
RE-USABLE PRODUCTS — USE BY GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS — QUESTION BY MRS. HANNAN
The Governor: Question 4. The hon. member for Peel, Mrs. Hannan.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
What steps are being taken to end the use by Government departments et cetera of disposable products when re-usable alternatives are available?
The Governor: I turn to the hon. member for Rushen, Mr. Walker, again.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, no general direction has been issued by Executive Council to departments in this matter. However, I am aware the Department of Local Government and the Environment is looking further at the potential for recycling. When that exercise is completed it may be possible to issue some general notice for guidance.
Mrs. Hannan: A supplementary, Your Excellency. I wonder if the Chief Minister, when he is looking at this, could issue guidance to the departments of Government who are moving towards disposable items — plates, towels whatever it is — and try to use items which can be re-used, and also look towards the further introduction of milk bottles? (Laughter)
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I have never been under any illusions at all about the potential for using milk bottles. (Interruptions and laughter) Can I say, Your Excellency, in seriousness that I believe the hon. member has a very real interest
se-Usable Products — Use by Government Departments - Question by Mrs. Hannan T1110 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 in this particular subject and it may well be more useful to her if she could set those thoughts down in writing and convey them to the minister for the department so that they can take her views into account when they come to their conclusions.
NON-RESIDENT TRADERS' LICENCES — PUBLICATION OF REPORT — QUESTION BY MR. BARTON
The Governor: Question 5. The hon. member for the Legislative Council, Mr. Barton.
Mr. Barton: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
When did Executive Council call for a report on the subject of Non-Resident Traders' licences and when is this report expected?
The Governor: I turn to the Chief Minister, once again.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, Executive Council called for a report on the subject of Non-Resident Traders' licences from the Board of Consumer Affairs in February 1988. I understand the board hopes to be in a position to report by the end of this month.
Mr. Barton: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Would the Chief Minister be able to indicate why it has taken so long for this report to become available?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I know that the Board of Consumer Affairs has been talking with the Chamber of Commerce, has been talking with the planning authorities and other interested persons. I cannot in detail tell the hon. member why. Perhaps that question is better addressed to the chairman of the board.
HOMOSEXUALITY — U.K. GOVERNMENT PRESSURE FOR CHANGE (1) IN LEGISLATION — QUESTION BY MRS. DELANEY
The Governor: Question 6. The hon. member for Douglas North, Mrs. Delaney.
Mrs. Delaney: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
Whereas it was reported in the Jersey Evening Post of 23rd February 1990 that the British Home Office is putting pressure on the Channel Islands to change the law relating to homosexuality —
(1) Has any communication been received from the British Government on this matter?
Non-Resident Traders' Licences — Publication of Report — Question by Mr. Barton Homosexuality — U.K. Government Pressure for Change in Legislation — Question by Mrs. Delaney TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1111
(2) If so, does the Government intend to allow political pressure from outside this Island to override the resolve of the Isle of Man people on this matter?
The Governor: I turn to the Chief Minister for the sixth time.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, as members will be aware, our legislation relating to homosexuality is at odds with the European Convention on Human Rights and is out of step with the whole of Western Europe with the exception of Jersey. The question of whether our law should be amended will be considered when the Sexual Offences Bill comes forward in the near future. As regards the British Government, I am aware of only one letter on the subject in recent months from the Home Office. That letter refers to the factual position and outlines some recent developments in Jersey. It does not put pressure on us to change our law but it does reinforce our recognition about the inevitability of a change in our law. We should all clearly understand that our law will change in the foreseeable future to come into line with the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights and either we can change the law ourselves or have change imposed upon us. Your Excellency, that is not a threat, it is a statement of fact that is dictated, not by the British Government, but by the European Convention in international law. Whether we change the law is a matter for Tynwald, but if we do change it it will be because it is right that the Island's legislation should accord with the law of the rest of Western Europe, because it would be constitutionally undesirable to allow Her Majesty's Government to legislate for us in this area as we could not then be in a position to dictate the terms of the legislation and an unfortuante precedent would be created, and because such a move would pave the way for us to be able to grant to our people the right of individual petition to the European Court of Human Rights.
Mrs. Delaney: A supplementary, Your Excellency. As the matter is clearly a constitutional matter I would ask the Chief Minister, why then has he given Executive Council the right to a single vote in this matter rather than a collective vote by Executive Council?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the hon. member will be aware that there are strong moral undertones to this particular issue — that is one reason, and the other reason is that many members of Executive Council have in fact stated their intentions quite clearly and indelibly in the past and I think it would be wrong and unfair to persuade them and lean on them to change their minds.
Mrs. Delaney:. A further supplementary, Your Excellency. I thank the Chief Minister for his reply and for the memorandum that was circulated after my question was placed. May I ask another supplementary? While the proposed Sexual Offences Bill prohibits public bodies promoting homosexuality, will the Chief Minister ensure that any entrepreneur or individual will also be prohibited from promoting homosexuality through gay clubs or other social activities?
Mr. Walker: I certainly take the point the hon. member raises and I would suggest, Your Excellency, that this would be one of the merits in the branches
Homosexuality — U.K. Government Pressure for Change in Legislation — Question by Mrs. Delaney T1112 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 considering and approving this sort of legislation itself, that that sort of provision could in fact be incorporated into Manx law. It is unlikely that that sort of detail will be incorporated in Manx law if the law is in fact thrust on us by somebody else.
Mr. Quine: Your Excellency, given that members of Tynwald have very recently, as recently as 1987, made their views clear on this matter and have rejected a move to legalise homosexuality, what mandate has the Chief Minister obtained in the interim period to put forward this Sexual Offences Bill?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I do not claim to have received a mandate from anybody, but I do claim we have a responsibility, Your Excellency, and I believe the responsibility is to put in front of the branches law which they can debate, which hon. members can debate and which the branch can come to a conclusion on, which in fact honours our responsibilities under international law and I think I would be wrong, Your Excellency, as Chief Minister, in bringing forward a measure for legislation which I knew was contrary to our international obligations.
Mr. Gilbey: Your Excellency, a supplementary. Dealing with the second part of the hon. questioner's question, would the hon. Chief Minister agree that the overwhelming wish and resolve of the majority of the electorate, whom we represent, is that there should be no change in the law, that they do not wish there be a change in the law?
The Governor: Before calling on any other members to ask questions, I must insist, hon. members, that this does not become a set of statements or enter into a debate. I would remind you, as I have so often, of Standing Order 33: in this Question Time 'the proper object of a question shall be to obtain information on a matter of fact within the special cognizance of the person to whom the question is addressed', and I must tell you that I shall resolutely oppose any infringement of that Standing Order. I interrupted an answer from the Chief Minister, however.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I am aware of the wishes of very many people within our community that they would not like to see a change in the law and, Your Excellency, I suggest that that is one of the considerations that members have to draw to a conclusion in their own minds they have to diaw that, they have to think about that and they have to consider international obligations that are on this Court that we have entered into freely and unequivocably, and we have to bear in mind also, I think, our constitutional growth over the last 25 years and bear in mind what it would mean to that constitution. None of us are really aware of but we can all, I think, come to terms with the situation that there will be a change. Our constitution is not written; it is something that gets stronger the longer we are seen to be entirely responsible and in charge of our own affairs and, Your Excellency, I do believe if there is a need to impose a change in our legislation which affects the internal affairs of the Isle of Man, then constitutionally that will be a gigantic step backwards for the Manx nation. Your Excellency, these are all things that members have to consider in their own minds when coming to a conclusion on how to vote on this particular measure.
Homosexuality — U.K. Government Pressure for Change in Legislation — Question by Mrs. Delaney TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1113
Mr. Kermode: The Chief Minister made the statement that if we do not agree to this legislation it could be thrust upon us. Is it not about time that this Government stood up for itself and said, 'Look, we will not have these matters thrust upon us because we do not believe that it is right for the the people of the Isle of Man' rather than just taking everything lying down?
The Governor: That is not a question of fact in accordance with Standing Order 33 (Laughter) and it is out of order.
Mr. Ker.node: The point was made, Your Excellency.
Mr. Quine: Your Excellency, having regard to the fact that the Chief Minister lip• concedes that he has no mandate from the public, has he considered effecting the provisions of the Referendum Act of 1979 tied in, possibly, to the next general . election?
Mr. Walker: If I deal with that first, Your Excellency, I have not considered that. I would see it as, in fact, a way of fudging our responsibility. Your Excellency, I think this is one that members have to come to terms with themselves.
Mr. Gilbey: Your Excellency, the Chief Minister keeps referring to the fact this will have to be done. Will he not agree that it would be perfectly possible for the Isle of Man to ask to be withdrawn from this treaty and convention and that is specifically allowed for under the terms of the convention?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, it may well be possible and allowed for, but I would just say that as long as I am Chief Minister, Executive Council would. not ask to be withdrawn from the Convention for European Rights and Freedoms. I think that would be a pretty terrible situation for this Court to have to face up to, sir.
Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, bearing the seriousness of the matter under question here, would the Chief Minister indicate and in part (2) of the original question I am interested in, political pressure, the 15 votes to 9 was against that particular section at the last vote, has he had any indication that at least three members have changed their minds and will now be able to gain the 13 votes possible • so that this legislation can pass through this branch as he wishes? Mr. Walker: Yes, Your Excellency, if the hon. member is asking have I canvassed support and opinion, the answer to that is `no, sir'. The Sexual Offences Bill was in fact considered by the House of Keys sometime ago, and the House of Keys decided that it should be withdrawn and reprinted. Now, Your Excellency, in considering the re-introduction of that reprinted Bill, Executive Council, I believe, were honour-bound to consider again our law relating to homosexual provisions and, Your Excellency, we did do that and we did do it in the light of advice from the Home Office and we did do it in the light of being aware of the growing situation in Jersey, because their problems are the same if not one step worse because their individuals do have a right of petition to the European Court, so we were bearing in mind all those things when we decided to incorporate this clause in the Bill, sir.
Homosexuality — U.K. Government Pressure for Change in Legislation — Question by Mrs. Delaney T1114 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Mr. Cain: Your Excellency, I would just like the Chief Minister, if he could, to confirm that the outcome of the 1987 debate, which was promoted by Mr. Speaker at that time, and in which Mr. Speaker gave an excellent historic resume of the position, was a success of an amendment in the name of the Chief Minister in which the then Executive Council agreed to reconsider the issues, and indeed is not the outcome of the current situation devolving from that situation?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I can agree with the comment by Mr. Cain. Certainly there is a debate that has been deferred pending this particular subject being addressed by the branches and a conclusion reached thereon.
Mr. Corrin: Your Excellency, the Chief Minister referred to a commitment freely entered into; could he give us some information as to when it was freely entered into and what discussion took place prior to this commitment being given?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I cannot state chapter and verse of the discussion, but I believe it was as long ago as 1957 or thereabouts.
The Governor: '53.
Mr. Walker: '53? Even longer ago than I thought when the Isle of Man, in fact, became parties to the European Convention and, Your Excellency, I suppose there have been opportunities since then to withdraw: Certainly I would not advocate that. I would not advocate that for one minute. I believe it would be quite wrong. But there have been opportunities and, Your Excellency, that has not... those discussions have not been entered into, so we are left with an obligation, sir.
Mr. Delaney: My question deals, Your Excellency, with the concern that has been expressed about whether this is a moral issue under question or is a constitutional issue. The minister has expressed his concern about the constitution. Would the minister agree with me that as he has given the ministers right of free vote on conscience, that therefore applies to all members of Court and no pressure should be put in relation to constitutional responsibility on members?
Members: Hear, hear.
Mr. Walker: What I am saying, Your Excellency, or what I have tried to say, is that I do believe that the moral issue, as some people see it as a constitutional issue... that the whole situation has to be addressed by people in their minds when they come to a conclusion on the way they are going to vote against this particular clause in the Bill.
The Governor: The question before the Court, hon. members, is 'Has a communication been received'. The answer you have received is that there has been one and the second is 'Does the Government intend to allow political pressure from outside the Island to override the resolve?' I must ask hon. members to address their questions to those two and those two alone. Mr. Cannan.
Homosexuality — U.K. Government Pressure for Change in Legislation — Question by Mrs. Delaney TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1115
Mr. Cannan: Can I ask the Chief Minister, Your Excellency, in stating that he has received one letter from the Home Office, can a copy of that letter be given to members of Tynwald so that they can determine for themselves the level of pressure (Members: Hear, hear.) that is being put upon the Manx Government. And secondly, Your Excellency, can I ask the Chief Minister, is he aware that while the United Kingdom Government on the one hand permits homosexual activity, on the other hand, in accordance with the Armed Forces Act of 1971, Section 31, referring to the Army Act, the Air Force Act and the Naval Discipline Act, still continues to make it a criminal offence?
Mr. Walker: I understand, Your Excellency, that that latter matter has been accepted by the European Court. (Interruptions) It has been accepted by the European Court, sir. The United Kingdom has a responsibility for our external affairs, for looking after us in international circles.
Mr. Delaney: I will join the army; that is the answer to it!
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, if the Isle of Man finds itself drawn-up once again to the European Court of Human Rights, then we would look to the United Kingdom to defend our position. I think the United Kingdom have made it absolutely clear that they would not be prepared to defend our position, sir. They were not prepared. They lost a case as far as Northern Ireland was concerned and advocated or made a change of law there. We have absolutely no reason to believe that they would defend the Isle of Man's stance in this particular case and therefore they have certainly got the constitutional right to change our law for us.
Mr. Gi!bey: Your Excellency, trying to keep to the original question, whereas it appears that only one communication has been received which could hardly be called strong pressure and whereas it is clear that there is a resolve amongts most people in this Island they do not want the change, I just can ask, could the Chief Minister explain what is the real reason for bringing this forward now rather than waiting for some future date which might be years to come when there was real pressure? Why bring this forward now and cause all the argument and time-wasting that we are already seeing?
Mr. Walker: I hear comments from the hon. member for Michael about the homosexual lobby and so on — he knows that that is not true, Your Excellency, and the hon. member for Michael, I guess, has had a copy of this letter although I cannot guarantee that a 100 per cent. I did, in fact, not respond to the hon. member about the letter and whether or not I would make it available to all members of Tynwald. Your Excellency, rather than do that I would prefer to read it out if the hon. Court will (Members: Hear, hear.) accept that, and then it is a matter for the record. I have no embarrassment in that letter, sir.
Members: Read it!
Mr. Walker: Just to respond to Mr. Gilbey: 'Why do we bring the measure forward now?' The House of Keys deferred — whatever the right expression is —
Homosexuality — U.K. Government Pressure for Change in Legislation — Question by Mrs. Delaney T1116 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 pending a re-printing of that Bill. If we had not re-introduced it we would have had questions probably asking why we were usurping the request of the House of Keys, so, Your Excellency, we have stated in our policy documents that this legislation would be back in front of the branches and that the Attorney-General would be preparing the legislation, and that is why it is in front of us and I have told the hon. member and I have told this hon. Court, Your Excellency, why the clause has been inserted regarding this particular provision. Now, Your Excellency, the letter that I received from the Home Office is one that was written to me following a conversation I had with the senior officials at the Home Office, and it starts
'Dear Miles, As I explained to you when I was in the Isle of Man last week, we find ourselves in a difficult position on one aspect of Human Rights. It has arisen because the Attorney-General of Jersey has no longer been able to continue an amnesty against prosecution for homosexuals, introduced to encourage them to undergo testing or treatment for AIDS. His position was that while he felt justified in suspending the operation of the law in this way for a period of years pending a change in the legislation he could not do so indefinitely. Regrettably the Legislation Committee in Jersey decided against amendment of the law, despite the fact that the provision prohibiting homosexual behaviour between consenting adults in private puts the United Kingdom in breach of the European Convention of Human Rights. The decisions of the Attorney-General and the Legislation Committee were reported in the Jersey Evening Post and there have since been reports in that paper that some homosexuals are planning to complain to the European Commission. (As you will know, Jersey has accepted the right of individual petition). Our immediate difficulty is that we do not know whether complaints have been made to the Commission and we are unlikely to know until we are asked for the Government's observations on a case. At that stage it would be unrealistic for the United Kingdom to try to defend the existence of the law in Jersey or in the Isle of Man which is unlikely to avoid attention if the Commission starts looking at Jersey. We have already been forced to change a law having lost the Dudgeon case and the more recent case of Norris in the Irish Republic leaves us no room for manoeuvre. The only solution I see at this stage is that if Jersey and the Isle of Man have not taken steps to amend their law (or are not then able to do so very quickly), the United Kingdom will have to legislate for them. I recognise the seriousness with which you will view this and hence I am writing you this demi-official letter before putting the issue to ministers here. I hope you will not see it as a threat to the constitutional relationship. The issue concerns our international obligations and without action by either the Islands or ourselves, we do not have a leg to stand on. If the Isle of Man is prepared to reconsider this issue as a matter of urgency there are three points which may be helpful. Guernsey decided some six years ago to repeal their offending law but to allay concern did so initially for a trial period of three years. During this period there was no noticeable effect due to the behaviour of homosexuals (and no influx of homosexuals from Jersey as had been feared) and the repeal has now been made permanent with no dissent. Secondly, we understand
Homosexuality — U.K. Government Pressure for Change in Legislation — Question by Mrs. Delaney TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1117
that there have been no prosecutions of consenting adults in Jersey or the Isle of Man in the past ten years or so and it seems improbable that the law is in any way a deterrent. Finally there is the question of right of the individual petition. The Isle of Man is now totally isolated amongst all countries in the Council of Europe • which must make for an uncomfortable position for both of us. I am copying this letter to His Excellency. Yours sincerely...' Your Excellency, the letter from the Home Office, which I believe sets out the • situation quite clearly.
The Speaker: Who is it signed by, please?
Mr. Walker: Stuart Bampton.
The Governor: Hon. members, 1 am faced with a dilemma here as your presiding officer in that I am satisfied that I have not disallowed any questions that should have been disallowed and that I have not allowed too many questions that should have been allowed. But I have a 'responsibility to those who have set down questions in the Question Paper on other subjects and therefore I shall fail to catch any more eyes and call question 7.
BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL — FUNCTIONS - QUESTION BY MRS. HANNAN
The Governor: The hon. member for Peel, Mrs. Hannan.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
What are the functions of the Building Trades Council?
The Governor: I turn to the Chief Minister to reply.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the functions of the Building Trades Council are set out in its constitution and regulations as agreed in this hon. Court in 1971 and as amended in 1979, and those regulations are available to the hon. member.
Mrs. Hannan: Could I ask the Chief Minister, Your Excellency, if the powers of the Building Trades Council can be extended? While they register tradesmen can they not also ensure that tradesmen, who are actually working on sites and not registered and leave sites which they are supposed to be working with firms to make them a registered company?
Mr. D.C. Cretney: Your Excellency, could I ask the Chief Minister, would he not agree with me the time is long overdue that an inspector was appointed to carry out and assist with the work of the Building Trades Council?
The Governor: The Chief Minister to reply.
Building Trades Council — Functions — Question by Mrs. Hannan T I 118 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, of course it is possible to amend the regulations which appertain to the Buildings Trades Council. I think the Department of Industry are in fact enquiring quite closely to its future mode of operation. Your Excellency, over the years since I have been a member of this hon. Court and certainly, with my knowledge of responsibility to Local Government Board in this particular matter, it has been said that there is responsibility on the Building Trades Council for the quality of workmanship. Now, Your Excellency, that is not the case, sir. That is not the case and one of the recommendations we made to this hon. Court prior to its dissolution in October 1986 was this very point: that in fact some people we feel are misled by the thought that they are being protected by the Building Trades Council. That is not the case. Their remit is to register workmen, masters and so on, not to look into the quality of workmanship on site.
Mrs. Hannan: A further supplementary, Your Excellency. When the Chief Minister says that it is not to do with quality of workmanship, why then register someone who is a tradesman, and should not all people working on the building sites be so registered as tradespeople if that is the job which they are doing?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, to become a tradesman a few years ago or until comparatively recently you would have had to serve an apprenticeship. Having served that apprenticeship you became a tradesman. There is nothing to say that because somebody has served his apprenticeship he will be a good tradesman or the quality of his work will be any better than somebody who is in fact not a tradesman. The Building Trades Council was set up to register and to hold a register of tradesmen for the information, presumably, of the registered masters who wish to employ people, and also the Isle of Man Government, I think, through one of its boards, probably the Local Government Board, was party to the indenture arrangement of the apprenticeship and that was also a responsibility of the Building Trades Council.
Mr. Karran: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Would the Chief Minister not agree that the whole principle of the Building Trades Council is to safeguard that the building tradesmen are at an acceptable level, and would he not agree that we have all had an increase in the number of complaints about shoddy workmanship and we have a responsibility to protect our people from these cowboys and also to protect the Manx tradesmen who, at the present time, are suffering because of the lack of a proper constituted Building Trades Council with officers to run it?
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, the point that was made by the Chief Minister in his reply- could I ask why, then, Government look for registered firms with the Building Trades Council to carry out work that is funded by Government? If the Chief Minister is saying that it is not really important, why do Government look for people that are registered under the Building Trades Council?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, Government have followed along that line for some time. They do believe that it is one way of encouraging registered masters, firms, into taking on apprenticeship as part of their commitment of being registered, and we feel that while there is a registration system it is only right for Government
Building Trades Council — Functions — Question by Mrs. Hannan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 TI119
to honour that and to require registered firms to apply for jobs, and, Your Excellency, it is in fact a Tynwald resolution, so it was a Tynwald requirement that that should happen. As far as apprentices are concerned, the criterion is that they have fulfilled their obligations for apprenticeships, and in fact it does not say that their work is up to an acceptable level. I am sure we have in the past had tradesmen, perhaps, who through their apprenticeship period have got a very narrow experience of work and yet, once they have fulfilled that obligation of being an apprentice, then they become registered and they can do all sorts of different work that perhaps they have no experience of at all during their apprenticeship, and this is a matter of fact, Your Excellency, and it is one of the reasons why the last Local Government Board thought very long and hard about whether or not it was worthwhile, in fact, continuing the Building Trades Council in its present form and it was just thought, Your Excellency, that the benefit of the doubt was to have a body which could liaise between the masters and the tradesmen. It was better to have it than not to have it. But the amount of benefit in the Building Trades Council is, Your Excellency, in my view, very, very slender; sir, and it is something that the Industry Department are in fact looking at. 1 think, Your Excellency, we have to be very careful not to take the responsibility away from the consumer, from the purchaser of the house, and if he feels that somebody else is looking after his interests for him, then I feel that that is a pretty dangerous situation to get into and I would much prefer in some way seeing the responsibility left with the purchaser, with the consumer, with the customer, to make sure that he gets his money's worth out of the contract. The Governor: Is that your answer to Mr. Karran too, Chief Minister? Mr. Walker: I have just forgotton (Laughter) what Mr. Karran's question was!
Mr. Corrin: Your Excellency, would the Chief Minister not agree that what has prompted this question is nothing to do with the Building Trades Council as we have known it in the past, which registered craftsmen and also the master builder, the employer, and there was some law and order in the industry? Would the Chief Minister not agree that what has prompted this question now is the fact that a department of this Government in the last three years has abandoned those principles and we now have the cowboys in, and this, sir, we have ended up with and people, vulnerable people, young people, starter homes they have no way of protecting themselves from these builders, many of them Irish — you know where they have come from — the cowboys have moved in and it is a department of Government that has allowed it to happen.
The Governor: Hon. member, the question was not what prompted the question, it is 'what are the functions?' so I disallow that question.
MANAGEMENT OF POPULATION GROWTH REPORT — QUESTION BY MR. KARRAN The Governor: We move on to question 8. The hon. member for Onchan, Mr.
Management of Population Growth Report — Question by Mr. Karran T1120 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Karran.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
Is it intended to place the report on the management of population prepared by the Social Issues Committee before Tynwald and, if so, when?
The Governor: I turn to the Chief Minister for a reply.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the report of Executive Council entitled the 'Management of Population Growth' was considered by Tynwald on the llth July 1989, when it was agreed that conclusions and recommendations therein be approved.
Mr. Karran: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Would the Chief Minister tell this Court, when does he intend to bring in the legislation as far as the control of population is concerned, and could he also assure this hon. House that we will not have a situation where we have to wait until we have a major problem as far as rising numbers of residents in the Island before we actually see any movement on this front? Would he not also agree that it would be far better for us to have this legislation in operation ready to be enforced by Tynwald resolution than to be waiting until there is another crisis on the population quotas?
The Governor: The Chief Minister to reply.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the draft of the legislation which we would expect to bring forward has in fact been considered very recently by myself and a committee of Executive Council. There are certain minor amendments to it; that has gone back to the Legislative Draftsman, we will then get it back, we will have another look at it then to see how it looks because this is completely new legislation, Your Exellency, and we do not have the experience of other places to follow, so it is something that we are considering quite carefully. Your Excellency, when this particular motion was being debated in July 1989 the hon. member, Mr. Karran, I think, asked if I would expedite this particular piece of legislation. I resisted that, Your Excellency, because we have got quite a lot of social legislation which is also in the pipeline which has been the subject of reports to Tynwald and which has had Tynwald approval and it was my view then that that, in fact, ought to take some precedence over this particular measure, and I do not think I have changed my view on that one, sir.
Mr. Delaney: A short supplementary, Your Excellency. When this report eventually comes to us, will it be bearing in mind the legislation which is now becoming European national legislation in relation to the movement of people between member states of the E.E.C.?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, this legislation certainly reflects our obligations under the Act of Accession.
Mr. Kermode: Your Excellency, would the Chief Minister not agree with me,
Management of Population Growth Report — Question by Mr. Karran TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1121
assuming the hon. questioner is talking mainly about the people who are coming to the Isle of Man, Your Excellency, that without these people coming into the Isle of Man our new-found wealth and the things that we are doing socially from the point of view of this Government... that we would not have the money to do it had these people not been coming to the Isle of Man?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the legislation that we intend to introduce will in fact allow some control over the population of the Isle of Man. I take on entirely the point that the hon. member, Mr. Kermode, makes but, nevertheless, 1 would advocate, and Tynwald supported, that we should have some control measures (Members: Hear, hear.) available to Government in times of need.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, a supplementary. Would the Chief Minister not •agree that it is important that we have the structure there as far as residential control when and if it is needed? Would he also not agree that it is in good government to have a situation where we can react to pre-empt a situation and not react to a crisis, which is what we have-seen in the past?
Mr. Walker: What Mr. Karran said, in fact, was the basis of our recommendations to this hon. Court last July, sir.
Mr. Delaney: Follow on a quick supplementary, bearing in mind what the hon. member, the senior member for Onchan, has asked about the right of residents, will the Chief Minister again reaffirm to the hon. member that we are limited in what we can do under our obligations under the E.E.C. Treaty?
UNION FLAG IN THE ISLE OF MAN — QUESTION BY MRS. HANNAN
The Governor: We move on to question 9. The hon. member for Peel, Mrs. Hannan.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
Whereas the Union flag is the accepted national flag of the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man does not constitute a part of that country -
(1) Why are Union flags to be seen in great profusion each summer flying on Douglas Promenade and in other parts of Mann, including some Government buildings, to the almost complete exclusion of other nation's flags?
(2) Will steps be taken to terminate or encourage the termination of this misleading practice?
The Governor: I turn for the ninth time to the Chief Minister.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the Manx flag is flown on all Government
Union Flag in the Isle of Man — Question by Mrs. Hannan TI122 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 buildings and Government flagstaffs. The distinguishing flag of His Excellency, the Lieutenant-Governor, namely the three legs surrounded by a garland in the centre of the Union flag, is flown on the flagstaff at Government House whenever His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor is in residence and at the masthead of any vessel in which His Excellency is afloat within Manx territorial waters. Under the terms of Government regulations the Union Jack is not flown on Government buildings. Whether other individuals or bodies such as the Douglas Corporation fly the Union Jack on the promenade or elsewhere is a matter for them and we have no plans to seek to influence their decisions on this matter.
Mrs. Hannan: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Would it not be more inviting to people of other nations to see their flags flown? Should not we try and encourage flags of other nations to be flown, especially when other people are visiting our shores, and to fly just one flag — at least, that is how it seems to lots of people — is just that we are part of the United Kingdom when surely the position should be that, as in other countries — they fly many other flags — it does seem to be welcoming to visitors to that place?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, there are absolutely no restrictions on other nations' flags being flown in the Isle of Man other than on Government buildings. If the hon. member's commissioners in Peel wish to fly somebody else's flags (Interruption and laughter) then they are able, as are Douglas Corporation. Certainly at T.T. time, when there are many visitors to the Isle of Man from other places other than the United Kingdom, then their flags are flown quite freely at the grandstand during the race period. It is in actual fact for the body and the individuals concerned at the top.
The Speaker: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Would the Chief Minister make representations to the incoming Governor to ensure that the Manx flag is flown at Government House so that the Governor can display his sympathy towards the aspirations of those he has described as the natives? (Laughter)
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I am sure that the incoming Governor can be made aware of the regulations for the flying of flags on Government flagstaffs, which include Government House.
The Governor: I have to add that the Manx flag does fly at Government House.
Members: Hear, hear.
HOME OFFICE — CONSULATATION RE MANX LEGISLATION — QUESTION BY DR. ORME
The Governor: Question 10. The hon. member for Rushen, Dr. Orme.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
Home Office — Consultation Re Manx Legislation — Question by Dr. Orme TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 TI123
What is the procedure for consultation with the Home Office concerning legislation?
The Governor: I turn to the Chief Minister for a reply.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the Bills included in the legislative programme that is approved by Executive Council are drafted in the Attorney-General's Chambers in consultation with the department which is promoting the Bill or is most closely concerned with the subject matter of the Bill. When the drafting of the Bill has been completed to the satisfaction of the department concerned a copy of the final draft is sent by the Attorney-General to the Home Office for comment. In practice the comments, if any, which are subsequently received by the Attorney- General are normally restricted to technical drafting points. In the unusual event of any matter of principle being raised the matter would be referred back to the Manx department sponsoring or concerned with the Bill. Following the receipt of Home Office comments, the Bill is then submitted to Executive Council for consideration prior to being introduced into the branches. In exceptional cases — for example, where it is proposed that Manx legislation should be introduced to replace United Kingdom legislation extending, or capable of being extended, to the Island, there may be correspondence with the Home Office through the office of the Chief Secretary before a Bill is drafted. Once a Bill has been passed by the branches and a fair copy is available, it is considered by His Excellency's Royal Assent Advisory Committee in order to advise as to whether Your Excellency should recommend that the Royal Assent should be reserved or not. Immediately thereafter the Bill is despatched to the Home Office together with the Lieutenant-Governor's certificate relating to the reservation or not of the Royal Assent and the Attorney-General's certificate as to the nature of the Bill and any amendments to the Bill made by the branches during its passage. Confirmation is then awaited from the Home Office that it is in order for the Governor to announce Royal Assent. The length of time this takes is to a great extent dependent on the nature and number of any amendments to the Bill, which may require fresh consultations with United Kingdom departments.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, a supplementary. May I ask if the process that the Chief Minister has explained to us whereby there is a pre-submission of legislation that is to become before the branches to the Home Office by the Attorney-General — is that an informal procedure or is that a mandatory procedure?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I do not think it is a mandatory, because I am aware of Bills that have been sponsored or written that have not in fact gone through that procedure, but it is certainly a procedure that is customary, grown over a period of time, and one that suits both parties.
Dr. Orme: Could I ask a further supplementary, Your Excellency? In view of the fact that we are attempting to seek greater independence of mind and action within our Legislature, would it not be desirable to consider whether this procedure is necessary to continue in all circumstances?
Home Office — Consultation Re Manx Legislation — Question by Dr. Orme T1124 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
The Governor: The Chief Minister to reply.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I would have thought that it was always wise to, in fact... I do not know about always but usually wise to get a view from outside on legislation that is being proposed, especially as we tend to follow with much of the legislation of what has happened in the United Kingdom and they very often have an experience that is worth learning from, and sometimes amendments are made in light of that experience. As I said, Your Excellency, the comments we usually get from the Home Office are in fact normally restricted to technical drafting points and it is quite seldom, in fact, that matters of principle are raised with us.
Mr. Gilbey: Your Excellency, might I ask who comprises Your Excellency's Royal Assent Advisory Committee, which I think hon. Chief Minister mentioned in the course of his reply.
The Governor: It was answered at the last Tynwald sitting.
The Speaker: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Is it not a fact that this procedure is a procedure related solely to those dependencies which are dealt with by the Home Office and does not apply in the case of dependencies which are subject to the control of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, that may well be the case. I think we also have a practical problem that is worth addressing: we are, in fact, a small Island with a limited population and the amount of resources we have are necessarily limited. It seems to me sensible if we can make use of some of the resources from the United Kingdom at appropriate times, and this seems to be one of them.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, could I ask if there is a means by which the input that the Home Office has during this informal procedure between them and the Attorney-General confines their introduction of matters or alteration of the Bill to technical drafting points, as the Chief Minister has indicated, and restricts them from altering matters of principle?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I do not think they would alter a Bill of ours. They would certainly draw our attention to matters of principle but they would not in fact alter it.
ROYAL ASSENT — REDUCTION OF DELAY IN GRANTING — QUESTION BY DR. ORME
The Governor: Question 11. The hon. member for Rushen, Dr. Orme.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
Will you seek a reduction in the time taken by the Royal Assent Advisory
Royal Assent — Reduction of Delay in Granting — Question by Dr. Orme TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1125
Committee to advise the Lieutenant-Governor concerning Royal Assent for legislation?
The Governor: I turn to the Chief Minister.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, once a Bill has been passed by the branches, the committee meets as soon as a fair copy of the Bill is available and these meetings do not contribute significantly to the time taken to process Bills to Royal Assent. There is therefore no real scope in saving time by seeking to change the procedures and practices of this particular committee, sir. Dr. Orme: Given, Your Excellency, the discussion that we had at the last Tynwald, whereby there were considerable delays ranging something like two months to something like 11 months in the granting of Royal Assent, if the delay in the process is not in the hands of the Royal Assent Advisory Committee, where is the delay in the process?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, this goes on a little further than the question in front of me. We have got some information to this and I would be pleased to let the hon. member have it. It is something I know that the Clerk of Tynwald has been addressing and it has also been something that Executive Council has discussed. But, Your Excellency, there have been a number of areas of delay from the printers and so on; that has, I think, largely now been sorted out and I understand that we are now up to date with the printers and there is no particular problem there. Your Excellency, as I said, I think, earlier on in my answers, much of the delay can happen at the Home Office when a larger number of amendments are made to a Bill during its passage, after the first time they viewed it, in fact and sometimes they have to confer with other departments of the United Kingdom Government. But, Your Excellency, I think the area of delay that has been experienced has largely been cleared up and I shall look forward to, in fact, a speedier passage for Bills in the future.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, would the Chief Minister not agree that it is somewhat deprecating to the Legislature of this Island to bring considerable pressure upon it to speed up its processing of Bills when its average time for a Bill is something like three to four months when the Royal Assent process average time is something like six to seven months. Would he not be better aiming his endeavours in speeding up legislation at the Royal Assent process?
Mr. Walker: Yes, Your Excellency, I take the point the hon. member makes. I would just once again say that there is no delay, or there is not an appreciable delay, taken by the Royal Assent Advisory Committee in advising the Lieutenant- Governor of his responsibilities.
ROYAL ASSENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE — WITHHOLDING OF ROYAL ASSENT — QUESTION BY DR. ORME The Governor: Question 12. Dr. Orme, the hon. member for Rushen.
Royal Assent Advisory Committee — Withholding of Royal Assent - Question by Dr. Orme T1126 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
In what circumstances would the terms of reference of the Royal Assent Advisory Committee permit the Committee to advise the Lieutenant-Governor that Royal Assent be withheld?
The Governor: I turn to the Chief Minister.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, the question misunderstands the purpose of the Royal Assent Advisory Committee. The role of the committee is to advise, Your Excellency, on the discharge of your responsibilities under the Royal Assent to Legislation (Isle of Man) Order 1981. Under that order you may Assent to a Bill on behalf of Her Majesty or you may reserve the Bill for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure. The committee's purpose is to advise, Your Excellency, whether or not a Bill, when it has completed its passage through the branches, should be granted Royal Assent by yourself or reserved for Royal Assent by Her Majesty. It is not the role of the committee to advise whether or not Royal Assent should be withheld.
CONVEYANCING, GAZUMPING AND ESTATE AGENTS — REVIEW OF LEGISLATION — QUESTION BY MR. KARRAN
The Governor: We move on to question 13. The hon. member for Onchan, Mr. Karran.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
Will Executive Council institute a review of the legislation on conveyancing, gazumping and estate agents with the object of increasing protection against questionable and undesirable practices?
The Governor: The Chief Minister to reply.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I responded to a question from the hon. member in May 1988, informing him that the Department of Local Government and the Environment, in consultation with estate agents and the Law Society, were in fact looking at this particular situation at that time. The findings will be included in the Housing Report which is expected to be presented to Tynwald in the near future. Estate Agents legislation is administered by the Department of Local Government and the Environment and, if the hon. member has particular reasons for being concerned at the conduct of estate agents, I am sure the department would be pleased to discuss the matter with him.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, a supplementary. Would the Chief Minister give a clear undertaking to this hon. House: how does Executive Council view the legislation concerning the question that I have asked? Once again, Your Excellency,
Conveyancing, Gazumping and Estate Agents — Review of Legislation — Question by Mr. Karran TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1127
would the Chief Minister also not agree that it is far better to have this sort of legislation in existence so when the trouble once again arises we will be in a position to do something about it? Would he not also agree that it would be better for good government to pre-empt these problems instead of having to wait to react to them and then missing the boat on problems that affect every man, woman and child in the Island?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, on a number of occasions the hon. member has raised the issue of gazumping with myself and, I think, with the Minister for the Environment who has particular responsibilities for the Estate Agents Act and so on coming under the purview of his department. Your Excellency, each time these issues are raised and when we look to see what the cause of the problems we can find very few problems, in fact, that are caused by gazumping. It is the estate agents' responsibility to inform his clients, the vendor of the property, of all the bids received and it is the vendor who makes the decision on whom he wants to sell it to, so it is not always fair, in fact, to blame estate agents. Your Excellency, this hon.•Court is going to have an opportunity to discuss this particular matter on the Housing Report and I think it is probably better left until then, sir.
SUMMER TIME — E.E.C. ALTERATION OF ARRANGEMENTS — QUESTION BY THE SPEAKER
The Governor: Question number 14. I turn to Mr. Speaker.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chief Minister:
Whereas the European Community is proposing an alteration of summer-time arrangements within the Community —
(1) What is the opinion of your Government on these proposals?
(2) Has your Government been consulted by the United Kingdom Government on the proposals?
The Governor: I call on the Chief Minister to reply.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I am aware of the Council Directive on summer- time arrangements which provides for a common date and time to be fixed at the beginning and end of the summer-time period. It goes on to state that for geographical reasons Ireland and the United Kingdom should be afforded the possibility of fixing between '90 and '92 an end date for summer-time different from that provided for the other member states. It is my opinion that, whatever the arrangements which are agreed by the United Kingdom, it is in the best interests of the Isle of Man to adopt the same arrangement. In answer to part (2) of the question I can inform Mr. Speaker that we were
Summer Time — E.E.C. Alteration of Arrangements — Question by The Speaker T1128 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 consulted by the United Kingdom Government in March 1988 and again in June 1989 on the proposals.
The Speaker: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Is the Chief Minister aware, Your Excellency, of the hostility shown to the proposals in the North of England and Scotland and of the claim in a recent newspaper report that Her Majesty the Queen had seen fit to make representation to the Prime Minister because of the adverse effect the harmonisation of British with European time would have on her Scottish subjects? Now, as the effect on the Manx people of such harmonisation would be equally deterimental to that experienced in the North of England and Scotland, will you consider making similar representations to Her Majesty's Govern- ment?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I am certainly aware of the article in the Daily Telegraph of Wednesday March 14th which sets out in fact that situation that Mr. Speaker has just outlined. Can I say that in March 1988, when we had our first consultation document, we were in fact asked to consider three different options in relation to summer-time: firstly, there was the continuation of the present position; secondly, the harmonisation of the date for ending summer-time to bring it into line with the rest of the European Community; and the introduction of Greenwich Mean Time plus one hour in winter and two hours in summer. Now, we carried out quite a comprehensive consultation exercise with all the boards and departments of Government and, as is often the case, no clear preference came forward from that consultation exercise. Three departments, in fact, favoured the continuation of the present position, one favoured the harmonisation with the European Community and four favoured (c), which is the introduction of Greenwich Mean Time plus one hour in winter and two hours in summer — double summer-time, I think, is what it is popularly referred to, and we informed the United Kingdom Government of our view that that was the favourite alternative but, whatever we thought, that the Isle of Man should remain in line with the United Kingdom for obvious reasons, I think, and, Your Excellency, when we were consulted again in June 1989 we responded in a similar vein, sir.
The Speaker: A supplementary, Your Excellency. In the event of the United Kingdom being split in effect to this proposal and Scotland having a different time factor to England, would you align the Isle of Man with Scotland?
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I can raise this matter again with Executive Council if Mr. Speaker is in fact requesting that in light of this more up-to-date information, (Interruption) but, Your Excellency, it certainly seems to us that the favoured opinion of Her Majesty's Government is in fact double summer-time - an extra hour in the winter and two hours in the summer. (Interruption)
The Governor: Hon. members, before I call question 15, I have to observe to you, as I have done before, that we have now had the Chief Minister under question for an hour. We have asked half the questions on the Question Paper off one person, and the time taken to answer them and the time taken to prepare them is something which I think hon. members should have in mind.
Summer Time — E.E.C. Alteration of Arrangements — Question by The Speaker TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1129
FIRST-TIME BUYERS' HOUSES — POORLY CONSTRUCTED HOMES — RECOURSE FOR OWNERS — QUESTION BY MRS. HANNAN
The Governor: Question 15. The hon. member for Peel, Mrs. Hannan.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask H.M. Attorney-General --
What courses are open to buyers of first-time buyers' houses who find that their properties have been constructed to a poor standard?
The Governor: The learned Attorney to reply.
The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, several first-time buyer schemes have recently been promoted by the Department of Local Government and the Environment and also by Douglas Corporation. Under these schemes land has been made available by the Government or Douglas Corporation at little or no cost to builders to enable them to erect and sell low cost housing to those eligible to benefit under the schemes. In each case the contract for the sale of the land and the erection of the dwelling house has been between the builder and the purchaser and it must follow, therefore, that if there is any defect in the construction of the house the purchaser has a claim against the builder for breach of contract. In addition, purchaser of first-time buyer houses, under the different schemes, had the benefit of the Buildmark Combined Warranty and Protection Scheme issued by the National House-building Council. Under the Buildmark scheme, in addition to any contractual statutory or common law rights which the purchaser may have against the builder, the purchaser has the following rights which the N.H.B.C. have summarised as follows:
`Buildmark provides insurance up to £10,000 to safeguard•deposits lost through a builders insolvency or to put right defects. The Buildmark requires that the builder put right, at his own expense, any defects which arise as a result of his not keeping to N.H.B.C. standards for materials and workmanship. If the builder does not repair the defects the Buildmark gives the purchaser a right to arbitration and compensation if the builder is insolvent, and finally, the Buildmark insures the purchaser against major damage due to any defect in the load-bearing structure of the house and also, second and subsequent purchasers are insured against new defects which appear for the first time after they have bought the house.
LITTER — ENFORCEMENT OF LEGISLATION — QUESTION BY MRS. HANNAN
The Governor: We move on to Question 16. The hon. member for Peel, Mrs. Hannan.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask H.M. Attorney-General —
First-Time Buyers' Houses — Poorly Constructed Homes — Recourse for Owners — Question by Mrs. Hannan Litter — Enforcement of Legislation — Question by Mrs. Hannan T1130 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
(I) What authority is responsible for enforcing the Litter Act in respect of offences by the Department of Local Government and the Environment?
(2) Are proceedings taken against the owner or the operator of a site which is the source of litter?
The Governor: I turn again to the learned Attorney.
The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, the Litter Act 1972 provides in Section 2 that the Act shall be enforceable by the Attorney-General, the Chief Constable or any other police officer or a local authority within its district. In practice, prosecutions under the Litter Act 1972 have been brought by the police. In appropriate cases there is no reason why a prosecution should not be taken by one of the authorities empowered to take prosecutions under.the Act against a overnment department, including the Department of Local Government and the Environment. As regards part (2) of the question, Your Excellency, the deposit of refuse at an authorised refuse tip in terms of the Local Government Refuse Act 1957 would not amount to an offence under Section 1 of the Litter Act 1972, and it is unlikely that there will be any circumstances which would justify a prosecution of the owner or operator of an authorised refuse tip under the Litter Act 1972. However, a local authority may serve notice under Section 14 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1984 on the owner or occupier of land, the condition of which is seriously injuring the amenities of the district and also requiring that steps be taken to abate the injury. If notice is not complied with in those circumstances a prosecution may be brought.
Mrs. Hannan: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Could I ask the learned Attorney why a prosecution cannot be brought under the Litter Act of someone operating a landfill site when that litter moves outside that landfill site?
The Attorney-General: Well, the circumstances, Your Excellency, of litter being deposited at an authorised refuse tip would not itself give rise to an offence because that is something which is permitted. As I understand it, Your Excellency, the problem is that once litter has been properly deposited in an authorised refuse tip, subsequently some of it becomes windblown and blows out of that area into adjacent land. That, as I say, does not cause, certainly in normal circumstances, any situation which would justify a prosecution under the Litter Act. However, it might entitle, as I have said, the local authority to take action under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1984.
The President of the Council: Your Excellency, in view of what the learned Attorney has said, is the adjoining landowner subject to prosecution because of the condition of their land through no fault of their own?
The Attorney-General: Well, Your Excellency, under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1984 it would certainly be open to the local authority to issue a notice. However, without looking at the Act I hesitate to comment positively but I have no doubt that there would be a defence to a prosecution brought
Litter — Enforcement of Legislation — Question by Mrs. Hannan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1131 in the circumstances suggested by the hon. Mr. President, Your Excellency.
HOUSE PURCHASE AND MORTGAGE SCHEMES — INDEX-LINKING — QUESTION BY MR. LEVENTHORPE
The Governor: Question 17. The hon. member for Onchan, Mr. Leventhorpe.
Mr. Leventhorpe: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Minister for the Treasury -
In view of the present rate of inflation, will you consider index-linking the Government House Purchase and Mortgage Scheme?
The Governor: I turn to the hon. Mr. Gelling, the Minister for the Treasury.
Mr. Gelling: Your Excellency, I am not absolutely clear from the hon. member's question precisely what it is that he would like to have indexed. There are several components of the House Purchase Scheme, each of which it would be possible to link to an index of some sort — for example, the valuation of the property, the level of assistance or the income above which we will not give assistance. All of these things inter-react with each other and do not necessarily increase at the same rate or at the same time. Currently it would appear that house prices have stabilised and in some cases have fallen off. Would it be, Your Excellency, that Mr. Leventhorpe's intention, therefore, at this time that this level of assistance should be reduced? It would also be possible, incidentally, to index the interest rate we charge by linking it to commercial rates but I am quite sure that that is not what the hon. member has in mind either. If I could just go back to basics for a moment, Your Excellency, the whole philosophy behind the present House Purchase Scheme is to help young couples on low incomes to purchase their own property, specifically to help those who would not qualify for mortgages from commercial sources. The current maximum approved income under the scheme is £14,000 per year and I assume that it is this figure which Mr. Leventhorpe would like to have index-linked. However, if we consider this figure in greater detail it will become apparent that a couple earning a gross income of up to £20,000 per year could still qualify for assistance under the scheme, depending on the ratio of their earnings, and I do not think that anyone in this Court would consider £20,000 to be a low income. Index-linking is a mechanical device which constantly revises the criteria which are linked, but it is not possible to predict how this will affect the relationship between several inter-related criteria. This scheme is kept under constant review by the Treasury, and I can assure everyone in this Court that there is not a day goes by when some aspect of the scheme is not brought to my attention either by a member of the public, another member of this Court or by a Treasury official. In my opinion, Your Excellency, this is a much more effective way than artificial mechanical devices such as linking. However, Your Excellency, the House Purchase Scheme has been subjected to
House Purchase and Mortgage Schemes — Index-Linking — Question by Mr. Leventhorpe T1132 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 increasing abuse of late in a number of ways, the most frequent of which being for one partner in a couple to apply for assistance as a single person whilst either denying the existence of the partner, claiming to have split up, or maintaining that the other partner will have no financial interest in the property concerned even on marriage. This renders the applicant eligible for a very low rate of interest and very often makes a grant of up to £3,000 available also. Because of the generosity of the scheme most couples still qualify for the amount of assistance they require because of the lower interest rate available from only the one salary being taken into account. Therefore, Your Excellency, with effect from today — and there is a press release to go out during the day — the Treasury have decided to give priority to married couples, including engaged and cohabiting couples who intend to marry. Treasury have expended over £7 million so far this year on the House Purchase Scheme and are receiving applications at the rate of between 50 and 60 per month. Obviously our resources are not limitless and it is felt that this is the best way to aim our resources at those who are in most need.
Mr. Leventhorpe: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Would the hon. minister agree that if somebody receives a pay rise purely to compensate for inflation, it is possible he will be priced out of purchasing a property which he had already in fact perhaps contracted to do, and will the hon. minister also tell me where these cheaper houses are that he postulates?
The Governor: Could we have the answer to that first?
Mr. Gelling: Your Excellency, in evidence given at some of the appeals we actually see houses that are valued at £68,000 being on the market at £55,000, so the indications are that some of these houses are falling in price, and I quite understand from the hon. member's questions — because he came to see me on a specific case — it is very difficult; the scheme at the moment — you could say, Your Excellency, you could drive a horse and cart through it and we do want to address the situation, because our officers are having, at the moment, to put conditions in writing which certainly I do not like going out of the Treasury, to try to control some of the abuse.
Mr. Quine: Your Excellency, the Minister for the Treasury has referred to the fact that the scheme has loopholes and one could drive a horse and cart through it. The essence of the problem — and I will put... the question flows from it - is of course that we have people living in campers, never mind a horse and cart. Could the minister tell me how, if he adjusts these upper limits, the loans which can be taken, the grants that can be taken, how are the people within the salary bracket, the approved earning brackets, going to afford to pay even the Government mortgages? They are afready out of their depth in that respect. That is the first supplementary, Your Excellency, if I may, and the second: could he give us the split in regard to the £7 million? Of that £7 million how much of it relates to the Government lottery scheme of a first-time owner and how much relates to private transactions?
Mr. Gelling: Your Excellency, if I can take the second part first, I am sorry,
House Purchase and Mortgage Schemes — Index-Linking — Question by Mr. Leventhorpe TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1133
I can certainly get that but I have not got it in my brief — the split of the money between the two. The other situation — quite honestly I think wherever we made the limits we always get the case of those who are just outside, and I am afraid the situation, as I see it, that interest charges have gone up specifically to stop people buying out of their means, and the situation that we have is that we are trying to put this scheme to those at the bottom end to try to help them get a home, and I am afraid I certainly have evidence of people coming to Treasury purely and simply to try to get money cheaper than the commercial rate, which is quite obvious — if they can do that they will, because it is saving them a lot of money during each month. But, however, Your Excellency, I think the scheme in spirit certainly was to help those at the bottom end, but at the moment, because of the high interest charges, we are getting inundated with applications, so therefore I feel that the money that we have available we must put to those at the bottom end and particularly those who are setting up a home — as I say, a married couple or those who verify that they are indicating anyway that they are going to get married.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, the minister has indicated that he will require a statement of intent to marry from applicants. Will he say what time limit is to be put on that intent, what happens if in fact the intention is not fulfilled, and what in fact will be the disadvantages if that intention is not fulfilled? Will in fact the mortgage have to be surrendered? The other point is, Your Excellency: is in fact, the ministry embarking on a moral crusade which is going to be detrimental to a lot of people in this Island in the days ahead in order, in fact, to get his application list down?
The Governor: You may answer if you wish; I think it is obvious that that is not part of the original question. (Laughter)
Mr. Delaney: Make a declaration!
Mr. Gelling: Your Excellency, it is very difficult indeed and I am quite aware of the application the Speaker mentions, because you get a case of a couple coming and making an application, giving you all their details and it is refused, and of course you then receive one applicant coming forward in their own right, having dispensed with the partner in some way or other. Now the evidence is there in the original application but under the scheme we have the single individual coming along and they qualify. Now, our officers know this; they have the evidence beforehand and we do have this situation that we become in an impossible position of trying to, as the Speaker states, put down conditions, i.e., you have to get the Treasury permission if you go out with someone and you intend living with them, and we are getting into (Laughter) a moral situation where we would have to have one of our officers outside their door watching them day and night. This is why we want to look at this scheme, Your Excellency — to try and see if we cannot get it back to the spirit in which it was intended in the first place.
Mr. Delaney: 'Are you walking out together?'!
House Purchase and Mortgage Schemes — Index-Linking — Question by Mr. Leventhorpe T1134 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
The Speaker: How many officers do you employ?
Mr. Kermode: Especially down Maughold!
MANX GAELIC — FINANCES FOR TEACHING — QUESTION BY MRS. HANNAN
The Governor: Hon. members, we move on. Question 18, the hon. member for Peel, Mrs. Hannan.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Minister for the Treasury —
What representations have been made to your department by the Department of Education for moneys to finance the teaching of Manx Gaelic in schools?
The Governor: I turn again to the Minister for the Treasury.
Mr. Gelling: Your Excellency, in answer to the hon. member for Peel, no specific representations have been made to the Treasury by the Department of Education for moneys to finance the teaching of Manx Gaelic. Our discussions have centred on levels of expenditure for primary and secondary education and other aspects of the department's activities and not on any specific subject within or outside of the curriculum.
Mrs. Hannan: Could I ask a supplementary, Your Excellency? Does the Minister of the Treasury know, then, why the Minister of Education said in reply to another question that any help that the questioner could give in persuading Treasury to provide us with additional sources will be welcome? If such representations have not been made to the Treasury, how can any member of this hon. Court add any persuasiveness to that which has not been made?
Mr. Gelling: Your Excellency, it is fair to say that the Department of Education, along with all other departments, were asked by Treasury to reduce their original request for their revenue expenditure. Now, whether or not the Minister of the Department of Education wished then to use the moneys made available to him as he thought and his department thought fit I am afraid Treasury have no way in which they could direct finances to any division of the education system; that is purely and simply up to the Education Department.
Mr. D. C. Cretney: Your Excellency, could I ask the Treasury Minister, is he aware that the question referred to by the hon. member for Peel related to Manx culture, history and language and not specifically the teaching of Manx Gaelic on its own, sir.
The Governor: The minister to reply.
Manx Gaelic — Finances for Teaching — Question by Mrs. Hannan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1135
Mr. Gelling: I understand what the members are saying, Your Excellency, but in actual fact there has been no specific application or request to Treasury for Manx culture or the education of pupils in specific Manx Gaelic, if that answers the hon. member.
Mrs. Hannan: Can I ask a supplementary, Your Excellency? If such a request was made by the Department of Education, how would this be looked on by the Department of Treasury and would the Department of Treasury wish to see members of this hon. Court give such support for it before it would be considered in any positive manner?
Mr. Kermode: Unfair question.
Mr. Gelling: Your Excellency, again I can only stress that Treasury control as far as possible the spending of the departments but that is where it finishes. The itemised way in which they decide to spend that money, I am quite sure, is with the minister of that department and, of course, any other department, so I would think if the member was able to persuade the Minister of Education, that would be the correct avenue to proceed.
Mrs. Hannan: A supplementary, Your Excellency. With that reply, could I ask the Treasury Minister, does he understand that the Minister of Education has said that it is up to members of the Court to persuade Treasury to provide additional resources?
Mr. Kneale: Your Excellency, a supplementary to the Minister of the Treasury. Will you confirm that the Treasury have reduced the revenue estimates for the Department of Education for the financial year 1990/91 by £1,151,090, and to implement further efforts, as has been suggested by the questioner, would need additional amount besides that to bring us into a proper position to be able to cater for that?
The Governor: The minister to reply.
Mr. : Stick together, chaps! (Laughter)
Mr. Gelling: That is correct, sir.
SEA DEFENCE WORKS AT RUSHEN AND JURBY — EXPENDITURE — QUESTION BY MR. CANNAN
The Governor: Question 19, the hon. member for Michael, Mr. Cannan.
Mr. Cannan: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Minister for Highways, Ports and Properties —
Sea Defence Works at Rushen and Jurby — Expenditure — Question by Mr. Cannan T1136 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
During the period 1st April 1988 to 28th February 1990, how much has been spent by your department on -
(a) repair, restoration and renewal of the sea defence wall and public highway (including man hours, materials, goods and services) together with assistance to owners of private property, at Shore Road, Gansey, Rushen, following the adverse weather conditions; and
(b) sea defence work in the prevention of erosion along the North West coast between Glen Mooar, Kirk Michael, and Jurby Head?
The Governor: The Minister for Highways, Ports and Properties, Mr. Callin.
Mr. Callin: Your Excellency, this hon. Court will recollect that on the 9th March 1989 the sea wall at Shore Road, Gansey, was breached for approximately 50 metres following an exceptionally high tide and strong winds. Also, my department's staff and work force, assisted by private hauliers, mounted an emergency exercise and worked throughout the day and night to effect immediate temporary reinstatement, thus averting a disaster. These temporary works contained the situation until permanent works could be commenced at the end of May. It was also envisaged that a further length of some 150 metres of sea wall was inherently unstable and would require strengthening as part of the first phase of the work. Then, on 21st June, a further section of the sea wall, which was planned to be strengthened, collapsed and close inspection of the adjoining sections indicated that the whole of the concrete-faced masonry sea wall was unstable and needed strengthening. The total distance of sea wall requiring replacement and strengthening amounts to 450 metres, which involves considerable resources being allocated by my department and a high level of expenditure which had not been budgeted for. The answer to the first part of the question: the expenditure incurred between the 1st April 1988 and 28th February 1990 on the repair, restoration and renewal of the sea wall at Shore Road, Gansey, amounts to £20,000 temporary works plus £340,953.57 permanent works, made up as follows: labour — £88,874, use of plant — £29,592, materials comprising precast units, ready-mix concrete reinforcements — £191,142, and miscellaneous stores — £12,149, and stone from Poortown quarry — £19,185. The total costs incurred on the public highway at Gansey for the same period amounts to £28,500, of which it is estimated that a cost of £8,000 may be attributed to additional works to the public highway resulting from the events of the 9th March, being works over and above those that would normally have been required under routine maintenance. The public highway at Shore Road, Gansey was programmed to be reconstructed as part of my department's ongoing highway maintenance programme prior to the storm damage of the 9th March. I would emphasise here, Your Excellency, no financial assistance has been given to owners of private property at Shore Road, Gansey, neither have any works been undertaken by my department in respect of private property. Turning to the second part of the question, I can confirm that no expenditure was incurred by my department during the period 1st April 1988 to the 28th February 1990 on sea defence work along the north-west coast between Glen Mooar, Kirk
Sea Defence Works at Rushen and Jurby — Expenditure — Question by Mr. Cannan TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1137
Michael and Jurby Head. However, a sum of £1,063 has been expended since the 1st March for placing large boulders on the beach at the Cronk, Ballaugh, to afford protection to the public car parking following erosion to the car park during the recent storms, and I wish to add that Treasury did not grant any additional moneys to the D.H.P.P. for either the temporary emergency works or the permanent works to the sea wall at Shore Road, Gansey. At Treasury's request my department had to reschedule the works programme and defer revenue projects planned for 1989/1990 in order to undertake the work at Shore Road, Gansey, although it was stated that sympathetic consideration would be given to making up any shortfall.
The Governor: We move on, hon. members —
Mr. Cannan: A supplementary, Your Excellency.
The Governor: I allowed a long pause for you, Mr. Cannan; however, under the circumstances I will allow you to answer the question.
Mr. Cannan: I would just ask the hon. minister if he would confirm the figures I have taken down, that for the 200 metres at Gansey he has spent £361,000 and on the coastline on the North-West he has spent nothing — I accept that, but £361,000?
Mr. Catlin: I will confirm the figures that I gave, Your Excellency.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, a supplementary. Would the minister not agree that he has a statutory obligation as far as the work carried out towards the safeguarding of a public road and maybe it is part of the reason why it has to be done?
The Governor: The minister to reply.
Mr. Catlin: If I could just say, Your Excellency, in answer to that question, there has been an attempt to liken the problem with the erosion on the west coast of the Island to the Gansey, and I would to just clear that point up by saying that the two areas are not comparable and the situations are entirely different. At Shore Road, Gansey, the sea wall supports the public highway and my department has the responsibility of maintaining the public highway as the hon. member for Onchan raised the question.
RETAILING SECTOR — CONSUMERS' NEEDS - QUESTION BY MR. BARTON
The Governor: We move on, hon. members. Question number 20, the hon. member of the Legislative Council, Mr. Barton.
Mr. Barton: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chairman of the Board
Retailing Sector — Consumers' Needs — Question by Mr. Barton T1138 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
of Consumer Affairs —
What avenues are open to your board to protect the interest of the consumer in the Isle of Man by ensuring that the Island retains a viable retailing sector to . meet its needs and those of its consumers in the long term?
The Governor: I turn to the Chairman of the Board of Consumer Affairs, Mrs. Delaney.
Mrs. Delaney: Thank you, Your Excellency. In answering the hon. member'sc question I would first point out that Executive Council have laid down that mk responsibility within the Government for the Island's retail sector lies with the Department of Local Government and the Environment and not with the Board of Consumer Affairs, not that the board does not believe in the importance of a local viable retail sector — it does, for local consumers want competitive and attractive shopping centres. Now, what avenues are open to the board to protect the interests of the consumer in the Isle of Man by ensuring that the Island retains a viable retailing sector' and does it meet the needs of its consumers in the long term? Well, the board has tried to and will continue to with a view... we try to promote healthy competition. We encourage consumers to shop locally; we fight for bright and attractive enviroments in which to shop; we try to work alongside the local traders to promote the service they offer to local consumers. I say 'try' for we have not always been taken up on our offers of help. We encourage traders to pay close attention to the interests of consumers. It is in their interests as well to be consumer-friendly. We collect data and analyse costs affecting traders; the freight charges, the energy and the property rent reports are an indication of what we try to do, and we act on the findings. However, it must be remembered that whatever we do, retailers should themselves fight for their share of the market and not rely solely on the Government.
Mr. Barton: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Is the Chairman of the Board of Consumer Affairs satisfied that the present legislation for which she is responsible rgl is effective enough to ensure the stability of the retailing sector throughout the Island to protect the long-term interests of the consumer as, with a possible turnover of £15 million plus by non-resident traders in hotels, is there any measures the chairman would like to take to protect the long-term interests of the consumer?
Mrs. Delaney: Your Excellency, I rather thought the member was going to deal with the non-resident traders and what we are doing about it. We are certainly concerned, and I think the report that will be given to Executive Council will give a clear indication of our intent. The notion of the Consumer Board is, as the hon. member knows, that the right of any consumer is that there must be fair competition and fair trading, not just a stop on retailing outlets but fair competition and fair trading.
Retailing Sector — Consumers' Needs — Question by Mr. Barton TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1139
SUPPLEMENTARY PENSION/BENEFIT — COST OF RAISING ELIGIBILITY — QUESTION BY MR. CANNAN
The Governor: We move on. Question 21, the hon. member for Michael, Mr. Cannan.
Mr. Cannon: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Minister for Health and Social Security —
What would be the anticipated cost of raising the elegibility of persons to receive Supplementary Pension or Supplementary Benefit from the current scale £3,000 — £8,000 maximum value of assets to -
(a) Scale £6,000 — £12,000 maximum value of assets; (b) Scale £8,000 — £14,000 maximum value of assets; (c) Scale £10,000 — £16,000 maximum value of assets?
The Governor: The Minister for Health and Social Security, the hon. Mr. Cain, to reply.
Mr. Cain: Your Excellency, I have to advise the member for Michael that the Department of Health and Social Security does not hold information on the capital assets of persons in the Island or on their income position. I cannot therefore provide the answers sought by the hon. member.
Mr. Cannon: Can I ask a supplementary, sir? Surely the minister, in proposals before this Court in increasing the limit from £8,000 to £10,000, must have some idea of what it will cost and therefore he knows those in the salary scale between £3,000 and £10,000 — what the assets are in terms of eligibility to supplementary benefit. All he is being required to answer in part (a) is an estimate for those on the scale between £10,000 and £12,000. He already has the information up to £10,000 because he is already putting a promotion down, sir.
Mr. Cain: Your Excellency, I would ask the hon. questioner if in future he would just be a little more accurate in the way in which he frames his questions. But accepting what he is now saying as distinct from what he said in the question, I think the issue is that certainly there are changes which are being brought forward, as indeed he has mentioned. Now, we have estimated what the cost of these changes is going to be on the basis of a sample of cases to which we have applied all the relevant proposals to calculate the increased supplementary benefit entitlement, and then we have multiplied this sample up by an appropriate factor to give a global estimate of the current case load, and it has got to be pointed out that the estimates can only be based on the sample of those people who are currently in receipt of supplementary benefit, not on the total population of the Isle of Man, and that distinction is very fundamental to an accurate estimate: However, we have carried out an exercise on the basis of the current supplementary benefit case load which, as I have said, Your Excellency, is a very limited factor, to identify the costs associated with adopting the capital limits referred to in the question when compared
Supplementary Pension/Benefit — Cost of Raising Eligibility - Question by Mr. Cannan T1140 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 with the current capital limits — that is, £3,000 and £8,000. Now, it is fair to say that the estimated cost of operating the scale firstly on the £6,000 to £12,000 limits mentioned by the questioner are £98,500; £8,000 to £14,000 — £105,000; and £10,000 to £16,000 — £106,500. Now, these estimates assume continuation of the following principles in the treatment of capital: firstly a capital tariff of £1 per £250 in excess of the lower of the scale figure, and secondly that actual income from capital is, as is our current practice, disregarded. Now, it is fair to say that we are increasing the current upper capital limit in all cases to £10,000 as and from the 9th April 1990 and increasing the lower limit to £5,000 except in residential and nursing home cases, for which the present lower limit will continue to apply. The cost of these changes is now estimated on the basis of the sample that I have already referred to at about £81,000, so if we compare what we are proposing with the scale suggested by Mr. Cannan, the estimated cost of his suggestion reduces to £17,500, £24,000 and £25,500 respectively. However — and I must re-emphasise this — it has to be emphasised that all these costings relate to the current case load only.
Mr. Leventhorpe: Your Excellency, a supplementary. Could the minister tell us when the rates were last revised or updated?
Mr. Cain: I think I am right in saying, Your Excellency, that the rates are reviewed on an annual basis.
ELECTRICITY POWER CUTS — QUESTION BY DR. ORME
The Governor: We move on to Question 22, the hon. member for Rushen, Dr. Orme.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Minister for Industry —
Whereas on 28th February 1990 Ronague experienced its fifth electrical power interruption so far in 1990, is your department satisfied with this performance by the Manx Electricity Authority?
The Governor: I turn to the Minister for Industry, the hon. Mr. May.
Mr. May: Your Excellency, the circumstances leading to a number of interruptions of supply to many areas, including Ronague, were the subject of a statement I made to this hon. Court on the 20th February in response to a question of the hon. member for Douglas East, Mr. Delaney, and in that statement, Your Excellency, it was made clear that two interruptions during the period referred to in the question were due to technical problems at the Pulrose power station. Now, as hon. members will be aware, we have experienced long periods of stormy weather of unprecedented severity during January and February of this year resulting in structural damage in all areas. There were a number of areas, mainly in isolated rural locations, where electricity installations were affected and Ronague is one such
Electricity Power Cuts — Question by Dr. Orme TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1141
area, and I can confirm that of the remaining three interruptions one was caused during severe gales by the breaking of a fitting which secured a pole stay. The use of this type of fitting has been discontinued by the M.E.A. for some years now but was extensively used by the former Isle of Man Electricity Board, and the • Authority is systematically withdrawing these fittings from service as part of its distribution system improvement programme. The remaining two power cuts in the Ronague area were both caused by lightning damage to power transformers. To put this into perspective the M.E.A. has hundreds of transformers in service, of which only two, and no other equipment, were damaged by lightning. There has been no damage to M.E.A. transformers by lightning for several years although there have been many electrical storms. I suppose you could pose the question, Your Excellency, is there a power greater than the M.E.A. in operation in that area? ,Laughter) Hon. members may be interested to learn that during this period of stormy weather there were over 100 cases of damage to M.E.A. installations throughout a period of several weeks, and in each case the damage was repaired and electricity supplies were restored the same day, and this, I feel, is a creditable performance by any standards and one that surely deserves the appreciation of members of this hon. Court rather than any implied criticism. Certainly, the experience on the Island compares favourably with the repercussions of the weather on power distribution in the U.K., where hundreds of thousands of homes, offices and factories were without supplies for as long as four or five days and thousands for even longer than that. Whilst no-one can be satisfied with frequent interruptions to supplies — and it is a matter of real regret and concern — nevertheless we have to look at these things realistically. Neither the Authority nor my department can be held responsible for the vagaries of the weather and extreme conditions such as those recently experienced; these things unfortunately will occur from time to time. In conclusion, Your Excellency, may I just take this opportunity in paying public tribute to the hard working staff of the M.E.A., who deserve the fullest praise for their efforts in maintaining supplies under what have been extremely difficult and onerous circumstances.
Dr. Orme: A supplementary, Your Excellency. May I just ask for a simple answer? May I take it from that reply that the minister is satisfied with the performance of the M.E.A.?
Mr. May: As I said, Your Excellency, no-one can be entirely satisfied where there are breakdowns, but I have to say it is a matter of concern and it is a matter of realism. I am satisfied that the Authority and its staff have fulfilled their responsibilities promptly and efficiently in maintaining supplies during this extremely bad period.
Mr. Kermode: Your Excellency, would the minister not agree with me that it has not been all weather conditions that have been the cause of some of the breakdowns in our electricity supplies — indeed it could have been done by builders working on site and cutting electricity cables? Could I ask, Your Excellency, the minister, has his department any direction in which he could advise people who have suffered inconvenience or loss from such damage that they could be
Electricity Power Cuts — Question by Dr. Orme T1142 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
recompensed for what they have lost?
Mr. May: Your Excellency, the actual source of interruptions to supply — I have made it quite clear in the past in response to previous questions that have been addressed on this subject that certainly not all the interruptions are down to the weather. They are down to building site accidents and we have had the unfortunate problems with the power station, so I would concur with the hon. member in that assertion. As regards compensation, Your Excellency, I would not know exactly what the legal position is on that particular subject at this particular point in time and I am not aware of anyone who has suffered damage to the extent as would be possibly outlined by the hon. member for Douglas East.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, before expressing his satisfaction, to what degree has the minister ascertained that the performance of our electricity authority is comparable with the performance of electricity authorities in similar areas elsewhere in the United Kingdom?
Mr. May: Your Excellency, during the course of my reply I did make it quite clear that throughout the United Kingdom, never mind similar areas, but throughout all areas of the United Kingdom extensive power interruptions were experienced during these weather conditions, and I think the Authority has reacted exceptionally well under extreme conditions and we have been very, very fortunate in this Island, sir, that we have not suffered the major interruptions to supply that they have suffered in other regions.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, could the minister indicate to us the means by which he measures major interruptions to supply? Could he indicate to us the number of hours that an area like North Wales has been without electricity, the number of interruptions that they have had so far this year in comparison with the M.E.A.'s performance in order to back up the reason for his satisfaction with that performance?
Mr. May: Your Excellency, I have not got specific instances to hand but I am sure the hon. member, as I do, reads the national media and listens to the national media and is well aware of the extent of the difficulties that have been experienced on the mainland.
Dr. Orme: So are we to take it, Your Excellency, that the minister's satisfaction with the M.E.A.'s performance is based upon his reading of the newspapers in the United Kingdom?
Mr. May: Your Excellency, my satisfaction with the Authority's performance is on the Authority's track record and the way in which they have carried out and fulfilled their duties in recent times.
Dr. Orme: May I ask if the minister intends to take any action following this performance so far this year?
Electricity Power Cuts — Question by Dr. Orme TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 TI 143
Mr. May: Your Excellency, the Authority is undergoing a major programme of redeveloping not only the generation network but also the distribution system, and this is part and parcel of the ongoing procedure of upgrading the standards of the Authority and ensuring that we get the adequate supply that is vital, not only for the life of this Island but for the economic welfare as well.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, when considering the upgrading of the Authority's work, would he also consider the upgrading of the Authority when it comes for re-appointment?
The Governor: Dr. Orme, have you got a further question?
Dr. Orme: Yes, Your Excellency. Could the minister indicate to what degree he has considered the loss to computer owners who are operating computers when such unexpected power cuts occur when there can be quite considerable loss of either work in hand or filing that is presently being acted upon by the computer and, in indicating that he has not considered the possible consequential losses that one of the other members referred to, would he give some undertaking that this be considered in the future as one of the responsibilities of the M.E.A?
Mr. May: Your Excellency, this is a matter of which I am aware. I am aware that there have been difficulties experienced by computer owners. I am also aware that there are certain safeguards that computer owners and operators can take themselves to protect their equipment against this type of incident. I would recommend anyone that has been affected in such a manner to contact the Authority where they will find the Authority only too willing to give their advice and expertise in matters of this nature, but I can say that the Authority is aware and my department is aware and it is something that is under discussion.
POLICE — ESTABLISHMENT OF INDEPENDENT COMPLAINTS BODY — QUESTION BY MRS. HANNAN
The Governor: Question 23. The hon. member for Peel, Mrs. Hannan.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Minister for Home Affairs —
What progress has been made towards the creation of an independent body to deal with complaints against the police?
The Governor: I turn to the Minister for Home Affairs, the hon. Mr. Lowey.
Mr. Lowey: Thank you, Your Excellency. Your Excellency, earlier this year I set up a sub-committee of the department's Police Committee to review the current complaints procedure and to advise me on whether any changes are necessary. The sub-committee consists of the lay members of the Police Committee. Two of these
Police — Establishment of Independent Complaints Body - Question by Mrs. Hannan T1144 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 members are magistrates, one of whom is also a qualified barrister and he is chairman of the committee. The third member is a retired senior civil servant. The sub- committee is conducting an in-depth examination of the local complaints procedures and those that operate in the United Kingdom. Two meetings have already been held and further meetings are planned for the near future. When the sub-committee have concluded their deliberations they will report back to me and I will then have to decide on the basis of their advice whether any changes in the current procedures are necessary. They then, obviously, will have to come to Tynwald when I will have to amend or remove the existing regulations which govern complaints against the police. They have started their job and they have reviewed the present practices both here and elsewhere. The committee is working hard and methodically to acquaint itself with the problems and solutions that have been put in place elsewhere and I am confident that they will present to me a sound, reasoned and researched case and then I will have to make up my mind and then come back to this hon. Court.
Mrs. Hannan: A supplementary, Your Excellency. While the minister has said they are working towards this, are they working with urgency towards it, because it is something which many people are concerned about — that there should be this independent body set tip?
Mr. Lowey: Yes, Your Excellency, I can assure the hon. member that the committee is fully aware of her concern and the concern of other members in this Court. However, I have not asked them for speed to be of the essence because I want a proper reasoned, researched case. Speed is not the main criteria but I must say to the hon. member, the point that she has made about it not being put on a slow burner or a back burner is equally valid, and I can assure her it is the right decision that I am after, not a quick decision, but I take note of what she says.
Mr. Delaney: Not wanting to push the minister, could the minister generally give us an indication... could he say that, for instance, would he agree with me that maybe by this time next year he should bring it back to Tynwald Court? And the second supplementary is, is it not true that the regulations will have to be agreed by this hon. Chamber at the time — not him but this hon. Chamber?
Mr. Lowey: That is right. Can I assure him that I hope to be back here long before next year, but he is absolutely right — any variation of the Isle of Man police discipline regulations, which were last reviewed in 1980 — actually they were signed by my hon. and learned friend the Deemster acting as Deputy Governor at that time will have to be approved by this hon. Court, so this Court will have the final say, but I take note of the hon. member who asked the original question.
POST OFFICE SERVICES — RETURN TO PRE-1987 LEVELS — QUESTION BY DR. ORME
The Governor: Question 24. The hon. member for Rushen, Dr. Orme.
Post Office Services — Return to Pre-1987 Levels — Question by Dr. Orme TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 TI145
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Chairman of the Post Office Authority —
Will Post Office services return to the levels which existed prior to 1987?
The Governor: I turn to the Chairman of the Post Office Authority, Brigadier Butler.
Brig. Butler: Your Excellency, this is rather a broad question and I have, of course, to address myself to what exact information the member requires. One notices particularly the date of 1987. The controversial change in our system was in 1989, the rather disastrous United Kingdom Post Office strike was in 1988, and that led to a great deterioration in services which affected the Island very much, and there is not a lot we can do about that. However, the date is 1987; apart from the fact that I seem to remember that my hon. predecessor, the member for North Douglas, Mr. May, took over the postal services in 1987, I do not think that the hon. member for Rushen, Dr: Orme, was getting at that. However, he did take one decision that year and I would like to say he actually identified a lot of problems and started to set in motion the reforms that were needed, but he did make one decision, which is what I think the hon. member is getting at, Your Excellency. Before 1 address that specific and rather narrow thing I would like, in case he wants a broader answer, to give a very brief but broad answer because there is no doubt that Post Office services have deteriorated throughout the world and are deteriorating. There are a number of reasons for this and primarily, I think, because the postal services are labour-intensive and, in this world of ours at the moment, one is cutting down on labour and increasing the number of machines, but machines do not walk from door to door pushing envelopes through letter-boxes, and that is an over-simplification of the problem, but there are many, many problems and, certainly not least in the United Kingdom and the United States, postal services are deteriorating and we are subject to many of the same forces and problems that exist world-wide, and without in the very short time available outlining these problems, Your Excellency, what I would like to say is that what we are dedicated to, in the Isle of Man Post Office, first of all consolidating our position and making those things which we are doing at the moment work properly, retaining — which has been last in many areas — the rural nature of the individual delivery, and there is much to be done about this, but retaining the excellent services provided by our individual postmen and trying to provide them with the infrastructure and the conditions under which they can improve what is existing now. I am not satisfied with the existing system now, but personally I am proud of the efforts of the postmen and I believe things are going well and we are on a good financial basis, and I have some optimism for an improvement in the future, perhaps not to old standards. But I think that what the hon. member is referring to in particular is probably the household delivery service, because 1 know he certainly asked me in the past about this and also has written some letters to the Post Office. This is, of course a system that used to operate until 1987, when it was discontinued, for the delivery of unaddressed circular-type items which were delivered either on an Island-wide basis or to separate delivery districts. It was a very useful service, I might say, to hon. members because it was a way of getting letters, mail,
Post Office Services — Return to Pre-1987 Levels — Question by Dr. Orme T1146 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 cheaply to one's constituents on a large scale. The service does not come within the statutory letter mail duties which are laid upon the Authority, and it was withdrawn during 1987, as I said, and it has not been re-introduced at this moment because of really three reasons: one is the financial reason; this is a service which, while it is not heavy on costs, is very low on return, so if we introduce it we will effectively be introducing a service which has an element of subsidy in it, and I am not saying we are not going to introduce it but we have to think very carefully about that, because we do have to provide services which do lose money, I accept that, but this is not one that is laid down, Your Excellency. There is also staffing reasons, because it does impose an extra load upon the postman, although he does get some money out of it, and another, probably even more pressing reason at the moment is space reasons; we are very pressed for space. Our mail has increased in the last two or three years by quite an enormous amount — in items by 30-odd@ per cent. but in actual weight by much more and our space problems in the sorting office, for anyone who likes to go and look down there, are quite tremendous. So to take on a significant extra mail in the sorting office would be difficult. It is a discretionary service which requires staff agreement involving the extra additional payments per item to the postman, and when it was in operation it was not heavily used, although the hon. member did use it and I am sure got benefit out of it. However, what I will do is I will undertake, Your Excellency, to guarantee the hon. member that the Post Office will look again at the H.G.S. service towards the middle of this year and see whether it can be introduced on a basis which is both operationally and financially sensible for the Post Office. I accept this is something worthwhile and I personally myself would like to use it and if, without prejudicing other parts of our operation, we can take it in, then we will do, Your Excellency.
Dr. Orme: A supplementary, Your Excellency. I thank the member for his assurances but I am a little perturbed by his description that we all have to sit back and consider only our nostalgia for better times lost and past in terms of postal services. Given the efforts that have been going on in labour negotiations over the last 21/2 years to some pain and inconvenience to most users of the postal service, could he not promise at least a return to those services that existed prior to 1987? At least that surely must be achievable?
Brig. Butler: I think, Your Excellency, I did make it clear in my answer that we were devoted to steadily improving the service. I do not think you could say before 1987 because before 1987 goes back to the beginning of the Post Office, but certainly I would hope that in terms of letter mail, in times of deliveries in cutting down delays in the post within the Island I would like to think we will see a steadily improving standard and I would like to think that we will reach standards which will be, in these particular narrow fields which are within our power, equivalent to the very high standards that were maintained in the past. What I cannot promise the hon. member, Your Excellency, is that we could wave a magic wand and get mail in earlier or achieve increasing speed of the U.K. mail, which is being delayed four or five days, very often, before it even gets to the Island; we can do nothing about that except complain to the postal people, which we do. And also, Your Excellency, what I cannot guarantee, although we are looking very closely at it, is the solution of our financial problems. I am not talking about
Post Office Services — Return to Pre-1987 Levels — Question by Dr. Orme TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1147
losing money, I am talking about being able to pay for those services — because that is what it is about — with our income, because part of the problem in this enormous increase in mail is that it is a one-sided increase; it is nearly all, really, junk mail coming from the United Kingdom which we do not get paid for. We are trying to find ways of creating our own junk mail, we are trying to find ways of making sure the U.K. pay for it, but it is not easy, so before I start guaranteeing that we give much better services which require, really, more men I would like to know that the money is there, Your Excellency.
Dr. Orme: A supplementary, Your Excellency. Would the Chairman of the Post Office not accept that the public have seen since 1987 have a gradually decline of services and increasing costs accompanying that, and surely it is time to give an undertaking that a return to at least the levels existing in 1987 should be the aim of the Post Office?
Brig. Buller: Your Excellency, I believe I have already answered the question, because you cannot give a guatantee just like that. You cannot objectively say what the services were before 1987 and what they have been since. I subjectively would agree that there has been a deterioration both within the Island and worldwide I would make it clear I can do nothing about the worldwide situation but we are devoted to improving the situation on the Island. How far we can go is a matter of costs, Your Excellency.
ANIMAL BY-PRODUCTS PLANT — CURRENT PERFORMANCE - QUESTION BY MR. KARRAN
The Governor: Question 25. The hon. member for Onchan, Mr. Karran.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Minister for Local Government and the Environment —
Is your department now satisfied with the performance of the Animal By- Products Plant (Lilts)?
The Governor: I turn to the Minister for Local Government and the Environment, the hon. Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown: Thank you, Your Excellency. Your Excellency, the plant is regularly inspected by my department's Environmental Health Inspectors and, whilst some day-to-day problems inevitably arise from time to time, the short answer to the hon. member's question is that at present I am satisfied.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, with the total operating subsidy on this plant exceeding over the last three years £300,000 where we are seeing operating subsidies of well over £100,000 per year, does the hon. minister say that his department is satisfied with the performance, allowing, for a grave cost implication on the Manx
Animal By-Products Plant — Current Performance — Question by Mr. Karran T1148 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 taxpayer is concerned?
Mr. Brown: Your Excellency, first I would dispute the figures the hon. member has stated — 'in excess of £100,000 per annum' — and in fact that is not the information I have. Furthermore, I would suggest that the operation at this plant in the last... or certainly since about eight years ago has considerably improved on what was there prior to that. That being said, Your Excellency, I think it is a matter that the process itself is one that is difficult to try to ensure to keep standards up, but my department's environmental inspectors are doing all they can to try and ensure that standards are maintained.
DEPARTMENTiOF TOURISM AND TRANSPORT — STAFF CUTS /— QUESTION BY MR. DELANEY
The Governor: We move on to Question 26. The hon. member for Douglas East, Mr. Delaney.
Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, I beg leave to ask the Minister for Tourism and Transport —
Whereas you recently announced that you would be seeking a 30 per cent. cut in staffing levels in your department, will you state —
(a) how you arrived at that percentage; (b) from which areas of your department's staffing these cuts will be made; and (c) whether these cuts take into account the recent appointments and the two new appointments which have already been sought?
The Governor: I turn to the Minister for Tourism and Transport, the hon. Mr. Bell.
Mr. Bell: Your Excellency, I would firstly explain that the reduction of 30 per cent. of staffing levels within the Tourism Division referred to in the question is contained within the policy and strategy document which is, at this stage, being published as a consultative draft. A final document which will take account of the comments received during the consultation process will be placed before Tynwald in due course. The 30 per cent. reduction in staffing levels in tourism over the next three years must be, at this stage, regarded as a statement of policy intent rather than firm policy, although I would add that the restructuring of staffing will certainly be an element of the eventual document. The specific information which the hon. member has sought is as follows: the figure of 30 per cent. reduction in tourism staffing over the next three years, which is stated in the consultative draft, was arrived at after a careful evaluation of the present activities of the department and an analysis of the direction and targets in relation to tourism over the next three years. It represents an acceptance that the Tourism Division must respond to the changing industry and that the level of
Department of Tourism and Transport — Staff Cuts — Question by Mr. Delaney TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1149
resources which have previously been applied in pursuit of the vision of mass market tourism are no longer justified or necessary. The answer to part (b) of the question, Your Excellency, is that until consultations related to our policy and strategy document have been completed, it is not possible • to say where my department's staffing cuts will be made. And, finally, to part (c), the figure of 30 per cent. reduction in staffing levels is based on the permanent establishment of the Tourism Division, plus those temporary or part-time staff who are regularly employed on a seasonal basis. The recent appointments which have been made within the Tourism Division are appointments within that establishment. Insofar as the Arts Development Officer and the Sports Development Officer are concerned, these proposed appointments are nothing to do with the Tourism Division. I would emphasise that the reduction in staffing levels relates only to tourism.
Mr. Delaney: A supplementary, Your Excellency. In the latter part of your answer, which I am grateful to the minister for, for not using Standing Order 41 — a matter of public interest — to deny me an answer, would the minister indicate that, if these two officers are not to be paid from your department, from whose salary, from whose expenditure and whose budget will these two officers be paid? The second question: thanking the minister for his reply, realising the difficulty of identifying, will the minister, when he does identify, bring into consideration that a major part of his tourist department is made of two types of officer, civil servants and technical officers, and whereas civil servants can be moved to other Government departments, technical officers, who devote their lifetime, a lot of them, in your department, would find it very hard to get jobs in the Isle of Man of a similar nature?
Mr. Bell: Your Excellency, the answer to part one of the hon. member's question is quite simply that if the resolution before the hon. Court in relation to the establishment of the proposed Department of Tourism, Leisure and Transport is accepted and goes through, the two new appointments will be appointed under the Leisure Division, not to do with tourism, and there will be a separate budget for the Leisure Division within the structure in the same way that at present there is a separate budget for the Transport Division; it will not be part of Tourism. Secondly, I take the point entirely on the way that the department is structured with technical officers and civil servants, and we obviously will be bearing that in mind when any decision is taken.
Mr. Delaney: I thank the minister for his reply, sir.
The Governor: I-Ion. members, that brings us to the end of oral questions. I understand that an answer has been circulated on Question 29 for written answer and hon. members will have the minister's reply to Question 27 and 28 before them.
Department of Tourism and Transport — Staff Cuts — Question by Mr. Delaney T1150 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
TAX ALLOWANCES — COST OF INCREASING — QUESTION BY MR. DELANEY
Question 27
The hon. member for Douglas East (Mr. Delaney) to ask the Minister for the Treasury:
What will be —
(1) The estimated cost in terms of loss of revenue,by increasing —
(a) the single person's income tax allowance from £4,000 to £4,500;
(b) the combined allowance for a married couple to £9,000 such allowance being fully transferable between husband and wife;
(c) the threshold at which the higher tax rate (20 per cent.) becomes payable from £8,000 to £9,000 of taxable income for a single person and to £18,000 of taxable income for a married couple fully transferable between husband and wife.
(2) The estimated cost in terms of loss of revenue by reducing the standard rate of income tax to 121/2 per cent. after increasing the allowances and threshold as in (I) above, whilst retaining the higher rate at 20 per cent. for Isle of Man residents and maintain the 20 per cent. income tax rate on the whole taxable incomes of non- residents and companies?
Answer:
I regret that, under Standing Order 41, I must decline to answer this question upon the grounds of public interest. To provide such information only three weeks before the presentation to Tynwald of my Budget could be prejudicial to my consideration of the various options available to me. Such details as sought by the honourable member could be used by some persons to gain financial advantage for themselves to the disadvantage of the general revenue of this Island and to the majority of other taxpayers.
TAXATION — TREASURY RECEIPTS — QUESTION BY MR. DELANEY
Question 28
The hon. member for Douglas East (Mr. Delaney) to ask the Minister for the Treasury:
What will be —
Tax Allowances — Cost of Increasing — Question by Mr. Delaney Taxation — Treasury Receipts — Question by Mr. Delaney TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 TI151
I. The net receipts for the period 1st April 1989 to 28th February 1990 in respect of —
(a) Customs and Excise Division;
(b) Income Tax Division;
(c) Other Treasury receipts.
2. The total probable net receipts for the financial year 1989/90 in respect of I (a), (b) and (c) above.
3. The net departmental deficiencies for the period 1st April 1989 to 31st January 1990.
4. The total probable net departmental deficiencies for the financial year 1989/90.
5. The actual credit balance carried forward from the financial year 1988/89.
6. The estimate for the financial year 1990/91 in respect of credit balance to be carried forward from the financial year 1989/90.
7. The probable value of the Reserve Fund as at 31st March 1990.
8. With respect to the Capital Account —
(a) For the financial year 1988/89 —
(i) the actual balance unapplied and carried forward;
(ii) the total probable receipts;
(iii) the total probable payments (including borrowing authorities).
(b) For the financial year 1990/91 —
(i) the estimated receipts (including balance brought forward);
(ii) the estimated payments (including borrowing authorities).
Answer:
I regret that, under Standing Order 41, I must decline to answer this question upon the grounds of public interest. In three weeks' time my Budget will be presented to Tynwald and the information sought by the honourable member will then be made available to the Court. To provide the details sought so close to the presentation of the Budget would be contrary to legislative tradition and convention. Some persons might be able to make
Taxation — Treasury Receipts — Question by Mr. Delaney TI152 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 assumptions from such information were it to be provided with regard to my Budget recommendations, which could then be used to their financial advantage and to the disadvantage of the general revenue of the Island and to the majority of other taxpayers.
NON-RESIDENT TRADERS ACT — LICENSED SALES — QUESTION BY MR. BARTON
Question 29
The hon. member of the Legislative Council (Mr. Barton) to ask the Chairman of the Board of Consumer Affairs:
Will you list all premises in which sales were held in 1989 under licences under the Non-Resident Traders Act 1983 together with the number of days occupied by sales in each case?
Answer:
AFRICA HOUSE, DOUGLAS 2 days — Nov '89
ASCOT HOTEL, DOUGLAS 2 days — June '89
BONCOMPTE'S RESTAURANT, DOUGLAS 3 days — Nov '89
CASTLE MONA HOTEL, DOUGLAS 2 days — Jan '89 3 days — May '89 2 days — Oct '89
CASTLETOWN GOLF LINKS HOTEL, DERBYHAVEN 4 days — May '89 (Furs) 1 day — July '89 1 day — Sept '89 3 days — Dec '89
CONTINENTAL HOTEL, DOUGLAS 3 days — March '89
EMPRESS HOTEL, DOUGLAS 2 days — July '89
Non-Resident Traders Act — Licensed Sales — Question by Mr. Barton TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1153
GRAND /BLAND HOTEL, RAMSEY 9 days — March '89 (Exhibition of Fine Arts) 3 days — March '89 1 day — Aug '89 3 days — Sept '89 3 days — Oct '89 3 days — Oct/Nov '89 3 days — Nov '89
MANX LEGION CLUB, DOUGLAS 2 days — Nov '89
PALACE HOTEL, DOUGLAS 3 days — Feb '89 3 days — Nov '89
PALACE LIDO, DOUGLAS 2 days — July '89 4 days — Nov '89 (Ideal Home Exhibition)
SEFTON HOTEL, DOUGLAS 1 day — July '89 1 day — July '89 1 day — Aug '89 1 day — Sept '89 1 day — Nov '89
VILLA MARINA, DOUGLAS 2 days — May '89 13 days — May/June '89 (T.T. Extravaganza)
Events certified by.the Department of Tourism as events calculated to assist the Tourist Industry. (Description of goods/type of event where the sale was licensed beyond three days) In addition, Non-Resident Traders who visit customers in their own homes were licensed to sell: hearing aids (3 days — May and Nov '89); wines (3 days — June and Sept '89); and aerial photographs (5 days — Sept/Oct '89). Whilst principally at events calculated by the Department of Tourism to assist the tourist industry sales were also held by licensed Non-Resident Traders at various outdoor venues in conjunction with the:
T.T. Races Ramsey Sprint Kart Grand Prix Fun Fair, Nobles Park Forties Weekend Manx Grand Prix International Car Rally
Non-Resident Traders Act — Licensed Sales — Question by Mr. Barton T1154 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
ARTS AND SPORT — EXTENDED ROLE OF DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM AND TRANSPORT — ADJOURNED DEBATE CONTINUED
The Governor: We turn now to the main Agenda, hon. members and item 3, you will remember, was deferred from last month's sitting, along with items 4 and 5. I would remind hon. members that in item 3 the following have already spoken: Mr. Quirk, Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Hannan and His Honour Arthur Luft. As the mover of the adjournment, Mr. Gilbey has the right, if he wishes, to speak first. No? Does any other hon. member wish to speak? Mr. Duggan.
Mr. Duggan: Thank you, Your Excellency. I am glad this matter was adjourned because I have been contacted by quite a number of people during the past month who are totally opposed to the minister taking over this role. The people seem to I think in general that he has enough to get on with to get the tourist trade sorted out. I have a letter here, Your Excellency, which is a typical letter I have received, and one of my constituents feels it would be a absolute disaster to allow Mr. Alan Bell to have anything to do (Laughter) with the Manx Museum and National Trust'. This, Your Excellency, is a typical type of letter I have had and 'phone call, so I will be opposing the resolution.
Mr. Kermode: Signed by Mrs. Duggan! (Laughter)
Mr. Karran: Could I ask the hon. mover of the resolution, if the Department of Tourism was to take over the role for the Arts and the Sports Council, what safeguards will there be as far as protecting the arts from being consumed into the leisure side? I have had people on to me expressing concern that there should be some sort of representation on any such body that deals with the Arts Council, that they should be an artist in some form as far as this is concerned, and I think it is important that we do have these sorts of assurances that the art community will not be engulfed and forgotten about at the expense of the leisure side because I think it is important, and I think it is important that this hon. Court remembers that Government has a role as far as making sure that the arts are supported and maybe that Government departments should consider commissioning pieces of art when they have big public buildings in order to make sure that Manx artists get a fair crack of the whip as far as this is concerned. So I do hope that we will have that assurance. I have had a number of my constituents on to me over this issue. I feel that I do need the assurance of the hon. mover as far as this is concerned because I found myself in an awkward position because I have been lobbied myself, but I have discussed this issue with the hon. minister and I think that he will resolve it, but I do think it is important that he does make an undertaking that anybody that is to look after the Arts Council should be practising artists, sculptors, and the people that are actually in that sector are part of the body that are recommending conditions to the Department of Tourism and to safeguard them from being engulfed into just putting on pantomimes at the Gaiety Theatre and the like.
Mr. Delaney: Obviously, Your Excellency, my colleague for East Douglas and myself, as well as the other Douglas members, will have a direct interest in this
Arts and Sport — Extended Role of Department of Tourism and Transport — Adjourned Debate Continued TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 TI 155 as far as the welfare of this Island and its people in Douglas is concerned, particularly as part of what is left now of what was a mass market is still there, residing. Your Excellency, to get support for such a resolution, I believe a minister needs to prove a number of things: he needs to prove that at the end of the day — and to use his own words earlier on — that the change of policy here — and it is a change of policy — in bringing in these other areas will actually add, enhance and create for this Island; it will enhance what is already happening, it will create money - and that is a very important element, Your Excellency, because whereas there is lots of money flowing into this Island, or we perceive there to be by everything that is being done on behalf of the people, for the people, Your Excellency, what happens to all these new little segments when money stops coming in? You can always justify the Tourist Department as it is now, if it is getting a certain level of arrivals which creates — and the minister has used it and many people beforehand — of what it generates for the Manx exchequer, and to do that you can then justify the expenditure; just like in any marketing exercise, you can do that per unit against return — profit margin, if you like. Your Excellency, to get that first element - and the question I asked latterly — the minister has made it quite clear: no more kidding, there is no mass market. Hansard will show that. What I want to know and the people of my constituency want to know — they want to know exactly what market they can expect, because unless anyone in marketing can see what size that market is going to be, you cannot plan and you cannot cope with it, you cannot build for it, you cannot organise it. You must know at what level, and reversing the situation, we are going down to, not where we were; we know where we were. We want to know now far we can go down from this mass market before it becomes completely unviable in relation to an income to the Isle of Man as a whole. That part, Your Excellency, has never been addressed in this hon. Court. We see the figures dropping and we know the reasons for it. We have different ways of trying to counter that reason and why it happens but we still see it happening. Nobody yet, to my knowledge, has come forward to say how far we are prepared to see it drop before we cut off the millions of public expenditure, and which was said by the minister in his reply to me, that the mass market is not there and that is what has been said. Your Excellency, if that is true, now that we have said it to the people of the Isle of Man, even this morning — the minister is aware of this, and his department is aware because his officers were there this morning — we still have the situation that we are unable, inside our own area, to even plan and organise facilities for any market that is left. We cannot do that. This very morning in our constituency, officers of the Tourist Board, with officers of the Fire Services, were looking at what was a traditional guest house, which we now know there is no mass market for, who have 22 people coming for T.T. week — as an example, I am using this — and they have been told that unless they do major works they can take six on the home stay. I am sorry for the department's staff in Tourism because that adds another problem and dimension to the difficulties they have in giving accommodation to the people that they have already attracted and who want to come for that last major event. We know of the same problem in relation to young farmers, we know of other conferences; we cannot even house the people, and yet here we are wanting to change the whole format. Now, I understand why we want to bring sports in. I was too deeply involved
Arts and Sport — Extended Role of Department of Tourism and Transport — Adjourned Debate Continued T1156 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
in sports events when on that department to know it is a money spinner tourism- wise. I understand that. In marketing terms it is a positive, because you know'there is a market there in sport, but, Your Excellency, as far as that one little element about letters backwards and forwards about the Museum, I do not accept, Your Excellency, that it can be improved on at this moment in time. Why? I believethey have done as much with the new money available on the diggings at Peel and doing up the castles which have been spoken about and all the rest at this moment in time to make it attractive for those people we get here, but the point is, you have got to get them here first, otherwise none of us justify, and I go through all the aspects of tourism: you cannot justify running railways if there are no passengers when money runs short. That is the first thing which happened in 1976 in this Court, when they cut the northern section because it was not justified, there were no customers, and at that time we had 450,000 arriving tourists and we still found it necessary to cut that off because there was not enough custom. That was the argument. The second one we have with all the museums and all the money we have spent on them, which have done a marvellous job and really enjoyable, even for those who are not directly keyed up to that sort of thing, you still have some through put of people spending money in there, even if it is on the new catering situation, new marketing, which they had advertised for recently, to buy the goods that we wish to sell to actually get some income to justify it. But, once again, we are getting back to the arrival figures because we can only see it so many times before it becomes old hat to us. We need fresh blood. Your Excellency, steam railways — the same, the buses — the same; then we come down to the Steam Packet, our old friend. We all know, Your Excellency, they are cutting their cloth; we know that and the problem is going to go on going the mass market is going. What we need is to be out there getting what is left of the market and, unfortunately, I see nothing in these documents, the blue paper, the green papers, the white papers, that have been circulated to members that give me any inclination that we are going that way. I have seen the adverts at the weekend in the Sunday papers, if that was what was supposed to tell me, I have seen the advert with the horse tram on in the Sunday People and whatever — that does not give me any hope, Your Excellency, that we can even hold on to the market we have got now to justify the expense and the set-up organised for tourism. I do not believe, sir, that we can do that, but what I do believe — that if we allow the department, as honest as they want to be, to try and expand it, if we allow them to direct their efforts and energies and attract from what they should be doing, which is marketing the Isle of Man, by getting out there, Your Excellency, we do no service to the Isle of Man Exchequer, no service to the people in the tourist business direct and indirect and no service for the long term welfare of the staff of departments which will be cut when there is no justification because nobody turns up on the piers or at the airport. That is a truism, and it is foolhardy to try and pretend that this can go on indefinitely. The minister recognises it because in part that is what this resolution is about: to change direction completely away from the mass market, in his own words. Your Excellency, I do not believe that best part, the museums, if anything; to sports, yes, I can see an argument for marketing that, I can see that in tourism, but the museums themselves — I do not see other than them being a side thing to tourism where you can go out and say in the Isle of Man we have got a museum and we have got a farm down south and we have got a castle here. That has been
Arts and Spurt — Extended Role of Department of Tourism and Transport — Adjourned Debate Continued TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1157 done by lots of people. They are marketing incentives, they are aids to marketing, they are not just an item to sell to a mass of any sort, and I do not believe that to say this to the public, that this will actually increase or hold the arrival figures — I believe that is wrong. Your Excellency, the minister, fair enough, wants to go away with the support of the Cabinet and go on this journey, but I say he is over-burdening himself with baggage, because the Museum is a special type, it is being looked after by people who have a direct influence in it, who are interested in it and who have built it up when money was not available and we were still fighting in this Court and outside. Now they have got the money, we are going to say to them 'Sorry, get pushed into a Government department, what your justification for being there is, some tourist, who we cannot manage to get at the moment, when it does come, will want to get into the museums'. Your Excellency, that is not on. It is not on at all, and it will do no justice to it. I believe, Your Excellency, leave sleeping dogs lie, in this case, and let the Museum get on with what they have done best in the past. Now they have got the money to do it, they are doing better. I do not believe that you can actually justify a whole department incorporating the museums — the sports, yes.
Your Excellency, do not believe that the Isle of Man can expect from this resolution today any wonderful burning bush' it cannot expect anything like that because, after three years, the figures still show a decline. Fortunately, for the minister concerned and the department and its staff, the money is showing an increase coming into the Isle of Man so he can still afford to keep paying it out, but when you get down to the unit price of what the return is, the unit price which is per tourist — 'heads on beds', my old expression — the fact of it is, sir, the writing is on the wall for it. It is going to finish, and when you have got rid of all these little guest houses, which is going to happen, and you are down to half a dozen major hotels, which we are heading for, what happens then to all these wonderful events — the T.T., the carnival dances, any conference? You will not be able to house them. So tourism will depend on what those hotels can take and the market they themselves can possibly generate with the aid of things like the museums. It is a foolhardy exercise in marketing terms. We are now gauging our whole tourist industry to half a dozen large hotels, with subsidiaries, maybe, scattered round Douglas and a few in the country. We cannot even house a decent-sized conference and those numbers are dropping all the time. Your Excellency, I cannot support in total this resolution because I do not think it is in the best interest, certainly, of the people I serve and certainly not in tourism. I think it will take away from the direction that the department should be going in trying to hold on to those figures to justify the expenditure that people in the tourist industry are putting in and expected to put in even on such things as fire precautions.
Mr. Leventhorpe: Your Excellency, I think the speaker who has just resumed his seat has struck the right note: marketing is the key and the Department of Tourism is already deeply into that, and that is where I think that they should concentrate. It is where the Poole Report specified that their whole effort should be concentrated. Let others produce the wherewithal for them to market but they should not be in the position of running every operation which they intend to market.
Arts and Sport — Extended Role of Department of Tourism and Transport ' — Adjourned Debate Continued TI158 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Now, I have talked to people who actually play the games which go on, and they do not want to be co-ordinated, they want to continue to run their own affairs and make their own arrangements. They have found, in fact, in the past that others have not done it properly for them, so they have found it better to act on their own. So I can see no justification for any change in the role of the department. They are into sport, yes, but I do not see that they need to be, in fact, a Department of Leisure as such; they are a department of marketing. When we come to the arts scene, Your Excellency, I think it is a different matter — and again it has been touched on. The Museum has done and is doing a splendid job in promoting various aspects of the Island: the castles, Cregneash, the farm, the Laxey Wheel, and it is my belief that in fact the Gaiety Theatre, which no longer caters for the tourist trade, should also come under that umbrella because the tourist trade is practically non-existent and anyhow is for only three months in the year where the local populace enjoy it for the other nine — and in fact for the three when the tourists are supposedly here. Again, Your Excellency, I have heard a member from the Arts Council speaking on Manx Radio saying 'Oh, yes, it will be marvellous; we will have our own minister, he will look after us and make sure that we get plenty of money'. If you look at the estimates, you will find that, lo and behold, the estimates for the Arts Council have gone up 60 per cent. this year — an inducement perhaps for them to see it the Tourist Minister's way. I have talked, indeed, also to the Chairman of the Museum Trustees, and he tells me there is no problem with not having a minister — he goes straight to the Chief Minister! (Interruption and laughter) At any event, I believe that the political clout that the Museum has is very substantial already. It has three members of this hon. Court under Mr. Speaker, and that, surely, is as powerful an advocacy as he would wish. Another point, Your Excellency, which may well be relevant: the Museum gets donations and offerings from outside at the moment. People ask them if they can give them money for a project. I wonder if they would give that same help to the Department of Tourism? Your Excellency, I cannot see that there is any call for this motion. I cannot see that there is any need to change the relevance of the sports side and I do not believe that arts should come under tourism.
Mr. Brown: As you know, Your Excellency, I only speak very short on some of these issues! (Laughter) Your Excellency, the matter before us here, I think, is one which is a substantial matter of great importance, and I have to say I have been saddened at some of the comments that have been made in this debate already with regard to, in fact, playing down the role of tourism and the negative attitude that is coming in with regard to tourism. The Isle of Man is one of the few areas in the world now that is not investing in the infrastructure of its tourist sector. (Members: Hear, hear.) It is unbelievable that our commitment to tourism has been so minimal in the last few years, Your Excellency. We are now seeing, through the Museum and through the Tourist Department, some investment coming in which is now, hopefully, enabling those bodies to actually do something with what we have here, that has always been here. Your Excellency, I have always been a strong supporter of the Museum and the
Arts and Sport — Extended Role of Department of Tourism and Transport — Adjourned Debate Continued TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T I 159 work that it does and I still am, but I am also a strong supporter of what tourism is about in the Isle of Man and always have been. Your Excellence, the greatest concern that seems to be going on with regard to this debate at the moment is the letters that are going backwards and forwards which, I have to say, seem to confuse the issue, and I hope that the minister in his response will clarify exactly just what the situation is with regard to the letters that have been flying backwards and forwards between the Arts Council and the Manx Museum. What people want to know is, are we going to see a conflict between the two departments? Your Excellency, I do not see a conflict. In fact, if anything, my stronger leaning is towards the museum because I think it is historical value that we have is very, very important to us and most of it is there. What we have to do is invest in that to make it work for us, and that is now happening. The member who spoke just before me said the Tourism Department is about marketing and nothing else, basically — those were basically his words. Well, all I can say, Your Excellency, if we followed that along — I think it is called market forces or something like that — we would have no tourism at all. All you have to do is look at the United Kingdom, look into Europe, look into the Spanish resorts and say, 'Who leads with the investment in those areas?' It is led by Government. They invest with the private sector to get some of these things under way, Your Excellency. They start the ball rolling. They do not continue it, they start to create a product and work with the industries to get that going. As far as I am concerned, Your Excellency, within our future of tourism, we have our sport, our culture. our history and the arts, and what is important is that they all work together to ensure that it provides what we are trying to do. All that I am concerned with — and as I say, I hope the minister will clarify it and I know many are concerned with it — is this point of what is seen as the interference, or is perceived of as an interference, by the Department of Tourism in the work of the Museum. I do not believe that will happen. Statutorily, the position of the Manx Museum and National Trust is quite clear and quite specific. Therefore, your Excellency, as long as the minister is going to clarify that — because I do think it is so important — I think that members should be happy to support the way forward as proposed here and let us not forget, it is always the will of this hon. Court, if there is a problem, for that to be changed, but, Your Excellency, I believe we should make this step forward hopefully in the best interests of the industry.
Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, may I rise on a point of order under Standing Rule 98? If I can quote, 'Any member may rise to speak on a point of order which he must specify or upon a matter of privacy suddenly arising'. I would just like... in the light of some of the comments made this morning regarding the Museum. If any member in the public gallery would be forgiven if he thought the resolution before this House is somehow that the Museum and its functions should come within the permit of the Tourist Board. Can the minister now clarify to this Court that this is not the proposal that is being debated on this floor at this particular time?
The Governor: I accept it as a point of order.
Mr. Bell: Thank you, Your Excellency, and I thank the hon. member for raising this point and giving me the opportunity to perhaps clear up the major
Arts and Sport — Extended Role of Department of Tourism and Transport — Adjourned Debate Continued TI 160 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 misunderstanding right at the outset. The discussions which have gone on over the last six or nine months with the Arts Council in particular and with my department as well have in no way included any desire whatsoever to impinge to interfere, to have any representation with the Manx Museum. This resolution has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the Manx Museum. The outcome, if it is agreed by the hon. Court today, will in fact enhance the influence of the Manx Museum, because one of the proposals we are putting in to the structure for the new Arts Council is, in fact, a position for the Director of the Manx Museum or his nominee, whichever, which is a situation which does not exists at the moment, so in actual fact it is extending the other way, in effect, the influence of the Manx Museum, over the rest of the art world, and this was brought in specifically, Your Excellency, to co-ordinate the activities of the Arts Council and the Museum to prevent any overlap, to prevent any clash and any conflict in the future, so I can give this hon. Court the categoric assurance that the proposals in the resolution before the hon. Court today in no way desire to impinge on the role — and the hon. member for Castletown pointed out quite clearly, the statutory role — of the Manx Museum and National Trust. We only desire to enhance the relationship of the Arts Council with central Government within the Isle of Man and, indeed, to improve the liaison with the Manx Museum itself, and I have to say, Your Excellency, without getting in too deep at this stage, I cannot for the life of me understand how this gigantic red herring has suddenly dropped in the middle of this debate, because it is utterly and totally irrelevant and it is only the powers that be in the Manx Museum who decided on this course of action in the first place who can perhaps explain how they got their wires so seriously crossed, but I hope the hon. Court will accept my assurance that, as far as this debate is concerned, the Manx Museum has never entered into our considerations in any way; we have no aspirations to be represented on, to take over or to interfere in anyway with the Manx Museum and its present activities.
The Governor: The Court will adjourn until 2.30. The first to speak after lunch: the hon. Mr. Barton.
The Court adjourned at 1.04 p.m.
BILL FOR SIGNATURE
The Governor: Hon. members, we have a Bill for signature, the Fire Services (Amendment) Bill. If hon. members are agreed we will sign that while we continue with our business. (1t was agreed.) I call on the hon. member for Council, Mr. Barton.
ARTS AND SPORT — DEBATE CONCLUDED — MOTION DEFEATED
Mr. Barton: Your Excellency, I am not too happy that the Tourist Board take lead responsibility for the arts and sports. I feel probably less strongly over the second
Bill for Signature Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T I 161 part, the sports side. I think the Tourist Board have got enough problems at the moment producing a policy for tourism, and I concur with what the hon. member for East Douglas said this morning in relation to the sports side and therefore I will concentrate briefly on the arts. I fear that it could restrict the activities in the wider sense and also reduce the input or influence of the existing voluntary members not only of the Arts Council but supporters of the arts who give much of their free time and energy to the support of the arts in the Isle of Man. I look forward to the minister's reply because at the present moment I find it very difficult; I think if it was put in two parts I would have no problem but as a combined part of both the arts and the sports I find difficulty and I look forward to his reply.
Mr. Kneale: Your Excellency, the wording of the resolution before us is relatively harmless. It is the intentions of the department to implement the role which worries me. It is on the arts side that I intend to comment. Certainly Government should be seeking ways to encourage those people who are involved in the various organisations, who are endeavouring to provide an apprecition of the many art forms which are practised within the Island. But I do not agree that the ways suggested by the Department of Tourism are the best way forward. I have given a lot of thought to what I should do over this resolution. My first intention was to leave the Court before the vote was taken. But on further consideration, because of my strong feelings that what is being suggested is wrong and far from helping the encouragement of the arts within the Island, it will create problems, I have decided to vote against. From my own experience I believe that voluntary organisations are much better than regimented ones and if we were to appoint an Arts Development Officer to organise various functions I can foresee confusion and conflict within a very short time. Instead of spending money paying such an official and his back-up staff I believe such money would be better spent as grants to the various voluntary bodies to help them find better premises and equipment. Now I, sir, am a founder member of the Isle of Man Art Society and its current president. We have a membership of over 200 and encourage the practice of the visual arts by practical work and lecture and the organisation of art courses with artists from outside the Island. We organise a major art exhibition every Easter which lasts for 10 days. The Mannin Art Group carry out a similar function in the north of the Island and over the years we have developed an expertise in organising such exhibitions. There are many voluntary musical and theatre organisations on the Island who do a splendid job in providing the people of this Island with excellent entertainment throughout the year. The present Arts Council is not representative of many of these organisations and I believe it should be re-constituted to improve the link. I have spoken to many people who are involved with these various organisations and I have not found anyone who is in favour of the present proposals or who has even been consulted by the Department of Tourism or the Arts Council. Surely this
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TI162 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 should have been the first step before bringing forward any scheme. After all, it is much better to have the people who are actively involved going forward with you instead of trying to impose an organisation on them. As Minister for Education I take pride in the activities of our Music Department and can say without fear of contradiction that they provide excellent entertainment for the music-lovers of this Island. (Mr. Cannan: Hear, hear.) I cannot see how they would benefit from the appointment of an Arts Development Officer. In fact, sir, I believe the intentions of the Department of Tourism on this matter have been ill conceived and will do more harm than good.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, I rise for two reasons: first, to express my support for the resolution on the Agenda Paper and, second; to make some comment on the communications that we have had from the Manx Museum in this matter. Your Excellency, I have been party to most of the discussions with the Arts Council and the Sports Council, although I was not party to the meeting with the Manx Museum that took place recently. It has been notable so far, Your Excellency, that by and large the contributions of individual members have come into two categories. There has been the 'I will defend my patch' approach from the Manx Museum and there has been the 'no change' approach. But the discussion so far has been singularly bereft of alternatives for the promotion of both arts and sports in life on the Isle of Man. I have not heard another proposal come forward, a proposal that anyone would claim to have superior characteristics, and really that must be something that all members would give some weight to, that there has not been another proposal put forward. There was opportunity to amend this resolution, there was opportunity to propose further thought, there was plenty of opportunity. There has not been another proposal put forward. The choice as I see it, Your Excellency, is simple. We have a choice between progress and development and stagnation, effectively. We have a choice both for the arts and sports to have a manner and a system under which we could invest in facilities for both those components of life on the Island or we leave it as it is. We put into operation a system of management and a system of financial control, both of which, in my view, are essential if public funds are to be used, or we leave the present situation as one of the begging bowl, because that is what it is, Your Excellency: in effect the arts and the sports have a begging bowl in terms of the 3 provision made for them in life in the Isle of Man by Government, and we are proposing that that minimal provision should no longer be the case, that we should be able to invest in proper and full provision for those activities in life on the Island. Now there does not seem to be an awful lot of interest in that proposal when it finally comes down to it. That does not seem to be what attracts people's attention. It seems to me that it is either defending the patch or `No, we do not like change', but once again we are proposing something which I suppose is quite radical, that both of those aspects of our life should grow larger, that there should be greater Government provision, but that that provision must be done in a systematic and structured way that gives a protection for all interests. The relationship in my view — and I am completely at odds with the member for East Douglas who spoke who suggested that there was a complete contradiction between arts and sports and tourism, and I cannot accept that at all — they have
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1163
a relationship which to me is symbiotic: they both need each other equally. It is not a relationship of dominance, nor a relationship of dependence. They need each other. We in the Department of Tourism and Transport already have a considerable • revenue expenditure each year both in the arts and the sports in terms of events and attractions that we support. We have an expenditure of something like £90,000 in arts-related events which we support and something over £50,000 in sports-related events that we support. Surely there is an argument for the bringing together of the knowledge and the experience and the expertise present in both the Sports and the Arts Councils and the interest of generating tourism and therefore benefit to the Isle of Man economy through their knowledge, and our proposal is in essence to expand the area over which that knowledge and experience has some influence. We are seeking to expand their role. We are seeking to bring together their knowledge and experience, which has been applied very narrowly, and our lack of knowledge and experience but considerably greater funding under the present circumstances. Surely it makes sense that both of those have as much to contribute to each other and I really believe they do. We are asking that this increased and increasing role — because it will be increased in one jt mp by combining arts and sports councils with existing arts and sports- related activities in our involvement of the Tourism Department, it will be increased by one jump — but we see an increasing role from here. What proposal have members put forward to continue to increase the role of arts and sports in the Isle of Man? What proposals have they put forward to manage the considerable investment that is already... Stage I has been accepted of a National Sports Centre. What proposals have been put forward to manage that facility - by Isle of Man standards an enourmous leap in facilities requiring quite considerable increases in control, in management and in endeavouring to optimise its contribution to life in the Isle of Man?
Mr. Kermode: It is your department.
Dr. Orme: It is our department that is accepting that there is a responsibility there not only just to spend the money but to manage those facilities in an effective way and to maximise their contribution to the life of the community. It is our department that is asking for this measure to be considered. We are not trying to shirk the responsibilities that come with that investment, we are trying to make provision for it in advance. I hope that members will be able to distinguish between the thinly veiled self- interest of negative forces — because that is what it has come down to; by defending their patch they have essentially played a negative role — and also between those who wish for no change whatsoever under any circumstances, and habitually put forward this argument, and those who seek to develop and change the nature of life in the Isle of Man. We are responding to the requirements of this community. It is not as if we are trying to force something on them. There is an increased availability of leisure time, there is an increased demand from the public and the community who we serve for provision in this area. We are responding to that need. Surely that cannot be such a radical proposal, it surely cannot threaten those who
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TI l64 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
would wish that life must stay as it was for many years before. Your Excellency, I hope that the role of Government will be accepted. I think that Government does have an important role in this area. It cannot entirely be left to a tiny contribution through an under-nourished and under-supported council in both cases. It cannot just be left to chance and to private enterprise after that, Government does have a role to play, and in virtually every civilised Western economy that is accepted and I certainly accept it as well. I think this is an opportunity worthy of support and I hope that members will put aside the arguments that have been put for `No change' or 'Let us not touch the Manx Museum'. Your Excellency, if I might just touch upon the last issue, the Manx Museum, which seems to have been the subject that most who commented have touched upon, I can only say that in all the discussions that I have taken part in there has never been any suggestion of influencing the Manx Museum in any way, shape or form and it is therefore with some regret that I read a letter which was circulated to various parties, specifically, I believe, the Friends of the Manx Museum, and I quote from this letter: `Without any reference to or consultation with the Trust a political attempt appears to have been made to control the work of the Trust in this area'. Now, Your Excellency, that is an attempt to wilfully mislead the people to whom it is communicated. The parties who wrote that I do not believe really thought that to be the case. They are simply trying to protect their patch. They knew that such an issue had never been discussed, they knew that the ambitions of the Tourism Department were not in any way inclined along that direction, and they also know, Your Excellency, that those responsibilities and those duties are protected by statute in any case, that we could not, by this means, do it even if we sought to. I really do regret that the Museum has chosen to take such a negative stance when it could have been positive. It could have been contributing to this matter. It could have seen the alignment of its interests and the interests of a strengthened Sports and Arts Council, it could have seen that those would enhance each other. But, no, we have had this very negative contribution, and I regret that very strongly. Your Excellency, this is an opportunity. We either go forwards or we do nothing: that is the choice. I hope no-one will listen to the `Do nothing's and I hope everyone will reject the proposal of the Manx Museum representatives that their area, their special responsibility, should be considered above all else. It cannot be considered above all else, it must be considered alongside other responsibilities. Those responsibilities are vital to the health and well-being of our community, in my view.
Mr. Kermode: Look at the Bounty.
Brig. Butler: Your Excellency, I do not see much wrong with the resolution as it stands, in the sense that I certainly would see the Minister of Tourism as being the natural person to have the Government oversight of the sport and the art functions in the Island; the oversight, not of course the executive control which is a different thing. I also have no objection to the change of name to incorporate a formal recognition of this fact and so I am not in problem there. As far as the Sports Council is concerned, I have spoken at length to a number of them. As the hon. member for Rushen has already said, there is a clear, growing
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1165
Government direct funding and executive control situation as far as sports facilities are concerned and therefoe I have not any objections thus far. But of course we do have this problem, which we have all been talking about, of the arts side. Now I know that the Manx Museum and National Trust have produced a lot of paper, that they clearly have taken a confrontational position, presumably because of the strength of their feelings about the dangers that are posed to them. Some of the points they make one can see clearly answered in the papers that we have been provided with. But what bothers me really is that this confrontational position exists, (Mr. Delaney: 1-lear, hear.) and this hon. Court has three members on that Trust. We have had an interesting and clear statement from the hon. Minister for Education, looking from another angle because he also has interest in the arts, and it would appear that we do not have the sort of agreement and that we are being asked today to say okay to something which really would be a slap in the face for the people who have made the objections, so it seems to me. I know the hon. minister will say he does not have any threat to the existence of the Museum and Trust in its present form. I am sure he wishes to support them rather than to threaten them, but they feel threatened and I think simply to overlook those feelings at this stage would be wrong. I wish we could vote in such a way that I could approve the first bit and not disapprove the second. But I really feel very uncomfortable about this resolution as it stands, purely on that ground: the dissension, the disagreement that exists over the Arts Council. I do not argue with the need for an Arts Council, I do not argue with the need for the Minister of Tourism to be the natural person to have the oversight for the responsibilities of Government in that field. I am only concerned about the relationships and status of other organisations which are clearly very much opposed to the thing in its present form.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, can I just refer to perhaps the contribution made by the last speaker who referred to the fact that, and I think he said, 'We do have a problem'. Now, Your Excellency, I have yet to identify that problem. Surely there is a perceived problem, but I wonder is it real? And I do not believe that it is. I do not believe that the involvement of the Department of Tourism, of the Minister for Tourism, in the Arts Council and the Sports Council since 1987, the beginning of 1987, has in fact stifled the actions of either of those two bodies and I am certain in my own mind that it has not stifled the activities of the Manx Museum and National Trust where their responsibilities to the arts are concerned, and I do not think anybody is denying that there is a responsibility with the Manx Museum and National Trust as far as the arts are concerned and they do, as they inform us in the letter, obviously have the Art Gallery within their control and that everybody is so proud of, everybody that visits the Manx Museum certainly comes away with positive comments. Your Excellency, it is perceived that there is going to be a problem. Can I say, Your Excellency, that this resolution was looking for a way for Government in fact to support and promote the arts and the sports and certainly not to stifle them, and those people who suggest the Tourism Department have not really got an input into these areas are, I think, basing their arguments wrongly. I guess that the amount of investment in the arts and the sports that has been made over the last three years
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated T1166 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 by the Arts Council and the Sports Council is minimal to the amount of investment in fact that the Tourist Department has contributed to those activities. I do not think there is any doubt about that at all. Your Excellency, that the Department of Tourism and Transport should develop into more of a Department of Leisure is something that we have not hidden under • a shade at all. We have made mention of it in a number of our policy documents. It has been one of the endeavours of the department, certainly of myself, to give these two councils in fact much more support and Government backing, and I have to say, Your Excellency, I am disappointed by the contribution made by Mr. Kneale. This particular issue has been discussed at council and, as I have said, has been discussed in our policy documents on a number of occasions. The reconstitution of the Arts Council, Mr. Kneale suggests, would be a better way forward. But can I suggest that with any body such as the Arts Council or Sports Council there are bound to be individual sports and arts or sectors of the arts that are not directly represented and those people who are and who have played a very important part and made a contribution to the Arts Society and Sports Council in fact are not meant to be representatives of a particular sector of their responsibilities. They are meant to be people with a broad interest who can in fact give a view across the spectrum and they are not meant to be representatives of individual parts of the arts or the sports. Your Excellency, it is suggested that the involvement of the Tourism Department may in fact work against the voluntary element that is so important in the arts and sports and the voluntary element that this Isle of Man is so good in giving. I would suggest that certainly has not been the case as far as the Gaiety Theatre is concerned. That is a responsibility of the Department of Tourism. It has had a management committee and there is a very active voluntary movement, The Friends of the Gaiety Theatre, who give a tremendous amount of support to that particular place and I do not see that support stifled at all by the involvement of the Department of Tourism. I ask hon. members, why on earth should that be the case with the other responsibilities that can come within the arts? And we have the sports. We have seen what has happened in the past with the Sports Council, we know that the sports track and so on has been discussed ad infinitum over the last decade and it has not got anywhere and it did not get anywhere until in fact we got a department of Government to take the responsibility for that in pushing it forward (Mr. D.C.Cretney: Hear, hear.), and I guess there will be many instances in the future where the same sort of simile will apply both with the sports and the arts. Your Excellency, I cannot believe that the future of the arts and the sports in this Island are best looked after by committees that are set up purely by resolution of Tynwald, supported with a part-time secretariat and a minimum budget of their own. I cannot believe that that is the best way forward and, Your Excellency, there is certainly a great deal of need to develop the arts and to develop the sports on this Island. We all recognise that need, we all know from our constituents that they are looking to Government to develop areas or develop the different fields within these two responsibilities. Your Excellency, I am certain in my own mind that that development will be far better if it is supported, if it is supported by a department of Government. As I said before, the idea of this resolution is to support and promote those
Arts and Sport ' — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1167
responsibilities and certainly not to stifle the initiatives. The Arts Council and the Sports Council, as we have known them, have developed over the last three years under the chairmanship of the Minister of Tourism, although their vice-chairmen have really taken an active part. That relationship has worked well. There is a lot • of enthusiasm and there is a lot of support from those bodies who have carried those responsibilities forward to today for the way we are going. So I think we have to keep that in mind as well as perhaps a more negative point of view that has been expressed to us by the Manx Museum and National Trust and by a number of people out of our society. Your Excellency, I have no doubt at all in my own mind that this is the way forward, that the arts and the sports will be better supported and developed if they do have the strength of a department of Government behind them, sir.
Mr. Quine: Your Excellency, the first question that I think we should be looking at is whether the Department of Tourism is a department as such and whether it can stand alone as a department because until we have looked at the future of the department it is hardly appropriate to start blistering things onto it in a somewhat disorganised manner. The Poole Report of 1988 which has been referred to here today raised certain issues which impinge upon or touch upon the future, the possible future, of the Department of Tourism, Your Excellency. Firstly, in that report reference was made to the possibility of creating a Department of Economic Development which was to embrace certain responsibilities of the Industry Department, certain responsibilities of the D.H.S.S. concerning employment, and to have attached to it, so to speak, the Tourism Department as it now is as an agency, as a Tourism Agency. That was the approach taken in the Poole Report, a report by independent consultants. Secondly, in that report there was a proposal made that Government should be looking at the question of a Department of Transport which of course would take in the other part of this department, the Transport Division of this department. So again there is a big question mark over the future of the department as a department, just touching upon those two points and of course the third facet that completed the whole was the proposal that there should be a Public Works Department. So it is highly problematic at this point in time whether there is a future for the department as a department at all and that matter is still unresolved and I am sure hon. members will have already noted that in this explanatory memorandum which the Minister for Industry has provided today in regard to certain transfer of functions, in that explanatory memorandum in paragraph — I am now referring, Your Excellency, to the Transfer of Functions (Employment) Order 1990, a memo which has been given to us today — you will see that in paragraph 2 of that report the Minister for Industry has commented, and I quote: 'The report suggestion for a Department of Economic Development is still under review by this committee', this committee being the Administration Committee. So quite clearly, Your Excellency, at this point in time Executive Council have not yet made their mind up as to whether there is to be a Department of Tourism. So that is the first point, Your Excellency, and I might add, somewhat by the way, that if we are talking of departments I would have thought the energies of
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TI168 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
the Administration Committee of Executive Council would have been better directed towards looking at those very large departments which need to have perhaps, perhaps, a devision of their responsibilities in order that they may cope with them better, not to look towards small departments and try to justify their continued existence. The second point I would make is this, that I would suggest that it may be somewhat premature to create a Department of Leisure — I think it is 'Leisure' that is the added word there — and it would be premature for this reason. We have in circulation now a consultative document from the Department of Tourism and Transport, a document which puts under the microscope the question of a future strategy, a form, a content, an organisation, for the department and that document is still under discussion and I am aware that members of this hon. Court are sti in the process of formulating written responses to that document. So it is prematu in the sense that the department and Government and members of this Legislature have yet to make their contributions as to what is to be the final strategy for the Department of Tourism. So it is premature. I might add, Your Excellency, that I have found in that draft paper on tourism development strategy some welcome moves, if you wish, some indication at least that the department is going to move in a more radical way to try to deal with the matter of tourism, but it is only a draft paper, no final decisions have been taken on that paper and to start moving in this direction unless and until those discussions are completed and a final decision taken is organisational folly, Your Excellency. If 1 may come back now to the matter of sports and arts. My own view is that the least Government involvement in these areas, the better, (Members: Hear, hear.) the least Government involvement, the better.
Dr. Orme: How else?
Mr. Quine: 'How else?' is a very good question. A starting point, I would have thought, would be to consult with those who know more about it than the professed experts in the department. These organisations have stood up as independent entities and served this community well. The problem is not necessarily the structure, and certainly not the people who are involved in them, they are dedicated people. If there has been a problem attached to it, it has been a problem concerned with the resources provided for the existing entities. That may have been a problem. But that will not be changed by putting it under the Department of Tourism whose immediate reaction is to employ two highly paid officers, £20,000-plus officers; that is their immediate reaction.
Mr. Bell: That is nonsense; you should have read the paper.
Mr. Quine: Get these highly paid people in position. That is not going to put money into the arts, into sport. That is going to put money into the pockets of two or three and then of course there will be others — you do not have a chief without braves — there will be others coming along. (Laughter)
Mr. Quine: You cannot have a chief without the braves.
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 TI169
Mr. Kcrmode: In some departments you have!
Mr. Quine: And instead of this money going into the arts or to sport it will go into these little organisations that are going to be blistered onto the Tourism Department to make up for what is lost or what it has not been able to cope with under the context of tourism. Your Excellency, I cannot see the attachment of the Sports Council or the Arts Council, the placing of these councils under the umbrella of the Tourism. It will do little, if anything, for the activities per se; it will just help to create a further justification for the continued existence of the department now that its reason for remaining in being is diminishing with the demise or the subsidence of tourism. Their efforts would be better devoted towards sustaining tourism per se. Your Excellency, the matter of the independence of the Sports Council and the Arts Council — that, I think, is a very important matter and I am aware that His honour Deemster Luft spoke at some length on this matter. I think that is something we must not lose sight of. Certainly it is not a matter or which I would care to cover the ground that has already been covered by His Honour because I am aware that he made a very well reasoned and constructed case for the continuance of the Arts Council, the Sports Council and indeed the Museum and National Trust very much as they are. But the bottom line of all of this — and I think we must not lose sight of this — is that the Manx Museum and National Trust have a fear, a very real fear, that what is proposed here is going to cut across their statutory remit, they have spelt that out to us quite clearly, and it is not so much as to what is in this document. That flows from the fact that the nature of the department's involvement is so ill- defined, it is so ill-defined that once it has got the nod from this hon. Court it really has carte blanche to do as it wishes in these areas. One aspect of the continued independence of the Sports Council, which I think members may have spotted or may not have spotted, and that is what is in Annexe 1 and Appendix I to the explanatory memorandum from the department. There are two appendices there; one is concerned with the role of the Arts Officer and the other is concerned with the role of the Sports Officer, so to speak. In there you will see that the department — and this is very important — that the department, and I quote, 'shall employ or allocate such staff as considered necessary to enable the council to perform its functions'. That is the extent of the control which the , department will have over sports and arts, Your Excellency. It shall employ or allocate. Of course they will consult, but that does not alter the situation: they shall employ or allocate such staff as are considered necessary to enable the council to perform its functions. They are going to have the whip, they are going to be able to say, 'You can do that' or 'You cannot do that', because if you are going to do something, if you have not got the resources, you cannot do it and if the department have control over the resources, saying what you can have and how you can use it, then they are calling the tune absolutely. Of course, as I said before, I have little doubt that as soon as this is introduced, there will be further applications for additional staff to support both these areas of activity. I am sure it has also not missed the attention of members that these people are not to be inside the Civil Service, they are to be outside the Civil Service, so the
Arts and Sport Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated T I 170 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 conditions, the salaries, are a matter for the minister, and I am well aware already of what has happened in regard to the Department of Tourism in regard to people, senior officers of the department who are outside the Civil Service; their remuneration is substantially enhanced. One final point, Your Excellency, and 1 gather hon. members — I have had the benefit, of course, of views from members of the public, and one question that has been put to me in a letter here — and I think it is pertinent to perhaps end on that — in that letter the question is posed to me as to whether this resolution is the measure of the Administration's ability to determine priorities both as regards the use of civil servants' times and the expenditure which will flow from the use of civil servants' times. I think that is a very pertinent point on which to finish: is this resolution, with the expenditure that will flow from, is this an indication of the priorities of the Administration? Thank you, Your Excellency.
Mr. Gilbey: Your Excellency, far from increasing their influence in art and sport, I believe that politicians should be withdrawing it from tourism. I have no doubt that the promotion of tourism will never be really successful while it is dominated by politicians and run by a department of Government, and I am glad that someone who represents the tourist sheading constituency agrees. Most successful tourist areas are promoted by associations of those engaged in tourism with direct block grants from the public sector and they are not run by Government departments. Therefore,Your Excellency, I am convinced that, far from the department extending its political influence even further into sport and art, consideration should be now given to tourism being promoted on an agency basis or preferably by an association of those working in the industry rather than by a Government department. Indeed, Your Excellency, it is interesting that the Poole Report recommended that tourism should be put on an agency basis for its promotion and indeed, as the hon. member for Ayre said a few minutes ago, this matter is still under consideration and has not finally been decided on. Your Excellency, following up the hon. member for Ayre's remarks about the political control of the councils being exercised through the appointment of their staff et cetera, it is absolutely no good the hon. minister and others who he has persuaded to support him stating that the new Sports Council and the new Arts Council would effectively be independent bodies. One only has to read the constitutions of each, which are identical, and have of course been circulated to us, to realise that this is clearly not the case. Section 1(b) of each constitution states, and I quote, 'The eight members of the council shall be appointed by the Minister for Tourism, Leisure and Transport after consultation with the council and with Executive Council and shall be persons, not being members of Tynwald, who in the opinion of the minister represent the interests of the arts or sports and recreation in the Isle of Man', obviously the wording slightly differs whether you are talking about the Arts Council or the Sports Council. Thus, your Excellency, it is totally clear that the eight members will be appointed by the minister from people who in his opinion, the opinion of the minister, represent the interests of sports or art. Now, admittedly he has to consult each council about membership. However, he only has to consult. The councils have no power of veto and furthermore I am sure that if it appeared he was going to re-appoint most of the existing members
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1171 at any one time they are not likely to object if he personally suggests one or two nominees; such is human nature. It is almost certain also that as a member of Executive Council, the Council of Ministers, he could persuade that council to support the majority of his nominations. This is particularly so as he would have all the arguments at his fingertips to support his nominations, whereas the members of Executive Council are unlikely to have any arguments against the minister's nominations or arguments for other people. Then, Your Excellency, under Section 2 regarding the term of office of members of the council, in each case it states, 'Nothing in paragraphs (a), (b) or (c) shall preclude the minister, in consultation with Executive Council, at any time removing and replacing a member of the Council, i.e. the Arts Council or the Sports Council as applicable'. Again it is clear that as a member of the Council of Ministers he could persuade the Council of Ministers to the removal or replacement of a member of either the Arts Council or the Sports Council. Thus we should face the fact, Your Excellency, that their fate lies firmly in his hands. In these circumstances, Your Excellency, I do not think that any fair-minded person can deny that the membership of the two councils, when it comes to re- appointments, will be mainly at the wish and patronage of the minister and therefore as the person who appoints the councils the minister is in a very strong position to dominate them. Thus, Your Excellency, I have no doubt that the political domination of the Sports and Arts Councils would be considerable, and I believe as a matter of principle that this is entirely wrong and that these bodies should be entirely outside politics in every way. The tragic effects of politics on sport are evident for all to see. Although we in the Isle of Man are unlikely to be caught up on the international stage of sporting politics, you could well have political prejudices of various types creeping into sporting decisions. Art can also be highly controversial, as we have already heard in regard to statues such as the Laxey Miner and the Three Legs at the airport. Therefore it also should be kept completely free from political pressures and prejudices. I am very impressed by the fact that the hon. Minister for Education, with his own wide personal artistic interests and his long experience in charge of the Island's education, says that he has found few people — he actually put it more strongly, but I cannot believe he found absolutely no-one — in favour of these proposals and that he considers they are ill-conceived and will do more harm than good. Regarding the hon. member for Ramsey, Brigadier Butler, he talks about the dissension caused by this resolution and the papers accompanying it. Surely, Your Excellency, the way to deal with this is to vote against this resolution so new proposals can be put forward which are not the cause of such dissension.
Dr. Orme: Such as?
Mr. Gilbey: I could certainly put forward some and was just about to, Your Excellency. However, I would not say that mine are necessarily the only or best solution. But such as, in the case of the Arts Council, I would have thought that it should be either completely independent or, if it was to be placed under any
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated T1172 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 connection of government, it should be placed under the Manx Museum which already performs similar duties. (Mr. Cannan: Hear, hear.) Now I know it will be argued by some people that this could lead to the Arts Council's activities becoming more Manx orientated.
Mr. Delaney: What is wrong with that?
Mr. Gilbey: Indeed, what is wrong with that? We are in the Isle of Man and surely the more we do to encourage Manx art and Manx culture, the better that is. Regarding the Sports Council, I believe that it should be made up of independent representatives appointed by the main sporting organisations and associations and that in both cases the bodies should be funded by block grants from Government just in the same way that Manx Radio is. So they would be left with the maximum independence. Your Excellency, for all these reasons I shall certainly vote against this resolution and I hope that it does not succeed and that new proposals can be put forward to ensure the political independence of sport and the arts, which I believe is absolutely vital.
Mr. Cain: Your Excellency, there are only two points that I wish to make. I believe, first of all, that there are two issues in fact which are clouding this debate. The first one centres round the composition of the Arts Council itself, and this has been raised — maybe quite properly; I am not one to judge — by my colleague Mr. Kneale. In my view that issue is something to be addressed in the future. That is not an issue of principle, that is not the issue that we are addressing here this afternoon. The second issue, which has already been dealt with in my view very adequately both by the minister and indeed by his colleague Dr. Orme, is the issue of the submissions made by the Manx Museum and National Trust. Now leaving aside those two issues we have the submission of the Isle of Man Arts Council, and I would just like to quote from their letter dated the 16th March where they say, 'The memorandum's proposals for a change of structure for the Arts Council and a closer relationship with Government have been debated, amended and very carefully prepared over some months in discussion both with the minister and to a great extent without his involvement.' Now some may think that that is an excellent thing in any event. It goes on to say 'The members of the council are confident that the tighter structure, larger and better organised membership, the input of a professional administrator, a more streamlined plan for management of the Gaiety Theatre and the administrative backing of her Government department, as embodied in the memorandum, will all contribute to a more efficient, positive and forward looking Arts Council'. Now, I am prepared to accept that the actual composition of the Arts Council may be an issue which at some time in the future may have to be addressed, but I would ask the members of this hon. Court not to let their judgement be clouded by that issue when dealing with the issue of principle that is before you this afternoon. The next point I wish to make is this, that the proposal that is before us incorporates some political involvement, and I would say, why not? Because there has got to be political accountability (Mr. D.C. Cretney: Hear, hear.) when there
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1173 is public money involved at some stage and the degree of that involvement and how it is exercised is of course a matter that is subjective, but the principle again has got to be accepted. Now, one of the previous speakers — I think it was Mr. Gilbey, the member for Glenfaba — was talking at great length, I might add, about this business of the minister's power to appoint. My short answer to that, in addition to the points that I have just made, is that if the minister does appoint, he is politically accountable. He will not appoint in a vacuum. It is a nonsense! It really does not bear any relationship to reality. I cannot imagine a minister, whether he is dealing with sports or the arts, and he has got to pick or to be advised on a membership of eight, is it, for each of those bodies, who suddenly just picks out names out of the air which he thinks, as a matter of political favour, would perhaps be of benefit in a political sense.
Mr. Delaney: You d3 not know the Isle of Man very well, Jim Cain.
Mr. Cain: I know it as well as you do, sir.
Members: Hear, hear.
Mr. Delaney: Not, if you do not know the system.
Mr. Cain: I know the Isle of Man as well as any person in this hon. Court. Your Excellency, I intend to support the resolution and, as I said in the opening remarks, I have no doubt that the composition of the council, or indeed one or two other issues which are peripheral to the principle of this, may be the subject of further debate as time goes by, but I would ask all members of this hon. Court not to let those issues cloud their judgement when they are dealing with the principle of the resolution that is before them.
Mr. Kermode: Your. Excellency, how marvellously our views change when we go from the back bench then suddenly into the ministry system; we do not half change our minds quickly don't we, when we are on the inside?
A Member: And vice versa.
A Member: Yes! (Laughter)
Mr. Kermode: And I listened to the Chief Minister, Your Excellency, and it was not so long ago in this hon. Court that I asked the Chief Minister at Question Time, does he not think that politics should not be involved in sport? And he said, 'Oh yes, you are quite right, I will support the hon. member in that', and here we have another minister wanting to get involved, more political involvement.
Dr. Orme: Try reading the memorandum.
A Member: He cannot read!
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated T1174 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Mr. Kermode: Your Excellency, I was not involved in the Bounty project so credibility from the back can be lost in about two minutes! Your Excellency, there were only a couple of questions I wanted to ask of the Minister for Tourism. It has been pointed out, and I am rather concerned, it says in the green paper that the appointment will be made on a contract basis for renewable periods of three years with effect from the I st April and the post is not part of the Civil Service. Could he please give us some indication as to what salary he has in mind to employ these people?
Mrs Hannan: And who.
Mr. Kermode: And who. We have seen the expertise already in the Tourism Department: who is going to be the judge of employing them in the first place? And also it says as far as the Sports Council are concerned, it says the initial salary of the post will be adjusted at the end of one year and the subjection of the post will be negotiable. Once again, negotiable. We want to know what it is, what we are committing ourselves to, and I cannot agree with the hon. member Mr. Cain, for Douglas West. If it was financial vote in this hon. Court, and I have had him in our ministry and he is the first one to shout and ask for facts and figures before he makes a decision. He has always been the one in this hon. Court that has put the clouds over every issue, and yet he is getting up and saying, 'Oh, we should totally ignore that now because I am on the inside', and I do not agree with it. I will not be supporting this unless I get a suitable answer from the Minister for Tourism.
The Governor: Does any other hon. member wish to speak? I call on the minister to reply.
Mr. Bell: Your Excellency, at the start of the debate last month the hon. member for Council, I think it was, Deemster Luft, made the telling statement, 'Art is controversial'. It is not half as controversial as this debate has turned out to be. What started off, to our mind in the department and in the various councils as a relatively straightforward exercise of formalising the existing arrangements — the debate seems to have got out of hand totally and has strayed so far from the original concept it is difficult to recognise where we have ended up as what we started off with. Your Excellency, before I start to answer the individual points raised there are perhaps a couple of points I should try to make clear right at the outset, 'try' being the operative word because it would seem that, no matter what reassurances, what statements, are made in this Court, the feeling is to refuse to accept the statements coming from myself or my colleagues. But once again, Your Excellency, I want to re-inforce the point I made earlier on: this debate has nothing whatsoever to do with the Manx Museum and National Trust, and I think it is extremely unfortunate and untimely and detrimental to the arts community on the Isle of Man that they intervened in the clumsy way that they did without giving full consideration and indeed discussing the matter with us before they issued their documents. As my hon. colleague from Rushen has said, throughout some six or nine months
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1175
of discussion within my department with the Arts Council the word or the name of the Manx Museum has hardly ever been mentioned. It has never ever been the intention of this exercise to tread on territory outside that already recognised by the Arts Council. It has never been the intention to seek to take powers away from the Museum, it has never been intended to impinge on their activities in any way at all. I have found it disconcerting, to say the least — 'insulting' is probably a better word — when I see the letter put out by the Chairman of the Manx Museum, or the Trustees rather, stating that at a meeting which was held with me and with the Vice-Chairman of the Arts Council some five or six weeks ago I refused or we refused to give them any assurance that we were not intent on undermining their position as regard the arts activities on the Island, and I can say to this Court, Your xcellency, quite categorically again that both myself and my vice-chairman gave rhe assurance that they wanted at that time that we were not interested at all in interfering with their activities, and, as I pointed out earlier, far from interfering and trying to undermine the activities of the Museum, we did in fact and have in fact, in our memorandum, propose that the Director of the Museum or his nominee be appointed as a permanent member of the Arts Council, something which does not exist at the moment, which therefore would enhance their role in the arts world in a wider sense, it would give them more influence, it would help them to co-ordinate their own activities with that of the Arts Council and the rest of the arts world, which has, to my mind at least, to be immensely beneficial to the Museum in carrying out their statutory functions in relation to the arts. I cannot, even now, understand the vigour and the rationable behind which the Museum have opposed our resolution. It can only be of benefit to them and certainly to the arts world. So the first point, Your Excellency, I want to make quite clear is that, in spite of this point having been raised time and time and time again during this debate, the Museum is not an issue in this. It is nowhere included in our document and there is no intention whatsoever in the future, certainly while the present personnel are involved with it, to look in that area at all. The second point, Your Excellency, which I think needs some considerable clarification and that is in effect that this debate has nothing to do with tourism either. We are not grabbing the Sports Council, we are not grabbing the Arts Council and hustling it off for the greater glory of tourism. Again, quite the reverse. /III The hon. Mr. Speaker, in his contribution last month, castigated the Tourism %/Department saying we should get on with what we are there for, which is promoting tourism, and forget about everything else. If only the hon. member and other people who spoke in the same vein had read the document and realised what we were trying to do, that is precisely the aim of this exercise: it is to enable my department to clear the decks. At the moment we are involved in promoting and financing events and attractions and indeed facilities which are not directly connected to tourism. They only have an indirect peripheral benefit through the arts, through a number of festivals we put on, and indeed through the sports. What we are endeavouring to do is transfer the funding and the responsibility for that activity to the relevant councils for the people with better expertise than ourselves to take charge of them and to develop them in a more appropriate way, primarily for the benefit of local people, but obviously there is a spin-off, with the development of that sort of infrastructure
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated T1176 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 on the Island, for tourists. It is to enable us to clear the decks in that way to make sure that our people are concentrating their efforts on those areas which will bring direct benefit to tourism on the Island. The responsibility for the development of arts in its broadest sense will be with the Arts Council, not with the Tourism Division. We have at the moment a Transport Division working alongside tourism, which again is not inhibited or hijacked in any way for the tourist industry. The railway is certainly a tourist attraction, but everything else operates quite independently of the Tourism Division, and I hope that will continue. Our intention, our aim, through this resolution is to establish a Leisure Division, totally separate from tourism, totally separate from transport, in an operational sense, one whose prime effort and energies are channelled towards the enhancement (I) of the leisure activities of our own people internally in the Isle of Man. That is the thrust of our thoughts, anyway, behind this particular concept. To achieve that, all we are trying to do through this document, through the discussions we have had with the Arts Council and the Sports Council, is in effect to formalise the working arrangement which already exists and has existed for three years between my department and the two councils. We are not seeking to impose greater controls on them, we are not seeking to subjugate them for the greater good of tourism. We are simply trying to formalise a structure which has evolved over the last three years and, I have to say, works extremely well. I am sure there are a number of members in this humble Court who would refuse to accept my word for this, but the activity, the support, that the Arts Council have had and been involved in over the last three years, and likewise the Sports Council, has increased considerably over that period of time. It has worked more effectively. We are being able to assist our own people in the development of arts activities, we are most certainly being able to assist more effectively in the sports community their activities likewise. So what we are seeking to do in this resolution is quite simply to reconstitute both councils in this new form to enable us to take the next step forward. Both councils are at a crossroads at the moment. We can do what the negative thinkers, those who lack vision in this Court today, have suggested and leave things alone. That is easy. We can consign both councils back to the wilderness again; we can give them their spending money every year. That is the easiest thing in the world. Great, let us do that. Give them the f50,000 a year or whatever it is: 'Do not bother us, do not bother central Government, do not dare to come forward with a policy, do not dare to come forward with a strategy for the development of sport'. You will appoint both these councils simply as paymasters for the various organisations on the Island. All they will be left to do in effect is dole out requests for financial assistance, which, quite frankly, any clerk in any department could handle if it was deemed so to do. You will be taking away from them the ability to develop a policy, a properly thought through policy, one which involves consultation with the arts community, with the sports community, to develop a policy which will be endorsed by Government, supported by central Government, for the development of both of these areas for many years to come: something which has never existed before. This is the alternative: you send them to the wilderne§s or you give them a central
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1177 role in the planning for their activities in Government. Which is more preferable? Is the bias against the Tourism Department so strong that you are prepared to sacrifice the development of sport and art on the Island to scoring points over the Tourism Department? That, sadly, is what it comes down to. Your Excellency, several points have been raised during the debate which I think I have to comment on, and I have to say again Your Excellency, the one thing that does disturb me, as well as somewhat amuse me with some of the comments which have been made, is the quite obvious lack of understanding as to what the present situation L in relation to the membership, the structure and the role of both the Arts Council and the Sports Council. In fact I should think both councils will be quite reassured to see this sudden upsurge of interest in them. It has been totally absent for the five years that I have been in Government. It is nice now to see that people at least recognise they exist, but I just wish they had taken the time to talk to members of both these councils to find out what the present relationship is before they made some of the statements that they did. Mr. Quirk made a number of comments, the hon. member for Council, mostly in relation to the activities of the Sports Council. One statement which sums up everything I have been saying that he made was that he did not believe there was sufficient consultation with the Sports Council before this measure was brought forward. The Sports Council, hon. members, was involved in this from day one. It was almost, as far as the sports area is concerned, it was almost entirely their recommendations, their pressures, which generated this document. Further on in the debate comment was made about the appointment of Arts and Sports Development Officers, and I can assure all hon. members that pressure for the appointment of these two officers came from the respective councils, it did not come from the Tourist Department, or myself or my colleagues. The Sports Council have believed for a very long time that there is need for professional advise and profession back-up for the council if it is going to effectively do its job and carry the development of sport forward for the future. We have taken that suggestion on board and we have included that in the document that has been presented before you. Mr. Quirk has also made comment about the political involvement. Again, Your Excellency, he believes that there should be less political involvement. This document will mean less political involvement. At the moment both councils have political chairmen and have done from the day they were conceived. The new proposals that we are putting forward will mean in fact that the executive chairmen, the people with the responsibility and the day-to-day ability to operate these councils will be non-politicians.
Mr. Kermode: Not according to this.
Mr. Bell: Well, you should read the document. That is exactly what it says in that. It says that the Minister for Tourism and Transport and Leisure will be the non-executive chairman of the councils. Now you need to understand the difference between non-executive and executive. The executive chairmen will be non-politicians. For the first time both the Sports Council and the Arts Council will not have a politician as a chairman, it will be a chairman selected from amongst their own
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated T1178 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 ranks, from outside of Government, and I think that is a positive step forward. The Sports Council will have a sportsman as a chairman and the Arts Council will have someone from the arts community. There is just one brief point I should mention and again to reinforce what the hon. Chief Minister mentioned. Mr. Quirk has referred to the title of 'Leisure' and the inclusion of 'Leisure'. I would remind hon. members that for at least the last two policy documents that have gone out from Executive Council, which have been debated by this hon. Court and indeed accepted by a majority of this hon. Court, there has been the clearly stated intention to develop my department as the Department of Tourism, Leisure and Transport. That has been in for at least two years, without any adverse comment from any hon. member of this Court. I have touched on a number of points raised by Mr. Speaker. I have to say that I find his attitude very disappointing, as someone who has normally in the past supported the development of arts activities on the Isle of Man, and I hope, even at this stage, the hon. member will accept the assurances that I have given him that there is no threat to the Manx Museum and indeed it will enable the Tourism Department to get on with what it is there for, which is to develop tourism without being encumbered by the events at the moment and activities at the moment, which should rightly be controlled by the Arts and Sports Councils. Mrs. Hannan came next, the hon. member for Peel. I must congratulate the hon. member on a first-class exercise in filibustering. I just wish before she had started it she had read the document; we might have had a more constructive contribution. (Interruption)
Mr. Delaney: Nobody has read the document as far as I can work out. I did and I am sure you did.
Mrs. Hannan: I did.
Mr. Bell: Perhaps it is the way we wrote it then.
Mr. Delaney: It must be; you are right there.
Mrs. Hannan: I think it must have been, yes.
Mr. Bell: Mrs. Hannan is concerned, to a great extent about the role of the Gaiety Theatre and seems concerned in fact that the Arts Council should take over the Gaiety Theatre, although we have had another suggestion that the Museum should take it over, so perhaps that is more acceptable to some members.
Mr. Kermode: It might be run better!
Mr. Bell: But the one thing that the hon. member was concerned about is Arts Council money going into the the Gaiety Theatre, and I would again like to reassure her and hon. members that there will be a separate budget set aside, as there is at the moment, for the operation of the theatre and for the general use of the Arts Council. It is exactly the same as happens at the moment. The only difference that you are going to see now is once again politicians will
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1179 be withdrawn from the management of the Gaiety Theatre. The Gaiety Theatre Management Committee at the moment consists of the three members of my department and three members of the Arts Council. The future will be that the politicians will be withdrawn from the theatre, it will be handed over completely to the committee of the Arts Council, together with the budget, and it will be their duty then to develop the theatre in the way they think best for the arts community on the Isle of Man. It has to be an improvement for the people of the Island, it withdraws the political representation from it, it has to be in line with the points which have been raised around this Court: the need to withdraw politicians: this is what we are trying to do. We recognise in the Gaiety Theatre that times have changed, that the greater usage now comes from local people rather than tourists, and therefore it will be their responsibility to develop a programme which will satisfy local demands first. I recognise and accept the points made by the hon. member for Peel about the work which has been done by the Museum. The Museum has done an excellent job in the new extension, and we all applaud it, I am sure, and my department has supported it. But it does not give the Museum the sole right to represent everything in relation to arts on the Isle of Man. It certainly came out at the meeting we had.
Mrs. Hannan: We never said that.
Mr. Bell: Again, Your Excellency, the hon. member has queried, why is the department taking over new areas for locals as well as tourists? And I have to repeat myself and say we are simply rationalising the existing situation. It is most important that hon. members, before they make their decision tonight, are fully aware of what the current situation is. We are not recommending any radical change other than what happens at the moment. A number of members have made reference to the independence of these councils, and again I have to stress that throughout these negotiations which have taken place we have been at great pains to try and protect as far as we possibly can the independence of both these councils. We should not forget that they do not have total independence at the moment. They have chairmen who are politicians — it just happens to be a coincidence at the moment that I am chairman of both councils, but tomorrow the situation could be totally different — but they will still be two politicians. They have financial accountability to the Treasury. Treasury controls their budget: they cannot operate without Treasury approval. The controls which will come in as a result of this new procedure will be no more onerous than the present situation. If we are talking about enhancing the financial contribution from the exchequer to both these councils, as we are intending and hoping to do, there has to be some form of accountability. This is all we are asking out of this document. Surely no member can object to that. It is no different to the present situation. As far as the staff employed being responsible to the chief executive of my department, that is really just a nominal arrangement which has to apply and applies in every department: there has to be an employing officer. There is not a department that does not operate on the same basis, and likewise with staff being paid by the department: it is the logical thing to do. We have the structure there, therefore it is paid through our finance section.
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated T1180 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Mr. Karran offered, I think, his support for the scheme, but mentioned the fact that no artist at the moment is represented on the council. I take it he means no member of the fine arts is represented. There has been a representative up until only three or four weeks ago when the then member resigned and so far no replacement has been put in his position until the outcome of this debate is known, but it is certainly the intention to have a representative of the fine arts on the council, as there indeed, I believe, always has been. There is no reason at all to change that now. He again makes the point about the necessity for the arts community to be represented on the Arts Council and for it not to be engulfed by tourism, and once again I can give that assurance. There is no intention whatsoever to get the Arts Council involved in the tourist activity. The Arts Council will be their representative of the arts community to work to benefit the quality of life and the facilities available for those involved in the arts world on the Island. Mr. Delaney, the hon. member for East Douglas, made a very long speech and a lot of it I agree with him, but I have to emphasise: this is nothing to do with tourism. We are trying to set up an independent division within the Department of Tourism and Transport which is aimed solely at enhancing the quality of life of our local people. The arguments that he put forward in relation to the development of tourism I hope he will put forward either to my department under the strategy document that has gone out or indeed, when we eventually have the debate in Tynwald, on that document here.
Mr. Delaney: The blue one.
Mr. Bell: Whatever colour it was, yes. The opportunity for members to discuss the tourism policy will come in the future and Mr. Delaney's comments will be welcome, but at this stage we are not talking about the growth of tourism, we are talking about developing the relationship between the Arts Council, the Sports Council with central Government, and I hope people will bear that in mind. I have to say that I share the hon. Chief Minister's disappointment, to say the least, at Mr. Kneale's attitude, the hon. member for North Douglas.
Mr. Kermode: Ministers fighting! (Interruption)
Mr. Bell: Mr. Kneale has not voted against this item in Executive Council, he has expressed his reservations about its relationship with the Isle of Man Arts Council, and that is the limit of his objections, and I find it very disappointing at this stage that he should come out in opposition without having registered his vote against in Executive Council at the time when the opportunity was available. He has argued, though, that the best way forward is to reconstitute the Arts Council; this is the way he sees the problem being resolved. And again I have to say to hon. members this is precisely what we are proposing: the Arts Council will be reconstituted, there will be increased membership, there will obviously, as a result of that, be new membership. The opportunity then exists, because whoever is the minister, he will have to consult Executive Council and Executive Council can nominate those people from
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1181
the Isle of Man Art Society, if Mr. Kneale wishes to nominate them, or whoever else they feel has a relevant contribution, but both these councils will be reconstituted. They have to bec 'use their remit runs out on 31st March. The ability for members then to influence the new membership is there and Mr. Kneale has the same right as everyone else to make his comments on that. I think that my hon. colleague Dr. Orme summed up quite effectively the situation we find ourselves in as regards both these councils at this time. We have a choice, hon. members, between progress and development, or stagnation. It is as simple - as that. We have the opportunity, unanimously supported by the members of both councils, to introduce a new structure for both these councils, to give them a central role in Government for the first time, to give them the role to develop policy, to evelop strategy, to have professional back-up: again something that they have not wilad before. They have the ability now to take the Isle of Man into the next century on a more professional, stronger base than they have ever been before. Or we can accept the views that have been put forward by the Museum and a few of their supporters here today which really means 'Leave everything alone, let things tick over as they are'. If you do that you are condemning the arts world to going backwards, you are condemning the sports community to going backwards. You cannot also hon. members cannot run away from the decision they took only recently to establish the National Sports Centre, and I made this point last month in the debate. The first recommendation in the Pickering Torkildsen Sports Report which was accepted by this Court was to establish a sports management structure. The proposal that we are putting forward today is the first step, the first brick, if you like, in that structure. If you do not accept it this way, sooner or later you are going to have to face it in a different way, but there needs to be a management structure of some description set up if you are serious about carrying forward the sports centre to its ultimate conclusion. It cannot operate on its own. We have a choice, Your Excellency. This proposal has been well thought out over a great many months with the input of those people who I believe know best how the arts community should develop on the Island, how the sports community should develop on the Island. They are the people that this Government, Executive Council and yourself, sir, have entrusted with the duty of safeguarding these interests for a great many years. They are not novices who have just come into it. They have wide experience of the arts world and the sports world, and I hope hon. members •will bear that in mind. There is no intent in this resolution, Your Excellency, to be confrontational with the Museum or with anyone else. We simply believe that this is the best way to protect and develop these essential activities on the Isle of Man and enhance the quality of life of our people. Your Excellency, I hope I have answered most of the questions. Yes, Your Excellency, the other points which have been raised I have already touched upon. Your Excellency, I have tried my best to answer the queries put forward by members over these two days of debate. I hope now members will accept my assurance that we are not intending to take powers away from anyone, we are simply trying to take the development of art and appreciation of art forward on the Island, to take the development of sports forward on the Island, in the logical way that we believe we are trying to do.
Arts and Sport — Debate Concluded — Motion Defeated T1182 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
1 would urge hon. members to support the resolution.
The Governor: I put to you, hon. members, the motion that item 3 on the Agenda Paper. Will those in favour say aye; those against say no.
A division was called for and the results were as follows:
In the Keys —
For: Messrs. North, Walker, Dr. Orme, Messrs. Brown, May, D.C. Cretney, Cain, Bell, Gelling and Karran — 10
Against: Messrs. Gilbey, Cannan, Quine, Corrin, Mrs. Delaney, Messrs. Duggan, Delaney, Kermode, Kneale, Mrs. Hannan, Brig. Butler, Messrs. Leventhorpe, L.R. Cretney and the Speaker — 14
The Speaker: Your Excellency, the resolution fails to carry in the House of Keys, sir, with 10 votes being cast in favour and 14 votes against.
In Council —
For: The Lord Bishop, Mr. Lowey, Mr. Callin, and the President of the Council — 4
Against: Messrs. Radcliffe, Quirk, Barton and Luft — 4
The Governor: Hon. members, in the Council 4 votes cast in favour and 4 against. I have, as usual, no decision to make really because it is conventional for me to vote in the way that the Keys have voted. I therefore cast my vote against and the resolution fails to carry.
SEWAGE DISPOSAL — STANDARDS — DEBATE COMMENCED
The Governor: Item 4, Sewage Disposal. I call on the Minister for Local Government and the Environment to move item 4.
Mr. Brown: Your Excellency, I beg to move:
That —
(I) the EEC Bathing Water Quality Standard (presently 76/160/EEC) be adopted as an objective in respect of those activities and marine water quality; and
(2) (a) a standard no less stringent than the Royal Commission 20/30 standard should be retained for effluent discharges from sewage works to river waters where receiving watercourses can routinely achieve an 8:1 dilution standard;
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1183
(b) where such a dilution cannot be achieved at all times the standards imposed on effluents should be a 10/10 standard; and
(c) consideration be given by the Department of Local Government and the Environment to the adoption of a five parts per million ammonia standard.
Your Excellency, in October 1989 the Government Analyst submitted to my department his report on bathing water quality. This report reflected the sampling and analysis that had been undertaken through the summer months of 1989. In his comments accompanying the report the Government Analyst indicated that the E.E.C. directive concerning the quality of bathing water is not applicable to the Isle of Man and, furthermore, unlike member states, the Isle of Man has no obligation to comply with the directive. Whilst acknowledging that Government departments have informally adopted the directive as an essential target for bathing water quality, the Analyst stressed ' his view that such an arrangement required to be formalised and that the precise role, if any, of the E.E.C. directive in the Isle of Man should be defined. This matter was concurrently being considered by the Environmental Working Group who were at that time compiling their first interim report to Executive Council. Members of the Court will recollect that they were circulated with a copy of the Environmental Working Group's First Interim Report during January. Executive Council considered and approved the Environmental Working Group's report which, in considering only atmospheric and water pollution, made considerable comment as to water quality standards and associated matters. Within the report the Environmental Working Group made it clear that it too felt it to be essential that the Isle of Man Government formally adopt a recognised standard to be applied to the quality of bathing waters. The group indeed further suggested that the E.E.C. directive be the standard so chosen. Once again observations were made that the working group had been made aware of the D.L.G.E. having suggested to the D.H.P.P. that the E.E.C. standard should be applied in the case of future sewage disposal schemes and refurbishment. However, it was the considered opinion of the working group that formal adoption of the standard could not be avoided. Having decided upon the standard in the view of the working group, the Government, through the D.H.P.P., must then assess the options available for achievement of that standard. Accordingly, the adoption of the E.E.C. standard forms the basis of one of the formal recommendations within the report. Ideally the long-term objective would be to achieve a position where all possible bathing places around the Island's coasts comply with the standards in the directive. Whether this is realistically obtainable will depend on the cost of remedial measures in particular locations when compared to the benefits derived from those measures. In the short term it is necessary to establish which beaches currently comply, and which do not, with those standards. Those beaches found to be satisfactory could then be identified. The beaches that are not wholly satisfactory could then be the subject of an inter-departmental review and thus determine any order of priority for remedial measures. It is of course the case that in addition to direct sea outfalls sewage arising from inland areas is treated at sewerage works which then themselves discharge liquid
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TI184 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 effluent to the watercourses. With regard to river waters and discharges to them from sewerage works the Environmental Working Group also made comment. Problems have arisen in relation to the pollution of the inland watercourses from sewerage works, a situation of which our colleagues at the D.H.P.P. are well aware and are taking considerable steps to address. At the present time the D.H.P.P. apply the Royal Commission 20/30 effluent standard to the liquid effluents discharging to the Island's rivers. Recognising this as a legitimate and appropriate standard to apply, the working group simlarly recommended that its adoption be formally enshrined. Furthermore, in relation to river waters, the group recommended the consideration of adopting a five parts per million ammonia standard. The opportunity to give statutory effect to these recommended standards in regards to bathing water quality and effluent discharges to river waters will arise with the forthcoming River Pollution, and Sewerage and Sanitation Bills. Both of these Bills are included in the legislative programme for the years 1990 and '91 onwards. In the meantime, however, it is the case that the D.H.P.P. would wish for endorsement of these standards by Tynwald so that they may immediately be applied for planning and strategical purposes. It is particularly important with regard to the finances involved and the long- term effectsof remedial works that the D.H.P.P. are able to have a definite applied series of appropriate standards on which to base their future policy. Furthermore, my own department feels that it is important that a definite commitment to this level of environmental protection through the adoption of these internationally recognised standards is undertaken at the earliest opportunity. Your Excellency, I beg to move that the resolution in my name stand.
Mr. Collin: Your Excellency, I beg to second and in so doing I support the principle contained in this resolution, for the reasons that my department and the local drainage authorities require, as the hon. mover has mentioned, recognised standards to be set, by which we can determine our policies as to the technical specification of treatment works that we provide, and as to the location of discharge into the watercourses or the sea, depending upon the degree of dilution that is necessary. The standards set by the Department of Local Government and the Environment will enable us to determine our policies not only as regards siting and technical specification but also priorities. This is because priority for redesigning or construction of treatment works and outfalls will largely be determined by the extent to which the various installations do or no not meet the standards that are set. Obviously we would attempt to deal first with those which are least satisfactory in relation to the laid-down standard. Now, Dr. Orme will be moving an amendment on behalf of the department to the effect that the Royal Commission standards dealing with the effluent discharges from sewerage works to river waters should be adopted at this point in time as objectives only, and this I fully support. Your Excellency, let there be no doubt that the members of my department, and especially Dr. Orme, are as anxious as anyone to achieve the standards which are the basis of this resolution, but they cannot be achieved overnight.
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1185
In terms of expenditure it would be incumbent upon us to ensure that resources are made available primarily and sufficiently to deal with any treatment works and outfalls which fall significantly short of those standards, irrespective of whether they are in the ownership of the department or a local authority. However, if the work of upgrading any of the treatment plants or outfalls is extensive and requires considerable design, construction and expenditure, then it may well take a few years to undertake the work to bring the effluent discharge specification up to the standards set. It is not necessarily the case, therefore, that the plants that require the most attention will be the ones which can be brought up to standard the soonest. Members will be well aware that we have an extensive programme in hand with the local authorities for renewal and repair of sewerage systems. This is the pipe networks and this is of great priority in the interests of public health and the bathing water quality which is the subject of this resolution. Studies have shown that bathing water quality on certain of the beaches in certain specific locations could be affected more by leakages from the old sewerage pipes than it is from the discharge from treatment works or from sea outfalls. Because of this bringing our treatment works and outfall discharge standards up to the standards proposed by the Minister for the Local Government and the Environment cannot take absolute priority in use of resources and we will need a degree of time to be in a position to embark on any works at treatment plants and outfall pipes to meet these standards, particularly if the works required prove to be extensive. I have to stress, Your Excellency, that we are aware that E.E.C. minimum standards for bathing water quality are likely to be upgraded again before our programme of works can be completed. Therefore, so as to avoid having to go through the whole exercise of modification to treatment and disposal of sewage again in a few years time and to avoid the additional costs that would involve, it will be necessary for us to design our new or modified treatment and disposal works to meet the standards which we anticipate will be imposed in the E.E.C. within the next few years. Accordingly, according to information which becomes available to us from time to time from Brussels and from the U.K. Department of the Environment, an example is that we anticipate that future standards will be such that it will not be normally acceptable to discharge untreated sewage into the marine environment, even through very long outfalls, and therefore the greater capacity of onshore treatment works will have to be provided by us and the local drainage authorities. The new standards of bathing water quality and the anticipated stricter E.E.C. standards for discharge of sewage into the marine environment will inevitably mean that we will have a lot of design and construction work to undertake and a great amount of expenditure to meet. It is not possible for a full programme to be undertaken, much less completed, within the span of a decade, and therefore, in supporting this resolution, it is on the basis that we trust the Department of Local Government and the Environment, who will be enforcing the standards, will co- operate with us in allowing us a phased, reasonable period of time over which we might come to fully meet their standards and in accordance with what is practicable for us to achieve. As I have said, bathing waters on beaches at certain locations will be improved by simply repairing the sewer pipes themselves, and this work, as members know,
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced T1186 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 is under way.
Mr. Duggan: Your Excellency, I agree wholeheartedly with the last speaker, regarding what he says. I have been concerned for quite a while, Your Excellency, regarding the disposal of the sludge by the railway station and of course it all goes down into Douglas bay and onto Douglas beach and the standards down there are not very good at present. I did mention this to Dr. Orme, who is in charge of sewage, Your Excellency, and Dr. Orme did pass me a note, and the note is: `Sludges to be disposed of at Douglas bay are all collected from septic tanks and sewerage works around the Island' — there are households approximately totalling 20,000 population without mains sewage connections, so there is a considerable amount of effluent certainly going down into the Douglas bay, Your Excellency — `and consequently the increase in sludges being deposited onto Douglas Bay', Dr. Orme goes on to say, `is considerable'. And the good doctor goes on to say that of course the Glen Vine sewage sludge treatment plant is due to come up on the Agenda and it is item 14, which I urge all members to support, because if this goes through today we hope to certainly abate this nuisance on Douglas beach and in the harbours by about August, I believe, and I would like an assurance from Mr. Brown, the Minister of the L.G.E., that this work would go ahead and we would get this job completed by August if possible.
Dr. Orme: Your Excellency, I rise to move a small amendment in my name but I would like to make some comments first. I support the resolution, in principle, completely, although there is a small clarifying amendment I shall move. I believe it is absolutely essential to establish agreed objectives in planning and even accepting that we are inevitably asking the Court to consider that there will be moving targets, it is nevertheless essential to begin and this is a very, very important beginning and I hope members will treat it as such. It really is a very, very important beginning. It is an essential foundation for long-term planning for what must be the largest capital project that the Government will consider for the next few decades, in my view, and I certainly welcome the leadership of the Department of Local Government in setting standards in this area. (Mr. Duggan: Hear, hear.) I think that is precisely how it should work and a very important first step. I have tried whenever possible to support improving standards throughout the environment wherever and whenever I believe they are practicably achievable and affordable to this community. I think we have to consider that that almost always must be a qualification. I certainly consider, as I think I have made clear, the marine and river environments to be absolutely vital components of the overall environmental health that we must consider, and I am always drawn to recollect in California, a land which was without water for centuries, that all the water authority wagons have a simple sign on the door and they say, 'Water — there is no substitute', and that is the simple message, and, when one thinks about it, water is such a vital constituent of life that it must be considered a very, very important component of the environment, and its health is our health in the long term. So the beginning that
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1187 is established by the minister moving this resolution is a most significant one, to my mind. However, as the Minister of the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties has indicated, we must realistically accept — I hope it can be realistically accepted — that these standards cannot be achieved short term either for the sea or the rivers. If we look at the resolution, Your Excellency, the E.E.C. Bathing Water Standard, as we all know, we have seen the measures conducted by the Government Analyst, we have seen the comparisons for just water quality standards in our bathing beaches, and we all know how many succeed and how many fail to meet those guidelines for the moment. So it is no good pretending we can meet that. That is an objective. The second part of the resolution, part (2), is seeking to apply Royal Commission standards to inland waterways, to rivers, and it is probable, I would say it is accurate, to state that our success rate in rivers is about the same. We in the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties have a monthly report on the analysis by the Government Analyst of the effluent from our treatment plants around the Island, and I picked one at random just to quote from, Your Excellency, and there were 21 plants sampled in November '89 and out of those plants sampled, if we applied the Royal Commission 20/30 standard, we would have had nine failures; we would have had six, because there were two samples, half succeeded and half failed, and six were okay. So we cannot, and I hope we would not, pretend that these standards are achievable right now, immediately, as the Minister of Highways, Ports and Properties has clearly stated. The amendment that I am therefore moving seeks to clarify that because I felt, when I first read the resolution, because it had been taken somewhat out of context straight from the first paper from the working party of officers on the environment, part (2) suggested to me that we were presently able to enforce the Royal Commission 20/30 standard, and I think we may as well accept that even if we were able to carry out immediately the tremendous amount of work that would be necessary to improve the performance, the technical performance, of our sewerage treatment works, we could not meet the 8 : I dilution standard in discharge to the rivers in any case. So we would be stuck on that one, and our sewerage plants are not capable, they were not designed to reach the 10/10 standard, and we could not practically claim to operate them. So what I hop: will be accepted we must consider is that the whole of this resolution is a proposal for objectives to be set, and therefore the amendment that I am moving is to insert after the number (2) in the resolution, the words: 'the following should also be adopted as an objective:-' — I hope members have got this; I did circulate a typed version of this amendment — so that (2)(a) and (2)(b) are clearly objectives in the same way as (I) is, and to also substitute for '(c)' a '(3)', so that (2)(c) becomes a quite separate comment, in that it will read, '(3) consideration be given by the Department of Local Government and the Environment to the adoption of a five parts per million ammonia standard', thereby, I hope, clarifying totally that all three, parts (I), (2) and (3), must be considered at the moment as objectives which we will head towards with all due speed and in an atmosphere of co-operation between the policemen — the Department of Local Government and the Environment — the operator of the plants — the D.H.P.P. — and other involved parties such as the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced T1188 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 as the responsible party for enforcement of certain standards concerning inland waterways, and other authorities such as the Water Authority. So I think that it is important that this amendment be accepted because I think it is important that we all understand that these are objectives and not something we can immediately wake up tomorrow and say, 'Well, we are all meeting these standards'. (Mr. Delaney: Hear, hear.) Time is going to be required, resources are going to be required, on whatever plan we operate, and I completely accept that proposals for the allocation of those resources have to compete with other demands on Government resources and that a case must be made to the Council of Ministers as time goes on and that they must accept a plan and commit us, through this Court, to the phased expenditure of resources, but that that cannot be achieved overnight, as the Minister of Highways, Ports and Properties has stressed. This is going to be a huge programme. It is going to involve, in all probability, the retirement of all inland treatment and the probable replacement of most sea outfalls and the introduction of land-based treatment of sewage at the head of new sea out falls, and that programme is going to be a long-term programme requiring considerable resources and cannot and should not be achieved just by pretending that we can get up tomorrow morning and adopt it. So, Your Excellency, I beg to move the amendment standing in my name:
After "(2)" insert "the following should also be adopted as an objective:-" and for "(c)" substitute "(3)".
Mr. Kermode: I beg to second the amendment, Your Excellency.
The Governor: Thank you. Mr. Speaker.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, I rise to support the resolution, in fact in its amended form. I welcome this as a worthwhile objective and I would say that the picture is not wholly bad. There are beaches in the Isle of Man which are measuring up to these standards now, and I would like to see an associated objective taken on by the department in relation to this point because there are only some 17 Blue Flag beaches in Britain at the present time. We have beaches here that are capable — there is one at Laxey — capable of reaching Blue Flag standard, but what is required to come up from the standard of the marine water quality to create a Blue Flag beach? It is simply a provision for a modest requirement in lifesaving provision, modest toilet provision, telephone provision and an area free from fouling by dogs. Having done that, you get your Blue Flag status, and what I would like to see as the objective here is where a beach has achieved the appropriate marine quality, then it must be forced to go for Blue Flag status, in the interests of the Isle of Man, because all to often we find in the Isle of Man local authorities are prone to sit back. Government having done the necessary work to achieve the standards of marine quality, if you like, they will not spend a ha'penny rate to do the rest themselves, and I would ask the minister to look at this position and to have as a duel objective here Blue Flag beaches operating in the Isle of Man, where that is achievable, and pressure put on local
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1189
authorities to really achieve that end.
Brig. Butler: Your Excellency, I think that what we are looking at today is part of a monumental problem, just a relatively small part of our efforts to deal with the whole problem of sewage and its disposal, and I have to say that I welcome the way in which we are approaching it, because in so many other areas we seem not to have a co-ordinated and thought-through policy, and in this particular instance we do seem to be getting together amongst the various departments and the various • technical advisers and we do seem to be producing a cohesive solution, and one of the things which I would be very happy about is that we have started off, in this case, by producing objectives to which we will work. If you do not have criteria, it is very difficult to measure the result. I certainly support the amendment of the member for Rushen, Dr. Orme, because that underlines the point I am making and I would not think the mover of the resolution would have any objection to that. So I am completely in support of what I regard as am important matter in itself and also as part of something much bigger which is being approached by Government in the right sort of way. It is not something we can do overnight. I mean, really we should have been tackling this many years ago. It is a long and expensive job, but at least we are looking at priorities and deciding what is possible and what is not. I would just ask the hon. mover one question — I hope he will forgive me if he has already referred to it, Your Excellency, because I missed part of his opening address — but the actual wording of the resolution says 'the EEC Bathing Water Quality Standard', and then in brackets the present standard, 'be adopted as an objective'. I presume that what is meant is that of course, should that standard be upgraded, as it probably will be, then the objective will be the higher standard, as it occurs. I think that is clear from the English, but there is a certain amount of area for doubt.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, last month this resolution was on the Order Paper; we did not get round to it but to all intents and purposes it was there, it was good intent on the part of the D.H.P.P. and the Department of Local Government and the Environment. An amendment came from a member of the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties amending this, so in actual fact this resolution means, quite frankly, nothing. I also find that with the amendment it is now faulty: 'the following should be adopted as an objective:- a standard no less stringent than the Royal Commission 20/30 standard should be retained'. How do we have something which is to be an objective and to be retained? So it is absolutely pointless. Are we retaining it or are we keeping it as an objective? Now I leave that for members of this Court, but if people cannot put forward a proper amendment, then I do not believe that it should be accepted by this Court. I will certainly not be going along with this resolution as amended. I will be going along with it as it is on the Order Paper. Now, if I start off with the E.E.C. Bathing Water Quality Standards, why is that an objective? Your Excellency, it is an objective because certainly one of the beaches
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced T1190 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 that does not conform to those standards — and we have heard many people round the Court talking about, yes, these bathing beaches do conform, or they are almost there, and the Speaker said Laxey is okay. All right, Laxey is okay, but Peel is not, and why isn't Peel? Because we get the leachate from the Raggatt tip. They come and they tip it and it goes down one of the sewers in Peel, which is one of the worst sewers in Peel because it empties so slowly, and it is accepted by the Department of Local Government, it is accepted by the commissioners of the area. The beach does not conform. I happen only to go in once a year, so it does not really —
Mr. Kermode: That is enough! (Laughter and interruption)
Mrs. Hannan: As I went under this New Year's Day I thought, 'Well, is it worth it?' And other people said as well. Anyway, I jest. But this resolution as it is on the Paper was designed to protect the environment; that is what we have been told. In actual fact it would if it was as it appeared on the Agenda Paper, but we are now having it amended. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has a piece of legislation: Inland Fisheries Act. Maybe when people are talking about the environment they are only talking about people, and people are very important, I accept that. But the Inland Fisheries Act 1976 says, 'Any person who, without lawful excuse, causes or permits any deleterious matter to enter any waters shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable — 'Deleterious matter since 1908 has been described under the Royal Commission standard of 20/30. Twenty biological oxygen demands and 30 suspended solids. It is very important and it has been used since that time as a guideline. I accept that it has never been accepted by this Court. In the Inland Fisheries Act of 1976 it is described as deleterious matter, but they have always used the Royal Commission standard, and that is what we should continue to use and anything which does not conform to that should not be allowed to go into the watercourse. It might not cause problems for people but it will cause problems for fish, it will kill a river off, and what we are saying is it should only be on objective, if the amendment as proposed by the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties is accepted in this Court today. There is a tripartite Rivers Committee and I think if you look back through the minutes, the late Minister of the Local Government and the Environment —
Mr. Delaney: I am not 'late' yet! Nearly. (Laughter)
Mrs. Hannan: — takes the responsibility for setting that up.
Mr. Delaney: Thank you.
Mrs. Hannan: I said 'take it'; I would not actually go that far but it is reported in Hansard. That committee has worked very hard. I am the only remaining member on that committee and it has not met since the departments have changed ministers. So it has not met since that time.
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1191
Mr. Brown: You know it is meeting.
Mrs. Hannan: It is meeting on Thursday, yes.
Mr. Brown: Thank you.
Mrs. Hannan: That committee has worked very hard, Your Excellency, the D.H.P.P., the Department of Local Government and the Environment and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. We plodded on for a time but I must say that Jim Cain, the member for Douglas West, joined the Rivers Committee and worked very hard and very diligently and did wonders within that committe,:.
Members: Hear, hear.
Mr. Brown: A man for sewage!
Mrs. Hannan: Absolutely. (Laughter)
Mr. Kermode: He went up the river without a paddle!
Mrs. Hannan: Also working at that time, Your Excellency, was the Environmental Working Group, the officers, and they made certain recommendations and their recommendation is as it appears on the Order Paper, that 'The Royal Commission 20/30 standard for effluent discharges from sewerage works should be retained where receiving watercourses can routinely achieve an 8 : 1 dilution standard. Where such a dilution cannot be achieved at all times the standard imposed on effluent should be 10:10 standard. Consideration should also be given to the adoption of a five parts per million ammonia standard'. Now they are not saying that we should introduce it when and how; they are saying that it should be retained, the 20:30 standard. (Interruptions) Now if I could go back to the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties, they wrote in 1988 to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry requesting standards. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry wrote back to Mr. Garton with the Royal Commission standards. He contacted the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and said the department was not being tight enough with what it was asking for. My department wrote back which said — if I quote two paragraphs from this and it is certainly not out of context — 'Further to my letter of the 24th November 1988 perhaps it would be useful to expand on the general concern of the department to introduce Royal Commission standards of effluent. A query has been received in the past week from an architect wishing to develop a site alongside a watercourse into which treated effluent would be discharged. However, the watercourse in question is small and fluctuates in its flow with the seasons. At certain times of the year it is possible that such a'watercourse may be a mere trickle or even dry. The department's view on conforming to Royal Commission standards referred to situations in which effluent of the requisite standard is being discharged into a flow which will dilute it sufficiently. I believe technical officers of the Department of Local Government
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TI 192 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 and the Environment would suggest dilution to the proportion of 8 : I. Where such dilution cannot be achieved there is a need for more stringent standards to be observed, perhaps no more than biological oxygen demand of 10 and suspended solids of 10'. That was received by the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties very well because they wanted particular standards to work to. If I could now return to this amendment, Your Excellency, this amendment was brought forward, and I do not know whether it was the Minister of Highways, Ports and Properties or whether a member of the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties; we know it has come from Dr. Orme. As I have said before, this is faulty. I do not know how something can be an objective and retained. However, this amendment came forward without any reference to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. The Environmental Working Group does recognise the part that the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries plays in the protection of the environment and are quoted in their paper — if anybody has got it and wants to refer it is 'River Waters' and subsections 3.3.7 and recommendation 3.3.10(3) but there was no reference to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; there has been reference since. But I would put it to this hon. Court, Your Excellency, that certainly the ministers do not care what happens to the watercourses, they do not mind what happens to the environment and I do not believe this Court either cares what happens to the environment. It is all right saying we are Green. (Interruptions) No, you do not care.
A Member: You do, though, don't you, Hazel?
Mrs. Hannan: All the concerns that have been in recent times, the setting up of a committee just to keep people out of the way.
Mr. Kermode: It is working!
Mrs. Hannan: Well, it might very well be working. Dr. Orme said, 'Water - no substitute'. Yes, there is no substitute for water and therefore we should be protecting it.
Mr. Delaney: Have you ever tried the beer in our local?(Laughter)
Mrs. Hannan: Maybe that is what comes from late ministers and maybe we should be grateful that they are late ministers.
Mr. Kermode: He does not pay for the beer anyway! (Laughter)
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I believe we do have standards and, as I say, I welcomed this resolution when it appeared on the Order Paper. I cannot and will not be supporting the amendment and I would urge all hon. members not to support the amendment because I believe that we should get on and we should be protecting the environment. We should be putting our money where are months are, and for the member for Rushen, Dr. Orme, to come forward and say that he brings this
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1193 forward now, after the utterances that have come from him on the environment, I believe it is only playing to the Gallery, Your Excellency. I would urge all members to vote against it and to protect the environment.
Mr. Kermode: Ah, poor Rupert!
Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, I rise to support the resolution as printed from the Minister of the Local Government and the Environment, Your Excellency. As the member for Peel rightly did say, we did take a lot of stick to get this started in a three-year term. This group of people have come back with what they believe to be possible, the technical people; they have put down what we can achieve, and therefore I do not think, Your Excellency, after taking so long and taking so much criticism, I might add, to get to the stage where this is down to start running backward:, now is a defeat for the people of the Isle of Man, whatever shade of Green they wish to be. Your Excellency, the situation is I support it as printed. I believe that everyone knows that the British Government and the British minister in the similar position have already said what is going to happen in 1998, he has given these undertakings, it has got to happen, so let us go along with that and let us push it along. The problem I see, Your Excellency, in support of the Minister for Highways, Ports and Properties and the very excellent presentation done by his officers on a future resolution to do with sewerage sludge, but you cannot get any of these things, as has been pointed out, until we stop putting effluent into the sea. That is how we get to the first stage, as said by Mr. Speaker; then we take the other steps and make sure we can achieve the Blue Flag, whatever benefits that might bring to the Island in status or in tourism or in anything else. But, Your Excellency, we must get to that and what worries me, what does worry me, is just having this down on paper, then when we come to the costs I think, Your Excellency, and I will forewarn, that is where members will start baulking, that is where ministers will start balking, when the cuts have to come to pay for these large multi-multi-millions of pounds to actually put these plants in to treat it, and I think the minister is worth supporting on this resolution which has come from this excellent group of people and for the objectives they wish to achieve for the Isle of Man, in relation to the rest of Europe, because that is what we have got to be talking about again. Your Excellency, as far as the amendment is concerned I do not take as strong a view as the member for Peel. I understand why the member who now has some responsibility for doing the things that have to be done when he finds himself in the awkward position of not being able to achieve, which is much easier sometimes to say than to do when you come down to it, and I understand the embarrassment he must feel. But nevertheless, Your Excellency, I think let us stick with the resolution. If it is not possible I am sure the minister can come back or the ministers can come back, jointly if they want, and say, 'We cannot do this because of (a), (b), and (c)', because, sir, the fact of it still is you cannot tackle this until you stop the sewerage going into the sea and the sewerage going into the sea has been put down, unfortunately, not by the ministers or their departments, but on behalf of the people that they all represent, and until we can get that problem tackled the ministers will still be
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced T1194 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 in the difficult position of trying to achieve even this. I believe we should support the minister on the resolution as printed and let us try and show some positive step in going somewhere with the sewerage problem and with the clean water we all wish to achieve, no matter how deep of Green shade we wish to look.
Mr. Cain: Your Excellency, this is a very important subject and I am sure that the issues which underlie it are really supported by everyone in this court. All we are talking about is how best to achieve a common, agreed goal. Now let us start from the beginning. The Department of Local Government is coming forward with a resolution which effectively says, 'These are the objectives', and why is it important that objectives are set? And the fundamental issue which underlies that is that otherwise the departments who are responsible for applying@ resources to try and tackle the problems that arise may waste substantial sums of public money, and it was for this reason that an approach was made by the D.H.P.P. to the Local Government Department asking them if they would set the standards and in turn the then minister who has just sat down appointed or arranged for the group of senior officers to discuss the principles involved, and that is all good, excellent. We are almost down to semantics in terms of the resolution and the issue of the amendment, and I would like just to draw the attention of everybody to the issue involved. What is being suggested by Dr. Orme is that, as things stand at the moment, if the Local Government Department lay down a standard which is approved by this hon. Court which says that in effect the bottom line is that at all times the standards imposed on effluent should be a 10:10 standard, that is the bottom line as the resolution is, and if because of the enormous task that faces us — and let there be no misunderstanding about this: it is an enormous task which will involve enormous amounts of money and will demand a degree of political reality which has got to be faced by the members of this Court when all the proper investigations have been undertaken — because of the size of the problem it is no use — this is what Dr. Orme, as I judge it, is saying — having looked into the issue, although the 10:10 is an agreed minimum standard, it cannot be adopted here and now, it is impossible. So what he is saying is let us have that and indeed, more importantly, the standard outlined in (2)(a) as the agreed objective and let us work as hard as the Court will allow in terms of resources allocated to achieve those standards but do not lay down standards which we cannot abide by, we just cannot do it. Now that is no reflection on the committee of senior officers who are responsible, no reflection on them at all. Maybe it is a reflection on me because I must admit that at the time — and Mrs. Hannan is right on this — as a member of the Rivers Committee, at that time we endorsed the recommendation that came from the committee of senior officers who came forward with the recommendation. But to a degree it is almost semantics; we are all wanting the same objectives. Now if I could just turn to one final point made by Mrs. Hannan who I know feels very strongly on issues relating to those relating to water and indeed the environment. She mentioned the issue that in her view there was a conflict in the wording of (2)(a) in terms of using the word 'retained', conflicting it with the word 'objective', and I see no conflict in that whatsoever. I cannot see how you cannot retain it as an objective which is really the fundamental issue which underlies her
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Debate Commenced TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1195
objection. I would add the following personal comments, Your Excellency. The Rivers Committee in my view does a very worthwhile job, it co-ordinates the activities of three departments of Government, all of whom are heavily involved in the same issue, and it is right in my view that that committee should be encouraged to continue its work. It will take time for real positive results to emanate but I believe there is a need for continued co-ordination and goodwill between the departments on the issues that they are tackling. It is right to remind the Court that the size of the task is very big indeed and political priorities will have to be undertaken because otherwise we are not going to be able to tackle the problem in a logical sequence, and some members on behalf of the communities that they represent are going to get priority in terms of application of resources and others are not, and I am afraid this is just part of life. But in fact if we agree that we are all proceeding towards an agreed overall plan which in turn has emanated from an agreed set of objectives, then we can all see that we are doing what is right and proper for the onward development of this problem in the Island. One final point, Your Excellency. Mr. Speaker raised the point about Blue Flag and specifically mentioned Laxey, which is right and proper. But again there is the same problem. There are a number of beaches in the Isle of Man which should be considered for Blue Flag status, and it is again a question of priority. Now that priority can be arrived at in two ways. One is, which of the beaches are nearest to Blue Flag status? And Mr. Speaker may well be right that Laxey may well be one of them. The other one is to say which are the beaches which are most popular, not in our terms but in terms of their use by the tourists who come to the Island and shouldn't we give some priority in those terms as well? And again there are political difficulties. This is an enormous problem, it is one where until recently there have been relatively few political votes, and I would urge members to support the resolution and the amendment as distributed by Dr. Orme.
The Governor: At least four more members have caught my eye, hon. members, so we will break now for 20 minutes for tea. First to speak the hon. member for Douglas South, Mr. Cretney.
BILL FOR SIGNATURE — REQUISITE SIGNATURES OBTAINED
The Governor: Hon. members, I have to announce that the Fire Services (Amendment) Bilk 1990 has been signed by a quorum of each branch.
SEWAGE DISPOSAL — STANDARDS — AMENDED MOTION APPROVED
The Governor: I call on the member for Douglas South, Mr. Cretney, who is not here. The member for Middle, Mr. North.
Bill for Signature — Requisite Signatures Obtained Sewage Disposal — Standards — Amended Motion Approved TI196 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Mr. North: Yes, Your Excellency, thank you. I would first of all like to support the resolution and the amendment and I would like to say this, Your Excellency. I am sure all hon. members in this Court accept that the hon. member for Peel, who is unfortunately not here, but her intentions in this matter, as those of the hon. member for Rushen, his intentions and the hon. member for Peel's are strictly honourable. (Members: Hear, hear.) The resolution as it is or the amendment really means nothing one way or the other because it is not law, Your Excellency, it is a declaratory resolution. Nothing has changed, as far as I understand as far as the law is concerned, that what we are asking for is that in terms of planning, the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties, this is a minimum standard, that this is the first step on a very, very important subject, a subject that is now, I would say, virtually a priority in terms of expenditure within this hon. Court and certainly as the years go by I am sure that things will speed up and this is the first step, this is the guidance. Without this resolution the D.H.P.P. cannot plan, design and go ahead; this is step number one: very important, Your Excellency. Everybody is working, as I think the hon. member for West Douglas has said, for an improvement, and for the hon. member for Peel to say that ministers do not care what happens to the water is disgraceful. I know she means well and I understand the way that she feels about it; she is very passionate (Laughter and interruptions). She could be termed our 'Water Queen', I am sure (Laughter and interruptions) I would hate to have embarrassed her; it is probably a good job she is not here, Your Excellency. Your Excellency, I can say no more other than I support strongly the resolution and the amendment and that we retain it as an objective. I am sure that the plan is to do it as quickly as possible and I am sure that every member in this Court will wish the department well in the years ahead and the work they have to do.
Mr. D.C. Cretney: Your Excellency, can I first of all apologise for being a little late. I was trying to find a Hansard which I have not been able to. I will be supporting the resolution as it is on the Paper. I will not be supporting the amendment. (Mr. Delaney: Hear, hear.) The hon. member in front of me keeps saying 'Hear, hear' and keeps referring to the tripartite committee which he established. Perhaps does not remember that the reason the tripartite committee was established was that this member moved an amendment in this hon. Court which sought (Mr. Delaney: Hear, hear.) (Laughter) to establish positive new legislation with regard to pollution of rivers. The hon. member for Peel earlier indicated that she was concerned about fish within the rivers and this hon. member is also, and that was one of the bases for putting down that amendment which was carried successfully in this hon. Court and, as I understood it, was still what we were trying to aim for, even though that has taken perhaps five years, I do not know if it is quite that long, it may be four years; that is why I was trying to find again the Hansard, without success. Hon. members, again with the amendment, in my view, with the amendment which has been proposed by the hon. member Dr. Orme we are again looking for a time thing which will take more time, and I think that we should be prioritising the introduction. I mean, the legislation which we are talking about is supposed to be coming in in a new River Pollution Bill in 1990 and it is taking an awful long time
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Amended Motion Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1197
and I am not convinced that we should be weakening the resolution as it is on the Paper, taking on board the practicalities of the resolution but it should be what we are aiming for and I do not accept that we should therefore weaken it by the amendment which has been proposed, that the thing should be an objective rather than it should be the policy. I do not wish to appear negative or anything but it sometimes appears to me that the reason the legislation with regard to river pollution has not been forthcoming to date is the fact that we in our various departments are those who on occasions • pollute the rivers, we are the guilty parties. Perhaps if it was those outside who were the ones that were polluting the rivers we might have been a bit more forthcoming with the legislation a little bit before now. Your Excellency, that is all I have to say. I support the resolution as printed on the Paper, taking on board the difficulties that there are with that but I do believe that we should not at this stage be seeking to weaken it, we should be seeking to make this a priority, and to go forward, as the former minister, not the late minister, the former Minister for the Department of Local Government and the Environment —
Mr. Duggan: He is still with us!
Mr. D.C. Cretney: — he did a good job, there is no doubt about it, he set up the committee, and the trouble is perhaps the committee have been going quite a while and they have had their problems because they looked at the United Kingdom legislation which licenses people to pollute the rivers, and that is obviously not right for the Isle of Man and I accept that we have to get the legislation that is right for the Isle of Man but I do not accept that we need to take for ever in getting to that stage.
Mr. Kermode: Hear, hear.
Mr. Catlin: Your Excellency, speaking very briefly to the amendment I would just wish to emphasise one or two points. Now I believe, as others do, that we are all on the one side of the fence in what we are trying to achieve. Reference has been made as to the cost involved. Now I am sure hon. members must appreciate by now that it is not just a question of cost at all. It is a question also of what can be achieved and what cannot be achieved, and I would say again, as I have said before, I say it again: the members of the D.H.P.P. are every bit as anxious to achieve the standards which are the basis of this resolution, as is anyone else in this hon. Court. (Mr. Kermode: hear, hear.) Now you have heard the hon. Minister of the D.H.S.S. who explained the situation very well and I would just finally say let us hope that Government does not create a situation where it shoots itself in the head, and I urge hon. members to support the amendment.
The Governor: Does any other hon. member wish to speak? Then I call on the Minister for Local Government and the Environment to reply.
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Amended Motion Approved T1198 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Mr. Brown: Thank you, Your Excellency. Your Excellency, I thank hon. members for their participation in the debate and I think again within this hon. Court we get some debates that tend to be pretty well uninteresting and get other debates that actually get members putting over their real thoughts and their real concerns, which in fact are helpful, I think, to every one of us and especially to the departments trying to achieve what in fact members are looking for, what they are trying to ensure that we work towards. Your Excellency, I would say first that I do not underestimate and I do not believe really that anybody in this hon. Court underestimates the importance that is now given towards the environment. That being said, Your Excellency, I think we have to be practical. That importance in fact has only come to the surface in about the last two or three years, both from the public's point of view and then being reflected through the political point of view. Certainly it was not a topic discussed at the last general election, not in my area, I do not suppose it was anywhere else; it was just not really that important. But now, this last two or three years, it has become a matter when we have all become far more conscious, because of the media, because of what is happening in the environment, people are saying and are talking about it in a way that they were not before, and I think the hon. member Mr. Cain covered it before when he said that a few years ago to have stood up and said you were going to fight for money for repairing the sewers of the Isle of Man or whatever people would have said, 'Well, so what? Fine, get on with it'; it would not have been a matter that was that important. But I think it is one now and certainly it is an area that we should take as important and I remember the now Chief Minister who was the Chairman of the Local Government Board between '81 and '86, in fact when the responsibilities for sewerage came over, the financing of it, came over to the then Local Government Board, making the point time and time again in this hon. Court that it was the Cinderella of the services, that Government and local authorities — and let us remember this and local authorities — had not put enough resources into overcoming the problems in the Isle of Man. We had, for example, a sewer pipe broken in Douglas bay and just left broken, nothing done about it, and it was left for years, and in fact it was only in recent times that it has been repaired to try and overcome the problems. So, Your Excellency, it has been a thing that has been building up for a while, the problem of ignoring this situation and allowing it to go on and on and not really bothering that much. So, Your Excellency, I think what we are trying to do with this resolution is actually say to hon. members as a declaratory resolution — and that is the thing to remember — here we have an objective, and rightly so, this is the first step towards getting standards improved in the Isle of Man and accepting on board our responsibilities. The amendment finds that resolution, if you like, to ensure we do not create impractical difficulties, and I see it as being more honest, in fact being honest to the public that what we are doing is we are saying, 'This is what we are trying to achieve, this is the way forward'. In fact the resolution as it is worded would create genuine difficulties, so why kid the public? Here we are, this is the way forward, Your Excellency. Now, Your Excellency, there are Bills that are coming into the Legislature which
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Amended Motion Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1199 are being worked on which are important and I think will be far more important than this resolution. What we are saying in the interim is until we get the legislation in we should have an objective to aim for and that is what we are talking about. Your Excellency, Mr. Duggan raised some points about the sludge that is being deposited into Douglas Bay, and assurances about the work. Well, I cannot give the assurances because that is a matter for the Minister for the D.H.P.P., but I am sure he will give those assurances, because I know he is as keen as anyone to overcome these difficulties. But again, I think the story we are finding out here is, Your Excellency — and it came up from the hon. member, Mrs. Hannan, about the leachate being poured into the Peel sewer system from the Raggatt tip, because, Your Excellency, we have not set up the proper processing plants in the Isle of Man to cope with these problems, and unless and until we invest money in these areas, whether you like it or not, you will have no choice but to dispose of it in this sort of way. (Interruption) All I can say is that there are tests done with regard to this factor. I am informed that, with regards to the leachate that is pumped out of the Peel sewer system, in fact it dilutes very quickly because it goes out past the breakwater, that in fact the tests that have been taken do not show any problems with regard to pollution, and the dispersement of it is very, very quick indeed. Now that is what I am told by our experts. (Interruption) Now, Your Excellency, again, as far as I am aware, when you are dispersing into the sea with this sort of waste, the dispersal, because of the undercurrents and everything, is very good. Now, all I am sayir.g, Your Excellency, is it may not be satisfactory at the moment, but what we are saying to hon. members, is we have to at the same time be practical, and that is what this is about. Here we have an objective; let us be practical about it. The rate of speed we invest money into this area is in the hands of this hon. Court, because if this hon. Court wants to invest considerable amounts of its budgetary resources purely into the D.H.P.P. to get this matter resolved in a quicker time then maybe would be the case, then it is a matter that this hon. Court would have to take, taking on board the practicalities of doing that, (Interruption) but at least, Your Excellency, it is important that we are working towards it, and we are at least holding our hands up and saying we have a problem, this is the way forward. Your Excellency, I think... and I can only say that certainly this is taken as being very important. It is something that I personally believe we have to progress, not only with this — environmental matters generally, and I have said quite clearly that environmental matters are important to the Isle of Man, and not only have we got to sort ourselves out as Government, we in fact have got to ensure that people in the Isle of Man do not spoil the environment by dumping waste, by doing all sorts of things, but we have to lead that, and I accept that fully — it is something we have to lead. So, Your Excellency, I hope hon. members will support this, and if members vote against the amendment but the amendment is successful and then we have the substantive motion, well, I would hope they would support that because, if we do not, we have got nothing at all then from that point of view, and I think that would be very bad for the Isle of Man, because that would give outside the image that Tynwald in fact does not care at all. I do not think that is the case, Your Excellency. I hope hon. members will support the amendment and, if it is successful, I hope that they will then at least be able to support the proposal as amended.
Sewage Disposal — Standards — Amended Motion Approved T1200 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH, 1990
The Governor: Hon. members, let us just consider the amendment in the name of the hon. member for Rushen, Dr. Orme, seconded by the hon. member for Douglas East, Mr. Kermode. Will those in favour say aye; those against say no.
A division was called for and the results were as follows:
In the Keys —
For: Messrs. Gilbey, Cannan, Quine, North, Walker, Dr. Orme, Messrs. Corrin, Brown, May, Mrs. Delaney, Messrs. Kermode, Cain, Kneale, Brig. Butler, Mr. Leventhorpe and the Speaker — 16
Against: Messrs. Duggan, D. C. Cretney, Delaney, Mrs. Hannan, Messrs.3 Karran and L. R. Cretney — 6
The Speaker: Your Excellency, the amendment carries in the House of Keys, sir, with 16 votes being cast in favour and 6 votes against.
In Council —
For: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Lowey, Quirk, Barton, Catlin, Luft and the President of the Council — 7
Against: Nil.
The Governor: Hon. members, all 7 votes in the Council cast in favour; the amendment therefore carries, and I put to you the motion as amended. All those in favour say aye; those against say no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
ISLE OF MAN WATER AUTHORITY — MEMBERS ELECTED
The Governor: Item 5, Membership of the Isle of Man Water Authority. I call upon the Chief Minister.
Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, I beg to move:
That approval be given to the election by the Douglas Corporation of two members of the Isle of Man Water Authority as follows:- Councillor J. A. S. Christian Councillor C. A. K. Dougherty
The Governor: Is that agreed?
It was agreed.
Isle of Man Water Authority — Members Elected TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 TI201
PROCEDURAL
The Governor: Hon. members we now come to a dilemma because I have given authority for the members of the Treasury to leave the Chamber to sign all the orders which have to be signed consequential upon the U.K. Budget, and there are some important ones that have to be signed straightaway, and therefore I would propose that we move to item 9. Are hon. members agreed?
It was agreed.
HARBOUR DUES REGULATIONS 1990 — APPROVED
The Governor: Item 9, Harbour Dues. I call upon the Minister for Highways, Ports and Properties.
Mr. Catlin: Your Excellency, I beg to move:
That the Harbour Dues Regulations 1990, made by the Department of Highways, Ports and Properties in exercise of powers conferred on the department by Section 55(2) of the Harbours (Isle of Man) Act 1961, and of all other powers enabling it in that behalf, be and the same are hereby approved.
The Governor: Is that agreed?
It was agreed.
CORONERS FEES ORDER 1990 — APPROVED
The Governor: Item 10, Coroners Act 1983. I call on Her Majesty's Attorney- General to move item 10.
The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, I beg to move.
That the Coroners Fees Order 1990, made by Their Honours the Deemsters under Section 5(1) of the Coroners Act 1983, be and the same is hereby approved.
Your Excellency, the Coroners Fees Order 1990 revokes the Coroners Fees Order 1988 and increases the fees payable to coroners by 13 per cent. in line with inflation over the last two years. However, the order makes one minor change: coroners will, under this order, receive a higher fee for serving a petition for an injunction or order in proceedings involving domestic violence, and is payable for serving other documents, as the coroner is often subject to some stress when serving documents in domestic violence cases. I beg to move.
Procedural Harbour Dues Regulations 1990 — Approved Coroners Fees Order 1990 — Approved T1202 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Mr. Walker: I beg to second, Your Excellency.
The Governor: Thank you, Chief Minister. Mr. Karran.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, could I ask the Attorney-General is it likely in the near future that we will see a complete review as far as the way that coroners and that are paid for their services? I wonder whether there are any moves afoot as far as putting them on a proper wage structure, as I feel that the present scheme leaves a lot to be desired. 1 am very concerned about it, and I think that it needs to have close scrutiny by the Attorney General, as far as the present set-up is concerned, because I think it needs to be completely reviewed, and maybe look at other ways as far as the way that they make their wages up.
The Governor: D'oes any other hon. member wish to speak to item 10? I call upon the Attorney-General to reply.
The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, I am not aware that there is any such review going on at the present time. The functions of the coroners have been looked at over the years, and in particular, of course, by the House of Keys committee at the time of the consideration of the Administration of Justice Bill, which became the Administration of Justice Act 1981. But in recent years I do not know that there has been any scrutiny at the overall method by which the coroners are paid. There are problems, however, in treating the coroners simply as civil servants, or people who work for a regular salary, because of the nature of the coroners' duties — they have to work at very peculiar hours, in the attempt to serve documents and so forth, and I do not therefore think that they can be treated simply as 9.00 to 5.30 civil servants and paid a salary accordingly. They have to be paid on the basis of doing difficult jobs at difficult times. I do not think, therefore, a simple salary is appropriate. However, I have no doubt it is a matter which can be looked at and I will discuss it with Executive Council.
The Governor: I put to you item 10, hon. members. Will those in favour say aye; those against say no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
EAST VIEW, BRIDE — PURCHASE OF LAND FOR BUILDING FIRST-TIME BUYERS' HOUSES — EXPENDITURE APPROVED
The Governor: Item 1 1 , First-Time Buyers' Houses. I call on the Minister for Local Government and the Environment to move item 11.
Mr. Brown: Your Excellency, I beg to move:
That Tynwald pursuant to its commitment to provide additional first-lime buyer and public sector housing -
(1) approves the Department of Local Government and the Environment
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T I 203
expending a sun: not exceeding £87,000 on the purchase of land, and legal fees associated therewith, at East View, Bride;
(2) authorises the Treasury to expend out of the Consolidated Loan Fund during ▪ the year ended 31st. March 1990 a sum not exceeding £87,000 to ,need the cost of the above;
(3) approves of and sanctions borrowings not exceeding £87,000 being made ▪ by Government, such borrowings to be repaid within a period of 20 years.
Mr. Brown: Your Excellency, the motion relates to the purchase by the department of field numbers 572 and 573 adjacent to East View, Bride. The property vas initially offered to Bride Parish Commissioners, who subsequently introduced the department and negotiations regarding the matter have now culminated in the present owners accepting an offer of £85,000, plus any legal fees. Your Excellency, I beg to move the resolution standing in my name.
Mr. Lowey: I beg to second, sir, and reserve my remarks.
The Governor: Thank you, Mr. Lowey. Mr. President.
The President of the Council: Your Excellency, I congratulate the minister on being able to achieve outside the Douglas conurbation something to do this. I hope he can do that in other areas throughout the Island because I think we do need to get a balance of development. It is very important rather than just be stuck in the one area around the Douglas conurbation, which is causing more and more traffic problems.
Mrs. Hannan: Your Excellency, I am concerned that we are having more first- time buyer houses when there is a great need for public sector housing. The question that I raised this morning regarding first-time buyer houses, I think, should be considered by the hon. Court, the problems that have been experienced, not only on Phase 2 at Anagh Coar, but Phase 1 as well. I am. also led to believe there are problems at Jurby. I am also led to believe there are problems at Cornaa. gm Before we start encouraging people into the first-time buyer houses I do believe IlIrthis problem should be solved. The problem of people buying houses that we might consider to be relatively cheap — in actual fact they are not, because the land has been given with these houses. These young people have very little money. They are inexperienced when it comes to buying houses, and when they come up against problems of builders and what is going on in the building of these properties is something that I believe we should take a responsibility for. Certainly on Phase 2 at Anagh Coar, Your Excellency, there have been all sorts of problems. Houses have even been re-allocated without any reference to anybody else. The list is unending, and I feel, before we encourage young people to go into first-time buyer houses, I think we should look at the problem, have it properly assessed and then set up somewhere where we can actually protect these people. It is all right saying that, you know, the first buyer is protected, the second buyer is protected, and therefore there should be no problems — people
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved 11204 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 have looked at these houses at Anagh Coar and are appalled at the state that they are being built. They are already six months behind time. It is probably going to be a year later that they are going to get into their properties. If they are in properties they have had to move out of, they have a problem there. So I really believe, Your Excellency, while this is a good project put forward again by the Department of Local Government, all the problems that have been assessed in recent times by these young people that we have encouraged to go into buying a property — it is no good encouraging them to go into buying a property if we do not offer them the back-up as well. There must be back-up on byelaws, but the byelaws do not seem to come into it. Nobody wants to know the problems that these people have.
Mr. D.C. Cretney: Rubbish!
The Governor: Hon. member, I must ask you not to barrack, especially in those terms, which are quite offensive.
Mrs. Hannan: It is rubbish, what is going on, Your Excellency. (Interruption) These properties are an absolute disgrace to us, that we have encouraged people to go into buying properties which they cannot afford. I know the hon. member has been involved and he has tried to do something about it, but the problem is bigger than each of us individually. We have got to do something collectively to solve this problem. It is no good saying we will move into another phase and we encourage people to get into this problem again. We would be much better to build public authority houses. Then we would realise, when these people moved into them and got all the problems, that then we would have to deal with them and we would know what the problems are. These people in some cases are buying problems, and these problems are going to be with these houses for ever if we do not do something now before people go into them. There are two phases at Jurby, one phase where people are in and they are having all sorts of problems. They have had to get builders back, but, as we know builders, come and builders go, and maybe by the time some people who do not know about these problems have found these problems, these builders are long gone. We know that from Peel High School; we are still having problems at Peel High School because the builders came and the builders went, the architect came and the architect went, and it is no good saying, you know, we have been trying to do... We have not solved this problem, and I believe before we go into this problem at Bride, causing more problems for more people, we should actually set up some sort of inquiry as to how this can actually be solved, and if it means putting more manpower, more people into supervising these jobs, then I feel we as a Government should be doing that. Thank you, Your Excellency.
Mr. Kneale: Your Excellency, I am pleased that this item is on the Agenda, this is one area where we have been trying in the Department of Education to encourage people to build. We have got a splendid little school there but a great shortage of children, and I hope the houses that have been suggested will provide accommodation for the young families that will bring the children back into that area.
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1205
Mr. Duggan: Your Excellency, like Mrs. Hannan said, Your Excellency, there have been problems up at Anagh Coar over workmanship and also delays. I know of one couple in particular, Your Excellency, which is typical — they should have been in that house last November; now it is March and the house is nowhere near • built, there are only a few bricks laid. Mr. Cretney and I have been quite busy with meetings with the directors over the past several months and we have made little headway, Your Excellency. We have had lots of assurances but they have not come to fruition, by the look of it. What I think is necessary over these first-time buyers' ▪ houses, Your Excellency, is certainly a lot more supervision. Mrs. Hannan is right there; it is definitely more supervision which is required, to make sure that the people do get a good quality house.
The Speaker: Your Excellency, I rise to support the resolution but I would ask that emphasis be placed on local authority housing, as opposed to first-time buyers', and secondly that, following on the comment by the hon. member for Peel, the department considers setting up a unit which will specifically look after the interests of first-time buyers. The situation, Your Excellency, usually is one where the young couple, acquiring a home for the first time, are fully extended financially. They go into the property, they find problems, they have not got the financial resources to take on the legal advice and follow it through, they cannot fight, they are limited in their fighting capacity. Hon. members will get up and stand up for them — great, that is a wonderful and very desirable practice, but at the end of the day I believe responsibility devolves on Government's own shoulders in this matter, and there should be a unit set up within the department specifically for the purpose of aiding these people with their problems. They have responded in a difficult situation to Government's well-meaning overture. The first-time buyers' houses have a real place in our community, but unfortunately in practice, Your Excellency, it is found that they fall far short of the requirements that will be placed on the normal building contractor. This I believe to be the case, and I do not think we can step aside, hence the suggestion that we interest ourselves as Government on behalf of these people so that in the future they know they have got a shoulder to lean on as they advance their problems in respect of their purchases.
Mr. Corrin: Your Excellency, I think it has been clearly demonstrated that there is a problem with these first-time buyers' housing and the quality of the workmanship, but perhaps it should be looked at in its own right, by whatever means; perhaps the Public Accounts Committee should be looking into it to see if we are getting value for money. That, perhaps, Your Excellency, is something for the next two or three weeks, four weeks, to look at. To turn to the motion on the paper, Your Excellency, I do support it but I will just ask the minister if he could split it up so we could see what actually we are getting for our money. What area of land are we getting? Or are we getting £7,000 worth of land and paying £80,000 in legal fees, or is it the other way round? The way it is bundled up here — with respect, Your Excellency, it does not mean very much. What are we getting and what is the price we are paying?
Mr. Quine: I rise to support the motion, Your Excellency, and I would like to place on record my thanks to the former Minister for Local Government and the
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved T1206 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
Environment and of course his staff at that time, and also the present minister of the department, and, I might add, the Minister for Education, who have been very supportive in pushing forward the provision of additional housing in Bride, Your Excellency. I think it is fairly well recognised that we have in Bride a lovely little village, but it has to a certain extent been suffering from what one might term a degree of economic and social disintegration because of the movement of people, of employment, out of the countryside and the problems that has brought about. In terms of the question of public housing or the other form of housing, first- time buyer units, I think the situation in Bride is that there is public housing there at the moment; it is the question of whether it is suitable in terms of family accommodation, Your Excellency. There are a small number of very nice little bungalows. There are some what I would call 1'h bedroom houses down at the northern end which are really transit houses because of the nature of the accommodation, and of course we have at Lambhill a small number of family units. But what is important, Your Excellency, is to bring further accommodation and further people, I think, into this village, which is a village that has got a very distinct identity, and that can be done by this particular proposal that the minister has before us today. It will bring, I am sure, new life into the village, new life into the school, into the church. Hopefully we will get a shop worthy of the village again, and we will get perhaps a post office back in the village. I think it is very important to the life of the village, and I would like to thank all members of the administration that have helped to make this possible. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I too support this resolution very strongly, and I think it would not be inappropriate to thank the vendor of this land, because it has been quite a struggle over very many years in Bride to try and find land suitable for housing, and the person, as I understand, the owner or the owners of this land, were quite happy to sell. Bride School, as the hon. member for West Douglas has said, is desperately short of scholars, and hopefully in time this new estate will produce pupils for the school. But the point, Your Excellency, that I would like to make is that I would not anticipate too high a proportion of public authority housing on this estate — in fact, only a very small proportion, because there are already in the Bride village area 44 houses which are owned by the Department of Local Government, and I would say that it would be far better to see people building their own houses on an estate such as this, and they would, I think, make it a very good estate. Over a period of years, Your Excellency, there are some estates on the Island where houses have been built by workers in the building trade, and they have been put up, not in 13 weeks or so but rather over a period of 13 months, and those houses have given the owners, I think, very, very little problem. So, Your Excellency, I say I would hope the department will encourage this self building because, as I say, many of the people are already employed in the building industry, they put into a house that they build for themselves the very best of what they see in houses that they are building for other people, and it would, I think, be a quality estate in Bride, and I understand again that quite a few that are interested in houses on this proposed new estate already live on L.G.B. estates, and, by allowing them to do this self building, it will thereby release more houses owned by the public
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1207 authority. I strongly support this resolution, Your Excellency.
Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, in my appreciation to the new , minister who as actually got this down, and in my joy that after so long the member who should take the credit for this, the member for the constituency who has pursued this and aided the department in getting this negotiated settlement with the legal advice of that particular person, I am delighted to see it come to fruition on this paper. Your Excellency, as I will be delighted to see when the houses down south are ready for coming out to the buyers, and the rest of the Strang, and all the other area up there which took some putting together, as this piece of land did here - from nothing, nothing comes; you have actually to have something to work from. Now, Your Excellency, I want to first of all defend — and I will fight with them politically when I have to —.but I want to defend the two members for South Douglas. When it is said in this Court, Your Excellency, that nothing... or no-one is doing anything and it is an injustice, I think that I have the right, and I am sent here to say that is not true. The two members for South Douglas, with others, when the problems — and I will get into those problems in a minute — have arisen, have been there to look after their constituents, and their future constituents, their potential constituents, and to take that away from them is totally politically wrong. I know that because I was on the other side of the fence. I was on the backing side, they were on the bowling side, so I know what the facts are. Your Excellency, that undertaking — I am going through this one — at Anagh Coar, is run by Douglas Corporation, and is out, as the minister will say himself, of control from the ministry, except for where they are overrun with byelaws. If they have their own byelaws, they have their own officers, they have 18 local authority representatives, they have all the administration that virtually the L.G.B. has, so they are quite capable, and in this House, and in this Court, we are always saying 'let local authorities get on with it'. Well, we did. Now do not change the rules to say 'You should not have done'. We did. Now, there are problems in the property, and there have been, but remember the ones they are talking about, Your Excellency, if anyone has ever been on... anyone who has been in the building trade at all, when you are building one or two houses with a couple of local builders, as the hon. member of the Council pointed out, over 13 months, that is fine, and everyone knows what the rules are, but even they do not come on time, and I have been in the building game, I know the situation. When you are talking of hundreds of houses, you have it multiplied by a hundred times. If one bricklayer gang goes absent or is sacked that week multiplies on each of those houses. So after a hundred problems you can be a hundred weeks behind, and unfortunately, Your Excellency, on that site that has happened and the Douglas Corporation are quite in a position to defend themselves. I do not agree with the way they went about it, but I had no say in that. Your Excellency, on the other situation, in this House and in this Court two years ago — rightly so — we had and still have a housing problem. The Court said 'Get on with it', and that is what had to be done, Your Excellency, from nothing. Now, the minister will tell you in his reply that he has got plans already for 150 to 200 council houses, the houses of Anagh Coar, other council houses at Anagh Coar, which took two years to build are coming on stream; the first 14 have been handed over, the rest will come on in due course — July is the next batch. The other housing in Douglas, the sheltered housing in Ramsey — all have been completed in that
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved T1208 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990
two years since the resolution was in this House. Your Excellency, what I object to is people who actually did not build a brick on a brick and did not have a policy for anywhere to solve the problem can get up and tell us all that is wrong. I am quite sure, Your Excellency, that if you are dealing with this number of people, you are bound to get problems and you are bound to get dissatisfied customers. Your Excellency, you are going to have more in the future if you carry on with the policy, but it is the only policy to house our own people in the land of their birth, because there is no other way of doing it. You cannot do it through resolution in this hon. House; you have to do it by a policy and with builders and all the other problems they will bring even to the Island. Your Excellency, I believe that at the end of the day, when history is written, the one thing if anything else we go down for in this Court, is at least we have seen the problem and tackled it. Now, the minister still has to get on with that, and 11) attacking him here about the problems which are still going to be there... and as you heard the Attorney-General this morning saying these houses we have built legally are better covered than any other houses that have been built in the Isle of Man, so any assertion that they are not is misleading not only the members of this hon. Court but the people that the proposers purport to wish to help. They would be better if they picked up the documents these people have and said 'That is the route to go. Go and see a lawyer who has worked for you' and is charged only half cost, by the way — another thing which is done by the society to cut down the price for home buyers — half the charges. They have here a document, a guarantee, from people who are on the Island every week and have officers to go and see. Your have your local authority to go and see, you have everyone to go and see, and at the last resort you can have a resolution down in this Court; I have not seen it. These problems are solvable. Your Excellency, I have been in enough housing estates during my private business to know, and to have worked, to have seen the faults built in houses, not for these people but I can name them: Birch Hill — I look to the members of Onchan — I worked on that estate. I have seen houses built in a week, never mind 13 weeks, built in a week, from footings to putting the roof on, and the people did not know what they were buying, and I can name the company because they went into liquidation, it was Scanciv Building. Your Excellency, I have seen the problems. The problem always will be, whenever you have to build houses or any building, you are going to have problems from it because buildings create dirt, rubble, rubbish, noise, all levels of pollutants we (1) do not like, but, sir, if someone could tell me other than getting a bag of cement and adding a drop of water, where it says on the bag 'stir briskly and you have a house' — it does not happen. Hon. members, support this resolution, support the minister for the future, because that is the only way. I am not saying you will not have any problems, but that is the only way that the minister and this Government can carry out its promises to the people to make sure we build houses for the Manx. Out of the houses that are being built, 20 per cent. of them have gone to council house tenants, and each of those tenants and each of those tenants was a burden on the as we know, of some degree. They have now taken on the burden themselves and I think, Your Excellency, they should be applauded for wanting to become home- buyers. Every house we build now has £130 a week deficit which we have to carry as taxpayers on behalf of the taxpayers. Better to have an equal mixture so those
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1209
that can afford the scheme by the Minister of Finance and those that cannot afford it are covered, but there is only one thing you have got to do: you have got to have land to build it on and you have got to have builders to build them. Your Excellency, I congratulate the minister's resolution. I am looking forward to a lot more in the next 15 months.
Mr. Cain: Your Excellency, I just want to make a comment in terms of the potential development of the land that has been acquired down at Bride. It is my pei-sonal opinion, of course — architectural style is very much a subjective issue — that the existing housing that surrounds what, in my view, is a delightful little hamlet or village is not of the standard that I would like to see. I would hope that the development that takes place, as and when it is developed, is built to a style which is sympathetic to and indeed enhances the village itself.
Mr. D.C. Cretney: Your Excellency. Really, what has encouraged me to say something about this resolution was the words to the effect that either nobody cares or nobody has tried to help with this situation, which is what Mrs. Hannan indicated, and you, rightly, sir, told me to calm down — and you are right! I have got a file at home, Your Excellency four inches thick, probably, full of correspondence which I have had and have been involved with all along with the hon. member in front of me, Mr. Duggan, between the contractors and the first-time buyers to try and relieve any problems, because there are going to be problems wherever you get a major housing scheme; there are bound to be problems and, like the hon. member, Mr. Delaney, who was on one side of the fence at one time and Mr. Duggan and I, who were on the other, I have seen both sides of the fence, so I think I can understand some of the problems the contractors have had. I think it goes back, Your Excellency, to the original contractual arrangement between the Corporation and the first-time buyers where the Corporation said, 'We will give you the land, then it is a matter between you, as first-time buyers, and the building company' and I think that presented difficulties for a number of first- time buyers who have not been involved in such a major decision or such a major financial matter as this before, and it caused problems for them. They also did not know who to got to to speak to about the problems, and I think, in the future, we should be indicating to first-time buyers that the correct course of action, if they have problems, is to go 1,2,3 and, if that is not resolved, then perhaps take it up with other parties. Another matter which was raised related to the specifications of the construction of these houses. Now, it is not the fault of the building contractor what the specifications of the construction of these houses are, and that is one of the faults that has been listed. Because a cheaper method of construction or because of the method of construction that was specified by Douglas Corporation, that is not the fault of the contractor, and I am not here, and have never been in the past, to defend them. I think it should be balanced and, up until now, it has not been balanced on this occasion. Mrs. Hannan was exactly right when she said about supervision. Supervision from day one has been one of the major problems, along with public relations, on that particular site. If the company had had the public relations better, the job might have progressed better and also, if there had been adequate supervision, the job
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved T I 210 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 would, no doubt, have progressed better. The hon. member in front of me, Mr. Duggan, and I have had a number of site meetings, we have received assurances, and indeed the question which the hon. member sought to raise in the Tynwald question this morning was raised with myself. I did have site meetings. The contractors should be given the opportunity to put right a number of faults which they have said, in reply to the hon. member, in reply to the house purchasers, they would do. Now, there have been difficulties because of the weather, and I think they should be given the opportunity to put the problems right. If they do not, it is quite right that we should go down on them, but they should be given the opportunity to put right the faults that they have said they will do. There is also a problem on these particular schemes. For example, the bricklayers — sub-contract bricklayers were chased off the site by the building firm because it appears to me that they did not seem to know what they were doing. That accounted for the bulging walls that the hon. member related to. That house was knocked down because we got involved in it. There have been a number of problems and maybe that relates to her other question about sub-contractors and the Building Trades Council, and I think she is right and she should pursue that. Your Excellency, a number of members were circulated with a letter from future constituents of mine who I have been involved with, and I have to say that I do not believe that the best way to resolve the way was via a Tynwald question. I believe that the way to do it is to make it clear to the contractors that they should put right problems, which will inevitably happen on these kind of schemes. Give them the opportunity; if that does not happen then other action may be called for, but I do not believe this was the case in this instance. I will be supporting the resolution, sir.
Mr. Karran: Your Excellency, I just would like to say that there are a two points which have been raised in this debate on this issue which are important: the points of the member for West Douglas, Mr. Cain, said about hoping that they will be at a suitable standard as far as this little Manx village is concerned. The other point is what the hon. member for Rushen had to say as far as having a clear undertaking of what we are getting for our money as far as this is concerned, because there is no question about it, in my opinion: there are certain first-time buyers' estates that have been nothing but — it could be described as — a disaster as far as I am concerned, and I think that the member for Peel is quite right to voice her concerns and the concerns of other members in this hon. Court, because they do leave a lot to be desired, and the question of value for money must be brought out as far as the taxpayer is concerned. They are paying £30,000-odd with the subsidy that is coming from the taxpayer. I question the value of these properties, especially the Douglas Corporation ones, and it is no use the Department of Local Government and the Environment doing its Pontius Pilate bit and saying somehow it is nothing to do with the D.L.G.E. The D.L.G.E. had involvement in that as far as that is concerned, I am led to believe. I would say that is the important thing. I hope that the minister will reassure this House that we will not see another sad chapter where we get the Government or get the local authority, in this case Government, to be ripped off, and I believe that they have been ripped off over certain things. The attitude that somehow, by building fiist-time buyers' houses, you are getting people out of subsidised houses — I do hope the minister will make this quite clear to this hon. Court that both
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1211 council houses and first-time buyers' houses are subsidised and at the present time I would suggest that, if the truth is known, the subsidy is far greater on these first- time buyer' houses, the likes of Anagh Coar and the likes of other parts of the Island, than there is in council houses, especially when you take off the expensive element of sheltered accommodation, and I think it is quite wrong, the way we are trying to disguise the problem so that somehow, if you are living in a council house, you are some sort of parasite. I think it is quite wrong and I think this attitude has come over in the last couple of years and has cost a lot of less fortunate people personally, simply because of the fact that we did not get down to the job in hand of building council houses in the first place. (Interruption)
The Governor: I call on the minister to reply.
Mr. Brown: Thank you, Your Excellency. Again, this is one of the areas that concerns all of us, and I can just say that, as far as I am concerned, the policy of my department in regard to housing is to try to ensure we can meet the needs of the people of the Isle of Man, and all I can say is that the department has made it clear already that its priority is in public sector housing and I think we take the point of the type of housing we are talking about, as in meeting the need with ordinary public sector housing. Also, we do see an importance still in first-time buyers' housing because you cannot say one without the other; there is a very important balance there in the housing market that we have to retain. Again, I think, in fairness, the department previously have been catching up as well with regard to meeting the needs for sheltered accommodation. As we all know, sheltered accommodation is expensive and it is more complicated to build than it is to build just an estate of ordinary housing. So that need. is being met now and a lot of work is going on in that area. Your Excellency, could I just say that Mr. President opened the debate by saying that he was delighted to see this and that land was being purchased throughout the Isle of Man. Again, there has been a difficulty in trying to identify land in certain areas of the Island because of the nature of land that is available. Certainly, from the point of view it was a lot easier initially to start in the Douglas and Braddan area because most of the land available was in the hands of the local authorities, and therefore they had land banks ready to strike straightaway. But again, this is one area that we see as important, not just the building of houses, but in fact the purchase of land, and members will be notice that in the Green Book there is a price of £2 million which has been put into my department's estimates, and that is for the purchase of land and that is with a view to purchasing land throughout the Island, with a view to purchasing land for development, and hopefully, for some land banking for the future, because again this problem will never go away and it is important that we have adequate land available wherever it may be, Your Excellency. Now, we are looking at land, for example, in Peel and Castletown with regard to those two areas which have a specific problem with regard to redevelopment within the centres, and that is where, for example, land is available that is either derelict or buildings are derelict and looking at the practicalities of buying some of that land, maybe demolishing houses — in fact some areas have already had houses demolished over they ears — and regenerating within those areas, and there is some potential there. What this Court will have to determine is allowing for the
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved T1212 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 extra cost that will cost us to redevelop in our town centres, but I believe that will be a very, very good investment instead of going out into the green fields all the time and letting the centres die. So, Your Excellency, I have no qualms I will here asking for the money when, hopefully, these schemes come together, but we are looking at those two areas. Port Erin — we are looking at land, and also Douglas and Braddan also have some land, and again we are looking at those with the possibility of schemes going on, so we are looking throughout the Island, and again I am sure the North will be looked at because there are areas of land in the North which are available too. Your Excellency, one of the main concerns that was raised was regarding the difficulties with some of the first-time buyers' houses. I think we should remember that many of the first-time buyers' houses are not having a problem. There are some that are, and that is accepted. Can I just say that myself and Mr. Cretney met senior (1)1 executives — I think is the right word — or directors of the firm involved about three weeks ago, and I think we were reasonably blunt as to what the situation was in the Isle of Man and in fact that, unless they got their reputation right and got them selves sorted out, it would be extremely difficult for me or anybody else to stand up in this hon. Court and put forward their name for contracts in the Isle of Man. As a result of that, Your Excellency, they went back to their head office and, as a result of that and the concerns expressed, I will be meeting, with my colleagues, the chairman of that company in the next few weeks and I can tell you and I can assure the public, I will be laying it quite clearly on the line exactly what is happening with regard to these contracts and, in fact, how from their point of view it is doing them no good at all, and we have all seen the headlines in the papers and the concerns expressed, so let there be no doubt. I will not hesitate to let them know in no uncertain terms exactly what the situation is here in the Isle of Man, and they will have to overcome the problems that they have. They have a P.R. problem; in fairness they have had a problem establishing in the Island, and that in itself is something they are trying to overcome, and they have had a workforce problem but, at the end of the day, it is their responsibility to sort that out and they should not be bringing unnecessary concerns on people who are purchasing houses from them, and that is the major problem. Again, I have to say I think it was unfortunate that Mrs. Hannan, in her style — if that is the right way to use it — tended to go very much one way and did not even recognize, as she already knows, that the hon. members for South Douglas have in fact already been involved in trying to overcome the problems. Officers in my department have been involved with it, my predecessor was involved in it and now I am involved in it. Let us be clear, Your Excellency, there is a limitation for my department. We have no legal responsibility; we have no legal right to interfere. We are using, if you like, the point that we are a Government department, that they may or may not get more contracts depended on the standard of workmanship and how they deal with their customers. We have no legal rights at all, but our officers have tried to advise some of these first-time buyers, and I myself have written to them, to try and see what we can do, so, Your Excellency, we will do all we can to help, but there is a limitation on us for that one. I think the lesson to be learned, Your Excellency, is at the end of the day the site with the biggest problem is the one that the Douglas Corporation control and the problem has been, I would suggest, no clerk of works. That is the problem.
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 T1213
Now, in our department where we have been involved and we have had supervision, the problems have been minimal. There are still problems but they are nowhere near as great as those in the Douglas area, so again that is another story and and another one important. Now, with regard to trying to assist first-time buyers, Your Excellency, my department is producing a leaflet to inform them of their rights and how they should take complaints, because again, until I was asked about it, I did not know how you deal with a matter like this and therefore, how on earth can these young people, or the not-so-young people, know, if they up against a problem like this and are fobbed off, where they go next? They come to us, and quite rightly, we try to help them, Your Excellency, So we are going to reproduce some information there. Your Excellency, it is important to get a balance. With regard to this scheme, can I say that we are very conscious of the needs in Bride. Mr. Cain raised the point about the architectural style for a village, a hamlet and so on. Last week 1 met the Bride Parish Commissioners and I had a good two-hour meeting 'on the stage', as I call it, and we spoke about this scheme. Excellency. The Bride Parish Commissioners are saying to us that they favour self- build with service plots. I have said to them that I certainly do not rule that out. What we have to do is see the implications of doing that and the cost of that because it may cause other problems, but we are open to considering that. With regard to the buildings being sympathetic to the area, in fact we could at that point very much, Your Excellency, and, as hon. members are aware, my department and its Planning Committee are very conscious that we should be building buildings that are more in keeping with the natural environment or the character of the village or town. That may in itself create additional costs to the buildings. We will have to look at that if we are trying to help the first-time buyers, but it is important that if we are building something there, it is something that at least reflects the area and, because of the lay of the land, it is going to be very important that buildings do not become too obtrusive and, again, we will be doing all we can to help on that. I think a lot has been achieved in the last few years. Here we have a scheme which is another one to help a small number of people in a small village which is very important if — and we all talk about this, Your Excellency — our way of life survives. These villages and parishes and towns are our way of life and to centralise everything all the time, whether it be centralising it all in Castletown or Peel or Douglas, is not the answer. The answer is doing some of that as well to meet the needs of those areas but also ensuring that we meet the needs in these small villages, and that may mean us having to, if you like, having to make some decisions because we are conscious of building in the countryside, but we have to be careful and it can be done if it is very strictly controlled. With the last point, Your Excellency, Mr. Corrin asked for a breakdown of costs. I thought it was clear; I had said £85,000 for the two fields, and that is the resolution, £87,000 — that is £2,000 for legal costs. The two fields, Your Excellency, are one field at 1.18 acres and one field at 0.83 acres, and all I can say is from the valuation we have had it is excellent value for money, Your Excellency, and again can I put on record my thanks as a department and, I am sure, this Government's thanks and Tynwald's thanks to the owners of this land who have been very helpful in not standing back and waiting for the top price; they have in fact been very helpful to that area. Again, while my department has got funds allocated for purchase of
East View, Bride — Purchase of Land for Building First-Time Buyers' Houses — Expenditure Approved T1214 TYNWALD COURT, TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 1990 land and while I recognize we have to compete in the market, I believe there are people out there who are only too happy for the community to help by providing a price that is helpful to us to enable us to help more people. 1 look forward to that support, Your Excellency. I look forward to the scheme going ahead and I hope members will support the scheme. I beg to move.
The Governor: I put to you item 11, hon. members. Will those in favour say aye; those against say no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF ROYAL ASSENT
The Governor: Hon. members, I have to announce that Royal Assent has been given to the Fire Services Amendment Act 1990.
PROCEDURAL
The Governor: Standing Orders oblige me to consult you, hon. members, as it is now after 6 p.m. Can I just put a few facts to you? There are still 34 items on the Agenda Paper. On the other hand, the next items that we are to come to are 6, 7, and 8, all of which are fairly hefty. I think we have got a choice, hon. members, really, between stopping now or dipping in to item 6 and going on with a check again at 7 p.m. Would any hon. member like to propose either of those courses?
Mr. Delaney: I would propose, Your Excellency, that we adjourn until tomorrow morning. I believe that after six or seven hours in here we are just drawing to a standstill. Can I ask another question, Your Excellency? Did you say Royal Assent has been given to the Fire Services?
The Governor: Yes. Does any member wish to second the first part of Mr. Delaney's statement?
Dr. Orme: I beg to second, sir.
The Governor: I put it to you, hon. members, that we have had enough. Will those in favour say aye; those against say no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. We will adjourn until tomorrow morning.
The Court adjourned at 6.15 p.m.
Announcement of Royal Assent Procedural