S T A N D I N G C O M M I T T E E O F T Y N W A L D C O U R T O F F I C I A L R E P O R T
R E C O R T Y S O I K O I L B I N G V E A Y N T I N V A A L
P R O C E E D I N G S D A A L T Y N
ENVIRONMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE
DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE
HANSARD
Douglas, Friday, 15th April 2016
PP2016/0066 ENVI-I, No. 2/15-16
All published Official Reports can be found on the Tynwald website:
www.tynwald.org.im/business/hansard
Published by the Office of the Clerk of Tynwald, Legislative Buildings, Finch Road, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 3PW. © High Court of Tynwald, 2016 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Members Present:
Acting Chairman: Mr G D Cregeen MHK Mr D J Quirk MHK
Apologies: Mr T P Wild MLC
Clerk: Mrs J Corkish
Contents Procedural ...... 45 EVIDENCE OF Hon. P A Gawne MHK, Minister and Mr N Black, Chief Executive Officer, Department of Infrastructure ...... 45 The Committee sat in private at 4.36 p.m...... 78
______44 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Standing Committee of Tynwald on Environment and Infrastructure Policy Review
Department of Infrastructure
The Committee sat in public at 2.30 p.m. in the Legislative Council Chamber, Legislative Buildings, Douglas
[MR CREGEEN in the Chair]
Procedural
The Acting Chairman (Mr Cregeen): Good afternoon and I welcome you to this public meeting of the Environment and Infrastructure Policy Review Committee, which is a Standing Committee of Tynwald. I am Graham Cregeen MHK, and I will be chairing the Committee in place of Mr Wild MLC, who has sent his apologies for today. With me is my colleague Mr David Quirk 5 MHK, and Mrs Corkish who is Clerk to the Committee. Please ensure that your mobile phones and any other electronic devices are on silent, so that these do not disrupt proceedings. Also, for the purposes of Hansard I will be ensuring that we do not have two people speaking at once. The Environment and Infrastructure Policy Review Committee is one of three Standing 10 Committees of Tynwald, established in October 2011 with a wide scrutiny remit. We have two Departments to cover: Infrastructure, and Environment, Food and Agriculture. Today’s session is the main annual oral evidence session with the Department of Infrastructure. Our last such session was on 11th November 2015. Minister Gawne and Mr Black, we would like to welcome you today and thank you for attending. 15 The Minister for Infrastructure (Mr Gawne): Thank you for inviting us.
EVIDENCE OF Hon. P A Gawne MHK, Minister and Mr N Black, Chief Executive Officer, Department of Infrastructure
Q102. The Acting Chairman: First of all I would like to ask: would you like to make any statement before we start, or go straight into questions?
20 The Minister: I think the only statement I would like to make is that we are here to answer your questions. I think the opportunity to be able to do this in a very public way is a really good thing and I look forward to doing my best, as indeed I am sure does my Chief Executive, in giving you the answers you are looking for.
______45 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
25 Q103. The Acting Chairman: Thank you very much. If I can start off on budgetary matters: in your departmental summary in the 2016-17 Budget document, you state that you expect to achieve the 2015-16 budget targets – which is good news – but this has only been possible as a result of ‘cutting back on planned expenditure’. Can you describe what areas of work have been affected by this? 30 The Minister: Yes, there is a range of different issues that we have in relation to our budget. We have what we believe to be a historic overly optimistic forecast for income, which has never been reached in all the years that we have been trying – particularly in relation to the Airport. So, for example, despite this year seeing increased growth at the Airport we still struggled to 35 even come close to the income target. So that clearly means that we do have to cut back in other areas. Obviously this year with some of the major damage to highways and other infrastructure that took place, there was a lot more work being done from the capital budget, which allowed us to maintain reasonably the level of works that we would have expected to deliver this year. But 40 inevitably with the way in which our budget is set ... and I would suspect, unlike the Health budget, we can actually stop doing certain jobs at certain times if necessary to ensure that we come in within the budget. Obviously in my colleague’s area, in Health, that would not be something that we would find acceptable – you have got to carry on doing the operations even if you do not have the budget. 45 We are fortunate in that regard in that we can at least, if it looks as if the budget is getting overspent, reduce the amount of works that we do.
Q103. The Acting Chairman: So could you give an example of what you have stopped doing to get within the budget? Specific projects? 50 The Minister: Well, I think I said it was because we have had a lot more work to do in relation to the storm-related issues; we have not effectively stopped working. So work that we might have done if we had not had the storm damage would have been further maintenance work, but effectively we would be maintaining some of the things that 55 were damaged and were then paid through capital ... or through insurance. So we have not, to any great extent anyway this year, had to cut back on areas that we had planned to spend on this year.
Mr Quirk: Can I ask the Minister: when those decisions are made, are they made by yourself 60 in conjunction with the Chief Executive, or would you include your Members of the Department?
The Minister: Certainly this year we have not needed to have a full departmental meeting to talk about that level of budgetary challenge; but certainly the year before, the year that effectively I joined part way through somebody else's budget ... I think it was David Cretney’s 65 budget. The Hon. Member for Rushen had started the year and he had done a quarter of the year before I then took over; so certainly towards the end of that year we had to have a conflab with the Members of the Department to try and work out what we were going to stop doing to fit within the budget. This year just gone, we had plenty of time to plan the budget. It was the same political team 70 in charge at the beginning of the year as was there at the end of the year, so we were able to plan it properly – the Members were fully aware what was happening and there was no need to make any political decisions about that. I am sure that Nick and the senior management team do have to review the budget from time to time, and slow down in some areas and speed up in others. As both of you will know 75 from your time on the Department of Infrastructure, there are some jobs which are expensive to
______46 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
do because they require a lot of materials, and then there are other jobs that are cheaper to do because they just require men with shovels. So occasionally we will have to shift the balance between which sorts of schemes we undertake. 80 Q104. The Acting Chairman: If I give an example of when you are looking at your priorities across the Isle of Man – and you have mentioned the flooding and how you have reacted to that. How did the resurfacing of the Sloc fit into your budgetary year, when you consider that you go down Victoria Street and it is falling to bits? And even in your own constituency up in Fistard 85 the road is falling to bits – and the main road through Santon and Ballasalla. And yet a road which is probably not used as much as those gets quite a lot of expenditure near the end of the financial year!
The Minister: Yes, and Nick can go into some more detail on that. 90 But first of all there have been allegations made and people have said, ‘Well, the Minister has just done this because it is in his constituency.’ First of all that is not true; the Minister had nothing to do with it. I do not get into that sort of detail – I believe that it is appropriate to leave that to the engineers. But secondly, even if I had chosen to pick a road in my constituency and said, ‘You must get 95 that done’, I cannot imagine that the Sloc would even come close to the top 10 – there are loads of other roads, in my view, that need to be done! The reasons I am aware of why the Sloc was done, was because first of all we had an underspend in the capital programme – so we had some spare money and we needed to spend it on something. Secondly the Sloc, because of its nature and not having any ironwork on it, did not need to be designed as such, it was a relatively simple 100 thing to do – there was a little bit of planing around some of the edges that needed to be done, and then it was really just a case of laying tarmac. So in that regard it was a relatively simple job to do and easy enough to slot into the capital programme, in the same way that various other roads have been done over the course of the last two or three years – rural roads without drains underneath, or wires, or any ducts, or 105 anything like that. But I do not know whether Nick may have some more – ?
Mr Black: Thank you, Mr Chairman. The Minister has given a very full explanation of the situation. 110 The Department has identified major works needed for the next 10 years and has asset management staff who look into it and use their engineering skills to estimate when major works are needed, to avoid having to cope with failure. So it is a planned maintenance programme for the highways, for our major structures. The situation arose when we struggled to spend this year's capital allowance because of, 115 probably, three schemes: the Ramsey Transport Interchange did not succeed at planning permission stage; the Douglas Railway Station does have planning permission, but that planning permission took a long time to come and needed a lot of negotiation afterwards, due to the conditions imposed by the inspector – so that was not able to be started, although the work has now started on site. Ramsey Transport Interchange is not there yet and we will have to apply for 120 planning permission again. The more obvious one, of course, is the Promenade Scheme where we had scheduled to spend between £5 million and £6 million, if my memory serves, this year, making a start on the first phase of that – and we clearly were not going to be doing that because the decision on planning only came very recently. And, as you know now, we did not spend anything on the 125 promenade at all because we did not achieve planning permission for the proposals. The Department can roll forward this capital money, so that the promenade budget still needs to be maintained at the whole amount, otherwise we will not have enough when we do
______47 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
do it. But as you know, all Government Departments are asked to spend capital as far as they can to keep the local construction industry going – and in our case to make sure that we 130 maintain the infrastructure. So because we had the labour available we moved some things forward, because the promenade went back. And neither the Minister nor I did the choosing – neither of us saw a map, neither of us said, ‘Here is a list of 10 schemes, what would you like to do?’ Our engineers said, ‘These are things that need doing; these are the things we can do.’ And 135 the Minister has quite rightly identified that where we are short of time – and, as you know, the promenade decision came only very recently – they look for roads with no kerbs, no drains and no significant junctions; and in those situations the planing and the paving equipment can work very quickly and do large lengths of road in a short time. So the Sloc was one road and there were a number of other schemes that were done on the 140 same basis. If you wish, Chairman, I can provide you with a list of works that were done on that basis. I cannot get them all off the top of my head today, but I can provide you, through your Clerk, with a list of the schemes that were done. But it certainly was not just the Sloc. The Sloc, as you might recall, whilst absolutely still open for traffic, was previously used for various motorsports; and the condition, with the bumps and the lumps in it, was such that they 145 had to stop using it. So it was due work and that work had not been programmed to be yet, but we were able bring it forward.
Q105. The Acting Chairman: My main concern is, like the Minister just said, that some capital money was identified that needed to be spent. And it has been policy that we are not supposed 150 to be having the ‘mad March spend’. Would it not have been possible to extend that period, where you started the work on some of the main roads which are having serious problems at the moment and even extended that through into April, even though you started spending that money – (Interjection by the Minister) which would have been a better spend of taxpayers’ money? 155 The Minister: That is a very interesting point that you make in relation to how the capital budget works, and there is an argument that says perhaps capital budgets should not be running on an annual basis. If we have agreed to spend money on projects then perhaps those projects do not need to have a 1st April end point – and of course, technically, they do not, but we are 160 very focused on year-to-year spend. I think the points that you make are very reasonable points and, that said, the work at the Sloc was a part of ... there were about three or four schemes that were put to Treasury, I think it was in December. Treasury then asked some questions about those schemes, there was probably a month-long delay and then the work went in. It was probably asked for in November, 165 it went in in December – and Nick will correct me if I have not quite got those dates right, but it was certainly before Christmas. So we had identified that there was an underspend in the capital long before March, and we were coming forward with schemes that we could spend the money on during the financial year. So that was the timescale and it was not all rushed in at the last minute – Treasury had asked, 170 ‘Are there any schemes that can be brought forward?’ And that is what we endeavoured to do. I would agree with you that there are an awful lot more roads that in my view – as someone who is a biochemist by training, not a highways engineer – I would say that the Ballakillowey ... sorry, the Ballafesson Road, needs to be done.
175 The Acting Chairman: A Freudian slip!
The Minister: The main road going through the Level would be an obvious one and we have got plans for works going from Ballabeg to Colby. All those stretches are obviously in need of doing. And the Ballakilpheric Road is obviously in need of repair.
______48 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
180 So there are a whole load of roads that from a political priority I would certainly have favoured in my constituency. I am also aware of loads of other work: obviously the final stretch going through Upper Foxdale that is in desperate need of being done; there are works in Malew, as you have described; there are works all around the Island that from a political perspective would seem to be more useful to have been done. 185 But we are politicians and I do not think there are any politicians who are highways engineers. In my view, we leave the technical stuff to the experts –
Q106. The Acting Chairman: Is it not just the case that you are saying you had to look for quick, easy schemes rather than those with kerbs and with ironwork, and that is why those areas 190 were done – because they were going to get done reasonably quickly? If we were able to look at it wholly on value for money and the best impression for the Isle of Man, those roads probably would not have – ?
The Minister: I am not so sure, actually. 195 In relation to the Sloc, the Hill Climb had stopped using the Sloc. The Sloc is one of the most iconic things in terms of video for that particular race. (Mr Quirk: Scenic view.) A really beautiful part of the Island. So in terms of benefit to the Island, being able to continue with the Hill Climb up there would probably be quite a positive thing. Added to which I know, having been alerted that people were disgruntled about this, I did 200 check it out and the Sloc was something around £15 per square metre to have done, whereas I think the next nearest was in the late teens. There were a few schemes in the mid-20s per square metre, but most schemes – certainly schemes that involve lots of infrastructure and kerbing and drains, as we have described – would be £30-plus per square metre. So on value for money, the Sloc gives excellent value for money; but in terms of political 205 priorities and priorities that the public might see, I would agree that there are plenty of other roads that we really need to be getting on with and that we are certainly intending to do in the near future.
Q107. The Acting Chairman: Can you advise what the total cost of the Sloc was? 210 The Minister: Well, we have got that sheet; I think it was published this week in a press release. But we will certainly circulate the sheet, it has got all the financial information for all the schemes that we did this last year.
215 Q108. Mr Quirk: Could I just ask, Minister: you do have a Highways Member. Would it not be prudent for us, or it would be yourselves … the Highway Member would know particularly what it was like?
The Minister: Yes, he would. 220 Mr Quirk: So getting away from the influence point of view – we have all seen the criticism. But there is a Highways Member in there which gives that governance, or the final cut; and if there were two close together he could then choose A or B. And that would be recorded somewhere. 225 The Minister: Yes, and I know John Houghton, the Member for Highways, who I have properly delegated to do that area, has taken a very great interest and worked very closely with the Director of Highways Services on these things.
230 Q109. Mr Quirk: So it is not why – and I am probably being a bit cruel here – Johnny Watterson’s Lane was included at the same time? (Laughter)
______49 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
The Minister: You could say that, but I could not possibly comment!
The Acting Chairman: Mr Black. 235 Mr Black: Thank you, Chairman. I thought it might just help the Committee if I confirm that because this is capital money … and you reference the ‘mad March’ which is always something – you are quite right – the Treasury has always said no we must not do that. 240 The money would not have disappeared, we could easily have spent it in April or we could have spent it in May. But the issue for needing quick schemes … and the impact is that we are very limited for capacity in terms of design and engineering. And, as the Minister said, these schemes need very little of that – they need some brief drawings and some setting out on site. As soon as you move into an area with a town or lots of junctions they have got to be properly 245 considered – traffic management surveys, lots of engineering work and lots of detailed design. You have spent time in the Department, you have seen the drawings – they are very complicated and that is why we employ professionals to do them. But you cannot say to those professionals, ‘I want to do a main road through the village’ – and give them two weeks to do the job. That would lead to very poor standards of work and 250 very poor value for money. So these are schemes where we were trying to contribute to Government’s overall capital spend, simply by moving money backwards and forwards over a year-end; there was no need to spend money before it disappeared and our budget was cut ... it is not at all like that, it is all in capital funding. It could easily have waited six months but Government as a whole was asked to try, as it is every year – Departments are always asked to 255 try and get their capital spend up, and this was our response. It was a scheme that could be delivered quickly. We tend to look for schemes in this case which do not need planning permission, which we have the resources to manage and which can be completed on time; and for us we can often do the work swiftly. But it is the resources to manage and supervise that can be scarce and, particularly if we need planning permission, then 260 timescales are outside of the Department’s control.
Q110. The Acting Chairman: And it was all work carried out by outside contractors?
Mr Black: I would have to confirm to you, I do not know exactly the allocation of internal or 265 external works.
The Minister: Yes, I know the Sloc was certainly done by our men, but I do not know about –
Mr Black: If you are happy I will provide you with a breakdown of what proportion was spent 270 within the Department and what was spent outside.
Q111. Mr Quirk: Can I just move to within the budget as well, within your Department – the Public Transport Division. From our research it is possibly incurring an overspend of about £3.2 million – or £3.1 million? 275 The Minister: No.
Mr Black: No, there is no overspend at all, Mr Quirk, in public transport. Two things might have affected the figures you are looking at, depending on which ones you 280 are looking at. First of all, Public Transport’s budgets have historically been set to allow for a wide variation in income and expenditure. So because much of the work they do is in the commercial field, I think as Mr Cregeen will remember, he previously had to go back to Tynwald and ask for approvals to offset expenditure and income. Because you can end up if you have had
______50 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
a very successful year, you might receive – let’s say, for the sake of argument – an extra half a 285 million pounds of income; but clearly to run those services you will have incurred costs in terms of fuel, staffing and maintenance. So even though you may, let’s say, have made a net gain of £100,000, you will have spent £400,000 to gain the £500,000. So the budgets have a lot of flexibility in for that. Additionally, the Public Transport’s budget has changed in two important ways: one, the 290 Government’s fleet budget is now contained within the Public Transport Division. That is a very significant amount of money, because we restructured to provide all our vehicle engineering being co-located in terms of management – and indeed increasingly in terms of depots. So you might have seen the fleet budget there and, as I think you discussed collectively in Tynwald, all Government budgets look like they have gone up because of the allocation of monies for the 295 payment of pension contributions in terms of the revisions there.
The Minister: And it is capital repayments –
Mr Black: And the capital repayments. 300 So there have been some structural changes, but to my understanding the public transport budget has been reducing year-on-year and we have made savings. But I can happily provide you with a summary of the total subsidy for public transport, the net budget for public transport for the last half dozen years if that would be of interest to you?
305 The Minister: Yes, that £3.2 million might reflect the subsidy that public transport gets from the taxpayer – that is possibly where the figure is coming from. But I know when I first joined the Department it was suggested to me that maybe we should have a target of 50% of the costs of public transport being met by income; so we have set that target and we are approaching that now. 310 All I know is that I have been told income was up this last financial year and expenditure was down. So I would be surprised if there was an issue there.
Q112. The Acting Chairman: Will that be because you have started charging for schoolchildren, and that has now come into your income targets? 315 Mr Black: It is nowhere near £3.2 million –
The Acting Chairman: No, but part of your additional income has come in from charging for schoolchildren – 320 The Minister: Yes.
Mr Black: There is income from there. And of course as you know, Mr Cregeen, from your own experience, the changes in the ticketing structure and the numbers of people using the 325 buses are increasing. The income is growing and, as the Minister said, the costs are falling. I think approximately, in the last five years, the cost of public transport has fallen to the taxpayer by over a million pounds a year. But I would feel much more confident providing you the figures in writing, so that I can give you a clear table with when we started and when we finished, and you can compare it. 330 The Minister: But I just think with reference to the charging for schoolchildren, one of the main drivers for that, as much as anything, was to discourage children who lived within walking distance of school from getting on the bus. And that, as much as anything, was a health-related issue rather than revenue raising, because at 25p a journey ... is it 25p? (Mr Black: Yes.) That is 335 not really a very significant amount in terms of the overall income we get from it.
______51 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Q113. The Acting Chairman: Sorry, I thought part of that was because of the expansion of the fleet, because you are allowing people to travel from short distances. I mean, in a small area of about a mile, or half a mile, from school, that people were getting on the bus because it was there for free, and that you could fill a bus up from half a mile. So by 340 trying to encourage people to walk, because of the charging, it would save you on fleet costs.
The Minister: Yes.
Mr Black: Yes. 345 Q114. The Acting Chairman: I remember as part of the proposals for the ticketing, actually there was a significant sum put towards saving on revenue protection. I understand you now have revenue protection officers. Can you confirm whether their salaries are being covered by the saving in fares? And, 350 whether there have been any prosecutions?
Mr Black: There certainly have not been any prosecutions. The Minister and the Member for public transport have been considering whether or not we need to provide legislation for such as a penalty fare, where you might have in London, say, a £20 fare – and I give that figure totally at 355 random. We could choose a fare that was, say, four or five times the maximum normal fare and if the person is travelling without, that would be the penalty fare. We do not have that legislation, but the Minister has asked us to prepare thoughts on how that could be delivered in the next administration. So that will help. We have also identified some quite significant cases of fraud whereby, for 360 example, we have found people claiming to be college students and buying the college cards, and when you look at it you think this does not add up. And we have been able to identify that because each card records their journey patterns. And when a bus driver queried an individual and took the card from him, we were able to check that before returning the card. So I will check the detail of your answer, Mr Cregeen, in terms of the salaries – they are very 365 new appointments. I think overall the ticketing system has been of great value, I am sure it has helped us recover the income we are due; and of course it has a number of other benefits that I accept you are aware of, but I think I had best rehearse if only for Mr Quirk’s benefit and for Mrs Corkish’s benefit. 370 We are now very close to being able to launch an app which will allow you to – literally, if you wish to – sit in your front room, or in the pub, and see that in 10 minutes your bus is heading down the road; or you could see it coming round the corner. We are now able to monitor all the vehicles in real time and if you were to go into Banks Circus you would see there is a large electronic map on the wall and each bus is colour-coded – and the ones that are red are the 375 ones that are running early. And of course you will recall that the public will tolerate a bus being a few minutes late, but they are fairly unhappy if the bus has just disappeared down the end of the street at the time it should be there! For us an early bus is a bigger problem. We can monitor all that, and the drivers now have a device in their cab on the ticketing machine which tells them if they are running early or late, so we are able to provide much more 380 reliable services. Those then increase people’s willingness to use them – with reliability, investment in the fleet and that we are able to provide services that people want. We have managed to increase the numbers of services I think since your time with public transport, we have put on more services in the evenings in certain areas; we have services up to every 20 minutes on main routes and lots of opportunities for people to travel – and that is paying off 385 with increased income. But I will answer the question, I may not be able to specifically say which amount of income came from the inspectors’ presence, but I think we can say how the income has grown since the
______52 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
ticketing machine was introduced and what costs are associated with that. And I will identify the salaries of the inspectors for you. 390 Q115. The Acting Chairman: Have you confirmed that it is actually working on the railways as well now?
Mr Black: Yes, it worked all last season on the railways; and indeed last year also on the 395 horse trams.
Q116. The Acting Chairman: Also, when we are talking about public transport, how are you getting along with the Department of Education and Children regarding the minibuses, because there has been a bit of a storm about who owns what and who operates what? 400 Are you getting anywhere near to a conclusion on that?
The Minister: Yes, we are – and have been for some considerable time – getting on very well with the Department of Education and Children. Unfortunately, I think, for both Departments information became public before we were in a position to have reached agreement as to how 405 exactly everything was coming to. I think we were pretty close to having reached an agreement; and I think there was a degree of confusion as to exactly what was and what was not being proposed. But what is being proposed is in my view something that is entirely reasonable. And indeed the friends of Arbory School who were most concerned about some of the issues, I met them 410 and explained what we were actually trying to do – and as a result of the meeting I think they are an awful lot happier. We are not trying to impose anything on anybody, but we are entirely reasonably expecting that any minibus that is carrying children meets reasonable standards of care. Some of the minibuses that we have serviced, or have been asked to service, since the 415 change in fleet services where we would take over the management, have been in a very poor state – and certainly would cause anybody whose child was likely to be travelling in those minibuses to have some concerns. But I think if we remember why we are doing this: this exercise is being undertaken to remove a very large degree of inefficiency across the whole of Government’s fleet. 420 There was one minibus that had not moved at all for the whole of the last 12-month period and there were several which had done barely 1,000 miles. And, quite frankly, when you have got minibuses that are used in the daytime, and you have got minibuses that are used exclusively in the evenings, and minibuses that would be used exclusively at the weekends – and a Government that is strapped for cash – that is a gross inefficiency which we should as 425 politicians, collectively, be quite ashamed of. I think it is entirely the right thing to do, in the same way that I know you, Chairman, identified some of the issues in relation to properties that are doing the same in relation to fleet. So to try and get a more comprehensive management is entirely the right thing to do. As ever, though, when someone has been used to doing things in a particular way, if you go 430 to change those things there are always going to be problems, there are always going to be concerns raised as people get used to the new system – and we are very much aware of that in the Department. We have had to manage that with the change in Estates Shared Services which was not universally popular with all Departments but, again, in terms of Estates Shared Services one of the drivers for that was a £2 million saving from all the budgets. And you do not save 435 £2 million by providing exactly the same service to the same standard. That said, in terms of fleet, yes we have a target saving set for ourselves but we believe that saving is highly deliverable with very limited impact on the level of service that will be provided.
______53 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Q117. Mr Quirk: Can I just swing it over towards those vehicles that are for the disabled, with 440 wheelchair access and so forth, from some of the Government Departments, including Social Care – because obviously the homes will require some of the vehicles which are specially adapted. Has anything been brought to your attention about maintenance of those vehicles and having them to use, because it is not something that you would have ready in the fleet to substitute? 445 The Minister: Well, we are not just plucking ideas out of thin air – and we know that similar fleet management services exist in other parts of the world. Obviously Ian Longworth, our director, is familiar with the way these things operate in the UK so we do know that it is possible to manage a fleet in a central way, in the way that we are proposing. 450 I do recognise that there will be concerns particularly in the areas you are talking about; and I would certainly hope that the officers in Social Care will be working very closely with Ian Longworth and his team in identifying what the needs are, and how we can adapt the service to make sure that we meet their needs. Nick, have you got any … ? 455 Mr Black: I could perhaps add a little bit more detail, Mr Quirk. There are two main strands in terms of the carriage of people with additional needs. Firstly, the Department thought some time ago – probably in its predecessor in public transport, in the Department of Community, Culture and Leisure, actually – that disabled passengers should be 460 able to board buses in the same way as any other passengers. You will notice that in the small buses that we have, which are larger than your traditional school minibuses – they are sort of a midi-bus – disabled passengers board through a ramp, past the driver in the same way as everybody else, just as on the big buses; whereas traditionally, in a minibus you might find a rear-loading ramp on a hydraulic platform, and the disabled passenger 465 would effectively go in with the bags. We took a decision, which was a political decision at the time, that that was not right and we should wherever possible treat disabled people totally equally; and they boarded through the front, paid in the same way and there was space for them. So in terms of our purchasing, we continue to look to buy additional numbers of those 470 vehicles and to work well with the needs of the community. We are soon to pilot a community transport scheme, probably initially in the north of the Island, where lesser-used services will be replaced by vehicles operating to an on-demand-type service. So an individual who might be the manager of a nursing home, or it might be a lady wanting to get to an appointment, or it might be someone who is otherwise not using any Government services at all – and it is not just for 475 disabled people, it is for anyone who wants to use the service. And they will be able to say, ‘I would like to get from place A to place B tomorrow, please, so I am there for 10 o’clock.’ We will schedule vehicles around them. So we do not provide a bus service there with all the costs of a big bus running around, let’s say, a rural area, but we are able to provide the community – and the social inclusion – that means that all people can access their social, 480 medical and community needs. And we should be able to provide vehicles with good standards of access, with low running costs, and provide a bespoke service. And even though we feel that the service will improve, we are not promising everybody that they will be able to get the vehicle exactly when they want at the time, because we will want to schedule these vehicles. We might say to passenger A, ‘Do you think you would mind going 485 15 minutes early, because we can pick up somebody down the street who will go a bit later?’ And we will try and pick them all up in a round. The initial plan is, when we are collecting people who are accessing health-type appointments, we would provide some sort of escort. We are working with the Department of Social Care and the Department of Health. There are a large number of people currently being carried by ambulance where, as long as there was an escort, 490 they might be able to be carried in a bespoke community transport service.
______54 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
So there are opportunities – yes, again, as the Minister has said – for efficiencies; and our overall fleet savings over this year and the last two are programmed to be £1 million. We have achieved the first half million and we have got another half million to save this year. That is to be saved in two forms: one, we have expanded the role of the fleet service in terms not just of 495 fixing vehicles, but in terms of running them – that includes everything from choosing to buy the right ones and making sure there are enough. And we hope – and, Mr Quirk, this might be another issue of reassurance – we would like to be in a position where we have a loan vehicle. So that when a youth centre brings in its minibus what it is most concerned about is – not the standard of servicing, they assume that will be spot-on – they want to make sure their bus 500 comes back promptly, or that they can borrow one. So we hope to be able to provide one that they can book and borrow, just like you would when you take your car to the garage. That will allow them to keep providing their services, which is the ultimate aim of Government, and for us to keep the costs down. So, as with all these shared service areas yes, as the Minister says, there is the element of 505 spotting efficiencies, spotting inappropriately high standards; but also an element of adding professionalism to say there is a better way of doing this because we do not expect everyone to be experts. So if we can bring these things together, we should be able to make improvements in the service and reductions in the cost.
510 Q118. The Acting Chairman: And just one final one on the public transport side: you have no doubt probably made a significant saving with the reduction of diesel in the last year or so. Have you made any provision to hedge for the future, as in fuel prices?
Mr Black: Shall I answer this? 515 Mr Chairman, the contract for diesel is a longer-term arrangement through Treasury’s … oh, sorry, the Attorney General’s procurement services, now! I believe there are a couple of years left to run but I will happily check. To the best of my understanding, that is done on a cost-plus basis so that the price fluctuates with the price of crude oil effectively, or imported fuel, and there is a price benchmark and an allowance on that. So whilst that means we never lose out, it 520 also means we never make a huge windfall gain either. So, yes we have done better than we expected this year because of the fall in the price of diesel. We go through a very significant amount of diesel; the bus fleet alone can use about a million and a half pounds’ worth of diesel a year. Our overall energy bill therefore ... and you can imagine with all the transport fleets in the rest of Government, we are easily spending well 525 above £2 million; and the purchasing contract is important to us. (Interjection)
The Minister: And thanks to the foresight of the previous Minister, we have much more efficient buses than we used to have running on the Manx roads.
530 Mr Quirk: But no bendy ones?
The Minister: No bendy ones!
Q119. Mr Quirk: Can I switch the topic, regarding the implementation of the parking policy 535 for Isle of Man Government staff: could the Minister or the Chief Executive give us an update on what, and where, are we now?
The Minister: Yes, it is being implemented; and in different areas the level of implementation is good or bad depending on which area. 540 I think we are seeing signs that elements of the policy are working, certain prominent members or officers in my Department are choosing to walk to work rather than pay to park – and that is a positive thing, it will do them the power of good.
______55 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
But I will hand over to Nick who will be able to give you more on the detail.
545 Mr Black: Mr Quirk, as you know the policy determined by Tynwald came into effect on 1st April, at the start of the new financial year. The Department has received applications and paperwork from the vast majority of Departments holding offices within the boundary identified in the policy. Clearly each accounting officer is charged with the policy of making decisions about how they implement that policy within the guidelines. In the majority of applications, speaking 550 from my own experience, it is really quite clear-cut – if somebody is on a lower pay grade they are exempt by that version, and if they are working part-time they are exempt under those criteria. There are some staff who do have access to a space but do not need a car at all for work – and it is very clear they should pay. Whereas, perhaps a little more difficult, is when people 555 make occasional use of their car for work, say three or four days a week, or two or three days a week, and where there are no pool vehicles available. So for some Departments where they have adequate pool cars, effectively everyone is paying. For Departments where they have offices with no choice and staff who are regularly out of the office, there is a provision for essential use exemption and accounting officers are using that where it is appropriate. I am in 560 touch with my colleagues in the Chief Officer Group and the other accounting officers, to make sure that we are trying wherever possible to be fair. In Government you quite often have staff sharing a car park but working for a different Department, so it would be very easy for one person to say, ‘Well I am paying, and you are not!’ And that would clearly cause a great deal of unrest and upset. So we are trying, wherever 565 possible, to be consistent in our application. Looking through the figures there is a degree of consistency and clearly with the very small offices one or two either way makes a big swing. But the larger Departments are certainly asking people to pay where they are not subject to the exemption. Of course there are still some offices with very little parking and, as the Minister said, one of the benefits he intended was for 570 spaces to be released, so that those on lower pay were able to access them; because even though there is a charge, it is still a lot less than paying for parking in the first year than it would be, say, in Chester Street. Although, as you know from your voting on the matter, the policy over time brings you to parity with private charging.
575 Q120. The Acting Chairman: The one thing I would like to ask is could you supply us with figures for each location about how many spaces there are, and how many people are paying for those number of spaces? As you will be aware, in the Tynwald Chamber there are a number of people saying there are certain locations where people have been exempted because they could do – not because it was 580 probably correct to?
Mr Black: I can certainly give you the numbers, Mr Chairman. What I cannot do is identify each individual by name –
585 The Acting Chairman: No, no, just the location of the building –
Mr Black: – or say the reason for their exemption; but I can happily say either the premises or indeed the Department – (Interjection by the Acting Chairman) if you want it by car park?
590 The Acting Chairman: By premises, yes – so Hamilton House, Banks Circus, and similar things like that.
Mr Black: That may take some juggling of the data so it might be a few weeks until we provide that, but I can do that. And I have not quite got all of the last ones in yet so it perhaps
______56 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
595 might take us three or four weeks to get you accurate up-to-date figures, if that is acceptable – we will happily do that.
Q121. Mr Quirk: Has there been any increase in the pool cars? I do not know how many pool cars the Government may run? 600 The Minister: It might be a bit early yet … it has only been a few weeks, but it would be interesting to see.
Mr Quirk: Yes, that is fine. 605 Mr Black: I can see –
Q122. Mr Quirk: And, like the minibuses, if the pool cars are actually used – because you will know by the mileage figures, won’t you? 610 Mr Black: Yes, certainly a number of Departments have policies where you cannot claim mileage if the pool car is available on that day and free – it was your choice to take your own car therefore the taxpayer should not refund you. But there are some Departments where there are no pool cars at all, or there is one between a large number of staff. 615 So I do not know where all the pool cars are at the moment but again I will look into that, Mr Quirk, at some other point if you want us to.
Mr Quirk: I hope I get some latitude from the Acting Chair, otherwise I will. Can I just switch it slightly there, because we have outsourced the parking in Chester Street 620 and also into … I have forgotten the one in that well-known superstore – ?
Mr Black: Yes, Drumgold Street is the actual name of that car park, near the well-known shop.
625 Q123. Mr Quirk: How is the revenue on that actually working? And can I just ask the Minister – well I will ask you to ask first – regarding the policy of the Chester Street one? I know people are monitored, and I have monitored them myself when I have been going in and out there, and even when it is free in the afternoon there just does not seem to be people going there for some reason. 630 The Minister: Yes, if we go back to why as opposed to how – why did we do this, why did we make the change? The reason for that was because we had two parking authorities in the Department, and those two parking authorities had different approaches and they had different charges; and it 635 did not seem to make sense to me that we had effectively two parking authorities, because there was confusion amongst people as to which car parks were doing what. So it made a lot of sense – and generally it makes a lot of sense to me – to have local policy issues like parking dealt with by local authorities. So we have certainly done that in Douglas and we are endeavouring to roll some of that out across the rest of the local authorities too. 640 There is an issue with Chester Street car park, it is clear that the spaces are not as wide as many people would like … certainly having recently bought, by necessity it is fair to say, a two- door as opposed to a four-door car the doors are that much bigger, and actually trying to get in and out in Chester Street car park it can get a bit tight. But certainly we are aware that there is an issue there. 645 That said, we have a sitting tenant below the car park and an agreement with them which makes it difficult for us to reform too much in relation to the parking spaces; but I know the new
______57 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
operator, Douglas Borough Council, have had some concerns about that and we are in ongoing discussions about how we might be able to improve the car park at Chester Street.
650 Q124. Mr Quirk: Can I just ask, to lead you a little bit, the policies made by yourselves and handed over to the Corporation to run, is there an intention to use that facility of the free car parking in the summer months to increase the footfall in there?
The Minister: Certainly the idea … as far as central Government is concerned the primary 655 objective of running car parks was gaining an income. As far as the Douglas Borough Council is concerned, they are there to look after the town of Douglas and their priorities may well be different to ours; and if their priorities are to increase footfall in the town to therefore increase the general wealth in the town, and possibly then increase their rates or whatever in some other way, then that is a decision that they can reasonably take. 660 As I say, it is fairly early days yet in relation to this, we have only really … have we even got a full 12 months yet? I think there is more work that needs to be done and we need to fine tune the relationship a bit, but I do believe that having one authority responsible for parking makes a load of sense. We are hoping in one of the Bills that we are about to introduce into LegCo to clarify the 665 position in relation to local authorities being able to take on parking controllers, to deal with some localised parking issues in their particular area; and I think that adds to the whole package of effectively getting a parking authority responsible for parking in its area, because obviously on-street parking will affect how off-street parking works. So joining it all up and giving it to one authority to do that – particularly, in Douglas’s case, the authority responsible for this area – 670 seems to make a lot of sense to me and it allows local decisions to be made about issues in that particular area.
Q125. The Acting Chairman: If I can go back to the Government parking one, just for clarification if Mr Black could actually put it in his figures at these locations how many people 675 have applied for essential user exemption? Not the people who are on the lower income, but people saying, ‘Oh, I am in and out of the office’? Also, do you have figures on how much it is costing to administer? And also the income from the parking, where does that end up? Is it for your budget to be used, or does it go back to Treasury? 680 Mr Black: The income budget comes to the Department as part of its overall Estate Shared Services, therefore it is the taxpayers’ money, of course; and if in time it grows to be a significant amount, then I am sure Treasury will be adjusting the rest of our budgets to suit – I think that is a reasonably sure prediction, and entirely proper. 685 In terms of can we provide the numbers? Yes, I think we can provide the fact that people were exempt. It may take me a bit longer as I may have to go back to Departments and say, ‘On what basis did you exempt them?’ And I clearly understand, Mr Cregeen, you are less interested in someone who is exempt on the basis of low pay or part-time, than on the basis of whether the accounting officer made a 690 discretionary decision – if that is correct?
Q126. The Acting Chairman: Yes, that is right, because it if somebody goes, ‘Yes, well you go out of the office twice a week, but we will give you a free parking space’. And the other one is the administrative costs. 695 Mr Black: Yes. Of course, in the Department we already administer various schemes for the issue of the annual pass for parking so we have no more staff, but some of the time they have
______58 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
spent is effectively a cost because some of their duties now include this allocation. It is effectively a once-a-year task. 700 We work of course with Treasury payroll for the deductions, so it is not the case that there are large numbers of cheques coming in and being handled and counted, it is simply a question of taking the application and whereas previously we would have simply issued a permit disc, we now issue a permit disc and, if necessary, trigger a payroll deduction to Treasury.
705 The Minister: So, if anything, we are actually recouping for the taxpayer some of the cost of administering parking spaces. The administration of parking already exists, but at the moment it is a cost to the taxpayer and there is no income. At least this way the cost to the taxpayer will be partially covered by the income coming in.
710 The Acting Chairman: I know Mr Quirk and I are paying for our parking spaces. So I am just wondering when we will get our permit discs!
Mr Black: I thought yours had already gone, but I will check.
715 The Minister: I have not seen any yet!
Q127. Mr Quirk: Finally, just starting to pull it back a little bit, regarding the policy that you have given the management, of those car-parking spaces to those who are on disabled spaces within those major car-parking areas. 720 Does the policy emanate from yourselves? (The Minister: No.) Or is it truly devolved to the local government?
The Minister: That is a devolved policy now. As far as possible ... and this is certainly what I have said in all the political meetings that we 725 have had to the councillors: ‘When I say I want to hand over parking to you, that is exactly what I mean.’ And I want to do that because I do not think it is appropriate for us, as national politicians, to be dealing with relatively minor issues such as parking, which should be done at a local level. Now, how the officers have then gone and interpreted what the politicians have said, I am 730 not absolutely sure, because I have not gone through all the agreements in great detail; but certainly that is the way I understand it is working – Douglas Borough Council effectively do parking policy now.
Q128. Mr Quirk: Okay. 735 Could I just ask the Minister, I presume you would encourage the local authorities to discuss those issues with the relevant agencies if increases were going to be made, or changes in policy, because it did create quite a difficulty ... ?
The Minister: Yes, absolutely. I think there was, again … and inevitably whenever you do 740 things like this there are teething problems and I think, hopefully, that is how it will have been. I hope that as we move forward now the Council will get a better understanding as to how our car parks work, and they will be able to incorporate them much better.
The Acting Chairman: Yes, move on. 745 Q129. Mr Quirk: Okay. Can I open up another subject, then – which is quite relevant, actually – transferring functions to local authorities?
______59 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
I am looking for your initial update on progress: roughly how many have engaged? And has 750 anybody just sat back and said, ‘No, we are not doing it’?
The Minister: I was interested at the reaction to the numbers of people who have put their names forward for the last local election. I was not too surprised at the numbers, but I was a little surprised at the reaction – bearing in mind we started transferring services over 12 months 755 ago – to expect the public to have understood within that 12-month period that actually things really are starting to shift. To overcome decades-worth of ... yes, I think it is not unfair to say ‘disillusionment’ in local government, and ‘disbelief’ I suppose in that local government could actually deliver very much – to expect to do that in 12 months was always a big ask. But it is fair to say that over the course 760 of the last 12 months we have transferred more power than has gone to local authorities in maybe the last 10 years. Added to which, of course, we agreed in the House of Keys ... was it this week?
Mr Quirk: A couple of weeks ago. 765 The Minister: The Third Reading of the ‘Dilapidated Properties Bill’ – for want of a better word – which again is going to strengthen the powers of local authorities to actually deal with some of the grot spots in their particular areas. So I see this as a medium- to long-term exercise. I do not believe that you can alter a 770 relationship as significant as the central/local government relationship overnight. I think it is going to take time to do but actually if, in five years’ time we have radically reformed the relationship between central and local government – effectively having spent six or seven years doing that – that is something I think everyone would be quite pleased with. So in relation to the detail, some local authorities have been more eager to take part than 775 others. It does not necessarily act as a rule that the larger ones are keen to take things on and the smaller ones are not. I think there is a general mix across local authorities. Some have been, it is fair to say, dragged kicking and screaming to the table; others were very enthusiastic participants. But what has been said to me, which is why I am saying it, and I am not trying to blow the 780 Department’s trumpet on this, is that the most significant thing most people have noticed – both from a central Government officer point of view and from a local authority point of view – is a change in relation to the trust between central and local government. There is a far greater trust between both, and that we are actually trying to work for the same goals as opposed to central Government trying to impose things and local government having to put up the barricades to 785 stop central Government doing it to them. So I think in that regard that has been a very big success. In relation to housing, we have agreement in the West; we have agreement in the North; we have a reasonable level of agreement in the South; but the East remains a challenge – Douglas is a very large housing authority anyway so Douglas, it is felt, is probably best left as it is. Braddan 790 and the newly-formed Garff constituency are keen to work together. And it is fair to say that Onchan is still waiting to see how things develop; but again, to be fair on Onchan, they are the second largest local authority housing body –
Mr Quirk: They are probably looking forward to the new members. 795 The Minister: Yes, so they are playing a bit of a waiting game. The only other authority that is not engaged directly, or joined a joint committee, is Port St Mary. They have, for one reason or another, decided that again they want to sit outside of the process and we will just see how things develop with that. 800
______60 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Q130. Mr Quirk: Could I ask the Minister about new policies going forward or new initiatives for the waste side, within your division – you have the waste structure? And housing: you mentioned yourself that the Department now carries all the housing stock – it was handed over by Health and Social Care. 805 And then governance, which is the biggest issue I would think within parliament as well as a good majority of the public out there ... those particular elements within the next tranche of initiatives, maybe, that are coming from yourselves. Have you got any comment to make on those?
810 The Minister: Certainly. In relation to waste, we started off with people whose only real interest – and I would probably count myself amongst these – in relation to waste, the main governing factor for them would have been environmental factors. And then on the other extreme you had people who were only really interested in, ‘How much does it all cost?’ 815 We formed a working group, with a diverse range of views on that working group from all regions of the Island – North, South, East, West and Douglas. And that contained local authority members, me as the Minister and a range of officers from the different authorities – so an officer from the larger authorities and officers from the smaller authorities, and officers in between, as well as our own Government officers. As a result of the discussions from that 820 working group we reached agreement – which was surprising because we did have quite a lot of conflicting views! The agreement, basically, is that we do need to continue to have policies which allow us to recycle – we do want to find ways in which we can do that. We also, though, recognised that all taxpayers tend to be ratepayers, and all ratepayers tend to be taxpayers, so the constant 825 argument about where the balance should lie between how much the taxpayer funds and how much the ratepayer funds, was largely an irrelevant argument; and we needed to decide which would be the fairest proportion for the taxpayer to take and which would be the fairest proportion for the ratepayers to take. What we agreed in relation to that was that large capital costs – so, for example, the cost of 830 building the Energy from Waste Plant should really be borne by central Government. It is a taxpayer facility and it is provided for the nation to dispose of our waste. But it is not at all unreasonable then to expect local authorities to pay for the availability fee and the disposal costs at the Energy from Waste Plant. So the level that we have now reached in terms of payment is about the right sort of level we feel for that, so ratepayers are effectively paying for 835 the revenue costs of the Energy from Waste Plant and Government is paying for the capital costs. In the future we are hoping to move so that the availability fee is based on per head of population. At the moment, this year we are basing it on the actual tonnage that went through last year, but if we stuck with actual tonnage that would probably drive strange behaviours in 840 relation to local authorities as to how much waste they would try and push through, or otherwise, so we have decided the best and fairest way would be per head of population. And I say ‘fairest way’ because there is no fair way and whatever you do there will be a degree of unfairness about it. We had three possible options for this: we had a rateable value option; we had a per-head of 845 population; and we had previous year’s tonnage; so those were three possible ways of calculating what the availability fee should be for a particular year. In each and every one of those a degree of unfairness was identified – and the least unfair option appeared to be per head of population, in terms of divvying out the costs to local authorities. Now, that is not to say that each person will pay the same, because what we are saying is if 850 you have got a thousand people living in your local authority area then you will pay a thousand people’s worth of availability fee; if you have only got five hundred in your area you will pay five hundred people’s worth of availability fee. But the most expensive properties in that area will
______61 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
pay more of that five hundred people’s worth of availability fee than the cheapest properties because you are effectively using the same rating system. 855 So that is how we have agreed to move forward: we are going from tonnage this year, a 50/50 tonnage head of population next year, and then on to per head of population the year after – that way we are doing a gradual transition rather moving straight from one thing to another, and that seems to be acceptable to the local authorities.
860 Q131. The Acting Chairman: If I can stay on the transfer of functions: you must be disappointed that there is still a level of misunderstanding around who has what responsibility for what area between your Department and local authorities, when it comes to street cleaning and the drains? I hear on numerous occasions that people will phone up the Department and say, ‘There is a blocked drain, there is a problem here’ – and they will say, ‘It is local authority 865 issue’; and then they phone the local authority and the local authority says, ‘No, no, ours is only this road.’ So do you have to do a better job of actually publicising which roads are your responsibility and which services are yours, or have some sort of central service where they can disseminate where that call goes to? 870 The Minister: I do not think it is necessarily disappointing. It is certainly not surprising, because again what we have done is taken a system that has worked for decades and we have changed it; and it is fair to say that there is one particular part of the Island that is still negotiating hard as to, ‘Well, I’m not sure how high could we actually get the cutter to go along 875 the hedge? Would it be this height or would it be ... ?' So there is still some of that going on. But we believe that we have been very clear to local authorities around what is and what is not expected, and I think most of the local authorities have got that. But it is also fair to say that I am aware of some examples where people have rung up my Department and the information that has been given from the Department – if reported 880 accurately to me – demonstrates that our staff still need to fully understand what is and is not part of the agreement; and yes, I think over the course of the next 12 months it will become clearer to people. Again, the transfer began on 1st April last year and I do not think it had concluded until about the end of June. So we are still not into our first 12 months of this, and I think it is inevitable that 885 again there are going to be some teething problems. But I have not heard many complaints, I have to say, and I think it is going to work – in fact I am confident it is going to work as we go through.
Q132. The Acting Chairman: Have you published a map that has … ? 890 The Minister: Yes, several times!
The Acting Chairman: I have never seen it, sorry.
895 The Minister: I think we have published it in answers in Tynwald before.
The Acting Chairman: It would be an electronic copy, was it, that was sent out?
The Minister: Yes, I am fairly sure there has … but we are more than happy to send them, we 900 have got loads of maps!
Q133. Mr Quirk: But the major one, the coup de grâce I suppose, at the end of the day, is governance. And maybe the local –
______62 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
905 The Minister: Yes, governance. Well, actually in terms of future policy there are a whole load of other areas that I think are really important that we should be considering. But in terms of governance the obvious issues there are the length of time it takes for Government to approve things which the local authority have already gone into great detail on 910 and approved themselves – and you think, ‘Well, why are we doing that?’ Neither central nor local government has the luxury of having vast resource at the moment to spend time double- checking everything that everyone is doing. So there is a lot of work going on there to rationalise things like the petitioning progress, to speed things up to make it much simpler and actually more effective. 915 The other area which I know I am particularly concerned about – and I know Hon. Member for Onchan, Mr Quirk, you are too – is in relation to getting greater clarity in relation to things like Standing Orders of local authorities and making sure that local authorities do declare interests in the appropriate way, and sort all those problems out. That is a big area and I know that we had originally proposed to come forward with some legislation. We were hoping to do 920 that early in this legislative year, but due to the huge pressure on the legislative timetable for all Government Bills … basically, there was not enough space to fit that particular Bill in. Added to which, there had been some concerns expressed about local government elections and how they were run, and there were issues associated with that. So then it was felt that perhaps the best thing to do was to wait for the new administration, and come forward with a 925 more comprehensive piece of legislation amending a range of things in relation to local government. But I think some of the more exciting areas that we should be looking at is in relation to the things that local authorities do not currently do, but probably would be better done at a local level – and we have already heard discussion about local authorities taking a greater role, 930 moving ‘Re-gen committees’ perhaps into local economic development committees. I think there is a lot of positive work that could go on there and obviously the more local authorities can be engaged in that process the better, in my view – I know Ramsey is being used as a pilot project for that, but I am sure we could do that across the other areas of the Island. Another area which the former Social Care Minister, Mr Robertshaw, was quite keen on and I 935 would certainly share his thoughts on this, is actually using the expertise that we have at a local level to identify the areas of vulnerability in society – we do not really engage in that at the moment. I think particularly in relation to some of the work that we are doing in housing, transferring some of the responsibilities that central Government has for housing back to local authorities, that will give local authorities far more input into that kind of social care remit of 940 understanding where vulnerability is, and understanding how that could be better organised. But again what I have said to officers and to local authorities is, what are the things that you should be doing? What are the things that I should not be doing? As a central Government politician, I really should not be organising village fetes and making sure that the community spirit in my particular area is buzzing – and that is not to say that I would not want to take part 945 and be involved, of course I would; but that is the kind of thing that should be being delivered at a local level – making sure the community ticks, making sure the community looks good, making sure the vulnerable people in communities are well protected. Those are the sorts of things that local authorities in my view should be doing; so I am doing my best to excite interest amongst local authorities – 950 The Acting Chairman: But it is not working!
The Minister: No, I think it is working! (Interjection by Mr Quirk) Actually partially, it could be argued that one of the reasons that a number of the longer- 955 standing members have not stood again is because –
______63 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
The Acting Chairman: You talked them out of it!
The Minister: We are saying that the future really should be about doing far more for your 960 community. And there are then issues about, if we are expecting local authorities to do more then the local authority members are going to have to attend more meetings – and then there are issues in terms of the cost of that. I think those sorts of questions do need to be considered. But where we are at in terms of the Department now is that we have done our bit, and we are going to make sure that we continue to maintain what we have done. There are a few little 965 areas, particularly in relation to governance, that we hope we might be able to bring forward. There is a little bit more work on housing and waste that we can do; but then it will really be handed over to whoever is fortunate to become the new DOI Minister after the next election – (Interjection by the the Acting Chairman). But whoever takes on that role will have the opportunity to continue to drive this process 970 forward. It is going to take time and there will not be instant overnight successes. It is going to take a long time because the view of most people, I think, in relation to local authorities, is that local authorities are there to empty the bins and make sure that the streets have got street lights on. We need to move that perception and that is not going to happen overnight – it is going to take some time. 975 Q134. Mr Quirk: Can I just say, finally, and I will cut it off then: regarding the local authority that has not achieved its numbers and has only received one person; and obviously with the time delay we are only a couple of weeks away from the dissolving date when the local authority will cease to exist in membership. 980 What happens? Would the Department step in as a custodian? I am just looking for the –
The Minister: Eventually we would. There is an opportunity for the local authority or the people in an area to redeem themselves at a by-election.
985 Q135. Mr Quirk: They are not in time though are they?
Mr Black: There is time.
The Minister: Well, there is time. 990 So they have that opportunity, and if a by-election is called and still no names come forward, then at that point the Department will probably have to appoint a few people. And it is an interesting one to decide what sort of people you would want to appoint. Do you appoint people who are so irritating and destructive in an area so that suddenly everyone wants to stand just to get rid of the appointees? Or what do you do? 995 Mr Quirk: I am sure everybody will be looking at you! I will hand over –
The Minister: Yes, you are next. 1000 Q136. Mr Quirk: Oh, flooding – sorry, I had picked up that particular topic there. Obviously we have had the flooding in particular areas, and you have responsibility for flooding on the highways – and sea defences as well, at the end of the day. But also because you are the major ‘protector of buildings’, I suppose is a term I could use. 1005 How is the Department addressing that now for certain areas of the Isle of Man, including the East and other areas? I do not want you to go into a massive thing, but we are just looking to see … because you are doing that in conjunction with Manx Utilities, aren’t you?
______64 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
The Minister: You will be aware, because the Minister for Environment has been talking 1010 about this in Tynwald, that we have in the Environment and Infrastructure Committee of the Council of Ministers undertaken a piece of work to review the whole of the flooding – that is coastal sea defences, coastal erosion issues in terms of rivers flooding, and things like that. So there is a major piece of work which hopefully is to come back …. I think was it June or July Tynwald? (Interjection by Mr Quirk) And that, I would hope, would answer your questions in 1015 relation to that.
Q137. The Acting Chairman: When I was out yesterday I was talking to a member of an insurance company, and I was informed that some of our rivers cannot be dredged at the moment. The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture have said that because there 1020 are fish spawning in the river, they cannot dredge it. Would you agree with the policy in the UK where they said that actually people’s houses and property will have to come before the environmental issues?
The Minister: I think what we have to remember is that each river has its own problems. 1025 There is a river that runs through my father’s farm which was dredged fairly regularly, and every time it was dredged the banks collapsed in – and then you get a bigger problem. So there are certain rivers that you probably do not want to dredge; and there are other rivers where if you dredged them within a reasonable period of time it will actually have the effect that you are looking for. 1030 So I think it is really a case of not looking at this on an ‘every single river on the Isle of Man must be dredged’ basis; there are certain ones which would probably benefit from some dredging, and others that would not. And for example, in Laxey when we went down to look at the bus parked underneath the bridge, one of the old fellas from Laxey, Mr Kinrade, came up to me and said, ‘What you should be doing is taking all the stone from the bottom and dumping it 1035 back up at the top.’ Because what was happening was … I mean, this was not the issue in relation to the bridge, but it was an issue in some places – the actual riverbed was getting lower and lower because the stone was getting washed out, and actually you needed to put stone back into the bottom of the riverbed. So it depends where you are as to what the solution is going to be. 1040 Q138. The Acting Chairman: Well, if we say it was by the NSC, and areas like that, where you can actually see there has been a large build-up of the stone in the middle of the river, which is a problem, would you not consider it is appropriate to move it whatever time of the year, to ensure that if we do get any flash floods we are not in the situation that we were in before, 1045 where we were getting serious flooding? I am sure you will agree that if you have got islands in the middle, it means that the water is not going through the middle – it is actually eroding the banks either side. So it would be appropriate to take those islands from the middle.
1050 The Minister: And what would not be appropriate would be for me to comment on the work that the MUA’s officers will be undertaking. What I would say, though, is that in an emergency I would totally agree that people’s property comes before environmental issues, depending of course on what sort of environmental issue you are talking about; but if we are talking about fish spawning and yet 1055 there was an estate of half a dozen houses about to collapse into a river, then quite clearly you would have to do the work. As I have said, there are a number of other factors that have to be taken into account and dredging rivers do not necessarily solve the problem, depending on the area. So for example, in the areas around Douglas there are certain pinch points were once the water gets to … it does 1060 not matter how deep the river is before it gets to the pinch points, it is going to block the river.
______65 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
And my understanding of what went on in Douglas was that the water got as far as it could and then started backing up, so it did not really matter how well you dredged the river. But you really need to speak to the MUA engineers if you want a considered and erudite answer.
1065 Q139. The Acting Chairman: But you are part of the Council of Ministers’ Environment and Infrastructure Committee –?
The Minister: Yes, I am, but I am not a rivers drainage engineer! The boys will know far better than I will what the right answer to it is. 1070 Q140. Mr Quirk: Well it is an appropriate point, so we could maybe go on to silt. Regarding the Peel inner harbour: we are just looking for an update on progression regarding what is happening with the continuation of the dredging that should be taking place annually now, or quarterly, or whatever. And if I can slip in too, regarding the developments at Poortown 1075 Quarry, how are you moving forward with a pre-application for looking at sites and evolving it?
The Minister: Yes, we are making some significant progress on both fronts. I am a little concerned that we have not been able to start until now but I think we are starting fairly shortly to do some work in relation to digging out stone in the marina in Peel. 1080 Added to which we are about to go out – if we have not already – for calls for expressions of interest for a new … what did we call it? Hazardous waste facility? (Mr Black: Problematic.) Problematic waste facility, which would deal with the problem of Rockmount. But I think Nick would probably have more on the detail.
1085 Q141. Mr Quirk: Sorry, what do you mean ‘problematic’ waste? Is that hazardous waste?
The Minister: No, problematic waste – I got it wrong, he got it right.
Mr Black: Mr Quirk, Chairman, to answer your questions: the harbour at Peel since the flap 1090 gate was installed has been subject to fairly regular dredging, and indeed since the marina was opened. So that the flap gate went in in 2006, the pontoons in 2009 and in between that time dredging was done in 2008, and there was also work done in 2011 – I should actually say there was work contracted to be done in 2011 but I think, as is fairly well known, the contractor failed to discharge their obligations and the contract was terminated. 1095 So we did work in 2012 with our own equipment, and then as you know we purchased a cutter suction dredger and have been using that, initially to take the silt out to sea but also to move it to the bank so it can be removed for on-land storage. As I think has become fairly well- known we have had problems with the contamination in the silt where recent heavy rainfall has brought more contamination down, increased the volumes ending up in the harbour and has 1100 meant that we have had to look for on-land disposal routes. Mr Quirk, you have referred to Poortown, and the quarry at Poortown –
Mr Quirk: The temporary solution.
1105 Mr Black: – the temporary facility at Rockmount. We have built next to that where the Minister undertook with the local community, the Parish of German, to have it there for no longer than five years and not to put another one with problematic waste there. So we obviously have a number of areas of work. The Minister has referred to dredging and we are finalising arrangements for this year whereby we will dig out more river stone and we 1110 will clean that by washing, concentrate the results and store those in a facility on Island that is properly licensed. So we will do all this, but the Minister has also asked us to look at re- engineering the entire area so that I think a number of Members said – and I suspect the
______66 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Minister has said in the past that he was one of them – ‘You are storing up trouble by blocking the river; why don’t you send the river out down the side?’ 1115 And I apologise, I am not an engineer, but effectively allowing the river to drain naturally into the bay whilst retaining the water on the tidal basis. So our engineers are looking at whether we can make a business case for that. Of course, that does not really solve the environmental issues it just allows the contaminants to come out to sea permanently, on a regular basis – so that is to an extent better – 1120 Q142. The Acting Chairman: Sorry, would there be an issue? If it went on a continual basis would it be an issue, because you are not actually disposing of them in large quantities at a time? So if there had not been a marina, it would still have been going out to sea – 1125 The Minister: I think the thing that certainly shocked me – well, ‘shocked’ is probably a strong word, but certainly it gave me some cause for concern – when we actually did some of the background checks in relation to the levels of lead and cadmium, was just how high those levels are in both the bay close to where the Laxey River goes into the sea, but also where the river 1130 goes into the sea in Peel. So there are quite high levels of lead and cadmium there. There are works probably that need to be undertaken in relation to some of the old mine workings and obviously some has been done recently near Foxdale, at the Deads. But actually what you also find is background levels in the water which is flowing naturally from the streams into the River Neb are still quite high with lead and cadmium. 1135 So inevitably, yes, it is going to keep flowing into the sea and it probably has been for very many years. When it is flowing on a daily basis it is probably acceptable, but when it is not flowing on a daily basis, but 365 days’ worth is dumped in a particular area at a particular time, that is when the bigger problem actually starts.
1140 Mr Black: To finish off if I may, Mr Chairman, in answering Mr Quirk’s questions, those are the short-term measures in terms of this year. The longer-term measure is to investigate this change in the way the water flows; but also it has become very clear to us that if environmental concerns mean that we cannot dispose of silt to sea – which, I have to say, is the normal measure with most harbours – then we will have to look for disposal on land. We are not 1145 allowed to ship contaminants off the Island, as you know, due to the various waste legislations, without very specific reasons and very specific permissions under transfrontier shipment rules. So the Department, with the Minister’s blessing, is placing a prior information notice asking for people to come forward if they believe they have got the ability to store problematic or inert waste – those are very different things, obviously. The Department currently deals with 1150 problematic waste at its facilities at the north of the Island – Wright’s Pit – but that is limited in terms of its space and is not going to last forever. Clearly, the Minister would want to avoid the difficulties that were caused when a previous Department went out with a suggestion that would create a new problematic waste site – I think they suggested Archallagan might be a good spot. That is not a policy line the Minister is in any 1155 way interested in pursuing.
The Minister: We could do with a bit of controversy in the Department, though, couldn’t we?
Mr Black: However, there are sites on the Island in private ownership, Mr Quirk, that really 1160 are more suitable for the containment of problematic waste if properly engineered. So the Department is saying effectively to the private sector, is there anyone who would like to come forward with an offer? There are already people in this business. We are trying to suggest that Government does not build and create a brand-new facility, but that we actually look to existing facilities to see if they could be developed to take the Island’s needs. Of course
______67 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
1165 that would have to be paid for, but it could well be cheaper to fund an existing operator than it would be to develop a whole new site and run it ourselves. With inert waste: there is capacity still for inert waste but some of that is in places that are better suited for other needs. And because it is closely linked with the construction trade, there are certain people who will not use certain other sites; and again the opportunity is there. So we 1170 hope that, over the next few months, we will be able to get people brought forward. If the prior-information notice shows that there is interest in the private sector, if it shows that it is professionally appropriate for us to look at new sites – and that will depend on both waste management and environmental management opinions – then we will move to expressions of interests. We will then look to sign contracts with people who will provide 1175 facilities for the Island as a whole, working with us perhaps doing the funding and perhaps doing the policy, so that the Island is properly accounted for. If we find the right sites, then the Minister will be able to do better than he has promised the German commissioners, and we will be able to empty the site at Rockmount, make that good and move it to a new permanent facility where it can be properly handled in the very long term. 1180 Of course the site it is at is engineered, in that it is lined and the waste water is controlled, but that is a very temporary facility and that cannot take the Island’s waste, and the Minister has promised it will not. We do need somewhere for the Island, we will always have wastes; and the issues at Peel of course are caused by industrial workings from 100-plus years ago. We do not know what the next thing coming along is, so we need to make sure we have got somewhere for 1185 waste.
Q143. The Acting Chairman: Can we just stay on the topic of the silt? Back in 2011, when the initial plans were drawn up to dredge Douglas and Peel, and then the financial collapse of the company: how come a new provider was not found between 2011 and 1190 2013; and what sort of actions did the Department take during that time?
Mr Black: Minister, would you like me to answer that?
The Minister: Yes, I was not in the Department at the time – 1195 The Acting Chairman: I don’t think Mr Black was either!
The Minister: – as you know we were in the Department between 2010 and 2011, us three politicians, and we did feel that we had a solution that was developing – and unfortunately, as 1200 we know, the contractor went bust.
Mr Black: I think I should make it clear, obviously I have access to the Department’s records and whilst I cannot give you first-hand knowledge I can give you the information I have been provided by my colleagues and our records. So I am happy to answer your question, Mr 1205 Chairman. I am told that the contractor did not go bust, they were dismissed for poor performance. Whether they subsequently went bust is not a matter for the Department, but they failed in the Douglas work as you will recall; and they were then due to move to Peel, but they were dismissed in between. 1210 So the Department reviewed it and I have got information from the previous Director of Harbours that the whole issue was reconsidered. The initial dredging in 2008 was done by an external contractor but it was quite disruptive because they had got very large heavy-gauge equipment. As you can imagine, the equipment used in places such as Liverpool and the main ports of the UK is large scale compared to our needs. So it could be quite intrusive. After the 1215 2011 problems there was a review of how we should do it, and the Department did 2012 using the Tarroo-Ushtey, which is its own harbours workboat – (Interjection by Mr Gawne)
______68 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
The Minister is just correcting my Manx pronunciation … But ‘the T-U’ as we refer to it to avoid this problem, carried out plough dredging in the inner harbour area, and that was satisfactory and successful in that year. But the professional staff decided that a cutter suction 1220 type of dredging would be better and we purchased a vessel from the UK in 2013, and that was operational in 2014 and undertook dredging works – and of course was used in 2015 which was the more publicly known piece of dredging. But in 2014 we removed silt and we removed stone from Peel using the May Queen – no pronunciation problems with that one! (Interjection by Mr Quirk) 1225 So we continue to use that vessel, it is working in Douglas; but the problems in Peel of course are caused by the nature of the silt having passed from the previous mine workings and minerals in the area – Douglas does not pose the same level of problem.
Q144. The Acting Chairman: What dredging are you doing in Peel this year? 1230 Mr Black: In Peel this year we identified three separate areas, and the easiest way to describe this without a map is opposite and on the other side to the House of Manannan, on the southern bank of the Peel Marina, there is the main channel of the water and that area has become shallow by particularly stone moving down river and the larger elements. That will be 1235 removed by a longreach excavator then brought out, washed, and the concentrated re-covered silt from the washings – which is the information I gave to Mr Quirk – will be encapsulated and moved into safe storage. Other areas in that harbour then, because we have been advised this year – because we did resample with the help from DEFA – that the contamination remains a problem. They have 1240 asked us not to place it out into the sea. The Minister has agreed with that through the Environment and Infrastructure Committee. Clearly there is an impact if we ignore that, on the fishing industry and the fish stocks, and an environmental problem; so the Department has happily said, ‘Okay, we cannot do that.’ So we are moving silt towards the area we will have just emptied of stone using the cutter 1245 suction dredging, and then we are hoping to excavate that and again find proper licensed storage for that. So we are in negotiations for that final change. We had hoped that we would be able to discharge small amounts to sea, but that has not now proved possible, so we are having a change around. But the stone certainly will be removed and I hope that some silt will be removed with the aim of making sure we achieve our published depths. 1250 Q145. The Acting Chairman: If I can just go on to a quick topic now. The hazardous waste facility, down by the Richmond Hill Energy from Waste Plant: can you confirm when that was commissioned, and if it is a waste transfer station?
1255 The Minister: I cannot, but –
The Acting Chairman: Two blank looks for a second!
Mr Black: Mr Chairman, the facility has been brought into use but there are some problems 1260 in terms of the design that are causing the operator some problems. I cannot give you an honest answer as to whether it has been fully commissioned, but I will very happily provide you with a written update. I know that there were some elements of the design specification that have led to more weather-related problems than were expected, and I am not sure if the drainage has yet been 1265 adapted to cope with that – but I will happily provide you with a written update.
______69 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
The Minister: There have been some issues too, where we have been trying to work with DHA in relation to their development down there as well, to try and make sure that the two fit – which may not have been the original plan. 1270 The Acting Chairman: If we could just move on to …
Q146. Mr Quirk: I am sure we can do that, Mr Chairman. Can I just ask regarding the settlement lagoons at Poortown? 1275 There is an obligation for the environmental side to test, and I wonder … we have not had any results; and we were going to Wright’s … and although it is done by another Government Department we could insist that they are given to us, I suppose. But I am just wondering whether … ?
1280 The Minister: I do not think there is anything to hide on that –
Mr Quirk: No, no, I am sure there is not.
The Minister: – and I would hope that they will be made available. 1285 Mr Black: Mr Quirk, would you like us to provide what we have? But it may be that –
Mr Quirk: Yes, and that will save any arguments –
1290 Mr Black: It may be that you have to ask the Department for Environment, and nag for anything that is beyond our bit. But the bits that are on our sites that we have been advised of, I will try and obtain for you.
Q147. The Acting Chairman: If we now move on to the Airport: at our last meeting you 1295 advised that the primary radar system would be fit for licensing by Christmas, and the secondary system by March 2016. Has a taking-over certificate been issued at this time?
The Minister: I think you know the answer to that question; no, it has not! 1300 The encouraging news is that every month that goes by we come closer to the supplier of the materials and the supplier of the radar actually paying for the total cost of the project. It is unfortunate and it has taken rather longer than we would have all liked. That said, the UK’s CAA are pleased to be able to work with us – they see us, effectively, as a pilot project. There has been one UK airport, I think, that has a primary bit fitted and there is another one that has had a 1305 secondary – is that right? But no airport has had the primary and the secondary developed in this particular way. So it is quite new. We seem to have had some problems, possibly cultural, possibly linguistic, with the provider of the service, in actually getting them to understand that just supplying something that worked does not necessarily mean that they have met their part of the contract – it has to work and be 1310 approved by the UK CAA. And that is what has taken a little bit of time to get sorted, although there was a fairly robust exchange just before Christmas at which it was made very clear what actually was needed. It was not just sufficient to supply something that worked technically, it had to work technically and meet the requirements of the CAA. We are now very confident that the supplier will do that and I have got the dates – what are 1315 the dates, where are they?
Mr Black: Here. The end of July.
______70 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
The Minister: Yes, the end of July we believe the project should be complete. 1320 Q148. The Acting Chairman: Do you think Tynwald was given a misunderstanding when this project came forward, that the existing radar would not be certificated for another year, and that is why there was an urgency to do this scheme? And when will you actually call it a day if it is not signed off? So if it is not signed off by July, 1325 will you say to the supplier, ‘I’m sorry, we will not accept any further extension and we now want a replacement that will work’?
The Minister: We already have a system that works –
1330 The Acting Chairman: But be signed off?
The Minister: We have had a system that works for quite some considerable time – what we have not had is a system that can be signed off by the UK CAA. And, as we are making such significant progress now that the contractor fully understands what is required I can now say, 1335 hand on heart, I have every confidence that we will get what we need delivered and it will be everything it was supposed to be. What I can also absolutely refute was the suggestion of misinformation. We have letters from the UK CAA making it very clear to us, subsequent to the Tynwald debate, that indeed that was their position. The only reason that they are allowing this to continue is because we have taken 1340 the step that we took, so that is very clear –
Q149. The Acting Chairman: But do you not think that if that was the situation ... that this was an untried radar, that it had not been certificated anywhere else before, that Tynwald may have taken a different view on it? 1345 The Minister: I think Tynwald was aware of that – certainly I was aware, and I am fairly sure I told Tynwald that.
Q150. The Acting Chairman: We were told that the old radar had carried a certificate for 1350 another year, so there was an expectation that it would be up and running within that year. But can you just clarify the point that if it is not signed off say, by July, will you call that a day on this system and ask for something that can be certificated by the CAA?
The Minister: I have already answered that question; I will answer it in the same way. I have 1355 every confidence that now the people we are working with fully understand what is required ... I think it is fair to say that there had perhaps been a less than rigorous approach taken by various sides to this in the past. A rigorous approach is now being taken and I am confident that we will have what we have paid for, and actually have a fair chunk of that several hundred thousand pounds paid for by the 1360 people who have not supplied it in the timescales that they were asked.
Q151. The Acting Chairman: I think you have not quite answered my question, which is that if it is not – and I know you are giving your word that you are confident, but if they do not complete it by that day, will you allow them further extensions or will you say to them, ‘Enough 1365 is enough, we want a system’ ... because I think it is written into the contract that if the system does not work that they will supply a different system. Will you impose that on them by that date?
The Minister: Well, let’s give you a different answer, which will not be necessarily the answer 1370 that you want, but it may help.
______71 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
If we were 99% of the way there we would be mad, wouldn’t we, to then say, ‘Scrap that, let’s start again’? If, on the other hand, we go backwards very significantly from where we are and find that we have actually got something which is maybe only 50% of the way there, then it may well be that what you suggest is worth considering. At the moment we are already a long 1375 way towards getting this resolved and I think it would be foolish, having gone so far and having put up with so much over the years, for us not to finish the project.
Q152. The Acting Chairman: You have said that you have been paid a penalty clause for this. Has the Department taken any additional costs for your consultants, for your own officers? 1380 Is that taken out of that sum or is that additional to the sum? I think your consultants were Burroughs Stewart. Have they been paid additional sums apart from those that have been agreed by Tynwald in the capital scheme?
The Minister: Inevitably there will be officer time associated with this, but as far as I am 1385 aware there have been no costs above and beyond what Tynwald agreed.
Mr Black: I think, Mr Chairman, we are likely to come in significantly under the cost agreed by Tynwald due to the amount that the contractor will have to pay us in terms of compensatory payments. The contractor has already spent quite significant sums repairing the primary radar. 1390 And without going through the whole tale again, as you are aware the original vote was for the wide area multilateration secondary radar, and the CAA have confirmed that we were absolutely right to go for that – it has a fantastic benefit to our staff who have been able to see round Snaefell because it operates from 19 sites around the Island with good access. It is a significant technological development. I accept your point about it being a risk to have 1395 new technology, but it will also provide much-improved capability for our air traffic services. So we are within budget and we will continue within budget. You are absolutely right to say there have been additional costs, but the level of payments both in terms of compensation and in terms of the money that the contractor is providing from his own purse to maintain our existing equipment – which has come very close to failure several 1400 times, but which they have been able to maintain and bring on. It will not last for ever and the Minister is absolutely right, and I do understand your point that at some point this does have to stop. We have to say we cannot just nurse the old … we are the only airport operating in the UK with an extraordinary licence for the old technology. So it is not the case that Tynwald – as the Minister has said, he would not want to have 1405 misled Tynwald. The CAA have only us on the list of people with an extraordinary licence for this type of old-fashioned secondary radar.
Q153. The Acting Chairman: Yes, my concern being that if the old radar is unable to be maintained you are left with a radar system which is not going to be certified, and therefore we 1410 could have links to the Isle of Man compromised – so that is my concern.
Mr Black: The primary radar was installed in 1965, and was rebuilt in 1995 –
The Minister: A good year, 1965. 1415 Mr Black: And so we are very much aware that there is a need for this work to be done; and as the Minister has said he is confident that we will be able to make good progress in the next few months.
1420 Q154. The Acting Chairman: And the other one I have got is that, unfortunately, I think last time I thought the scaffolding had come down at the control tower – and it is still up there. Can you give us an update on the position of the ‘water feature’ in the control tower?
______72 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Mr Black: Yes, I think you meant the glazed curtain walling? (The Acting Chairman: Yes.) Chairman, we are pleased to announce that the contractor’s insurer has agreed to pay the 1425 full cost. It has been accepted that what the Department specified was not what was installed, and although the contractor is no longer trading, their insurer and their insurance stands. The amount has been agreed and the work is ongoing, and will be finished by May at no cost to the Department. So it will no longer be, as you refer to it, a water feature and will then indeed be as we 1430 intended, a glazed curtain wall for the side of the building.
Q155. The Acting Chairman: Have you taken out any structural surveys because of the amount of water that has gone through, to ensure there has been no actual damage to the structure? 1435 Mr Black: I would be very surprised if my colleagues had not looked at that, but I am happy to confirm that there had been no consequential damage as a result of the water ingress. It is a fairly substantial structure so I would hope it was not damaged but I will check and we will report to your Clerk as to the position. 1440 Q156. Mr Quirk: Can I quickly go to legislation, just to move you on a little bit? We are looking for a response in written form – which would be better. We are looking for your legislative programme for the future, for when the next House drops in. And I will leave it with you. 1445 The Minister: Right. What I can say is that it is not for me to predetermine what a new Minister may wish to do, or not do. All I can say, though, is that we have this year moved ... one, two, three, four, five –
1450 Mr Quirk: You may want to hint about unfinished business.
The Minister: – seven or eight Bills we have managed to get through. So we have pushed it on as fast as we can. There will be one or two … the local Government one which was referred to earlier, and there maybe a few others that will be priorities; but it will 1455 be down to the new Minister to decide.
Q157. Mr Quirk: Okay, can we quickly move to the staff survey? How is the Department staff’s relationship with you – both inside and outside? How are they getting on with the cuts and so forth, and with the limited number of staff you have got – both 1460 the inside and outside? I am just looking for a general –
The Minister: Yes, Nick will be able to give you more on the detail on that, but quite clearly there will be a degree of concern amongst our staff. It was interesting actually, we took the press up (Interjection) for a ride in a minibus a couple 1465 days ago, to look at the work we are doing on the mountain; and a number of our staff refused to speak to the press, because of the negative press that they get pretty much on a daily basis. They work extraordinarily hard and they put in a fantastic job and they are regularly hammered by the public and the press. I think it is really unfair. However, how do you overcome that? The Highway Board has always 1470 been the butt of people’s jokes. I think it is unfortunate because I think, certainly at the moment, they are a very good bunch and doing a fantastic job. But Nick has got more detail on the survey.
______73 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Mr Black: Mr Quirk, the survey has been very useful; unfortunately, it has been very hard to 1475 compare with the previous one because the Department has changed so much. We have taken in Estate staff, we have taken in caretaking staff, cleaning staff – a whole range of people – housing is another area which is new to the Department. So it is a very different Department than it was just over two years ago. The biggest single benefit to me was that to promote the survey I decided the best thing to 1480 do was to get out of the Sea Terminal and talk to as many people as possible. At certain times of the year we will have about 1,350 staff; it was not possible for me to speak to them all, but I am keeping it up and keeping going. I think that it is very useful, people like to know where they are working, who their colleagues are and what they are being asked to do. They want to have the chance to ask questions. 1485 Clearly, in a Department like ours we cannot just rely on a quick email or a quarterly update. Although I can see the management team quarterly and the broader supervisory team perhaps every six months, I cannot talk direct to every member of staff – and a large number of our staff do not have email. They do not see a noticeboard because a lot of them will be based either in a van or from home, or from the nearest school location in the case of education staff. A number 1490 of our staff will have difficulty with either electronic communication or written communication, so it is important that we cascade the messages down. But we are definitely trying. And where I can see that we have real successes is, for example, after the recent flooding and the storms that caused so much damage, our highway services people – frankly, as always – are out there in the worst of the weather. I think the public expects 1495 them to be there at all times in all weathers – but no one turned us down. Everyone who was asked to stay late on the night of the flooding, as you know the worst of it came in around five o’clock. I was at the Sea Terminal and I ended up trying to marshal and support the bus drivers to reverse them safely onto the parking areas we provided, because Banks Circus was flooded out. I was talking to colleagues who drive buses who were there with 1500 their trousers up to their knees, their socks and shoes soaking wet, absolutely rung-through wet because they had been wading through water – and about to take a bus out to Peel. I am not saying relationships with staff are perfect, and we do have much more work to do to get good levels of engagement and make people feel valued, trusted and respected, but when the chips are down people turned up and I do think that is an important measure. If you are 1505 willing to go out soaking wet through, with your trousers rolled up to take a bus out, that says a lot about your commitment and your willingness to work with the Department, and to provide a service to the public. When we called people in over the weekend to deal with the flooding nobody, when phoned, said, ‘Do you know what? I don’t want to come.’ Everyone took up the offer. Yes, I accept they 1510 are paid at overtime rates to come in but people still gave up their time to do that. So for all that, as the Minister has said, sometimes our staff are not portrayed as being somehow perfect; there are some great people working for the Department and the vast majority of our staff do a really hard-working job to a very high standard. I am proud to be one of their colleagues. We do things that count and without the Department the Island would not work. A lot of our 1515 work is below the radar – probably the wrong phrase to use – but a lot of our work is taken for granted.
The Minister: We have just got over that one!
1520 Mr Black: We have just got over that one … a lot of our work is invisible to the public and they would only notice if we did not do it. So both the Minister and I regularly – and rightly – record our thanks to our colleagues. We have got work to do, Mr Quirk, and the survey has been useful. There are areas where we have particular problems and there are particular parts of the Department who have more work 1525 to do; and there are some areas where people are clearly very engaged and very willing to
______74 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
contribute and go above and beyond. But our staff all felt that they know what is expected of them; they are committed to delivering good customer service; and they work more than their job requires to get things done. Those were all top three things: that they know what is expected of them, they want to do 1530 good customer service, and they work beyond what is the minimum requirement to get the job done. So I accept there is more to do about informing people about the future, all of our colleagues worry about the future. Some of the things that my colleagues worry about are not in my gift to fix, issues such as the pension scheme do cause concern – whatever your view on it, they are 1535 causing concern. Issues such as the future size of Government and what will happen after the election. I cannot fix those things personally, but by good communication and answering questions we can make them easier for colleagues.
Q158. The Acting Chairman: Do you think some of the difficulty you have is that occasionally 1540 it is difficult to relay the rationale for some decisions, that people start questioning like, as I say about the Sloc? ‘How come you do the Sloc when the rest of the roads are starting to fall to bits?’ And when this project has not been managed properly or it has not had the outcome that you wished, that unfortunately what you are getting is a situation where the big projects which 1545 are not being seen by the public to make sense, yet the staff are coming in on those conditions … I know when I was in the Department we had some bad storms and I went out with the Director of Operations at one o’clock in the morning. We went down and we saw all of it, and the guys were putting a lot of work in … and some of the abuse that they were getting from the public – you really do wonder. 1550 And it is only a minority of the people; but how do you get over that thing of getting information about the rationale, and future project information to them?
The Minister: I am not sure that you can because the Promenade Scheme, which we have not talked about – and we may yet get on to it – 1555 The Acting Chairman and Mr Quirk: It is next!
The Minister: In that area we felt that we had a really good case, we had spent a huge amount of time talking to as many stakeholders as we possibly could – there was only one 1560 stakeholder group that we could not reach agreement with, and we did make several compromises to try and accommodate their concerns. We spent £400,000 designing the tram track walkway element of the scheme, so we had lots of experts and lots of people who knew their stuff advising us and ensuring that what we had designed was appropriate. And yet we lost the argument. And I do not think we lost the 1565 argument necessarily on fact, but we certainly lost the argument. There is no way you can ever win in those sorts of situations, because we actually put forward a very thorough case and it was a very well-reasoned and considered case. But others had a different point of view and in a large scheme such as the Promenade Scheme you are always going to have a dozen or more different points of view, and you will never make a 1570 scheme which everyone is happy with – I can absolutely guarantee that. (Interjection by the Acting Chairman)
Mr Black: But in answer to your question, Mr Cregeen, I think what I found most helpful is when I was out around the Department, people would walk up to me and say, ‘I’ve heard this – 1575 why?’ ‘I’ve heard you are selling this land’, ‘I’ve heard you are closing this site’, ‘Does that mean my job is under threat?’
______75 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
If you give them a straightforward answer they go away much happier. Mostly that straightforward answer I have to say, was, ‘I don’t know where you got that from, because I have never heard that myself!’ And, ‘That’s wrong!’ And I could reassure people that we are not 1580 doing that, it is this. Sometimes you have to say, ‘Yes, absolutely, I am afraid there will be changes coming along’ – but at least people walk away and say, ‘Thank you for being straight with me.’ But it would be fantastic if I could spend my entire time walking around talking to people – it is important; and I think that people want that chance; and I encourage as many of our 1585 management team who can, to spend the time to do that. But of course there are a number of other obligations on all staff, such as making decisions, getting on with the job and leading the Department forward … so that is a balance. But I do accept the point that I know the Minister has made before, that by working with our staff and by listening to them we will get a better outcome. The better we inform them, the 1590 better they will understand, and there have been many occasions where people have said to me, ‘Do you know what, you could think again about this’ or ‘What about this?’ We have had some great suggestions. We are trying to work with people but I am not going to pretend, in response to Mr Quirk’s question, that it is all perfect – it is not. We have a way to go in some areas – some are very 1595 good, some need more work – but it is a matter of great importance. We are bringing forward a whole range of ideas and I really want to make sure that all our colleagues feel that they are treated with respect, they feel valued and that they feel they have a role to play in our future.
Q159. The Acting Chairman: I think one of the issues if we go back to the charging for car 1600 parking, the messages I have had from Health and Social Care and the Departments, are that people were giving of their time working longer hours, they were not charging for them, they were going the extra mile and it is the swings and roundabouts part of the thing that it has actually undermined a lot of confidence and goodwill. These small things for some people –
1605 The Minister: That was the will of Tynwald. (The Acting Chairman: I know, but – ) If you recall it had been parked in the long grass by the Department, Tynwald then unanimously said, ‘Department of Infrastructure, bring forward this policy’ – and that is what we did, and Tynwald then supported it.
1610 Q160. The Acting Chairman: Well it is a policy and it was not just the central Douglas. But I think, is that fair across civil servants? And I know the argument regarding St John’s – but quite frankly Mr Black’s colleague out at St John’s has effectively got a pay increase compared to what you have, because he is now not paying for his parking whereas you are. 1615 I think that is where the difficulty comes across the whole of Government, that people are feeling disadvantaged because of the proximity of where they work. I know the OFT are just moving out there so that is a benefit, and of course the Police have moved out of the area, so that is a benefit to them. So what you might find is that the people will be looking to move out to save those costs! 1620 The Minister: It is possible. I think if members of our staff are feeling that way about a policy that was imposed on them by Tynwald, then inevitably across the whole of Government there are policies that Tynwald is agreeing to which are going to cost all civil servants money. The latest one to come along is obviously public sector pensions, which we will be discussing next 1625 week. Again, in terms of real long-term costs, that is going to be far more expensive than parking for the vast majority of civil servants.
______76 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
The Acting Chairman: But that is across every civil servant, it is not being directed in a certain 1630 area –
Mr Quirk: It is not before this Committee though, is it?
The Minister: But those are the kinds of issues that are coming along – 1635 Mr Quirk: Unlike the game of politics.
The Minister: – which undermine the morale of all the staff; and the constant barrage of those sorts of things – (Interjection by Mr Quirk) 1640 Q161. The Acting Chairman: I think we will finish off on the final bit of the Promenade Scheme – as you mentioned it! (Interjection by Mr Quirk) How do you feel the future is regarding the horse trams? What is the long-term future regarding the horse trams; and who will bear the cost? 1645 The Minister: Well, what we have demonstrated is that it is possible to run the horse trams at a substantially lower cost than Douglas Borough Council was able to run them. That is not necessarily criticising Douglas Borough Council, it was just more about the way in which they account for certain things. Obviously we already have a heritage railways team so we do not 1650 need to replicate that team to run a relatively small horse tram service. So we have been able to do that. We think we will be able to bring the cost to the taxpayer down to around about £50,000 this year. I would be surprised if we continue to operate the horse trams that we would not be able to bring those costs down further. 1655 Now, as you will know from your time as Minister for Community, Culture and Leisure, the heritage railways are a great draw and attraction to the Isle of Man; and I think it was in your time that the – was it Ecorys survey?
The Acting Chairman: It was before my time. 1660 The Minister: It was before your time, okay. It was the survey undertaken which demonstrated something like an £11 million contribution to GDP from our heritage railways. We know that since that was undertaken there has been a significant growth in interest in heritage railways, and the income from the heritage railways. So 1665 what we also know is that the horse trams, according to heritage railways experts, are the most significant piece of heritage railway that we have on the Isle of Man. So people come because we have got horse trams. They like the other elements – they like the steam railway, but that is by no means even close to unique as there are a lot of similar steam railways around the British Isles. The electric trams are getting a little bit more special in 1670 terms of the heritage railway enthusiasts, but right up there at the top of the list is horse trams. But what Tynwald is going to have to do at some point in the not-too-distant future, is make a decision: does it want to continue with the horse trams or doesn’t it? I think there is a motion that we will be discussing next week on this, and I would support that motion. We need to know does Tynwald support the horse trams continuing, or doesn’t it. Until we know that it is very 1675 unwise of us to waste any more money trying to find where to squeeze in a tram track if Tynwald does not believe that we need to have one. So from a personal perspective of someone who has stood at every election, now, wanting to protect and preserve the unique aspects of our culture and heritage, I think it is very obvious where I stand in relation to the horse trams. But it will be down to Tynwald to make that final 1680 decision.
______77 ENVI-I/15-16 STANDING COMMITTEE, FRIDAY, 15th APRIL 2016
Q162. The Acting Chairman: I think during my time at the Department of Community, Culture and Leisure, Public Transport did question the amount of value that the horse trams actually brought in, compared to what they had to pay out to Douglas Corporation for the people travelling on it. 1685 So there was a big question on the figures – I think it was between £20,000 and £30,000 that was transferred to Douglas Corporation on the heritage rail tickets. I think that is where it is going to be a very difficult area to quantify. I think from figures we have seen in the past, that the majority of people come to travel on the steam railway and the MER – and the horse trams are a ‘nice to have’. 1690 The Minister: It is interesting you say that, because that is the opposite of what the heritage railways people are saying now. There may have been other reasons that they were saying that then, I do not know!
1695 The Acting Chairman: Okay. Mr Quirk, have you got any further questions? Right, if there is anything else you would like to (Mr Quirk: Confess!) now is your last chance!
The Minister: There are loads of things I would like to confess, but probably best that I leave that to another occasion. 1700 What I would do is thank you for the way in which you have conducted the session. And again if there are any further follow-up questions that you think of from what you recall, we are more than happy to provide further information – any information that you need, just ask.
The Acting Chairman: Thank you very much Mr Black and the Minister for attending. 1705 That now draws this sitting to a close, and the Committee will now sit in private. Thank you very much.
The Committee sat in private at 4.36 p.m.
______78 ENVI-I/15-16