Report of Proceedongs of Tynwald Court

Printed (by Authority) by Nelson Press Co. Ltd., St. George's Street, Douglas, Isle of Man REPORT OF PROCEEDONGS OF TYNWALD COURT

Douglas, Tuesday, April 14, 1981 at 10.30 a.m.

Present: The Governor (Rear Admiral Sir Nigel Cecil, K.B.E., C.B.). In the Council: The President of the Council (the Hon. J. C. Nivison, C.B.E.), the Lord Bishop (the Rt. Rev. Vernon Nicholls), the Attorney-General (Mr. T. W. Cain), Messrs. G. T. Crellin, R. E. S. Kerruish, G. V. H. Kneale, R. MacDonald, P. Radcliffe, A. H. Simcocks, M.B.E., 0 with Mr. T. A. Bawden, Clerk of the Council. In the Keys: The Speaker (the Hon. Sir Charles Kerruish, O.B.E.), Messrs. R. J. G. Anderson, W. K. Quirk, J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Mrs. C. M. Christian, Dr. E. J. Mann, Messrs A. A. Catlin, R. L. Watterson, J. R. Creer, E. G. Lowey, M. R. Walker, N. Q. Cringle, Mrs. E. C. Quayle, Messrs. G. A. Quinney, M.B.E., P. A. Craine, D. F. K. Delaney, E. C. Irving, Mrs. B. Q. Hanson, Mr. T. E. Kermeen 1.S.O., Dr. D. L. Moore, Messrs. J. J. Christian, G. C. Swales, with Mr. R. B. M. Quayle, Clerk of Tynwald

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE. The Governor: Hon. members, 1 haVe apologies for absence from the hon. member for South Douglas, Mr. Ward.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF ROYAL ASSENT. The Governor: I have to announce in accordance with the terms of section 2 of the Acts of Tynwald (Emergency Promulgation) Act 1916 that the Royal Assent was given to the following Act on 18th March 1981:— Welfare of Animals Act 1981.

BILLS FOR SIGNATURE. The Governor: Hon. members, according to the Agenda we only have one Bill for signature, the Industry Board Bill, but I understand that the Administration of Justice Bill is also ready for signature. Since there is some urgency for this to go forward for Royal Assent I hope members will agree that it can be signed now, rather than waiting for the May sitting. It was agreed. The Governor: If hon. members agree we will continue our business while these Bills are being signed. It was agreed.

Apologies for Absence. — Announcement of Royal Assent. — Bills for Signature. T1030 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

PAPERS LAID BEFORE THE COURT.

The Governor: I call on the Clerk to lay papers.

The Clerk: Your Excellency, I lay before the Court:— Excise Duties— Excise Duties Order 1981. Value Added Tax and Car Tax— Value Added Tax and Car Tax Order 1981. Value Added Tax (Terminal Markets) (Amendment) Order 1981. Value Added Tax (Handicapped Persons and Charities) Order 1981. Car Tax (Amendment) Regulations 1981. Customs and Excise Acts (Application) Act 1975— Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 1981. Unemployment— Second Interim Report of Select Committee on Unemployment. Advocates' Fees— Second Interim Report of Select Committee on Advocates' Fees. Gaming and Amusement Machines— Report of the Gaming Board of Control. Licensing Act 1961— Licensing (No. 4) Order 198.1. Licensing (No. 5) Order 1981. Music and Dancing Act 1961— Music and Dancing Order 1981. Manx Decimal Coins Act 1970— Manx Decimal Coins (The Betrothal and Wedding of the Prince of Wales Crowns) Order 1981. Manx Decimal Coins (The Wedding of H.R.H. Prince Charles to Lady Diana Spencer (Gold Coins)) Order 1981. Road Traffic Act 1967— School Crossing Patrols (Prescribed Places) (Amendment) Regulations 1981. Fire Precautions Act 1975— Fire Precautions (Cinemas) Order 1981. Cinematograph (Safety) Regulations 1981. Burials Acts 1881 to 1965— Malew Parish Burial Ground Rate Order 1981. Arbory Parish Burial Ground Rate Order 1981. Mineral Workings (Offshore Installations) (Isle of Man) Act 1974-- Mineral Workings (Offshore Installations) (Isle of Man) Act 1974 (Appointed Day No. 2) Order 1981. Douglas Corporation Electricity Act 1981— Douglas Corporation Electricity Act 1981 (Appointed Day) Order 1981.

Papers Laid Before the Court. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1031

European Communities— Applicable European Communities Secondary Legislation, February and March 1981. Accounts— Audited Accounts of the Government Treasurer for the year ended 31st March 1980. Diseases of Animals (Prevention) Acts 1948 to 1975— Disinfection (Foot and Mouth Disease) Order 1981. Importation of Vehicles and Farm Machinery (Foot and Mouth Disease) (Temporary Prohibition) Order 1981. Wage and Salary Agreements— Report by Finance Board for year ended 31st March 1981. Annual Reports— Annual Report of the Chief Constable of the Isle of Man for the year ended 31st December 1980. Annual Report of the Isle of Man Electricity Board for the year ended 31st March 1980. Annual Report of H.M. Prison for the year ended 31st December 1980. Report of the Isle of Man Assessment Board for the period 1st April 1976 to 31st March 1980. Annual Report of the Isle of Man Civil Defence Commission for the year ended 31st March 1980. Local Government Board's Approval to Petitions— Approval dated 20th February 1981 to the following Petition— (1) Petition of the Douglas Corporation for approval to the sale of the premises No. 5 St. George's Terrace; Douglas, to Charles Frederic Higgins and Ann Elizabeth Higgins of Anfield, 13 Upper Church Street, Douglas, for the sum of £350 plus all legal and other fees in connection therewith. Approval dated 6th March 1981 to the following Petition— (2) Petition of the Peel Town Commissioners for approval to the sale of a certain plot of land containing 522 square yards at the Ballaquane Estate to Ian MacDonald of Jurby Police Station, Jurby, for the sum of £3,132. Approval dated 20th March 1981 to the following Petition— (3) Petition of the Douglas Corporation for authority to borrow a sum not exceeding £4,000, repayable within 15 years, to defray additional costs in connection with the renewal of the submarine electric cable to the Tower of Refuge and decorative lighting.

APPOINTMENT OF BOUNDARY COMMISSION — QUESTION BY MR. KERMEEN.

The Goveror: We now turn to the Question Paper. Question number I. I call on the hon. member for West Douglas, Mr. Kermeen. Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of Executive Council:— Will you initiate action—as outlined in paragraph 45 in the report received by this hon. Court on 22nd April 1980 — for the appointment by the Governor in Council of a

Appointment of Boundary Commission—Question by Mr. Kermeen. T1032 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Boundary Commission of five persons, not being members of Tynwald, to the end that the provisions of section 1 of the Representation of the People Act 1951 as amended by sections 1 and 5 of the Representation of the People Act 1956 be reviewed and legislation for a desirable and equitable amendment thereof be presented to the Branches?

Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, I regret that the answer to the hon. member is no, sir. In view of the failure of the Representation of the People (Redistribution of Seats) Bill to receive a second reading in the House of Keys, I consider that no useful purpose would be served in initiating the action as proposed by the hon. member at the present time. I believe, too, that since it would require legislation in the House of Keys, and the second reading of the Bill I have referred to failed on 16th December last year, Standing Orders would prohibit the introduction at the moment of further legislation. I would like to say that personally I support the proposal of a Boundary Commission very strongly, and would hope that before long some action could be taken.

Mr. Kermeen: Just one supplementary, Your Excellency? Would the hon. Chairman of Executive Council keep under review, in view of the increasing disparity, as to the population between the seven constituencies electing to the House of Keys?

Mr. Irving: Yes, sir, with pleasure.

BRITISH MIDLAND AIRWAYS — WITHDRAWAL OF APEX FARES — QUESTION BY THE LORD BISHOP. The Governor: Question number 2. I call on the Lord Bishop. The Lord Bishop: Your Excellency, 1 beg to ask the Chairman of the Isle of Man Airports Board:— Will you— (1) Please indicate the reasons for the withdrawal of the Apex fares by British Midland Airways for travellers from the Island from the beginning of April where the return journey is made within a week — not staying over a Sunday? (2) Convey immediately to this company the deep concern of this hon. Court that this concession is no longer available? (3) Indicate what steps his Board is taking to ensure the cheaper fares for travellers can be obtained from either British Island Airways or from some other company which could be granted the franchise? The President of the Council: Your Excellency, during the past winter British Mid- land Airways have operated an advance purchase return fare on its routes to and from the Isle of Man. The reservation retrictions applicable to this fare were that bookings had to be made at least two weeks prior to the commencement of the outward journey, and were available only on the non-stop or through flights of British Midland. Full payment for the ticket had to be made at the time of reservation and the ticket was valid for the maximum stay of one month. No restriction was made on the return journey because the company was endeavouring to generate additional winter traffic. However, in answer to part (1) of the question, since 1st April 1981 the airline still offers the advance purchase return fare but because of the summer traffic expected and the necessity for the airline to increase its revenue - that is the important part—the necessity for the airline to increase its revenue during the period, it has imposed a restriction on the validity of the ticket by stipulating that the return journey is not permitted prior to

British Midland Airways—Withdrawal of Apex Fares—Question by the Lord Bishop. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1033

01.00 hours on the Sunday morning following the day of the outward travel, but the ticket is still valid for a maximum stay of one month. If it is necessary to cancel the ticket prior to travel a charge of 50 per cent. of the full fare must be paid, and full refunds are only made in the event of death. No refund can be made after the travel is commenced. So, in answer to the Lord Bishop's question, the reason is that it is in order to increase the revenue. The cost of operating domestic airlines has risen enormously, particularly with fuel charges and other airport charges, et cetera. In answer to the second part about conveying immediately to the company the deep concern, we are constantly in touch with the various airlines on trying to get the maximum number of concessionary fares but they do add from time to time that they have also to try to make these domestic routes more profitable. Not more profitable, profitable is the word because most domestic airlines are running at a very severe loss. There are very few of them. Now, the third part of the question — would you indicate what steps the Board is taking to ensure the cheaper fares for travellers can be obtained from either British Island Airways . . .? As members of the Court will know, British Island Airways have been amalgamated with other airlines and are now called Air U.K., and we are constantly in touch with Air U.K., and I would say that my own view is that Air U.K. would not be able to' do as well, never mind better than, the present company, British Midland, which is operating. However, we are in touch with them and are constantly in touch with them, and we believe that the people who have the franchise at the moment on the London route are doing an excellent job and trying to keep the fares as low as possible, and do offer many concessionary fares. It is regrettable, however, that they have taken away this particular condition during the summer-time, but it is in order to increase revenue. I hope the Lord Bishop will accept the reasons. Although none of us will find it palatable we must accept the reasons why the company do it.

Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, may I ask a supplementary question? Would you agree that the route from Heathrow to the Isle of Man is indeed very profitable? Is it not a fact that 65 per cent. occupancy of a 'plane is profitable, and that there are very few empty seats on the flights from Heathrow to the Isle of Man, or vice versa? And would you agree that indeed the domestic flights which are non-profitable are those from Heathrow to Manchester and Heathrow to Liverpool and, indeed, the Isle of Man route for the British Midland is subsidising the domestic routes of Heathrow to Man- chester and Heathrow to Liverpool'?

The Lord Bishop: Your Excellency, may I ask a supplementary question'? 1 find it extremely difficult to comprehend the mathematics of the company and I would like to ask the Chairman of the Airports Board how, indeed, does the company anticipate increasing its revenue by insisting that people are off the Island on a Sunday, or not returning to the Island on a Sunday? Is he aware that this is precluding people from travelling to London on a Monday or a Tuesday and returning on a Thursday or a Friday simply because there is another £20 at least on the air fare, and this is surely not the way to increase revenue, but to decrease revenue? There is great concern in this Island. I have had many people contact me as a result of my question. There is great concern that people who are retired are now being subjected to very heavy expenditure simply to visit families or, indeed, to fulfil business engagements, and am very unhappy at the answer that the Chairman has given on behalf of the company.

British Midland Airways—Withdrawal of Apex Fares—Question by the Lord Bishop. T1034 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Mr. Lowey: A supplementary, Your Excellency? Would the hon. Chairman not agree that the way in which the company has announced, or rather did not announce, the withdrawal of these concessions leaves a lot to be desired? And is his Board satisfied with the information made available to the travelling public by all the airlines?

The President of the Council: Your Excellency, in answer to the hon. lady from West Douglas, the profitability of the Heathrow/Isle of Man route was such that when British Airways were running it they were losing in the vicinity of £600,000 a year, and despite the pleadings that we made with them to continue it, they were unable to do it purely on economic grounds. So far as the Heathrow/Manchester run is concerned, that is run by British Airways. British Midland run to Liverpool and they also run to Belfast. Some of their more profitable routes are to the Channel Islands. It is true to say that the load factor on many aircraft, the break-even may be something like 65 per cent., and then all above that would be in the profitable sector. It is my information - which we derive not particularly from the air operators, from the Civil Aviation Authority — that many of these air operators are having extreme difficulty in making ends meet on their domestic lines. It is their international lines that prop up the domestic lines. It is not true to say that the Heathrow/Isle of Man route is propping up these others. If they are propped up at all they are propped up by their international routes which they run elsewhere. As far as my hon. friend, the Lord Bishop, is concerned, it is true we are all unhappy about concessions being taken away, but there are still for these people who want to visit their families . . . All it insists is you should stay over, go over the weekend, and the object is for the business people who are going on the short flights, they should well pay the whole fare, rather than give the concession. The concession is given to just the people you were talking about, my Lord Bishop, who want to visit families, and they could stay over the weekend, and instead of having a return fare of £92, which is the normal fare, they could get the Apex for £60. I would say that they do endeavour to provide concessionary fares for long stayers rather than the business traffic, and if the 'plane is too much diluted with cheap fares the break-even factor becomes higher. British Airways told us that even if all the aeroplanes were flying to capacity they would still lose money with the fares that were being charged on the Heathrow, London route. So I regret that these concessions are taken away and I regret that fares do rise from time to time.

A Member: It is cheaper to go to America!

The President of the Council: Well, it is not really if you go on the scheduled flight. There will be routes running to the Isle of Man this summer where the fare factor in the holiday could well be something in the order of £35, but that is in packages. That is a different trade altogether than the scheduled line which has to go regardless of whether there are any passengers on it or not.

Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, could I ask a supplementary on a point of clari- fication? Am I wrong in saying that British Midland fly Heathrow to Manchester? I understood they fly from Heathrow to Liverpool and also from Heathrow to Manchester.

Members: No.

British Midland Airways--Withdrawal of Apex Fares—Question by the Lord Bishop. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1035

Mrs. Hanson: Am I wrong there?

A Member: It is not Airways, anyway.

Mrs. Hanson: No, it is not British Airways.

The Lord Bishop: Your Excellency. I am most grateful to my hon. colleague for his answer.

Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, I would be grateful if the hon. Chairman would reply to my question.

The President of the Council: On the question of publicity to any changes which are made, I think if you were to check with our friends from the press and if you check with our friends from Manx Radio, you would find that they are constantly giving information to the public about the fares that are available, and a lot of literature is obtainable in the travel agents. They do endeavour to make this as widely known as possible but it is a very expensive business to advertise everything, but full marks to British Midland with their "Flight Watch" which is on Manx Radio every day giving information on not only when the flights go but about the concessionary fares that are available. And space is taken in the leading Isle of Man papers from time to time advertising these particular concessions. We are satisfied that they are doing all they can, and we at the Airports Board, too, have taken space from time to time in order to advertise particularly some of these concessions.

Mr. Anderson: Just very briefly, Your Excellency, a supplementary to the hon. Chairman. Is it not correct that what hon. members are trying to say this morning is that they are pointing out what the advantages are but when they withdraw those advantages the public are not informed about them?

The President of the Council: It may be a practice that is used commonly in business, I do not know. But I do not think it is done intentionally. It is true to say that the fare structure has to be submitted to the Civil Aviation Authority and publications are issued, but whether they should do it widespread, an unprofitable exercise of this kind, it is a very difficult thing, but they do advise people accordingly and the travel agents know about it.

The Speaker: A supplementary, Your Excellency, with your permission? In respect of the third part of the question presented, would the hon. Chairman agree in respect to this element of the question that the airline policy in respect of Manx routes is now in shreds, and would he undertake with his Board to produce for the guidance of this Court, by July of this year, a policy which might be adopted for the future so that we may all have an indication of what is the best type of service to really effectively serve the interests of the Isle of Man?

Mr. Lowey: Very briefly, Your Excellency, really this expands a little on Mr. Speaker's supplementary, has the Airports Board taken up with the airline concerned their concern that other air operators are slashing their fares to encourage traffic, where our main air firm, British Midlands, is, in fact, increasing its fares?

British Midland Airways—Withdrawal of Apex Fares—Question by the Lord Bishop. T1036 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Mr. Christian: May I ask a supplementary, Your Excellency? Noting that this withdrawal takes effect from 1st April, and knowing that all the airlines have to apply to the Civil Aviation Authority for any variations which take place on the 1st April, do the airlines notify the Airports Board in advance of what alterations they are seeking? And if they do not, would the Chairman of the Airports Board seek to ensure that they do in future so that this Court, as well as the Board, could be informed when alterations are being contemplated by the different airlines, in advance? The President of the Council: Your Excellency, in reply to the hon. member for Ramsey, it is true that the Civil Aviation Authority, under the Act under which they work, are obliged, not out of courtesy, but they are obliged to advise the Isle of Man Airports Board of any alterations in schedules or fares, and this is done. We have almost a set reply to this, that we oppose every increase that does come forward, but we have to admit that when they give us figures showing a 200 per cent. increase in the cost of fuel over a period of about 18 months, the enormous cost of other equipment, the enormous cost of repairs, but in answer to the hon. member for Ramsey, they do advise us and we, in turn, have to reply to them whether we concur with it or whether we disagree with it, and we invariably give information about it. It is true to say that the prices are all on the up-and-up over the years. I would say, in answer to my hon. friend, Mr. Speaker, that we do not agree that the air services to the Isle of Man are in the state he described. I do say that it is very difficult to get airlines to operate these services regularly which, incidentally, not only go 4o London/Heathrow, London/Gatwick, but to Blackpool, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds/Bradford, Manchester, Newcastle, Dublin. Belfast. It is remarkable the number of aeroplanes we do have flying to this Isle of Man and one sometimes wonders if it justifies quite so many, and whether in the future it may well be that we will have a shuttle service from Manchester and everyone has to get to a place like Manchester. It may well be something of that nature. But I do say, the people who have been trying for the franchise, and the Lord Bishop mentioned the franchise, they have said that they would run Short 330's, little ones, or Bandeirante, little 17-seaters, and so forth, and we said perhaps these were not acceptable. The cost of one 30-seater 'plane is just about £1 million. There is a very big capital required to run these services, and we greatly regretted when we came out of the national grid because they had the ability to get the necessary equipment, the more modern aeroplanes. But I can assure Mr. Speaker that the policy of the air routes to the Isle of Man is constantly under review and I will assure him, too, that we will give a report before July as to the way we see it regarding the future. With regard to my hon. friend, Mr. Lowey, I am almost missing him again. What was it again, if I can answer? Mr. Lowey: Will the Board make representations to the airline where other airlines are slashing their fares to encourage traffic? The President of the Council Yes, we are aware of this, and the slashes invariably are done on particular special flights which they are trying to fill up. But on the scheduled services these fares, mile per seat, we are advised, are very comparable to other domestic scheduled services, if not cheaper, than many of the European routes. Mr. Lowey: All I am asking for is our share of slashing prices. The President of the Council: Well, we are endeavouring to get those through charter companies, and you do know that the Tourist Board and the Airports Board are eagerly

British Midland Airways—Withdrawal of Apex Fares—Question by the Lord Bishop. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1037

anxious to get, particularly for tourists, parties coming over whereby we can avail ourselves of the charter trade. Mr. Christian: May I ask another supplementary, Your Excellency? Would the hon. Chairman agree that the main problem at the moment is that all these airlines make block bookings to the big firms such as Cooks, et cetera, and there are returnable on one month's refusal, so people are being told the aircraft is full and they cannot get seats on it, and when, in fact, it arrives often it is half full or less? I know that in particular, and I can inform him of one 'plane which I knew people could not get on to the first Sunday in August from Glasgow, and 1 went to meet it and seven people got off it, that is all that were on it because all the other seats had been handed back by the big travel agents on their right to return them on one month's refusal. Would he please try and do something perhaps in conjunction with the Tourist Board to see whether this could not be overcome. The President of the Council: 1 think this matter, Your Excellency, is being rectified. The operators themselves are very conscious of this and, naturally, as business people they were losing money through this. It is not so prevalent as it was hitherto and they are watching very carefully. The position for the future is not so much about people not being able to get on, but getting as many people on as they can. This is the state of the business today.

RADAR SPEED-CHECKING EQUIPMENT — QUESTION BY MR. CRAINE. The Governor: Question number 3. 1 call upon the hon. member for South Douglas, Mr. Craine. Mr. Craine: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the learned Attorney-General:— In the light of the recent successful appeal by a motorist at Newport Crown Court after electronics experts had said false readings could be given by hand-held radar speed- checking equipment, particularly if a police car radio was operating nearby, are you prepared to advise the Chief Constable to suspend the use of such equipment until it has been shown to be fully dependable? The Attorney-General: Your Excellency, the apparatus which was recently the subject of comment by the Judge in the Gwent Crown Court was a Muni-quip hand-held radar which is manufactured in Kent. This apparatus is used by a number of police forces in the United Kingdom and is also used by the Isle of Man Constabulary. I have not seen a transcript of the proceedings before the Gwent Crown Court, but I am informed that the Judge in that case recommended that police forces should carry out certain checks on this apparatus to ensure that there are adequate safeguards against error occurring in its use. I am informed by the Chief Constable that he has given directions to all traffic police officers in the Island using this apparatus that the following recommendations of the Judge in the Gwent Crown Court, which have been endorsed by the manufacturers of the apparatus, be observed. Those directions are (1) that before commencing a speed-checking operation at any site the officer should move the radar through 360 degrees and observe that no spurious readings occur, thereby checking that the area is free from radio transmissions which may interfere with the accuracy of the Muni-quip apparatus; (2) the officer should ensure that no police radio in the immediate

Radar Speed-Checking Equipment—Question by Mr. Craine. T1038 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 vicinity is transmitting while speed-checking is being undertaken; (3) the officer should observe the speed for a reasonable length of time before locking the reading into the memory. I am satisfied that provided these precautions are observed, this equipment may continue to be used by the police in the Isle of Man. The Speaker: Could I ask a supplementary, Your Excellency? May 1 ask the learned Attorney-General how it comes that he is answering a Police Board question? The Attorney-General: I have answered the question because the question was addressed to me on the Order Paper. The Speaker: Would Your Excellency note that when questions are directed they are placed in the appropriate channel, and in this case surely it would be the Police Board who are responsible for police activities.

MANX-LINE / SEA LINK — MANX EMPLOYEES — QUESTION BY MR. CALLIN. The Governor: Question number 4. I call upon the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Callin. Mr. Catlin: Your Excellency, I beg to ask the Chairman of the Isle of Man Harbour Board:— In this Court in November 1977 you stated that the proposed Roll-on/Roll-off service between Heysham and the Isle of Man would be "Manx based, run and operated and financed and flying our flag with Manx seamen." (I) How many Manx seamen do Manx-Line/Sea Link employ on their service? (2) What proportion of the total number of seamen employed on the route do they form? Mr. MacDonald: Your Excellency, the hon. member, unfortunately, 1 am sure completely unintentionally, selected the question from part of the November 1977 debate which was dealing with monopolies on the sea routes, and to put it in its true context, what I actually said was: "My Board have studied this situation and I would prefer another Manx company, Manx based, run, operated, financed and flying our flag with Manx seamen to operate it on the sea routes." He could have quoted from another section of the Hansard where I actually said "I hope". However, it would help the Manx public, who I am sure are pleased with the competition and the attendant benefits they ere now deriving, certainly with regard to the fares on the sea routes and the choice that is being offered, to get the true facts of this situation regarding Manx-Line which are— of Masters and deck officers, nine out of 12 are Manx; of engineering officers, seven out of 15 are Manx; of catering officers, five out of nine are Manx. So in officer manning, 58.33 per cent. are Manx. Deck ratings — I will enlarge on this later — here there is a problem. Deck ratings, able seamen, this company does employ qualified able seamen. They have trained men at their own expense, they have paid for their accommodation whilst they are training and taking their exams. Unfortunately, those they have sent so far have failed and are employed elsewhere as ordinary seamen. Engine- room staff, one out of eight; catering staff, 12 out of 40; shore staff, 36 out of 36. A total of 73 out of 144 are Manx, or 50.69 per cent. of the total staff. Most shipping companies, Your Excellency, as I know you will be fully aware, including our local companies, are members of the General Council of British Shipping. They all contribute to the seamen's labour exchange operation which most members will know is called

Manx-Line/Sea Link –Manx Employees—Question by Mr. Callin. TYNWALD COURT,\ APRIL 14, 1981 T1039

"the pool" which operates in conjunction with the National Union of Seamen, and all recruitment is dealt with by the pool at Liverpool. Contrary to the hon. member's inference, the availability of Manx able seamen is virtually nil, and at 10.30 a.m. yesterday there were 148 officers and 892 rating on the seamen's list at Liverpool. These are all British seamen, and Manx seamen carry a British seamen's identification card. Only four registered as Manx residents — one able seaman who returned from deep sea on 28th March, last month, who was with the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company in 1979 and is currently on leave from deep sea; one other able seaman who returned from deep sea in February; one waiter who left Townsend Thoresen in October last year and was also formerly employed by the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company; one fireman who registered in February last on return from deep sea. All these men are operating deep sea. It therefore follows that even if vacancies should occur, the Manx-based staff are not always available, and if they are any attempt to suggest that other United Kingdom- based staff should be dismissed by the company to make way for new men joining the list could have very serious repercussions on our Manx deep sea mariners, very serious repercussions. I am quite certain the hon. member would not like that to occur. We have more men permanently deep sea than we have running on the local ferry service, apart from in the summer when the bulk of the staff picked up are from the Liverpool pool. To sum up, although operating only one ship at present, this company is providing employment for 144 persons, of whom 73 are Manx residents and its crewing compares almost equally with other Manx-based shipping companies. In fact, one other ship signing on only recently had pretty well the same ratio, about 50 per cent. Manx, 50 per cent. other United Kingdom, British. Mr. Callin: Your Excellency, I wish to thank the hon. Chairman for his very informative reply.

ELECTRICITY CONCESSIONARY TARIFF SCHEME — QUESTION BY DR. MOORE. The Governor: Question number 5. 1 call on the hon. member for Peel, Dr. Moore. Dr. Moore: Your Excellency, 1 beg to ask the hon. Vice-Chairman of the Electricity Board:— Whereas Tynwald Court on 9th December 1980 approved a concessionary tariff scheme for assisting certain needy consumers. (a) What steps were taken to make consumers aware of the scheme and the procedure for application? (b) In cases where consumers were not aware of the scheme and paid their bills without the reduction for which they were eligible, will you make arrangements to credit subsequent bills with that amount? Mr. Quirk: In reply to the first part of Dr. Moore's question, this is a scheme which commenced in 1977, and to find out who were to benefit from assistance we decided at that particular time to circularise the 15,000 of our consumers. From that inquiry we received answers from probably just over 1,000-1,023. These were carefully scrutinised and the qualification standard at that particular time was, and still is, £2,000 a year, £40 per week. In that particular year assistance to the amount of £12,036 was paid. For the following periods, 1978/79, 1979/80 and 1981, the allowances were made in the first instance to the people who were concerned with the original scheme but we did take steps in other ways to find out if there had been any changes in circumstances of the

Electricity Concessionary Tariff Scheme—Question by Dr. Moore. T1040 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 particular consumers for that time. The people in our showrooms, our meter readers and all concerned with this were asked to submit to us the name of any person who they considered was to qualify under this scheme. And, indeed, since February 1981 we have had a total of 39 further inquiries. In answer to the second part of the question, in cases where consumers were not aware of the scheme and had already paid, it has been the practice to credit bills within the current quarter but not earlier. That means that people who had paid for January and February would be credited in March and accordingly they would get their money reimbursed the following month. It was estimated, I may say this for your information, that approximately 700 customers have applied who will, we believe, be entitled to this support during the two winter months.

Mr. MacDonald: Could I ask a supplementary, Your Excellency? Would the hon. member, when he is looking again possibly at the discretionary tariff system also have a look at the standing charge arrangements he has got because what I find people are complaining about is that the cost of the standing charge, where people are being very careful, is often much greater than the actual cost of the electricity they are using.

Dr. Moore: Could I ask the Vice-Chairman a supplementary, Your Excellency? Next winter quarter, would he consider circulating a small piece of paper with the routine electricity bills pointing out that this scheme does exist?

Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, may 1 ask a supplementary? Would the Vice-Chairman not agree that the reply given is totally unsatisfactory? In effect, he has said that 1977 was the last time they actually sent out any applications to their consumers. We are now in 1981. Would he not agree that this should be an annual event, and not once every four years?

Mr. Quirk: As far as the standing charge is concerned, 1 do not think this really affects the case, but I can say to the hon. member for Peel that the standing charge is levelled out over everybody, and this is a charge which is set out to actually reduce the cost to the people who really need it most. We have had an exercise taken in the past where on one side you have a private estate and on the other side has been a public estate, and we have found that the people on one side who use more electricity are benefiting by the standard charge scheme. That is something which you can argue all day and probably not get to any satisfactory conclusion. In answer to Dr. Moore's question, and I think Mr. Lowey was on the same beam, that we should circularise once more, we do thank you for your suggestions. We do try and find all the needy persons we can. It is almost impossible because there are occasions when people very independently deem it an imposition to pry into their affairs, and we would welcome anybody who knows of any needy persons, we would welcome any information on this particular point. But we will take your suggestions and next year include with our bills a little note to that effect.

FINANCIAL AID TO BASIC ECONOMIC SECTORS — QUESTION BY THE SPEAKER.

The Governor: Hon. members, the next three questions are for written answer. Question number 6.

Financial Aid to Basic Economic Sectors—Question by the Speaker. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1041

Question:— The hon. Mr. Speaker to ask the Chairman of the Finance Board: Will you please state, in respect of each year's operation during the life of the present House of Keys, the estimated financial aid afforded to, and ptiblic revenue attributable to, each of the Island's basic economic sectors, namely, tourism, agriculture, finance, fishing, manufacturing, construction, etc. — as listed on page 17 of the Current Statistical Digest — indicating separately any proportion of such revenue figures hypothesised as being derived from the Common Purse, or calculated as being a "multiplier effect" thereof? Answer:— The answer to the first part of the question is shown on the attached sheets, which include figures from 1969/70 to 1980/81. There are a number of obstacles to overcome if an attempt is to be made to attribute public revenue to each economic sector. The revenue from Customs and Excise, which represents over half Government's total receipts, is provided, either directly or indirectly, on the basis of the spending by consumers on the Island on dutiable or taxable items. Under the Customs and Excise S Agreement, excise duties on spirits, wine, tobacco and matches and mechanical lighters are paid according to the size of the fiscal population, which is determined by the Decennial Test, the Island's estimated population and the number of arrivals in a particular year. Revenue from hydrocarbon oil and beer duty, a proportion of value added tax and car tax is based upon actual receipts, while the remainder of value added tax and various other revenues, such as those from the Agricultural Levy and the Con- tinental Shelf, are based upon the Island's resident population. It is not possible to attribute receipts of indirect tax to economic sectors on a pro rata basis according to the numbers employed or to income levels because a high proportion of those receipts is generated by the spending of people who are not economically active. Also, contributions to indirect tax are influenced by the propensity to save and by patterns of expenditure. The relative importance of each economic sector is generally measured by examining national income statistics because, although these may be derived from receipts of income, they are not distorted by the differences in tax allowances that may be claimed by individuals and companies. For example, a company in the manufacturing sector may make considerable profit and distribute the total profit to shareholders. In such an instance, the manufacturing company would pay no tax, and if receipts from tax were to be used as an indication of the value of that manufacturing company to the economy, the results would be misleading. Similar distortion can occur as regards employees. Two employees undertaking identical work and receiving the same pay will almost certainly pay different amounts of tax because (a) tax allowances can vary — one man may be single, whilst the other may be married with children; and (b) the employees may have sources of income other than their employment. The information relating to national income is used for analysing the structure of the economy and for making intertemporal and international comparisons. When more specific information is needed, for example, the importance of tourist spending, this is acquired by survey. The "Common Purse", now officially termed the "Customs and Excise Agreement", is an arrangement whereby various taxes and duties are collected jointly by the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man, and subsequently shared on an agreed basis. The "Multi- plier Effect" is produced by an increase in expenditure, while the receipts from the Customs and Excise Agreement are merely the moneys paid to the Isle of Man in return for spending that has taken place. It is not possible and would be totally misleading to ascribe a "multiplier effect" to the aggregate of these revenues when their origins are so diverse.

Financial Aid to Basic Economic Sectors—Question by the Speaker. CAPITAL GRANTS AND FIXED CAPITAL FORMATION BY GOVERNMENT 1969-81 (to the nearest £ thousand)

Fi 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 1973/74 1974/75 1975/76 1976/77 1977/78 1978/79 1979/80 1980/81

n (0,(ii) (0,00 (i) anci Agriculture and Fisheries 23 17 4 20 12 27 80 163 62 417 244 239 al Manufacturing 41 73 132 17 64 226 500 750 775 700 1,000 1,100 A Tourism 180 42 23 24 24 69 118 348 830 398 1,379 1,236 id Public Utilities 25 41 198 76 38 36 60 55 169 898 1,792 TYN

t Transport 146 79 145 115 71 125 359 1,352 1,111 537 796 1,762 o B

6,130 WA asi TOTAL 416 253 503 252 209 483 1,117 2,668 2,947 2,052 4,317 c LD

E (i) Post Budget Estimates C con (ii) Re-classification of certain items took place in this year OURT o mi c S ect , AP SUMMARY OF GOVERNMENT NET LOANS IN SUPPORT ors OF ECONOMIC SECTORS 1969-81 RI —

Q (to the nearest £ thousand) L 14 uesti Sector 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 1973/74 1974/75 1975/76 1976/77 1977/78 1978/79 1979/80 1980/81

(i) (i) , 1 on b

Agriculture and Fisheries 16 59 71 44 258 156 291 318 291 537 1,021 1,256 98 y

Manufacturing —5 —21 —39 —31 2 47 68 100 400 400 600 750 1 th Construction NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL 1,205(iii)1,100 1,025 967 e S Banking and Finance NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL pe Tourism 89 67 89 72 489 890 900 580 680 1,533 1,970 1,386 ak Public Utilities NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL 631 2,135 3,925

er Transport NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL 125 500 904 NIL NIL . TOTAL 100 105 121 85 750 1,093 1,257 1,123 3,076 5,105 6,751 8,284

(i) Post Budget Estimates (ii) Re-classification of certain items took place in this year (iii) From 1977/78 includes Government loans for purchase of new houses SUMMARY OF NET ECONOMIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS 1969-81 BY ECONOMIC SECTOR (EXCLUDING LOANS, INCLUDES CAPITAL AND LOAN CHARGES) (to the nearest £ thousand) Fi n anci Sector 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 1973/74 1974/75 1975/76 1976/77 1977/78 1978/79 1979/80 1980!81 (i) (0,00 (i) (i) al

Aid Agriculture and Fishing 493 583 652 505 641 1,070 1,443 1,428 1,237 1,828 1,273 1,851 Manufacturing 122 172 242 181 189 305 432 851 923 1,021 1,190 1,445

1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 21 28 34 31 I

t Construction o B

Banking and Finance ------IA 4,333 4,798 asi Tourism 677 462 733 613 885 1,369 1,761 2,187 3,070 3,052 Public Utilities 80 97 267 122 128 113 165 147 314 480 1,115 2,165 MN c E Transport 773 764 919 810 886 1,292 1,998 3,240 3,345 3,880 3,880 5,594 rIV co 2,146 2,079 2,815 2,232 2,710 4,142 5,802 7,856 8,910 10,377 11,825 15,885 C

nomi TOTAL op

c S (i) Post Budget Estimates Lun ect (ii) Re-classification of certain items took place in this year `, ors— Q uesti

NET ECONOMIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS BY SECTOR T `17 o 1980-81 - POST BUDGET ESTIMATES n b T y Regulation Research Provision Land Loan 186 th and Admini- Development of Building Subsidies Charges Capital Loans e S stration & Promotion Services Equipment peak £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ er Agriculture 308,960 50,070 (70,110) 30,700 1,110,820 182,510 238,880 1,256,000 . Manufacturing (51,435) (25,395) 60,450 140,000 221,240 1,100,000 750,000 Tourism 325,500 675,640 765,569 286,194 1,459,495 49,720 1,236,261 1,385,680 Transport (172,045) 2,065,935 801,202 689,255 447,170 1,762,441 - Public Utilities 91,750 - 53,890 227,130 1,792,150 3,925,000 Construction 31,250 - - 967,000

SUMMARY OF NET ECONOMIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS 1969-81 BY TYPE OF EXPENDITURE (to the nearest £ thousand)

Type of Expenditure 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 1973/74 1974/75 1975/76 1976/77 1977/78 1978/79 1979/80 1980/81 IA1 (i) (i),(ii) (i)

Regulations Administration -34 -38 -16 -90 -175 -165 -320 296 297 274 194 411 IVMN Research/ Development/ Promotion 205 236 325 345 389 552 727 487 509 584 626 700 Provision of Services 595 656 882 782 1,040 1,683 1,967 1.582 1,900 2,423 1,909 2,884 Provision of Land, Buildings Equipment, Amenities (including acquisitions) 304 218 279 261 362 519 818 354 1,076 847 1,185 1,179 'IMOD G Subsidies 659 756 844 683 896 1,090 1,695 2,469 2,181 2,907 2,704 3,453 Capital Grants and Fixed wav

Capital Formation 416 253 503 252 209 483 915 2,668 2,947 2,052 4,317 6,130 ri - - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 2,146 2,079 2,185 2,232 2,710 4,142 5,802 7,856 8,910 9,087 10,935 14,757 7T

LOANS ACCOUNTS 100 105 121 85 750 1,093 1,257 1,123 3,076(iii)5,105 6,751 8,284 `t TOTAL 2,246 2,184 2,936 2,318 2,461 5,235 7,059 8,979 11,986 14,192 17,686 23,041 6I

(i) Post Budget Estimates T8 (ii) Re-classification of certain items took place in this year (iii) From 1977/78 includes Government loans for purchase of new houses TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1045

HOUSING LISTS — NUMBERS, ETC. — QUESTION BY MR. CRINGLE. The Governor: Question number 7. Question:— The hon. member for Rushen, Mr. Cringle, to ask the Chairman of the Isle of Man Local Government Board: (1) What is the total number on the Local Government Board housing list? (2) What numbers are on other housing authority lists? (3) Is there any element of duplication in the lists? (4) How many have been over six months on any list? (5) What is the average "waiting" period? Answer:— The answers to the five parts of the hon. member's question are as follows:— (1) and (2) Total number on list Local Government Board ... 146 Douglas Corporation 367 Castletown Town Commissioners ... 24 Ramsey Town Commissioners 127 Peel Town Commissioners ... 47 Onchan Village Commissioners 70 Port St. Mary Village Commissioners 30 Port Erin Village Commissioners ... 68 Braddan Parish Commissioners ... 38

Total 917

Note: The size of the housing list reflects the number of qualified applicants desiring local authority housing. It is not necessarily a reflection of individual need. The lists include a proportion of applicants of low priority who would be offered accommodation only if no applicants of greater priority were available. (3) It is the agreed policy of all functioning housing authorities that an applicant cannot be included on more than one housing waiting list at any given time. Liaison does take place between housing authorities to try to ensure that whenever an applicant has a "split" residential qualification or is fully qualified for acceptance on to the lists administered by different authorities that there is no duplication. (4) No. of applications on list more than six months Local Government Board ... 106 Douglas Corporation 313 Castletown Town Commissioners 15 Ramsey Town Commissioners 102 Peel Town Commissioners ... 42 Onchan Village Commissioners 50 Port St. Mary Village Commissioners Port Erin Village Commissioners ... 55 Braddan Parish Commissioners ... 38

Total 741

Housing Lists—Numbers, etc.— Question by Mr. Cringle T1046 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

(5) If "average waiting period" is taken to be the size of the total waiting list divided by the number of units allocated during the 1980 calendar year, the answer is approximately 21 years. The length of time an individual applicant spends on a housing lists before being allocated a tenancy depends on many factors including frequency, type and location of vacant properties; the family size and requirements of the applicant as to type and location of dwelling; the circumstances pertaining to the applicant and the degree of priority resulting. Dwellings are allocated in accordance with an assessment of individual circumstances rather than a simple queue basis. It obviously and rightly follows, therefore, that those applicants particularly in need of rehousing will be offered accommodation well within the average time, whilst those of low priority must expect to wait longer.

PEEL TOWN DRAINAGE — FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE — QUESTION BY DR. MOORE.

The Governor: Question number 8.

Question:— The hon. member for Peel, Dr. Moore, to ask the Chairman of the Isle of Man Local Government Board: Whereas in a letter from your Board to the Peel Town Commissioners dated 29th June 1979 approval was given for proposed alterations to the town drainage, and it was stated "the amount of financial assistance is 60 per cent. of the difference between the cost of the scheme and the £10,689.15 in your authority's drainage connection fees reserve account." And Whereas the drainage alterations were carried out at a cost of £18,225.39. Will your Board now honour its original commitment and reconsider the decision to give a grant of only £195.23? Answer:— The grant arrangement offered to the Peel Town Commissioners in June 1979 was based on the standard arrangement which operated at that time in relation to major local authority drainage schemes, namely, the authority was expected to utilise a sum equivalent to its Drainage Fees Reserve Account in full to meet the cost of the works with the balance of cost being met on a 60 per cent.: 40 per cent. basis by the Local Government Board and the Authority. At the time of the Commissioners' application for approval to grant assistance the amount in the Reserve Account amounted to £10,689-15. Delays in implementing the scheme meant that the Commissioners' claim for grant was only made in January 1981, by which time the balance in the Reserve Account had increased to £17,900. In accordance with the standard arrangement, this balance was deducted from the cost of the scheme of £18,225.39, to leave an amount of £325.29 to be apportioned between the Board and the Commissioners — 60 per cent. being £195.23. Drainage Fees Reserve Accounts are set up to hold connection fees for use on sewage schemes such as that completed by the Commissioners. It would be unreasonable for Central Government to meet the capital cost of sewage works within the town of Peel whilst funds remained in the account and in these circumstances the Local Government Board sees no reason to review its decision on the matter.

The Governor: That completes the Question Paper.

Peel Town Drainage—Financial Assistance—Question by Dr. Moore. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1047

LAND SPECULATION TAX ACT 1974 — AMENDMENT (BY ADJOURNMENT) — MOTION AMENDED AND APPROVED. The Governor: Returning to the main Agenda, item number 4 is the resumed debate from the January sitting, and the motion reads as follows:— Tynwald is of the opinion that the Land Speculation Tax Act 1974 should be amended to provide that the profit arising on the sale of a house owned and occupied by the vendor as his principal dwelling house shall be chargeable to tax only if sold within one year of purchase. The hon. member moving the adjournment has the right to speak first. The member is the Chairman of the Finance Board, the hon. member of Council, Mr. Percy Radcliffe. Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, in accordance with the wishes of this hon. Court, Finance Board has been giving further consideration to the operation of the Land Speculation Tax Act 1974. The intention of this Act was to charge tax on the profits from short-term land transactions. There is no doubt that the Act has been successful in that it has penalised land speculation through either land speculation tax or income tax on profits made. For example, receipts from land speculation tax rose from £111,834 in 1975/76 to £445,293 in 1979/80. The total amount of tax raised in the five-year period was £1,029,571, 41 per cent. of which came from owner/occupiers and 59 per cent. from other chargeable sales. However, as we are all aware, there have been complaints about the operation of the Act, and the view has been expressed that the Act has served its purpose and is no longer required. I must, however, once again emphasise that we cannot continue to spend lavishly and at the same time abolish various sources of our income. The main complaints about the Act arise from the fact that owner/occupiers are liable to pay tax on the profits of the sale if they have owned or lived in the house for less than three years prior to the sale, even though the profit, or some part of the profit, merely represents the effect of inflation. Finance Board has considered the following alternatives:— (a) The repeal of the Act; (b) exemption of owner/occupied property from the Act; (c) a reduction in the period of liability on a sale by an owner/ occupier from the existing three years to either two years or one year; or (d) further exemptions to meet the oft-quoted hardship cases of owner/occupiers who, because of circumstances outside their control, are left with little alternative but to sell their home before the three-year qualifying period for exemption has elapsed. From the discussions that the Finance Board has had, it has come to the conclusion that the Act does serve a useful purpose and should not be repealed, and as the Board is aware of instances of speculation by owner/occupiers, it is not in favour of exempting owner/occupied property from the Act. It appears to Finance Board that most of the objections to the Act could probably be overcome if the period for liability for payment of land speculation tax was reduced from three to two years, and if the liability to pay the tax was waived in circumstances where the vendor or his or her spouse has died. I am, therefore, moving an amendment to the resolution to substitute "two years of purchase" for the words "one year of purchase". In addition, it is Finance Board's intention to include in the amending legislation, which will be necessary to reduce the qualifying period from three to two years, exemption from liability in the case of the sale of an owner/occupied property within two years of purchase if the vendor or his spouse has died. The Board also has in mind exempting sales where the vendor or his spouse has been moved on

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)—Motion Amended and Approved. T1048 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

medical advice to an old persons' home or has been committed to prolonged hospitalisation, but the Attorney-General, rightly, has pointed out certain difficulties in the definition and interpretation of the circumstances in which the Board would wish to extend exemption. Hopefully, these difficulties may be overcome before the amending legislation is introduced. I have circulated an amendment this morning and I beg to move:— For the words "one year of purchase" substitute the words "two years of purchase and that Finance Board should examine other proposals to alleviate hardship caused by the tax." That amendment covers the various points I have made. First of all we change it from one year to two years and then during the time when the new legislation has to be introduced the Finance Board will look at the various aspects of the hardship cases put forward. Mr. Kermeen: I beg to second and reserve my remarks.

Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, I would remind the hon. Court that it was as a result of a recommendation and legislation that I brought into Court that this came into being. It came into being at a time when £100,000 would be made over a weekend in land transactions in the Isle of Man, something which was at that time completely unacceptable, and I think it has had some influence in dealing with that position, but it was never intended to militate against the ordinary owner/occupier in the way in which it has done. I think the hon. Chairman is aware of several cases in my constituency which I have brought to their notice where a family is breaking up or in cases where somebody has had to go into hospital or go to hospital daily, and the liability of meeting the commitment of repayment is very, very difficult indeed, and also the fact that if they put their house on the market they are going to be liable for this tax and this is creating real hardship. I appreciate that the Finance Board has been making an endeavour to deal with that problem but I am afraid that unless it is spelt out clearly that the legislative difficulties can be overcome I will be supporting the hon. member for Ayre's motion as printed because I feel there is indeed some real hardship. I think the other aspect that has never been taken into consideration is, in fact, that the proportion of additional moneys that has been acquired for properties sold has not taken into account inflation in coming to decisions, and I think that where a person has got to find a property in which to live because of the fact that they have had to shift their place of work or for some other reason, family reasons or whatever, they have got to find additional money to acquire a similar sort of property to meet their needs. Therefore, there certainly is an element which is unjust in this as it now stands and unless absolute assurances can be given that people who have, through no fault of their own, entered into difficulty, that can be overcome, I will be supporting the hon. member for Ayre, as printed, because it does keep a brake on the person who is just out to speculate on his own and I do not think any great hardship would be created. I would remind the hon. Chairman that at the time, and I know he was not Chairman of Finance Board at the time when I introduced it, the then Finance Board resisted this very strongly indeed and what did come out in the legislation bore no resemblance to the declaratory resolution that I put before this hon. Court. It has been altered, and altered very sub- stantially, so I feel that I have no loyalty in supporting the legislation as was then

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)--Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1049

brought forward and I have no qualms in supporting the hon. member for Ayre as there is some doubt as to whether or not hardship can be dealt with in legislation in this way.

Mr. Shncocks: Your Excellency, speaking to the amendment moved by the hon. Chairman of the Finance Board and inspired by the hon. member for Glenfaba who has just sat down, it is all very well for him to say today what he is now saying, but the fact of the matter is that this Act is the law of the Isle of Man as a result of action taken by the hon. member himself, and anybody who pauses to think before he takes action must realise that in these days of inflation any form of capital taxation must necessarily have a measure of injustice. As long as you have capital taxation which totally disregards the rapidly decreasing value of the pound sterling and charges tax on apparent but illusory profits, then you are bound to have injustice and it is no good the hon. member huffing and puffing at this stage. He is the man who introduced the principle of capital taxation on real estate transactions and he must bear responsibility for any injustice which has resulted, especially in view of the fact that the Bill which was prepared was duly debated in the Branches. On the other hand, I cannot help feeling that what the hon. Chairman has said does not really deal with the problem adequately. I have a daughter living in the United Kingdom who has twice bought and sold property after having lived in each house once for one year and in both cases she was able to sell one property to buy another, moving as it were up the ladder, starting in a small way and working her way up. Now in that case, and we are looking at the laws of Britain, and Britain is supposed to have more severe taxation laws than we have, particularly in the realm of capital taxation, and yet in England today if the owner and occupier of a dwelling sells a house which he or she has occupied for one year then that sale is not subject to capital taxation, and I would have thought that it might be possible for the Finance Board to agree to that. On the other hand, there is the question of the exercise of discretion by the Finance Board. It may be thought that two years would be an appropriate time for total exemption if the Finance Board were able to operate an unrestricted exercise of discretion in the case of hardship, and in that respect I do ask the Court to recall that by particularising, as the hon. member has done in his speech, it would restrict him and his Board from exercising discretion in the case of hardship, it would restrict him to those particular items which he mentioned. I would ask him that if the Court does accept a principle of two years' exemption combined with the exercise of discretion by the Finance Board within that two-year period, that the discretion be not limited by having been particularised so that a person, for example, who sells a house because he is sick and has to go and live, let us say, with his daughter, • would not qualify because the discretion is limited to those who sell their house and go to live in an old people's home. I would ask the hon. Chairman and his colleagues on the Finance Board not to fall into the trap of particularisation because he would find himself limited in the exercise of his own discretion. However, I do believe myself that we should do at least as well as is done in the United Kingdom, and I would have thought myself that honour would have been satisfied if the resolution moved by the hon. member for Ayre were to be accepted. In that case it would be unnecessary to introduce the discretionary relief suggested by the hon. Chairman of Finance Board.

Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, having just listened to the hon. member of Council who has just resumed his seat, I honestly believe that if there had been powers available

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)—Motion Amended and Approved. T1050 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 198T

to Finance Board and they had in the past acted and used their discretion on certain cases brought to their attention, not only by members of this Court, and I think all members at some time in the last four years have seen cases of injustice to certain people who had to move their homes, then I am sure that this resolution would not have been necessary. I am much obliged to the Chairman of Finance Board because I think his amendment is most acceptable because it shows the art of the possible. It also achieves for the hon. member for Ayre and other members of this Court, including myself and the hon. member for South Douglas, who have recently had to handle this sort of problem, to show that we can come to a situation where we are prepared to review decisions that have been taken in the past. I would much rather have seen some amendment moved if it was possible to give Finance Board powers of discretion of reviewing cases where tax would be charged on the sale of properties, households. I think that would have been the answer for all of us, but unfortunately it is not in front of us, but I will be supporting the Chairman of Finance Board in his amendment because I think honour is served, as the hon. member of Council, Mr. Simcocks, has said, and it shows that we can do what our job is to do really, to compromise. It would be nice to abolish this Act altogether if possible, but the Chairman of Finance Board has pointed out the income that is derived from this particular section of taxation. I will support his amendment to show that we are working in harmony in reviewing decisions taken in the past. Mr. Christian: Your Excellency, I support the amendment which was proposed by the hon. member for Glenfaba, Mr. Quirk, and just in case other members, like myself, have rather forgotten what it said from the last Court, perhaps I could read it. It said: "That the words from 'the sale of to 'purchase' be deleted, and the following words substituted therefor: 'land speculation tax shall not be charged on any profit arising from the sale of a house which has been owned and occupied by the vendor as his principal dwelling house'." The circumstances are completely changed from those which appertained when this tax was brought in. It was designed originally to prevent speculators who were coming to the Island, purchasing land with no intention of using it, purchasing properties of all kinds with no intention of occupying them or using them for their own purposes but merely as speculation, and that is why it is called land speculation tax. Well circumstances have changed completely from that time. One has only to go round the Island and see the number of houses which have been on the market for sale for many, many months. I can understand the point of view of the Chairman of Finance Board when he says he has to be very careful about giving up any sort of source of income whatsoever. On the other hand, he might find he would not lose income but gain it if the property market could be encouraged at the present time and more people brought into the Island because the impression one gets at the present moment is that more people are leaving the Island than are coming into it. I think this tax hits innocent people in a way which is very unfair. I used •to find when 1 was in practice, for example, people would come to the Island to retire and many of them would buy a house somewhere in the country, come in the summer and see the lovely views and say, what a beautiful place to live. They would live there for a year or two and they would move into the town because the wife wanted to be near the shops, she felt remote and cut off, and perhaps in some areas they did not have as great a bus service as they might have done. This happens all the time. Now that person might very

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment) —Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1051

well have the house back on the market again within a year and because of inflation they have to pay more money for a new house, so why should this be applied to a person's own home? I think that the hon. member for Glenfaba, Mr. Quirk, has suggested it should be dealt with, and I entirely agree. It should be removed completely from a person's principal dwelling house. That is not a speculation, that is a home to live in. If he wants to change it he is going •to have to pay more after a year, he has done for many years past. We hope that inflation will be completely conquered and that will disappear, but that is not so at the moment. I think we should vote for the amendment of my hon. friend, Mr. Quirk, on the grounds that whatever the net effect may be on taxation, and it would not be very great, the amount that would be lost, but it is grossly unfair that anyone who for many, many reasons that may arise has to sell their principal dwelling house, their own home that they reside in, should be taxed, should lose money on the sale which they do not recover when they have to buy another house. I would have supported the amendment of the hon. Chairman of Finance Board if it said what the hon. member of Council, Mr. Simcocks, was suggesting it said, but it does not say. that Finance Board shall have a discretion. If it had said that Finance Board shall have an overall discretion as to whether in any particular circumstances this created a hardship, then I would have supported my hon. friend, Mr. Radcliffe's amendment, but it does not say that you see. It says, "For the words `one year of purchase' substitute the words 'two years of purchase and that Finance Board should examine other proposals to alleviate hardship caused by the tax'." I may be wrong, but to my mind that would not give the Finance Board any power whatsoever to say we are going to exercise a discretion in this case and we are not going to charge this man land speculation tax. All this amendment says is that Finance Board should examine other proposals. I think we want to go further than that. I think it is only fair that we should support the amendment of the hon. member for Glenfaba and remove this tax completely from a person's own principal dwelling house, his own home.

Mr. Creer: Your Excellency, what I was going to say has already been said so I will be very brief. You will have the' same hardship in two years as in one year or in three years. You will always find people on the boundaries, on the borderline. I believe the way to solve this, and this is what the hon. member of Council, Mr. Simcocks, has said, we should allow the Finance Board to use its discretion and I would like to move a further amendment to Mr. Radcliffe's, as follows: That for the words "one year of purchase" substitute the words "two years of purchase and that Finance Board should use its discretion in borderline cases."

Mr. Delaney: I beg to second.

Mr. Crellin: Your Excellency, 1, too, shall be very brief. Having been involved in the background to the Land Speculation Tax Act, I think it only fair to make one or two points. The hon. member for Glenfaba is perfectly correct. The Finance Board at that time disliked this Act intensely. The more I have seen of it the less I have liked it, and nothing would suit me better if we could afford at this stage to have it repealed, but the fact of the matter is that we cannot. Tynwald is always very clever at throwing away means of revenue and then expecting the revenue to be conjured up out of the air. We cannot afford to take a step of that nature. We have discussed this very carefully on

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)—Motion Amended and Approved. T1052 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Finance Board and we feel that to reduce the period to one year would be very dangerous. We need every penny we can get into our coffers. Two years, we are prepared to go with the wishes of the Court on it. We are, naturally, the servants of the Court, but I do feel that the day will come, and will come soon, very much in line with what the hon. and learned member for Ramsey is saying, that we will regret ever having this Act on the Statute Book and at that stage when we can afford it we will be queuing up in order to get it repealed. It is, to my mind, another example of an Act which was made to cure a temporary evil but was put into a permanent form. When it is in the form of that white paper it is there. It is the law. Very similar, I might say, to that other hateful piece of legislation, the Control of Employment Act. Mr. Quirk: Your Excellency, 1 will be very brief because my hon. colleague from Ramsey has already said all that I would have said if I had had the chance, but I did at the last adjournment believe that the Finance Board were really going to look at this and do something in a flexible manner. That was my hope at that particular time. This has not happened and just to say it is going to be discretionary is really not sufficient either because to be discretionary you have got to lay down the points which you are going to be capable of dealing with. But this, to me, is still not settling the situation. As my hon. colleague from Middle has already said, whether you reduce the period from one year, two years or whatever, it is still going to leave people in this particular bracket who are going to be caught, and these are the people who should not be in this particular bracket, they are people who are, in a general sense, not the people for whom this land speculation tax was brought in. There are no two ways about that. It is all very well us saying we have got to have money, of course we have got to have money, but there are people in this Isle of Man against whom we are discriminating and that is not fair either. If this hon. Court wants to bring in a situation or to keep a situation where you can be discriminatory against people who really need the money and who are not in a position to do anything about it themselves, well, that is all right, but at the same time this is not going to cause a great deal of disturbance to our income if we do away with this tax altogether. It will probably stimulate a bit of interest in the area that is necessary at the moment when, as Mr. Christian has already said, there are so many empty houses lying about, it could stimulate a little bit of interest this way. I believe that this should be now taken up and this tax which is on a person's principal dwelling house should be abolished. Mr. Swales: Your Excellency, 1 think really, listening to members of the Court, we have got to design a law that will retain the tax for speculative purchase, if you like, and remove the tax from the genuine owner/occupier, and if, in fact, we can design an amendment to take cognizance of this today then I think we can achieve what the Court wishes to achieve. Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, I think that the hon. mover of the original resolution, Mr. Norman Radcliffe, is a shrewd cookie in political terms. He must be delighted with the response that this Court has given to his original proposition. There is a willingness, I think, in this Court to resolve iniquities and unfair burdens when they are shown palpably to be unfair, and this is why the Finance Board, I think, contrary to my hon. friend for Glenfaba, have shown a degree of movement as far as I can see in the two months since we last debated this proposal. I will be supporting the amendment of the

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)—Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1053

hon. member for Middle, Mr. Creer, because it gives more flexibility to the Finance Board in their dealings of hardship. Now again I think the Court has got to remember that we are living in a real world. We do live in harsh economic times and we are not going to resolve them at a stroke. I think the movement by the Finance Board is quite a major step and following, I think, the move by Mr. Creer, the step as he has amended the resolution from the Chairman, will give that the desired effect and that is to get rid of the iniquities on that small number of people. The overall thing of land speculation tax is on housing because it is a misnomer, it is nothing to do with land, it is about housing. I did say when we first discussed it that I would hope that the Finance Board would look at the original intention which was to stop this speculation in land. They have not been able to do it in two months and I am not criticising them for that, but what the Court will have to remember is that no matter what we decide today it will mean amending legislation. I think here is where we can refine it, if you like, much S better, but I think we must not give the overall impression that we can do away with this money, and it is a large sum. I was rather amazed when I saw the amount. We have got to be realists. You cannot, and there is no dodging the issue, no matter how much we would like, get rid of that amount of money in the particular circumstances we are facing this year. That being said, I believe that this Court would be very well served if we accept the amendment standing in the name of the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Creer, and we will achieve all our desires in that particular amendment.

The President of the Council: Your Excellency, I was rising to support the amendment of the Chairman of the Finance Board in so much that this is a declaratory resolution and the hon. member for Ramsey did make reference to the fact that saying that the Finance Board should examine proposals to alleviate hardship caused by the tax was not strong enough, but this is only declaratory and the strength will come in the Act, how the Act is amended, and if this Court gives an indication that they would like the term reduced to two years and we would also like the sections to be amended to alleviate the hardships, surely the Finance Board's amendment does actually provide that. If any member is subsequently dissatisfied that it does not go far enough, as the hon. member for Rushen, Mr. Lowey, said, it is in the Bill when it comes before the Branches. That is where the real alteration will be done. I think we should be guided, we do appoint Finance Board to look after our finance as we appoint people to look after our health matters and so forth, and I have no doubt the Finance Board have gone fully into this. They are the people who operate it, they know all the pitfalls. They have promised by their amendment that they are going to look into means to alleviate the hardship cases of those people selling their own genuine homes because they have got to go to other areas to work. There is plenty of provision here and if we pass this, surely when the Act comes before us we will be in a happy position to do all that we want to do and yet retain that tax against the speculators. I believe myself, and I commend to the Court that we should support the hon. Chairman of the Finance Board in his amendment and this will meet all the requirements that we wish.

Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, I think it would be wise of the hon. Court to examine the reason why the original Act was passed. At that time the Island was quite prosperous and there were people engaged in buying and selling houses, a very lucrative exercise, and to a degree the Island was being exploited, so the Land Speculation Tax Act was

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment) –Motion Amended and Approved. T1054 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 passed in order that some income should accrue to Government from these activities. Personally, and actually, of course, as is apparent, the Finance Board have regarded this very carefully over the past months. To me, what was wrong with the Land Speculation Tax Act, it was too definitive. It should have been an enabling Act to allow Finance Board, with the approval of Tynwald, to make the adjustments which are now suggested. Whatever happens in the debate today we have got to consider, if indeed the hon. member, Mr. Creer's amendment is passed, how we will then prepare legislation. I have nothing against it, I think this is a move forward. It means that there will be flexibility over the application of the Land Speculation Tax Act which does produce, quite rightly in my view, income which is much needed in the Isle of Man. I do hope that this Court will look, indeed, at the whole question of the land speculation tax and possibly produce considerable fundamental amendments to allow the situation to be dealt with from time to time as circumstances change. Many companies now who were engaged in buying and selling property to profit are, of course, covered by income tax and income tax produces a degree of revenue to the Isle of Man from this particular source, but in future if we do go away from this Court with some proposal we will, I think, have to look at the difference between definitive law — the learned Attorney-General may agree with this — law which is basic to our needs, and law which is better proposed as enabling measures, allowing Tynwald from time to time to adjust in the light of circumstances.

Mr. Christian: I would like to speak to the last amendment, Your Excellency. What we are talking about is only removing the tax from a person's principal dwelling house, so the total tax would not be lost to the Treasury. All other tax from office properties or from land or general speculations would not be affected. Tax would still be paid on that. We are only talking about removing it from a person's principal dwelling house, from his own home.

Mr. MacDonald: Your Excellency, I would agree with the amendment proposed by the Finance Board and the amendment suggested by the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Creer. I think what we have got to remember is, as the hon. member for West Douglas. the member of Finance Board said, why we introduced this. There is no doubt about it that speculation was rife and to a certain extent it still is. Let us not fool ourselves that this is not going on any more, and it is a lot of the Manx who are playing the game. It is not the new people coming in that are playing, the Manx are playing this game. Properties that are probably really worth £5,000 or £6,000 are still being sold for £10,000, £12,000, £16,000, and that is the price, take it or leave it. This is why there is so much on the market, because nobody local can afford to pay the price. There are properties in the Isle of Man at the moment and plots of land, young people are buying a plot or taking an option on a plot, they can no longer afford to build the house on the plot because the prices are utterly ridiculous. I travelled a little while ago with a lady on an aeroplane to London — (laughter) — and she happened to sit by me, and I was very intrigued. This was a lady who was definitely in the speculation game. (Laughter.) Having got you all in a great frame of mind and a good humour, now I will tell you what happened. Apparently this good soul, she did not realise, but I was at this time sitting on the Planning Committee and she went to great lengths explaining to me how the Planning Committee were fools. We may have been, but it was interesting to listen to. She had bought three houses in a very short space of time, she had got planning

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)-- Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1055

approval on all of them, one after the other, and she had made a fair sum of money on every one of them. She had paid speculation tax but she said that meant nothing. All that happened was that she stuck that on to the price she was selling it at. She was doing very well out of the whole deal. I remember telling the Chairman of the Local Government Board what fools we were. This was the very type of person who, with her husband, was still working the speculation game on property. It finished me completely with this type of person when I went to lift her case off the carousel to find it was as light as a feather and I said, "That is a light case." She was taking it to somewhere, Malta I think it was, where she was going to fill it up with jeans, which you can buy very cheaply in Malta, and bring them back to the Isle of Man and she could sell them at a vast profit. Now these people are still here. Let us not fool ourselves that everything is good today, all the bad ones, the Judas', have all run away. We have got our own Manx ones and this is what the problem is, this is what is behind this real problem. The problem is how to devise a scheme where we catch the people who are blatantly speculating, and it includes an awful lot of people in the business buying and selling property, they are in it as well, how do we catch these people? Very difficult, extremely difficult to do, but I do believe that the Manx public have every right to expect a certain amount of money from people who are definitely speculating. I know other cases of people who are building houses, they will live in one room and spend maybe two or three years there. There is one not far from me up the Ramsey Road at the moment, and I will guarantee that the day that house is completed it will be put on the market and probably they will get £120,000. The labour working on it is coming at weekends to work on it. I doubt very much whether they are declaring what they are earning for tax purposes, but a lot of this is still going on within the Isle of Man and it certainly could do with being stopped. How you stop it I do not know, but I will support the Chairman's move and Mr. Creer's move.

Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, as the resolution on the Agenda today is in the name of my hon. friend, Mr. Norman Radcliffe, could I have your guidance, sir? Has the amendment put forward by the hon. member for Glenfaba been seconded?

The Governor: All amendments have been seconded.

Mr. P. Radcliffe: If I could speak to the amendment in the name of the hon. member for Glenfaba, just to cast our minds back to the time when this legislation was introduced in 1974, I at that time was opposed to the introduction of the legislation and the S very point the hon. member for Peel has made, any astute businessman, if he knows he has got to pay a tax on the property, will estimate the price he wants and then put the tax on top of it and all it does is make the property very expensive for the person who is going to buy it. But having said that, since that time I now find myself in a position where I have got to look after the economy of the Isle of Man and as my hon. friend and colleague on the Finance Board has said, we want all the money we can possibly get at this moment in time. If Tynwald decides to spend lavishly, as I said earlier, we have got to have the revenue. I would hope the day would come, and as quickly as possible, that we abolish this altogether but to do that we must expand our economy. This is what we in the Finance Board are striving every day to try to do, to get an expansion in our economy to get more revenue from direct taxation without increasing

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)--Motion Amended and Approved. T1056 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 that level, but to get more money in so that we will not have to put these iniquitous taxes on. But I would strongly oppose the idea and the amendment put forward by the hon. member for Glenfaba in reference to a person's principal dwelling. I know of one gentleman who came to the Isle of Man and bought a property and he lived in it for six months and he moved on and he lived in six properties in about two years, and they were all his principal dwellings. Well, if that is not speculation I would like to know what is. If you are going to accept that you might as well throw this Act out of the window completely because it absolutely defeats the object of the exercise. Nobody can tell me that there are not people in the Isle of Man who are not doing exactly that very thing at this present moment in time. I hope hon. members will reject that amendment and support the amendment we have put forward. We are quite prepared, as it says in our amendment, to examine the proposals, and as the hon. President of the Council has said, when this comes forward in legislative form, that is the time to amend it and do whatever the hon. members wish to do with it, because whatever we decide today nothing can be implemented until we introduce a new Act to cover it. I hope that hon. members will support the Finance Board's amendment.

The Governor: Hon. members, before I ask the hon. mover to reply, just for clari- fication, you should have three amendments. The last one was by the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Creer, seconded by Mr. Delaney, which has not been distributed, which says, "That for the words 'one year of purchase' substitute the words 'two years of purchase and that Finance Board should use its discretion in borderline cases'." Then there is the Finance Board's amendment which you had this morning, and there is the first amendment by the hon. member, Mr. Quirk, at a previous sitting. I will now ask the mover if he wishes to reply.

Mr. J. N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I am very grateful to you, sir, for the opportunity of replying to the debate. Once again this resoluiton has provoked a very full debate here again today and in seeking to reply to some of what has been said, I am reminded of the story of the young man who went into the harem for the first time. He said, "I know what 1 want to do but where shall I start?" (Laughter.) I am a little bit in that position too. Your Excellency, hon. members and yourself will recall that at the January sitting of this hon. Court my resolution was deferred for three months so that the Finance Board should consider the operation of the Land Speculation Tax Act 1974 and decide what amendments the Finance Board would wish to propose to that Act in response to the proposal contained in my resolution and, of course, their response to the various amendments which hon. members put forward, and again there were some very excellent points raised from the floor during the course of the debate. I would inform the hon. Court that, true enough, as he promised in January the hon. Chairman of the Finance Board and myself have had consultations. We talked, among other things, of reducing the time for the liability for tax, that was from the three-year period. We talked about the situation where a person changes his place of employment within the Island. There are many people who live in the north and work in the south, and vice versa. We talked of a deal being free of tax once in 10 years or something like that. In fact, we talked of many things, and in response to that I received a letter from the Treasury informing me that Finance Board had now considered the matter and in the light of the discussions they were deciding to do three or four things. One was

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)—Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1057

to reduce the period of liability by an owner/occupier from three years to two, and they were talking of providing that land speculation tax would not be charged within two years of purchase if the vendor, as the Chairman has mentioned this morning, had died or moved on medical advice to an old people's home or had been committed to prolonged hospitalisation. I thought somewhere I had heard this before when I received this letter and, true enough, there it was in Hansard, page 571. The hon. Chairman of the Finance Board said, "One or two of the suggestions that have been given consideration by ourselves are, for example, where the vendor or his spouse dies within the three-year period, where the vendor or his spouse has moved on medical advice to an old people's home, or been committed to prolonged hospitalisation within the three-year period." And he went on later on in his remarks in the debate, "We thought a compromise would be two years, but I would be quite prepared," he said, "and I am certain my colleagues would be, to take this back and give further consideration to these points that we 'have now looked at for a second time." It is quite obvious that the second look S was no different from the first and, in fact, the Finance Board have not deviated one iota from their original stance on this in January, and I must confess I am greatly disappointed in them. I had been prepared to meet them on the question of the time, I was prepared to go from one year to one-and-a-half years, but it is now quite obvious to me that they are going to take no real notice of the feelings expressed in this hon. Court. Instead they are going for these amendments which I feel, certainly the latter one talking about medical advice and hospitalisation, and so on, I think they will be fraught with great difficulties in regard to their legal interpretation. In fact, the hon. Chairman has already said that. In short what the Finance Board is proposing in no way really meets the object of my resolution and 1 ask the Court to reject the Chairman of the Finance Board's amendment as circulated here. I would like to make one or two remarks about the comments today. The hon. Chairman of the Finance Board was the first speaker and he asked a question about the Act being no longer required. Well I would never say that the Act is no longer required. What it requires is certain amendments. Three speakers made mention of imaginary discretionary powers. There is no mention of discretionary powers any- where in the Act, in any of the amendments, but this will be sorted out if and when legislation comes to the Keys. Your Excellency, again, quite a lot of points were covered, but the main basis of my argument is that this should be to help young people who are caught in circumstances sometimes outside their control, and those are the ones I seek to help. I do not seek to help anyone who is speculating. I would say finally, the reason I put this resolution down in the first place was to air the very real problem which catches young people and, in fact, ordinary people, shall we say, the ordinary person who gets caught up in what are sometimes distressing circumstances. The finer points can be argued out when it comes to legislation. The main thing, I felt, was to point the way to the Finance Board, but I would say that we might just as well have stood at St. John's and preached to the Millennium stone, as we did in January, and again today, to the Finance Board. I ask the Court to reject all the amendments and vote for the resolution which stands in my name. The Governor: Hon. members, I will put first of all the amendment standing in the name of the hon. member for Middle, Mr. Creer. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no.

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment)—Motion Amended and Approved. T1058 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

A division was called for and voting resulted as follows: — In the Keys— For: Mrs. Christian, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Creer, Lowey, Walker, Mrs. Quayle, Messrs. Quinney, Delaney, Mrs. Hanson, Messrs. Kermeen and Swales — 11. Against: Messrs. Anderson, Quirk, J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Callin, Watterson, Cringle, Craine, Irving, Dr. Moore, Mr. Christian and the Speaker— 12. The Speaker: Your Excellency, the amendment fails to carry in the House of Keys, 11 votes being cast in favour and 12 votes against. In the Council— For: Mr. MacDonald — 1. Against: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Kneale, Crellin, P. Radcliffe, Kerruish, Simcocks and the President of the Council — 7. The Governor: In the Council, one in favour and seven against, the amendment fails. I will now put the second amendment in the name of the Chairman of the Finance Board, the hon. member of Council, Mr. P. Radcliffe. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. A division was called for and voting resulted as follows:-- - In the Keys— For: Mrs. Christian, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Lowey, Walker, Cringle, Mrs. Quayle, Messrs. Quinney, Delaney, Irving, Mrs. Hanson, Messrs. Kermeen and Swales -- 12. Against: Messrs. Anderson, Quirk, J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Callin, Watterson, Creer, Craine, Dr. Moore, Mr. Christian and the Speaker — 11. The Speaker: Your Excellency, the amendment carries in the House of Keys, 12 votes being cast in favour and 11 votes against. In the Council— For: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Kneale, Crellin, P. Radcliffe, Kerruish, Simcocks, MacDonald and the President of the Council — 8. Against: Nil. The Governor: In the Council, eight votes in favour, none against, the amendment carries. And the final amendment in the name of the hon. member for Glenfaba, Mr. Quirk. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. A division was called for and voting resulted as follows: - In the Keys — For: Messrs. Anderson, Quirk, Watterson, Craine, Dr. Moore, Mr. Christian and the Speaker -- 7. Against: Messrs. J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Mrs. Christian, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Callin, Creer, Lowey, Walker, Cringle, Mrs. Quayle, Messrs. Quinney, Delaney, Irving, Mrs. Hanson, Messrs. Kermeen and Swales — 16.

Land Speculation Tax Act 1974—Amendment (by Adjournment) —M otion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1059

The Speaker: Your Excellency, that amendment fails to carry in the House of Keys, seven votes being cast in favour and 16 votes against. In the Council— For: Nil. Against: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Kneale, Crellin, P. Radcliffe, Kerruish, Simcocks, MacDonald and the President of the Council — 8. The Governor: In the Council, none in favour, eight votes against, the amendment fails. I will now put the substantive motion as amended by the amendment of the hon. member of Council, the Chairman of the Finance Board, Mr. P. Radcliffe. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. A division was called for and voting resulted as follows:— In the Keys— For: Messrs. Anderson, Quirk, J. J. Radcliffe, Mrs. Christian, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Callin, Watterson, Creer, Lowey, Walker, Cringle, Mrs. Quayle, Messrs. Quinney, Delaney, Irving, Mrs. Hanson, Mr. Kermeen, Dr. Moore, Messrs. Christian, Swales and the Speaker — 21. Against: Messrs. J. N. Radcliffe and Craine— 2. The Speaker: Your Excellency, the substantive motion carries in the House of Keys, 21 votes being cast in favour, two votes against. In the Council— For: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Kneale, Crellin, P. Radcliffe, Kerruish, Simcocks, MacDonald and the President of the Council — 8. Against: Nil. The Governor: In the Council, eight votes in favour, none against, the motion as amended carries.

BILLS FOR SIGNATURE — REQUISITE SIGNATURES OBTAINED. The Governor: Hon. members, I have to announce that the following Bills have been signed by a quorum of both Branches — the Industry Board Bill and the Administration of Justice Bill.

EXCISE DUTIES ORDER 1981 — APPROVED.

The Governor: We turn to item number 5 on the Agenda. I call upon the Chairman of the Finance Board. Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:— That the Excise Duties Order 1981 made by the Finance Board on 26th March 1981 be and the same is hereby approved.

Bills for Signature—Requisite Signatures Obtained. — Excise Duties Order 1981 —Approved. T1060 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed, hon. members?

It was agreed.

HYDROCARBON OILS — SUPPLEMENTARY REBATE — APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 6. 1 call upon the Chairman of the Finance Board.

Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I beg to move:--

That—

(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the supplementary rebate on hydrocarbon oils (other than aviation fuel) used in the Isle of Man shall, with effect from 6 p.m. on the 10th March 1981 be - (a) £0.011 per litre in the case of— (i) light hydrocarbon oils (other than light hydrocarbon oil used as furnace fuel); (ii) petrol substitutes; and (iii) power methylated spirits; (b) £0.000367 per litre in the case of kerosene; (c) f0.003666 per litre in the case of - (i) heavy hydrocarbon oil (other than heavy hydrocarbon oil used as road fuel and kerosene); and (ii) light hydrocarbon oil used as furnace fuel; (d) £0.011per litre in the case of heavy hydrocarbon oil used as road fuel; (e) f0.0055 per litre in the case of road fuel gas.

(2) the supplementary rebate on hydrocarbon oils used by - (a) the Douglas Corporation acting through its Electricity Committee; and (b) the Isle of Man Electricity Board, shall, with effect from 6 p.m. on the 10th March 1981, be £0.0077 per litre in the case of light hydrocarbon oil and of heavy hydrocarbon oil;

(3) the resolution relating to rebates on hydrocarbon oils approved by Tynwald on the 10th July 1979 and the 22nd April 1980 shall be deemed to have been revoked with effect from 6 p.m. on the 10th March 1981.

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed, hon. members?

It was agreed.

Hydrocarbon Oils—Supplementary Rebate—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1061

VALUE ADDED TAX AND CAR TAX ORDER 1981 — APPROVED. The Governor: Item number 7. I call upon the Chairman of the Finance Board. Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— That the Value Added Tax and Car Tax Order 1981 made by the Finance Board on 26th March 1981 be and the same is hereby approved. A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed, hon. members?

It was agreed.

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE ACTS (APPLICATION) (AMENDMENT) (No. 2) ORDER .1981 — APPROVED. The Governor: Item number 8. 1 call upon the Chairman of the Finance Board. Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— That the Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 1981 made by the Finance Board on 11th March 1981 be and the same is hereby approved. A Member: I beg to second. The Governor: Is that agreed, hon. members? It was agreed.

PORT ERIN VILLAGE COMMISSIONERS — CONTINUATION OF ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION RE PURCHASE OF BRADDA GLEN — APPROVED. The Governor: Item number 9. 1 call upon the Chairman of the Local Government Board. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:— WHEREAS Tynwald on 26th June 1946 approved of 10 annual contributions of up to £200 per annum to the Port Erin Village Commissioners towards the loan charges in respect of the purchase of Bradda Glen. AND WHEREAS Tynwald has from time to time extended the period for the repayment of the annual contributions aforesaid, expiring on the 31st March 1980. NOW THEREFORE Tynwald approves of the Treasurer of the Isle of Man continuing to make an annual contribution to the Port Erin Commissioners towards the cost of the purchase of Bradda Glen up to and including the year ending 31st March 1995, such contribution to be at the rate of £500 per annum. Your Excellency, in 1945 Tynwald approved a Petition of the Port Erin Commissioners to purchase Bradda Glen and headland and agreed to provide an annual contribution of

Value Added Tax and Car Tax Order 1981—Approved. —Customs and Excise Acts (Application) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 1981—Approved. — Port Erin Village Commissioners—Continuation of Annual Contribution re Purchase of Bradda Glen —Approved. T1062 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

£200 towards the cost of the purchase. The payment was a contribution towards loan charges and was to be for 10 years. The cost of the acquisition of the area was £20,000 and the Commissioners were given authority to borrow this sum over 50 years. The grant arrangement was extended most recently in 1957, when Tynwald resolved that it should continue until 1979/80, and the annnual grant was increased to £250 in 1966. The grant arrangement having expired, the Commissioners made representations for increased grant assistance for an extended period and the Local Government Board agreed to seek Tynwald approval today to an increased grant of £500 per annum for the remainder of the borrowing period, that is, up to 1995. In considering the Com- missioners' request, the Board had in mind that it was plainly Tynwald's wish in 1945 that Government should meet a proportion of the costs deriving from the imaginative purchase by the Commissioners of this important area, and the value of the area to the Island as a whole is as great now as it was in 1945. The Commissioners have incurred considerable additional capital cost over and above the original purchase price, for example, re-roofing the cafe, modernising the kitchens, and providing additional toilet facilities. The annual debt, including interest on the glen and headland, is currently £8,030 approximately. In addition there is an operating deficiency which in 1979/80 amounted to £7,500. The majority of the glens on the Island are owned by the Forestry, Mines and Lands Board and the cost of these are wholly met by Government. In these circumstances my Board regards the increase and the extension of the grant as just and reasonable. Your Excellency, I beg to move the motion standing in my name.

Mr. Walker: I beg to second and reserve my remarks.

Dr. Moore: Your Excellency, my question, very quickly, was really whether the Chairman's Board has a coherent policy on assisting local authorities and the tourist industry in this area? Is it just in because it started in 1945 or do you review the Island situation?

Mr. Anderson: I think, Your Excellency, it is important to recognise what I pointed out at the end of my remarks, that most of the glens in the Island are totally paid for out of the revenue of the Island and a local authority in most cases pays no contribution whatever towards that, so it is reasonable and just, in my view, considering the small contribution that is made in this case to the Port Erin Commissioners. I do not think there is any parallel to my knowledge in any other part of the Island where a glen is looked after and supported by any local authority, so if there is and it is brought to our notice we would look at it, I would hope, favourably. The Governor: Is that agreed, hon. members? It was agreed.

UNEMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE — SECOND INTERIM REPORT ADOPTED. The Governor: Item number 10. I call upon the hon. Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— (1) That in accordance with Standing Order 162(3) the provisions of Standing Order 162(1) be waived to enable the following resolution to be considered.

Unemployment Committee—Second Interim Report Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1063

A Member: I beg to second. The Governor: Is that agreed, hon. members? It was agreed. The Speaker: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:— (2) That the Second Interim Report of the Select Committee on Unemployment, subject to any necessary Finance Board concurrence, be adopted. In moving the resolution standing in my name, there are two courses members can follow in relation to the Second Interim Report of your Unemployment Committee. You can say there is nothing in this report that we did not already know, shrug it off, and by receiving it and by exhibiting indifference to the Court's responsibility to the Manx people, let, as has frequently happened in the past, events overtake us. The alternative is an acceptance of the guidelines portrayed in this report and a continuation of that awareness and sense of real responsibility that brought the Committee into being on an issue which relates closely to the well-being of the individual. I am sure it will be the second alternative to which the Court will turn and, with the report as a guide, act to mitigate the effects any relative increase in unemployment can have in the lives of our people. Obviously, you have examined the report and you will appreciate that in paragraphs 1 to 4 you will find an acknowledgement; an acknowledgement of the principal factors which, up to now, have helped us to maintain a contained situation here in this Island when all around us in Britain the position deteriorates. There is no new startling formula associated with this. There is one constant element, however, and that element, hon. members, is stability. The concern and, indeed, responsibility shown by employers and employees alike has been of significance. The overall policy of Government has similarly played a real part in engendering the confidence so essential for the continuation in times of stress of what is, after all, an island sustained by small business interests. It would be incredible but quite possible for any one body to destroy this most attractive of assets, stability, and perhaps the greatest danger lies in those areas where a loose association with Government in a "Devil take the hindmost" situation can occur and, unhappily, we are beginning to witness the emergence of a similar pattern of irresponsibility which has brought chaos in other societies, and I refer to the strike patterns that are beginning to emerge, with the Island's power workers as a classic example. I am told of resulting stoppages in local factories, and recognising this development as an extremely dangerous one from the point of view of the Island's workforce as a whole, I would suggest that those elements of the Trade Union movement whose actions portray nothing but contempt and indifference to the fate of others, should get the message that no man is an island and this is a time, if ever there was one, for them to show responsibility. Our relative success today in holding down unemployment has been related to the application of common sense by every sector of our society and its continuation is dependent on an on-going display of that same resource. What then, hon. members, in Government can we do to portray our good faith, our response, when, despite concerted action so far, unemployment figures continue to edge up. As the Committee responsible, we have given the matter considerable thought and our conclu- sions, possibly shared by many, are that as the recession bottoms out we will continue slightly later and, possibly, take slightly longer to experience the related depression in employment in this Island. But there is one area in which, because of the peculiar

Unemployment Committee—Second Interim Report Adopted. T1064 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 nature of the trade, there appeared to us to be an urgent need for action, and this was in tourism. What the season of 1981 holds for British resorts is certainly a matter on which there are conflicting views. We know that many tour operators have a steady lift of 25 per cent. in their figures in relation to their overseas traffic. Holidays in the sun with beneficial rates of exchange have actually improved the prospects of many overseas resorts. In our setting, the picture as we saw it, and we are fortunate in that we have an element of Tourist Board membership on our Committee, was very different. High access fares by air referred to here this morning, a low value of the punt, these were factors that could not be ignored, and we felt there was a need for stimulus, to buy time, if you like, during this season while the Board strives to put its house in order and develop an effective operational pattern for the next decade. We brought together the Tourist Board and Finance Board and the result was the injection of some £400,000 included in the Tourist Board Estimates. Whilst this should prove helpful, rarely will such activities these last minutes produce benefits equal to an early planned operation and, consequently, we have asked that the 1982 campaign be developed at an early date as this industry is no exception to the old saying that even gold can be bought too dear. Now in those paragraphs headed "Employment prospects" you will find our assesment of the position that we faced — an increase in unemployment contained by the maintenance of a stable climate for investment in industry, and we use the term "industry" in the broadest sense. If you undermine that by inflationary Government taxation, by irresponsibility in any way, this figure could soar to damaging levels. We believe that by exercising judgment, accepting constraints, the Government could best directly assist in the area most likely to be affected, and that is the one of the unskilled worker. The picture is not all bad. Even this morning with an unemployment figure of 976 people, a large number not holding work permits, there are some 178 job opportunities on offer and I think this is a significant point. Past experience reveals that last minute provision is rarely the most successful in terms of job effectiveness and we say that not only should the cash be made available in the Budget but that Executive Council, acting on behalf of Tynwald, should, in concert with Boards and local authorities, plan now for a cost effective provision to be made for the forthcoming winter, with Tynwald placed in the position of giving its consent at its last sitting in October. With an Election pending, a vital three months could be lost if this proposal were not to be implemented. Next we touch on construction and we suggest that Tynwald should do what it has often thought of doing, namely, monitor the building trade, phase Government work in such a way that we have what one might term "drop of the hat" proposals available for implementation at very short notice. We are of the opinion that small contractors, hitherto staunchly individual, may, as has happened in the haulage industry, co-operate and co-ordinate as a matter of self-interest and we stress the benefits of employing the locally-based contractor where possible. I would, at this point, perhaps express a personal view that it is in the interests of Government in particular in the present climate of development to make the break and get down to fixed-price contracts in the whole of their contracting system. In paragraph 4 . 3 we stress the obvious advantages to be derived from our earlier comments that larger contracts tended to be placed off the Island. We also mentioned the desirability of Government embarking on what in Manx terms would be considered the small to medium-sized contracts. If you look at paragraph 5 of the report you may have already noticed with surprise the interest your Committee has displayed in non-resident traders. Frankly, hon. members, we have been amazed at

Unemployment Committee—Second Interim Report Adopted.

TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1065

the size of the operation of some firms operating here with no Manx base, quite frequently suppliers to Government. We are conscious too of the need that has generated this type of activity and we say so, you will have noted, in paragraph 5 . 3 and then we suggest action under two headings. On the one hand, a Manx identity for certain types of trader. On the other, a more realistic licensing provision for those entrepreneurs whose actions undermine the ability of the local trader to perhaps maintain a wider range of goods and be more competitive than he is capable of being against this form of opposition. If you turn next to paragraph 6, one of the marked trends internationally has been the encouragement of the small business. Wide-ranging forms of encouragement are available, some of which we have portrayed as examples, and we have looked at possibilities against the background of the existing Manx provision, provision which, let us face it, has served us well and is not the subject of criticism. However, it is significant that lines of approach are changing, greater interest manifest in using acknowledged channels of lending and monitoring as opposed to the often rigid and sometimes not wholly effective Government agency, this along with an acknowledg- ment of the role of the entrepreneur who, with Government recognition, puts together a package involving private investment, Government investment, and the businessman who is seeking to go into production with sometimes little more than a very good idea. Our examination and our links with the organisations named in Appendix B, coupled with our belief that our competitiveness in this field is now in doubt, as the United Kingdom and, indeed, Eire, when thinking of outlets to which potential manufacturers in the British Isles can turn have now very, very attractive terms on offer in certain districts and are most competitive. All these points combined have led us to favour consideration of three specific proposals. First there is the United Kingdom pattern of stimulation of small businesses through banks, a development which we consider could cover all types of business including those in the older basic industries of farming, fishing and horticulture. The second, the stimulation of agencies and the encouragement of participation by the local investor. We are convinced that there are many people here who would welcome an opportunity of investing in small projects and, of course, there has to be tax stimulation along with the' possibility of tax holidays if we are to witness what we on the Committee consider to be the worthwhile development of that type of business that is most suitable to the Island's needs and that, hon. members, remains the small business. So it is with a real sense of purpose that we aslcks in our report for these suggestions to be examined and advanced by the Finance Board in the most acceptable form and we would, as a Committee, wish to express our appreciation of the help we received from quite a number of organisations, mainly in the financial field. Now in paragraph 7 you will find our views on training and re-training. It is folly, I think you • will accept, to bring in workers to fill jobs, as we do even now, when with a measure of re-training that job could go to a resident. In general, the provision for training being provided by the Board of Education, stimulated and broadened, as we suggested in our earlier report, with an industrial training centre being created, can go a long way providing there is flexibility of approach to meet the Island's needs, but as is so often the case it needs will, drive and co-ordination to make an overall programme effective. Given the will it should be possible to achieve what we term sideways movement of elements of our labour force. One small but not necessarily unimportant point we make is the one related to the worker who, not in employment, wishes to qualify himself for a job and improve his personal skills. If that person is in employment today we, as

Unemployment Committee—Second Interim Report Adopted. T1066 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Government, will give him financial assistance. Unemployed, he is out on his own. This is an omission which should be rectified. As new skills, not necessarily sophisticated ones, are required, sometimes necessitating only minimal periods of training, then Manx workers should be fitted to meet those requirements and the type of job which has an illusory name attached to it for the purposes of, shall we say, the work permit scheme will be met from local sources without any real difficulty. And so, hon. members, bearing those points in mind, I would ask the Court to look at the recommendations which you will see set out in paragraphs 8. 1 to 8. 8, and I would hope that recognising the benefits that they can confer on the economy of the Island, the benefits they can usefully contribute to the happiness of our people, you will adopt them. Mr. Cringle: I beg to second and reserve my remarks. Mr. MacDonald: Your Excellency, whilst I agree, as Mr. Speaker says, this sums up what everyone knows and puts it on paper, the thing that rather disturbs me is that we had a Committee set up with quite clear terms of reference and despite that Committee having been in being for some time now we still have 976 people on the unemployment register. As Mr. Speaker says, quite a lot of these people need work permits, but they are here, they are on the Island and we have got them. To me, the most important thing is to get these people doing something. The recommendations we have got here in time can do something but they do not solve the immediate problem. The other thing that worries me is that to make an attack on the workers in the electricity industry I do not think helps anyone. It does not help anyone at all in the Isle of Man. Let us look at these men. Who are they? They are all Manxmen. We know them all, or most of them. Certainly 1 know the Peel ones. The members for Douglas probably know the men in the Douglas power station. When these men look at what Tynwald is agreeing, pay rises of £3,000 and £4,000 a year at the drop of a hat, we have another one, last night I got it. These increases are all approved because they are employed directly by Government in the civil service, and these men for 21 years have been negotiating what has already been agreed elsewhere. There is nothing wrong with the men, there must be something wrong with the system. No man is going to wait for 2+ years while people talk and talk and get nowhere. I think it is completely wrong to attack men when we are talking of labour. This could create trouble. Mr. Christian: They are not attacked in the report. Mr. MacDonald: I know they are not attacked in the report. Mr. Quirk: On a point of order, sir, I think to say that the negotiations have been going on for years, this may be correct, but — (interruption) -- this is totally wrong at this present time.

Mr. Anderson: We should not be discussing it, Your Excellency.

Mr. MacDonald: But why bring it up at all then? These are the things to set out, not starting attacking the men. We are talking of labour, we are talking of working men and men need work. Quite honestly, Your Excellency, looking at this, as I have said, this gives us all sorts of ideas — pump money into the tourist industry, Executive Council should place proposals before winter for employment schemes. Fair enough for next year, for next winter, but it is the people at the moment I am worried about.

Unemployment Committee—Second Interim Report Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1067

Now the first thing I would have thought we could have done is let us see these 936 people. There are not thousands of them, there are not 50,000 of them, there are 976. You could sit down if you had a Committee and in no time at all you could interview the lot. Find out who they are. Just who are these people? You could take 300-odd off to start with, the work permit people. Let us see these 676 people and find out what are their views. What are they doing? Where have they come from? What have they been doing? We are not told any of that, who they are, what they are. If you are going to solve their problem they are the people you have got to see. As regards the fixed- price contracts, Your Excellency, anyone who is dealing with engineering or construction knows in this day and age that it is not on. (Interruption.) You can say so, yes, but it is not on. You give me one firm which will do a fixed-price contract. A Member: Northern Joiners.

Mr. MacDonald: Yes, all right, put a window in my house and I will get a fixed-price contract. It can be done in a short space of time but anything that is going to last a year, over a year, two years or three years, no way will you get a fixed-price contract unless it is from an idiot who will not complete the project in time and will ask for more money. (Interruption.) Up to about 12 months and that is your lot, but over 12 months you will not get it. They will load that contract as we will find out in a certain very big scheme where we broke the contract halfway through and we will soon find that one out. Your Excellency, I believe the Committee has done a job. It has put on paper, as I say, what their views are but I do not think this is going to solve the problem. There are a lot of people at the moment looking for work and they could be taken on. Nothing has been said about the men we took on. My Board has always taken on men before Committees have recommended. We have managed to get money from Tynwald, from the Finance Board, for projects we have got. Yes, it is listed in there and we could still keep those men on. Men are leaving us to go to better paid employment now, but we have got a certain sum of money. Up to a certain figure we can spend, but after that, what do we do? Pay them off? We could continue using those men. There is plenty of work to do for this type of labour, plenty of work which could be done. Had the Committee said that Boards can continue to employ these men until they find other work and recommend that moneys would be made available we could take these men on now. We took three men on yesterday to replace men we had already lost for better employment, higher paid employment. If the money we got recently could be stretched we could continue to employ them. This is the whole aim of the scheme, to keep men doing something. Your Excellency, I have moved an amendment that this should be received because once again I believe, I honestly believe this, that Committees of Tynwald should not be expecting reports to be adopted. We have an Executive Council appointed by Tynwald, by the Keys and by the Council, and when these Com- mittees come forward, as we agreed in a Standing Order only last month, only last month Tynwald agreed unanimously, apart from Mr. Speaker, all they have got to do is make their recommendations to the Court and then Executive Council act, but it must be left to Executive Council in consultation with the Finance Board to work out what can be done financially and what cannot be done. This is why, I presume, the Chairman of Finance Board always sits on Executive Council, the Treasurer is always in attendance, and so I hope today that we will receive this and leave what is the Executive Government of the Isle of Man to get on with it. If they do not get on with the job,

Unemployment Committee—Second Interim Report Adopted. T1068 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 sack them and replace them. But give them the job to do and let them get on with it. Otherwise you are getting Government that continues to be operated by Select Com- mittees which produce first interim reports, second interim reports, third interim reports, but never seem to wind themselves up, and like the Transport Steering Committee the sooner it is wound up the better. The Governor: Hon. and gallant member, are you formally proposing your amendment? Mr. MacDonald: Yes, Your Excellency, I beg to move:— For the word "adopted" substitute the word "received".

The Governor: Have members got copies of this amendment? Is it seconded? Dr. Moore: I beg to second.

Mr. Kerruish: Your Excellency, over the last two decades the Government of the Isle of Man has pursued a very clearly defined and I think a very consistent policy. It has been concerned with the attraction of new residents and new industry and given support to our basic industries, agriculture and fisheries. It has also been concerned with the development of the financial sector and of the manufacturing sector and I suppose against that background it would be quite easy to say that there is no need for a Committee of this nature, that they cannot tell us anything new and let us leave it to the various departments of Government to pursue their policies as they have pursued them very successfully in the past. As one who is associated with one particular agency of Government concerned with the development of the manufacturing sector I might take that stance, but I am not going to do so. I am going to welcome this report. I think it is a really worthwhile report, not only because of its contents because there are certain of its contents I could criticise if I so wished, but at least it does something else. It makes everyone think about our problem and situation. It has made my hon. and gallant colleague, Mr. MacDonald, think in certain directions. It certainly made me think as far as being Chairman of the Industrial Advisory Council is concerned, and I feel in this particular regard it is right and proper that it should be shown by Government to those in the Island who are unemployed that we are directing our attentions to trying to cope with this problem. That is most important. Our numbers may not be large, and I will touch on that later, but it is very important that it should be seen that Government is concerned with it and is prepared to grapple with this evil problem. Now, sir, in that particular context I especially welcome the recommendation of this Committee that Executive Council place proposals for short-term winter employment schemes before Tynwald by October. This particular saga was started a couple of years ago by the hon. member for Ramsey, Mr. Christian, and it was a short-term exercise. I think it is right and proper against the economic background of the Island, and particularly that of the British Isles, that we should recognise that this problem is not going to go away very quickly, and it is right and proper that we should recognise that fact and in time make what plans we can to cope with one particular sector of this problematic area. It is particularly with regard to the Committee's observations concerning the manufacturing sector that I was especially gratified. I think this spells out once again that Government recognises the great importance of stimulating the manufacturing industry within the Island. This is a gospel I have preached for quite a long time and I know that my

Unemployment Committee— Second Interim Report Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1069

colleagues on the Industrial Advisory Council recognise that in the long-term this is one of the areas, probably the area, in which there is the greatest potential for job opportunities and greater employment, for giving our workforce in the Island a greater opportunity of getting well-paid and trained jobs within an expanding and varied manufacturing sector. Touching on some of the views expressed by the Committee, and as I say, I welcome them, I can assure the Court that the Council are aware of the need of ensuring that our package of incentives is competitive. To this end we certainly always recognise the needs to keep ourselves aware of what is being offered by our competitors from the regions or from other countries. But I think in devising a policy we have to take into account the overall situation in the Island as compared with the overall situation in many other competitive areas. Here in the Island we have been most fortunate. We have a high degree of political and financial stability and despite what has been said here this morning our record as far as labour relations is concerned is almost unique. It has been excellent, and I am going back over the last 20 years, excellent, and I would hope that Government and every agency of it would take every step it possibly can to ensure that the very good relations, excellent relations, which have existed will continue to do so because in talking to industrialists, or would-be industrialists, I often talk about our low direct taxation, our easy accessibility to various agencies and personnel within Government, our lack of unnecessary control, but one of the greatest things I am fond of emphasising is our excellent record as far as the relations between both sides of industry are concerned. We must recognise that and do everything we can to keep it that way. This is one of our biggest selling points. Now, sir, compare that with the situation that exists in many of our competitive areas where they have undergone really traumatic experiences during the present recession, where you can go to certain regions and certain areas where unemployment is perhaps 15 per cent. I could pinpoint certain areas where it is 20 per cent. in the United Kingdom in some of these very depressed areas and the prospects there are very, very bleak indeed. Now it is quite obvious that in devising a package of incentives for a situation such as we have in the Island and such a situation as exists in other areas, there can be a very wide variation in approach. It is true that no one would wish to be complacent about our unemployment — four per cent. I know when you talk about 1,000 unemployed it has a psychological impact upon everyone, but that is at four per cent. and we must do everything we possibly can to see if we can reduce that. If we had a situation where our unemployed were trebled as in uplifts of even from four per cent. to 12 per cent., I would be looking for drastic remedies, and I do not blame the regions for emphasising the need to do everything they can to attract new industry there. But when saying that, S let me emphasise that I accept the view expressed by the Committee that every avenue must be explored to see if we can make more attractive the package we can offer to our present existing industrialists and would-be industrialists and in acting as a probe to the Industrial Advisory Council as well as maybe to tourism or other departments of our economy, I welcome this incentive from the Committee. I do not criticise them for making these points at all. I applaud them for that fact. Now, sir, if I may touch upon one or two of the ideas, and I accept that the Committee has put them forward as no more than ideas as worthy of explanation, but perhaps I could touch on one or two. With regard to the Government guaranteed loans scheme through banks which has been mentioned in the report and which was mentioned in the United Kingdom Chancellor's Budget speech, as yet that scheme is not in being. It has been floated at the Budget

Unemployment Committee—Second Interim Report Adopted. T1070 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 stage and it will be debated, no doubt, and I agree it will probably be accepted by the United Kingdom Government, but if that is implemented I can assure the Court that we will be watching that very, very closely and if we can pick out any points in that particular approach that would be beneficial to us here we will not hesitate to do so, but at first glance it seems to me that even that scheme does not compare favourably with the schemes that we can offer at the present time. We have not been backward in this particular regard. The scheme as mentioned in the press indicates that commercial rates will be charged to would-be borrowers — at the moment probably 15 per cent. in the United Kingdom plus, I think, a guaranteed premium of about three per cent. which would up the overall cost of borrowing under that particular scheme as we read of it now, it is not finalised of course, as being something in the order of 18 per cent., but as the going rate as far as the Isle of Man Government to would-be industrialists is concerned, at the moment it is of the order of 12 per cent. However, we will certainly watch that scheme and see whether we can improve our particular approach to that area of activity. There are one or two other matters that are mentioned by the Committee which I think are largely within the ambit of the Finance Board. One is the tax relief scheme for those who are prepared to inject capital into industry and I think that is one well worthy of approach and, of course, the other point they touch on is the need to encourage small business investment corporations. I know their views have been widely expressed from certain quarters in this particular regard and I would like to spell out here and now that no sensible person would place any obstacle in the way of such organisations making an impact upon industry in the Isle of Man. That is self-evident. Indeed, we already have financial companies and other bodies in the Island which have shown they are willing and able to inject capital into local industry and back them up with advice and expertise. If more can be done in this particular direction, well, we would welcome it and I am quite certain we would give such an approach our very warm support. However, I would emphasise, sir, that at the present time Government, through the agency of the Industrial Advisory Council and the Finance Board, have a very flexible scheme. Subject to the approval of the Finance Board we can operate on a very wide sector, but there is one principle that I have always been very anxious to observe and it is this. In advancing grants to would-be industrialists or existing industrialists our limit has been 40 per cent. which means that by one means or another the entrepreneur has to inject 60 per cent. into that particular enterprise. There is nothing easier in the world than to hand out Government money, but I feel that by observing that particular principle you ensure that the entrepreneur is putting in a worthwhile stake, the larger stake, and that is a great incentive for him to ensure that the business he is entering into is going to be a success. I have always said that we do not want to own industry or we do not want to control industry but we want to co-operate with it to the full and leave the full incentive in the hands of private enterprise. This is a policy that has been pursued very actively up to now and against the background of this particular report and developments in the United Kingdom and other areas I can assure the Court that the Industrial Advisory Council — I hope in the new season the Industry Board, whoever that might consist of — will not be unmindful of the views expressed by the hon. Mr. Speaker today and do our best to still further develop this most important sector. Finally, let me say that I warmly welcome the views expressed regarding the setting up of a training centre. This is an area in which we have been very much concerned for a very long time. Indeed, after the principle was accepted some

Unemployment Committee--Second Interim Report Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1071 months ago :I had discussions with my hon. friend, the Chairman of the Board of Social Security. Between us we did devise the outline of a scheme that we feel would lead to the setting up of a training centre and I sincerely hope that this will help the Finance Board to make up its mind and give to the Board of Social Security the necessary funds in order that this training centre may be put into operation during the present financial year. Those are all the views I have to express on this report, sir, which I find most interesting. I can assure the Committee that the Industrial Advisory Council will bear in mind its observations and sincerely hope that we will be able to do something further to develop this most important sector.

The Governor: Hon. members, who wishes to speak to this motion? The hon. member for Glenfaba followed by the hon. member for Rushen, and we will hopefully adjourn at one o'clock.

Mr. Anderson: Very briefly, Your Excellency, I wish to support the Committee and the recommendations that they make. I would hate to think that there would go out from this Court any message, today that because it was four or two or even one per cent., that this Court was complacent. It is no consolation to the man who got up this morning without a job to go to that, in fact, he was only included in four per cent. of the population. To me, there is no more demoralising situation than to find that you have not got a job to go to and that the world has no use any longer for what you have got to offer or the skills that you have acquired. I would suggest that we as a Court have got an obligation to give everyone, as far as is humanly possible, who is willing to work, the opportunity to go and to do a job. To me, there is nothing that is more soul-destroying than to find that you are not able to go out and earn day by day the bread for your family and I would support everything that can be done in order to sustain existing job opportunities and create greater job opportunities in the forthcoming winter season. Whether it is done by Executive Council or it is done by this Committee, it matters little to me. What does matter is that the job is done my somebody and that job opportunities are provided for the people on this Island who want to work, to do just that.

Mr. Lowey: 1 rise to support the second interim report of the Select Committee and, as usual, to congratulate the mover of this report for his usual cogent explanations. I just regret the opening remarks because I, too, feel that certain things are sub judice and'I think we should really try and keep the climate as cool as possible. Having said that, I find this report not the same as the first report, obviously, because the first report was short-term in its aims. It was to get people into jobs almost immediately. This report, quite obviously, is a medium/long-term arrangement. Now, having said that, I believe it is right and proper that this Committee is one of the Committees that I would have in constant session because I believe we are not out of the woods yet and to talk of the bottoming out of the recession, I believe this Committee has got a valuable part to play and, therefore, I welcome it still being in existence and producing reports such as this. I cannot add one syllable to what my hon. friend in the Council has said in his usual statesman-like way regarding the industrial sector. I think his record in this field surpasses anybody in this Court and we all owe him a debt. I think his views on paragraph 8 . 6 of the report are invaluable. I do find interesting, however, the contribution that the licence fee payable by certain non-resident traders be increased to £500. I

Unemployment Committee— Second Interim Report Adopted. T1072 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 welcome the Committee looking at this particular aspect and it is far from me to say, like my hon. friend from Ayre this morning who said he thought he had heard these words before, but I, too, thought I had heard these words before and I was immediately drawn to the fact that Executive Council charged my Council in 1978 to look at this particular area. Now we gave a report to Executive Council on 15th June 1979 making some recommendations on these very matters, and for non-resident temporary licences to trade, in June 1979 we recommended £500 for the first three days of trading and £100 for every consecutive day after that, and so on, enforcement to be of prime importance, et cetera — a page and a half of recommendations to deal with this particular item in 1979. It was with regret that six months later I noted a letter from the Council saying that Executive Council had noted the recommendations and done nothing about them. Then I look at the Committee and find that three senior members of the Committee, the Chairman of Executive Council, the Chairman of the Finance Board and my hon. colleague, Mr. Cringle, are on Executive Council and yet I see they have signed this recommending that the thing be increased to £500 although they were advised of this in the report in 1979. Better late than never. The only thing I would suggest is that the fee is a little bit low. Inflation has continued since 1979 and it should be upgraded. In that report, if you care to look at it, the views of the Chamber of Trade and Commerce are expressed, and expressed very forcibly, and why we arrived at that figure then. So I welcome that report, as I say better late than never, but I believe again it is a step in the right direction. Your Excellency, this report on unemployment, it is sad that we should be in this position but I think this Court has a record over the past five years second to none in the western world of dealing with unemployment. I think it is a success and I know we can congratulate ourselves on doing good works but I do believe this is one of the successes of this particular administration and Finance Board have led in it, and I believe that to continue this Committee in its present form, doing this work, can do nothing but good for the people it affects, and that is those unemployed. The Governor: Hon. members, we will continue this debate after lunch at 2.30 p.m. We will hear Petitions at 4.30 p.m.

CELEBRATION OF WEDDING OF H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES AND LADY DIANA SPENCER. The Governor: I have to announce regarding the celebration of the wedding of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer, for the information of hon. members, a Proclamation of the Governor in Council has been made appointing Wednesday, 29th July 1981, to he observed as a bank holiday in the Island. We will adjourn until 2.30 p.m. The Court adjourned for lunch.

UNEMPLOYMENT — DEBATE CONCLUDED. The Governor: Hon. members, we will carry on with our debate on item number 10. Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, when the hon. Chairman of the Industrial Advisory Council spoke this morning I listened with the customary interest, and what he has said, of course, is what has been on record in the past, so when he was talking about

Celebration of Wedding of H.R.H. The Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer. - - Unemployment—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1073

complacency, I quite agree, it is certainly not a matter at this time that we should be complacent about. The Industrial Advisory Council, as he knows full well, does come to the Finance, Board from time to time for assistance, and I think you will agree that most times that assistance is willingly afforded them. However, there is one aspect of the Industrial Advisory Council work which I would like to draw his attention to because in the past, rather sporadically, there have been attempts to attract people to the Isle of Man. I remember full well the Swiss enterprise, and whether that has paid off I do not know, I do not think it has. But when you have your advisers coming along and examining the claims or the applications for assistance, they do a splendid job. But I would like to see them extending their particular function, and that is going out and attracting business. I am sure that not only on the Continent but in adjacent islands, and particularly the adjacent island to the west, there are opportunities for marketing and if an attraction was made for industrialists, entrepreneurs from that particular area, I am sure there would be found in the Isle of Man a much more amenable climate to that of Ulster. So I do hope that when it comes to recommendation 8 . 6 which deals entirely with finance, there shall be added to it this attempt to attract industrialists more to the Isle of Man. That is the way in which unemployment is to be tackled. In this coming year, unfortunately, we are going to be diverted by the General Election of the House of Keys. I would not like to see that diversion in any way prevent us from tackling the serious problem of unemployment that will arise this coming year. Now the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom only yesterday said there was no necessary connection between unemployment and the amount of money that is put into the community to combat it. There must be a spirit, and the spirit of the community here is, I hope, at every cut and turn to assist particularly the young school leaver, training, retraining, encouraging and seeing that he does not, or she does not, get on the streets and cause a nuisance which, unfortunately, as we know only too well and too sadly, is happening in Brixton at this moment. Mr. Quinney: Your Excellency, 1 welcome this report of the Committee. I have seen several of these reports over the years where they have tried to tackle unemployment problems as and when they have arisen, and especially had experience for some considerable years on the Employment Advisory Committee which had this particular responsibility. Mr. Speaker was quite clear and precise in his presentation of the report, and I am sure the hon. Court will endorse this report without hesitation. However, I, too, must express regret at the remarks Mr. Speaker made regarding the action of the power workers. After all, there are both sides of industry and it is not just the Trade Union side that can create industrial unrest. Both sides of industry must show initiative • to work together under the basis of collective bargaining. These methods have proved satisfactory in the past to arrive at a settlement of pay structures and, more specifically, of honouring agreements. There can be changes of basis, there can be changes of attitude, but I do feel that this hon. Court must always realise that there are two sides of industry. There can be a little bit of obstreperousness on both parties, so do not always put the blame on the workers' side. Having said that, I welcome the report. I also would agree with the report that in the 1980/81 winter we will still have an unemployment problem with us. After all, the recession in the United Kingdom is having its effect in the Isle of Man. I said so on a previous occasion and I still feel that. However, I do feel that the Committee of the Board of Social Security will be monitoring this position very, very carefully, and I am sure they will carry out their responsibilities

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. T1074 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 whereby they will be reporting to the hon. Court much earlier than they did last year so- that an emergency does not arise. The Industrial Advisory Committee over the years have done a considerable job to reduce and keep unemployment down. There is no question about this. I can go back to the recessions in 1953 and 1962 and know that they have done a lot. The manufacturing industries have created considerable employment and it must be to their credit that we have not had what we used to have every winter, an unemployment problem of well over 1,000 people, and winter work schemes used to have to be initiated every winter, not one winter but every winter, and we have been very fortunate in this last few years that our unemployment, in effect; has been practically negligible. The point that I may take issue with in the report is when it referred to the building trade. We are fully aware that in the building industry there has been a considerable fragmentation of that particular industry,- the fragmentation being that more and more craftsmen have become self-employed craftsmen in their specific industry. So when it comes to Manx companies, a plan for contracts, subsequent contract, it is found these contracts are not being undertaken by the contractor with direct employment, but the employment of sub-contractors to do a lot of the work. So it is hard to •say, really, when you analyse the figures, as to whether there is a serious unemployment problem in the actual building industry as far as the workers are concerned. It does affect • more so here the labourer and the semi-skilled worker because it is obvious they do not become self-employed persons in that category. So there is that aspect of looking at it. If a contract previously has been awarded to an English contractor, it has been my experience that we have found that several of these Englislv contractors have affiliated to the Employers' Federation and operated the local agree- metits. Coming back to the Industrial Advisory Committee, there is a limit to expansion in the present industrial recession and I am sure that that Committee is not complacent, and I would go along with the hon. member for West Douglas that we should be looking further afield and going out to try and attract the industries in the Isle of Man which would provide employment and thereby reduce our unemployment problem. Now, retraining. I, too, welcome this part of the report. However, there is an aspect that has to be watched very closely in this connection, and the aspect is that on the retraining, whatever the retraining is to be, that we are going to have the industry which will be able to absorb these particular workers being retrained. Because taking what happens in the United Kingdom, there seems to be a greater aspect and variety of industry where people can be retrained, where I feel in the Isle of Man the amount or variety of industry for retraining is very, very limited. However, it is another aspect that can, and I feel sure will, be looked at in every consideration. And this is an issue which I am sure even the Board of Social Security, in paragraph 8 .7 where it says, "... consider assisting people intent on retraining. themselves for alternative employment." The Board of Social Security over the years have had various schemes for the retraining of people, and I am aware of the fact that even at the, job employment centre and the work done by the officer there, here again he has to look at the aspect as to whether people being sent away for training, that work will be available for that type of training he receives, when he comes back to the Isle of Man. But I fully endorse the report as presented. Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, in brief, I think any member of this Court would be foolish not to accept this report and not to realise the benefits that are bestowed upon us through the resolution of the hon. member for Ramsey when he first initiated this. I think it would be foolish in the circumstances that prevail in the Isle of Man, and

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1075 will prevail over next year and the year after, and probably the year after, and into infinity unless the economy on the other side alters. We are going to find the pressure more and more upon us, and everybody should welcome this report. But more important still, when they go back again----and I hope they go back quickly because I think speed is all the essence here — I hope they will look at these ideas. They are ideas, and an idea is not worth a carrot until it is implemented into some benefit, it is actually put into practice, and -rather than just a talking shop, to get down to the real nitty-gritty which is implementing the ideas. They are all good ideas, but they are all theory. We have got an excellent Chairman of the Industrial Advisory Council and I would like to know the answer to a question which is often asked of me — who actually markets the Isle of Man? Who goes out and says to the big world outside the Isle of Man, here we have a stable -economy? We talk about it inside this building but we have not got to sell each other to each other, we have got to sell ourselves to the world outside. But who actually does it? I know we have Polecon but as far as I understand it their brief is not to go to groups of individuals and say, here is the Isle of Man, this is the package you can get there, if you create so many jobs you might very well get this from the Government. We do not have that What we have is us sitting here with all these goodies we keep telling each other we have got — we have stable labour relations, we have a stable esconomy, a stable Government. It is no use us telling ourselves we have got the stable things unless the person who is going to invest his cash knows that this is the truth of it. We need to have this. We have got to sell ourselves outside the Isle of Man. And I cannot find, looking through the records of Government, anybody who actually does that for us. Now and again we send over somebody from the Finance Board to talk to somebody, with one of these ex-British champions, and he gets his photograph in the Isle of Man papers with a coin. That seems to be the most we ever get involved in. We should be selling. I am interested, sir, in somebody getting down to actually implementing what we talk about, and this is what we need. I am sure we are not professional in that field. The one part of the report that obviously is of interest to me and my constituency is the part dealing with tourism, and I 'am delighted to see it was first on the list because eventually we have got to get down to realising that is the one that is going to govern what will happen next winter in the Isle of Man, and what is going to happen the winter after that and the winter after that. If, this year, things that are expected to happen acually happen, not only will the Finance Board be hurt with an awful lot of lost income tax and revenue for the Government, not only will the people who spend the money to keep other people in businesses on the circuit of the tourist industry have no money to spend, but the circumstances that will prevail in this town, in this Island, will be so detrimental that you will not be talking about 1,000-plus unemployed, you will be talking about 1,500 to 2,000. Now they are facts that every member here realises in his heart of hearts. But what will be the outcome, if that is happening this winter, on the following year? I will tell you what it will be. Because of so much money being borrowed from the tourist industry for the development of tourism, and because of the drop in the tourist industry, there will be no money back in the coffers to pay back to Government, although there are low interest rates, the money that has been borrowed. You will have a knock-on effect so that the shopkeepers in Strand Street and all these other people involved in the tourist industry will be pushed into a situation . . . And most businesses in Douglas, 1.- know, most operating carpet houses,. shops, you name it, cannot survive without a

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. -nom TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 good season. I am quite convinced that unless we do as Mr. Speaker asked and plan 1982 now, forget about 1981, there is very little we can do, we have done the maximum, maybe we can do a little bit for the end of the season to pull over an extra 5,000 or 10,000 people, but 1981 has gone. For 1982, 1983 and 1984 we must have on the drawing- board now the outlines of plans to ensure that at least the figures remain static for those four years, if not a growth. And how can we do that? I am quite convinced that with the product we are selling now, as we have it, it is not going to avail itself to the people who wish to spend holidays at a cut-price rate, and that is the market we are in. Mr. MacDonald: Does the Tourist Board only plan a year in advance, then? Mr. Delaney: Just let me finish. I am delighted to see on this Agenda today Mr. Speaker's resolution in relation to the future of the Common Purse Agreement because I believe that no longer is it going •to be the option of maybe, we will be forced into a situation where we have to. The whole future of the tourist industry relies on that because if we do not have something to sell we will not be in the market long enough or strong enough to get the results necessary to keep this community alive. And when I say the tourist industry I mean all of it because without it you will have none of the income coming in to pay all the other fringe outlets, and I mean outlets, because none of them bring benefit to the Isle of Man, to keep them in operation, and they will go under as well. And, really, the resolution should have been adopted and signed on to Mr. Speaker's other resolution in relation to the Common Purse. I know it is going to be difficult but I have never been in any doubt in the last couple of years, and looking at what is happening in Britain, our future must lie in that particular aspect of what we can do. It is the one thing we have up our sleeve, literally, that may — and I say may — pull us out of the draught. In answer to the hon. member who popped the question in — do we only plan for one year? — unfortunately, sir, we do plan for one or two years ahead, but as you know we work on a system in this Island, the Green Book of Estimates. I was given to understand at lunch-time that contrary to the opinion that has been expressed on many occasions, and rightly so, the Finance Board turn round and say, you must produce your Estimates again from what they ask us to do, or I understood it to be. That is fine, we will do it, it is a paper exercise. But I am asking members now to realise that in six or seven months' time when we realise the consequences, not for this summer but for next summer, we will be coming back, and we will have to come back for a large amount of money to keep us in the same level of selling on tourism that we have this year because all our competitors are spending more and more to get the same customer we are after, and either we can opt out of it and let them have the customer or compete for him. That is what we have to decide. In the future, in seven or eight months' time, I am quite convinced you will see a financial resolution down on this, either with the agreement, or a declaratory resolution through the Tourist Board asking for one very large amount of money to inject into the Tourist Board and the tourist industry. If members will think about that they will realise the truth of that statement, because we cannot be prepared to back away from the problems we are facing, and the problems are that we are being out-sold, we are being out-marketed, we are being out-committed by other resorts who have more to offer than we have. If we can plan for a long-term future for the Isle of Man it is not within the cornerstone of this resolution and these recommendations, it is within the cornerstone of the Common Purse Agreement, and when we get to that, remember what has been said in this debate because the future of unemployment in

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1077

the Isle of Man hangs on that debate, not on this one, on what the policy is of the Finance Board in the same way that the late and great Sir John Bolton realised, that the possibility of reducing income tax in the Isle of Man — which is exactly the same theory of extracting more by taking less — and the same thing will happen to the tourist industry. We have to be in a position to take less in the hope of getting more. My hon. colleague and friend, the President of the Council, only yesterday described the situation that he had heard four or five days ago in a small island group similar to the Isle of Man, when they realised the benefits of duty-free and value added tax reduced, and they deal in millions of people at this time of the year. We are either in the tourist business or we are not. We cannot be in fifty-fifty now because what has happened is that we are totally committed either to be in or to be out. And when we come to the debate later on in this session I hope that members will remember what is being said now because that is where it hangs. (Interruption.) The hon. member asks me what the Board is telling them to do. Like his Board we are governed by the Finance Board. That is the rule of this game in Tynwald here now. They are the boys who hold the purse strings, rightly so, but we have to convince them where the money is best spent, and it certainly is not best spent on turning round and saying at this moment in time, your Estimates for next year are governed in that corner there, that is what you are going to get, and we have to plan for that much. We cannot do it. I hope that members really commit themselves to realising that at the end of the day it is the tourist, the light industry sector, the finance :sector and the farming sector that keep us going. But let one fall and they all fall. Mr. Christian: Your Excellency, I am very pleased with the reception of this report, which I think is a good report, has received from all the members of the Court who have spoken so far. I hope I am not speaking too soon when I say that they have all supported it with one exception. And I must admit that when I listened to my hon. friend, the member of Council, I really felt a little despair; not a lot because I have come to know him! (Laughter.) But when he says that this report does not solve the problem of unemployment, what does he think we are? Magicians, wave a magic wand and unemployment disappears? Well that sort of talk is silly, cheap talk. And when he says that it sums up what everyone knows and puts it down on paper, well, maybe that is no bad thing. Maybe that in itself is certainly better than sitting on our hands and doing nothing. Because after all, the resolution by which this Committee was formed only came before this Court on 19th November, and the first interim report was submitted on 9th December, and that dealt with the short-term measures to try and overcome the problems of winter employment, and which it contributed to very largely and very successfully. And let me say, in the case of my own Board, the Railways Board, we got nearly 40 men and the work they did was invaluable, they worked very well and we got value for money. Let us be quite honest about this, the money was well spent. It costs almost as much to keep a man on the dole as it does to keep him in employment. What must it feel like to be a man with a family, a wife and children. to find that through no fault of your own you are out of work? It must be absolutely soul-destroying. There is one obligation we do owe to the constituents who put us here, it is in times when work is not plentiful to try and provide and plan for it. am not suggesting we should go overboard with large schemes, no way at all. My reaction to the speech when we were discussing the Estimates from the Chairman of Finance Board, we would back him wholeheartedly in cutting right back, putting a

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. T1078 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

brake on hard and cutting out everything that can be cut out, providing — and I say providing at' the same time that we do at least provide enough work, plenty of schemes, Government schemes. Now is the time .to think about providing small Govern- ment schemes which will help to alleviate the unemployment which otherwise we are bound to incur next year, next winter. But there is no question about just suddenly solving the problem overnight. We are fortunate, we started off with a lower percentage of unemployed in the Isle of Man than probably in the whole of Western Europe. This second report gives more long-term proposals. The first one simply dealt with 'immediate measures. What else could you expect? The report was brought into this hon. Court within a fortnight of the Committee first meeting, and this is only what; some four months later, And as a matter of fact I would like to pay tribute really to - the hon. Mr. Speaker for the amount of time and energy that he has put into it. After all, no one so far has suggested anything we may have left out. 4 would be very interested if there is anything. That was what I was waiting to see, was somebody to say, well, why have you not included this, that, and the other? That would be very helpful, I am sure. But I think that we have covered the ground fairly comprehensively. After all, if you look at it, one of our recommendations is that continuous efforts be made to stimulate the tourist sector.. With the close co-operation to the Tourist Board from the Finance Board, for which I am very grateful and I am sure we all are, that has already been put into operation. I must say that the Finance Board has really been extremely helpful and, as my hon. coleague from East Douglas has just said, the prospects for the summer perhaps are not all they might be, nevertheless, we would hope. It seems to be the same not only in the Isle of Man but over the whole country. And this year, of course, let me just counteract a little of the depression which he may have created by saying that this is the case all over the whole country, the bookings are much later. Mr. Delaney: It does not help us though, if they are going under, that we should go under too. Mr. Christian: No, of course it does not, 1 am not suggesting for one moment that it would. But what I was going on to say was that the inquiries are coming in all right for accommodation for holidays but they are not being turned into bookings, and this is happeneing everywhere. After all, I heard three times myself on the television programme about holidays, Cliff Michelmore saying at the beginning of the programme, "Now take my advice and do not book too soon because there will be lots of special offers coming along later as there were last year." I heard him say that three weeks in succession. And people know now they do not have to book so far in advance. Things are now starting to pick up, and let us hope that perhaps it will not prove such a bad season after all., A Member: I hope you are right!

Mr. Christian: Well, my fingers are so crossed I cannot get them straight! So number 1, you see, of our recommendations has already, in a matter of a few weeks, been largely carried into effect at a cost of something in the region of £400,000. This is a considerable sum of money. And the next one, "That the Executive Council place proposals for short-term winter employment schemes before Tynwald at its October sitting." Well, this is right, this is what we have been saying for years. We should not be just saying we want to do something about unemployment next week. We should

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1079 be talking now and planning so that we will have proposals put before us in October, at the beginning of the winter, to deal with the unemployment which could be foreseen through the coming winter — surely a very excellent thing. And the third one, "That Government monitor the work-load of the building trade and have a bank of suitable projects available to draw on, needed to maintain the industry at an acceptable level." Well, the building industry, as we all know, has always been accepted as a barometer of the prosperity of trade and commerce in general in the Isle of Man. I think it is in the United Kingdom as well, it certainly is in the Isle of Man. If the building trade is prospering it is an indication that everybody is, and vice versa. So all these cannot do anything but good, and they are all different aspects of the economy which we have looked at and investigated. And here again, not only do I want to pay tribute to Mr. Speaker but also to the many people who came along and spoke to us in committee, all the people engaged in various industries in the Island, and also all the banks in the Island with whom we communicated. We wrote to them all and asked them what they thought about a loan scheme; and almost without exception they were extremely helpful and promised full support for it. So it is nice to know that at least we have the co-operation in trying to do something to alleviate unemployment, and we could look as if we could rely on the full co-operation of people in business and commerce in the Island, and they are not just looking to us to do everything as used to happen in the old days. They seemed to think that the people in Tynwald should be able to solve all these problems, that is what we sent them there for, and nobody else needed to do anything. But our message has been, this has got to be solved by co-operation between people in business and industry and Tynwald. We cannot do it all. And "That in the placing of Government contracts in the construction industry the following criteria be adopted." Well, these are all excellent things. We have covered a broad field in this report. As I say, if anybody can say, well, there is one field you have not covered, let him tell us so and then we can go into it. The licence fee for non-resident traders, that is fair enough. Wherever possible Government contracts should be entered into with Manx companies. Well, this will, I am sure, satisfy a lot of the criticism there has been in the past about employing English companies and this, as far as I can see in any case, only happened when there were not Manx companies big enough or at the time able to take on the business which was farmed out outside the Isle of Man. I think it has always been the policy, as far as I can see, to employ Manx businesses and Manx companies wherever possible. But this is emphasising that this is to be official Government policy. And then that the Finance Board and the Industrial Advisory Council consider various proposals for tax holidays for new industries, bank loan guarantees — I have already mentioned the bank loan — tax relief for new businesses and encouragement for development agencies. Well, we have, as we acknowledge, an excellent Industrial Advisory Council under a very good Chairman indeed, if I may say so, and I am referring to the member of the Council, Mr. Kerruish. But at the same time he is not saying, this is nothing to do with you, this is my little plot, you keep off. He is saying again we are only too happy to co-operate with the Employment Committee, and that is a very good attitude to see, that he is broadminded enough not to say, this is nothing to do with you, this is for us, keep off and leave it alone. And then, "That the Board of Social Security consider assisting people intent on retraining themselves for alternative employment." I think we can claim that in the short time in which it has been produced and the wide area of employment in all fields that it has

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. T1080 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

covered, that this is not a bad report, and it is nice to know that everybody supports it. And from here, of course, the important thing is not just to take this report and have it just filed away and put in the cupboard and forgotten about, it has got to be implemented. Mr. Watterson: Your Excellency, the hon. member for Ramsey, as so often happens during debates of this nature, said three-quarters of what 1 was just about to say, and I thoroughly agree with it. But there are two points to which I would like to address myself. First of all, the comments of the hon. member of Council, Mr. MacDonald. His remarks, to me, and his amendment seem a complete contradition in terms. On the one hand, criticising the Committee for not doing something immediately, and on the second hand trying to produce an amendment which would take any effective action into a pious hope. I think what the public and this Court have come to expect now is not short-term palliatives and hand-to-mouth living for political expediency, but they expect a Committee of this nature to look to the long-term requirements of the people of the Isle of Man and try and get to grips with it, and this report at least has attempted, I hope, to do that. 1 was extremely privileged to be a member of this Committee, and there is one item on it which is of specific interest to me. But as far as unemployment is concerned, it produces an attitude of mind and it produces a discontent right throughout, and the troubles go a long way beyond the initial problem of the unemployment of one particular individual, and it reflects right through the society in health, in social problems, and even in law and order. If we are concerned about law and order then I will suggest that instead of looking sometimes to the cure we must look to the prevention, and a report of this nature helps to do just that. The items which I am particularly interested in in this report are those that relate to retail and consumer needs. The needs of 65,000 people is pretty big business, and if a substantial part of that business gets taken away from the Island community it is bound to have an effect, and an effect on employment. And, therefore, the item starting at paragraph 5. 1 in the report on non-resident traders, I do believe that that is a real threat to unemployment in the future years to come, particularly the next two years when things show no immediate signs of improving in the United Kingdom, and the United Kingdom companies, and companies elsewhere, will be looking to markets where they might be able to get a little extra business. The van that comes off the boat with very little overheads, sells to the detriment of the local traders, and goes back on the boat again, the mail order system which is used frequently with a very good range of goods at a good price, that is to the detriment of the Manx society. The people who go on shopping trips to London or Manchester or wherever, or Liverpool, that is another detriment I do believe to the Manx society. I am extremely keen, therefore, that the message should go out from this Court that the actions of the individual consumer matter, not just Government, and that where possible people should patronise local business, aid local business and buy from local businesses as far as they possibly can. Now, the argument may well be that prices are not so competitive in the Isle of Man and you can do better when you go off. Well, I would suggest that if we only had 50 per cent., 25 per cent. of the business that is spent off this Island spent on the Island it would greatly increase the competitiveness of businesses here and the range of goods that they offer. So I would like the message to go out that one should buy locally as much and as far as possible. But I would also like the message to go out that if the Manx consumer is prepared to do that, then the shopkeeper and the retailer must also be

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1081

prepared to give the service, to try and provide the prices, to get his quotations in on time, which is a point we frequently hear grumbling about, and provide the hours that people want to shop. How many of you go down town to a shop and find it shut at lunch-time, the only time you can get there? This sort of thing I think has to be improved. But we have got to remember that it is vitally important, as the tourist industry is important to one sector of our society, as the manufacturing is to another, the retail industry is equally important. I believe every individual in this Island has a responsibility to try and spend as much as he possibly can within the society and not without, because at the moment it is our job to look after our unemployed and not somebody else's.

Mr. Swales: Your Excellency, 1 shall be very brief. Obviously, 1 support, like other members of the Court, the recommendations of this report in total, and I hope the Committee will remain in being to bring the content of these recommendations to fruition in the long term. But this will take the Committee a period of time. They cannot do this in a year. This requires planning, even the training and retraining of young people for new skills or semi-skills will take its time. But unfortunately we read at the weekend, for example, that there are more than eight million people unemployed in Western Europe; more than 24 million unemployed in Great Britain. And the experts say the position will not begin to improve in the foreseeable future. This may, unhappily, be two or three years away. And we know here too that if this grips in Western Europe and the United Kingdom it will have its effect in the Isle of Man. It is bound to have its effect in the Isle of Man in the tourist industry, in manufacturing industries, and indirectly then in the agricultural and fishing industries. So, sir, for the short term, and I am talking now about the short term because I am fairly certain the Committee, under the Chairmanship of the Speaker, will be able to grapple with the long-term problems that are contained in these recommendations, but in the short term I feel that we have to have expansion in the public sector for the next year or two, in housing. in sewer repairs, in sewer outfall works and this kind of thing. These problems will not go away, they will have to be solved in the near future. What I would like to say in reply to that is this, that most of this work would be carried out by the private sector and, in turn, hopefully, their profits, their salaries, their wages, would be reflected in the income tax they would pay and, in turn, this would pay for the loan charges on the capital debt of the Government who are putting these works on a planned basis into effect and putting them into effect forthwith, to meet the next year or two's work-load so that, as I say, the Committee can get down to doing their long-term work as they hope to do in the recommendations contained in this report.

Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, I am proud to be Vice-Chairman of the Industrial Council which I believe has a fine reputation for its efficiency and success, and looking at the hon. member for Ramsey, Mr. Christian, I am sure he is quite right when he says that the Industrial Council is prepared to co-operate with any other departments, any other organisations, and is always prepared to hear how we can improve our work in promoting the manufacturing sector. So all I wanted to say, Your Excellency, was that we have heard some slight criticism this afternoon from the hon. member for West Douglas, Mr. Kermeen, and from my hon. colleague, Mr. Delaney, in terms of the Industrial Council not selling the advantages of the Island as a place for industry. The hon. member for West Douglas, Mr. Kermeen, mentioned Polecon and said they

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. T1082 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 did a splendid job. Polecon are regarded by most people as an orgainsation which advises the Industrial Council on individual applicatons for, shall we say, financial assistance. It does a great deal more than that. It advises us on our policies for the promotion of the manufacturing sector and they are responsible for its public relations. Now in terms of its public relations, Polecon' does not suggest, as we do in the Tourist Board, taking space in United Kingdom and other papers extolling the advantages of the Isle of Man but it is done in other ways, and I would like hon. members to know that we do, in the Industrial Advisory Council, sell the Isle of Man both in the United Kingdom and Eire and the Continent as much as we can. First of all we have the normal literature which is a splendid package produced very well indeed by local printers, I am very pleased to say, and this literature is sent to prominent United Kingdom companies and companies in Europe. Contacts are made with foreign Embassies and Consulates, industrial and trading organisations, chambers of trade all over the place, and Confederation of British Industries, and not just in the United Kingdom. Quite apart from this ordinary literature, we do, as much as possible, encourage trade journals, journals dealing with engineering trades, to produce articles and pictures of the Isle of Man. Some of you may have seen the magazine "Engineer" with a beautiful picture of Laxey Wheel on the front and a splendid article inside telling people what a good place it is to have an industry. Now this is one example, but we have journalists coming to the Island through Polecon to produce articles in national newspapers pointing out the advantages of having a factory in the Isle of Man. Quite apart from that we have the publication "See", and I think some hon. member mentioned the magazine which is produced called "See" with a very wide distribution indeed, all over the place, and here again we feel this is a very worthwhile publication. We also have "The Businessman's Guide to the Isle of Man" which also has a wide distribution. I would not like hon. members to think that we are not trying to do our stuff in selling the Isle of Man as an ideal place for industry — we certainly are. Perhaps now we can do a bit more, certainly I am sure the industrial Council will welcome the proposals conveyed in this report. Mrs. Hanson: Your Excellency, I would just speak very briefly on two points and the first point is, I strongly support the recommendation that traders outside the Island should have to pay this £500 licence fee. This is something that I have felt very strongly about ever since I have been a member of this hon. Court and I presume that this fee would in future, if this report is adopted, cover traders coming in to the T.T. grandstand paddock during T.T. week. The second point I would like to refer to is, I entirely agree with the recommendations, or the opinion expressed that young people cannot be under compulsion to attend the College of Further Education to obtain unemployment pay. It would, indeed, lead to absenteeism and resentment which would have perhaps dire results. I am very concerned about this problem of employment of young people. A few months ago four young boys about 16 years of age came to see me here in the lobby of Tynwald and they put their points to me and they told me they represented 59 other young people. They had had a meeting the night before, they were all unemployed. I asked them how they put their day in and they told me that they got up late in the morning, they came down town if they were out of town, they came into Douglas, they drifted around from one leisure centre to the other, to the pictures or the public-houses if they were open, and that was their day. When I suggested to them, "Well, you know, you are very foolish, why did you not

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1083 register when you left school to go to the College of Further Education for a foundation course?" they said this: "Mrs. Hanson, we have left school, we are glad to leave school, and we do not want to go to another place with a school environment." Now whether we like it or not there is a group of young people who once they leave school until perhaps they get a bit of common sense when they are 18 or 19, they do not want to go back into a school situation and what is needed is some kind of work scheme or work schemes that will employ them out in the open, if you like, to put in the years up to when they are about 18 or 19, when it suddenly hits them that they will not get a job in the future unless they have some training or qualification. I have met this before many, many times and when they realise it there is a rush to the College of Further Education to get academic qualifications, which often happens, and which they would not be bothered to stay at school to get or train for. Now what really concerns me is that if our young people are not going to be given jobs when they leave school they are going to drift through life by getting summer jobs and in the winter they have unemployment benefit and they will lose their motivation to work and this will be the pattern of life and this is what really worries me. The Governor: The hon. Mr. Speaker to reply. The Speaker: Your Excellency, in introducing this debate to the Court 1 suggested there were two possible courses hon. members might follow, the one portraying indifference, the other indicating responsibility, and I am very pleased at the end of the debate to find that the major portion of this Court, by far the greater portion of this Court, are resolute in their determination to deal with the situation that confronts it, not to shrug it off and leave it for tomorrow but to get to grips with the situation. However, Your Excellency, there must always be some little, shall I say, eruption in relation to this sort of situation and today we found that the Messiah from the west is, in fact, a Moonie. (Laughter.) He asked why, with 976 people out of work do we have no proposal here to put the whole 976 back into work tomorrow, and we go on to find the hon. member is dissatisfied but, frankly, has nothing better to offer; in fact, has nothing at all to offer as is all too often the case. Having said that, Your Excellency, we find he is also against any proposal which can be effective in producing good government, in handling the unemployment situation, so that when one mentions something as simple as fixed-price contracts we are immediately told, not possible, and yet every private developer in the Isle of Man today is going for, what? — fixed- price contracts, hon. members, and getting them, and that is the sort of situation that confronts us. The hon. member was visibly upset by my reference to the power workers. Now, hon. members, I make no apology for this and I will repeat what I said so you can assess it. ". . . unhappily we are beginning to witness the emergence of a similar pattern of irresponsibility which has brought chaos in other societies, and I refer to the strike patterns that are beginning to emerge, with the Island's power workers as a classic example. I am told of resulting stoppages in local factories, and recognising this development as an extremely dangerous one from the point of view of the Island's workforce as a whole, I would suggest that those elements of the Trade Union movement whose actions portray nothing but contempt and indifference to the fate of others, should get the message that no man is an island and this is a time, if ever there was one, for them to show responsibility." I do not think any member of this Court, realising that the power workers have rights and accepting those rights, would disagree with that but when you get a situation that the law, as I am informed,

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. T1084 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 has been broken by the power workers and that the machinery, and my hon. friend referred to this, the machinery has not been observed for negotiation, that is the point I am making, and I think we all want to ensure a responsible Trade Union movement and a pattern of machinery that is effective and is maintained by all parties. Now, Your Excellency, going on from there, there is the point that the hon. member of the Council made in relation to — do not adopt this report, receive it. I think if you ever wanted an example of how successful that course of action can be you had only to listen to the hon. member for Rushen, Mr. Lowey, who portrayed the fact that bur' own suggestion here for a £500 licence fee has nothing new in it — we accept that — and that it was a positive suggestion. It was noted, was his term. Well, hon. members, you all know in this Court that to receive a resolution is to note it, to adopt it you mean business, and I believe that today, despite the fact that we have, also from Peel, a seconder — is the west today producing mirages or something which is confusing the issue for our colleagues -- a seconder to this idea to put off the issue, do not face up to it, let it be noted, let it go away — you will all know what to do with that particular amendment, hon. members. I d6 appreciate, as I am sure my colleagues on the Committee all appreciate, the support that has come in varying quarters of the Court. The hon. member of Council and the bank loan scheme that it is monitoring, and so on, we are grateful to him for his observations, Your Excellency. Then we have other observations, the ones in respect of licence fees, Mr. Lowey, and so on, all extremely helpful. Mr. Delaney's points, Mr. Kermeen's points, Mr. Swales' point, a very valid one about supporting certain aspects of industry with Government schemes, off the shelf, as we are talking about, a Government infusion where necessary to boost the economy. And we have the position as we go through this of members recognising the need for actions although they are obvious in so many ways, but actually indulging in the concrete line of implementing what is well known to us but remains, shall I say, as vague until it is accepted in this form. I would, in particular, touch perhaps on Mr. Delaney's point here, of tourism. I think we all accept the value of tourism but I think we all recognise that we have got to change our tourist patterns, that they are outdated and that we have got to very quickly get to a situation where we are looking at an entirely new tourist policy, and that in this we are buying time, as I said earlier this morning. I will go no further than that. I think, hon. members, from a Committee point of view we would express to you our gratitude for your support. I hope that you will support us to the extent of adopting the report and, in so doing, try to ensure for the people of this Island a greater measure of happiness than perhaps has been experienced by their counterparts in other communities. The Governor: Hon. members, I will first put the amendment standing in the name of the hon. and gallant member of Council, Mr. MacDonald. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. A division was called for and voting resulted as follows: - In the Keys— For: Dr. Moore -- I. Against: Messrs. Anderson, Quirk, J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Mrs. Christian, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Watterson, Creer, Lowey, Walker, Cringle, Mrs. Quayle, Messrs. Quinney, Craine, Delaney, Irving, Mrs. Hanson, Messrs. Kermeen, Christian, Swales and the Speaker — 21.

Unemployment—Debate Concluded. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1085

The Speaker: Your Excellency, the amendment fails to carry in the House of Keys, one vote being cast in favour, 21 votes against. In the Council— For: Messrs. Crellin and MacDonald -- 2. Against: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Kneale. P. Radcliffe, Kerruish and the President of the Council — 5. The Governor: In the Council, two in favour, five against, the amendment fails. I will now put the substantive motion. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. The motion carries.

ADVOCATES' FEES—SECOND INTERIM REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ADOPTED. The Governor: Item number 11. The hon. Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— That the Second Interim Report of the Select Committee on Advocates' Fees be adopted. In moving that the Second Interim Report of the Select Committee on Advocates' Fees be adopted, members will recall that a little over a year has elapsed since Tynwald approved the Petition of the Isle of Man Law Society and appointed a Committee of five, in keeping with the provisions of the Advocates Act 1874. An initial assessment of the situation confronting your Committee led to our tabling at the July Tynwald what was, in essence, a request for the expansion of the authority of the Committee to enable them to do the job properly. The consideration of advocates' fees, if taken in isolation, would, in itself, fail either to achieve the objectives of the Petitioners or, indeed, of Tynwald itself, and the outcome was an examination of a pattern of operation with a view to finding an overall structure which would be equitable to both advocate and client and which took into account, in particular, the conveyancing side of the legal business. In our presentation to you today of proposals emanating from the study in which your Committee was involved, the perhaps surprising omission is in respect of the Law Society's Petition, and in relation to that Petition you will have noted that there is no recommendation. You will obviously wish to know why and it is explained by the fact that in the time that has elapsed since we first considered the Society's approach we have been unable to extract the essential information which would, in turn, help us to make a report based on fact. Yes, we had information on costs, but on returns, no information whatsoever. Perhaps we have experienced the sort of treatment about which we frequently hear and that is concern expressed by the public as to inordinate delay when dealing with some advocates' businesses. Suffice to say we found the position unacceptable and, indeed, insulting to Tynwald who had shown their willingness to consider a reasoned approach and, as a result, no recommendation in respect of the Petition, merely a recital of events. Those events are chronicled in paragraphs 1 to 7. Now, the effectiveness of the operation of the Bar is already linked to the provision of legal services to the public and we felt in that section of our report headed "The Profession" it could be helpful to those of you who, like the lay members of your

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. T1086 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Committee, were interested in how the machine was created and functions, to have a summary outlining this, and here I would acknowledge our indebtedness to the one legally qualified member of the Committee, Mr. Christian, whose help and guidance was invaluable. Now, Your Excellency, again we initially outline the Acts and rules that govern the field of law, indicating where as a fused profession there is a variation from the pattern applying, for instance, in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. We point out areas where, happily, there has been an increase in activity such as the financial field and other linked areas, particularly, I would say, investment, the investment field and the directorship field. Unfortunately, there has been increased activity also in relation to the family units in which, unhappily for our society, there is, of course, a vast increase in the number of cases in particular relation to divorce, and so on. Although of the opinion that the work-load of the Bar has increased significantly, it is interesting and maybe expressed, I think, as a matter of concern, that over the years the number of advocates in practice has remained fairly consistent at around 25. Against this background and recognising the importance of an effective legal service for the public we have also borne in mind the factors which we consider to be desirable. Those factors are, first of all, the retention of, shall I say, a Manxness in relation to the Bar. The Bar remains as the supply point for our judiciary and in protecting it in that way we consider that it will be at its most effective when that is allied to intellectual ability and, of course, probity. Now, although at the present moment there is an increase in the number of students going in for law, for a number of reasons this is not resulting in a greater entry into the Manx Bar. What the deterring factors are it is hard to establish. Possibly there is a situation where the number of rungs up the ladder are not so great as in other communities, there is less room at the top. But whether that is the only factor or whether it is the qualifying period that is too long after taking the University degree, these are points we have looked at, and we are concerned to try and ensure that the Manx Bar will get an infusion of young people which will enable it to maintain in the years ahead that degree of authority that has always been attributed to it in the past. To help us in respect of legal education we turn to the Ormrod Report which is produced with your report as Appendix A for information and if you have studied it you will have noted that they refer to education in law as being primarily the responsibility of the Universities, qualification to practice resting with the governing bodies of the profession. They commented on the weakness of the system of articles in much the same way, indeed, as an earlier Committee of this hon. Court commented on this system which at that time was chaired by the President of the Council, and that question was one of concern and still remains one of concern here. The point about new rules for qualification that they made has already been accepted in the United Kingdom and it has been in operation there since 1979 and while, as a Committee, we are not putting forward a particular request to the Law Society or to this Court, we are saying that we wish you to note these points, we wish you to bear them in mind, because we think that Manx standards of qualification should be maintained at a high level and that a University education in law is desirable for an entrant. We do not think it is proper to say it is absolutely essential because the Manx Bar has produced some very, very good members indeed under the present articles system and we are not suggesting that that should be abandoned but we are saying that every advocate entering the Bar should at least complete the obligatory course for qualification that an English solicitor has to complete. Now, Your Excellency, in touching on these points you will find

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1087

portrayed our belief that an attractive pay structure for entrants should be maintained as the articled pupils undoubtedly have an inherent value to their principals from an early stage in their careers. We believe there is no question of abandoning the Manx Bar examination even though the applicant be fully qualified in another jurisdiction but we do feel, and this is clearly set out in the report, that in certain cases the present two year acclimatisation should be reduced to one year and that such change, along with the others we mentioned, would in no way diminish the Manx character of the Bar which we regard as essential, but rather would improve its effectiveness and improve its output. In our next reference, that of the legal executive, we recognise that the linchpin of an advocate's office is, in fact, the managing clerk. Elsewhere the key roles of such personnel is recognised by the qualification of "legal executive" and in this context we are all, I think, conscious of the preponderance of retired people from other walks of life who appear to find employment with the legal profession. The co-ordinator of all this is, in fact, the managing clerk and to ensure that a high standard of operation is maintained we are of the opinion that a Manx Institute of Legal Executives be established which would be an effective medium to represent and maintain standards of the personnel involved. Naturally, court procedures, time consuming and of high cost, continue to be of concern, and for us, the Administration of Justice Bill with its inbuilt streamlining in respect of certain legal operations has been a timely introduction. We set out the procedures in paragraphs 4. 5, a client may follow in court actions, and illustrate that at the end of the day he may, if still not satisfied, complain to the Law Society. However, if those clients fare no better than perhaps we have done, and there is no reason they should, they have recourse to Your Excellency as the Visitor to the Law Society. I can perhaps sum up the situation confronting us by saying that it is not wholly satisfactory and until we get more competition with more lawyers in practice there is little likelihood of the present operators being able to give any better service than at the present time. However, Your Excellency, we think that in regard to court work, all parties can be assisted by the increased use of modern technology. You will find it, I am quite sure, interesting to study the reply to the Committee's inquiry in this regard embraced in the First Deemster's letter and which has been quoted at length in the report and we are satisfied, having consulted with both the Deemsters and the learned Attorney-General, to whom we pay tribute for their co-operation, there is a concern and a will to effect improvements in this particular direction. Now, Your Excellency, we come next and finally to one of the very important recommendations of this report and it relates to property transactions and here you will find the proposal to provide a land registration pattern here, a new system which, when established, should have the effect of maintaining the titles, of maintaining to the client a service which will cut his costs in the long term by something like two-thirds of the day to day costs, and in looking at this you will find it set out very clearly in paragraphs 5. 1 and onwards. We have, of course, studied it and I note that it is the subject of an amendment. I can understand the amendment but I am going to appeal to the mover of the amendment to, in fact, withdraw it with an undertaking from the Committee which I hope will enable him to do this. (Interruption.) I have it on my desk and I feel that in my own way I will happily deal with it both in advance and in reply. It gives me two cuts of the cake. However, my point is this. Since 1906, members of this Court have been trying to achieve a system such as the one recommended. First of all they were swimming against the stream, they were not getting the backing and the sympthy of the

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. 11088 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Law Society. A few years ago, in the 1960's, we got on to a level where the recommendations of the Committee of that day were, in fact, acceptable to the Court. They were also, and more important, acceptable to the Law Society, and I can well remember, I think, the present Attorney-General portraying his views to the Committee and a very interesting discussion would on occasion ensue when you would get lawyers disagreeing. However, this was what made it interesting. The income of continued discussion on this particular point was a proposal to set up a land registration operation here which would serve the Isle of Man. It will not be done overnight, it will take time to introduce it, and it will take time to get the whole operation established because this operation must be related to the up to date ordnance surveys of the Island. To cut my story short in this connection, and I am sure hon. members will apppreciate that in doing so I expect their sympathtic response — (laughter) — we have had the situation that Tynwald, having endorsed an earlier Committee's findings, found that when it went for funding it was turned down. Now the reason it was turned down was on the grounds of cost, because the cost of the initial programming was at that time estimated to be something like £100,000, but nobody, absolutely nobody, indicated what the returns were going to be. There was only the one side portrayed and, in consequence, it went out and with an Election, of course, it, in turn, was lost, and I am afraid that we are facing a very much similar pattern today. What I would like to see the Court do today is accept and adopt the proposals that are in this report because they are all designed to benefit the people of the Island as a whole, the overall pattern. Now why adopt it today? To enable the Bill which is attached to this report to be printed, and I would say that with that Bill there must be embodied in it an appointed day order to which the Finance Board would concur because I accept totally and without reservation in any way the situation that it is the Finance Board who must determine when the time is right and when the mood is right for the introduction of this particular legislation. But defer the legislation and you will find that it will be lost and gone as another document. I would say to you to illustrate this that the document that we have produced here as an Appendix to the report is, in fact, the updated document of the earlier report, updated with the co-operation of the learned Attorney-General and produced in this form. So we go on with this in mind, do not be put off the idea by saying, let us not have the legislation until it is opportune, rather let us have the legislation and when the time is opportune introduce it. Now, of course, that is not all that this particular section says. The section also says that ideas as to modernisation and the use of modern technology which emanated from the learned Attorney-General are certainly attractive to your Committee and we would say that the systems that have been recommended, and which are referred to in paragraph 5. 5, for instance, computerisation of titles, all this sort of operation is one for implementation in the future. It is there, it is being done in other communities, it can be done in ours. And so, Your Excellency, I come to the point of recommendations and you will find these set out in paragraphs 6 . 1 to 6 . 6, summarising that the Petition be deferred pending receipt of further evidence; that the Law Society reviews its training regulations; that the Law Society, in consultation with the Institute of Legal Executives, take steps to establish a Manx Institute of Legal Executives; that all possible steps be taken by the law officers of the Crown to eliminate wasteful and archaic procedures; that legislation to provide for a system of registration of titles in

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1089

accordance with the draft Bill attached be introduced forthwith; and that further consideration be given to the introduction of a computerised data bank system of land titles in due course. Your Excellency, I beg to move.

The Lord Bishop: I beg to second and reserve my remarks.

Mr. Crellin: Your Excellency, I welcome the opportunity to say what a good report this is. It is a very good Second Interim Report which is comprehensive and full, perhaps to overflowing, with very useful information. However, I should like to refer to the recommendations made in this report. I could not help feeling myself that perhaps this Court was being manipulated in a little way by the speech of the hon. Mr. Speaker. It is a great shame because I believe if he had heard what I have got to say about this he would really have considered in his concluding address that Finance Board is not going to ask for anything which is very difficult to produce. I ask hon. members to have a look at the summary of recommendations. Now each of these recommendations is very sensible and very conditional, but then you come to paragraph 6. 5 which says, "That legislation to provide for a system of registration of titles, in accordance with the draft Bill attached, be introduced forthwith." Now this is a very, very positive recommendation and it is the only really positive recommendation which is made in this report. I had the privilege of serving on the Committee which was set up to consider the Land Registration Bill under the direction and presidency of the First Deemster, who is no ad hoc thing of the Finance Board, do not get any ideas about that. This was a Com- mittee which was set up deliberately to study the terms and conditions of this Bill and when we went into it we reported and we reported back to the Finance Board in 1977. In 1977, Your Excellency, not 1981, Finance Board discussed the report of the Committee appointed to consider the questions arising on the draft Land Registration Bill of 1977 and noted that the present Registry of Deeds and the new Land Registry would need to continue in parallel for many years and the extra accommodation required might cost £100,000 or more. Since Government was to guarantee title, the Bill provided for the appointment of a number of legally qualified and other staff which, with annual running costs, might amount to expenditure of approximately £50,000 per annum. Loan charges on capital expenditure would also need to be taken into account with these estimates which were provided by the Committee, and Finance Board agreed to recommend that although the objects were desirable the cost of implementing them was too high and, accordingly, it could not concur with the introduction of a Bill at this time. Nevertheless, in view of the fact that the original purpose of the inquiry was to reduce legal expenses in connection with the registration of ownership of land, consultations should take place with the Law Society with a view to reducing the cost of conveyancing, particularly where the ad valorem fee was too high in relation to the extent of the necessary research into title. That was in 1977. In 1979 it had a further report from this same Committee and the same Committee had made little progress because of the fact that they were at an impasse on the question of the expense of the situation. I will not read it all through but it says, "Accordingly, while having reservations about the financial implications of providing and administering the Land Registry, Finance Board would be prepared to consider the question again if Tynwald reaffirmed the earlier recommendations in the light of present day circumstances and a full estimate was to be submitted to Finance Board of the cost and providing accommodation for a Land Registry and for its staffing and running." Now I find myself, and indeed my colleagues

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. T1090 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

— I am the junior member of Finance Board, senior in years, junior in experience - but, nevertheless, I find myself somewhat in a difficulty because of the fact that these are decisions which we have already made and already transmitted to the proper quarter and if hon. members would like to look back at paragraph 5 .6 of this report it says: "The Committee has ascertained that the Law Society, which was broadly in favour of such a system in 1969, still favours the introduction of a system of land registration. Accordingly, conscious of the considerable benefits which such a development will confer on the public in both the short and the long term, the Committee recommends the introduction of appropriate legislation at the earliest possible opportunity, in the form set out in Appendix B." In other words, "a system" to "the system", the system which has already been the subject of a great deal of controversy in the past. It will be noted that this legislation provides for the introduction of the system at such a time as Tynwald deems appropriate through the use of an appointed day order. Now, Your Excellency, that means quite clearly that the principle of the Bill would have to be accepted and what would be in question would be only the day on which it came in, but the principle would be there and it would be hanging round the necks of this hon. Court for ever and a day. Let us have a look at Appendix B to this measure, and this is the explanatory memorandum of the Land Registration Bill. It says: "Part I (clauses 1 to 4) and Schedule I provide for the establishment of the Land Registry, the appointment of a legally qualified Chief Land Registrar to run the Land Registry and of a Land Commissioner, with experience as a Deemster or Judge, to hear appeals and to carry out certain other judicial functions under the Bill." It goes on: "Clauses 27 and 28 deal with the examination of titles and it is envisaged that the majority of this work will be carried out by practising advocates who will certify the titles concerned." Paragraph 7: Part VI (clauses 58 to 60) deals with maps and boundaries in relation to registered land. The type of maps to be used will be prescribed by Land Registry Rules." We then are directed to look at Schedule I of the Bill. "The Registrar shall be appointed by the Civil Service Commission after consultation with the Land Commissioner. A person shall not be appointed to be Registrar unless he is an advocate and has practised as such is some part of the British Commonwealth for not less than five years." You realise how much it is going to cost you on that alone. "For the purpose of paragraph 2, service by an advocate in the Land Registry or in some other legal appointment under Government of any part of the British Commonwealth shall be deemed to be practise as an advocate. The Civil Service Commission may, after consultation with the Land Commissioner, appoint a Deputy Land Registrar (in this Schedule referred to as "the Deputy Registrar"), who shall be an advocate." So you have got one who is a Deemster or an ex-Deemster and one who is an advocate who will work under him. "The Civil Service Commission may appoint such other officers and persons as it considers to be necessary for the service of the Land Registry." In other words, the only point I am trying to make, Your Excellency, is the fact that if Tynwald today accepts this Bill without the caveat which has been placed on it and which I hope my hon. Chairman will move, if we accept it today without that then you are committing yourselves to a Bill which, for my money, will stand no chance at all when it comes to the Branches, and all I would like to be sure of is that when a Bill of this nature comes forward it is something which will really stick in the principle of land registration. All I am asking is that the hon. Mr. Speaker will accept the amendment, because the amendment does no harm. This other thing about the appointed day is a wishy-washy nonsense which

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1091

has been dreamed up and I hope that the hon. members of this Court are not fooled by it, because I most certainly am not. Dr. Moore: Your Excellency, I would like to take just two sentences from the report. The first one is a statement of fact. "There has been a substantial increase in divorce, separation, custody, maintenance and other problems related to family law." The second question is more a statement of opinion. "It is questionable whether sufficient attention is given to much of the routine court work", and I would like to concur with that opinion. I feel that very often the standard of legal service which many of our people get is nothing less than appalling, particularly where legal aid is involved. Now I have been told by several lawyers, and I accept that what they say is true, that legal aid work is done at a loss. It does not meet its proportion of the office overheads and I suppose it is reasonable to understand why it should therefore be given a lower priority, but the result of this is that it can sometimes take years to conclude a family law action with a great deal of inconvenience at the least, and very often with a lot more distress than that. A client under legal aid can often find it very difficult even to get to see their lawyer or even find out what is going on and what is happening. Regretfully, I accept that the standards are not going to improve until the remuneration of lawyers improves first. Now I accept the reasons stated in the report why the Select Committee could not make specific recommendations on this, but although I accept that an increase in the number of advocates would help the situation, I do feel that the prime need is to bring the fee scales up to date and I hope that the Committee will continue their work and pressurise as far as possible the legal profession to provide the necessary information to enable this to be done, else I feel a lot of people under legal aid are going to go on suffering delays and disappointments and distress. Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I am sure that hon. members will agree today, having heard my hon. colleague on the Finance Board, the member of the Council, Major Crellin, comment, as he is, on this occasion, shall I say, and on many other occassions I must admit as well, the expert, especially in this subject, and that is why I had the pleasure of letting him speak on the subject first. We on the Finance Board, generally speaking, are very concerned that many a time we get these various resolutions coming forward to be adopted or brought forward forthwith, and all we are saying at this moment in time is that we are pointing out to you that under our present financial circumstances we have got to be extremely careful how we handle our finances in the Island. What we want to do, and I am certain the, hon. Mr. Speaker who spoke to me about this prior to lunch-time would agree with me, that when this legislation is introduced, as long as we are certain, and this is why I am moving the amendment, as long as we are certain that within this legislation there is a clause which will make it perfectly clear that the legislation will not be implemented until the time when the Government can afford to do it, with that in mind, Your Excellency, I will still be moving my amendment because I do not think the Finance Board have any intention of holding up the legislation but we want to be able to see it, to examine it, to see that the clauses are in it that protect us from that point of view. I am certain that we will give it very thorough and immediate attention when it comes forward. So with those few comments, because I feel certain that my hon. colleague has covered the ground very well indeed, I beg to move that the following words be added to the resolution: Subject to the necessary statutory concurrence of the Finance Board being obtained prior to the introduction of the legislation referred to in recommendation 6 . 5.

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. T1092 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

The Governor: Is there a seconder to the amendment?

Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, I must second it and speak on it at this time. I would like to take the opportunity of saying that of all the people here in this Court I am the only person who has had practical experience of the Land Registry over a quarter of a century and, therefore, if I can make any contribution I hope it will be received in that spirit. Like a later item on the structure of Tynwald, it may be said that I am too near the wood to see the trees, but I think in this case, first of all, there is nothing at all incompatible, in my opinion, between the fact that I am a signatory to the report and the seconder of the amendment. It does depend entirely in the last resort on finance being made available to meet the expense which my hon. colleague on the Finance Board has outlined. However, it is my experience that it is in the public interest that there shall be a system of land registration. In 1847 Tynwald made a great step forward and produced a system of land tenure which has been the envy of many other countries in the world and the Registry of Deeds Act 1847 set the pattern for the whole century but that pattern now, in my opinion, requires to be changed. Each one of us at some time in our life as, indeed, with most people in the Isle of Man, has got to make a decision, if they can, to buy their own house. It is a major expense, never has it been anything else, and therefore when the time comes, particularly for young people setting up a home, to me, not only what many people consider the exorbitant price of houses but also they are faced with architects' fees and legal fees when at that time they find that the root title has been covered 40 or 50 times and they are still faced with an ad valorem duty on the consideration of the conveyance of £200, £300 or £400. That, to me, and I am speaking after many years as adviser to the original Commission on land registration chaired by Mr. Quayle when he was a member of this hon. Court, in my opinion it is right and proper that Government, the State, should undertake a degree of control rather than leave it to the legal profession. So when the time comes, indeed, that the Land Registration Bill will be considered, I hope the Finance Board, whoever constitutes the Finance Board, will look at it very carefully. The expense will be initially great. It will take a long time for it to become completely operative and in the initial stages, admittedly, those lucky people who will not be called on to pay large advocates' fees will, indeed, benefit and the Exchequer may not, but in the long term, and I am speaking long term on this, Your Excellency, this is a move forward which we should not reject in any shape or form. We are setting the pattern for the next century on land registration and it is in the interests of the public to see that the Land Registration Bill goes forward. I do not agree with the Speaker entirely because the Bill as printed as an Appendix does not contain the appointed day order that he spoke of, (Interruption.) In that case possibly Finance Board would have the opportunity to look at it. But please do not reject the amendment. It is the necessary consideration, it is ingrained in our law that given a, Finance Board it should look at the whole picture of how far Government can spend money and what gain will be made thereby to the public. I do hope the hon. Court will accept the amendment standing in the name of the hon. Chairman of Finance Board.

Mr. Christian: Your Excellency, I also would hope that the hon. Mr. Speaker would see his way to accepting the amendment which seems sensible to me. The recommendations in this report carry, some of them are very small indeed. For example, the one that all possible steps should be taken by law officers of the Crown to eliminate wasteful

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 11093

and archaic procedures in the court. Well, this sounds great and everybody thinks how out of date court procedures are, but they are not really. There is very little that can be done really to improve it under that provision. By far the most important one, of course, is the one which has just been under discussion, the updating of the system of land titles and as my hon. friend from West Douglas has just said, when the land registration system was brought in in the Isle of Man in 1847 it was way ahead of its time. It is interesting for a second to look back at the legislation which was being passed during the last century in the Isle of Man which was way ahead of its time in comparison with similar legislation in the United Kingdom. Take this particular example. The Land Registration Act was brought in in the Isle of Man in 1847. Nothing comparable was brought in in England until the 1925 legislation came into operation there on 1st January 1926, and it started then trying to catch up, so they were way behind. So it was on other things such as the Criminal Code, and so on, and also votes' for women. There were so many things that really, looking back, they were remarkable men who were in Tynwald at that time. They were not behind their times, they were way ahead of them, but that system, and a good system it was in its day, is now after a century outdated, and even the very fact that original deeds are being handled from day to day. You go along to the Registry, you look up an index under a parish and you see that you want a particular deed, a parish and then the alphabetical name of the vendor, and so on, and get out the deed. I remember when I was a student what a great kerfuffle there was when it was discovered that a certain member of the Bar, who shall be nameless, but who lived not in the north but the south of the Island, had walked off with the deeds and they managed to catch him when the train stopped at Ballasalla. They mounted the train and said, "You have run off with the deed", and they found that there it was in his brief case. Mr. MacDonald: By mistake? Mr. Christian: By mistake, but original deeds are still being given to people to examine. When I started off as a student the great thing was that you took a bit of deed paper up to the Registry and you got out some deeds, and then you got this deed paper under the counter where you could not be seen — there were boothes they had at that time because you were not supposed to let anybody see anybody else's title —then you tore this bit of deed paper under the counter and, of course, the then Registrar, Mr. S. C. Christian, would say, "Who tore that deed?" There was turmoil, so to speak. But it was a very good system in its day, now out of date. This helped to pass the time. (Laughter and interruptions.) Well then, Your Excellency, this is the point really that I am coming to. Members of this hon. Court must realise that it is not the lawyers in the Isle of Man who are preventing an updated system of land registration being brought in at the present time, it rests entirely with this Court and has rested entirely with this Court for a long time. So that is what we want, it is the politicians who the public should blame if they say that it is far too costly, that they have the same title checked over and over again, not the lawyers. The Law Society are in favour of it. I would say that this could be one of the most important things to try and get enacted in our five-year period in Tynwald, and that is why I would hope that the hon. Mr. Speaker would see his way to accepting that amendment which I shall support because it does no harm and in no way possibly let us fail to get this Bill through in our time here in this Tynwald. On the other matters I do not think it is really worth holding up this Court any longer.

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. T1094 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

The Governor: Hon. members, I will ask Mr. Speaker to reply before the adjournment.

The Speaker: Your Excellency, 1 am very appreciative of the support that this report has received from the Court, endorsement really by a general acceptance, if you like, of all that we have put forward in the way of recommendations, all we thought fit to express in writing, which I think finds confirmation in your own thoughts and in this sense, indeed, I am sure the Committee are extremely grateful. So we come to the one element of contention and that, of course, is related to land registration. Now you have just heard the only lawyer in the House of Keys say that the system is out of date. It helps lawyers to pass the time going up to the Registry Office.

Mr. Christian: Students.

The Speaker: And that, frankly, if anything is to be done about it you, hon. members, are the only people standing in the way of change. That is the fact today, that you are possibly standing in the way of change, with the siren notes of the hon. member of Council, Mr. Crellin, still ringing in your ears because when I listened to him this afternoon I felt, you know, no wonder we have been going on since 1906 trying to get an improvement in this field because the 1969 report was positive and the hon. member has been dealing with this in 1977, 1979, and today he is as strongly opposed as he was on the two prior occasions, whilst professing to be sympathetic to the idea. The report in this respect is termed wishy-washy. You are going to get no wishy or washy from me, I can assure you. (Laughter.) I am going to give you this afternoon the reasons why the 1969 Committee suggested it should be done, reasons which are endorsed by the present Committee. "It is considered", they said, "that the main disadvantages of the present system are: (a) the repeated deduction and investigation of the same links in a title by successive advocates. The existing law makes it necessary that virtually the whole of the title which has already been investigated by one advocate today, may again be thoroughly investigated by another advocate within a short period of time. (b) When a mortgage or charge is cancelled on record, as previously mentioned, the property to which it refers is then 'cleared' of that particular mortgage or charge, but as the system now stands these cancelled mortgages remain in the system and cause much unnecessary work. Although the mortgages are marked 'Cancelled' in the indices at the time they are cancelled by the Chief Registrar, most advocates are of the opinion that it is too risky to rely on this being correct as there is no provision for indemnity against the Chief Registrar if he has mistakenly placed 'Cancelled' against a mortgage that is not, in fact, cancelled. This results in many deeds being requested for inspection unnecessarily. If at the time of their cancellation they had been destroyed and the relative entries erased from the indices, this unnecessary work could have been avoided. During 1966, 578 mortgages were cancelled." They go on, "It is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain persons who are willing to do the 'fetch and carry' involved when a large number of deeds have to be produced from the strongroom" — and we are talking about our own Registry —"and replaced after use. This is understandable, as the work is monotonous and takes up a large part of each day. A new entrant to the Civil Service is inclined to feel that the best use is not being made of his abilities." Hon. members, you have heard the hon. member of the Council say this afternon that the principal is worth supporting. Now you also heard him refer to the factors which determined the

Advocates' Fees--Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1095 refusal, if you like, of the respective Committees to implement this very same principle — and what were they? They were, and he emphasised the point, and I take it, in 1977 £100,000 capital investment was required and £50,000 a year running costs. The hon. member made not one mention in any way of revenue from this exercise, at no time did he mention revenue. Now, Your Excellency, he said you will find the principle is one that is acceptable, the commitment, if you like, is one that will hang round your necks, and I say to you today that the principle is one worth taking and hanging round your necks because unless you do this you will have a repeat of all that has gone before. What I am giving an assurance on this afternoon to the Finance Board, whose viewpoint I totally accept, we cannot do it until we have the funds to do it and we cannot do it without their authority, and I have asked the learned Attorney-General if he could produce an insertion into this particular draft to the effect that it could not become operative without Finance Board authority. He says he can and I would say I would give a Committee assurance to the Finance Board that that would be inserted in the Bill and I would ask the Chairman, with that assurance, to withdraw his amendment because, hon. members, the Bill is capable of being passed by you in the life of this House and you will be doing something which for 40 years has faced respective Houses and has received the same treatment, just push it aside. It will be a step forward but a step only taken with implementation when the Finance Board, whoever they may be, think that the time is ripe and that we can afford it. And so I ask, and I plead with the Chairman of the Finance Board to pull out his amendment and accept the commitment from the Committee, with the learned Attorney-General's assurance, that it would be put in the Bill. Would you?

Mr. P. Radcliffe: No, Mr. Speaker. This last fortnight has made me very tough skinned. I can certainly assure this hon. Court that when the legislation comes before the Finance Board we will look very carefully at it. I am a firm supporter of the idea that Mr. Speaker has put forward that land registration wants examining, but I think we have got to be very careful with the legislation produced today that we are not going to have the word "fortwith" implemented until we are satisfied we can do it. All I am saying in our amendment is that we want the opportunity to do that.

The Speaker: Now, Your Excellency, whilst that has cleared the air, I do not think it clears you, hon. members, of your responsibilities because you will be avoiding them if you accept that particular amendment. I would give the Court the assurance that the Bill which would be printed in keeping with this resolution would include, and I am sure the Committee would accept this, the proviso that it would not be implemented until such time as the Finance Board said it could be implemented. With that assurance and the belief that you are all determined to try and improve the lot of the people that you know and I know are suffering from these very high charges, who come to us and say, "'Look, I am trying to buy my first house, my first home, and look at the charges I have got to face which I did not expect to have to face." We have all experienced this, hon. members. Let us for heaven's sake take one tiny step on the road of progress.

The Governor: Hon. members, I will put the amendment standing in the name of the Chairman of Finance Board, Mr. Radcliffe. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no.

Advocates' Fees—Second Interim Report of Select Committee Adopted. T1096 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

A division was called for and voting resulted as folows:— In the Keys— For: Messrs. Anderson, Kermeen and Dr. Moore. Against: Messrs. Quirk, J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Mrs. Christian, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Callin, Watterson, Creer, Lowey, Walker, Cringle, Mrs. Quayle, Messrs. Quinney, Craine, Irving, Mrs. Hanson, Messrs. Christian, Swales and the Speaker -- 19. The Speaker: Your Excellency, the amendment fails to carry in the House of Keys, three votes being cast in favour and 19 votes against. In the Council— For: Messrs. Kneale, Crellin, P. Radcliffe and MacDonald -- 4. Against: The Lord Bishop, Mr. Kerruish and the President of the Council — 3. The Governor: In the Council, four in favour and three against, the amendment fails. will now put the substantive motion. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. Hon. members, we will adjourn until 4.45 p.m. The Court adjourned for tea.

PETITION OF CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE ISLE OF MAN DISTRICT OF THE METHODIST CHURCH —LEAVE TO INTRODUCE A BILL ENTITLED THE METHODIST CHURCH BILL 1981 — APPROVED. The Governor: We now turn to the Petitions. Item number 29. 1 call upon the hon. member for Peel, Dr. Moore.

Dr. Moore: Your Excellency, in respect of the Petition of the Chairman and Members of the Isle of Man District of the Methodist Church for leave to introduce a Bill entitled the Methodist Church Bill 1981, I beg to move:— That the Prayer of the Petition be and the same is hereby granted.

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed?

It was agreed.

PETITION OF MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND BURGESSES OF BOROUGH OF DOUGLAS TO BORROW SUM NOT EXCEEDING £514,000 RE PHASE 3 OF REFURBISHMENT SCHEME IN LOWER PULROSE ESTATE — APPROVED WITH CONDITION.

The Governor: Item number 30. I call upon the Chairman of the Local Government Board.

Petititon of Chairman and Members of the Isle of Man District of the Methodist Church Leave to Introduce a Bill Entitled the Methodist Church Bill 1981—Approved. — Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas to Borrow a Sum not Exceeding £514,000 re Phase 3 of Refurbishment Scheme in Lower Pulrose Estate— Approved with Condition. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1097

Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, in respect of the Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Douglas for authority to borrow a sum not exceeding £514,000, repayable within 20 years from the date of borrowing, in connection with Phase 3 of the refurbishment scheme in relation to the Lower Pulrose Estate, I beg to move:— That the Prayer of the Petition be and the same is hereby granted subject to the approval of the Board being obtained prior to the placing of the contract for the works involved. Mr. Walker: I beg to second. The Governor: Is that agreed 7 it was agreed.

PETITION OF MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND BURGESSES OF BOROUGH OF DOUGLAS TO BORROW SUM NOT EXCEEDING £350,000, RE PHASE 1 OF SCHEME FOR IMPROVEMENT OF CERTAIN FLATS — APPROVED WITH CONDITION. The Governor: Item number 31. 1 call upon the Chairman of the Local Government Board. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, in respect of the Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Douglas for authority to borrow a sum not exceeding £350,000, repayable within 20 years from the date of borrowing, in connection with Phase 1 of a scheme for the improvement of certain flats in the ownership of the Petitioners to ensure compliance with Housing (Flats) Regulations 1979, 1 beg to move:-- That the Prayer of the Petition be and the same is hereby granted subject to the approval of the Board being obtained prior to the placing of the contracts for each sub-phase involved. Your Excellency, as stated in the report of the Board now before hon. members, this Petition relates to phase 1 of a two-phase scheme covering works necessary to ensure that all the flats in the ownership of the Petitioners are brought into full compliance with the requirements of the Board's Housing (Flats) Regulations 1979 which were approved by Tynwald in February 1979. The regulations require compliance to be achieved by January 1983. It will have been noted that the Petitioners found it necessary to revise their original programme in order to deal firstly with their 198 more modern flats because of the realisation of the problems and major disruption which would be involved in implementing the modernisation of the older properties, numbering 184. This reversal will allow time for proper arrangements and an appropriate time-table to be evolved for the more extensive and difficult works. The specific works under Phase 1, as detailed in the report, are principally fire precaution measures and it is known that the estimate of £350,000 under the Petition is over-generous, having been calculated on the earlier premise. In any event expenditure will be carefully monitored through the require- ment for the prior approval of the Board to the placing of the contracts for the six

Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas to Borrow Sum Not Exceeding £350,00, re Phase I of Scheme for Improvement of Certain Flats— Approved with Condition. T1098 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

sub-phases under Phase 1. The annual charges on the proposed borrowing are estimated at £54,340 over the 20-year repayment period and the annual deficiency in this connection will equal that sum. Your Excellency, I beg to move the motion standing in my name. Mr. Walker: I beg to second. Mr. W. J. H. Corlett (Advocate) appeared for the Petitioners. (Due to technical difficulties it has not proved possible to produce a full report of the debate on this Petition.) The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed.

PETITION OF MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND BURGESSES OF BOROUGH OF DOUGLAS TO BORROW SUM NOT EXCEEDING £30,800 RE IMPROVEMENTS TO PRE-1930 HOUSES — APPROVED. The Governor: Item number 32. 1 call on the Chairman of the Local Government Board. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, in respect of the Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Douglas for authority to borrow a sum not exceeding £30,800, repayable within 10 years from the date of borrowing, in connection with improvements to pre-1930 houses, I beg to move:— That the Prayer of the Petition be and the same is hereby granted. A Member: I beg to second. The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed.

PETITION OF MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND BURGESSES OF BOROUGH OF DOUGLAS TO BORROW SUM NOT EXCEEDING £40,000 RE COST OF PUR- CHASE OF DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT — APPROVED. The Governor: Item number 33. I call on the Chairman of the Local Government Board. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, in respect of the Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Douglas for authority to borrow a sum not exceeding £40,000, repayable within seven years from the date of borrowing, to defray the cost of the purchase of data processing equipment, I beg to move:— That the Prayer of the Petition be and the same is hereby granted. Your Excellency, this is a Petition for borrowing powers to enable the Petitioners to replace their existing accounting machine, which has passed its useful life, with up-to- date data processing equipment. The need for this equipment has become urgent due to the postponement over the last three years of action in the matter because of the

Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas to Borrow Sum Not Exceeding £30,800 re Improvements to Pre-1930 Houses—Approved. — Petition of Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Borough of Douglas to Borrow Sum Not Exceeding £40,000 re Cost of Purchase of Data Processing Equipment--Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1099

Petitioners' awareness of the possibility of changes in their responsibilities as indicated in the report of the Board. The Petitioners have investigated and assessed all possibilities to meet their needs in this respect, including use of the Government computer on an agency basis, and although the final choice of equipment and supplier has not yet been made, are satisfied as to the advantages to them of acquiring their own up-to-date machine. The Board recognises and accepts the Petitioners' desire to have complete control over the conduct of the affairs of their Borough to which, of course, they owe their first duty. The Board recognises also the necessity, to that end, for the Petitioners to hold all information within their own department, accessible at all times, to ensure the efficient and confidential functioning of their business. Annual charges on the proposed borrowing are estimated at £9,913. Your Excellency, I beg to move. A Member: I beg to second. (Due to technical difficulties it has not proved possible to produce a full report of the debate on this Petition.) Mr. Anderson (continuing): I find it perfectly understandable that they want available to them at all times the information that is going to be on this. One must recognise that, in fact, since the Government computer has been installed, a terrific advance in scientific moves along this line, that it is a completely different set-up, there is a completely different amount of accommodation required for such equipment. I entirely accept that and we actually put this to them when they met us, would it not be worthwhile. We were given the reasons why and we accept the reasons and understand precisely that this should be the case. I think it is important and I think it would be completely wrong that this hon. Court would give any indication that, in fact, because of what is happening and what is proposed to happen, it would remove the importance, the very great importance, of the Douglas Corporation. I hope it will become, through this, a much more efficient organisation than it has been in the past. A Member: Hear, hear. Mr. MacDonald: Your Excellency, could 1 ask the Chairman a question? Following what the hon. member for West Douglas says, I am not aware of any great state of flux on the future of Douglas Corporation and I presume it is going to continue. Certainly Tynwald has done nothing at all to suggest that Douglas Corporation will have to cease to exist if the road system is taken over. I do not think this has got anything at all to do with Douglas Corporation's continuation as a Borough Council. The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed.

PETITION OF RAMSEY AND NORTHERN DISTRICTS HOUSING COMMITTEE TO BORROW SUM NOT EXCEEDING £83,000 RE ADDITIONAL COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION FOR ELDERLY PERSONS AT COOIL-NY-MARREY, RAMSEY — APPROVED WITH CONDITION. The Governor: Item number 34. 1 call upon the Chairman of the Local Government Board.

Petition of Ramsey and Northern Districts Housing Committee to Borrow Sum Not Exceeding £83,000 re Additional Costs in Connection with Housing Accommodation for Elderly Persons at Cooil-ny-Marrey, Ramsey—Approved with Condition. T1100 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, in respect of the Petition of the Ramsey and Northern Districts Housing Committee for authority to borow a sum not exceeding £83,000, repayable within 60 years from the date of borrowing, for the purpose of defraying additional costs in connection with the provision of housing accommodation for elderly persons at Cooil-ny-Marrey, Waterloo Road, Ramsey, I beg to move:— That the Prayer of the Petition be and the same is hereby granted subject to the submission of the Final Account for• the project for scrutiny and approval by the Board and its technical officials. A Member: 1 beg to second. The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed.

GAMING AND AMUSEMENT MACHINES — REPORT OF GAMING BOARD OF CONTROL ADOPTED. The Governor: We will turn back to item number 12. I call on the Chairman of the Gaming Board of Control. Mr. J. J. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move: -- That in accordance with Standing Order 162(3) the provisions of Standing Order 162(1) be waived to enable the following resolution to be considered. A Member: I beg to second. The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed. Mr. J. J. Radcliffe:: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:— That the Report of the Gaming Board of Control on Gaming and Amusement Machines, subject to any necessary Finance Board concurrence, he and the same is hereby adopted. A Member: I beg to second. The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed.

LICENSING (No. 4) ORDER 1.981; LICENSING (No. 5) ORDER 1981; MUSIC AND DANCING ORDER 1981 — APPROVED. The Governor: Item number 13. 1 call on the Chairman of the Executive Council. Mr. Irving: Your Excellency: 1 beg to move:— (o) That the following Licensing Orders made by the Governor in Council on 12th March 1981 be and the same are hereby approved:— Licensing (No. 4) Order 1981. Licensing (No. 5) Order 1981.

Gaming and Amusement. Machines—Report of Gaming Board of Control Adopted. - Licensing (No. 4) Order 1981; Licensing (No. 5) Order 1981: Music and Dancing Order 1981—Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1101

(b) That the Music and Dancing Order 1981 made by the Governor in Council on 12th March 1981 be and the same is hereby approved. Licensing (No. 4) Order and (No. 5) Order both deal with the provision of intoxicating liquor to delegates at specified conferences and events at any of the hotels where the delegates are staying. This is something we have done for the past two years. There are two orders because there is a legal limit on these. The period of an order must not exceed four weeks. Since this covers a long period during the summer there have to be two orders. The Music and Dancing Order 1981 is to provide music and dancing at the Villiers Hotel from 8 o'clock until 10 o'clock on Sunday, 3rd May, for the Lions International Convention. I beg to move, sir.

Mr. Delaney: I beg to second, sir.

The President of the Council: Your Excellency, 1 passed this remark last year when these orders were being asked for. I have no objection to people coming to conferences and having an opportunity to invite some of their fellow delegates into their hotels and being able to offer them the necessary refreshment they require. That is one thing, but giving permission to in excess of 100 hotels which you have here . . . (Interruption.) In the event of certain people staying over in connection with the Lions or some other conference which may be held, is one thing, but I believe it should be applied only to those hotels in which the delegates are staying. Now if that is so, all this gloom that we have had around the place, that some people have no bookings for the summer, et cetera, we have 100 hotels here occupied with these conferencs and we are giving them permission to extend their facilities beyond those of other opposition houses until 1 o'clock in the morning. It includes the Glen Mona Hotel in Maughold, the Glen Hotel in Lonan, the Sulby Glen Hotel in Lezayre. the Castletown Golf Links and a whole series of hotels, 100 in all, or in excess of 100, which I think clearly is making a bit of a mockery of licensing. I have been on many conferences myself and have sometimes been criticised for going on those conferences. Nevertheless, we do meander into other people's hotels for the purpose of conducting the business and it is nice if the person you visit can offer you the hospitality they can offer to the same people on the same delegation staying in the same hotel. That is one thing and we must make provision for that, but to do it by this clumsy method of giving permission to all these hotels, it says to official guests. Now is is a very difficult thing to prove who is an official guest and who is not an official guest when they are all jollying it up at five minutes to one in the morning. I think it would be better if in future we were to do it just in the case of the hotels which had the people actually staying, delegations staying in those hotels. On the other hand, I may be completely wrong. I am sure the Chairman of the Executive Council will tend to prove how wrong I am, he will be saying that there are delegates in all of these hotels, and how I wish there were, and I would put both my hands up for these orders, but I think it is a clumsy way of dealing with it.

Mr. Quinney: Your Excellency, previously on conferences there have been great objections from delegates who have found that they could not go with their fellow delegates into some other hotel, and do not forget a lot of these hotels are residential hotels and, therefore, are not allowed to serve any guests unless the guest is invited in for lunch or dinner and then he must not drink after 10 o'clock in the evening, it must

Licensing (No. 4) Order 1981; Licensing (No. 5) Order 1981; Music and Dancing Order 1981--Approved. T1102 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 be over by then. I cannot answer as to whether everybody is staying, there are going to be residents in every one of these hotels, but when this was approved, believe you me, it made a big difference to the conferences coming into the Isle of Man in so much that delegates from one hotel could go into the hotel of another delegate and have drinks without any problems. It certainly did not create any drunkenness of any kind. All it did was create hospitality which does take place in Blackpool and other resorts in the United Kingdom where the conferences are held, and it was felt at one time that by giving this facility there was the possibility of obtaining more conferences in the Isle of Man which is a very desirable effect we would like to see.

Mr. Kermeen: The hon. member who has just resumed his seat has reinforced, if reinforcing is required, the point that was made by the Committee of the Keys, mentioned again last month by me, and I make no apology at all for reiteration, that it is not the business of this Court to deal with this type of order. It is a matter for the licensing bench and 1 do hope, despite all the promises that have been made, that the hon. mover of this will make one effort as far as we are concerned below the shelf, as it were. The sands of time are running out for this House of Keys. They have determined that there shall be a rational licensing law which concerns also the point I am making, and yet that Bill has not yet been produced and it is a long way down in the queue to all sorts of minor Bills. We have just had two this morning. We have little time available, four sittings of the House of Keys available to us to consider, so again, probably for the last time because after this date there will be no point in doing it, let us have a Licensing Bill before the Branches before the dissolution and let us get rid of this sort of exercise once and for all.

Mr. Delaney: 1 agree with the hon member of Council, this is probably the wrong way of doing it. It is trivia in relation to the business of this Court but it is very important to the tourist industry, and as has been spelt out by the hon. member for North Douglas, a very important part of our future will lie in conferences and conference business and if we are not, and I say not, able to say to people who represent large conferences or any conference, yes, you can get facilities to go into each other's hotels to converse and to meet with your colleagues, we are in the wrong business, we want to pull out of it, because this is what automatically happens at every other resort which is chasing these sort of people for business purposes, and we should not in this Court be debating this. I believe the idea of giving this sort of temporary licence should be put directly in relation to the Chairman of the Tourist Board and the Board in conjunction with the High-Bailiff's department, and it would stop us each year, as the hon. member for Council said, of going through this rigmarole, rightly in some cases but wrongly in most, of talking about our future and how much handicap we can put in the way of our customers. Let us get on with it and let us get this out of the hands of this Court and put it where it belongs, in the Tourist Board.

The Governor: The Chairman of Executive Council to reply.

Mr. Irving: Your Excellency, I would like hon. members to know that we go to considerable trouble to attract conferences to this Island and we are going to have to spend a lot more money from the Tourist Board in attracting conferences. I would like

Licensing (No. 4) Order 1981; Licensing (No. 5) Order 1981; Music and Dancing Order 1981---Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1103

to point out that we now have a spendid conference booklet — here is another case of a local printer producing a first-class publication. The hon. member who criticised the order, the President of the Council, I know he has shown me the long list of hotels, but I would have thought that as Vice-Chairman of the Tourist Board he would be well aware that this list was produced by the Tourist Board, and what the hon. member should remember, I think, is that I cannot say now which of these places will be taking conference delegates. What we have to do, as the hon. member, I am sure, knows, we have done this for years, is get a list of places which are trying to attract conference delegates. Some will already have bookings, some will hope to have bookings. (Inter- ruption.) If there was provision for all there would be 600 or 700 here, not 100, but we do not know, for example, if we take the conference of the National Association of Colliery Overmen, Deputies and Shot Firers, 19th to 27th June, no one can tell us yet where all these people are staying. They will be staying at some of these establish- r ments but none of these guest-houses or hotels can serve anybody other than residents with drink unless there are conference delegates staying at the place. Then the hon. member talks about official guests. Official guests will mean other delegates and only delegates at a conference could go to one of these places and drink if there are delegates for the conference staying in that particular establishment.

The Governor: Is that agreed, hon. members?

It was agreed.

MANX DECIMAL COINS (THE BETROTHAL AND WEDDING OF THE PRINCE OF WALES CROWNS) ORDER 1981 — APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 14. I call upon the Chairman of the Finance Board.

Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— (1) That in accordance with Section 1 of the Manx Decimal Coins Act 1970, Tynwald hereby approves the issue by the Treasurer of a set of four coins each of face value of twenty-five pence in platinum, in gold, in silver and in cupro-nickel to a total denominational value not exceeding £500,000 to commemorate the betrothal and wedding of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales to Lady Diana Spencer and (2) That the Manx Decimal Coins (The Betrothal and Wedding of the Prince of Wales Crowns) Order 1981 made by the Finance Board on 26th March 1981 be and the same is hereby approved.

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed?

It was agreed.

Manx Decimal Coins (The Betrothal and Wedding of the Prince of Wales Crowns) Order 1981—Approved. T1104 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

MANX DECIMAL COINS (THE WEDDING OF H.R.H. PRINCE CHARLES TO LADY DIANA SPENCER (GOLD COINS)) ORDER 1981 — APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 15. I call upon the Chairman of the Finance Board.

Mr. P. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— (1) That in accordance with Section 1 of the Manx Decimal Coins Act 1970, Tynwald hereby approves the issue by the Treasurer of a set of four gold coins with face values of five pounds, two pounds, sovereign and half sovereign to a total denominational value not exceeding £500,000 to commemorate the wedding of His Royal Highness Prince Charles to Lady Diana Spencer; and (2) That the Manx Decimal Coins (The Wedding of His Royal Highness Prince Charles to Lady Diana Spencer (Gold Coins)) Order 1981 made by Finance Board on 26th March 1981 be and the same is hereby approved.

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed?

It was agreed.

SCHOOL CROSSING PATROLS (PRESCRIBED PLACES) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 1981 — APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 16. 1 call upon the Chairman of the Highway and Transport Board.

Mr. J .N. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:— That the School Crossing Patrols (Prescribed Places) (Amendment) Regulations 1981 made by the Isle of Man Highway and Transport Board under the provisions of section 16 of the Road Traffic Act 1967 be and the same are hereby approved.

A Member: l beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed.

FIRE PRECAUTIONS (CINEMAS) ORDER 1981 — APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 17. I call upon the Chairman of the Local Government Board. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:— That the Fire Precautions (Cinemas) Order 1981 made by the Isle of Man Local Government Board on the 20th March 1981 under Section 1 of the Fire Precautions Act 1975, be and the same is hereby approved.

A Member: I beg to second.

Manx Decimel Coins (The Wedding of H.R.H. Prince Charles to Lady Diana Spencer (Gold Coins)) Order 1981—Approved. --- School Crossing Patrols (Prescribed Places) (Amendment) Regulations 1981—Approved. — Fire Precautions (Cinemas) Order 1981 —Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1105

The Governor: Is that agreed?

It was agreed.

CINEMATOGRAPH (SAFETY) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS — APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 18. 1 call upon the Chairman of the Local Government Board.

Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:— That the Cinematograph (Safety) (Amendment) Regulations 1981 made by the Isle of Man Local Government Board on the 20th March 1981 under Section 28 and Schedule 8 to the Fire Precautions Act 1975, be and the same are hereby approved.

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed.'

It was agreed.

MALEW PARISH BURIAL GROUND RATE ORDER 1981 — APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 19. I call upon the Chairman of the Local Government Board. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— That the Malew Parish Burial Ground Rate Order 1981 made by the Isle of Man Local Government Board on 20th March 1981 under Section 5(2) of the Burials Act 1949, as amended by section 1 of the Burials Act 1962, be and the same is hereby approved.

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed?

It was agreed.

ARBORY PARISH BURIAL GROUND RATE ORDER 1981 — APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 20. 1 call on the Chairman of the Local Government Board.

Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:-- That the Arbory Parish Burial Ground Rate Order 1981 made by the Isle of Man Local Government Board on 20th March 1981 under section 5(2) of the Burials Act 1949, as amended by section 1 of the Burials Act 1962, be and the same is hereby approved.

A Member: I beg to second.

Cinematograph (Safety) (Amendment) Regulations—Approved. — Malew Parish Burial Ground Rate Order 1981 - Approved. — Arbory Parish Burial Ground Rate Order 1981 —Approved. T1106 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

The Governor: Is that agreed? It was agreed.

CLASSIFICATION OF ROADS — PART OF PHASE 2, DROGHADFAYLE PARK, PORT ERIN — ADDITION APPROVED.

The Governor: Item number 21. 1 call on the Chairman of the Local Government Board. Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, I beg to move:— That Tynwald approves the addition of the following road to the Schedule of Classified Roads in the Village District of Port Erin — Carriageway Road Length Classification Part of Phase 2 Droghadfayle Park Port Erin 200 m Class 111

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed')

It was agreed.

BUDGET DEBATE — BROADCAST OF CHAIRMAN OF FINANCE BOARD'S SPEECH — MOTION AMENDED AND APPROVED. The Governor: Item number 22. 1 call upon the Chairman of the Broadcasting Commission. Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, 1 beg to move:— That Tynwald resolves that Manx Radio be authorised to carry a live broadcast of the speech of the hon. Chairman of Finance Board in the Budget Debate at the May 1981 sitting of this hon. Court. The resolution as it appears on the Agenda Paper is similar to that which has appeared on our Papers for the last few years and has met with the approval of this Court, and this Court has, in essence, agreed that the people of the Isle of Man have the right to hear over Manx Radio their destiny for the next 12 months. To my mind, there is no substitute for a live broadcast when the atmosphere of expectation and interest can be shared by all. This resolution does differ this year in as much as the Broadcasting Com- mission would wish to expand it a little, and my Vice-Chairman will shortly be moving amendments that have been circulated and I would apologise to hon. members for not having the full resolution set out on the Agenda Paper. Incidentally, I would also apologise for my croak this afternoon. Your Excellency, the first part of the proposed amendment refers to the broadcasting of the debate following the policy speech by the Chairman of the Finance Board and this is a facility which has been requested by the management of the radio station and the Broadcasting Commission have some sympathy

Classification of Roads –Part of Phase 2, Droghadfayle Park, Port Erin—Addition Approved. — Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech --Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1107 for it, at the same time being aware of the reluctance of some members about the general principle of broadcasting proceedings of Tynwald. The amendment is couched in terms that would allow the recording of the full debate for broadcasting at a later date and could allow for subsequent vetting by the Broadcasting Commission or an appropriate Committee of Tynwald if the wish is not to broadcast the debate in full. The final part will authorise the Broadcasting Commission to discuss with the Manage- ment Committee of Tynwald a policy to be approved by Tynwald for the fuller coverage of Tynwald proceedings and events, and I think there are many non-controversial issues which are of interest to the general public and which could well be recorded for their interest. Your Excellency, I beg to move the resolution standing in my name.

Mr. Simcocks: I rise to second the resolution, Your Excellency, and formally to move the amendments which are standing in my name: That the following paragraphs be added:— (b) That Tynwald resolves that Manx Radio be authorised to record and subsequently broadcast the debate following the Budget speech at the May sitting of this hon. Court. (c) That Tynwald authorises the Broadcasting Commission to discuss with the Management Committee of Tynwald the wider coverage by Manx Radio of the proceedings of the Legislature, and report to Tynwald thereon. I would like to stress first of all that with these two amendments I hope it will be possible for you, sir, to put them, separately so that the Court is able to accept either or both. I have always felt that the local radio station has been missing the opportunity of performing what I believe to be a true function of local radio. That is to say, to let the people of the Isle of Man hear what their elected representatives are saying on their behalf. Clearly, it would be undesirable, I think, for a live microphone to be in this Chamber and in the other two Chambers whenever we are meeting because not everything we do is of great interest, but I would have thought that there would have been an immense amount of material available to our local radio station if we were prepared to allow recordings to be made. I know it will be said that that means that selected items will be broadcast and that I will not get as good a hearing as, let us say, the hon. member for Douglas North, but when we consider that every item which is printed in the newspapers of our deliberations, every item one reads has been selected by journalists, professional men, whose job it is to do these things, I would hope that this Court would agree particularly to amendment number 2 which would enable the debate on the Budget to be recorded on tape and then broadcast later. I believe myself that the meeting of this Court for the Budget is one of the more important occasions and that if a programme could be produced which contained actuality broadcasts of members making the points which they have to make, I believe that the public would be a great deal more interested in our proceedings and a lot of the feeling that we are not earning our money would be got rid of. (Interruption.) It is not a matter of time, of course, is it, Your Excellency? Sometimes it is more quality than quantity. However, amendment number 3 is a long-term amendment hoping that the Broadcasting Commission and the Tynwald Management Committee can come to an acceptable arrangement under which the public will be given the opportunity of hearing us at work. I therefore move the amendments standing in my name.

Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. T1108 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, I think this is a very important decision that is before this hon. Court here today. I think it is very important if this is going to be seconded and carried here today. There are many people of the opinion that there are certain people, and especially in Election year, who are getting a lot of coverage on the radio at the moment. We appreciate that, in fact, this is a very dangerous procedure and it has got to be seen to be. If this is a national radio it has got to be fair to all the members and I do not see how this is going to be done satisfactorily because everyone this year should get the same crack of the whip. I think it is completely unfair that certain people can be selected and will be selected if this is taking place and that their voice is going to be heard. They are going to get a lot of publicity out of this and I think that hon. members should be very aware of the dangers that are inherent in this. There can be a lot of playing to the gallery because it is:, known that it is going to be broadcast and I think it is fraught with dangers if it is not controlled properly. I have the gravest misgivings and I would want a lot of assurance from the hon. mover that, in fact, everybody would be given exactly the same sort of opportunity and I do not see how that can actually be achieved. I think it is very important in a small community like this that each person is seen to be given a similar opportunity through that media. I think it is absolutely important and I am not happy about it at all, Your Excellency.

Mr. J. J. Radcliffe: Your Excellency, I would wish to second the amendment, and that will bring it formally before this hon. Court. I would support these ideas put foward by the Broadcasting Commission. The great thing about radio is it is live, instant communication with the advantage of recordings, perhaps, at more suitable times of the day. I think it is knowledge that Manx Radio already plays an important part in our day to day lives. I just wish that they would have some of their more community- type programmes in the evening. I have suggested to a member of staff that perhaps they could produce what I call a plain man's guide to Tynwald and that it should be in the evening when that plain man has the time to listen to it. I think their "'phone-in" programmes, by and large, serve a useful purpose in giving the community an opportunity to express their opinions, to let off steam. Again I think perhaps a lot could be done in the evening. It might be a good thing and possibly I would just suggest that they could have a specific topic more often rather than covering the whole range of things that concern our constituents. Here I would support what the hon. member for Glenfaba says, in that we should all have equal exposure, if that is the word, and possibly be there to answer some of the points that listeners make. I feel the difficulty at the moment, or the danger, Your Excellency, is that someone raises a point on their "'phone-in", their friends and neighbours hear it, and because it was on the radio hence- forth it is slightly higher than the gospel. "It must be true, I heard it on Manx Radio." We hear of the power of the press, of course, but power of the radio is even greater. I welcome this and I feel that we should play a greater part in the lives of our constituents, that they should know what is happening here. I think again the schools, a marvellous opportunity, that they, too, should share in this wonderful institution that we have here in Tynwald, and I warmly support it.

Mr. MacDonald: Your Excellency, I rise to support the resolution as amended because I do believe Manx Radio can be used for the benefit of the community. How- ever, there is one thing I would like to stress very strongly. It must be constructive,

Budget Debate--Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1109 what is done, and it must be balanced. As a gentleman once said to me, "You have a member who very rarely speaks in Tynwald but speaks a lot on Manx Radio," and I said, "Well, maybe he should work for them." But this happens, and other people *never speak at all on Manx Radio. There is a very important thing in this and that is there is one programme which I have heard my colleagues in Tynwald are not too happy about and that is the Manx "moan-in" which is so unbalanced. (Inter- ruption.) It is very good fun, I enjoy it, but there is no doubt about it, you need balanced comment. You do not wish to hear the views of the controller of the programme because often he has not got a clue at all. In fact, usually he has not got a clue. The answers, in fact, without moving too far I could say even if you tell him what the facts are he is bound to get them wrong. But it is very important that it is reasonably balanced. What they state is correct, and factually correct. I would think there should be programmes where you have got both points of view. One that I can remember, even the Africans used it, where you had a balanced view. You had two people or three or four people there. (Interruption and laughter.) Never, Sierra Leone broadcasting service was way ahead of Manx Radio. The men there were properly trained. (Interruption.) But I would support this. I think the more you can do to get over to the public what you are trying to say and what you are trying to do, the better. But one thing I do think as Election time is coming up, I hope that the Commission or the Broadcasting Corporation or Company will make certain that all members get a fair opportunity, and some, one or two, do not hog the lot. I think this wants to be planned now, not waiting until a week before the Election, and then you find somebody else has been on the air ever since July. It is very important this is planned very early so all members of the Keys get equal opportunity and, if things happen, the members of the Council get their opportunity as well. Mr. Watterson: Your Excellency, I did not know that this amendment was coming before the Court today but I welcome it, and I welcome it very simply on these lines, that it is a practice throughout the Commonwealth, in most Commonwealth countries, to provide broadcasting of parliamentary proceedings, if not all the time at least on selected occasions for public information. Onr own citizens now have the benefit of being able to listen on Radio 4 to the United Kingdom Parliament whilst they do not have the privilege of listening to this Assembly except once a year when we have the Chair- man of the Finance Board's speech. But I would suggest to you that the amendment that is before you this morning is sensible and you have to remember that the arguments about who gets what coverage, who edits what, who plays to the gallery, what air time the programmes are given, all of these are very old arguments which have been thrashed out in many countries around the world — it is not unique to the Isle of Man — not least of which in the United Kingdom. Some countries have resolved the problem by broadcasting the lot but they have separate channels on which to do this. A Member: No one listens to them. Mr. Watterson: Exactly, very rarely anybody does. Some countries, like Britain, broadcast selected highlights which are listened to and there, of course, we then come to the vital point as to how it is edited and how it is presented. Now this is a very real fear but, hon. members, we used to have, as you will remember, many years ago on the back of our newspapers Hansard printed in full. The people do not get the opportunity to see. that now. A great deal of what we do has absolutely no value for radio at all

Budget Debate--Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. TI110 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 but selected items do have value, and you do have to remember that the newspapers which people get are edited by people who are professionally employed to do the job and the people who are employed by Manx Radio are just as competent, and in some instances more so. I do believe you will not get something which is as out of balance as you may think because you do have to remember that the Broadcasting Commission Act clearly obliges that the Commission will ensure that a balance is provided and there is a clear provision there in that Act. Now you may worry how that is going to be brought about and what I would suggest to you, hon. members, is this, that if you look at the amendment before you, the first part resolves that Manx Radio be authorised to record and subsequently broadcast the debate — one debate — the debate following the Budget speech at the May sitting this year, and the hon. Chairman of the Broadcasting Commission has already assured you that he will provide a method to satisfy members as to how that will be broadcast and/or edited. He has given you that assurance already and that is one debate and I would suggest that it is worth trying. The second item I would doubt if anybody could argue about: "That Tynwald authorises the Broadcasting Commission to discuss with the Management Committee of Tynwald the wider coverage by Manx Radio of the proceedings of the Legislature, and report back to Tynwald thereon." So you have a further attempt to pass comment and discuss it later. So, hon. members, I firstly welcome this amendment that is here today. I sincerely hope that you will try it. If you remember, when I brought the original resolution forward to broadcast the speech many years ago now, there were doubts then over that and it has been quite satisfactory. I think we are now at the next step of evolution to allow the debate to be recorded and broadcast later and if that is satisfactory maybe one can progress further, but we do have to develop. It is a state-owned service. The public are entitled to a service from it and I think that this is a very cautious amendment and well worth accepting.

Mr. Cringle: Your Excellency, unlike the hon. member who has just resumed his seat, I find this amendment most unwelcome. In fact, I would almost go as far as to say that it is despicable to be put on as an amendment, particularly from the Broadcasting Commission. I would have had no objection whatsoever if a member of this hon. Court was standing up to move such an amendment because that is fair game if the motion is on the Agenda Paper, but I find it most unfortunate indeed that the Broadcasting Commission should have seen fit today to put this, a matter of principle which has been debated here before, that they should have seen fit within the last two weeks to have made a decision, and maybe for all we know even in advance of that, but certainly since the Agenda Paper was printed they have come forward with a matter of principle as an amendment to a resolution which we have accepted as this hon. Court for the last three, possibly four years, certainly a number of years now. So in that respect I cannot welcome in any way this amendment today and, of course, I would go further to say I find it most unfortunate that even part (c) on the amendment should even get on to an amendment sheet because it says, "That Tynwald authorises the Broadcasting Commission to discuss with the Management Committee of Tynwald the wider coverage by Manx Radio ..." What is to stop them doing it now? Do they actually require Tynwald authorisation if that is what they wish to do? They could very well carry on with as much consultation as they wish at the present time. Having said that I find it most unfortunate that it should arrive in front of us in this way, I am firmly of the

Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1111

belief, quite firmly of the belief, that it would be a very retrograde step indeed to record the proceedings of this Chamber or, in fact, of either of the other Chambers of Govern- ment, and I do so although I am a supporter and a full supporter of Manx Radio. I do so because I find the words which the Chairman of the Broadcasting Commission himself used this afternoon when moving or half moving the amendment, I found that his words were that we would record the debate, vet it, and then put it out. I could not in any respect accept that as a vetting by anybody and then putting out. I can certainly accept, or I could possibly accept, the whole debate being broadcast. That may be on. I know full well that the people of the Isle of Man would get very, very bored by it, I am absolutely certain they would, but I could accept that because hon. members must realise by now that from time to time in this hon. Court or in any debating chamber, no matter where it is or what level it is, there suddenly at particular times comes a change of emphasis. It may only be a slight inflection or alteration to the tone of a voice. You do not get that out of reading Hansard. How often do we as members pick up Hansard and turn back to look up what has been said before, and the members who had been here and actually been in attendance at that debate reading Hansard, I would suggest to you that it reads differently if you have heard the speech than if you read a speech which you have not heard, and it is for that reason that I could not accept that this hon. Court should be vetted in any respect and put out over the airwaves to the Isle of Man. When all is said and done, the Isle of Man is a comparatively small area. We are not Lands End to John O'Groats. If the people of the Isle of Man wish to come, and I would dearly like to see the public gallery full every time we sit, I think that would be good, I really genuinely believe that would be showing that people were interested. It is nice that people should come and take an interest. I very well remember before I ever became a member of Tynwald, there have been a number of occasions when I myself have sat in the public gallery on my own. I know the hon. member for East Douglas has done the same.

Mr. Delaney: For seven years.

Mr. Cringle: The hon. member has referred to Hansard being printed at the back of the paper and it is not available. Well, quite genuinely, that is a ridiculous statement. It is available and is still available. Not at the back of a paper but it is available today from the Printing Committee for a less sum of money than buying a newspaper every day of the week, and I know because I did it for many years. I subscribed and actually got Hansard for the purpose, if you like, of reading it. So if the person requires it, if they want it, it is available.

Mrs. Hanson: It is in all the libraries as well.

Mr. Cringle: But having accepted the principle, I cannot support the principle, albeit it is apparently getting the full backing of the Broadcasting Commission. I think it is most unfortunate and I will ask members to vote against it because, as I have said, a debate changes colour by voice and at various times we have all felt an atmosphere alter and change within the debating chamber. People say it does not happen and no matter what you say does not matter. Well, in actual fact, those of us who are here know from time to time that it does matter and it matters very much what a person says on the floor of this Court and, in fact, it matters sometimes how we say it. I would suggest

Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. T1112 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

that members would be very well advised today not to accept this backdoor method of trying to tack this on to the Agenda Paper.

Mr. Delaney: Your Excellency, I should start off. 1 think, by practising "The rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain" because it seems to me the arguments coming forward are how you sound not the content of what you will say. So everyone will have to be looking in the mirror rehearsing their speeches. I am not against this, I am not against it at all. Realising that the media in the Isle of Man is one way of getting across your message to the people you represent, that is half your job, not only doing something but telling the people you are doing something. That is how so many members, including the people you used to sit opposite, are not here today, because they did not have the gift of being able to tell people they were doing something. I am not against it. If the Court wants it, get on with it, but it would have to be done in such a way that each member would roughly have the same time, including the members of the Legislative Council. You are talking about 32, 33, talking one at a time. What are you going to get? Two minutes each? How much can you say in two minutes? Quite a lot if you say the right things but quite little if you say nothing, whether or not it matters at the end of the day. The hon. member for Glenfaba is quite correct, members will use it. They are not stupid, they will use it for the Election period and they would be foolish not to, but on the other hand would the other candidates coming up in November be very pleased about it? I do not think they would and that is what I have to think about because everybody has the right, should have the opportunity of expressing their point of view before an Election, and we are getting far too close to November and that would worry me. But I know that at the end of the day, whether some members are on the radio more than others does not really matter. Some people are in the papers more than others, other people have their photographs in the papers more than others, some people are more photogenic than others. It does not really matter, Sir. But what I would like to say at the end of the day is, if you are going to go along with it do not do it because it might personally affect you. Think how it will affect the other members of the Court and the other candidates in November as far as the House of Keys is concerned. They all say it is up to them how they get on. That might be true in a political sense but surely what is going to happen today in this Court has to be carried on year after year after year and if we all know in the future this is going to happen each year it is going to be some fun and games on Manx Radio. It really is because everybody will have set speeches. They know the things that will get to their constituents and they will take that opportunity, unlike the situation at present where every time this Court sits each member expresses his attitude to a particular event and makes it felt through the media, the radio or the newspaper, the message he wants to get across to his constituents. What is wrong with that? But do not do it once a year, do it often so everybody gets an opportunity.

The Speaker: Your Excellency, I rise to support the resolution, to oppose the first part of the amendment and to support the second part of the amendment. The first resolution is established procedure. I do not think we should engage in this exercise without giving it a lot of thought and I feel that somehow we are trying to perhaps ape in this setting the activities of other Legislatures who, in fact, have a different problem to ours, and by that I mean if you take the Canadians who have their television, they

Budget Debate - - Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech ---Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1113

have to cover their people 4,000 miles away. You take the Nordic Circle who beam the programme on satellite television and get it down to the Fiords, and so on. A different problem in the Isle of Man, so small, so concise and interested. Now here you have it. We talk of the man-in-the-street who is interested in what is going on, listening to possibly a four-hour programme on Manx Radio because I, for one, would never con- template a vetting of that programme at this stage. I would like to know a litte more about the procedures. We have heard the hon. member for Middle speak of the press and how the press used to print Hansard and the public no longer have the availability of that Hansard. Well, I assume that anybody who owns a newspaper, and the hon. member for Ramsey will know this better than I do, anyone trying to sell that newspaper today on the basis of Hansard reports would be in the bankruptcy court before very long. You have to face up to the situation. Then you get the situation where members say, ah, some people can get on Manx Radio, other people cannot. I will tell you how to get on Manx Radio, there is a very easy way — join a delegation to Europe. Get out there and fight for your fishermen, fight for their interests. Get out there and fight for tourism, fight for their interests and try and improve their lot. Get out there and seek improvements in transport to the Island and a general pattern of lift for the Island economy. Do that, hon. members, and what will you get? The cat of nine tails applied by the public who, not knowing what it is about, know more than they will know, regrettably, what the Budget debate is about when thrown into the arena like that. You will get the condemnation and your efforts will be in vain because whether it be in Europe or whether it be in this Island, what we are all doing is trying to improve the lot of the people, and those who are interested will come in here. The press who are interested and Manx Radio will come in here, and I think in fairness to them, will endeavour to give a picture to the public, a picture that the public will appreciate and will not discard. So I feel there is merit in looking at the possibilities for the future, but for heaven's sake not this year of all years broadcast the whole of the Budget proceedings. For me, the resolution and part (c) and nothing else.

Mr. Kermeen: Your Excellency, I think the point has been lost by the hon. member for Rushen, Mr. Cringle, over the second part of the amendment. This calls for discussions and nothing really should be held against discussion. It is the way in which Government will conduct itself. I will, however, take the opportunity, if I may, of taking issue with the hon. member of Council, Wing-Commander MacDonald. He has criticised what he calls the "moan-in", the "'phone-in." But I would like to point out that in the (course of technological development the "'phone-in" is taking the place of the public meeting. The public meeting in the Isle of Man has been always an institution. It is full of banalities, it is full of good humour, and probably little sense is spoken but, nevertheless, it is part of the set-up of our community. I heard yesterday about a lady on the "'phone-in" and she said, "I have just been over to John Bell's for a drink." And the interviewer said, "Yes", and she said, "That is all I wanted to tell you." (Laughter.) I like to see the "'phone-in". I hope it will be developed because it is in its embryonic stage at the moment. It is going to be part of the communication between this hon. Court and the electorate, and may it continue irrespective of whether it is Election year because the nearer we are to the people we represent, through all the media that is available to it, be it press, be it radio, be it television or anything else, the better it is for the good government of this Island.

Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Financ;, Board's Speech —Motion Amended and Approved. T1114 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

Dr. Mann: Your Excellency, I am going to support the Broadcasting Commission and support this amendment as printed in its entirety. I notice a change in the opinion of this Court from when we first started five years ago, when the chance of this sort of thing ever being accepted was very small indeed. For some reason people feared exposure of what went on in this Court to the public. And to a certain extent there are still some members who fear what would happen. But I suspect this change of opinion has been brought about by the very success of the "'phone-in" programme because now you have the public, the electorate, saying what they like, when they like, with complete freedom, and yet we, as a Government, are silenced, and only in the limited news items does anything come out as to the activity of the members of this Court. I think if these things were broadcast freely, and quite honestly I would not even be frightened of the way in which items would be selected, people would be aware that things are going on here, and things are going on that affect the electorate who are ' otherwise just complaining. And soon the novelty would wear off. People would even forget that the microphones were here. It would only be for the first few sessions that everybody would be fighting to get their words in. But, most of all, I think the public would realise that this is probably one of the best behaved Assemblies in the world. Members: Hear, hear.

Dr. Mann: 1 think that even if that got over to the electorate, that would be a very good asset for the success of this operation. I think we ought to take this and go ahead with it, and if it does not work and people are not satisfied with it afterwards, it can always be stopped. But let us not fear this, and whether there is an Election or not I do not think it makes the slightest bit of difference. Candidates can still 'phone in with ereater freedom than we can be heard from this Court. Mr. Kneale: Your Excellency, 1 am supporting the main resolution and the second part of the amendment, but the first part I do not think is a starter. Let us just consider the amount of tape that would be necessary to record the Budget debate, and then just think of the poor person who has got to do the editing of it afterwards. Now, editing of the tape is not a straightforward job, it takes a certain degree of skill to be able to do it, and I would hate to think of the results that would come out. But some members seem to be worried about certain people getting on the air more than themselves. 1 would not worry too much about that because some of the people who are going on the air are doing themselves more harm than good by what they are saying! (Laughter.) And when we are talking about what we should be saying and where we should be saying it, the main part is to say it in this Chamber, and more important to be in the Chamber when the votes are taken on what you are saying! (Laughter.) Because it is no good going on Manx Radio and telling people what you are doing or what you are going to do, and then being missing when the vital votes are taken. This it not much good at all. As regards the "'phone-ins". I listen to them quite often and I recognise the same voices over and over again. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Kneale: Even though sometimes they have got different names! (Laughter.) I would bring to the notice of the Chairman of the Broadcasting Commission some of the things that are going out on the air unedited on these "'phone-ins", and I believe

Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1115 there is a very good reason for caution on these "'phone-ins", and that the person who should be conducting them should be a person who is a responsible person, and not trying just to create sensation. Mr. Lowey: Your Excellency, hon. members will not be surprised to discover that I will be opposing the amendments in their entirety. I will, with reluctance, support the procedure which we have adopted of allowing the Chairman of the Finance Board to broadcast his speech to us, because we have had it a week. I do believe, along with my colleague, Mr. Cringle, that the actual amendment is an attempt to "bounce" this Court. If you have ever been "bounced", and most of us have at one time or another — (laughter) — you will recognise all the signs, and it is here, it is here in abundance. The serious part of this particular resolution — and there is a serious part to it — is that we have a job to disseminate information to the public, and I believe the Court, in accepting the broadcasting by the Chairman of the Budget speech as he gives it in this Court, putting it into effect, I think is reasonable and correct. But the latter part, the whole of the debate, I do not think is a starter. I do not believe that Tynwald Court is a circus or a music hall, although sometimes you would be forgiven for mistaking it for that. A Member: Is it as good as that? Mr. Lowey: Yes, at times it is as good as that. However, I do believe the timing is totally wrong, it is an Election year. There is certainly a time for doing it, but now is not the time for doing it, of that I am absolutely certain. Consider the role of His Excellency, and consider the role of calling members to speak. What an invidious position we would place in that chair. It is an intolerable position and one that I do not think we should put His Excellency in. It is about fairness. I do not believe the timing is right, if it will ever be right, and I do believe the attempt is rather a clumsy one of bouncing this Court into taking a decision it would not on consideration, reasoned consideration, be prepared to take.

Mr. Christian: Your Excellency, I will vote against the amendment because I do not think this will be in the interests of obtaining the highest standard of debate in this Chamber, and that is what we are really interested in. The people should be able to speak freely in this Chamber without having to think, "Oh, this is going over to the electorate, it is going over to them all over the Island and so I should be thinking of what effect it is going to have on them." I had 10 years' experience in the newspaper business for my sins, and I remember how difficult it was because we always tried to get a short report. They have to be short reports these days because, as the hon. Mr. Speaker said, "No, we want sport, I want sport." When I started in the newspaper business I said, "Let us get back to trying to get fuller reports." But we were soon talked out of that even by the ordinary man-in-the-street because he was uninterested. And how difficult it was to get a balanced report. Also, after you had got what you thought was a balanced report, how often you got complaints from the members of the Legislature that they had not received the attention that their very important speech should have received, and they were certain that there was bias. We used to get accused of bias. It was absurd but, believe me, it happened regularly. They would say, "Obviously you are biased against me, you have not given me the coverage I should

Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. T1116 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 have got, so-and-so got so many column inches more than I did." It could lead to all sorts of trouble and especially at a time when it is going to be an Election year because this would surely not be fair to candidates who will be standing at the Election who are not members of the Legislature. Are they going to be allotted time on Manx Radio as well? It is far too complicated, and I think we should leave well alone.

The Governor: The Chairman to reply.

Mr. Walker: Your Excellency, well, I will start by thanking those members who have spoken in support of the resolution and the amendments, and I would thank my Vice-Chairman for his support, as always. He did say that the radio station allowed the general public to hear what their elected representatives had to say, and I think that is absolutely right and no one should argue with it. He also spoke about the reluctance of members to allow the broadcasting, and feeling that perhaps some members get more coverage than others. This is something that has been made known to me as Chairman of the Broadcasting Commission by hon. members. I understand their concern, and certainly we are taking steps to see that fair coverage is given to all. To follow on from that, I have asked the radio station to keep some sort of register of members that are spoken to by the interviewers from the station, and members who are invited to appear, so that we can check to make sure that everybody is given a fair crack of the whip. Mr. MacDonald supports the resolution, and I thank him for it. And he, like many others referred to the fact that a balance must be kept, and this fife Broadcasting Commission recognise. Mr. Watterson when he was on his feet supported the resolution as he has always supported the proceedings of Tynwald getting wider coverage from the radio station. We thank him for his support. As far as my colleague, Mr. Cringle, is concerned, I apologise for the way in which the resolution was presented today, and I accept the responsibility for it. But I did feel, however, that it was more honest to ask Tynwald's consent to investigate wider coverage of Government affairs. I felt that we could have been criticised if we had gone straight to the Management Committee with a view to more coverage, and then reported to this Court without even having asked for permission. I referred to the possibility of vetting by the Broadcasting Commission or an appropriate Tynwald Committee. I said that if the station feels the need to edit, then it might be more acceptable for the Broadcasting Commission or an appropriate Committee of Tynwald to hear the tape before it was broadcast. I appreciate that a four-hour programme of the debate following the Chairman's speech would be most uninteresting. I am sure that in practical terms some editing would be necessary, and I feel it would be more acceptable if members of Government, the appropriate Com- mittee, were given the opportunity to hear the editing. It is a way in which we could publicise the proceedings of Tynwald, enliven the general public's interest in Government affairs, and this would be a way to generate more enthusiasm. I would thank Mr. Delaney for his support. (Laughter and interruptions.) You said you supported me and you recognised the importance of the media to give publicity to members' aspirations. We know, sir, that you recognise the importance of the media, but he once again underlined the need for a fair system, with which we agree. And Mr. Speaker - I would thank him for his support. I can understand his reluctance in accepting the amendment. However, it was a request from the radio station and we thought it was right to bring it to Tynwald. He certainly supports the investigation of the subject of

Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981 T1117

'wider coverage which is, in fact, all he asks. Dr. Mann, I thank him for his support, along with Mr. Kneale. As far as your comments about the "'phone-in" are concerned, I will certainly take them up with the appropriate bodies. My colleague, Mr. Lowey, said that we are trying to "bounce" this Court. Mr. Simcocks and I have no intention of "bouncing" this Court. We both know there are members here with far more experience than us, and we have no intention at all of trying to do that. But Mr. Lowey did admit that he appreciates the need for a wider coverage by the media, but not the radio, and I think that that is unfair. He pointed out the difficulty Your Excellency might be in. This is one that I had not thought about, sir, but it is certainly one that we will take into account. Hon. members, I hope you support this resolution. It is a step forward for our radio station. Now that the station is not run by politicians, it is run by an independent board of directors, it seems to me a jolly good opportunity to try something new. I beg to move the resolution standing in my name. The Governor: Hon. members, I will put the amendment standing the name of the Vice-Chairman of the Broadcasting Commission in two parts. First, part (b). Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. A division was called for and voting resulted as follows: In the Keys— For: Mr. J. J. Radcliffe, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Watterson, Walker and Swales 5. Against: Messrs. Anderson, Quirk, J. N. Radcliffe, Mrs. Christian, Messrs. Catlin, Creer, Lowey, Cringle, Mrs. Quayle, Messrs. Quinney, Craine, Delaney, Irving, Mrs. Hanson. Mr. Kermeen, Dr. Moore, Mr. Christian and the Speaker --- 18. The Speaker: Your Excellency, the amendment fails to carry in the House of Keys, five votes being cast in favour and 18 votes against.

In the Council-- For: Messrs. Simcocks and MacDonald - 2. Against: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Kneale, Crellin, P. Radcliffe, Kerruish and the President of the Council — 6.

The Governor: In the Council, two in favour and six against. Part (b) of the amendment fails to carry. Part (c) of the amendment. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no.

A division was called for and voting resulted as follows: --

In the Keys— For: Messrs. Anderson. Quirk, J. J. Radcliffe, J. N. Radcliffe, Mrs. Christian, Dr. Mann, Messrs. Catlin, Watterson, Walker, Cringle, Delaney, Irving, Mrs. Hanson, Messrs. Kermeen, Christian, Swales and the Speaker — 17. Against: Messrs. Creer, Lowey, Mrs. Quayle, Messrs. Quinney, Craine and Dr. Moore — 6.

The Speaker: Your Excellency, that amendment carries in the House of Keys, 17 votes in favour and six votes against.

Budget Debate—Broadcast of Chairman of Finance Board's Speech—Motion Amended and Approved. 11118 TYNWALD COURT, APRIL 14, 1981

In the Council - For: The Lord Bishop, Messrs. Kneale, Crellin, P. Radcliffe, Kerruish, Simcocks, MacDonald and the President of the Council — 8. Against: Nil.

The Governor: Eight in favour and none against. I will now put the resolution, as amended, namely with part (c) after the substantive motion. Will those in favour please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it.

ROAD TRAFFIC COMMISSIONERS — ELECTION OF TWO MEMBERS

The Governor: Hon. members, we will just have time to take item number 23. I call upon the Chairman of the Selection Committee.

Mr. Anderson: Your Excellency, in accordance with section 3 of the Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) Act 1964, we have to elect two members of the Road Traffic Commissioners for a term expiring on 14th April 1984. I beg to move: - That Mr. J. R. Allan and Mr. J. W. Radcliffe be elected.

A Member: I beg to second.

The Governor: Is that agreed?

It was agreed.

The Governor: Hon. members, we will adjourn until 10.30 tomorrow morning.

The Court adjourned.

Road Traffic Commissioners—Election of Two Members.