T Y N W A L D C O U R T O F F I C I A L R E P O R T
R E C O R T Y S O I K O I L Q U A I Y L T I N V A A L
P R O C E E D I N G S
D A A L T Y N
HANSARD
Douglas, Wednesday, 16th June 2021
All published Official Reports can be found on the Tynwald website:
www.tynwald.org.im/business/hansard
Supplementary material provided subsequent to a sitting is also published to the website as a Hansard Appendix. Reports, maps and other documents referred to in the course of debates may be consulted on application to the Tynwald Library or the Clerk of Tynwald’s Office.
Volume 138, No. 25
ISSN 1742-2256
Published by the Office of the Clerk of Tynwald, Legislative Buildings, Finch Road, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 3PW. © High Court of Tynwald, 2021 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Present:
The President of Tynwald (Hon. S C Rodan OBE)
In the Council: The Lord Bishop of Sodor and Man (The Rt Rev. P A Eagles), The Attorney General (Mr J L M Quinn QC), Mr P Greenhill, Mr R W Henderson, Mrs K A Lord-Brennan, Mrs M M Maska, Mr R J Mercer, Mrs J P Poole-Wilson and Mrs K Sharpe with Mr J D C King, Deputy Clerk of Tynwald.
In the Keys: The Speaker (Hon. J P Watterson) (Rushen); The Chief Minister (Hon. R H Quayle CBE) (Middle); Mr J R Moorhouse and Hon. G D Cregeen (Arbory, Castletown and Malew); Hon. A L Cannan and Hon. T S Baker (Ayre and Michael); Mr C C Thomas and Mrs C A Corlett (Douglas Central); Mrs C L Barber and Mr C R Robertshaw (Douglas East); Hon. D J Ashford MBE and Mr G R Peake (Douglas North); Mrs C S B Christian and Mr S P Quine (Douglas South); Mr M J Perkins and Mrs D H P Caine (Garff); Hon. R K Harmer and Hon. G G Boot (Glenfaba and Peel); Mr W C Shimmins (Middle); Mr R E Callister and Ms J M Edge (Onchan); Hon. A J Allinson and Mr L L Hooper (Ramsey); Hon. L D Skelly (Rushen); with Mr R I S Phillips, Clerk of Tynwald.
______2508 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Business transacted
Farewell and thanks to His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor, Sir Richard Gozney KCMG CVO KStJ and Lady Gozney ...... 2511 Procedural ...... 2513 Order of the Day ...... 2513 19. Financial Provisions and Currency Act 2011 – Coronavirus Fisheries Industry Support (Amendment) (No. 2) Scheme 2021 approved...... 2513 20. Highways Act 1986 – Highway Diversion (Public Right of Way No. 268, Ballahick Lane, Ballasalla) Order 2021 approved ...... 2515 21. Highways Act 1986 – Pulrose Golf Course Public Path Order 2021 approved ...... 2516 22. Recreation and Leisure Act 1998, Local Government Act 1985 – Recreation and Leisure (Garff) Order 2021 approved ...... 2520 23. Income Tax Act 1970 – Income Tax (Common Reporting Standard) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 approved ...... 2521 24. Income Tax Act 1970 – International Tax Compliance (United States of America) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 approved ...... 2522 25. Income Tax Act 1970 – Recovery of Foreign Taxes Regulations 2021 approved ...... 2522 26. Income Tax Act 1970 – Income Tax (Substance Requirements) Order 2021 approved ...... 2523 27. European Union and Trade Act 2019 – Burma and Misappropriation Sanctions (Revocation) Regulations 2021 approved ...... 2524 28. Elections (Keys and Local Authorities) Act 2020 – Election Fees Order 2021 approved ...... 2525 29. Value Added Tax Act 1996 – Value Added Tax (Amendment) Order 2021 approved .. 2526 30. Amendment of Standing Order 3.5(2) – Extension of time for Questions – Motion carried ...... 2526 Procedural – Tabled Questions ...... 2530 31. Youth development – Need for further support – Amended motion carried ...... 2530 32. Sewage Strategy in Peel and Laxey – Replacing the regional strategy – Motion not moved ...... 2551 33. Structural Review of Civil Service Terms and Conditions – Report; impact of removal of Personnel Control Mechanism – Debate commenced ...... 2551 The Court adjourned at 1.05 p.m. and resumed at 2.32 p.m...... 2553 Structural Review of Civil Service Terms and Conditions – Debate concluded – Motion carried ...... 2554 Supplementary Order Paper No. 1...... 2557 1. Standing Orders suspended to take the business on Supplementary Order Paper No. 1 ...... 2557
______2509 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
2. Papers laid before the Court ...... 2558 3.-4. Public Health Act 1990 – Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.14) Regulations 2021 approved; Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.15) Regulations 2021 approved ...... 2558 The Court adjourned at 5.14 p.m. and resumed its sitting at 5.42 p.m...... 2593 Procedural – Order of remaining business ...... 2593 Main Order Paper ...... 2593 39. Single Legal Entity and New Public Service – General Debate ...... 2593 Standing Orders suspended to complete all remaining business ...... 2616 34-35. Council of Ministers’ collective responsibility and papers – Establishing good practice for future – Motions carried ...... 2618 36. Manx public satisfaction poll – Item not moved ...... 2624 37. Size, structure and cost of Government – Adjusting to meet Island’s needs – Amended motion carried ...... 2624 38. Tynwald Commissioner for Administration case TCA 1909– General Debate ...... 2628 Farewell tribute to retiring President of Tynwald, Hon. S C Rodan OBE ...... 2635 The Council withdrew...... 2639 House of Keys ...... 2639 The Court adjourned at 9.02 p.m...... 2639
______2510 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Tynwald
The Court met at 10.30 a.m. in the presence of His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor, Sir Richard Gozney KCMG CVO KStJ
[MR PRESIDENT in the Chair]
The Deputy Clerk: Hon. Members, please rise for the President of Tynwald.
The President: Moghrey mie, good morning, Hon. Members.
5 Members: Moghrey mie, Mr President.
The President: The Lord Bishop will lead us in prayer.
PRAYERS The Lord Bishop
Farewell and thanks to His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor, Sir Richard Gozney KCMG CVO KStJ and Lady Gozney
The President: Please remove jackets, if you wish, Hon. Members. I am very pleased to welcome to this Chamber this morning His Excellency the Lieutenant 10 Governor, Sir Richard Gozney, and Lady Gozney. It was in June 2016 that you were first officially welcomed to Tynwald Court as the Island’s recently sworn in representative of Her Majesty the Queen, Lord of Mann. It is hard to believe that exactly five years have now passed as the Court greets you one last time to this, the June 2021 sitting, with your term as Lieutenant Governor now drawing to a close. 15 Five years ago, my predecessor, Mrs Christian, observed that at your swearing-in you had expressed the desire to ‘work in tandem with our Government in pursuit of the Island’s aspirations’. This was much appreciated, not only by Government, but by Members of this Court, with so much going on in the international and local politics, business, sports, arts and the community. It was also noted that you and Lady Gozney had already ‘thrown yourselves into local 20 events at almost TT racing speed’ in the weeks since your arrival. Clearly, you started the way you meant to continue. After nearly 40 years in the diplomatic service across the world, Latin America, Africa, London, Indonesia, Bermuda, you arrived in the Isle of Man as representative of the Crown and it quickly became very clear to us that this was to be more than just one last job, one final posting. Your 25 appreciation of this Island and enthusiastic engagement with its people has shone through in all your work here, with Lady Gozney invariably at your side. The community visits and events you have supported and so warmly hosted, welcoming many overseas visitors to Government House, commercial and political, the numerous charities and organisations of which you have been patron, your ceremonial duties, your timely grant of Royal 30 Assent, for which we are grateful, this has all been appreciated and the way especially you have
______2511 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
opened up Government House to so many and really got to know the people of this Island, with, may I say, a recall of names that many politicians would envy. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) (Laughter) Personally, I, and I know others, have also appreciated your wise counsel and advice, always offered in a spirit which acknowledges the Island’s modern constitutional position and 35 today’s role of the Crown at its head. You are the 25th Lieutenant Governor to be appointed since the fourth Duke of Atholl and you have had a job that is somewhat different than his was. As an integral player in Island life in all its aspects, one thing you have enjoyed especially is its natural beauty, with Lady Gozney being familiar, I think, with almost all of our public footpaths, moors, cliffs and wooded glens, appreciating the wildlife and especially bird life to be found there. 40 It was, I think, Mr Henderson, the Courtʼs resident expert on bird life, who drew your attention a year or two ago to the peregrine falcons to be found perched on the steeple of St Mary’s Church across the road from this very building. As Your Excellency knows, our official court of arms bears both Odin’s Raven and a peregrine falcon, in historic recognition of the traditional presentation of a pair of peregrine falcons as a tribute from the Lord of Mann on the occasion of every 45 coronation of the monarch. So it is perhaps appropriate that Tynwald Court will today present to you, as representative of the Lord of Mann, an official gift in appreciation of your service, which features a picture of a peregrine falcon on the cliffs at Spanish Head, and we hope this will remind you, not only of the constitutional significance of the peregrine falcon in our national story, but of the pleasure you derived from birdwatching during your years in the Isle of Man. 50 The people of this Island will be truly sorry when the time comes for you both to leave us in a few weeks’ time. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) Tynwald Court says most sincerely: gura mie eu, sir, cair vie, and may you both enjoy many years of health and happiness ahead in your retirement.
Members: Hear, hear. 55 The President: I understand, sir, you may wish to say a few words?
The Lieutenant Governor: Mr President, unlike at any point in the last five years, I am a bit lost for words. (Laughter) But I thank you, on behalf of Diana, as well as myself, for those very kind, 60 warm, undeserved, but nice words that you have spoken about us. I would like to thank everyone here for the openness and ease with which they have allowed us to talk to, meet, interact with in every sense Tynwald Court during the last five years. It has been a very easy relationship, both with you as a Court, as an institution and with all of you as individuals. We have got to know all of you and you have all played a part in that, as have the 65 senior officials of Tynwald Court as well. Many of you are not just people we have talked to in an official context, but you have become good friends of ours as well, and we shall miss you very much. We leave here, not quite yet, but we leave here soon with enormously fond memories of the people of the Isle of Man, of the leadership of the Isle of Man, of the politicians, the 70 businesspeople and others of the Isle of Man, as well as fond memories of the peregrines. But we do not go quite yet, we have got another couple of months – end of August we will be actually off – and in our last two months we will continue to watch with great interest what happens in the politics of the Isle of Man. I think it would be unwise for a Lieutenant Governor to say any more than that, (Laughter) on that subject, and one of my last acts will I believe, I am told, be to 75 sign the election writ for September. So we wish you well and thank you very warmly, and I can see already across the Court here the picture and that will be a wonderful memory, and that will have pride of place in the house when we go back to our corner of England – long-term corner of England – in Norfolk. Thank you all very warmly indeed. 80 Members: Hear, hear.
______2512 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The President: Thank you, sir.
Members stood and applauded.
The President: I invite you and Lady Gozney into the Court.
His Excellency and Lady Gozney entered Tynwald Court to receive a gift from Mr Speaker on behalf of Tynwald Members.
85 The Speaker: It is my pleasure on behalf of Tynwald Court to present this to you and to reflect the warm words of Mr President in relation to the coming months, and to wish you a very happy remaining stay on the Isle of Man and a long and happy retirement for both of you after that.
The Lieutenant Governor: Thank you very much indeed. 90 The Speaker: If we could have a quick photo. (Laughter)
The Lieutenant Governor: Thank you, and may no Lieutenant Governor ever have the beady eye of the peregrine hawk! (Laughter and applause)
Procedural
95 The President: Now, Hon. Members, before we proceed with our Order Paper at Item 19, I would inform you that I intend to take the Supplementary Order Paper as first business after lunch.
Order of the Day
19. Financial Provisions and Currency Act 2011 – Coronavirus Fisheries Industry Support (Amendment) (No. 2) Scheme 2021 approved
The Minister for Environment, Food and Agriculture to move:
That the Coronavirus Fisheries Industry Support (Amendment) (No. 2) Scheme 2021 [SD No 2021/0163] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Hon. Members, Item 19 is the Financial Provisions and Currency Act, and the motion is in the name of the Minister for Environment, Food and Agriculture, Mr Boot. 100 The Minister for Environment, Food and Agriculture (Mr Boot): Thank you, Mr President. The Manx seafood industry is an important Island employer supporting up to 300 jobs. It is part of an integrated network of businesses in which catching, processing and export sectors are interdependent. It is, importantly, also economically valuable with sales in the region of 105 £20 million each year, with most of the Island’s five main fisheries’ products exported and sold internationally, mainly into Europe. However, during 2020 and 2021 the effects of COVID-19 have
______2513 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
had a significant impact on this industry and a number of tranches of financial support have been provided, most recently between 7th January and 1st April 2021. Recent discussions with the industry have indicated that there has been no significant 110 improvement in the overall situation since April, and that there is little improvement on the horizon in the short term. The lack of export sales and subsequent cash flow remains a major concern to processors and the exporters of seafood products. As such, the Manx seafood industry has requested additional short-term support. My Department has carefully considered this request and has explored options to reduce or adjust the Scheme to deliver cost savings or provide 115 better targeted support. However, on balance, there appear to be limited options for either savings or alteration due to the integrated and varied nature of the Manx industry and the dynamic unpredictability of the export seafood market. This additional 12-week period of funding, from 2nd April to 25th June, is therefore intended to help offset the ongoing and cumulative impacts of the coronavirus pandemic and to ensure 120 that Manx fishermen and seafood processors are not disadvantaged relative to the UK industry. This financial support is also important in protecting the Island’s fishing and processing assets so that the local industry is well placed to recover as market conditions eventually allow. The maximum financial assistance which may be granted during this proposed period of funding is capped at £285,000 based on the numbers of vessels and businesses known to be eligible to apply. 125 This will bring the total amount of funding under the Scheme since it was introduced in March 2020 to approximately £1.5 million. Mr President, the Manx fishing industry is a proud, independent and hard-working industry (A Member: Hear, hear.) and as in the future it recovers, it will once again be fully contributing to the economic and social recovery of the Island. 130 Mr President, I beg to move that the Coronavirus Fisheries Industry Support (Amendment) (No. 2) Scheme 2021 be approved.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Perkins.
135 Mr Perkins: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks.
The President: Hon. Member for Ramsey, Mr Hooper.
Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President. 140 Just a quick question for the Minister: how did he come by the date of 25th June? Is that when he expects the industry to have started to recover, or actually is he going to be coming back in the July sitting of this Hon. Court to ask for a further extension to cover the period to, say, September or December? I am just trying to get some better understanding as to actually what is going on here in terms 145 of how long he thinks this sort of support will be necessary, and why the period of June has been chosen?
The President: Minister to reply.
150 The Minister: Thank you, Mr President. Two aspects: first of all, on 1st July, the King Scallop season starts and we are hoping that there may be a recovery and an improvement in market conditions, so we will review the situation then. Obviously up to that point, in the present situation, and the markets have not recovered and as we all know some of the restrictions have been extended, the restaurant trade, etc. has been very 155 slow. So we are hoping for a recovery. I cannot promise this Hon. Court that there will not be a requirement for another tranche of support. It will depend very much on market recovery, and particularly in Europe. I beg to move. ______2514 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 19. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. 160 The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
20. Highways Act 1986 – Highway Diversion (Public Right of Way No. 268, Ballahick Lane, Ballasalla) Order 2021 approved
The Minister for Infrastructure to move:
That the Highway Diversion (Public Right of Way No. 268, Ballahick Lane, Ballasalla) Order 2021 [SD No 2021/0030] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 20, Highways Act, Minister for Infrastructure to move, Mr Baker.
The Minister for Infrastructure (Mr Baker): Thank you, Mr President. Public Right of Way No. 268 runs from the A5 Douglas Road to the B33 Balthane Road for 165 approximately 1,120 m. The existing public right of way follows the Ballahick Farm track through Ballahick Farm. Ballasalla Bypass will cross over Public Right of Way No. 268 at approximately 346 m from Ballahick Lane’s starting point at the A5 Douglas Road. The diversion is necessary to bring the public right of way to the same level as the Bypass in order to facilitate a safe crossing point. This is achieved by diverting the route up an embankment, across the road and down an 170 embankment on the opposite side of the road. The farmer requested a diversion of public right of way due to Ballahick Farm’s track and farmyard becoming increasingly busy with stock and farm machinery. Over the last 50 years, Ballahick Farm has changed and developed and the farmyard has expanded into the area the path passes through. The public right of way is also being used more frequently, resulting in justified 175 safety concerns. The diversion is necessary to take the path away from the farmyard, therefore preventing vehicles and walkers coming into conflict. It will also provide a safer, cleaner and more scenic route. A notice of the proposed Diversion Order was put in the press and also displayed at either end of the affected section of the path. The notice informed members of the public where they could 180 view details of the proposed diversion. Notice was also served directly on specified parties, notably the landowner and the local authority, Malew Parish Commissioners. No objections to the proposed diversion were received. Under section 33 of the Highways Act 1986 the Department may make an order to divert a public highway, however any such order cannot take effect until it has the approval of Tynwald. 185 In making such an order the Department has to be satisfied that it is expedient that the existing highway should be diverted for the purpose of providing a shorter or more commodious route for traffic entitled to use the highway. The diversion is required to provide a safe crossing point due to the new Ballasalla Bypass. Diverting the public right of way away from the farm track and farmyard will provide a safer, 190 cleaner, more scenic route. Due to these reasons, the diversion of Public Right of Way No. 268 will provide a more commodious route, therefore it would be expedient to make such an order under the Highways Act 1986. I invite Tynwald to approve this Order under section 33 of the Highways Act 1986. Mr President, I beg to move the motion standing in my name. 195 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Cregeen.
Mr Cregeen: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks. ______2515 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Moorhouse. 200 Mr Moorhouse: Thank you, Mr President. Could the Minister please provide a brief update on his Department’s plans for the Balthane end of the Ballasalla Bypass? Thank you. 205 The President: Minister to reply.
The Minister: Thank you, Mr President. Clearly this is a public right of way which is associated with the Ballasalla Bypass, rather than 210 part of the Bypass work itself, but the Department’s plans are progressing well in that regard.
The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 20. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
21. Highways Act 1986 – Pulrose Golf Course Public Path Order 2021 approved
The Minister for Infrastructure to move:
That the Pulrose Golf Course Public Path Order 2021 [SD No 2021/0114] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 21, Minister for Infrastructure. 215 The Minister for Infrastructure (Mr Baker): Thank you, Mr President. The long-term vision of the Isle of Man Government’s Active Travel Strategy 2018-21 is for the Isle of Man to be an Island where cycling and walking are normal and realistic transport choices for people of all ages and abilities. The creation of this Pulrose cycle path supports the Programme 220 for Government, specifically the objective in relation to active travel to:
Support and promote healthy, safe and cost-effective travel and encourage the uptake of low carbon transport
The Active Travel Strategy, as approved by Tynwald, is supported by the Active Travel Investment Plan. This cycle path around Pulrose Golf Course and football pitches was identified as a high-priority route in the investment plan, as it links Anagh Coar, parts of Farmhill and Pulrose to the developing cycling network. The creation of the Pulrose Golf Course cycle path will provide 225 a free active travel resource for the use of the people of Douglas and its environs. Its location will make it convenient for commuting and for leisure. Using the cycle path can offer a healthy package for people using the National Sports Centre, Pulrose Golf Course and the football pitches. In making such an Order, Mr President, the Department has to be satisfied that there is a need for a cycle path, the extent of which would add to the convenience or enjoyment of a substantial 230 section of the public or to the convenience of persons resident in the area. This route will add to the convenience and enjoyment of the general public as it extends the developing cycle network and provides a safe and convenient off-road route that links Anagh Coar and Pulrose. The new cycle path will begin at an entrance from the A5 New Castletown Road. It will run along the edge of Pulrose Golf Course at a width of 3 m for approximately 190.5 m. It will then 235 branch into two cycle paths. A short spur will run for approximately 16 m at a width of 3 m, exiting on to the C747 Spring Valley Road. The main branch will run alongside the golf course at a width
______2516 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
of 3 m for approximately 176 m turning and running for approximately 24 m along the side of Pulrose football field to exit onto the C729 Springfield Road. A notice of the proposed Public Path Order was put in the press informing members of the 240 public where they could view details of the proposed creation of the cycle path. Notice was also served directly on specified parties, notably the landowner and the local authority, in this case both being Douglas Borough Council. No objections to the Public Path Order were received. Under section 91 of the Highways Act 1986, my Department may make an order to create a public highway, however any such order cannot take effect until it has the approval of Tynwald. I 245 invite this Hon. Court to approve this Order under section 91 of the Highways Act 1986. Mr President, I beg to move the motion standing in my name.
The President: Hon. Member, Mrs Christian.
250 Mrs Christian: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Quine.
Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. 255 I would like to say how much I welcome this excellent addition to the Active Travel Strategy, and I would be grateful if the Minister could pass on my thanks to the work gangs involved for the high level of workmanship which is so clearly evident. Not for the first time, Douglas South is leading where I hope others choose to follow. Thank you, Mr President. (Laughter) 260 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Harmer. (Interjection by Mr Robertshaw)
Mr Harmer: Thank you, Mr President. I rise to support and congratulate the Department for moving this forward. This is one link, one 265 important link, in the whole overall Active Travel Strategy and obviously something I am very passionate about. But obviously what is really key about this link is a whole linking in with Pulrose Bridge and that network there, and the Nunnery, the heritage path – this is all one part and I hope to see many more motions in future, as we build the network also into Onchan. So I think this is a really good news day for Douglas South but also the whole Island. 270 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Thomas.
Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President, and I, too, welcome this new path. 275 Could the Minister say a few words about how this new public order right of way might extend more around the Douglas Golf Course according to Douglas Borough Council’s plans and also how it might link into I think what is called the ‘Enterprise Way’ up into Cooil Road and also with further detail about the plans that Minister Harmer has just outlined?
280 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Shimmins.
Mr Shimmins: Thank you very much, Mr President. I very much welcome this additional cycle path and I think this is tangible evidence that the Department of Infrastructure is making progress with the Active Travel Strategy. So I am very 285 supportive. I hope that many people will use this new path, which will enable people to travel safely, away from motor vehicles, and hopefully on a regular basis. The evidence from elsewhere is that we have seen an enormous uptake of people choosing to take active travel and incorporate that as ______2517 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
part of their daily or weekly routine. Even if it is just one or two days a week, then the benefits for 290 everyone are significant, and the benefits for the individual are that they can save themselves a lot of money, Hon. Members, in terms of their commuting cost, their parking cost, and they can also improve their physical and mental health, which in turn benefits our Health Service. We know from in-depth research that has been done on multiple active travel initiatives elsewhere that for every £1 the Government spends on active travel initiatives they get £8 back 295 in terms of a payback, in terms of benefits, and for everyone this type of active travel investment reduces congestion, because we all know that the roads in and out of our capital are congested at peak times. So this is a very sensible investment which reduces congestion for everyone and I think is to be commended. I would welcome the Minister’s views on how this fits into the wider picture of active travel, 300 particularly with this specific – I am not looking, Mr President, to widen this into all parts of the Island, but particularly this element of the link came around because the research that was shown at the outset of the active travel initiative showed that there were lots of people living in Douglas who worked in Spring Valley and the Cooil Road in the various offices and other employment centres, many thousands of people now working in Spring Valley and in the Cooil Road, who 305 actually live in Douglas or Onchan and vice versa there are many people living in Anagh Coar, Pulrose and Governor’s Hill, which are major estates, who actually commute on a daily basis to their place of work or education, wherever, in Douglas and Onchan. So this is a key link. What I am particularly interested in the Minister’s response is the ends of the link. This is right in the middle. So will we see the path continue up to Spring Valley? What is the plan for that, 310 where many offices are now based? Also, how do we get people from the end of the path safely into Douglas? So there are some options there. We are very keen to see obviously some active travel provision incorporated as part of Pulrose Bridge but that is just one part of it. Because I can tell you, Hon. Members, using the cycle lane down Peel Road is quite an unnerving experience, as many junctions are on that road, and even for experienced cyclists it can be quite daunting, 315 particularly during peak times. So well done, Minister, for getting this done. It is much appreciated. Keen to understand how the ends of the link are going to work. Thank you.
320 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Hooper.
Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President. The first thing really, I was just going to really endorse those comments made by the Hon. Member for Middle around the ends of the link. This seems to be something the Department 325 is doing in various parts of the Island. You will place a cycle way in that whilst very well- intentioned, actually the start point and the end point mean that they are not very well used. So we have seen that in Ramsey, as a good example, where there was a cycle lane that really started nowhere and ended nowhere and it is because, as has been highlighted, you have still got to go through all the traffic and all the unnerving travel on the rest of the main roads because there are 330 not any alternative routes. So I know things are getting better, but in this context going from one busy road to another busy road, actually, are people going to use this to cut out part of their journey? Quite possibly. Is it going to encourage more people to cycle? Probably not, when they have still got to go past the NSC, over Pulrose Bridge, back into the main traffic on Peel Road. So if he could provide some 335 information on that, that would be great for us. The second thing is the Highways Act actually describes a cycle path as a path where the public have a right of way on a pedal cycle that may or may not also come with a right of way on foot. I do not see any reference at all to a right of way on foot in the Order that has been made, so can people also use this cycle path to walk down as opposed to walking down the main road or is that 340 something that is totally separate? Just some clarity would be appreciated. ______2518 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The President: Minister to reply.
The Minister: Thank you very much, Mr President, and I would like to thank all contributors for their contributions, which has been really positive, and I think this is a subject which captures 345 the spirit of our times, not just in the Isle of Man, but elsewhere. It is tempting to think that active travel is purely an Isle of Man thing, but it is not. It is far wider and I think we need to recognise that; that it is about progressing and moving forward. So Mr Quine, thanks for your comments. I will make sure that those are fed back to the team and particularly on the high level of workmanship, which is appreciated. 350 Minister Harmer, who, obviously my predecessor as Minister in the Department, was very passionate about this active travel initiative and I am continuing it on. I am equally committed, perhaps tackling it in a slightly different way, but equally committed to driving it forward. Like him, I look forward to much more progress in a similar vein going forward within the Douglas conurbation and more broadly out into areas such as Onchan, but beyond and right across the 355 whole of the Island. Both the following two speakers, Mr Thomas and Mr Shimmins, and indeed Mr Hooper, talked about how does this fit in with wider plans. This is just one step on a big journey here, and the key thing is to blend strategic vision with pragmatism and opportunism, and what I want to achieve is the best of all of those things. 360 So we do have a very clear strategic vision of where we are trying to go, particularly in the Douglas conurbation and connecting those population centres where people reside with the places that they work. One of the processes that we have in place is a regular meeting which is open for the Douglas and Onchan MHKs, and at the last meeting of those Members we took them through the latest thinking in terms of connecting Onchan through Noble’s Park and into Douglas, 365 and I think it is fair to say that that was pretty well received by those who were present. I would be more than happy to share those plans with a wider audience, because this has to be connected up. It is no good just doing a small section and then thinking the job is done – it is not. A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step and I think we have got some momentum. We have got a steering group which involves three Ministers – myself, the Minister 370 for Policy and Reform and the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture – who are driving this with officers, meeting monthly and making real progress. I would also highlight that there has been a change of thinking in recent times and that best practice in the UK has identified a more specific need to separate the cycle traffic and walkers in particular from motor vehicles, and that thinking is being reflected into our plans going forward. 375 Having said that, we have to live within the constraints of the built environment that we have as an Island. We have a Victorian infrastructure, we have roads that are of a certain width, and we have a fairly challenging topography on the Island for cycling, particularly in the Douglas area, and we need to reflect that balance of pragmatism and strategy. But we are committed to this. It is really helpful, the £8 payback for every pound spent, and I think the Hon. Member for 380 Middle might find that in future business cases for active travel. I would also highlight, whilst I am on my feet, that we are not just doing the physical things, but we are also doing educational things and Hon. Members will have seen the press release yesterday, or are about to see it, about the appointment of a schools officer, which is a very progressive step, and we hope to appoint somebody to work with businesses as well. But that is 385 still to come. So in closing, Mr President, this is a key journey that we are on, we are committed to it, and I look forward to bringing more positive updates in the weeks to come. In terms of Mr Hooper’s concern, as far as I am concerned, the pedestrians can use the cycle track just the same as cyclists can, but if there is any difference to that I will make sure all 390 Hon. Members are informed immediately. Thank you, Mr President. I beg to move.
______2519 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 21. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
22. Recreation and Leisure Act 1998, Local Government Act 1985 – Recreation and Leisure (Garff) Order 2021 approved
The Minister for Infrastructure to move:
That the Recreation and Leisure (Garff) Order 2021 [SD No 2021/0050] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 22, again, Mr Baker, please. 395 The Minister for Infrastructure (Mr Baker): Thank you, Mr President. The Department of Infrastructure, with the consent of Garff Parish Commissioners, have made this Order under section 6 of the Recreation and Leisure Act 1998 and section 6A of the Local Government Act 1985. This Order applies to Garff Parish Commissioners sections 1 to 5 of the 400 Recreation and Leisure Act 1998, which confers powers which are currently applied to the Department for Enterprise and the Department of Education, Sport and Culture onto the Commissioners to enable them to provide recreation and entertainment facilities within their district. This corrects a historical oversight and puts Garff in line with the vast majority of the Island’s local authorities on this issue. 405 If I can clarify, Garff Commissioners require this to be approved so that they can transfer the ownership of Lady Evelyn Waterwheel from Laxey and Lonan Heritage Trust and then look to maintain the structure going forward. This Order facilitates this. Garff Commissioners are one of the few local authorities that are not currently covered by orders applying the Recreation and Leisure Act to them. It is a historical oversight and correcting this now will put Garff in a similar 410 position as the vast majority of other local authorities. This Order also disapplies the relevant provisions of the Local Government Acts 1916 to 1963 in respect of the Commissioners. The Order additionally makes amendments to the Recreation and Leisure (Northern Districts) Order 2000. This Order will empower the Commissioners to be able to provide recreational and entertainment facilities in their district under the powers 415 provided under the Recreation and Leisure Act 1998. My Department therefore feels this is something to be welcomed and therefore made this Order. The purpose of bringing this Order to Tynwald is to seek approval to this Order by this Hon. Court. Mr President, I beg to move that the Recreation and Leisure (Garff) Order 2021 be approved.
420 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Callister.
Mr Callister: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second.
The President: Hon. Member for Garff, Mr Perkins. 425 Mr Perkins: Thank you, Mr President, and I very much welcome this move. Garff is an extremely responsible local authority, and it is great to have the record put straight and the fact that Lady Evelyn will be under proper control now and will have proper funding I think is an excellent move. 430 Thank you very much, sir.
The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 22. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. ______2520 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
23. Income Tax Act 1970 – Income Tax (Common Reporting Standard) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 approved
The Minister for the Treasury to move:
That the Income Tax (Common Reporting Standard) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 [SD No 2021/0144] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 23, Income Tax Act. Minister for Treasury, Mr Cannan. 435 The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Cannan): Mr President, to enhance the Island’s international reputation as a reputable finance centre, this Hon. Court committed to implement the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s, or OECD’s, Common Reporting Standard for the automatic exchange of financial account information in 2014. The Regulations to 440 enable information to be provided to the Assessor of Income Tax by Isle of Man financial institutions were approved by this Hon. Court in October 2015. The Income Tax (Common Reporting Standards) Regulations 2015 have since been amended; in 2017, to facilitate the provision of information from reporting financial institutions to the Assessor of Income Tax, and in 2019 to formally require the completion of a Common Reporting Standard compliance return. 445 Since the last amendment to the legislation, the OECD are now turning their intention to ensuring that jurisdictions have implemented the Common Reporting Standard correctly in practice and have sufficient compliance measures in place. This will ensure the information reported under the Common Reporting Standard is accurate and that all the relevant financial institutions are reporting all of their relevant financial accounts. This is carried out via 450 questionnaires and via the OECD’s peer review system. In order to ensure that financial institutions continue to comply with the Common Reporting Standard practice has indicated that some clarity regarding the penalties for non-compliance is necessary, as well as a strengthening of the position in respect of serious non-compliance. The Income Tax (Common Reporting Standard) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 amend those 455 approved by this Hon. Court in 2015 to clarify the position regarding penalties for failure to comply with the Regulations. They also provide for a penalty to be applied where a return is not submitted, deeming the penalty date as the day after the return should have been submitted. In addition, these Regulations make it an offence for a person not to submit their return under regulation 7(1) of the 2015 Regulations within six months of the due date. Furthermore, these 460 Regulations amend regulation 14, to make the position clearer in respect of significant non-compliance. Mr President, approval of these Regulations being considered today will further demonstrate the Island’s dedication to meeting international standards and help us to continue to play our part in the global move to ensure fair taxation. 465 I beg to move.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Peake.
Mr Peake: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks. 470 The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 23. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
______2521 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
24. Income Tax Act 1970 – International Tax Compliance (United States of America) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 approved
The Minister for the Treasury to move:
That the International Tax Compliance (United States of America) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 [SD No 2021/0143] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 24, Mr Cannan.
475 The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Cannan): Mr President, in December 2013 this Island signed an intergovernmental agreement with the United States of America. In 2014 this Hon. Court approved the regulations to introduce the legislative framework necessary for the operation of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, more commonly known as FATCA. Under the agreement, financial institutions in the Isle of Man are required to report specified information regarding 480 accounts held by specified United States persons to the Assessor of Income Tax who will then forward it to her counterpart in the United States. The 2014 Regulations, which have not been amended since they came into operation, detail the information to be reported and they also set out the timescales for reporting to help ensure the Island fulfils its obligations under the agreement. To date, there have been no civil penalties 485 introduced for FATCA, unlike those for the Common Reporting Standard. However, the United States Internal Revenue Service is now beginning to increase aspects of compliance with FATCA. Now is therefore an ideal opportunity to align the compliance aspects of FATCA with the Common Reporting Standard. These Regulations that I bring before this Hon. Court today introduce civil penalties for non- 490 compliance in respect of FATCA. They also provide appeal rights in respect of an imposed fine and are clear on the enforcement of any such fine imposed. The amended Regulations are consistent with the amended Common Reporting Standard Regulations. Mr President, approval of these Regulations will continue to demonstrate the Island’s dedication to meeting international standards and help us to ensure we play our part in the global 495 move to ensure fair taxation. I beg to move.
The President: Mr Peake.
500 Mr Peake: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second.
The President: I put to the Court Item 24. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
25. Income Tax Act 1970 – Recovery of Foreign Taxes Regulations 2021 approved
The Minister for the Treasury to move:
That the Recovery of Foreign Taxes Regulations 2021 [SD No 2021/0147] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 25, Minister.
______2522 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
505 The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Cannan): Mr President, these Regulations are made under section 104EA of the Income Tax Act 1970. In October 2018, this Hon. Court approved the United Kingdom/Isle of Man Double Taxation Agreement. Article 27 of this Agreement deals with the assistance in the collection of taxes. This Article is reciprocal and requires that the two jurisdictions assist each other in the collection of 510 taxes. These Regulations allow for the recovery of tax debts relating to relevant foreign taxes with which the Island has an appropriate international arrangement. They allow for the foreign debt to be collected as though it is a domestic debt. This means the Isle of Man will be able to collect certain outstanding tax debts on behalf of the other jurisdiction and that jurisdiction will, on behalf of the Isle of Man, be able to collect certain Isle of Man tax debts as detailed in the agreement. If, 515 for an example, an Isle of Man resident who has a large Isle of Man tax debt sells their home and moves quickly to the United Kingdom without clearing their debt, the Assessor will be able to approach HM Revenue and Customs to collect that debt on our behalf. If approved, these Regulations will come into operation tomorrow. However, it should be noted that article 27 of our Agreement with the United Kingdom only has effect from the date 520 specified in an exchange of letters between ourselves and the United Kingdom. This date will not be agreed until after the approval of these Regulations. I therefore bring these Regulations to the Court today. I beg to move.
525 The President: Mr Peake.
Mr Peake: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks.
The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 25. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. 530 The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
26. Income Tax Act 1970 – Income Tax (Substance Requirements) Order 2021 approved
The Minister for the Treasury to move:
That the Income Tax (Substance Requirements) Order 2021 [SD No 2021/0156] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 26, Minister.
The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Cannan): Mr President, the matter of economic substance is now a worldwide issue and therefore a new international standard. 535 To ensure the Isle of Man continues to meet its commitment both to the European Union and to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, this Hon. Court previously committed to bring forward the necessary transparency measures and subsequent legislation. Economic substance was introduced from 1st January 2019 in respect of resident companies in certain relevant sectors. In 2020, a further amendment was approved by this Hon. Court to include 540 self-managed funds within the scope of economic substance. There is a clear message from the European Union Code Group that partnerships should be included within the scope of economic substance and that this should be implemented no later than 1st July 2021. This temporary taxation order enables the legislation in relation to economic substance for partnerships to be introduced in time to meet the European Union deadline and 545 therefore will help the Island to continue to meet the international standard. ______2523 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The main purpose of this Order is to amend Part 6A of the Income Tax Act 1970 to include partnerships within the scope of the substance requirements for income tax purposes. The legislation will require a resident partnership which receives income from a relevant sector, as defined in the legislation, to have adequate substance in the Island. Where a partnership does not 550 have adequate substance in the Island, the Assessor of Income Tax may impose a civil penalty. There are certain partnerships that will be exempt from the substance requirements and these include those partnerships that are comprised solely of individual partners, and partnerships that are wholly domestic. Where a partnership is not conducting activities outside of the Island, nor part of a group of multinational enterprises, it will be considered wholly domestic. Like companies, 555 partnerships will also be eligible to appeal a decision to the Income Tax Commissioners. In addition to the changes of Part 6A, amendments are also included in respect of annual tax returns made by partnerships, including the introduction of civil penalties for late annual return forms. There is also a new requirement for a certain partnership to register with the Assessor. The Order also makes an amendment to the Partnership Act 1909 and to the Limited Liability 560 Companies Act 1996, each amendment providing for a limited partnership or limited liability company to be struck off the register if a notification is sent by the Assessor. Mr President, approval of this Order being considered today will further demonstrate the Island’s dedication to meeting international standards and to help us to continue to play our part in the global move to ensure fair taxation. 565 I beg to move.
The President: Mr Peake.
Mr Peake: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second. 570 The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 26. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
27. European Union and Trade Act 2019 – Burma and Misappropriation Sanctions (Revocation) Regulations 2021 approved
The Minister for the Treasury to move:
That the Burma and Misappropriation Sanctions (Revocation) Regulations 2021 [SD No 2021/0146] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 27, Mr Cannan.
575 The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Cannan): Thank you, Mr President. These Regulations, made using powers contained in the European Union and Trade Act 2019, revoke two regulations concerning financial and trade sanctions. The revocations made by these Regulations follow the revocation of the sanctions regimes relating to Burma and misappropriation in the United Kingdom on 29th April 2021. 580 The United Kingdom sanctions regime that was established in relation to Burma has been replaced by the one established by the Myanmar (Sanctions) Regulations 2021. Those 2021 Regulations have been extended to the Island by the Myanmar (Sanctions) (Isle of Man) Order 2021. The United Kingdom’s misappropriation sanctions regime has been replaced by the one 585 established by the Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regulations 2021. Those 2021 Regulations
______2524 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
have been extended to the Island by the Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions (Isle of Man) Order 2021. I beg to move that the Burma and Misappropriation Sanctions (Revocation) Regulations 2021 be approved. 590 The President: Mr Peake.
Mr Peake: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second.
595 The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 27. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
28. Elections (Keys and Local Authorities) Act 2020 – Election Fees Order 2021 approved
The Minister for the Treasury to move:
That the Election Fees Order 2021 [SD No 2021/0166] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 28, the Minister for Treasury.
The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Cannan): Mr President, this Item provides for an increase in 600 the fees paid to returning officers who perform a vital role in ensuring that elections are properly administered in accordance with the law. Whilst the Election (Keys and Local Authorities) Act 2020 appoints the Chief Secretary as the Returning Officer for elections in the Isle of Man, the well- established approach used for previous national elections will continue in 2021. The 12 local advocates appointed as deputy returning officers by the Chief Secretary will retain 605 the power and authority to run the Election in each of the constituencies. They assume responsibility for the majority of the processes required to conduct an election and put in place teams to manage the polling stations and the count. The 2016 General Election saw the introduction of a simplified payment structure which removed the previous complexity around claiming expenses, and made the process more efficient and less bureaucratic for returning 610 officers. A flat fee of £10,000 was introduced for contested elections and £3,000 for uncontested elections. Previously, returning officers had been required to log and submit a number of claims for fees and expenses. Section 69 of the Act 2020 states that in setting the election fees the Treasury must have regard to the increase in the cost of living since the last order was made. Having sought advice from the 615 Economic Affairs Division in the Cabinet Office, the Order therefore today proposes that fees for constituency returning officers are increased in line with CPI to £10,720 for a contested election and £3,240 for uncontested elections. Mr President, many take on the responsibilities of a constituency returning officer out of a sense of duty and a willingness to play their part in the life of our community through maintaining 620 public confidence in the democratic process. On behalf of all of us, I wish to thank, and indeed express my gratitude, to those individuals who have agreed to serve during this year’s Election and also the Law Society for helping to recruit a sufficient number of constituency returning officers. Mr President, I beg to move that the Election Fees Order 2021 be approved. 625 The President: Mr Peake.
______2525 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mr Peake: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second.
630 The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 28. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
29. Value Added Tax Act 1996 – Value Added Tax (Amendment) Order 2021 approved
The Minister for the Treasury to move:
That the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Order 2021 [SD No 2021/0150] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Item 29.
The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Cannan): Thank you, Mr President. 635 This Order is made using powers contained in the Value Added Tax Act 1996, amending the Act as a consequence of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union. The Order inserts into the Act new Schedules 9ZA and 9ZB which make provision in connection with goods and their movement to or from Northern Ireland, and new sections for online marketplaces and reverse charges on goods supplied from abroad. 640 The Order also inserts women’s sanitary products into Schedule 1 to the Act to apply zero rate of Value Added Tax to sanitary products. Mr President, I beg to move the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Order 2021 be approved.
The President: Mr Peake. 645 Mr Peake: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second.
The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 29. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
30. Amendment of Standing Order 3.5(2) – Extension of time for Questions – Motion carried
The Hon. Member for Douglas Central (Mrs Corlett) to move:
That Standing Order 3.5(2) be amended to add the words ‘; but the Court may determine that the time shall be extended’.
The amended Standing Order would read: (2) Subject to Standing Order 2.2(5), unless the President directs by notice set out on the Question Paper, the time allotted for tabled Questions shall be two and a half hours; but the Court may determine that the time shall be extended.
650 The President: Item 30, Amendment of Standing Order 3.5(2). Hon. Member, Mrs Corlett to move.
______2526 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mrs Corlett: Thank you, Mr President. The principle contained within the motion has been accepted in the House of Keys. My 655 intention with this motion is simply to provide uniformity with the House of Keys and Tynwald Standing Orders and to accept the requirement for a simple majority, for or against, in both Branches. Mr President, I beg to move.
660 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Thomas.
Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks.
The President: Hon. Member for Douglas North, Mr Ashford. 665 Mr Ashford: Thank you, Mr President. It is just on a point of clarity, because I am not going to repeat everything I said in the House of Keys. It is all there on the Hansard and my view has not changed. But just for absolute clarity, although the Hon. Member reflected on it there in her speech, it is not actually in the motion. In 670 terms of a vote, it is silent on how it would be taken, Mr President. Would it be taken by Tynwald voting as a whole, or would it be taken on voting by Branch so we would need a requirement of a majority in both Branches? I will give way to the Hon. Speaker.
675 The Speaker: If the Hon. Member would give way, the presumption in Standing Orders is that it would be a majority of both Branches that would be required.
Mr Ashford: Thank you very much, Mr President.
680 The President: Hon. Member for Ramsey, Dr Allinson.
Dr Allinson: Thank you, Mr President. I thank the Hon. Member for bringing this motion. Again, we had a long conversation in the other place around Question Time, the length of Question Time and I think there was almost 685 unanimous agreement to go ahead with that. I think this Hon. Court is slightly different in a number of different ways. You can just look at the Order Paper and the amount of work that we have to go through here; and also we have a considerably longer time period to take Questions as well. So personally I am not in favour of amending the Standing Orders for this. I think the situation 690 here works very well. Some of the criticisms of the workings of the other place are not applicable to here. I think actually one of the key areas with Standing Orders is not necessarily just what is written down in the book we have in our drawers, but the way they are applied. So in his penultimate sitting of Tynwald, I would just like to thank the President for the way he applies Standing Orders. 695 In my first sitting, I was told that I was talking too much when I was asking a Question, and yesterday I was told I was talking too much answering a Question. (Laughter) So I suppose I have evolved as a parliamentarian, perhaps. Again, it is that discipline that we need to apply Standing Orders, but also the discipline of the Presiding Officer as well to make sure that we remember what we are here for and do not go off on tangents due to enthusiasm or for any other reason. 700 So whilst I think that the sentiment there is very valid, I do think we need to remember that we need a balance between the various roles we have on the Order Paper, from passing legislation, motions, General Debates, Questions, Statements, Emergency Questions, Emergency Statements. There is a lot here and I just worry that if we put too much emphasis on to answering
______2527 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Questions, particularly given sometimes the number of Questions that are tabled, we may distract 705 from the other important work we have to do. Thank you, Mr President.
Two Members: Hear, hear.
710 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Thomas.
Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President. Just a small question, perhaps of you, but perhaps also of the mover. My understanding of the words on the page is that the time allotted for tabled Questions would probably exclude, or should 715 exclude, Emergency Questions, for instance. (A Member: Yes.) I just wanted to make sure that was absolutely clearly understood because they are not tabled in any sense. The second point is just to give the counterargument to that point. I do think it is right that the Hon. Court has the simple method, which is what this is, a fair method according to established democratic principles to extend Question Time in the way that is described in this motion. 720 So I am fully supportive, and that is why I am very pleased to be invited to second it.
The President: Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge.
Ms Edge: Thank you, Mr President. 725 I fully support the motion brought by Hon. Member, Mrs Corlett from Douglas Central. But I am brought to my feet by what the Hon. Member for Ramsey has just said about important business for Government, and that Question Time should not get in the way of important business. Question Time, I feel, is just as important as important business. (A Member: Hear, hear.) So therefore I totally disagree with what the Hon. Member, Dr Allinson, for Ramsey said. The majority 730 of Questions come from our constituents and that is what we are in here for. It is a democracy. How many times in this administration have we sat in here beyond two days, Mr President? There is plenty of time, it is just down to Government as to whether we use that time effectively; and I do believe that Hon. Members, when they are elected into this hon. place, it is for your constituents, and we are here for that. 735 We are also here for Government business but there needs to be a fine balance, and I think that this motion certainly would bring that today. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Hooper. 740 Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President. I think for me this is just about aligning the Standing Orders between the two Branches. I think that is a principle that Tynwald has had for quite a while, making sure there are not differences where there do not need to be. So I am happy to support this on that basis, but I do tend to agree 745 with some of the things my hon. colleague, Dr Allinson, has said. We have not had the same issues with Question Time in Tynwald as we have in Keys. There have not been lots and lots of attempts to need to extend Questions in this Hon. Court in the same way that we have seen in Keys where it was quite a regular occurrence. So I am not really sure that this will be used actually in the same way. 750 But the one thing I would say is that the last time we voted to extend Question Time in Keys, we took the rest of the Questions at the end of the legislative business. So we did not interrupt the stuff that actually was quite time-sensitive, that needed to be done there and then, and we had time left at the end of the session to finish off Questions. So if this motion is approved I think we should be thinking about things like that in terms of, actually, we definitely want to get through 755 all the Questions, but maybe it is a good idea to say let’s get through all the other stuff first and ______2528 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
then come back to anything maybe at the end, or take Questions on a Tuesday and then maybe first thing on the Wednesday morning, rather than just thinking we have to deal with them there and then immediately all on the Tuesday morning. So I am happy to support this on the basis that we are just aligning the various Standing Orders, 760 but I would just encourage Members to try and be a bit more creative when they are bringing motions to this Hon. Court.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Baker.
765 Mr Baker: Yes, thank you, Mr President. I have not got much to add, but I just wondered if we feel as though we are fixing one element, or playing with one element of the Standing Orders and particularly around Questions, and I just wonder if there is perhaps a need for a wider review about the numbers of Questions, the balance, the order, the prioritisation of them, maybe. 770 We have a Standing Orders Committee and for me this would be better sat with the Standing Orders Committee to do a proper review and then to come back with a package of recommendations.
The President: I call on the mover to reply, Mrs Corlett. 775 Mrs Corlett: Thank you, Mr President, and I thank Members for their questions. First of all I thank Dr Allinson, but I do feel in response to his comments that it is up to Members to decide what they feel is appropriate, as they did yesterday. The democratic principle of a simple majority to stop a minority of votes carrying the decision – that is all I am trying to do. 780 Dr Allinson and also Mr Hooper were talking about the balance between the business in Tynwald, and I do think Members are entirely capable of taking responsible decisions in order for that balance to be achieved. On the last occasion that Question Time was extended in the House of Keys, Hon. Member for Ramsey, Mr Hooper proposed we take remaining Questions at the end, a responsible proposal that created the balance required. 785 What I am not trying to do here is to make the extension of Question Time a given. What I am trying to achieve is to make it possible with a simple majority. That way, individual Members can decide whether they feel it is appropriate to extend or not, and their vote will actually count. Mr Baker’s comments about the broader issue of Questions, we did discuss this in the House of Keys and I think we all agree there is a broader issue here that needs addressing, and that 790 should be. But as far as this motion is concerned, I am simply trying to bring some fairness and equity to the decision when we make it, about extending Question Time. I think I will leave it at that, Mr President.
The President: I put to the Court the motion at Item 30. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. 795 The ayes have it.
A division was called for and electronic voting resulted as follows:
In the Keys – Ayes 17, Noes 6
FOR AGAINST Mr Ashford Dr Allinson Mr Baker Mr Boot Mrs Caine Mr Cannan Mr Callister Mr Peake Mrs Christian Mr Quayle Mrs Corlett Mr Robertshaw Mr Cregeen
______2529 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Ms Edge Mr Harmer Mr Hooper Mr Moorhouse Mr Perkins Mr Quine Mr Shimmins Mr Skelly Mr Speaker Mr Thomas
The Speaker: Mr President, in the Keys, 17 votes for, 6 against.
In the Council – Ayes 7, Noes 1
FOR AGAINST Mr Greenhill Mr Henderson The Lord Bishop Mrs Lord-Brennan Mrs Maska Mr Mercer Mrs Poole-Wilson Mrs Sharpe
The President: And in the Council 7 for, 1 against. That motion therefore carries.
Procedural – Tabled Questions
The President: Hon. Members, I simply make an observation that I would have made had I been given the opportunity to take part in the debate, that all Questions that are tabled are 800 answered. They all receive an answer at the sitting. All that happens is those that are not reached in time and are not answered orally, there are no supplementary questions. That is the only difference.
31. Youth development – Need for further support – Amended motion carried
The Hon. Member for Arbory, Castletown and Malew (Mr Moorhouse) to move:
That Tynwald recognises the importance of Manx youth to the Island’s future; and further recognises the need to have support and local facilities in place that are greater than the existing culture, education and sporting programmes, in order to ensure that the personal development of each individual can be maximised and calls on the Council of Ministers to report on how this can be achieved, with an implementation plan, by January 2022.
The President: So with that, we move on now to Item 31. Hon. Member, Mr Moorhouse to move. 805 Mr Moorhouse: Thank you, Mr President.
______2530 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
This motion aims to open up a new dialogue about what is arguably the Island’s greatest resource, its people, and the need to develop a clear policy which will support all of them at best to reach their goals. I have purposefully left the wording quite open in the hope that more ideas 810 will be shared. This motion will hopefully result in the creation of a Government policy which includes the incentives and the support mechanisms to enable young people to achieve more. This is not about fast tracking just the most entrepreneurial, but it aims to provide the support and encouragement and the safety nets that will enable all the Island’s young people to jump even higher. 815 Last year, I asked several questions relating to the need to attract young people back to the Island, and also to make this the destination of choice for similar individuals; those who choose to remain on the Island and others who come here for the first time. It has been good to see the development of initiatives by the Department for Enterprise which actively encourage students to return home and to assist those who remain with training. New initiatives, internship 820 programmes, have been developed and the Treasury has devised a number of schemes which will benefit those individuals financially. In 2011, I proposed a range of ideas which would have encouraged young people to be supported in a range of areas at a time in their life when positive inputs have the potential to create massive benefits, not only for those individuals, but everyone around them. The core 825 suggestion was an opt-in mentoring scheme for everybody under 21 in the first instance, then going to 25 and eventually through all age groups. The proposal would have produced a formal opt-in system, supported by local volunteers with recognised skills and experience in areas relevant to the individual they were mentoring. Those positive role models will provide support and valuable guidance as these individuals develop businesses, continue with their education and 830 enter the jobs market. In 2021, the challenges for the Island’s young people are perhaps the greatest they have been for over 30 years. Job opportunities are limited and other challenges are significant. The Isle of Man’s greatest resource is its young people; the more skilled, the happier and healthier these individuals are, and the brighter the Island’s future will be. With limited time remaining of this 835 parliamentary session, I believe the opportune moment to assess the challenges faced by these individuals and hopefully new initiatives can be developed. The motion recognises the existing excellence in relation to cultural, education and sporting programmes, but it wants to go further. Whilst in school or college or the UCM, students receive mentoring. Their skills base increases and their life chances will improve. However, what about 840 the human capital or the skills base of those people who enter the workplace or find themselves out of work? Too many of these individuals drift and get caught in uncomfortable ruts, or comfortable ruts. As a consequence, their levels of productivity will stabilise and even fall. This is about giving them a positive nudge. What the motion seeks to do for young people is what the concept of joined-up Government 845 could do for the Island. The silo mentality must be pushed aside and the resources in all key areas, such as Enterprise, Education and the Treasury must come together and produce something more significant than the separate strands. If this is done, the impact will be huge in terms of personal, economic and social benefits for our young people. With increased support, Junior Achievement could potentially achieve increased things in this area. 850 Junior Achievement has over 25 years of providing business mentors to support initiatives like the Company Programme. I currently mentor two Junior Achievement teams and this input has enabled me to have active dialogue about the positive value of having mentoring. If this initiative works and a similar model can then be applied to older age groups, and the process further refined and improved, this will produce a benefit for the whole Island and all its people. 855 This is quite an unusual motion, because today I would like to create a positive wish list for young people that the Council of Ministers can then take away and return in January 2022 with a clear strategy on what is required to ensure the support mechanisms are in place to enable our young people to perform at the highest level. Today I focused on mentoring because I believe this ______2531 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
is an area which could create massive added value for the individuals and the Island economy at 860 a low cost by effectively harnessing a volunteer network. However, there are many other areas that could be considered, such as alternative sports, mental health support, meeting places, and the list goes on. This is not about starting again, but to identify clear areas of focus and to incorporate the best of what we have now into a unified programme with each component contributing towards a 865 more significant total. The key line in this motion is that Tynwald recognises the importance of Manx youth to the Island’s future. What support is required to ensure the personal development of each individual is maximised and their goals achieved? As a consequence of this, there could be real improvements in areas such as productivity and the skills base, but more importantly, the well-being of the Island’s young people. 870 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Dr Allinson. Were you intending to second? Perhaps not. Do we have a seconder? No seconder. 875 Mr Henderson: Yes, sir, Eaghtyrane.
The President: Mr Henderson.
880 Mr Henderson: For the purposes of debate, I will second Mr Moorhouse.
The President: Hon. Member, Dr Allinson.
Dr Allinson: Thank you very much, Mr President, and I thank the Hon. Member for bringing 885 this motion. I must admit, I read it as something slightly different and so I am glad that he has expanded on this idea of mentoring that will carry on for quite a long period of time. As we were just talking about questions, I would like to bring people’s attention to a Written Question from Mr Speaker, who actually asked me what assessment there had been of facilities for children of different age 890 groups around the Isle of Man and what gaps had been identified by age and region. I hope Hon. Members will read the Answer to that, because we tried to be as comprehensive as possible. I think there are a couple of key issues here with the mover of this motion. There is an awful lot that goes on in our Island already. We have 24 youth clubs around the Island. He talks about a positive wish list, but what I would advocate is that wish list should come from young people 895 themselves, not necessarily from Tynwald. (Two Members: Hear hear.) We have a huge amount here in terms of education, sport, in terms of culture. A lot of that is from the grassroots up rather than from the top down, and that is why you get community involvement. I think there possibly are gaps in provision of services for young people. The last Youth Survey that we carried out was back between February and April 2018 and actually generated 1,590 900 responses, which fed in an awful lot about what young people thought was important for them. I think that voice actually is incredibly important that we need to hear it. Again, in a Question, to Mr Speaker yesterday, I talked about meeting young people and actually their perspectives are often very different to ours. Sometimes they coalesce, but they are very different. One of the things that came up in my meeting on Monday was about careers advice, from 905 young people, and the hon. mover mentions that. At the moment, yes, we do have quite a lot of careers advice at schools, but some of the students I spoke to felt that they were being excluded from certain options, particularly in terms of the armed forces. That one or two of them had been very keen on taking a role in the Navy and found accessing that information really quite difficult. So certainly that is something that I, as a Minister, will look into. But also in terms of when you 910 leave school, at whatever age, there are various careers advice services on offer from the ______2532 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
JobCentre, and I would like to thank my hon. friend from Ramsey, Mr Hooper, for the generation of regional hubs to actually get some of that advice, get some of those services out to people in their own communities, (Two Members: Hear hear.) rather than dragging them in to somewhere central in Douglas. So I think there are definitely things we can do here. 915 The question really is, are there gaps in provision? We need the evidence for that, so I think asking young people what they want is incredibly important, but more than that why some people are active all the time and other people are not. What are the barriers for access? What are the barriers for people to take part in some of the activities that we have already? And whether that is financial, whether that is to do with confidence, whether that is to do with mental health issues, 920 we need to address that so that all our young people can make the full use of the facilities we have on offer. So I thank the Member for his motion. In terms of mentoring, I do have slight problems with what he is imagining in the future, because he highlights Junior Achievement, which obviously is active in our secondary schools, and as he says, does a very good job of getting volunteers from industry to come in and mentor young 925 people in terms of business. We also have a range of other organisations, particularly from the banking and financial sector who come in and give people advice, both careers advice and skills advice. One of the things we are very keen on doing in education is generating those life skills. Simple things like how to fill out an income tax return, which I never learnt. I had to follow somebody else – my mentor was my father, in the end. But for those who perhaps do not get that 930 support, we need to give them those life skills to succeed. Going forward though, I think there is a role, as the hon. mover has said, of linking up and making accessible some of the excellent facilities and services that are provided by the Department for Enterprise. The generation of things like Eagle Labs in the centre of Douglas has done an incredible amount of work in terms of young start-up companies, giving them the 935 confidence, giving them facilities to go forward. So rather than try to recreate a whole range of other things, perhaps we should look at what we have already, make sure that they are advertised clearly and make sure they are accessible to all. Thank you, Mr President.
940 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Thomas.
Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President. I thank Mr Henderson for seconding the motion and the mover for bringing it, because it gives us a chance to reflect on an important issue, and also to put that important issue in some other 945 context, which I would like the mover to do in his reply. Because in 2009, when only three Members in this Hon. Court were in this place, we actually had an Isle of Man Children’s Plan dated 2009 to 2012, which seems to be along the lines proposed but much wider. And at the end of that Children’s Plan 2009 – 2012, the next steps were the creation of an implementation plan, ongoing engagement of children, just as the Minister has outlined, and wider dissemination of the plan. So 950 there was a time, like there was a time when we had a national housing strategy, in fact, in 2009, we had a Children’s Plan. In that Children’s Plan we also had talk of a Children’s Bill, which included the creation of a Children’s Commissioner, a Children’s Advocate, a Children’s Committee, a Children’s Service Partnership and a Children’s Community Unit. But policy moved on. For whatever reason, it was 955 decided to approach things in a different way, and I just put down a couple of pointers to why we might have gained something by approaching something in a different way, and perhaps why we might have lost something. The way that we might have gained something is captured in an idea that has been very important in the Department of Education, Sport and Culture for five years – at least – but as yet 960 has not really realised anything, which is the idea of lifelong learning. Children are perhaps not different from all of us, it is just people grow up at a slower rate and so on, and so on. We are all children at heart in the sense that we still like to learn and we still like to do things. And so perhaps ______2533 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
it is better not to focus on children; perhaps it is better to focus on lifelong learning and lifelong opportunity. 965 Then, if I go to another context, which is safeguarding, at the time the Children’s Plan came out of some bad things that happened to Isle of Man children most significantly, and we had a new Department with ‘children’ in the name of that Department and we set up a safeguarding board for children. It was my privilege to work with some excellent people in safeguarding to grow safeguarding up and to be progressive and pioneering, in British islands’ terms, because through 970 the legislation that I took through, we moved away from having a children’s safeguarding board and an adult safeguarding board, to having a safeguarding board that looked at risks throughout society and throughout the family, and surely that is a positive move. So they are two pointers to what I would suggest might be a different way, a better way, rather than compartmentalising people and deciding, ‘Are you 16 and a child? Are you are 18 and a child? 975 Are you 21 and a child?’ What do you do about mental disability when people have got the mental age of two but they are adults – and so on, and so on. So these are all important issues and perhaps a pointer for a better way of doing it. The negative way of doing it is that I suspect that not a lot has happened since that Children’s Plan because of the lack of joined-up Government and departmental silos and competition, and the fact that things like housing have been pretended to 980 be infrastructure roles rather than social policy roles, and the fact that education is seen differently from social care, which is very important for education. Then we have a focus on the state doing things rather than enabling people to do for themselves. So I think it is a very helpful motion, I do not think we need to debate it a lot today, but I cannot support this motion, but I do think it is important for this Court now, as we mature, to actually try 985 and challenge ourselves to come up with proper, all-encompassing policies for doing exactly this for all of us, enabling everyone to fulfil themselves. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins. 990 Mr Shimmins: Thank you very much, Mr President. I am going to support my hon. friend, Mr Moorhouse, and I welcome the fact he has brought a different motion to this Court. (Mr Harmer: Hear, hear.) A motion that talks about our young people who he described as the future of the Island, and I find that refreshing. So thank you very 995 much, Mr Moorhouse. Looking at the motion, it is interesting that the previous speaker, my hon. friend, Mr Thomas, talked about children. Most people would define ‘youth’ as the period between childhood and adulthood, so I am not sure we are talking about children, and the United Nations defines ‘youth’ as when you are between 15 years and 24 years. So I think it is important that we understand this 1000 is about that age group rather than younger children. I think mentoring is a very powerful support for people to achieve their full potential, and that is what we want to see: as many of our young people achieving their full potential as possible. So I am very supportive. I would also just like to draw Hon. Members’ attention to the wider demographic picture, 1005 which I have talked about a number of times in this Hon. Court. The Minister for Enterprise may remember when I accused him of sleepwalking to demographic disaster some time ago, in terms of the way that we are looking at our population make-up, and I eagerly await the outcome of the recent census. Hon. Members, I am not a big gambler. I might have put 50 pence, 50 whole Manx pennies! (Interjections) 1010 Mr Cregeen: A whole 50 pence! (Interjection)
Mr Shimmins: I am willing to put that on the line (The Speaker: Standards Committee!) with anyone in this Court that we will see a continuation of the previous trends. And the previous ______2534 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
1015 trends are that our population is getting older and that the 20-somethings population is declining. That really is a big concern for me. So anything which helps us become more attractive for young people and the youth who are our future, I am very supportive of. I would just also, perhaps just to stoke a wee bit of controversy this morning (Dr Allinson: Never!) say, I would just suggest, how often do we talk about heritage, about saving old buildings, 1020 about horse trams? How often do we spend millions and millions of taxpayers’ money on things which are really aimed at not our youth, I would suggest, Hon. Members? I think this Court could do with spending a bit more time looking at intergenerational fairness on this Island. (A Member: Hear, hear.) I think if you look at some of the things that we are grasping for at the moment, we are seeing young people saying it is very difficult to buy their own property in this Island, and 1025 actually, we have seen an increase in property prices. That helps those people who are perhaps a bit older, who already got their homes – it does not help our young people. We are seeing our young people leave. I think we should be concerned about this, Hon. Members. So I thank Mr Moorhouse, I support your motion. I think we need to talk more about our young people and support our youth. They are our future. 1030 Thank you very much.
The President: Hon. Member for Garff, Mrs Caine.
Mrs Caine: Thank you, Mr President. 1035 Children are our future, I agree with the hon. mover. It is easy to support the sentiment of the motion, but I am not sure what evidence there is of the need for more than the existing support and local facilities. We are aware of the long waiting times to obtain mental health therapy and the expansion of listening services in schools, but is it enough? So I have a question: what exactly does this motion extend to? Pre-school provision? Play 1040 equipment? Clubs? The hon. mover focused on mentoring, which I found particularly interesting. Is that a perceived or an evidenced lack in our society? I feel the removal of the word ‘children’ from the Department of Education and Children was a pivotal moment in our history politically, when children lost political focus. Having served as Children’s Champion, I am aware of the perception there is a lack of provision over a whole range of services, but I would prefer to see 1045 ongoing engagement to ask young people what facilities or support they feel are lacking, but also, more importantly, to understand barriers to access. I am aware that a photo call arranged not that many years ago by tourism marketers tasked with promoting our coastal activities resulted in a group of boys being invited to kayak off Maughold. They were fabulous action models, but it turned out none had ever been north of 1050 Douglas, and none had enjoyed any previous participation in water sports. I find that shocking and sad. We have plentiful activities, from paddle boarding to coasteering, while in-land gorge walking and abseiling, unlimited walks through wooded glens, uplands and coasts, numerous dance schools, sports clubs, other youth clubs, a wide range of a variety of sporting, social and cultural extracurricular activities. 1055 I have heard the young people would like to get more life skills, as the Minister for Education touched on, especially banking, budgeting and tax. The fact that Government takes a cut of their earnings came as a complete shock to one young person I know. Tax had never been mentioned. So I am a little puzzled what exactly the mover hopes to achieve by bringing the motion today. I feel it is wide open. If approved, how would it be delivered, whose responsibility would it be to 1060 provide local facilities greater than existing in our culture, education and sporting programmes? It is easy to support on paper, but how will it be effective in achieving a positive outcome? Although the Hon. Member for Arbory, Castletown and Malew mentioned a Government wish list coming back in January 2022, there is no action included in the motion, no one responsible for delivering its aims. 1065 If it is simply to highlight some policies for debate before an election to encourage debate, then that is a positive, especially if any of those policies make it into the next Programme for ______2535 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Government. But I agree with the Hon. Education Minister, Dr Allinson, Member for Ramsey: let the young people inform future direction of policies to provide facilities for them. Let’s establish the gaps in provision and the barriers to access. We can always do more, but I think it needs to be 1070 more focused and evidence based. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Cregeen.
1075 Mr Cregeen: Thank you, Mr President. During my time at the Department of Education, Sport and Culture, some of the things that were there was there was Career Ready. So it was engaging with the schools about careers. One thing that we did was we went to all the secondary schools and asked the young people what they would like, and it was amazing to see some of the things that came back. There were comments 1080 of, ‘No, we’re fine, thanks. We do not need anything else.’ There were comments of an ice rink and other things. Mr President, what I will do is I will dig out the report and circulate it to everybody, because it would be quite interesting, I think, for Hon. Members to see what the young people wished for. I do have a bit of a concern with the Hon. Memberʼs wording on this and his Item 37, where he 1085 is saying let’s have a wish list on this Item, and a report of implementation by January 2022, and yet his Item on 37 is regarding the scope and structure of Government and having a Government that we can afford. (Laughter) So there is a bit of a clash there. We are here to be aspirational and if we were to do everything that we could just afford at that time, how are we likely to be that aspirational for our young people? 1090 Mr President, we also have MyBnk, who are visiting the schools to give some advice on banking to young people, and I was interested to hear the comment from the Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins, saying about aspirational for young people so that they can have the future that they deserve and some equity in the funding when you compare it to older people. Yet when we were trying to be aspirational for the young people at Castle Rushen, our budget was constantly 1095 getting picked at. So aspirational does cost money.
Mr Shimmins: No, it is just you were incompetent. (Interjections)
Mr Cregeen: It was not that, it was you wanted your way. 1100 Mr President, one of the things that we have really got to look at is what the children want, what they can aspire to and also how we can deliver this for them. Unfortunately, having this implementation plan by January, it is not giving anybody in the new administration any time to really look at it. You are not going to be able to budget for it, because you are already through the budgetary process. I think it is going to be very difficult to do something like this. I would hope 1105 that the Hon. Member would understand that if this is approved, that any report is going to be way after that date. Our schools are getting designed so that they are more accessible for our young people and for the community. Previous designs you ended up locking the whole school up because you had to go through one area where the students are and there were some concerns about children’s 1110 artwork on the walls, and if you go into the school people were having to take it off the walls because of the regulations. As Chairman of Ballasalla Community Partnership, one of the things that we realised was facilities for young people, so we ended up raising money for two portakabins, which are in the grounds of Ballasalla School, and that is for the availability for all the people in the community. 1115 I think what we really need to do is go across all the local authorities and see what facilities we have there, because you will all be amazed of what is going on that we do not know about. I think that is one of the areas that we need to have that feedback from local authorities in saying what we are actually providing and maybe a central place where you can see what is going on in your ______2536 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
area, because if your children are in a school and they do not know what activities are going on, 1120 how do you know to take them to it? So I would hope that part of this will be that we have a centralised area of activities across all the Isle of Man and you could regionalise it so where you live, you can just go on to that. So with that, Mr President, thank you.
1125 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Harmer.
Mr Harmer: Thank you and I want to say thank you to the Hon. Member for bringing this motion, and just to reiterate thank you, because actually, he has changed the tone of debate. We talk about so many different things and we do not talk about our young people and about our 1130 youth. (A Member: Hear, hear.) At that point, and I just reflect on my own … gosh, it was a long time ago, but the point was (Laughter) it is fundamental. The people that speak to you at that point, the people that give you an opportunity at that point, makes such a huge difference – massive impact. And, yes, we do need to do more and I think this is perfect in this context of the election, both the local authorities 1135 and for the Government, in saying that actually we need to do more, because it is not a case of ‘they are our future’: without them, there is no future and I just feel that sometimes our policies, the way we direct things, is not focused enough around what would attract and build people into the Isle of Man. (A Member: Hear, hear.) But I would be concerned that everybody talks about sport. Not all of us are sporty (A Member: 1140 Hear, hear.) and I would be concerned about linking everything into a sport context. It is about culture, it is about music, it is about a whole lot more. Yes, there is lifelong learning, but it is just a pivotal point. So I am just really grateful for the mover for bringing this motion. I think it has generated a lot of debate and I hope that going forward people will actually think a bit more in terms of future debates and it will be a formative part of the Programme for Government. So 1145 actually, the January 2022 date is absolutely perfect for that as well. So with that, I give my full support to the motion. Thank you.
The President: Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Lord-Brennan.
1150 Mrs Lord-Brennan: Thank you, Mr President. I think that the motion from Mr Moorhouse has already been worthwhile, just to bring out all the various points about young people and children, and particularly the points made by Mr Thomas about there once being a Children’s Plan. I agree then, actually, with Mrs Caine – I think Mr Shimmins as well – who said, ʻLook, actually, have we lost the political focus for children 1155 along the way somehow?’ It strikes me that we have. Whether this motion is the best way to deal with it necessarily, I am not totally sure, and I will explain why. It is because – and I am going to support it, but I just want to put a different view – that actually, in terms of mentorship, I think things like that go through from real life experiences and, for example, working or finding your own way, and I am not necessarily sure it is essential or 1160 the right way, as a construct of Government, to facilitate at every step in this. I think that sometimes, actually, Government maybe needs to get out the way and think of the implications. So I remember the first thing, and I think we were shocked at the time because it was probably only my second sitting or something like that, the first thing I voted against in this Hon. Court were some regulations to do with effectively teenagers working, a lot restrictions around that. I think it 1165 was to do with food service or kitchens, and basically we were saying they could only work for two hours and they cannot be near knives and ‘What if something happens?’, but it is little things like that that means that it is harder for young people to get jobs. And if they cannot get jobs, they are less likely to have the experience of somebody who is older, experienced in business, or just to be frankly socialised in that way in what you need, rather than facilitated.
______2537 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
1170 So I think that aside from intervention, there are definitely considerations that need to be taken in just ordinary policy or regulation so that we are not being over-prohibitive or coddling, so that actually children/young people do not get the sort of experience and the outcome in terms of personal development that Mr Moorhouse is seeking in this motion. So I think already it is worthwhile. I am not sure the state should be manufacturing mentoring 1175 as such, but I do believe in the value of mentorship. It does come in all forms though, and sometimes Government needs to get out the way. Thank you very much, Mr President.
A Member: Hear, hear. 1180 The President: Mr Speaker.
The Speaker: Thank you, Mr President. Well, when I first arrived in this place at the age of 26, I probably still counted as a youth myself, 1185 and now, 15 years later, I turn to my primary school-age children for their views, and that really does reflect well on what Dr Allinson said about how we have this view at one stage of our life and it develops and it changes, and then you look down to the next generation and see how their views are shaped and changed and how different they are to your own. And then you can compare that to your parents’ generation and see just how different that is. So these perspectives are 1190 important. I am conscious that the major issue we seem to have about this motion so far is about a quibbling over the wording, so I wanted to just try and perhaps quite simply remove that. The motion itself seems to provide an imperative about how this wish list can be achieved, whereas the wording I am offering is instead of saying how this can be achieved, it is a report on what can 1195 be achieved with an implementation plan by January 2022. So it is not about saying that this wish list that we all heard must be achieved, it is about saying what can be achieved and then taking that list forward. I hope that makes sense. It is incumbent on all of us, I think, to engage and ask young people, to listen and encourage them, to empower and enthuse them. Again, I was slightly disappointed to hear Dr Allinson saying 1200 that some young people quite interested in joining the Navy did not know how to go about that, where to turn. Well, certainly in terms of my own role as Armed Forces Champion, I would be happy to put the people in touch with others at HMS Eaglet in Liverpool and also through the Army Reserve Centre and other places like that to make sure that they get those opportunities. But I suppose, like so many other things, it is knowing where to look. 1205 When I started off in this place, like Mr Cregeen, one of the things we got on the doorstep: ‘there’s nothing for young people to do’. So we set up a small group of members and we looked and found out what there was to do and compiled a list of over 300 clubs, groups and societies that accepted young people to join and take part. Now, okay, these might not have been for everyone, and it did count each cub and guide group separately, and it did include things such as 1210 chess clubs and crown green bowls, which may not stereotypically have attracted young people, but let’s not forget that … There is a bowling green near me and I walk pass that really often, and it is an intergenerational thing and people take their children and their grandchildren. So perhaps to pick up Mr Shimmins’ gauntlet, and say that my own enthusiasm for our heritage came when I was young. You go on the steam trains and the trams and you see families and young 1215 people who are just as excited to be there. And when I go to the Manx National Heritage sites it is families that I see there as well as older people. So this is an opportunity to engage in our heritage and heritage does have a part to play in this. I do have questions about whether we make it easy for parents and adults to run groups, and I think that has been well covered through everything from safeguarding to arranging the finances 1220 and the banking community and how easy some of them make it to do that.
______2538 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Another plea, I suppose, just to add into the mix, is to encourage local authority candidates to enter into this space as they start campaigning for their elections in July. I think that they have a large part to play in provision of some aspects of youth provision, and I would hope that they pick up and run with that as they do for their commissioners’ campaign. 1225 One of the things that I think we have got wrong over the last decade is that we – and Mr Thomas alluded to the Children’s Plan – but I think it was a real mistake to take the name ‘children’ out of the Department of Education and Children as it was; we now have the Department of Education, Sport and Culture which covers a multitude, but children is not the focus anymore and I really thought that it should have been. 1230 So if there is one thing that does come out of this, it is not perhaps a wish list of this thing and that thing that I would like doing, but it is about a commitment by the Department of Education, Sport and Culture to look holistically at young people, and not necessarily provide everything for them, but enable it; to encourage, to advertise, to signpost, but to put them at the centre of this, not just about their education, but about them as a person. 1235 I think there is an opportunity we have missed over the years. It was seized in the 2006 Everall Report, which identified these opportunities, and we have drifted away from them over the years and I think that is to our detriment. That is something that I would really like to see coming out in the future. So with that, and I hope that the slightly looser wording will allow more people to get behind 1240 the motion and the principle rather than the detail, I beg to move the amendment standing in my name, Mr President:
To leave out the words ‘how this’ and insert the word ‘what.’
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Hooper.
Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President. 1245 I would just like to thank the Hon. Member for bringing this General Debate, because really what we are having is a General Debate, here. The motion itself says:
That Tynwald recognises the importance of Manx youth to the Island’s future; and further recognises the need to have support and local facilities in place that are greater than the existing culture, education and sporting programmes …
So my first question for the hon. mover is: what evidence does he have to base this statement on? He did not mention any of that in his opening remarks. There is no evidence that has been presented to say, actually, we need more than we currently have. There is a general feeling, I 1250 think, that that might be the case in some areas, but actually we need to be making evidence- based decisions here. I think I am a bit uncomfortable making a statement like this without any evidence at all to back it up. I had cause very recently to describe and list all the facilities and offerings available in Ramsey or near Ramsey that relate to children and young people. We have got parks, beaches, glens, a 1255 swimming pool, schools, free school sports facilities, sports clubs, cultural venues and societies, a library, shopping, youth clubs and even a wildlife park within about five minutes’ drive. I had to stop myself (Interjection) because I realised that actually nobody was going to believe this list. It is just completely unrealistic to think that any town with a population of 7,000 or 8,000 people has all of these facilities in it or near it. 1260 My wife is from the Midlands and she said that the only thing they had within a 10-minute drive was a rundown football pitch. The comparison is just incredible compared to what we have here on the Island. In his opening remarks the hon. mover talked extensively about mentoring and internship, but the motion does not really mention those. He meandered off into economic development 1265 initiatives and opportunities, again not covered by the motion. The motion itself is almost, to me, ______2539 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
it feels like it is saying we have a string-related problem and asking Government to go away and report on how long that piece of string is. Everything has been raised in this debate. We have had Mr Shimmins not even sure what age group we are really talking about here. Mr Thomas talked about children and safeguarding. We 1270 have had demographic challenges, heritage, intergenerational fairness. I mean, where do we stop talking about all of these things? One thing that has not been mentioned is support for additional needs. That is one area where there is evidence of a significant amount of unmet need within our education system. (A Member: Hear, hear.) Young people with additional needs are clearly being stymied from reaching their full 1275 potential, not touched on by the mover, not touched on so far in this debate. That is not a criticism. The point I am making is that that is the problem with the motion. It is not the wording about who does what, as Mr Speaker is suggesting, but actually what is being asked for is so unbelievably broad that any single report or single piece of work is just not going to deliver on this. I am not convinced that it is sensible to ask a Government to meander around in that sort of 1280 unfocused manner, especially when we are trying to support young people and we are trying to do things that will help them enhance their lives and reach their full potential. This is a very well- intentioned motion, but I think it could actually cause more harm than good if we start trying to do too much all at once. Any report that will come out of this, I think it would just be the usual wishy-washy rubbish that you get when Government does not really know what it is trying to 1285 achieve but has been asked: ‘We have to produce a report because someone has asked us to report. So here you go.’ Actually, is that what we want? I would be much happier hearing the Department or the Government commit to going away and actually engaging with young people and finding out what they think we need on the Island, what they think they need to help them succeed. Go out and engage with teachers, go out and 1290 engage with social workers, go out and engage with people and find out actually what the public thinks is necessary, rather than just trying to dictate from the top down that there is definitely an issue here that needs solving. Let’s find out if there is, first. I completely support this evidence-led concept and completely support the comments that have been made here around all the things you could potentially be looking at with a motion like 1295 this, with a workstream around young people. But I do not think I can support something that is this broad, that is this empty, I suppose, of context. I think, come back with something that is a bit more focused, come back with something that ties in to some of these issues that have been talked about across the field and I would be happy to support it. But actually I think doing something like this is just going to risk derailing any of the good work that is already ongoing. 1300 (A Member: Hear, hear.) Thank you very much, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Sharpe.
1305 Mrs Sharpe: Thank you, Mr President. I welcome this motion brought by the Hon. Member, Mr Moorhouse. Talking about mentoring, specifically, Mr Shimmins asked us to consider that ‘youth’ stretches probably up to the age of 25, and in fact what we now know about the human brain is that emotionally it does not mature until at least the age of 25. So that is really useful to bear in mind. 1310 Mr Thomas talked about lifelong learning. The other day I spoke to an advocate who is only in her early 30s, who feels she is very trapped in her career. She wants to change careers; and she is not alone. I think having an overall mentoring scheme on the Island also for older adults would be very useful, because people can transfer skills and they can have mentors in other career areas. Talking as political lead for Children and Families, I think that care leavers certainly would 1315 benefit from a mentoring scheme, and also children who are coming from families who are receiving early help. You might remember, Mr President, that we invited members of VIP – Voices in Participation, which is an organisation for care leavers on the Isle of Man – to have lunch with ______2540 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
us in the Barrool Suite about a year ago. This was on national looked-after children day. I spoke to VIP afterwards and 100% of the care leavers who attended that lunch said that the best thing 1320 about that whole day had been having lunch with Tynwald Members, and actually just talking to them and feeling that they were being listened to. I am really glad that I got that feedback because I think this is something, just at a personal level as Tynwald Members, that we could carry forward for our children who have just left care. So you are talking about age 16, 18 and onwards, and we could mentor, we could offer advice and 1325 support just on an informal basis. This is just something that we could do very easily. It is not going to cost us anything and it is not going to cost Government anything. One of the things that actually came out when I spoke to those children – well, ‘young people’ I will call them – is that they do not like being called ‘looked-after’ children, they prefer to be called children in care, and that is something that you do not know unless you actually talk to people. So it is useful. 1330 So to my mind it would be useful on the Island to have something akin to the Prince’s Trust in the UK, which works with young people aged 11 to 30 who are disadvantaged, and so far the Prince’s Trust has mentored 1 million young people to date. Mrs Caine talks about the importance of listening to the voices of young people and having evidence-based information; and I welcome the fact that Mr Cregeen is going to circulate feedback which he gathered when he was the 1335 Minister of DESC. But what we need is ongoing feedback. So we have Junior Tynwald, we have school councils and hopefully in the future we will have Youth Parliament. We need a mechanism which will bring feedback on a consistent basis into parliament from our Island’s young people. That is what we need. So what is that mechanism going to be? I think Mr Hooper touched on this when he said that 1340 it is all about listening to the voices of young people. Could this be achieved through this motion? I know the motion is what you could call quite loose, but on the other hand the positive side of having quite a loose motion is that it leaves it very open for Government to actually think outside the box, and to come up with ideas which it might not have come up with had the motion been a bit more specific. So I do not know whether the fact that it is quite loose is such a bad thing. 1345 I think that looking at what can be achieved with an implementation plan by January 2022, which Mr Speaker has suggested in his amendment, is closer to what we are looking for here. I wonder whether anyone else might amend that to what can be achieved by the end of the next administration – might be more useful, because at least it focuses the mind on what can be achieved within five years. 1350 So I will be supporting Mr Speaker’s amendment, thank you –
The President: No, it has not been seconded yet.
Mrs Sharpe: And I would second it, Mr President. 1355 Thank you.
The President: Hon. Member, Mrs Maska.
Mrs Maska: Thank you, Mr President. 1360 I also welcome this motion in terms of the debate that has arisen from it being moved today. I absolutely understand the motives that sit behind it and the hon. mover’s desire to offer as wide a range and the best opportunities to our young people. Who would not really want to do that? But I also am aware that currently there is a real richness of opportunity out there. I think we are all aware of that, but part of the problem is we do not have a holistic picture to communicate to 1365 our young people of what is out there, what they can engage with. I also would like to share … We had a Question yesterday about the Bona Vacantia fund. I can confirm that the Isle of Man Arts Council and Culture Vannin, working collaboratively, were successful in achieving funding from the Bona Vacantia fund to actually get interns within each body. Those interns have added such a lot to the operation of both of those bodies. One of them ______2541 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
1370 is still in place and really there has been two-way traffic in terms of we have learnt from them, they have learnt from us. They have been mentored and it has really been a success story. So again, I would like to think that mentoring can be part of a future plan as we go forward. I also think that during the COVID experience, the engagement has changed direction and developed in terms of what young people can do for themselves and how we can encourage them 1375 to engage. For instance, we have not had the Manx Music Festival for two years, but what happened this year, in half term, there was an online music competition which actually attracted 4,000 entries from our young people and was an amazing success. My problem is, I think, as others have said, the motion is too broad with no real picture of what we have, what evidence there is, to what are we trying to fix. I think that really is needed. 1380 I think one of the breakdowns we have is really exciting and imaginative communication, (A Member: Hear, hear.) and that is across Government. But to engage our young people it has got to be stimulating and open their minds to the opportunities that are there and that we can offer. I would like to think that we do ask our youth what they need, what they would like, as has been done before. But, if I remember correctly, the 2018 Youth Survey was narrow in terms of it 1385 went through youth clubs, through schools, but it was I think a paper exercise that was not greatly engaged with. I think that needs to be broadened and that would really provide an awful lot of evidence and could build upon what the mover is trying to succeed in doing with this motion. But I do not think the motion has quite hit the mark today. I would like to think that as we go forward, we can engage, we can gather the evidence and 1390 give a plan to our young people of what we can do to assist in mentoring, in offering opportunities in the arts, sport, culture and other opportunities across our whole system, whether it be Government, whether it be private enterprise, whether it be alternative ways of lifelong learning. Thank you, Mr President.
1395 The President: Lord Bishop.
The Lord Bishop: Thank you, Mr President, and I express gratitude to the Hon. Member for bringing this motion before us. Clearly the quality of the debate and the contributions of all Hon. Members have illustrated just how important this is. 1400 I think at this stage I have four thoughts, really. The first one is that as a number of hon. colleagues have said, the young people and youth are our future. I mean, they are also our present as well. They are here at the moment with us. Clearly what we are talking about, therefore, is not just future-proofing, but it is investment and it is consultation and it is listening, and it is hearing and actioning things that may already be there. So it is not just about youth as our future but as 1405 our present, as part of the present of our Island. I think the points the Hon. Member, Mr Shimmins makes are well made. There are demographic issues here that need to be addressed, and probably now, rather than looking at them as a future challenge. My second thought is that this is actually not in any way a hostile motion and the first clause 1410 ‘that we recognise the importance of youth’, that is fine. The second one, ‘recognising a need to have greater things in place’, that is actually always going to be the case. That is merely what it means to be a place that is developing, a place that is growing, a place that is aspirational. We know there are gaps, there always will be. I recall that questions have been raised recently in this Hon. Court, for example, around the teaching of modern languages, around creative 1415 writing – those are two areas that come to mind where hon. colleagues have felt there are gaps to be addressed. We can look at those, and that is not in any sense being detrimental to what we already have in place, which is simply looking to develop these things further. My third thought is that whilst it is true that Government will often need to get out of the way, Government can also, and does have a duty, to set the vision, I think, and that is the benefit of 1420 what we are talking about this morning. There is a vision and how we take that forward is now up to us. ______2542 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
That would be my fourth point, really, just reflecting on comments from Hon. Member, Mr Hooper and others. There may be something broad and unfocused about this motion, and we might wish to acknowledge that. But actually the last part of it perhaps is simply saying to us, ‘Let’s 1425 see if you can focus this.’ Let’s see if we can focus it and work out what some sort of development plan might look like. So Mr President, with those thoughts in mind, I think I am happy to support the motion and indeed also Mr Speaker’s amendment. Thank you. 1430 The President: Hon. Member, Mrs Poole-Wilson.
Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you, Mr President. I think, as others have said, it is a good thing actually that we are having this debate today. I 1435 think I would like to repeat what the Lord Bishop has said in referencing the Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins, that we probably do not talk enough in here about children and our young people and the demographic issue, and also the issue of intergenerational fairness. So I think it is important and healthy that we have this discussion. But I do think what we are having in effect is what the Hon. Member for Ramsey, Mr Hooper 1440 said is more of a General Debate. That is also a good thing, because lots and lots of issues have been touched upon. But I think probably where I would part company with the Lord Bishop’s remarks is instead of supporting this particular motion, I think it would be better to draw on what specific issues we might need to look at, and have tailored, focused action around those specific issues. My concern would be that there is potential here for an open-ended, and I think somebody 1445 referenced a sort of wishy-washy output, that does not really target what we need to do and prioritise it. I think there is a danger in that. My question would be really we know there is a wide variety of provision, nobody would doubt that. I also recognise that it is aspirational and you are never there – if you want to improve things there is always more you can do. But I suppose the question is: what are the gaps? Do we really 1450 know that? So would we not be better off encouraging Government to identify the gaps, and where those are down to Government to address? Or where those are things that, naturally, the third sector, the private sector and others will fill in if it is made known that there is a need? I think the other thing is: what barriers are there? I think that is really important. There are lots of people on the Island, lots of children and young people who do participate in a huge variety of 1455 activities, but also there are some young people and children who do not, sadly. But actually what is stopping them can be very complex. I think this is where a holistic approach again becomes important. What are the barriers if a child is in a setting which involves domestic abuse? I recall a young child coming along to the local Beavers group when I ran it, and the parent would never leave 1460 them because of anxiety problems. I have subsequently found out it was a lot deeper than that. So I think we also have to recognise that sometimes the barriers and the difficulties can in and of themselves be quite complex and they speak to wider social needs. So I think there is a holistic need here. The hon. mover spoke about mentoring. I think there is provision, but I would say: is it good 1465 enough? So wearing my St Christopher’s hat to the point Mrs Sharpe made before about care leavers and mentoring, St Christopher’s do run a ‘Support into Employment’ service, which is currently financed through fundraising and donation, and that is very targeted to try and give specific support to the particular needs of the young people involved. That can be everything from assistance to have some sort of routine in your life, through to helping them write a CV, to 1470 interview skills. It can be a wide variety of support, but it has to be very tailored to the needs of those individuals. So I welcome the motion in terms of the debate it has triggered and the richness of contributions around the Court, but I am not sure I can support the implementation aspect of it, ______2543 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
even with Mr Speaker’s amendment, which I understand what he is trying to achieve, because I 1475 think overall I would encourage the Social Policy and Children’s Committee to look at this and look at actually what are the things that really need to be targeted and addressed, and of their own volition bring back some sensible proposals as to what Government could and should be doing more of. Thank you, Mr President. 1480 The President: Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge.
Ms Edge: Thank you, Mr President. I, too, welcome obviously the way the debate has gone. I thought at first we were not even 1485 going to get a debate when there was not a quick seconder there, but all I really want to add to it is actually within the motion, it says recognise ‘the need to have support and local facilities’. So I have not heard anybody mention yet about local authorities. They can play – Oh, did … (Interjections and laughter) All I heard was the Ballasalla …! (Interjection) Sorry. But it does lead to all working and being joined-up, which clearly there are gaps, major gaps, with regard to that. 1490 Apologies Hon. Members that did mention the local authorities. But really I suppose where I have seen it and Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Poole-Wilson, said there are gaps, clearly is gaps. I quickly had a look on the Youth Service website, and obviously they only start services from the age of seven to nine. We have children in need of activities and facilities younger than the age of seven and the Youth Service does not pick that up. They also do 1495 not provide services throughout the holiday periods, they close down at half terms and that. So there are gaps that I think Government could be looking at, and really and truthfully, that is what the Hon. Member for Arbory, Malew and Castletown, Mr Moorhouse, is trying to achieve here. But perhaps it is time that Government actually now looked at bringing forward a children’s strategy, because we have, in this administration, changed an awful lot of legislation to change 1500 the age of a child to 18. So we have changed our legislation and increased that to 18, which I totally support, but I think it would have been great, and obviously I have not had the opportunity to speak to the Hon. Member, but to me this Government – or the next one, actually; we will not be able to achieve it – should be bringing forward a children’s strategy that is from birth to 18. I am not aware of that being talked about, and certainly there are lots of strategies out there, but 1505 they do need to be pulled together so that we can focus on the children of the Island, what they need and communicate with them, is key. Certainly coming from a school environment into here, there is an awful lot of really good work that goes on with the third sector, but a lot of it is not advertised or signposted. I think there are major gaps of people not knowing what they can get, what services are available. Let’s be that 1510 Island that … we want to encourage people to move to the Island, we want to try and encourage the people that are economically active. Would it not be great if we had something out there that said you can do all of these activities in the Isle of Man. As well as this here, you can have culture, and it is all very focused in silos, as I am sure the Hon. Member for Douglas East will be telling us later. We do need to focus, bring forward a children’s strategy – that is what I would be saying to 1515 the Chief Minister. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member for Douglas Central, Mrs Corlett.
1520 Mrs Corlett: Thank you, Mr President. I wish to move an amendment to Mr Speaker’s amendment, simply to change the date of reporting to July 2022. If this motion is supported, I feel a January 2022 reporting date would be difficult to achieve with a new administration, the election of a Chief Minister and a new Council of Ministers being put into place. In my opinion, July 2022 would be a more realistic and achievable 1525 timeframe. ______2544 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
I beg to move:
To leave out the word ‘January’ and insert the word ‘July’.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Robertshaw.
Mr Robertshaw: Thank you, Mr President. 1530 I am very happy indeed to second the amendment in the name of Mrs Corlett from Douglas Central. This has been a fascinating debate that nearly did not happen, I think. (Laughter and interjection) Because it was a well-meaning, well-intentioned, but very general point. But we have seen here this morning Tynwald bringing its focus on this subject and realising, as the Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins, so eloquently said, that we really should be doing this 1535 and then we heard from Mr Hooper, Hon. Member for Ramsey, that, yes, but it has got no focus. So that is why this amendment in the name of Mrs Corlett is right, because here we are at the end nearly of five years, and has it not flown by, (A Member: Hear, hear.) just like that? Well, believe me, between the time that you get re-elected and you have, as the Hon. Member said, formed the Council of Ministers and you have really focused on trying to bring a programme 1540 together, you might lose this, if you are not careful. Therefore, planting it in front of the new administration and this Hon. Court and give it time to bring it together and give it meaning I think would be an important step. Thank you, Mr President.
1545 The President: Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Lord-Brennan.
Mrs Lord-Brennan: Thank you, Mr President. I was going to speak to the amendment because it was focusing in on, it made me focus on what Council of Ministers … well, ‘Council of Ministers to report on what can be achieved’, and 1550 then it made me think about what I was like as a teenager – I was completely wayward! (A Member: Oh dear!) I was completely wayward. There was no chance, no chance at all, I would respond to any sort of authority or Government kind of facilitation or intervention –
A Member: There is no change there! 1555 The Speaker: Hasn’t changed a bit! (Laughter)
Mrs Lord-Brennan: Well, it formed me! That is the point, isnʼt it? It formed me to make me the person I am today. Ms Edge is looking at me; she knows! 1560 So I was concerned then actually thinking about Minister Allinson’s point about grassroots, that is going to shift the focus away from it being something that needed to happen from the ground, from the people, versus from the people who we are assuming are going to have the authority and the knowledge to deal with this. Of course, we are not really even talking about this Council of Ministers because this 1565 Government … the time is running out. So I was almost going to say would it not be better, thinking about the other points that have been made, if it was just going to almost be a declaratory motion and then allow for the next Council of Ministers, the next Government to pick it up and decide what shape things needed to be and what needed to happen, because it has been fascinating this debate, and Mr Moorhouse has already achieved, I think, probably more than he might have 1570 expected, but we have heard so many different angles on this. So I am not quite sure which way I am going to go on it, to be honest. I think the better option would be to have it in July next year. However, is it the right time to be penning in on this exactly to tell that Council of Ministers in the future exactly how it is going to be handled? If we are
______2545 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
discussing whether it is ‘what’ or ‘how’, maybe that is telling us something, is what I would say. 1575 Okay. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member for Douglas North, Mr Peake.
1580 Mr Peake: Thank you very much, Mr President. I am a great fan of personal development. There is a whole industry built up around personal development, coaching, mentoring, available to everybody right now. You can go down Strand Street and buy a load of books about it. What we do not need is more bureaucracy and I do align myself with Mrs Lord-Brennan. Government really does need to get out the way. I think you are 1585 absolutely right. You have hit the nail on the head. There are a lot of things there that you can find out for yourself, so the Lord Bishop, the vision … It has been a great debate, a great general debate. Mr Hooper was absolutely right. This should have been a great general debate because it could actually be quite dangerous. So I do align myself with Dr Allinson. Minister Allinson, you have got a great opportunity to start having open minds, 1590 growth mindsets, you have got a whole body of teachers there who have the ability to really encourage and ignite, inspire our youth, and that is development. So that is the one thing I can agree with this title is development. It is moving on from education and it is developing people, people throughout their lives. So I am going to vote against this motion, because I do agree with Mr Hooper. I think this 1595 possibly could be dangerous. I do agree that Government should try and get out the way, but I urge, and I know Dr Allinson is listening, that there is a great opportunity here to actually turn learning into fun. Most Members remember this wonderful book I brought to their attention, but there are two Members in here who probably have not heard of it, (Interjections) and it is Who Moved My 1600 Cheese?! (Laughter) I urge you two new Members to go – in fact I will send the link to you! I will send it to you.
Mr Quine: It certainly wasn’t me!
1605 Mr Peake: It is fun. It is how to learn, it is how to pick up things from stories. Dr Allinson, it is in your hands. Thank you very much, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Thomas. 1610 Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President. Ministers seem to be supporting this motion. I support both the amendments because it gives more chance to Ministers to put something together, to do something useful. In regard to the amendment to the amended motion, which is stronger now than it was 1615 previously, I just wanted to point out, to give Ministers the best possible chance, that Ministers did actually produce an excellent report on intergenerational fairness in August 2019. That white paper produced local evidence to complement the more general evidence in the UK Intergenerational Commission report and the conclusion, the main conclusion of that evidence, that local evidence, was that it is not actually Education, Sport and Culture that affect young 1620 people most. That is not what young people tell us. There is loads going on and they know about it. Young people in the sixth forms in the Isle of Man go to parties all over the place. Young people in the Isle of Man have every sporting opportunity that they want. Of course the Isle of Man is small and it is a long way to get to Manchester and Liverpool and London, but they budget around that and they organise around that and they have loads of opportunities.
______2546 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
1625 Now, what is holding back young people and what is causing our intergenerational issues? Well, it was summarised in the intergenerational report:
Earnings progress has stalled for young adults. Millennial families are less likely to own their home and more likely to rent privately.
That is it, really. We are only looking at a part of it if we look at the education, the sport and the culture. It is much wider than that. This is not anything more than a declaratory resolution. It does not imply any more money; let’s hope it does not set up more bureaucracy and take away time, 1630 but basically, if we are looking at this, we have got to look at this properly as an intergenerational fairness. The Family Library provides masses of opportunities for young people, young families and so on, but, from what I can gather from Government spokesmen, we care more about the Mobile Library that goes around to look after older people in rural communities. We have to make sure that we are honest about ourselves; that we really are setting ourselves 1635 up for fair, intergenerational policies that actually do not blame anybody, do not blame any other generation, but just make sure that we do things right by all people. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Boot. 1640 Mr Boot: Thank you, Mr President. I was not going to speak to this motion. I cannot argue with it, and who can complain about the sentiment of the motion? But having listened to the debate as it is developed, and taking on board what Mr Hooper said, we seem to be underselling ourselves as a nation state. 1645 My daughter moved back here with her children because of the opportunities that they have on Island. Within eight miles of where they live, and I will go through a list of things, they play football, they go riding, they go biking, swimming, hiking, they play badminton, they go to the Wildlife Park, they have fencing lessons in St John’s, they go fishing, they go walking in the glens, they do painting, they have got their own little garden, they even attended and took part in the 1650 Isle of Man Youth Games, they go to the Centenary Centre, the theatre, the cinema, the House of Manannan, the Manx Museum, all within eight miles of where they live. Now, isn’t that great? When they lived in Kent, they had to drive 10s, 50, 100 miles to get some of those facilities. What is more, it is a very safe environment, and I think we are underselling ourselves and I am not quite sure whether we are trying to reinvent the wheel here or not. I cannot argue with the 1655 sentiment of the motion and I will vote for it, but are we trying to do something that we do not need to do? I take Mrs Kate Lord-Brennan’s comments on board – is Government trying to interfere itself in something here when these facilities are available and they are not all Government sponsored? Some are schools, some are private, but we have a great environment for children here. So there is a lack of evidence that we actually need to do this work, but we have 1660 youth surveys and those have been evidence, the Clerk kindly forwarded them a short while ago, about what is available, and there is a great list of things available. So whilst I will support it, and I certainly –
Mrs Sharpe: Mr President, would the Hon. Member give way, please? 1665 The President: Will you give way, sir?
Mr Boot: Yes, certainly.
1670 Mrs Sharpe: Thank you, Minister; I do appreciate that. I just wanted to respond to your rhetorical question when you said is it possible that we are doing something that we do not need to do. I just wanted to share with you that I spoke to
______2547 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
someone who used to work with Mobex, which works with children who are no longer in school, and he took a 10-year-old child to the top of Snaefell. It was the first time that child had been 1675 outside of Douglas. So we do have on the Island families which do not have the opportunities that you are talking about, and I think we need to be mindful of that. Thank you. That is all I wanted to say. Thank you, Mr President.
Mr Boot: Thank you for that further information, and I agree with you that there are some 1680 families that do not take advantage of what is available or perhaps are not aware of what is available. When I say we are doing something we do not perhaps need to do, perhaps a report will highlight the opportunities available and maybe look at the shortcomings in terms of messaging that out to the community and having access to it. So in closing, I would just say that I will support the motion as amended, and I support the 1685 lengthier date to July, because I think the earlier date was never going to be tenable with what is going to happen with the new administration. Thank you.
The President: Hon. Member, Dr Allinson, to speak to the amendment. 1690 Dr Allinson: Thank you very much, Mr President, and I thank everyone who has contributed to this. I think we are having a general debate, (Several Members: Hear, hear.) (Interjections) and trying desperately to snatch something out of it, (Laughter and interjection) something, rather than just leave it in the air. 1695 I thank the Hon. Speaker for trying to do that. I just have some problems. What we are trying to do, apparently, it is to ensure the personal development of each individual can be maximised and the Council of Ministers/Government are going to report back on how we are going to do that by July. To be honest with you, it is a bit empty words, isn’t? It is a report – I can see it now – we will do a focus group and we will have a questionnaire and we will do this and we will do that and 1700 we will not really get anywhere. I actually thank Mr Shimmins and Mr Thomas for pointing out that really what we are talking about is intergenerational fairness. The Resolution Foundation has done some very good reports and they all come down to one thing: fairness and money; actually having the money and the ability to make choices for yourself, and I hope the next administration can actually act on that in 1705 a meaningful way, because that is at the heart of a lot of the conversations we are having today, it is at the heart of health, it is at the heart of housing, transport, all these sorts of things. I cannot vehemently disagree with either the motion or the amendments, but please let’s be realistic; and if we are going to make meaningful change, let’s try to delineate what direction we are going in. I think actually looking at social policy and Government policy that achieves 1710 intergenerational fairness, or at least tries to start on that route, would be a good first step. Thank you.
The President: Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge, to speak to the amendment.
1715 Ms Edge: It is okay, Mr President, thank you. Thank you.
The President: No? Thank you. Hon. Member for Garff, Mr Perkins.
1720 Mr Perkins: Thank you, Mr President. As ever, I will be brief. I think we really need to make sure we focus on not just the sporting issues, as we have mentioned previously, but other basic family values. I look back on my childhood and I think my biggest mentor was my granddad. I was running around as a young tiddler and he would say, ‘What would you do in this situation?’, and I remember, he was a big ______2548 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
1725 chap, holding my hand up here, and he led me along. And somehow or other I think we would try to get that into the whole equation of what we are trying to do. It is about family values, it is about family break-ups, and I would point out that the youngsters in Onchan, I stopped one evening, and the last thing they want to do is talk to a bloke in a suit. So I turned up in a T-shirt and had a word with some of these lads that are wandering around. I do 1730 not know whether they were the bad ones or the good ones, but just said what can we do to help you as Government? What do you want? And they did not really know. So my next question was ‘Why don’t you play football?’, ‘We haven’t got the right gear. We haven’t got the right football boots.’ And that reflects on society that they feel unable to join the footballers because they have not got the right kit. I really feel that these are fundamental things that we should start examining. 1735 One final point I will make. When I was a teenager, I also had some mentoring from a bloke in a suit who was going bald, and I called it tor-mentoring, (Laughter) so we have really got to make sure we get it right. Thank you, Mr President.
1740 The President: Mover to reply, Mr Moorhouse.
Mr Moorhouse: Thank you, Mr President, and thank you, Mr Henderson, for making this possible. We hit a rut in the road and potentially this could have been missed. I just want to go back to the key wording in the motion. In order ‘to ensure that the personal 1745 development of each individual can be maximised and calls on the Council of Ministers to report on how this can be achieved’. That is really important. Three weeks ago, I met three individuals on the same day. All those people, five-10 years ago, had huge hopes and huge aspirations, and they have been ground down and perhaps not achieved what they could have achieved. I wanted to bring something today without … giving that kind of insight. I wanted to have it open and I 1750 wanted to find out about what we really knew about young people, about people between the age of 18 and 25. Some people, like Mr Shimmins, really rose to the bar and they really came up with a clarity in terms of those people are our future. Those people are really key. We need to get more of them and that was really important. 1755 We also had other people coming in saying we have done surveys in the past, we should feel quite happy with that. I want to go beyond that. I want the next parliament to actually have some reflection in terms of what these people are thinking, where are they coming from. It is not going to be a report laying out lots and lots of possibilities, but it is going to be allowing the next Tynwald to actually have that link. As one Member said, there is potentially that opportunity to create 1760 something going forward in terms of linking between the politicians and linking between these people. I do not want to go through each individual’s contribution, because everyone has said something positive. Everyone also said something perhaps quite restrictive, in a way, in that there were limits to what we were seeing. Five years of being politicians has perhaps dulled us in some 1765 respects. I think that is exciting about the Election: that many of us are going to go out, we are going to look at the opportunities, we are going to talk to people again, and it is so easy in here to be lost in a book, or lost in the iPad doing things, but at the end of the day, it is those people out there who have got issues, those people we can support and what this motion is trying to do is build that link to ensure that we know what is being expected and hopefully those expectations 1770 can be achieved. I would have liked to have gone through all the brilliant thoughts that were suggested, but I think we are actually at a point where we can either hand this over or put it back on the bookcase. We have looked at it from lots of different angles and thought about it in lots of different ways, and that is what I really wanted us to do today. It is a really important age group and it has been 1775 good to focus on them for just over an hour. Thank you, Mr President. ______2549 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The President: Thank you. Now, the motion at Item 31 has two amendments. We will deal with the amendment in the name of Mr Speaker first. Those in favour of that amendment, say aye; against, no. The ayes have 1780 it. The ayes have it. That becomes the substantive motion to which I then apply Mrs Corlett’s amendment with the July date. Those in favour of the amendment, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. I put the motion as amended. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it.
A division was called for and electronic voting resulted as follows:
In the Keys – Ayes 19, Noes 4
FOR AGAINST Dr Allinson Mrs Barber Mr Ashford Mr Hooper Mr Baker Mr Peake Mr Boot Mr Thomas Mrs Caine Mr Callister Mrs Christian Mrs Corlett Mr Cregeen Ms Edge Mr Harmer Mr Moorhouse Mr Perkins Mr Quayle Mr Quine Mr Robertshaw Mr Shimmins Mr Skelly Mr Speaker
1785 The Speaker: Mr President, in the House of Keys, 19 votes for, 4 against.
In the Council – Ayes 5, Noes 3
FOR AGAINST Mr Greenhill Mrs Lord-Brennan Mr Henderson Mrs Maska The Lord Bishop Mrs Poole-Wilson Mr Mercer Mrs Sharpe
The President: And in the Council, 5 votes for and 3 against. The substantive motion therefore carries.
______2550 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
32. Sewage Strategy in Peel and Laxey – Replacing the regional strategy – Motion not moved
The Hon. Member for Council (Mrs Lord-Brennan) to move:
That Tynwald notes the Environment and Infrastructure Policy Review Committee’s First Report of Session 2017-2018 (Regional Sewage Treatment Strategy, Phase 2 – Peel), and the evidence taken by the Committee in the course of its inquiry; in particular, reaffirms its opinion that there are valid concerns about the calculations relied on by the MUA and its advisors in support of the continuation of the regional strategy for the West of the Island and that sewage treatment, while essential, will not solve all of Peel’s water quality problems; and is further of the opinion that the regional strategy for the West of the Island should be replaced by an integrated sewage scheme for Peel and Laxey.
[PP No 2018/0038] is relevant to this Item.
The President: Item 32 will not be moved at this sitting.
33. Structural Review of Civil Service Terms and Conditions – Report; impact of removal of Personnel Control Mechanism – Debate commenced
The Hon. Member for Onchan (Ms Edge) to move:
That the Structural Review of Civil Service Terms and Conditions Above Executive Officer Level [GD No 2018/0034] be received; and that the Council of Ministers should investigate the impact on employee structures of the removal of the Personnel Control Mechanism in 2015, and should report by January 2022.
The President: That takes us to Item 33. I call on the Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge, to 1790 move.
Ms Edge: Thank you, Mr President. I bring this motion today to ensure Tynwald receives the report carried out by 2000 Weeks and to highlight where I believe the significant change has taken place which has impacted all our 1795 frontline facing roles and services. Mr President, my original motion on 21st March 2017 was:
That Tynwald is of the opinion that a full review of employment costs in Government Departments, Statutory Boards and Offices should be carried out by an independent body; and its recommendations should be presented to Tynwald in October.
During that debate I highlighted the public’s concerns and the clear message most Members received at the last Election was that the public would not tolerate the inefficiencies in Government. The Court has previously had a number of reports with the perceived intention of 1800 smaller, smarter Government, including the Scope of Government Report 2006, and a review of that in 2012 which included and moved forward with centralisation of services. I hope Hon. Members will agree we have all seen the consequences of some elements of centralisation of services which have cost this Government more. An example of this not being value for money
______2551 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
was following the review of Treasury and the school meals, and school meals moving back to the 1805 place where it belonged. In 2006, some excellent recommendations were made; Agenda for Change and from this the review in 2012. Were the recommendations carried through? I think not. Back in 2006, recommendation 23 was that the Internal Audit Division of Treasury should become part of the ‘Department of 1810 Corporate Development’. What foresight – moving the internal auditors away from Treasury! It has not happened Recommendation 27 stated that Isle of Man Government should be established as a legal entity for international agreements. This was in addition to, and not in place of, ‘the separate legal personality of individual Departments and Boards,’ and not to ‘impinge upon the legal personality 1815 of individual Departments and Boards’! I will say no more on that, Mr President, because I am sure the Hon. Member for Douglas East will let us know his view later on in the sitting. Although I respect where the Hon. Member for Douglas East, Mr Robertshaw, will be coming from, we all need to understand what has led to it; and I think it is Government policy and calibre of officers and the bloat at the top with bureaucratic processes that have failed, not necessarily the entities. 1820 Moving onto the 2000 Weeks report, I was very disappointed with it, Mr President. I do not know what it cost, however it was clear that only a review of grades was carried out. They appear to have focused on comments from the debate rather than what was requested. Did anyone in Government go back and challenge 2000 Weeks for not completing the full scope of the motion from the then Minister for Policy and Reform and as published in a staff bulletin by the Chief 1825 Secretary to all employees the day after the debate? The words I wish to focus on from the staff bulletin are as follows:
As you will know, last night Tynwald debated a motion on a proposal to undertake a structural review of the civil service. The proposals included a plan to carry out a limited dip sample of all grades at EO or equivalent and above to look at management spans and layers, a review of grade reviews, salary benchmarking and …
– and this is the most important one, Mr President:
… a general review of the size and structure of the civil service.
That did not take place. It also went on to say:
I don’t underestimate the impact this news may have had on you, but let’s not let this detract from our core business which is serving the community we live in and the people we care about. I’d like to ask you all to carry on doing what you do so well and in the knowledge that I fully appreciate and support you and the great work you’re all doing. The Isle of Man civil service provides a much wider range of services than its counterparts else where, served by skilled and dedicated people, and this is not always understood or appreciated by the wider general public.
When I speak further, Mr President, people will understand why I have read that out. 1830 I am surprised that this report was not more supportive of the will of Tynwald and looking for employees’ views, as through my Whistleblowing Committee there are many concerns and excellent views from committed employees. Mr President, I have worked within Government; we have had, and have, some excellent senior officers and had the same with the Chief Secretary. They have run a very tight ship! The significant 1835 difference then was there was a Personnel Control Policy and Mechanism in place. The aims of this policy were as follows:
(a) to limit and control Government’s long term pension liabilities;
The date on this policy, Mr President, is March 2006.
(b) to restrict the public sector from becoming disproportionately large compared to the private sector; (c) to provide an incentive for Departments and Boards to maximise the use of their existing labour, and to invest in new technology and improved productivity; ______2552 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
(d) to lead to a scrutiny of labour-intensive marginal activities to release workers for new priority recruitment in other areas; (e) to encourage Departments when considering new capital schemes to identify fully the staffing implications of a range of options at an early stage; and (f) to cause Departments and Boards to examine whether it would be more efficient and cost-effective to buy in services from the private sector.
I think they were excellent aims back in March 2006, Mr President. I do feel it is time to review the impact on costs and structures since the removal of the personnel control policy and 1840 mechanism. Government has changed the policy. The current policy, was it put forward and recommended by the officers who wanted the control of the number of employees to be solely in their remit? The current policy of personnel budgets capping any uplift which is via the budget process, I understand why it was put in; it was put there to try and drive the change. That can only happen 1845 if you have the calibre of officer to achieve the change by capping personnel budgets. What appears to have happened is numerous retired from the permanent payroll and then came back on temporary projects. How many have done this since that change in policy, Mr President? The CEOs and the head teachers can employ as many staff as they wish. I certainly feel this is where Government policy has helped create top-heavy structures with increased layers of 1850 management. I am using DoI as an example here because we have all had the opportunity to read the recent Beamans report. For example, there were directors and the next role down was SEOs. There was not a CEO, then a deputy CEO, then directors, then lead officers. I now believe the lead officers, which is three layers down from the top, are the SEOs. This is where I believe that bloat has come 1855 in our Government. Mr President, I do hope Members will support my motion as I believe this is where the change in policy has continued to cost the Manx taxpayer with increased pension and increased salary costs. Mr President, there is no control. It appears out of control, as if a Department overspends, 1860 where do they come? They come in here to all us Hon. Members, Mr President: ‘We have overspent our budget. Can we have more?’ We do not get a breakdown of that overspend. It could all be for payroll, for all Hon. Members know. I suspect not, but it could be. I do hope that Members will support this review which is looking at the structure, not the grades, and that is what the report should have done but has not. So I do hope that people will 1865 support what I feel is the essential review that needs to take place at this point in time. With that, Mr President, I beg to move.
The President: Mr Thomas, are you going to formally second it …?
1870 Mr Thomas: And reserve my remarks.
The President: And reserve. The motion having been moved and seconded, we will complete this Item at 2.30 p.m. and then go on to the Supplementary Order Paper. Thank you, Hon. Members.
The Court adjourned at 1.05 p.m. and resumed at 2.32 p.m.
______2553 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Structural Review of Civil Service Terms and Conditions – Debate concluded – Motion carried
1875 The President: Fastyr mie, Hon. Members.
Members: Fastyr mie, Mr President.
The President: Please be seated. 1880 We resume our debate on Item 33, the motion from Ms Edge, and having been moved and seconded, I call Hon. Member, Mr Harmer.
Mr Harmer: Thank you, Mr President. I thank the Hon. Member for her comments, which are duly noted, that the Structural Review 1885 undertaken by 2000 Weeks is received. The purpose of the Review was to conduct a general, holistic analysis of Civil Service grading, salary bands, organisational size and structure to identify whether or not there has been an inappropriate drift upwards in salaries or grades. It is notable that the audit found no evidence of this. In the analysis undertaken, the audit found that the jobs evaluated were done so with rigour 1890 by trained evaluators, but broad salary bands remain on par with those offered across the Isle of Man, in the UK and Jersey; and the organisational structures were logical and appropriate. Accordingly, notably, 2000 Weeks had no recommendations to make and in doing so the expertise and professionalism of officers conducting such evaluations within the Office of Human Resources was duly recognised. As has been raised here and in another place at various times in 1895 the past, the public service on the Isle of Man comprises a wide range of different professions that would be under different terms and conditions elsewhere. The comparative size of our public sector is not necessarily comparable to other jurisdictions, as many civil servants are working in operational or specialist fields in their own right, such as social workers, air traffic controllers and prison officers, and a number of services that are public here are provided privately elsewhere. 1900 Turning now to the proposal to investigate the removal of the Personnel Control Mechanism. The Personnel Control Mechanism, or PCM, was established by the Council of Ministers in 1991 at the time when the Isle of Man was experiencing unprecedented growth, and in response to concerns that a 16.6% increase in the public sector workforce over the previous four-year period was unsustainable. It was recognised that uncontrolled increases in Government personnel 1905 numbers could have undesirable consequences for the Island’s economy and Government’s ability to fund salaries and consequential pension liabilities. The fundamental policy underpinning the PCM was that any growth in the workforce should be properly managed so to ensure that such growth as permitted under the policy was directed at achieving Government’s priorities. The mechanism underwent a major review in 2005 and 1910 2006, which identified that some Departments were establishing fixed-term appointments or contract posts to circumvent the need to secure the Council of Ministers’ manpower approval. This led to new arrangements to strengthen the mechanism but allowing for certain exemptions with specified employment groups, e.g. Statutory Boards, seasonal staff and general contract posts. Further exemptions were subsequently agreed in respect of medical and nursing staff. 1915 Then, in October 2014, the Council of Ministers agreed to suspend the Personnel Control Mechanism with effect from 1st April 2015 and to replace it with a new system of financial control to manage personnel numbers based on strict budget allocation, which ring-fenced salary costs and included all employee costs such as pension costs, rather than personnel numbers. By removing the restraint of strict personnel control, there is no implication that designated bodies 1920 of Government may employ as many staff as they wish without constraint. The constraint is the absolute limit on the expenditure of the Department, Board or Office level agreed with Treasury during the budget-setting process, and approved by this Hon. Court. ______2554 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Nonetheless, and in conclusion, the Personnel Control Mechanism was suspended six years ago and obviously it is reasonable that the matter is now reviewed. That being so, the Council of 1925 Ministers is happy to support this motion for an investigation on the impact on employee structures on the suspension of the mechanism in 2015 and, subject to the approval of this Hon. Court, will now make arrangements to do so. But, in concluding, I want to highlight a number of the points that were just made in the opening remarks – namely, that the assertion that the 2000 Weeks review did not do what it was 1930 asked, is not true. The terms of reference were approved by Tynwald in October 2017 and 2000 Weeks fulfilled those terms of reference. This included recommendation for a general review of the size and structure of the Isle of Man Civil Service. Whether it fulfilled the terms of reference to the satisfaction of the Hon. Member, obviously is a separate matter. The Review identified that in terms of the overall percentage, as I said before, the grades are 1935 broadly the same as the UK and Jersey – and structures – and found no evidence that they were inappropriate. In fact the terms of reference approved by Tynwald were primarily about checking management spans, quality grades, reviews and salary benchmarking. Obviously, the Hon. Member quoted extensively from the Review of the Scope and Structure of Government reports, which are not on the Order Paper but have been subject to several debates in the Hon. 1940 Court in previous years, and indeed the themes that appear in those reports are included in reports on the Order Paper at Item 39. Obviously I look forward to that debate. And just a final point about numbers: we have got to be incredibly careful that this is not a numbers game. Remember it is suspended, so I may actually come from a slightly different viewpoint in saying the review is appropriate, because a review might not necessarily have the 1945 outcome that the Hon. Member thinks. For example, some of the increases in numbers have been directly linked to the Health Transformation project. They have been directly linked to Age Concern, which was brought in. It also directly links to 30 new apprenticeships and links into some of the other work that this Hon. Court has initiated, such as climate change. And of course, as evidenced in the Beamans Report, actually, if you hollow out all the project managers, for 1950 example, you may get other consequences. Finally, as I said in my earlier remarks, my experience in the private sector is that sometimes false limits can just drive strange behaviour where the same person is recruited as a contractor rather than a permanent employee. So we have got to be absolutely careful. So, whilst happy with the review, as I say, the review might not actually deliver what the Hon. Member thinks. 1955 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: I call on the mover to reply.
Ms Edge: Okay, thank you. If nobody else wants to speak. 1960 I would like to obviously refer back to what the current Minister for Policy and Reform has just stated. He said to Members, a large number … He was talking about apprentices and he has talked about social workers and air traffic controllers. I think what the Hon. Member has failed to grasp is that this is a review of the Civil Service grades and structures. An awful lot of the people that he mentioned in his speech are public sector workers. We all respect the public sector workers and 1965 they are the very ones that are normally on the front line that are getting impacted by this Civil Service structure that seems to have increased –
Mr Harmer: Will the Hon. Member give way?
1970 Ms Edge: Yes.
Mr Harmer: I would just be very careful in the way you are phrasing this. A lot of people that are classed as Civil Service and in the PSC and so forth are actually front line. So I do not know; I would just be careful in the way that this is being framed. ______2555 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
1975 Thank you, and I thank you for giving way.
Ms Edge: Thank you. I think actually it is showing the lack of understanding of what a Civil Service individual, an employee, is. At the last count I think it was actually less than a thousand that are actually on the 1980 old Civil Service terms and conditions and their structures. When you talk about MPTC, that is slightly different from the Civil Service anyway. But obviously I thank the Minister for supporting this and I think the main thing I am trying to achieve from this motion is to see if there has been a change, to see if there has been a difference, because quite clearly it was a strong policy, the Personnel Control Mechanism, and it was changed 1985 just before all of this administration came in. It was changed by the previous administration and we have seen many areas where there is concern about the increasing costs and the increases in grades, and the public certainly feel that they are not getting an efficient, effective service delivered. So I thank the Minister for his words and completely understand some of the comments he has 1990 said but this is quite clear, the motion actually reads:
That the Structural Review of Civil Service Terms and Conditions Above Executive Officer Level be received; and that the Council of Ministers should investigate the … Personnel Control Mechanism …
So it is not actually the whole of the public sector, Mr President, and I do think Hon. Members need to be clear about that. It is just a sector. With regard to the 2000 Weeks and what the Minister said with regard to that: it was all about grades, and that is not the structure. The structure is what the Personnel Control Mechanism 1995 agreed many moons back with regard to how many people a Department needed … Obviously they had one leader and then how many people they needed underneath that. That was the whole point of the Personnel Control Mechanism, to make sure that the structure and size of Government did not increase beyond the services that needed to be delivered to the people. But with that, as no other Members have chosen to speak, I beg to move, Mr President. 2000 The President: Hon. Members, I put to the Court the motion at Item 33. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Now, Hon. Members, we turn –
2005 The Speaker: Sorry, Mr President, Ms Edge has requested a divide, in time –
The President: Oh, there was a division called. Right. In that case, we have the division.
A division was called for and electronic voting resulted as follows:
In the Keys – Ayes 22, Noes 2
FOR AGAINST Dr Allinson Mr Peake Mr Ashford Mr Robertshaw Mr Baker Mrs Barber Mr Boot Mrs Caine Mr Callister Mr Cannan Mrs Christian Mrs Corlett Mr Cregeen Ms Edge ______2556 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mr Harmer Mr Hooper Mr Moorhouse Mr Perkins Mr Quayle Mr Quine Mr Shimmins Mr Skelly Mr Speaker Mr Thomas
The Speaker: Mr President, in the House of Keys, 22 votes for, 2 against.
In the Council – Ayes 8, Noes 0
FOR AGAINST Mr Greenhill None Mr Henderson The Lord Bishop Mrs Lord-Brennan Mrs Maska Mr Mercer Mrs Poole-Wilson Mrs Sharpe
The President: And in the Council 8 for, none against. The motion carries.
Supplementary Order Paper No. 1
1. Standing Orders suspended to take the business on Supplementary Order Paper No. 1
The Chief Minister to move:
That Standing Orders be suspended to the extent necessary to allow the business on Supplementary Order Paper No. 1 to be taken.
2010 The President: Hon. Members, as indicated, we will now deal with the Supplementary Order Paper and the first Item on that is the suspension of Standing Orders. I call on the Chief Minister to move.
The Chief Minister: Thank you very much, Mr President. 2015 I beg to move that Standing Orders be suspended to the extent necessary to allow the business on Supplementary Order Paper No. 1 to be taken.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Ashford.
2020 Mr Ashford: I beg to second, Mr President.
The President: I put the motion to the Court. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
______2557 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
2. Papers laid before the Court
The President: I call on the Clerk to lay papers. 2025 The Clerk: Ta mee cur roish y Whaiyl ny pabyryn enmyssit ayns ayrn jees jeh’n Chlaare Obbyr Arbyllagh. I lay before the Court the papers listed at Item 2 of the Supplementary Order Paper.
Public Health Act 1990 Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.14) Regulations 2021 [SD No 2021/0194] [MEMO]
Public Health Act 1990 Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.15) Regulations 2021 [SD No 2021/0205] [MEMO]
3.-4. Public Health Act 1990 – Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.14) Regulations 2021 approved; Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.15) Regulations 2021 approved
The Chief Minister to move:
3. That the Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.14) Regulations 2021 [SD No 2021/0194] [MEMO] be approved.
4. That the Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.15) Regulations 2021 [SD No 2021/0205] [MEMO] be approved.
The President: Items 3 and 4 are two sets of Regulations under the Public Health Act. The Chief 2030 Minister has indicated he would wish for those to be debated together and voted on separately. Is that agreed? (Members: Agreed.) Thank you. Chief Minister.
The Chief Minister (Mr Quayle): Thank you, Mr President, and I apologise, I have to wear my 2035 glasses but they steam up while I am wearing this mask. I am grateful for your permission, Mr President, for a Supplementary Order Paper to bring the Public Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.14) and (No.15) Regulations 2021 to the Court for approval at this sitting. In April, Tynwald approved version 2 of our Exit Framework, which set out some clear dates 2040 and indicators for what we might do in order to return to unrestricted travel between the Isle of Man and the rest of the British Isles. Since April, as a community we have once again become used to what is a relatively privileged position, in that for many of us, Island life continues almost as normal, before we entered the pandemic in 2020. But equally, this is not normality for many, and it will not be, until unrestricted 2045 travel can once again return between the Island and our near neighbours. We all know of families and friends who have not seen each other for many months and it is very clear that we have areas in our economy under real pressure from the continued border restrictions. And we just had a briefing at lunchtime which reminded us of the pressures some families are under too. Over the last few months we have, as an Island, made huge strides in what has been an 2050 unprecedented mass vaccination rollout. This progress is also being seen across the British Isles ______2558 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
generally. We are extremely fortunate and privileged to be able to access these vaccines that are undoubtedly our long-term path towards a more sustainable position, where we are able to live in a world with COVID-19 on an ongoing basis. Unfortunately, however, the Delta variant has also entered the race, and a race it clearly is, in 2055 the UK in particular, to get vaccination levels up and for them to be fully effective ahead of the pace of virus, which is currently accelerating. The move towards unrestricted travel is undoubtedly one of the hardest decisions we need to make, and it is a decision that can only be fully reviewed with the benefit of hindsight. More specifically, do we believe that the increased risks posed by opening up the border further are 2060 outweighed by the needs across our society and our economy to do so? We had clearly hoped that by now the position around our Island, across the British Isles, would have continued on its positive path. That path has unfortunately changed, and we must adjust our position accordingly. I would like to thank Hon. Members for their participation, honesty, challenge and suggestions at last week’s workshop. Given the challenges we face, having Members’ engagement up front 2065 has genuinely been helpful in guiding the Council of Ministers through its subsequent discussions. The themes that came out from the workshop included that Hon. Members were concerned about the prospect of unrestricted travel at this stage; that the 28th was still however, on balance, an important milestone and expectation; and that vaccination status could, and should, be an important mitigation as we move forward. To that extent we have listened and we have taken on 2070 board these comments as well as views from other areas. Before setting out the changes proposed for 28th June, it is perhaps worth assessing what has happened since the last changes on 24th May. Since then, some 4,000 people have travelled to the Isle of Man, a significant number being returning residents and over 97% have chosen the ‘Test to release’ pathway. We know that there have been over 1,500 family applications during 2075 the same period, perhaps signalling that the last change came at the right time and was a welcome relief to many people. Importantly, the arrival testing pathways implemented at the same time have done their work, identifying eight positive cases on first test. But we cannot be complacent. The same cautious approach that informed our decisions then is necessary now. 2080 Hon. Members, we all understand the potential for this virus to gain a foothold in our community, and we must remain on our guard whilst at the same time adjusting our approach where and when we can. Looking around us, in the last few days alone, England, Scotland, Jersey and Guernsey have all adjusted their positions. On Thursday last week, Jersey announced a delay to its stage 7 re-opening, one that would 2085 return pubs and nightclubs back to full operation, and they introduced further border restrictions. They do, however, differentiate on vaccination status. On Friday last week, Guernsey revised its proposals for 1st July, reflecting the opportunity for vaccinations to be used as a mitigation for travel from within the Common Travel Area, and will differentiate the treatment of travellers who have been fully vaccinated accordingly. 2090 And more recently, on Monday evening, the UK Prime Minister confirmed what had been widely previewed, a four-week delay to England’s stage 4 re-opening, and Scotland only yesterday also confirmed a delay to its plans. All of these jurisdictions have reacted to the growing concerns around the Delta variant and they have adjusted their plans accordingly. And so must we. Hon. Members, based on the developments in our neighbours and input from the likes of our 2095 clinical and Public Health colleagues, and from the Emergency Advisory Group, we believe that we must exercise caution in the short term. This means we must continue to seek mitigations at our borders. But, again supported by your feedback, the Council of Ministers has determined we do need to continue to adjust our position, from the 28th, taking what it believes is a proportionate approach to risk and the restrictions in place, recognising the value vaccinations play in reducing 2100 the levels of risk. Not completely eliminating these risks, Mr President, but clearly reducing them. Consequently, from 28th June, under the Regulations before you today, we will move further forward, but only where vaccination status can act as an appropriate mitigation. ______2559 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
We increasingly understand that the vaccines are broadly as effective against symptomatic illness from the Delta variant as they are when compared to the Alpha and other variants after 2105 two doses. We also however take comfort from the increasing confidence that the vaccines appear to be effective against serious illness and hospitalisation, even for the Delta variant and even after just one dose. In a world in which we need to live with COVID-19, it is the risk of serious illness and hospitalisation that we are most concerned could hold us back, and the risks of hospitalisation will 2110 be of prime importance in measuring our response, rather than simply case numbers. So what exactly will the position be under our COVID-19 legislation following the making of the amendment Regulations? Mr President, Hon. Members have been briefed on this but I think it is important to set out the position to the Court today. The main changes that these Regulations bring into effect are as follows. 2115 The first Regulation, No. 14, simply seeks to move the current sunset clause in the Regulations that without extension would mean that all the measures and mitigations we have in place would automatically expire on 25th June. Clearly, we cannot allow this and we need the powers in support of continued mitigations over the summer months, moving the date forward to 26th October to allow the baton to be handed over to the next administration. 2120 Turning to amendment number 15. The pathway for travellers into the Island who have not been outside of the Isle of Man, UK and Channel Islands in the previous 10 days is expanded to the whole of the Common Travel Area (CTA), including Ireland. Whilst Ireland’s overall case numbers have remained relatively flat over recent weeks, we do believe that going forward we now need to let residents and non-residents who have been in Ireland be treated the same as 2125 anyone who has been in any other part of the British Isles. That was of course part of our original plan. A new exemption to the test and release pathway is introduced in new regulation 5A for persons who have received two qualifying vaccinations for COVID-19 in a relevant country and at least two weeks have passed since the second of them – the ‘2 + 2 vaccination exemption’ – and 2130 this exemption will only apply to persons who have not been outside the CTA in the previous 10 days. This will dramatically move us towards what is broadly unrestricted travel across the British Isles for many of our residents and non-residents, and that percentage eligible will only increase over the coming weeks. A landing form will still be required but there will be no need for testing 2135 or isolation as we open up for the first time in over a year, to non-residents who have been fully vaccinated. A new regulation 5B sets out the isolation and testing rules that apply to children who enter the Island from within the CTA, ensuring that non-resident children can also travel with vaccinated family members, and also carves out a provision across all testing and isolation pathways for all 2140 children under the age of five. A power for the Council of Ministers to issue guidance and issue directions in respect of isolation and testing during the period when the House of Keys is dissolved is inserted into the principal Regulations under section 9A. This is simply, Hon. Members, to allow the Council of Ministers to act with speed where necessary, with the caveat that Tynwald approval is required 2145 for the direction to continue after Tynwald reassembles following September’s House of Keys General Election and is there only as a precaution at this stage. The Council of Ministers would also fully hope to come back to this Hon. Court with further adjustments for July’s Tynwald. Recognising the risk that travellers from countries appearing on the ‘red list’ published by the UK government pose, the Regulations introduce a prohibition on persons who have been in such 2150 a country in the previous 10 days from directly entering the Island. They should of course be quarantining in the managed facilities in the United Kingdom, but this is an additional safeguard for us to avoid direct entry, for now. They will of course be able to travel once again, the same as any other traveller, after they have served the appropriate 10 days quarantine in the United Kingdom. ______2560 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
2155 A new regulation, 16A, is created to provide the legal basis for voluntary community testing in the event that surge testing is needed broadly or in a specific location on the Island and follows advice from our Information Commissioner on how best to enable this. Schedule 2 to the principal Regulations is then substituted to give effect to the 2 + 2 vaccination exemption and the change to travel within the whole Common Travel Area, i.e. travel from Ireland 2160 to be treated the same as from the UK and the Channel Islands. Finally, Mr President, the Regulations extend the vaccination exemption to contact-traced persons of confirmed cases. This is an important part of our forward planning on how we avoid large numbers of our population being isolated as a precaution whilst cases are in the community and otherwise inadvertently locking down society and the economy. It follows discussion with our 2165 clinical and Public Health colleagues on the advice issued in April 2021 by the European Centre for Disease Protection and Control surrounding the treatment of fully vaccinated individuals. Hon. Members, as I have said before, these changes are perhaps the hardest to call. There will be many members in our society that will be anxious on the concept of further adjustment. We do understand that. There will be some within our community who will raise calls to increase, not 2170 decrease restrictions on our borders. We also understand that. And, when cases do inevitably occur, there will be members of our community that question the approach we took, in the full knowledge that any border movement carries risk. But, Hon. Members, the Council of Ministers has considered the position over a long period of time, weighing up many options, and believe the Regulations posed today strike the right balance. 2175 The balance between the concerns over rising cases and hospitalisation in the United Kingdom, and the increasing pressures across society and the economy for movement once again. The balance between the benefit of waiting for more of our population to get second doses, and the important insights, such as those published by Public Health England, that give us more confidence that the vaccines are effective against the Delta variant when it comes to serious illness and 2180 hospitalisation, even after just one dose. The Council of Ministers has determined that we should plan to move forward, with mitigations and with caution. There may still be challenges ahead of us, even in the next two weeks, that require us to consider further, but for now that is the direction we believe we should take. Hon. Members, I should say that, all being well, it is anticipated that when the number of our 2185 residents who have had both doses of the vaccine has increased, and when we have more knowledge about the impact of the Delta variant on our neighbours, we should be able to make further progress along our Exit Framework. Returning unrestricted travel between our Island and the British Isles for all of our society, and visitors from around us, remains our goal. And I very much hope that it will be possible to bring further coronavirus regulations to next month’s sitting 2190 of the Court. For now however, we must retain some caution and retain mitigations, with vaccination status being an important part of that balance. Mr President, with that, I beg to move the two motions standing in my name and have them voted on separately. Thank you. 2195 The President: Hon. Member for Douglas North, Mr Ashford.
The Minister for Health and Social Care (Mr Ashford): Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks. 2200 The President: Mr Speaker.
The Speaker: Thank you, Mr President. I did not think I would be first on the list. I would like to thank the Chief Minister for his explanation, and I am certainly happy to support 2205 without reservation the first of the motions in front of us today that extend the life of the Regulations. ______2561 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
I do, however, want to express my nervousness, I suppose, about the approach being proposed here today. I appreciate the difficulty of the decision and, if you will forgive me for using an analogy outside my comfort zone, this is somewhat like pressing down on the accelerator of 2210 vaccination while lifting the clutch of the controls with a view to driving the economic vehicle forward. So I do understand the tensions and the balances that are at play here. My principal concern is the preparedness of the Manx public for this move in stark contrast to our surrounding neighbours. This plan accepts that COVID will return to our Island sooner or later, which will mean a retrograde step for many thousands of people on the Island. Today, there are 2215 2,176 people in priority group one on the Island who cannot or will not have the vaccine and sadly, as far as I am aware, we have no idea of the split between those who cannot and those who will not. For those who have made a conscious choice to bear the risk, there is still a high risk; because of their age or underlying health issues they are at high risk of death or hospitalisation, and 2220 currently this group has the cover of our elimination strategy, knowing that Government will step in with controls when community transmission occurs. It appears to me that this elimination strategy is coming to an end, and I am concerned that this is a major shift in policy and whilst I am very grateful that Tynwald Members were involved in a workshop on this a couple of weeks ago – sorry, last week. Doesn’t time fly when you are having 2225 fun! Just last week – I am really worried that this is not a journey that the Manx people have really been on. The public have not really been involved in this decision and giving us a day and the public even less time has not really helped with that. I appreciate that the Chief Minister has stated that there will be more guidance issued, but we should remember that, unlike our neighbours who have lived with restrictions – masks, 2230 distancing – this new policy can only be a retrograde step for the universal domestic freedoms we currently enjoy. We should remember that the UK is still a nation of mask-wearers, social distances and that is just not the case on our Island; and whilst it was fantastic to go and see Pride at the Villa Marina, everyone was shoulder to shoulder, there were not many masks, it was a level of domestic 2235 freedom that we have got used to, and we at the moment are taking for granted; can that continue? Is returning to this ‘old normal’, as perhaps I should describe it, a necessity between now and a more complete vaccination programme? There are economic and social benefits that counteract that, as friends and family can reunite without using an entire year’s annual leave for a short visit away and the business community can 2240 get back into the world and compete again. However, with the exception of some emails at polar opposites of the debate, I do not really have much information to work with in making that judgement. I would very much welcome something from the Council of Ministers to say how they have been balancing these factors and the data, and what information they have had to look at that perhaps we and the rest of the Court have not. 2245 Across our Island, 10,000 people still have not had any vaccine. If we have community transmission, which with the Delta variant we can expect to be rapid and hard to contain, if we have no prospect of lockdown on the Island, I would like just some reassurance that our Hospital can cope with the expected influx of cases and potential explosion of numbers, that our nursing settings are still going to be adequately protected for the foreseeable future. 2250 Mr President, we set out an exit strategy predicated on the mantra of data, not dates, and the data is still showing a high number of cases in the Republic of Ireland and the north-west of England which, according to that strategy, would indicate level 3 border controls. Now, do not get me wrong, I am happy with where we are. The Delta variant is picking up speed, not slowing down, which represents an additional risk factor, which has been recognised by all surrounding nations. 2255 However, I am worried that it seems that the data is becoming inconvenient and dates are becoming far more important. I would like to know, for example, why lateral flow tests are needed and being considered at our schools, but not our borders.
______2562 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
I would hate for anyone to misunderstand me; I do not advocate keeping our borders closed forever. I do not believe that elimination is a strategy that can last forever. Vaccination is a game 2260 changer and something that we will have to move towards from the safe cosy Island bubble that we have created. I am not under any illusion that life is any different to that. I have already said that I do not know all that the Council of Ministers do. I cannot claim to have my finger on the pulse of the business opinion in knowing the financial or human cost of not opening the borders in this way at the end of the month, but I am certainly not beyond persuasion. 2265 All I can say is that I do not believe our people yet understand the consequences of these actions. The groundwork has not yet been laid. It seems to me too soon and that a further two-week delay does not seem unreasonable. I appreciate fully the difficult balance that the Council of Ministers has had to strike, and I know that that difficulty will be shared by many across society. I will confess, Mr President, I am not yet 2270 sure how to vote on this matter and all I can say at this stage is I will be listening really carefully to the debate and the summing up. Thank you.
The President: Hon. Member for Onchan, Mr Callister. 2275 Mr Callister: Thank you, Mr President. Firstly, can I just thank the Chief Minister for his statement this afternoon. From where I am coming from, I think it is good that the Isle of Man is starting, or continuing, to take small steps towards fully opening our borders once again. However, just sitting there listening to the Speaker 2280 over the last few minutes, I think he came from a completely different angle. I do appreciate his contribution this afternoon because when I was looking at this … and there is so much information to get through in such a short period of time, as Members. Unfortunately, I am left with more questions than answers, especially from a tourist point of view. So I was going to ask the Chief Minister some questions. 2285 But, again, I do thank Mr Speaker for his contribution because I think it does show how difficult this decision is. I have had this from constituents and I have had it from my colleagues in this place that views do differ. I think the workshop did highlight that and, if nothing else, the record should show how difficult some of these decisions have been over the last 18 months. I do actually feel for some of my colleagues in the Council of Ministers having to make these decisions, especially 2290 the Chief Minister, and officers as well having to make these balanced calls because we are easy enough to judge people after the event, but sometimes we have got to make these difficult decisions to help the Island to move forward. I think the Treasury Minister has said that so many times as well in his speeches when he talks from a financial point of view. But realistically this afternoon I am left with questions. 2295 Therefore I was going to ask the Chief Minister if he can actually just outline what checks and balances will be undertaken in order to validate the two qualifying vaccinations from people visiting our Island, possibly from 1st July. Are we relying on our airlines and on the Steam Packet Company to carry out these checks; or are we relying on the NHS app in the UK? That is also causing confusion with locals because a lot of people feel … I know that the Health Minister has 2300 already highlighted this, that we are not going to be signing up to the NHS app. But maybe the Chief Minister can confirm that. I thought most of us, as locals – (Interjections) Are we? (Two Members: Yes.) Okay, because I thought we were going to use ... Well, that then opens up the questions about medical records, and everything else … So maybe you need to clarify that, because I think locally a lot of us are 2305 signed up to Patient Access. That gives us the information in respect of our vaccination. I can go anywhere and it has got both of my vaccination dates on there. So maybe you could clarify that point, because there is some confusion around that, if we are going to be asking local people to be using the NHS app; because I personally will be using the Access app, which is something I have
______2563 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
already signed up for and it has got all my data there if I need them, and if I have to go away I can 2310 show that. I was also going to ask the Chief Minister with regard to the penalties, if he could just confirm that if people come to the Island and they make a false declaration with regard to vaccinations, are the penalties as set out in Part 10 of the ‘Offences and penalties’? That relates to a three- month custodial sentence or a fine not exceeding four times level 5 on the standard scale. So 2315 maybe the Chief Minister could clarify that? I also just want to put on record that I am disappointed we are going to be charging £30 for tests. I think now that we are moving towards opening up our borders and we are getting more and more people visiting the Isle of Man, then maybe we should be looking at a different way of testing. That moves on to the point that I think we should be moving away from the Grandstand. 2320 Most of our visitors to the Isle of Man who have been double vaccinated will not know where the Grandstand is. We should definitely be moving testing directly to the Airport, to the Sea Terminal as a matter of urgency, and I would welcome the Chief Minister actually looking at that, because there surely has to be a risk there if we are asking visitors coming to the Isle of Man who have been double vaccinated or who have got children that have not been vaccinated then to travel all 2325 the way up to the Grandstand. What information will be given to people to actually tell them exactly where the Grandstand is; how they get there; how they are tested? There are questions around that. I also want to ask the Chief Minister what guarantees will he give in respect of visitors coming to the Isle of Man and having to be tested, especially family and friends and young children as 2330 well, and being tested and released within a reasonably satisfactory time, possibly 24 hours? If we have got visitors coming to the Isle of Man what we do not want is people actually coming to the Isle of Man then finding that they are stuck in their room for three or four days of their holiday because they are waiting for test results. So what guarantees are we are going to put in place to make sure that people are going to be tested and released as quickly as possible once a negative 2335 test has been given? I was also going to just ask very quickly, Mr President, I was wondering if the Chief Minister can just give me two scenarios, and I have got two here, really. If a family is booked for a holiday to the Isle of Man, mum and dad have been fully vaccinated, both have been double vaccinated, they have got three children, age five, six and seven, what actually is the scenario there? I mean, are 2340 the children …? Can he confirm the scenario with that and what the process is? Obviously, mum and dad have been vaccinated, how long will they have to wait to get those tests for the children? The other scenario is relating to what happens if one particular parent has already got a holiday booked here, but only one parent has been fully double-vaccinated. One may not be able to because of medical reasons and one may have only had one vaccination. Again, what the scenario 2345 is. As far as I understand that family will not be able to travel here. But again, if the Chief Minister can just confirm that, I will understand exactly what he is saying. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member for Douglas North, Mr Peake. 2350 Mr Peake: Thank you very much, Mr President. I will bring some clarity to the situation now. (Mr Robertshaw: Thank you!) Thank you very much to the Council of Ministers and the Chief Minister for listening to the Tynwald Members. Those two last workshops were absolutely excellent (A Member: Hear, hear.) 2355 and you took on board I think what the sentiment was of the Members. So I am very grateful for that. Non-residents who have two vaccinations, and two weeks after their second vaccination, can come to the Isle of Man without being tested. That is absolutely clear, and I completely support that as long as they come from the Common Travel Area. That is very clear. There is some risk, I
______2564 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
2360 get that; there is some risk. But we are ready for that now. The vaccination is the game changer, as Mr Speaker says. So that is what you want to do. It is really clear. We are now open to non-residents as long as they have had the two vaccinations. The detail will be worked out by the officers. We have put it into their hands now and it could not be better. So we can welcome now and look forward to 2365 medical … And that was a change for me, to be honest, when the Chief Executive of DHSC was able to say that once you have had two vaccinations and the two weeks following, there is no need for a test, there is no medical reason for a test. So you can actually then go about your business and get on. So we welcome, then, the change in the borders with some mitigation. So thank you very much 2370 indeed. Thank you very much, Mr President.
A Member: Thank you.
The President: Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins. 2375 Mr Shimmins: Thank you, Mr President. I rise to support the Chief Minister and the Council of Ministers’ proposals today, which I welcome. Differentiating the border entry pathway by vaccination status is becoming the norm across Europe. (A Member: Hear, hear.) It is a sensible way forward and it follows the clear 2380 medical evidence which now confirms the protection offered by the two vaccinations. We will never eliminate risk completely, Hon. Members, but in terms of restricting the infectious transmissions of the disease we now know that the two vaccinations really do provide a high degree of protection. But critically, Hon. Members, we also now know from the studies that have been published, there is a much-reduced impact on those who have been vaccinated and 2385 subsequently become infected. That is the clear game changer, I think; and that evidence shows that the nature of the illness is much less severe, with a very low risk of hospitalisation. So the evidence is clear, Hon. Members, and I think this helped striking the right balance, which absolutely enables us to start tackling the ongoing harm, Hon. Members, (A Member: Hear, hear.) that this crisis is causing across our Island in all sorts of areas of our society. We heard at lunchtime 2390 about some of the impacts that it is having on mental health and addiction services, but that is just one example of so many. We saw yesterday people who are very concerned about their businesses and that is just another example of so many harms that this crisis has caused to various people across the Island in different ways. We should not underestimate those harms; and many of these harms are hidden. 2395 So I very much welcome this change which moves us forward, I believe, as an Island. I also welcome the change to include Ireland as a part of the Common Travel Area, and that is very important for many Island residents who have not seen their loved ones in the Emerald Isle for well over a year, and in some cases a year and a half, and we should not underestimate the harm that has caused harm to them. 2400 The one query I have really for the Chief Minister is can he please confirm that the border regulations for children will be reviewed? I appreciate, actually, that these are difficult decisions and the question of testing children is exceptionally difficult, clearly, and there are a number of different factors. But I wonder if we could perhaps look at the Guernsey ‘blue channel’ arrangements where their approach on children is pretty much predicated on their parents’ 2405 vaccination status. I think it would be helpful if we could review that and make an announcement ahead of the school holidays, particularly, to enable Manx families to be reconnected with loved ones. But overall, thank you, and I will be supporting the motion.
2410 A Member: Hear, hear.
______2565 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The President: Hon. Member for Douglas South, Mr Quine.
Mr Quine: Thank you, Mr President. I, too, very much welcome this debate on how we look to move to adapt our border policy, 2415 following the postponement of ‘Freedom Day’ in England. As is the case for many Hon. Members, I have had some very well-informed correspondence on this issue from constituents, some of which is polar opposite in terms of content. Some welcome this as a positive step in the right direction, whilst at the same time balancing mitigation and caution with the welcomed resumption of derestricted travel. Others have, as I have just said, taken the issue that there is in 2420 fact de facto discrimination in this proposal. That is something which, on behalf of those constituents, I am obliged to request the Chief Minister to consider. For some, this is seen as a proposal that causes worry and anxiety in people who have either been unable to receive the vaccine for medical reasons or for those who, for ethical reasons, have chosen to wait until a fuller appreciation of any side effects is available, who look to question the 2425 current clinical evidence and data published by pharmaceutical companies, as it is their prerogative to do so, and now see that our Government are effectively coercing such people to be vaccinated in order for them to travel freely, thereby undermining the freedom of their personal choice and conscience, who are looking to sanction this by subterfuge. This has been put to me as ‘travel apartheid’ by certain correspondents, Mr President, correspondents who contend 2430 that what they see as a two-tier policy will be put in place and that this is not the answer. On the other side of the see-saw, of course, are those who see this as a positive step in the right direction. Those who have no truck with taking the vaccine and who would see it as discriminatory against them, should they be forced to either rearrange travel plans or to have to test on arrival on our Island even though, as I say, they have chosen to be inoculated. There is also 2435 a hard-pressed hospitality sector to consider and the associated jobs which go with this, and the potential for the sector to reach the tipping point where it falls into a depression from which it could take years to recover with the associated threats to jobs and our wider economy. So I am listening to this debate with a keen ear. No matter what happens, Mr President, there will be a group who feel aggrieved, for we do not live in a fair world. Discrimination in one form 2440 or another has always existed and despite well-intentioned reasons to fight it, just like risk, it always will. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge. 2445 Ms Edge: Thank you, Mr President. I just wonder, I would like to ask the Chief Minister if he could just clarify a few matters for me, really. You talked about the first-day tests and how many had been carried out. I think he said we had had 1,500 family applications. I do not know if that is four and a half thousand people or is it 2450 1,500. I just wonder if he could clarify that. I also wonder, out of the first-day tests, I think it was eight cases tested positive on the Island. Did those eight cases still test positive on day six or had some of those eight already left the Island? So I would actually like to know – and I do not expect the Chief Minister to have this information today – of all the tests that have been carried out on day one, how many of those people have 2455 then gone on to have a day-six test? I think that is important data for the Island, that none of us have seen. I completely accept that we have got to move forward and I do have real concerns about fraud. It is very clear in the UK that there is fraud going on about vaccination certificates and I do wonder how, obviously the officers … and I am sure we have an officer in charge of this that will know how 2460 to deal with that, but I do think we need some security and assurance around it. I will have to say again that around the direction notice or the entry certificates, will they have an end date? Do the individuals have to say they are coming to visit for a set period of time, which ______2566 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
will then help us capture the data of tests, if necessary, between one and six? Or are we just leaving them completely open-ended? I have raised this as a concern quite a number of times, 2465 and I do think this is an opportunity now to perhaps … We have seen the errors, we have heard the evidence to Public Accounts of the possibility that an end date on exemptions would have been really helpful, or on directions, certainly would have helped in the Steam Packet case, I genuinely believe, because that exemption or direction would have been reviewed within a period of time. So I would like to see some reassurance around that. 2470 Also, I hope the Chief Minister does have this information, but how many of our over-60s will be double vaccinated with 2 + 2 on the day that we make these changes to our regulations? I do have concerns that we are putting a barrier in front of families by saying it is from age five that they have to have a test. That could be quite traumatic for some people as well. I do wonder why we have moved from … It possibly could have been under-12s because I think the vaccine 2475 now has had … Certainly one of the vaccines they are saying is going to be suitable for children between 12 and 16, but we class our children on the Island between 12 and 18. So I am not sure from our figures when we talk about our adult population, are we talking about our population from the age of 18? From 18, that’s okay. Thank you, Health Minister. So that was just another concern. 2480 Just to reiterate what the Speaker said when he spoke about data and dates: the exit strategy that I agreed to and I voted on in this Hon. Court, Mr President, was with data and not dates. It clearly said that if we approved it was 50 cases in 100,000 in the UK. That seems to be forgotten now, and that does concern me because that is what the public knows that everybody in this Hon. Court signed up to, and certainly it has not been mentioned. It does not get talked about very 2485 much now. In fact, I think it said at some point it was 30 in 100,000, but certainly the exit strategy that I approved was 50 cases in 100,000 cases and I do believe … Somebody who is very close to me has a relative working in a hospital, and I know it is in Southampton but they certainly have not got the cases that the north-west have got and they are certainly seeing an increase in cases in ITU. My concern is that before opening our borders and 2490 inviting people to the Island what I have real concerns about is the protection of the health of the people of the Isle of Man. I think the key to that is how many of our over-50s have 2 + 2 protection. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Lord-Brennan. 2495 Mrs Lord-Brennan: Thank you, Mr President. I think that it might be perceived by some people that what is starting to be missed with this is the testing. I think it is great that we will be able to welcome more people to the Island on the 28th, but I think that, the same time as doing that, whilst it is of comfort to have the double 2500 vaccinations, why would we not be still having some form of testing? I say that in the context of day-six test, as well, I think there needs to be much more of a differentiation between what is happening between somebody getting a negative test on day one, but then potentially a positive test on day six. I think that day six will eventually get dropped because I am not really sure that there is a significant difference, apart from the healthcare settings. 2505 I think that if we are obviously accepting we are going to move into a phase where we are going to have more cases and there is going to be much more freedom of movement – and that is really good – but we should at the same time, surely, until we get to the point where more people are vaccinated, be trying to suppress the virus, and I think that part of that mitigation is around testing. But I also think that surely people who might visit the Island would actually be used to 2510 being tested, or may also be tested before they come to the Island as well. I think that is a possibility. These Regulations are also going to keep in place what we have been operating under the previous lockdowns, up until I think it was 23rd October, or something like that. So we need to be fully aware that in taking this approach we are knowingly putting in place the provisions for ______2567 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
2515 additional restrictions if we need it. The reason why I mention that is not because – well, I hope that we will not need it – I do not think that certain restrictions might potentially need to be put in place, but I feel that whilst those powers are in the back pocket to use in case of a potential need for lockdown, whether that at the same time puts the focus on the mitigations that might be necessary in order to make sure that the cases are kept down. I just think in the next few weeks 2520 that is the time that will make a difference. I know it is not exactly related to these Regulations, but I have had people contact me repeatedly about what happens if a child goes into school and they are negative on their day-one test, but then they turn out to be positive on the day-six test. I absolutely think that is the sort of thing that will cause problems. I think the public will have some difficulty with that, and I suppose 2525 in that way that does tie in with the treatment of children versus people who are vaccinated. Because, if we are saying if children are coming to the Island we need them to be tested, it is not completely clear, 100% clear, that vaccination is absolutely going to limit spread, but at the same time in schools we are saying that it is not necessarily important enough to make sure that they are definitely clear by day six. 2530 So it just feels like there are some bits here that are not fully knitted together for me, and I think in simple terms that is probably how it will be looked at on the outside. They will say, ‘Well, this is good that we have got this. But also are we definitely not at the stage where some testing would be helpful with a view to keeping cases down?’ Then, I would also like to know, are we going to be changing anything to do with the exit 2535 strategy in terms of numbers of cases that might trigger lockdowns, potentially, because if we are going to change that, or if we are not, maybe we just need to know what we are getting into, because otherwise we are just going to put these Regs in place and then that is it. So I just think we need to know what level of cases might actually then trigger, or not, the need for closures or prohibitions, because I do not fully feel that I know what we are going into. I just feel that we are 2540 at a critical stage now, so maybe it can be explained. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member for Ramsey, Mr Hooper.
2545 Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President. I have not had a great deal of time with these Regulations, so there are bound to be things that come out in the wash I think over the next few days. For me, I am quite glad to see this is starting towards a slightly more simplified approach. It has been mentioned that we are moving away a little bit and using vaccination status as the differentiating criterion, which is helpful. But for some 2550 reason we are also continuing to use resident status – resident or non-resident – as a criterion. I get at the outset that was an important distinction to make when we were trying to control numbers and trying to find ways of minimising a risk to the Island. But now, where we have such a clear differentiator as vaccination status, I am struggling to see the logic in saying, actually, why are we also saying if you are a non-resident who has not been vaccinated you cannot travel here, 2555 if you are happy to isolate? That is the message, surely. If you are happy to do your isolation and do your testing, it does not matter where you live. I cannot imagine very many people would want to travel to the Isle of Man and spend their time here in isolation, but actually from drafting the Regulations from a simplicity perspective, I would have thought that now the differentiating criteria should very well be vaccine, 2 + 2, or not. And then instead of saying, ‘Well, if you’re not, 2560 sorry, there are extra reasons you can’t come’, simply saying. ‘We’ve got two pathways: your vaccinated pathway and your non-vaccinated pathway. One requires you to isolate and be tested and the other doesn’t.’ That seems to be the way that other jurisdictions are going. It is certainly where Guernsey seems to have gone. They have got some nuances around their various categories, but in essence 2565 they have adopted that model. So this idea of test or isolate is where we used to be; now I think
______2568 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
we are at a stage where it is vaccinate or test and isolate. I do not really know why we have not quite got there. So to that, really, I would like to get a better understanding of what our current maximum testing capacity is, because it does feel to me that this restriction is another artificial restriction, 2570 perhaps to try and control the amount of tests we are doing on the Island rather than because it actually has any real benefit to us in a wider context. On that, I do support the argument that has been made saying that we should be testing at the ports. We are not vaccinating at the Airport any more, so clearly there is a possibility, I think, if we use those very well-constructed vaccination booths now as a testing centre. I am a little unclear as to why that has not already happened. 2575 I would also be grateful if the Chief Minister could advise what the view of the EAG was, the Emergency Advisory Group, on this proposal. I thought the purpose of getting that body set up was to provide that independent perspective on decisions that were being made on recommendations or policy change. This is a big policy change. I know that the EAG were consulted at the outset, the same as Tynwald Members were, but I do not believe they were then asked for 2580 their formal views on, ‘Here is the outcome of that consultation, here is the outcome of the process. What do you think about where we have ended up?’ I certainly have not seen anything from the EAG that would indicate that they have provided a perspective on whether this set-up actually meets their suggestion that the borders could continue to open on 28th with appropriate mitigations. Do they feel that these mitigations are 2585 appropriate or not? We have gone to the effort of appointing these people, we should at the very least be consulting with them. I would also like to ask how long it is anticipated that these particular regulations will be in force. The reason I ask that is I can see that they are intended to last until October, but between now and then we are going to reach a point on the Island, sometime in early August, according to 2590 Government data, where everybody in priority groups 1 and 2 who have opted to have a vaccine will have had both doses. That is the Government’s position, in early August everyone in the adult population will have had two doses of the vaccine, which means by the end of August every adult on the Isle of Man who has chosen to have the vaccine will be at that 2 + 2 status. So at that point, is that another critical decision point at the end of August that says something will change at the 2595 end of August? The reason I am asking that now is because at the end of August there will not be a Tynwald in place to make that decision. So Government either needs to make a decision now that says, actually, if such and such will happen by that August point, this is what will then occur. Or we need to say, ‘Actually, it doesn’t matter what happens between now and August. This is what we are 2600 sticking with.’ You cannot leave that decision up until the middle of August. You cannot leave that decision (A Member: Hear, hear.) until the House of Keys has dissolved and there is no one to have that conversation with. So I think whilst this gradual relaxation is very welcome, I do think we also need to have an idea of what is going to happen over the next three months, and we need that information sooner rather than later. 2605 I would also like to get some information really on what the plans are around vaccinating 12- to 18 year-olds, I suppose. We know the MHRA has approved the Pfizer vaccine for this age group. I know we are waiting for the JCVI. Again, we have waited for the JCVI for other decisions and it has often been an unnecessary wait. So the decision that they make will obviously be related to the UK position and the UK perspective. Ours may be slightly different. Are we capable of making 2610 our own decision in that space? Yes or no? And if not, why not? And if we can, when will that kind of decision be made? On the Regulations themselves, though, I had an email from a constituent earlier this morning who asked me if I could get some more clarity on the situation around children, because I think that is quite a gap in what we have heard so far. The issue raised by the Hon. Member of Council, 2615 Mrs Lord-Brennan, about schools, I think we need some clarity on that as well. What will happen? What are the protocols in place for if a returning family comes back and the child tests negative and then subsequently tests positive? I think we need to get some clarity. Not necessarily here ______2569 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
and now in this debate, but something I think needs to be done by way of communication to parents and families so that everyone can be reassured that all necessary measures are being 2620 taken. In respect of the Regulations, though, there is a slight issue I think in terms of the way that children are being treated. So if you are a Manx resident and you leave and you come back, and you go away with your kids and come back, your kids will be treated as Category A, as far as I can make out, unless they are under five – if they are under five, they are just exempt from everything. 2625 But if they are between five and 18 they will be treated as a Category A individual, which means they can opt in to the testing regime that the Regulations set out in regulation 13A, so that is whatever the current rules are around vaccination, around testing, and early test for release and all the rest of it, that is set out quite clearly. So I think the situation for an Isle of Man family is relatively clear. 2630 If, though, you are a visiting relative or a friend and you are coming through on the compassionate route or on one of the other routes in there, again, nothing is changing on that. So again we have got some clarity I think for people there. The gap, though, is if you are one of these newly vaccinated 2 + 2 families. So if I am a 2 + 2 coming over here with my kids, the rule says – quite worryingly, actually –that my child must have a day-one test. Must. It is what the regulation 2635 says. All of the other language around all of the other testing pathways says you may elect to have a test. If you do not, you isolate for 21 days, or you can elect to have a test. That is not what it says around these children of visiting tourists. Essentially, you must have a test on day one and then you must have a test on day six. There is no choice there. There is no, ‘Actually, what if I would rather opt to isolate? What if I would rather do something different? What if I do not want to have 2640 my kid tested twice by the Manx authorities?’ There is no election process here, you must have this done. So I would like to get a better understanding of why we have changed that. Why are we taking a slightly different approach for those families; and actually what is the view of the Council of Ministers on whether that might put people off? If the whole purpose of doing this is to try and 2645 allow some more freedom of movement, actually mandating that people will be tested – which we have not done as yet. Actually, at no point have we mandated an individual will be tested, because we have always felt that was perhaps a step too far, to mandate a test. We have always given people the option to opt out of the test and just isolate as an alternative. This then I think brings me on to some other concerns around how this is structured, because 2650 the 5B regulation that is being introduced specifically says that these individuals are not a Category A person. These kids coming over with a 2 + 2 family are not Category A. Now, the problem with that is the regulation that talks about test and release, three tests, charging for tests very specifically at the top of that says, ‘This applies to Category A people’. So these kids coming over who we are now mandating must have a test, they have to pay for it. Is it free? It does not 2655 actually say. There is no context around that at all. I am not sure you could charge these families for a test if it does not specify in the Regulations that you can. But also, then, there is not really much information on how you get out with that pathway. It says, if you test negative at test one, you isolate, and you keep isolating until day six, but then what? Again, the test and release pathway set out in regulation 13A only applies to Category A 2660 people. It does not apply to this new category of children in regulation 5B because it has just been left off, I think. That regulation 5B also does not talk about what their default isolation period is because they are not listed in the Schedule, so if they do test positive at test one, how long do they isolate for? Is it 21 days? Is it 14 days? Is it 10 days? Is it six days? Does it matter? I think it does. I would assume that it would be the same default as for 2665 everybody else, but the Regulations again do not specify. So there is not really a framework around how these kids would isolate and how they get out of that isolation. There is also no reference to an inconclusive sample. So in the other testing regulations there are three options: your test is positive, your test is negative, or your test is inconclusive. But in regulation 5B it has only got positive and negative options. There is not a middle ground. ______2570 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
2670 But it then goes on to say that if this family comes over, and the family have been vaccinated, 2 + 2, and they have got a kid, and that kid tests positive, everyone in that group has to then isolate. The whole family. Even the people who have been vaccinated will have to isolate. I understand the logic behind that but what it does not say is can they leave the house to exercise? Are they allowed to leave their place of accommodation to take exercise, or anything, actually? It 2675 does not talk about that, because again this framework that we have built inside the Schedule that deals with all these various categories of individuals does not have a category for children under regulation 5B who have travelled to the Isle of Man along with a vaccinated family. It is almost incomplete, I think. It could very well be that the policy around this is quite clear. I think I have not heard anything 2680 that would worry me in this space. I feel that you would be requiring them to isolate and there would be flexibility around exercise and testing and all the rest of it. I think that is all there, underneath it, but I do not see it inside the Regulations. That is a little bit of a concern because if you are obviously mandating tests for these families and these individuals, you are probably going to make sure you have got a sound legal basis for doing it. 2685 So all in all, Mr President, I think this probably is quite a sensible next step. I do not think it necessarily goes far enough in terms of getting rid of that resident/non-resident distinction. I think there is some clarity that probably needs to be dealt with in terms of schools, in terms of children specifically travelling. But again I do not see that as an issue to reject these Regulations today. I think we have got two or three weeks before these are going to kick in. There is plenty of time for 2690 the Council of Ministers to take away everything from this debate and fix or tweak anything that needs tweaking before 28th July. So I am happy to support these Regulations, but I just would be grateful if the Chief Minister – I do not expect him to respond to everything here, but – if he could just go away and think about some of these things in the context of, perhaps, if we do need to update them in the near future, that would probably be helpful. 2695 Thank you very much.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Ashford.
Mr Ashford: Thank you very much, Mr President. 2700 This was always going to be the difficult bit, wasn’t it? (A Member: Absolutely.) As we moved forward and we started to release, we always knew this was where it was going to get difficult, because there was always going to be concerns on both sides, there was always going to be trying to find that middle balance. The first thing I have to say is there is no right balance, there is no wrong balance. Different 2705 people will have different concerns and somehow, as an Hon. Court, we have got to mesh those concerns and those fears together to move the Island forward, because that is what it has always been about. It has been about slowly getting back to opening up our Island, not just to those of us who enjoy the Island day to day, but those who want to come and visit us, who want to come and visit family and want to spend time on the Island, because it is a great place to be, and it was 2710 getting that balance. Mr Speaker was absolutely right, Mr President, t here is a nervousness out there. There has been a nervousness every time we change. In fact, I will be perfectly honest, every time we make a change I personally wince because I know within hours of it being announced my email inbox is actually going to fall over. In fact, the one area I am surprised I have not had abusive messages 2715 from is the Government Technology Service due to the amount of strain I am probably putting on their servers; and it happens every single time, and every single time it is a mix. There are people welcoming the change and there are other people saying, ‘You are out of your mind.’ It is getting that balance right. Personally, I believe we are getting that balance right today. Mr Hooper referred to the fact of 2720 convoluted regulations in the past, and I have never hidden away from the fact, as Minister for Health, that a lot of those have been convoluted. Maybe some would argue over-convoluted at ______2571 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
times, but they have had to be because of the nature of what we are dealing with. Whereas now we are simplifying. We have got vaccine status. Our knowledge around the vaccine has radically changed over the course of this pandemic. From the start, when the vaccines were first rolled out, 2725 it was not certain how effective they would be. Would they actually prevent people catching COVID-19 or wouldn’t they? How effective would they be at reducing transmission? If you look at those early scientific reports there was not a lot of evidence around reduced transmission, but as always, with all these things, the scientific knowledge builds over time. We are in a very different place scientific knowledge-wise than, say, we were a few months ago. 2730 So for instance, one of the things that always annoys me when I look at the media, Mr President, is there is a continuous thing, whether it is the media just not understanding – the international media, I should say I am referring to here before I upset any of the local media – or whether it is just the fact it is easier to report, when they refer to the efficacy of the vaccines being reduced by the Delta variant, what they are referring to is preventing symptomatic disease. That 2735 is what that reduction is referring to. It is not necessarily referring to the reduction in serious illness or death. The actual scientific reports that are coming out are showing that when it comes to Delta, in terms of serious illness and death, although there is a reduced efficacy, it is actually quite low. What we should be always governed by is real-world data, Mr President, and numbers can be 2740 an interesting thing. I am grateful to the Hon. Member for Onchan, because she mentioned Southampton. Southampton is a very good example of this. If we look at the University Hospital Trust, if I get it right, for Southampton, which covers most of the hospitals across that area, they have seen in the last month their patients in hospital rise by 50% in a month. That sounds frightening, Mr President, until you actually look at the numbers. The number of patients they 2745 have gone from is on 5th May, 16, to 25 on 5th June. At the peak of the pandemic, to put it into context, they had 320 patients in hospital. So sometimes it depends what narrative you put around the figures as to what you end up with, and it is the same with, for instance, cases in the UK, where we have become still very obsessed with cases. 2750 Again, I am grateful for the Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge, because she mentioned about the Exit Framework, Mr President. We were in a very different world when that exit strategy very first came out. We were still in an elimination strategy and we have now moved to mitigation. We need to be absolutely clear what mitigation is, Mr President; it does not mean you are not going to have community transmission, it is about preventing serious illness and death. And, as with all 2755 our decisions, it is not just around case numbers per 100,000, it is actually around what is the virus doing. If we base it purely on case numbers per 100,000, COVID is likely, as advised, to be around forever. We may never reach that glorious figure we want to be below. It actually depends –
Ms Edge: Would the Hon. Member give way just for –? 2760 Mr Ashford: Of course, I will. I am happy to give way, Mr President.
Ms Edge: Thank you, Minister. The reason I mentioned that, Mr President, was every briefing we have had with regard to this 2765 mitigation, the Chief Minister has always said that we have agreed the exit strategy. Yes, we agreed the exit strategy, but we agreed it with the information that was in the exit strategy, Mr President. Thank you, Minister, for letting me make that clarification.
2770 Mr Ashford: Thank you, Mr President, and the briefings where I have been with the Chief Minister, I am also aware the Chief Minister has on several occasions, as have I, actually stated quite clearly that although it is an important measure, it is not the sole measure that we use when we make decisions and I think that is very important. ______2572 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
So we have to look at the data and we have to look at where this is going and I think that we 2775 are going to otherwise end up in a position where we never move forward. I can fully sympathise with Mr Speaker, saying another two weeks, but then they are having this very debate in the UK now – another two weeks, then another two weeks, then another two weeks. Where does it end? And what ends it? Is it the fact you have got no cases at all or the case numbers are going down? Is it the serious illness and death figures etc.? Where is that line drawn? That is the other 2780 conversation that makes it very difficult. I will answer some of the stuff, if I may, Mr President, the Chief Minister actually probably will not have the figures to be able to. So, firstly, around the Hospital, for instance, in the outbreak plan, 20 admissions would be normal. There is the ability to activate Newlands as well, which would give another 20. And moderate pressure would be between 20 and 30 in the main Hospital, 2785 but there is Newlands they can activate as well for another 20. Schools were mentioned and again the Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge, mentioned about testing over-fives. Many people in this Hon. Court remember that the outbreak we had in February was driven by school-age children across the Island, so I think at the moment it is a cautious approach. There are some jurisdictions that do not do any testing under the age of 12, 11. Some 2790 European countries have it at six. We can find a multitude of permutations, but we think for the current position it is the sensible approach to continue to have that testing in place. But again the key thing is this is another step on the path. It is not the end result, it is not there forever and in fact, as things move on, we are more likely to be changing things more often rather than less often. So I think as a next step it is important. The reason this Hon. Court has been so 2795 successful – and I think we have been successful as an Hon. Court in relation to COVID-19; it could have gone a lot worse the other way – is that we have always taken those incremental steps. We have always gone in increments. We have not rushed at something, we have not held back from something and I think today is another one of those incremental steps. There will be a huge amount of nervousness around and there will be anxiety and concern, but 2800 I think we need to take that step in order that we can move our Island forward and also open up our beautiful Island in a safe, secure way – nothing is without risk, do not get me wrong, I am not saying it is 100%, nothing is without risk, but – in the best risk mitigation way that we can, so that others outside our Island who may want to come and share that beauty can do so. Thank you, Mr President. 2805 The President: Thank you. Hon. Members, I have five or six Members still wishing to speak. Hon. Member for Garff, Mrs Caine.
2810 Mrs Caine: Thank you, Mr President. While this change to our border policy is welcome to bring certainty to the tourist economy, it is seen by some as a discriminatory decision, something that benefits non-residents more than younger Manx people, prioritising travel for our visitor economy over local residents and the domestic economy, where we have enjoyed freedoms still not permitted in the UK. 2815 I appreciate the Isle of Man decision is based on the calculated risk of people catching or passing on COVID, the potential impact on our Hospital, the increasing proportion of vaccinated residents and the increasing evidence that people two weeks beyond their second vaccination are less likely to catch or transmit the virus. I have passed that comment on to concerned constituents who, as Mr Ashford said, have 2820 inundated my inbox over the last 24 hours. Many simply will not accept it. Some suggest this breaches human rights legislation, notwithstanding COVID passports might be increasingly demanded across Europe and around the world. Others have commented that it prioritises travel by the off-Island older people when younger people – Manx people living in England or off-Island family of local residents – will not be able to return without a test on arrival. Imagine the stress of 2825 travelling with a family not knowing for certain that you do not have COVID. Families who have ______2573 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
not met up for two years say this casts into doubt a visit this summer unless the borders are fully open. Can I make a plea to ask that when CoMin discusses further adjustments to bring to July Tynwald that they consider younger visitors? Would it be possible for young adults who are not 2830 vaccinated to obtain a test off Island ahead of travelling and be permitted to enter without further testing or isolating on Island? Also, I echo the Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins, in asking for a review of the policy on all children being able to travel without testing. I am concerned that while Tynwald Members have been involved in discussions via the workshops, for which I am grateful, the Manx public’s view has not been sought. It would be a 2835 simple matter to set up an online survey to gather public views. Could that be done to assess the support or otherwise for this border level 2 + 2 policy and for future reductions or greater opening of our Island’s borders? I get an impression, from the numerous contacts that I have had, concerns on both sides. Some suggest we should pause for two or four weeks: two weeks until all priority groups are at 2 + 2 2840 status on the Island or until our schools break-up. The fact of opening to non-residents ahead of the schools breaking up is a key factor resulting in many concerned emails. Will students who travel be permitted to return to classrooms ahead of a day-six test? We need much more information to go out to the public to cover the time up to the school holidays. Plus lateral flow tests: why are these now considered useful when previously dismissed as unreliable, with the risk 2845 of false positives? Will anyone receiving a positive result be offered a PCR test to confirm it? I think, on balance, I do support the gradual reopening of our borders, but very clear guidance is needed for various settings and more equal treatment of all travellers once the risk to the Island population is reduced. Then again, for July and August in the summer holidays, if vaccination or testing on arrival is still required, please exempt children and enable an off-Island test to be taken 2850 ahead of travel to be a possibility. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member for Douglas South, Mrs Christian.
2855 Mrs Christian: Thank you, Mr President. I am for the borders reopening. I am for us moving forward. This Government has undertaken and delivered a world-class vaccination programme and I congratulate them on that, but we are not just here for the people who are vaccinated. We must support all our Island residents and I fear this change in our border strategy does not do that. I understand this is a temporary position 2860 and not permanent, but here are my concerns. We have a two-tier system now. One that is unvaccinated and one that is not. The non- vaccinated, including children, take more precautions to reduce the risk of catching COVID-19 than those who are vaccinated, and this is personal choice. But this action today will be the first concrete action to divide us and I am worried about that. 2865 In the little time that we have had to digest this new pathway, I have learnt about the Nuremberg Code which is a guideline, not law, and my understanding is Professor Cave, who is an expert on medical ethics, said the Nuremberg Code was not relevant to vaccine passports. It is a policy document. However, she did go on to say:
If restrictions are applied in relation to those who haven’t been vaccinated against Covid, consideration needs to be taken of the potential impact on people’s ability to choose freely and on the possibility that such a policy might discriminate against some groups within society.
But it should be noted that this is ‘not unprecedented’. For example, it is the current practice 2870 when you travel to countries who require proof of yellow fever vaccination. But I am glad we are discussing this here today as we have a responsibility to safeguard all in our society. Furthermore, the House of Commons’ Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee reported on 10th June in 2021 and in their conclusions: ______2574 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The [UK] Government must clearly set out the scientific case for a Covid-status certification system alongside any announcement it makes introducing such a system. This is essential for the public understanding of the decision- making process behind such a system and to increase public acceptance of and compliance with vital measures to combat the pandemic.
This Committee also concluded that:
64. A Covid … [test certificate] system would, by its very nature, be discriminatory ... While the Committee accepts that in emergency situations the prospect of temporary infringement of rights may need to be weighed against public health or other emergency considerations, these occasions should only ever be when there is an overwhelming case of necessity and should, in all situations, be proportionate to that necessity.
2875 Interestingly as well, we have also been told the other day in the briefing we are developing a vaccine app. This Committee concluded:
15. The decision to launch the Covid-status certificate function on the NHS app for international travel, without notifying and consulting Parliament, could be construed as contempt for Parliament and this Committee. The policy should have been set out in advance of any decision being taken to enable scrutiny, and the House should have been given the opportunity to vote on the proposals.
I do not remember the same being extended to Members of Tynwald in this parliament. If this is approved today, I urge the Council of Ministers to think about additional mitigations – (Interjection) Thank you. 2880 Mrs Christian: Is this Court today not concerned about people arriving on Island spreading the virus, albeit limited, to the non-vaccinated, including young adults and schoolchildren, and them bearing the brunt of that? Is it them who will be asked to isolate if an outbreak occurs and they have not been vaccinated? Year groups could be asked to isolate if there is a cluster or outbreak, 2885 and thus parents would have to stay off work for 14 days to look after these children. What support are we giving these people? Is this Court today not concerned about our passport control at the Sea Terminal and how we will be checking the identity of people coming to the Island? Proof of passport and proof of vaccination submitted to our Government will go unchecked. What is the Government doing 2890 about that? The Guardian reported on 16th May a person could acquire a fake COVID vaccine certificate on the dark net for up to £25. How are we going to prevent and monitor this? Is this Court today not concerned we are again doing an all-or-nothing approach with regard to mitigations? Take two towns in the UK, both with a population of 85,000 people, ask visitors in town A to 2895 wear face coverings and in town B do not ask visitors to wear face coverings. Which town do you think is most likely to have an outbreak of COVID-19? Which town do you think will ask the non- vaccinated to isolate or possibly year groups to close? In which town do you think we will stop visiting hospital and care settings? I do not want to be standing here in four weeks’ time and this Government saying ‘in hindsight’. 2900 We have the ability now to make the decision and ask travellers to wear face coverings when they come to the Isle of Man. This is a small ask that could save a life. It is a small ask to protect our children from possible long COVID effects which potentially destroy their lives as they have no vaccine-generated immunity or herd immunity. This is a small ask considering many people in the UK are used to wearing face masks. It is business as usual, but just with a mask. In Scotland, for 2905 example, if you are in a restaurant sat at a table you do not wear a mask, but when you get up you put one on. It is simple. As a Manx resident, if I went away and came back to the Island I would wear a face covering in public until that time had passed to protect our non-vaccinated and to protect our children – something that I see three Members who have recently travelled are doing today here in this 2910 Court. Furthermore, Islanders, specifically non-vaccinated people, would know when they saw
______2575 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
someone with a face mask and would perhaps naturally social distance. These are small measures which would have a huge impact to protect our population who are not vaccinated. I would agree with the Hon. Member of Legislative Council, Mrs Kate Lord-Brennan, that a test before or on arrival would be a sensible interim solution. I am not trying to worry the public. This 2915 needs to be a proportionate response and can be just as temporary – one that will allow us to trial, one that will allow us to get our Islanders used to visitors coming here again, which are so urgently needed. But we are deluded if we think we will not be moving towards a way of life that is more like the UK in the short term. Our euphoria will not last past 28th June. I hope that we can learn to live with COVID safely for all our Island residents. 2920 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: The list is growing again. Bear in mind quite a few points of view have been put and no need to repeat the same point. Mr Thomas, please. 2925 Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President. The first one is in the context of health and care settings and the 10-day limit. The verb that is used in the Regulations is ‘attend’. I just wanted to know clarification about what that means in terms of attend. My understanding is common sense prevails. We are in the era of simplifying 2930 things, as expressed so clearly by Mr Peake, so my understanding is that you work it out with the place where you are visiting, because there are all sorts of arrangements. My understanding is ‘attend’ is not defined in the legislation and what we are talking about here is reasonable management; you do not have to leave somebody in the car park if you take them to the Hospital, any more than you have to leave somebody outside a social care setting. So that is the first point 2935 of clarity I hope the Chief Minister can confirm. The second point is I think I am fully with Mr Callister in terms of the app, because I think we have developed a degree of confusion about apps, and I am going to try and use a question to bring more clarity, because I do remember clearly that the Chief Minister, confirmed by another person later on, has talked about developing an app and also at different points talked about 2940 looking into an NHS app. But as far as I know – and hopefully the Chief Minister can confirm this – there are two NHS COVID-19 apps and that might be the source of confusion. There is the NHS app, which is a bit like Patient Access and is to do with having the vaccine status and so on and so on, and then there is the NHS COVID-19 app which is useful for getting into a pub gardens and contact tracing in sports halls and that sort of thing. 2945 My understanding is, although it says all over the COVID-19 app that it is only for people in England and Wales, if you just put in a random postcode from England and Wales, you can start using it and so on, in the same way that lots of people in the Isle of Man have ID cards on that similar sort of basis and so on. So I just wanted some sort of confirmation. The health aspects, the ones inside the NHS app, that is where we get into difficulty – patient information and personal 2950 information and data protection law. So to me a degree of clarity about those two possibilities ... I also think it would be helpful for the Chief Minister to confirm that back in March, April, May we were talking about an information centre and apps and so on; but this is last year, this is in 2020 and we did move regulations – well, we did move orders under regulations – to bring that into place and then that all fizzled out and those orders were annulled in June. So there was a 2955 previous attempt to actually put together our own app. I do not think we are still doing that, but perhaps if we are, it is the right place to come clean about it. In terms of the third question to make a point, I think we have had an excellent discussion about some of the issues around children. I think my good friend, Mr Quine, expressed that very clearly and then a number of people have added detail to all of the issues about potential 2960 apartheid and potential issues with how we treat children and perceptions of different treatment and relative discrimination for people from off Island and older people relative to younger people.
______2576 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
There are two points I want to make. The first one is we have to remember this in the context of the debate we had this morning about looking out for the youth and making a place in the Isle of Man for youth to feel welcome. Because I can definitely tell you there is a belief amongst the 2965 youth that we are thinking more about older people and people who have got their pensions and do not do as much of the sort of things that young people do. That is something that we need to address and now here is a chance for us to say the Isle of Man is a place for young people; it is not just a place to look after people at a different stage of their lives. The second point: although we have had some very authoritative commentary on 2970 regulation 5B, there is actually commentary by Prof. Edge on his blog, which he has written overnight, and he is obviously a member of the Emergency Advisory Group, which has not been covered as far as I am aware. Lots of good points were made about regulation 5, but Prof. Edge gets into this debate about free choice and about discrimination, because he points out in his blog – and I am only quoting him:
There is no consideration in reg. 5B for a child, accompanying a vaccinated person, who refuses to take a test; but neither do they have their own default period of self-isolation if they refuse to take test ... It is not at all clear to me what the position of an unvaccinated child over 5 years of age, accompanying a vaccinated parent, is, should they refuse to comply with the testing regime.
2975 That is quite an important hole, if it is a hole, as described by Prof. Edge, so that is something that we need clarity on more generally. On that point, Minister Ashford helpfully repeated today some of those phrases that have become associated with Minister Ashford to do with ‘baby steps’ and ‘incremental’ and so on, and another phrase that I remember Minister Ashford has used quite a lot over the last 15 months – 2980 and full credit to Minister Ashford, he has been brave and communicating on the frontline the new realities – but I think Minister Ashford has made a big point that we are not going to have mandatory vaccination because he does not believe in it personally. So I think it would be quite helpful for Minister Ashford in the coming days to make clear statements about where we are going in terms of some of these vaccination points, because that is something that people will 2985 have remembered because they heard it from Minister Ashford.
Mr Ashford: Will the Hon. Member give way? I am grateful to the Hon. Member for giving way, because I am happy to state again I have always very clearly stated that, personally, I have never supported mandatory vaccination. I have 2990 always believed it is personal choice. I am happy to state that again to the Hon. Court. I have always believed that people should have the personal choice, but what I have also made clear is that with personal choice comes personal responsibility as well, (A Member: Hear, hear.) and if people choose to go down a certain route they have to recognise that there may be consequences to that, exactly the same as if I choose myself to be vaccinated, which I have. 2995 Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President, and to the Minister. That is very clear, because that will be very helpful for lots of people to hear in terms of the concerns they have had, and they have expressed a great number to us over recent days. Creating another question and beginning to answer it myself, and perhaps somebody will want 3000 to intervene to answer it even more clearly, is that there has been a great focus on this opening up debate on the fact that this will help visitors who can come here and live in our Island, where we like to be, and they apparently like to be. There has been a lot of focus on the economic aspects and the business sector, but I think that is a rather biased way of looking at it. Taking that biased way of looking at it, people can then say we are putting the ‘economic 3005 vehicle’, as Mr Speaker said it, ahead of other concerns. What I would like to say is that it is about much more than the economic vehicle. It is about people and their lifestyle, firstly; and secondly, it is not only about the business sector and the private sector and private businesses, it is about the public service. We have heard it quite categorically stated that our education system and our ______2577 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
schools are suffering because of the fact that teachers are having to make choices that they do 3010 not want to have to make. It has been the case for a decade at least in our healthcare system that we have got far too many people who come to the Isle of Man and then go back to the Isle of Man, which is different from what it was 10, 15, 20 years ago when there were so many more living in the Isle of Man to provide healthcare services. Therefore our very healthcare services they were acting to protect 3015 are actually suffering from our views on the border and going across. So to me, this border change, this opening up, is actually for all sorts of other reasons, other than just to encourage the tourist economy and to encourage the business sector. (A Member: Hear, hear.) And I see lots and lots of nods – which is now on the Hansard – from all the important Ministers in this Hon. Court! (Laughter) 3020 The last couple of points. Firstly, I think the Speaker said something that I think needs a slight correction, because the Speaker implied that the Council of Ministers knew things that we did not know and that the public did not know. Well, I asked that Question very specifically of the Council of Ministers and the Chief Minister, and got a categorical assurance that when the Council of Ministers and the Chief Minister have made decisions they did not know anything more, they did 3025 not have any extra evidence, they did not have any extra analysis that was only being kept to them rather than us. And I believe them; I trust them. I have got personal experience that that is the case as well, but anyhow. What I am saying is they have a difficult job, but they have chosen to make the decisions themselves based on the information that we have equally and then getting us to confirm it two 3030 weeks later inside the public health regime. So we have to remember that. It is not as if there is masses of rich information that is being kept from us, apparently. We have it categorically asserted to us in an Answer to a Question I asked, that the Council of Ministers only has the same information as we have. That is in part why I have put down the motion that I have put down a bit later on, just to make sure that is the real case, and that is the actual position. 3035 Then finally, going back to the excellent point that Mr Speaker started to make and other people have contributed to, about the arrangements in terms of democracy during the General Election period. It is something that I have been discussing with Prof. Edge and others for quite some time. It is such a coincidence of events. I do think that what these Regulations have, whereby we have the relatively unusual description of time periods when democracy is affected, is a way 3040 of doing it, and I do want to put on record that it is a good nod from these Regulations and from the people who have made them to the fact that we are in an unusual period. I am beginning to believe that it will work out okay. We will have Ministers in place. There is beginning to be a new respect in this episode for the will of the House of Keys and Tynwald beyond the House of Keys into the rest of the parliament, but it is important that these issues are being 3045 raised at the right time, in the right way, as they have been, rather than as part of some sort of political conflict 12 months ago or six months ago or whatever. It is actually important that we understand public health regulations are difficult during a period of an election when we have a continuous Tynwald but a House of Keys that stops for some weeks. Thank you, Mr President. 3050 The President: Hon. Member for Ramsey, Dr Allinson.
Dr Allinson: Thank you very much, Mr President. I will try to be brief this time. I would like to thank the Hon. Member for Onchan for having sympathy with Ministers and the 3055 Council of Ministers. Obviously, what we are trying to do at the moment is involve all Members. That is why we have had workshops and that is why what is in front of you now is there, because we are trying to reflect the will of the Members and the will of Tynwald in the regulations we pass. As the Hon. Member the Health Minister said, this is the really difficult part. Closing down things is relatively easy, you can be as draconian as you like; opening up when we have told
______2578 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
3060 everyone to stay indoors and not touch each other, is hard and it makes people anxious and I can understand that. But we are talking here about risk. When we started off on this journey over a year ago, we saw pictures of hospitals overflowing, doctors and nurses dying, patients dying in corridors. That was the reality. We now know that the risk of death in the adult population is 0.1% and the risk of death amongst children is one in a 3065 million. Public Health England’s latest data – and this is looking at the Delta variant – shows that two doses of Pfizer is 96% effective at stopping you going into hospital and two doses of AstraZeneca is 92%. This is our way out of the last year. Vaccination has changed things. I completely understand those Hon. Members who have talked about the ethics of vaccination and discrimination, and we have heard lots of other words. What we are doing is taking a step 3070 forward and we are used to making serious policy decisions in this Court. This is one of those, but it is a temporary decision. The Hon. Member for Glenfaba and Peel, Mr Harmer, has already said the aim is to come back in July with another step, so this is a temporary measure. I would advocate that what we are doing in terms of using vaccination as a way is actually making things easier for people rather than discriminating against the others. There is a fine difference there. We could 3075 call it a fast track; if you are going through an airport does that discriminate against the people who do not use it? I doubt it. I doubt anyone would say that. Using the vaccination helps people on the Island, but also opens up our visitor economy in the way we could not do otherwise. The Hon. Member for Ramsey, Mr Hooper, I am very grateful for his forensic analysis of the Regulations, and he makes some very good points that obviously officers will take up, but he was 3080 talking about why are we discriminating between residents and non-residents. Again, in terms of risk, it is the number of people coming across at any one time, and we are in that fine balance now where we are starting to open the tap gently at a time when there is uncertainty across. The Chief Minister, one or two months ago, said that on the 28th we would aim to open the borders up. That was our ambition and I think that was all of our ambitions, until the Delta variant 3085 came across and suddenly there is that uncertainty. So we need to deal with that effectively. Lots of people have talked also about children and obviously, in my capacity as Minister for Education, Sport and Culture, I am desperate to keep the schools open and the schools safe until the end of term. Absolutely. However, we cannot wait for all children to be vaccinated to start opening up. All children may not be vaccinated. The JCVI are currently looking at the balance 3090 between risks and benefits of vaccination. They are looking at the roll-out of vaccination in young people in America to see whether there are any very rare side effects which suddenly cause an issue. So I do not think we can depend on vaccinations being available for all children 12 and upwards. That is a much wider discussion about risk versus benefit. But what we can say definitely is, with the school outbreak plans we have, with the track and trace system that we have, with 3095 now the use of lateral flow tests as an option that we have, we can try to make things as safe as possible in the next couple of weeks while schools are still open. So with that, Mr President, I would just like to thank Hon. Members for their contributions, but again this is a step forward on a much longer path that hopefully we can achieve in the summer of opening up completely. Please support this because the alternative is to stagnate; and that is 3100 not good for the visitor economy, but fundamentally it is not good for our residents either. Thank you.
The President: Hon. Member for Douglas East, Mrs Barber.
3105 Mrs Barber: Thank you, Mr President. I am very grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the workshops on the changes presented. I think that has been a really positive piece actually (A Member: Hear, hear.) and certainly felt that there was a real willingness to listen to everything that people said. But that said, we also have to recognise we are a group of 35 people and we all have different views, and 3110 we have different reasons for those views; (A Member: Hear, hear.) and ultimately, despite that more collegiate approach, we are here with the final output that has come from the Council of ______2579 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Ministers, and I am grateful to them for what they have presented, but I think it is only right that people are airing their various concerns, some of which are more pressing than others. I am certainly exceptionally glad that the Republic of Ireland is now being included in the rules 3115 for the Common Travel Area. It makes eminent sense to me, given the shared flights with Northern Ireland, but it also means we are not excluding a large part of our community who have been disadvantaged by that rule for a short period of time. (A Member: Hear, hear.) My first concern is that we are making significant changes with less than 24 hours’ opportunity to review the draft regulations. For me, this is never ideal and some of the very important 3120 discussions around the rules for children specifically, I believe will need additional exploration. I would certainly urge the Council of Ministers not to wait the whole two weeks prior to doing this and, if necessary, to actually reconvene this Hon. Court to come back with amendments, because I think we would all be willing to look at that. I think we recognise we have to make progress, we have to be moving forward in this regard, but I would certainly encourage an additional piece of 3125 work, to go away and look at those points that have already been raised by other Hon. Members – and I am not going to repeat now, but there are really valid points that have been raised in this Court today. My other concern remains that we still have individuals in the groups 1 to 9 who are recognised as at-risk groups who are not doubly vaccinated with that minimum two weeks’ lock-in. Certainly 3130 some people I am talking to in these categories are scared. They want to know what mitigation measures are in place to protect them. The group 6 cohort, so the age 16 to 64 with underlying health conditions that put them at greater risk, has 7,094 people who have received their first dose; however, only 4,345 have had their second dose to date. That leaves 2,541 who have got their doses scheduled in for the next few weeks. Those people, I would argue, some of them are 3135 scared and we are absolutely right as a Court to understand how that feels for them. Mr President, my commentary around the management of COVID has often been more liberal than the Government position, so I find on this occasion I am actually possibly the other way round; there has been a slight flip of the switch, but it is more a word of caution than it is a stand- out challenge against what is actually being done because I support the principles in general here. 3140 I certainly stood in this Hon. Court and challenged the position over both pets and household waste being collected from flats and HMOs. For me, the rules seemed crazy at the time, and we were told the risk of COVID being transmitted on a bin bag or a dog lead was so significant we just could not risk this. Yet we are now saying that someone who is doubly vaccinated presents such a low risk in regard to transmission that we are not concerned if they are positive, potentially, or 3145 have been in contact with someone who is positive or who lives with someone who is positive. This is despite the fact that they could facilitate the surface transmission that we were told was so significant. For me, these are questions that we are right to ask. So I would like an exploration around further consideration of surveillance vaccination of those people who are coming into the Island who have had the double vaccination plus two weeks, 3150 either the presentation of certificates for those people coming to the Island from off Island or whether that be that we look at testing people on arrival. But I think that we need to have an understanding of how this is actually working within the context of our Island community, but also to give that confidence to those people who are going to be scared and, as I say, I understand how they feel. 3155 For me, while we have a publicly declared position of mitigation, in reality we are simply back to normal and that has been mentioned before, as Mr Speaker outlined. Very few wear masks, social distancing appears to be a thing of the past and ventilation is only in place and effective in a small number of places that I have certainly visited. So for me, I understand absolutely that there is this pressure for us to move forward. I think it 3160 has been talked about before about people who are unvaccinated, and that taking children out of the equation – because there is a very clear reason why that has not happened and there is work ongoing in that sphere – what there is is some people who have made a choice not to be vaccinated, and that is a choice. If we were saying those people could not travel I would be ______2580 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
standing here and arguing absolutely for their liberty, but we are saying they can travel but there 3165 are restrictions on them, and I am comfortable with that position. I think that ultimately we have to say that if people are not vaccinated there will be additional requirements on them to protect the rest of the population, and I understand that. And this is not unprecedented. I have certainly got a yellow fever passport. I have got my little book at home all signed and stamped that will last me for a few years; I might have to get another one at some point if we can then travel again. 3170 I think what I would like to know, though, and it is really important, is how we are going to record those people who cannot be vaccinated – not those people who have chosen not to be vaccinated, but those people who truly cannot be vaccinated – and the route that they will fall into and how that will be managed and how they will be given assurance that they will not be called out or challenged at the ports, but they will have a clear proof that they cannot be 3175 vaccinated. Just as we had evidence and ways for people to demonstrate they could not wear masks. I think it is really important we recognise that sector of our population. So while there is an incredible pressure on our tourism and hospitality industries that is absolutely unquestioned by me, and that it is absolutely right that we are aiming to that full reopening, and I support fully the movement towards that position, I think what is really important 3180 is we protect the tourist industry. But, ironically, the very industry we seek to support is the industry most at risk if we do not get mitigation measures right. So I would call on the Chief Minister and CoMin to really reiterate those measures to encourage people to take those personal responsibilities and to make sure that those mitigation measures are in place; because at the minute it seems like, rather than going from elimination to mitigation, we may have been going 3185 from elimination to laissez-faire, and I am not sure that is quite where we wanted to be. So that would be my word of warning. I think we are on the right route, we are taking the right precautions, but there is more that we can take, and it is on all of us to make sure we are communicating that message both to people in our constituencies, but people visiting this Island that ultimately we all want to protect and keep safe. 3190 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member of Council, Mr Mercer.
Mr Mercer: Thank you, Mr President. I have just got two points to make, really. 3195 Thank you to my hon. colleague in Council, Mrs Lord-Brennan, for raising the question of testing. I just want to point out that there is actually a finite limit to the number of visitors that we can test per day so depending on the success, or otherwise, that may well be a limiting factor for how many people we can let in. Minister Ashford also raised the subject of risk mitigation. The EAG was asked about the 3200 mitigation of risk and in their report dated 9th June they made six recommendations on this subject. So I think it would be good if, in the Chief Minister’s reply, he could highlight which of those recommendations are being taken up. (A Member: Hear, hear.) Thank you, Mr President.
3205 The President: Hon. Member for Douglas East, Mr Robertshaw.
Mr Robertshaw: Thank you, Mr President. As the debate has gone on, the opportunity to say new things is limited, therefore the amount left for me to say is almost minuscule. But there seems to be a different tone in the Court today 3210 compared to the discussions we had upstairs. When we had the discussion upstairs it was very clear that Hon. Members understood that the sense there was attached to the concept of two vaccinations plus two weeks, was a sensible step forward that we needed to take. Today, there seems a sense of fear in the Court, and I suppose that is inevitable because that has washed in from the general public. But we need to be sure, as a democratic parliament, that one of our 3215 fundamental duties is to protect rights and freedoms – freedom of movement – and we chose to ______2581 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
withdraw those for very good reason, because the degree of risk associated with continuing to allow that, created deep concern; and, yes, death. It was always inevitable that finding our way out of this was going to be incredibly difficult, but I commend the Council of Ministers for taking these first steps, these first careful steps, which 3220 apply to both those coming to the Isle of Man and leaving, and those leaving the Isle of Man and coming. There is no difference. I am disappointed by this idea that there is discrimination. All this parliament is trying to do is to return progressively everyone to the freedoms and liberties which we treasure. (Mr Quine: Hear, hear.) And it will not happen in a big bang way, it will happen in a steady and progressive way, which is what we are seeing now. 3225 I have a relation who cannot get vaccinated. That relation would not turn round to me and say, ‘You are discriminating against me because I am not in a position to be able to travel at this time.’ Well, they can travel, but they cannot come back, because they are creating a risk for themselves if they go away and a risk to others when they come back. So there is no discrimination here, there is a progressive opening taking place. All we have to pray for, I think, is that as we move into next 3230 winter, a new variant which is significantly worse again than the Delta variant that we are now concerned about does not appear. We have to try and grasp our freedoms when we can, where the degree of risk is recognised as being permissible. There has been a great deal of discussion about children, but the big issue about children occurs later on during the summer holidays, both for children leaving the Island and for children 3235 coming to the Isle of Man. And the opening up for the visitor side is very much focused on the fact that they tend to be more elderly at the present time, and they will be double vaccinated, and far more than perhaps two weeks ago that that took place. So we have to be sure that those coming in have had a double vaccination, and we have to all hope that no new variants come. But, meanwhile, let’s take our liberties and freedoms where we can, where the risk is acceptable. 3240 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Poole-Wilson.
Mrs Poole-Wilson: Thank you, Mr President. 3245 Just a couple of points from me as well, actually. I think my main point really builds on the point the Hon. Member for Douglas East, Mr Robertshaw, has made, which is that whilst this is not easy – and I think others have talked about how difficult these decisions are – my view is that this is the appropriate step to take at this point, based on the data that we have. I think to this point, and different Hon. Members have termed it in different ways, but the word ‘discrimination’ has 3250 been used. I think we should be very clear, Hon. Members, about the difference between ‘a step along the way’ and ‘an end policy point’. This is very much a step along the way. (A Member: Hear, hear.) It is not an end policy point. I think there are a whole raft of considerations when it comes to an area like discrimination, which are absolutely vital to weigh in the balance when you are formulating an end policy point, 3255 which will be the steady state. Hon. Members, we are not there; absolutely not there. This is a transitional step along the way and what it will mean for a period, hopefully a short period, is that some people are in a position at that point to travel in a different way to others. We all recognise that, but I think Mr Robertshaw has put it very well that faced with the alternative, which is to reduce all freedom for everyone more, that is probably not a palatable position for us to be in 3260 either. So bearing in mind it is a transitional step and there are sensible mitigations that go around it, I think this is the appropriate step along the way. As we move forward, before we make any final decisions I think about things like vaccination status, travel, movement freedoms, that is when it becomes absolutely significant to make sure there is a proper weighing in the balance of the 3265 impact for all parts of society. But that is not where we are. I think the only other thing I would like to add is that others have spoken, in particular Mr Hooper, Hon. Member for Ramsey, about some of the detail in these Regulations, particularly ______2582 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
regulation 5B. I think he made some absolutely spot-on points. It is important – and we have time before these Regulations actually become meaningful, in terms of the 28th – that these are looked 3270 at. I agree with the Hon. Member for Douglas East, Mrs Barber, I am sure Hon. Members would be more than happy to reconvene to make sure that the Regulations do work as well as they can, and so I would endorse that revisit, tweak, make sure it works well, before they kick in. I think the wider point of looking at how we manage this ongoing transition through the summer is definitely something worthy of consideration. Although I do not expect the Chief 3275 Minister would be able to answer that today, of course not, I think that is something that we probably want some forward planning and consideration of how that can be managed as we move forward. Thank you, Mr President.
3280 The President: Hon. Member for Douglas Central, Mrs Corlett.
Mrs Corlett: Thank you, Mr President. I thought that I would very much be in the minority in this Hon. Court today in that I am nervous about the changes being proposed. But it is obvious, listening to other Members, that I am not 3285 alone in my concerns. The vaccination programme and the border framework are now out of sync. That was always going to happen as we moved forward. The vaccination programme is set, as it is reliant on supply and delivery dates. The border framework is, as intended, moveable, in response to the ability to vaccinate, the prevalence of the virus and our ability to mitigate risk. The difficulties this poses are certainly not insurmountable, as long as we can mitigate the risk. 3290 I understand the pressures and expectations, and they have to be balanced. I am not suggesting that we do not move forward. Of course we must proceed, but proceed with caution. The vaccination is the game changer, but a proportion of our own population has yet to be fully vaccinated. Those who have been fully vaccinated are as safe as possible, but is the Chief Minister confident that we are not putting those Island residents who are waiting for vaccinations, and our 3295 children and young people, at unjustifiable increased risk? I would feel much more comfortable if the proposal had been to lift border restrictions for the groups of people allowed to travel or return to the Island now for a short time, before expanding to all who have been vaccinated twice plus two weeks, just to allow us to monitor the UK situation for just a little longer. I would have also been more confident in the proposals before us today if some testing was 3300 retained for arrivals into and returns to the Island. We talk about living with COVID. The UK are living with COVID. Restrictions apply in the UK – masks, social distancing, limiting on events. We are essentially living without COVID. We are living normally and there will be considerable concern that the balance of risk is not weighted in favour of the Manx residents. I have to admit that I do share that concern, because the mitigation message is just not out 3305 there. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) I need to be convinced that this is the right move and I have to honestly say I am not there yet. Perhaps the Chief Minister, in his response, can take me and many concerned Manx residents with him. Thank you, Mr President.
3310 The President: Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Maska.
Mrs Maska: Thank you, Mr President. I will try and be brief because there have been some excellent matters and responses. I do thank the Council of Ministers for involving us in workshops and I can see that what we 3315 are looking at today is a composite of the discussions there, and I think that has been very helpful. I think one of the most important things as well is that we try and achieve a balance for all our community. It is not about any pockets of our community, it is across the whole piece and that is what makes these decisions today even more important.
______2583 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
I absolutely understand the nervousness within our community expressed by both young and 3320 old, and especially when we consider some of the high increases in the Delta levels in the north- west region. When I look at the advice given by Prof. Andrew Heywood, who advises SAGE, one of his matters of advice is that the 2 + 2 substantially makes the result less bad. I am not trying to be gloomy, but this is realism. There is always going to be a risk, as has been said. We have been advised by the Director of Public Health that there is a risk. We are never going to be completely 3325 safe. So the decision today is: are we making that step forward, having made the right risk assessment? I do think we are. We cannot continue to keep ourselves locked up if we are wanting to go forward and inject energy back into our Island community. One of the important things as well, as the Hon. Member for Ramsey, Mr Hooper, pointed out, is that the Regulations – and I 3330 think they will be approved today, listening to the tenor of the debate – it is important to remember that these might continue through to October, and there will be no Tynwald in this intervening period. So it is really important that we actually can put something in place that we can work with and that does give protection, but have as much freedom as we are able. Finally, Mr President, I think clear messaging is so important, and communication. Because in 3335 the briefing it was – although we all understand now – to start with 2 + 2, people were saying, ‘Well, what is 2 + 2?’ Okay, it has got to be out there signposted in such a major way that people do understand the 2 + 2 is two weeks since your second vaccination. You cannot get your second vaccine and go out just as free as a bird. It has got to be that the public can understand that and they have that responsibility themselves. 3340 So, as we go forward, Mr President, I will be supporting the Regulations that come before us today, but I also think that careful watching and monitoring of the data that is collected at our borders and those within our community will also be very important. Thank you, Mr President
3345 The President: Hon. Member for Ayre and Michael, Mr Baker.
Mr Baker: Thank you very much, Mr President. To keep it really brief, just responding to something that the Member of Council, Mrs Maska has said. There is risk in acting, but equally the risk that we are not seeing is the risk in not acting. 3350 What we are doing here is just changing the dial. We are just rebalancing things a little bit. We are taking a little bit more risk on the COVID front, but we are opening up, we are easing up, we are making it better from a social point of view, from a resident’s point of view, from other healthcare matters, from a mental health point of view, from a relationship point of view, from a well-being point of view. 3355 The easy thing would be not to act here, because when you do not act you do not get criticised, generally. It is when you do act and people go, ‘Oh, you did this and it went wrong.’ The Council of Ministers and this Hon. Court is acting, and it is consciously changing the balance here. It is right to do so. It is right to move forward. We know where we have been, we know where we are now and we know we cannot stay there. We have to move forward. This is very considered. It is very 3360 balanced and I commend it to this Hon. Court.
A Member: Hear, hear.
The President: I call on the Chief Minister to reply. 3365 The Chief Minister: Thank you, Mr President. I have got copious amounts of notes (Laughter) but I am not going to shorten because I think, given the severity of the decision we are making, I am going to try and do my best to respond to you all individually. You might not like what you hear …
______2584 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
3370 So if I can start with Mr Speaker, who gamely went first. I thanked you for supporting the first set, and we can park that, can we? I do understand the concerns. I understand all of your concerns. Mrs Corlett gave a good speech. I am concerned at what we are doing. Do not think this is a definite success that you are voting for here. We are taking an educated way forward on this. We have tried to strike the correct balance on this one and I do appreciate, ideally, we would all like 3375 more time to consider fully any changes. The situation evolves rapidly as we have been working on this, and I have said in my speech in the last few days alone that other jurisdictions have had to adapt and so must we. We cannot aim for a date and aim to take on board real-time information and still have time to consider all aspects. It is absolutely fast moving. 3380 As to the exit framework, that did indicate where we thought we might be, but they were just indicators. We said we would need to take on board a wide range of factors. The system is complex and we have to strike the right balance. I do appreciate his honesty that he is not fully convinced, and hope that discussions have helped show the variety of the views, that we have tried to find the right balance. 3385 I think he did say: what are our mitigations? What are we doing? If I could just reassure him that the outbreak plan has been refreshed and all of our public services have been asked to ensure we are ready for cases. The Hospital is a key part of this and again has been briefed to be ready. Of course we do not welcome cases, but we must recognise that they are an inevitability, Hon. Members, and we need to be able to carry on with them occurring. 3390 The changes to the self-isolation requirements for fully vaccinated close contacts is part of that progression. Today, over 57% of the UK adult population are fully vaccinated and would be eligible to travel, and this number is only going to increase over time. So for now, the next few weeks from 28th, we have got to strike a balance. I think he also touched on the Emergency Advisory Committee. No, sorry, that was Mr Mercer 3395 himself, who was on the Committee, so I will leave that for slightly later. But I hope that gives him some food for thought. Mr Callister, and I thank you for recognising the difficulty we have had to face and continue to face in making these hard calls. He then hit me with about seven questions, so if you just bear with me, Mr President, as I try and refer to … He said it is always good to take small steps. 3400 First of all, as to his questions on validation, we will publish these details, but basically we will have a range of digital and non-digital options. We are progressing with the UK on the NHS application, but we will accept a range of evidence and the precise details are still being finalised. Also, regarding the penalties, there are penalties for any false declaration and that will apply to the whole process. 3405 The next one: the team does understand the pressure in particularly on families who arrive with a child. Children need to be tested and they will see if they can be prioritised, but the children must be tested. Then I think he mentioned about fees: £30. We have looked at the £30 fee and I think when I had it looked into there is actually a phenomenal amount of places that do the test and … here we are, there are 396 providers. So if you choose to go to Spain on holiday and you 3410 want to come back, you have got to take a COVID test prior to leaving the country for the UK. You have got to pay for day two and day eight tests, complete a passenger locator form and you can choose the provider for the tests on the return to the United Kingdom. Out of the 396 providers only one is under £30 – £29.49. One is £30 and therefore 394 providers are more than £30. If you come from an amber country, of which Spain is one, the minimum cost someone would 3415 pay for both tests is £49.99 and the maximum is £575. So given the fact that the economy has taken a hiding with COVID, I do not think our fee of £30 is too cheap. I think Guernsey beat us at £25, but I do not think we are being unreasonable. We have to balance the cost to the Treasury here, Mr President. It cannot just be to give all our money away. We have got to try and be reasonable. We do not want to take advantage of people and our £30 fee is certainly less than the 3420 cost of what it would be. But we do understand the pressure and, as I say, we will prioritise children. ______2585 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
As to the scenarios, there is quite a bit of complexity here and perhaps we could pick them up offline with the team. But in summary, yes, for now, if adults are not fully vaccinated then they cannot travel – just for now – but therefore they cannot bring their children, so that is an 3425 immaterial one. I think he gave an example of a family with five, six and seven tested. All those children would have to be tested and the family would have to isolate, but we would obviously do our best to make them a priority. Moving on to Mr Peake. Can I thank him for his kind words, and I welcomed him on the engagement with Hon. Members. I do welcome that process and his comments on the clarity on 3430 the simple proposition for those who are fully vaccinated. So thank you very much. Moving on to Mr Shimmins, my colleague for Middle. Again, thank you very much for your support, and I welcome your comments that this approach is increasingly being adopted across Europe and further afield, which I have tried to show. Ireland: I was speaking to the Taoiseach last week and they are introducing COVID 2 + 2, effectively; Jersey, Guernsey and other countries are 3435 demanding that you are tested before you even set foot, and then you have got to be tested when you come back. I have got a constituent trying to go to France to see their children. They have got to prove that they have had tests before they can set foot in that country. When I went to the conference I was at, I had to have a test before I was allowed to go into that conference. So this is becoming the norm, Hon. Members. Whether members of the public like it or not, 3440 this is the norm that we will be living for some time – and I sincerely hope not. I think the Hon. Member of Council clearly clarified it is not the end result, it is as we go along. It was a very valid point which I will touch on when we come to Mrs Poole-Wilson. As to children, it was a topic that exercised the Council of Ministers and it exercised Tynwald Members with differing views. I can clearly state Council will be looking at this again well ahead 3445 of the school term. However, we did bring this rule in. I was surprised by the comments of another Hon. Member because by saying that children under five do not have to be tested, but the rest do, that means in the next three or four weeks when our children are still at school any child coming to the Island has to be tested before they can then go to school. So surely that has to be support, Mr President, for our young people who are still at school and therefore large numbers 3450 of young people all together. If we have insisted that if you are five and over you have to be tested, surely that gives a defence mechanism, for a period, to all of our schoolchildren. Then obviously as we go forward, hopefully, I say at the next Tynwald, Mr President, we can then change that. But that was brought in to protect our young people who are living on the Island. I hope Hon. Members can see why we have done this. 3455 Mr Quine: he has got polar-opposite views of his constituents, and he mentioned some, and I thought, I have had those emails too. He mentioned discrimination, which to be fair we have discussed and I think clarified fairly well on that. More data: I have mentioned Spain, Ireland, Jersey and Guernsey. We cannot please everyone and, as I said in my opening speech, this is not straightforward. This is not easy. It is one of our 3460 toughest decisions we will have made yet, but this is a step, I think, in the right direction. We will revisit it. We will have another workshop with yourselves when we make changes for next Tynwald so that we can do it together. We are never going to be 100% happy with this because we are all nervous. I know I am nervous about it. Moving on to my hon. colleague, Ms Edge, Member for Onchan. I think she mentioned 3465 statistics, and requested on whether travellers tested positive on day six … I will ask the team to look at that and circulate that information online. I do not have that. I do appreciate that concern regarding the certificates was a concern about fraud and, again, we need to find a balance, one of ensuring pragmatism and simplicity for the whole arrival process and one that is rigorous enough to ensure that only those eligible to apply … We will have 3470 increased border activity and visibility and we will see increased Police and Customs activity. As to the vaccination estimates, I do not have all the 60 years and over to hand, but by the first week in July we expect all of the phase 1 priority groups to have had their second dose, those that
______2586 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
have agreed to have it, that is, and that goes down to 50 years and also 16 years upwards with underlying health conditions. They will all have had their second dose by the first week in July. 3475 Ms Edge, again, on indicators and the exit strategy. They were just indicators. The situation has changed and so must our plans. Equally, as certain indicators come down, our vaccination levels go up and that counterbalances when it comes to our concerns. Moving on to the Hon. Member of Council. Oh, yes, sorry, Ms Edge had a thing about no end dates, but we have never had any dates. Once you have come over and you have been tested or 3480 you are you clear, then that is it. If people want to stay longer and spend their money in the economy, I am more than happy for that as long as there is as low a risk as possible. We have always said, all the way through, once you have gone through those various tests then it is fine for you to stay. You have gone through that period of problems of infecting the Island once you have had the tests on day one and day six, so if they want to stay I do not see any point in giving an end 3485 date for when they must leave the Island. If you want to come on holiday and you fall in love with our beautiful Island, which would not be surprising, and then you have to buy a house, well, stay and settle down. (Interjection by Ms Edge) Moving on to the Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Lord Brennan, why not do testing on all coming in, and what provisions are there in place for spikes in cases, and if negative on day one possibly 3490 day six in school what will happen, and are we revisiting exit strategy level of cases? Well, we are constantly looking at everything, I suppose, is the answer. The amount of work that goes on behind the scenes just to get to these sorts of presentations that we give Hon. Members and then coming here, is phenomenal. I think Mrs Lord-Brennan asked for the suggestions for further testing for fully vaccinated 3495 travellers. That would seem to cut across the benefit and taking into account vaccination status as a primary mitigation referenced in April by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control that suggests testing and quarantine can be reduced for vaccinated travellers. As to the whole topic of schools, that has been a topic the Council of Ministers have come to a number of times and the proposed lateral flow testing, albeit voluntary for secondary schools, is part of our 3500 response to this. As to the number of cases that might trigger further restrictions, the important thing is it is not the number of cases but the impact it may have on hospitalisations. Increasingly, as we move forward, the ability for the Hospital to treat anyone that needs treatment is the important perspective and Manx Care have a response plan, an escalation plan. The vaccines are proving a 3505 weakening to the link between infections and hospitalisation, but we will need to keep an eye on this, as we have throughout the pandemic. I think the Health Minister, Mr Ashford, Member for Douglas North, did stand up and state that to Hon. Members. Moving on to Mr Hooper, Member for Ramsey, as to simplifying the Regulations, that indeed was a pathway forward. As we have needed to adjust our plans, they have not perhaps been 3510 simplified as much as we would have liked. As to the testing capability we are looking at, we have the capacity for around 800 tests per day, but also escalation plans for swabbing, for pathology and for resulting, but crucially we also have the capacity for surge testing should that be needed. So it is just getting that balance right. It is a very valid point. If we suddenly get 10,000 people rack up on day one, we are going to have a problem, but I cannot see that happening. It is going to be 3515 a gradual increase and, as those people increase, the percentage of people with 2 + 2 is going to increase anyway. So it is 57% of the UK population would not need a test anyway, and that is going to increase. Mr Hooper made an important point on contingency planning for August and beyond; and another reason why I fully expect, as I have said before, to reassure Hon. Members that we will 3520 be back in July Tynwald with further adjustments, and we will continue to monitor and work towards these, taking on views as always from a wide range of people. Again, Mr Hooper discussed, and I think Mr Mercer, as to the advice from the Emergency Advisory Group. They did publish an advice note over the weekend and they have considered various aspects of the current situation and have suggested caution. Council heard this and that ______2587 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
3525 was in keeping with Tynwald Members’ comments on not proceeding without mitigations in place, and that was why mitigations have been put in place. Mr Hooper, as to the language on ‘must’ testing for children who travel with vaccinated adults: I do understand that there is a choice to isolate as an alternative and the policy intent is certainly to give that choice. Practically speaking of course we would expect very few, if any, visitors want 3530 to travel to the Island and want to put their child into 21 days’ isolation as an alternative, it does not seem a particularly attractive choice – although that depends on your children, I suppose! (Laughter) Mr Hooper, as to the technicality of 5B and how to charge for children: I welcome his comments and the Regulations have been drafted in keeping with the defaults applied elsewhere. 3535 A child who becomes positive will be treated the same as any other resident or indeed individual who tests positive, and contact tracing have the powers to ensure that this is dealt with consistently. I am more than happy to ask officers, together with the Attorney General’s Chambers, to look into some of the specific concerns and if we need to make any aspects clearer then we can of course look at that in the next version. 3540 I thank him for his support generally and for raising that very important issue on 5B. We have not got everything right but we will commit to take on board his comments and make sure we have a good way going forward. If I can move on to Mr Ashford, I thank him again for drawing attention to the diverse range of views and the need for balance. This is, of course, what we have tried to do and find. He also draws 3545 an important point on the absolute numbers being imported and, as mentioned in the briefing, there are a fraction of the peak; but again it is hospitalisation which is the key, and serious illness and death. The vaccine has proven to significantly impact on these risks, and I thank him for confirming the position under Manx Care’s outbreak. I would also point out that he is famous for coming up with his ‘baby steps’ and this is a step forward. It is just one step, it was not the big leap 3550 that we all agreed in our programme we would make on the 28th, because of our concerns, Hon. Members, with the Delta variant. That is important to point out, that we open our Island as best we can. Moving on to my colleague, Mrs Caine, Member for Garff, who will welcome change, it is seen as discriminatory about some, but I think we have covered that in great detail. Younger visitors, 3555 pre-travel tests, look at going ahead, and these are the sorts of things … Yes, we can look at whether people in the next wave, if you have a test before you come into the Island, like I had to when I went to Belfast, that may well be a way forward. We will certainly look at all these things. I think, having a public consultation on changes, this is so fast-flowing, as much as I would like to give the responsibility to the public – so I do not have to make a tough decision – we, as Tynwald 3560 Members have to make these tough decisions in what is a very fast-moving and flowing situation. I then move on to Mrs Christian, Member for Douglas South, and she was in support of going forward; but then I felt she gave a speech that if it all went wrong it was my fault! (Laughter) ‘I told you so’ … And then went into the Nuremberg Code. I think we have covered all that element of the discrimination against people. I hope the Hon. Member is happy with that. 3565 The COVID certification is being developed in the UK. In fact I spent a long time at the British- Irish Council pushing for the Isle of Man to be part of that, because we had hit a wall on that, and I am glad to say that as a result of my conversation with a senior government minister, hopefully, we have moved it forward now for the Isle of Man. But it was a significant concern for me last week. 3570 The Council of Ministers are acutely aware of the concerns from residents and, should cases emerge, the effect that it will have on them. They are also concerned as to the hidden impact, should we not move forward. We have all had a talk today about families who need support behind the scenes and the domestic abuse and increased alcoholism. We have already said that there are problems out there in the community, Mr President, that have not shown themselves – 3575 increased referrals on mental health, long COVID. There are an awful lot of problems that if we do not move and we just sit back … And do not get me wrong, I am quite a cautious person here, but ______2588 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
if we do not move forward we could be enabling more problems down the line than we are solving by staying as Brigadoon at the moment. Regarding Mrs Christian, thank you for your comments on the benefit of face coverings and 3580 small measures generally for those who are travelling. Personal choice is important and that includes face coverings, but I am sure our communications will increasingly focus on these aspects. But I have to say, having had to wear a face mask, I have had to give up to give this speech, because the sweat is pouring off me and my glasses are steaming up and I cannot see a thing I am doing. So anyone coming on holiday to the Isle of Man and having to wear a face mask for two weeks … 3585 Would you do it? (Two Members: Yes.) I do not think we would get many visitors coming (A Member: We would.) if they had to wear it permanently, but that is just maybe –
Mrs Christian: When you are outside in public, yes, they would.
3590 The Chief Minister: Well, you are the only one saying that, I can see Mr Robertshaw disagreeing with you … (Interjection from Mr Robertshaw)
Mrs Christian: Well, he can disagree. (Laughter)
3595 The Chief Minister: But I get there was fraud re passports too, which is a recurring theme from other Members. So I look forward to her support, but I would ask if you do not really agree with it, do not vote in favour of it. Do not give me a vote and then say it was my fault if it goes wrong, because there will be problems. What we are announcing will lead to COVID cases on the Isle of Man. Let’s not hide this, Hon. Members, there will be problems. But there will be more problems, 3600 I think, if we do not go ahead and make these changes. We are putting in mitigations to reduce the risk. We cannot take away the risk and if anyone thinks … I am not selling these changes as taking away the risk, I am reducing … We, as Tynwald, are putting in place mitigations to reduce the risks to enable a step forward for the Island, and it is that balance of whether we do that or we stay locked up for another month. That is what I think 3605 we have all got to accept. There is no easy topic, there is no easy answer here, Hon. Members. I move on to Mr Thomas, who had quite a lengthy speech, and I am just trying to go through my notes and compare them. So as to the restrictions on health and care settings, the words have not changed. There are processes in these settings to enable pragmatism. On the NHS app, discussions are advanced with NHS England for their app, and this is the app which will be 3610 dominant in international travel. That is the app that we have been working towards. It hit a wall last week and hopefully it is now unlocked again and moving forward. If you can imagine, if we tried to do our own – which Jersey and Guernsey have to do because they do not have a reciprocal health agreement with the UK – racking up to somewhere foreign such as Azerbaijan or something with an Isle of Man piece of paper that says, ‘I have had the 3615 COVID two tests’ you are going to struggle to get that recognised, I would suggest. So we need to work and ensure that ours is recognised, and I sincerely hope that we can get it through the NHSX app that they are doing. Mr Thomas, as to more questions around information, GDPR and finer details on this process, and I am happy to commit to briefing Hon. Members on this topic when the situation is finalised. 3620 I do understand the importance of considering our younger people and ensuring they are represented throughout all of these difficult times. I think he was trying to say that the young people felt that they had not been fairly treated. I would put it to you that if COVID attacked young people and we had had to vaccinate them first, they would have the benefits. So we are not discriminating it is just that we know for a fact that COVID will kill our elderly first before our young 3625 people, and therefore we must give that protection first to our elderly. It has got nothing to do with being against our young people, and I would hope that the young people would get that, that if it was something that specifically hit them then of course they would be the ones who would
______2589 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
have been vaccinated first, and they would be the ones who would be able to travel before anyone else. 3630 Mr Thomas, like the previous Hon. Members, comments on clause B for children who may not wish to be tested travelling with vaccinated adults. I do think these numbers are likely to be limited, if any, and for most people travel in itself is a personal choice, normally driven by the adults choosing. I thank the Hon. Member for amplifying that it is not just an economic case, to take steps 3635 forward on reconnecting our Island. There are health, social, societal, educational and a whole wide range of factors that support the need for stepping forward cautiously and with mitigations. Finally, Mr Thomas. I thank the Hon. Member for his positive comments on working together through these tough times, and he did say he hoped that we had shared all information with him. Well, why wouldn’t we? Of course we are going to share all the information with Hon. … Why 3640 would we hold any information back and then have a workshop on how we are going to make a decision? Of course we share everything with you. It would soon get out if we did not; but why wouldn’t we? We want your ideas, we do not have exclusive rights in the Council of Ministers as to how we go forward. If I can thank Dr Allinson for clarifying on various points – it is taking a while, this summing up. 3645 He was very supportive and pointed out the risks to young people as opposed to older people. Mrs Barber, glad that Northern Ireland was included, and I thank the Hon. Member for the positive comments, and I think Mr Shimmins also alluded to that too in his summing up. But I thank the Hon. Member, Mrs Barber for the positive comments made on engagement and the welcoming of bringing Ireland into the proposals for the Common Travel Area. 3650 I do appreciate the challenge in reviewing the regulations at pace, and that of course is an outcome from having to try and provide early clarity for the likes of our visitor economy and our carriers, while also taking on board the latest real-time information, and this situation does remain complex and fast-moving. So, Council of Ministers are making a decision and then we are getting the legislation drawn up, then we are agreeing it; and then the following day, Hon. Members, we 3655 are meeting with you. So it is not as if we are thinking about it or moving on with other stuff and the information is sitting there for a week, it is fast moving and we are doing our utmost to share it with all Hon. Members. We are piloting in secondary schools and we are moving forward towards surveillance testing and waste management, and we will consider further opportunities where it is proportionate. 3660 I welcome the Hon. Member’s comments on inclusion, especially going forward, taking into account those who cannot be vaccinated. It is a challenging area and if we can improve on this for the next steps, we will. Moving on to Mr Mercer. I thank him again for his comments from the Emergency Advisory Group for their comments. They were both helpful and very timely and I do appreciate the pace 3665 at which they worked, and I would rather run through all of them. The first recommendation around communications – hands, face, space. Absolutely. We will ensure this increasingly is visible in our communications to travellers in particular. As to the use of surveillance testing in schools, we are progressing; and as to the continued emphasis on ventilation, this is an important point, so thank you all once again. 3670 That now takes me on to my good friend, Mr Robertshaw, who did comment on the fear in the Court and the change in attitudes, which I did feel was noticeable. We are all getting lobbied by people, and people are frightened. Some people do not want change; some people, we are not moving quick enough. I have had both of those. Some people refusing to have a COVID test or a vaccination, I have had that phone call today. So people are divided, people are nervous. 3675 We do have a good thing at this moment in time, but if we do not move forward, Hon. Members, the damage that we could be doing, not just to our tourism economy but all the other sectors and individuals, is significant. I thank him for his support. Moving on to Member of Council, Mrs Poole-Wilson. I thought an excellent phrase the use of the word discrimination is just ‘a step along the way not an end policy’, and I think that sums it ______2590 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
3680 up. Clearly, we do not want to end up with this but on our journey to open up we have to do these sorts of steps; and again commented on the detail regarding 5B which, as I have said, we are more than happy to discuss with any Hon. Member who has a view and wants to be reassured that we have got it right. Moving on to Mrs Corlett. Council of Ministers does recognise the concerns that exist in this 3685 Hon. Court and more generally of the position in the UK in particular. Vaccination is indeed the game-changer and I cannot give any guarantees that there are not increased risks from these changes. There are of course increased risks as a result of these. It is the balance of doing nothing or taking a step forward, and the damage if we do not do something as compared to the perceived protection, and maybe the protection while we get a few more thousand second jabs in arms. But 3690 we do have a very high – I think we have got 60,000 first jabs done and 40,000 second jabs done. So that is quite a lot of the population who have been protected. Moving on to my – oh, the last page! I have made a note here: ‘She is nervous about the changes’ – Mrs Corlett – and I think we all are. I do not think anyone thinks this is a dead certainty, but we proceed, and we must proceed with caution. 3695 I am coming to the end now … Mrs Maska, she understands the nervousness in the community. I think we all do, but we cannot continue to be locked up. We cannot be Brigadoon forever. Clear messaging is the key, which I think Mr Mercer through his membership, along with Mr Cregeen, on the Advisory Committee, that is the feedback we get and, yes, we must get as clear messaging as possible. 3700 And last, but not least, Mr Baker: there is a risk in acting and there is a risk in not acting; and there are hidden problems that will start to show that will be major issues on this Island. At the end of the day, it is up to Hon. Members. Please do not support this if you think you want a way forward that is going to give you guaranteed success – no cases on the Isle of Man and no problems. There is a risk in doing nothing, there is a risk in doing something, and I hope that 3705 with the information we have given, that we have shared and the mitigations we have put in place, that Hon. Members can give this the support I think it deserves. Thank you, I beg to move.
The President: Hon. Members, we turn now to the vote. 3710 I put to the Court Item 3 on the Supplementary Order Paper that the (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.14) Regulations be approved. Those in favour, say aye; against, no.
A division was called for and electronic voting resulted as follows:
In the Keys – Ayes 23, Noes 1
FOR AGAINST Dr Allinson Mrs Corlett Mr Ashford Mr Baker Mrs Barber Mr Boot Mrs Caine Mr Callister Mr Cannan Mrs Christian Mr Cregeen Ms Edge Mr Harmer Mr Hooper Mr Moorhouse Mr Peake Mr Perkins Mr Quayle
______2591 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mr Quine Mr Robertshaw Mr Shimmins Mr Skelly Mr Speaker Mr Thomas
The Speaker: Mr President, the Continuation Regulations, 23 votes for, 1 against.
In the Council – Ayes 8, Noes 0
FOR AGAINST Mr Greenhill None Mr Henderson The Lord Bishop Mrs Lord-Brennan Mrs Maska Mr Mercer Mrs Poole-Wilson Mrs Sharpe
The President: And in the Council 8 for, none against. That motion carries. I put to the Court that the (Coronavirus) (Amendment) (No.15) Regulations be approved. Those 3715 in favour, say aye; against, no.
A division was called for and electronic voting resulted as follows:
In the Keys – Ayes 20, Noes 4
FOR AGAINST Dr Allinson Mrs Christian Mr Ashford Mrs Corlett Mr Baker Ms Edge Mrs Barber Mr Speaker Mr Boot Mrs Caine Mr Callister Mr Cannan Mr Cregeen Mr Harmer Mr Hooper Mr Moorhouse Mr Peake Mr Perkins Mr Quayle Mr Quine Mr Robertshaw Mr Shimmins Mr Skelly Mr Thomas
The Speaker: Mr President, 20 votes for, 4 against.
In the Council – Ayes 8, Noes 0
FOR AGAINST Mr Greenhill None Mr Henderson The Lord Bishop
______2592 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mrs Lord-Brennan Mrs Maska Mr Mercer Mrs Poole-Wilson Mrs Sharpe
The President: And in the Council 8 for, none against. That motion therefore carries. Thank you, Hon. Members, that completes the Supplementary Order Paper. I think now would be an appropriate time to take a break. (A Member: Hear, hear.) (Laughter) Then we resume the 3720 battle at 20 minutes to six.
The Court adjourned at 5.14 p.m. and resumed its sitting at 5.42 p.m.
Procedural – Order of remaining business
The President: Hon. Members, we move on to Item 34. However, the Minister for Policy and Reform has asked that Items 34 and 35 be moved and debated together. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) and be grouped for debate after Item 39, as the General Debate sets the context and this 3725 would prevent repetition. (Laughter and interjections) (A Member: And deviation!) (A Member: Agreed!) One lives in hope! With the Court’s consent then, Item 39 General Debate will be moved first. (Members: Agreed.) Thank you, and having agreed that, just to say that amendments will be able to be moved to the two motions as usual as if they formed one composite motion. Members would only speak 3730 once to the main motions and then to any amendments moved, as is the practice, having already spoken in debate, Members would not then be able to move or second amendments. Mr Moorhouse’s motion, Item 37, is also relevant to the General Debate and that will be taken separately after Mr Thomas’s motions. So is the Court content with that arrangement? (Members: Agreed.) Thank you very much.
Main Order Paper
39. Single Legal Entity and New Public Service – General Debate
The Hon. Member for Glenfaba and Peel (Mr Harmer) (Minister for Policy and Reform) to move a General Debate on Single Legal Entity and New Public Service.
[GD No 2020/0074] and [GD No 2021/0035] are relevant to this Item.
3735 The President: I call on the Minister for Policy and Reform, Mr Harmer.
The Minister for Policy and Reform (Mr Harmer): Thank you, Mr President. Thank you very much and thank you to this Court.
______2593 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Last week in the workshop on this subject, many of us were regaled with a potted history of 3740 Government reform that started in 1959 with a report into the administrative organisation of the Isle of Man Government and today rests with two reports laid before us for this debate. Hon. Members, the subject of our scope, size and structure is as relevant now as it was back then. As the needs of our Island and the public change, so must our function, operations and services. There will be some here today who dutifully received many lengthy speeches about 3745 Government reform; for others this is their maiden reform voyage; and then we have the Hon. Member for Douglas East! (Laughter) The simple fact is it does not matter where we are personally or politically on the reform continuum; what matters is what we do next, how we see our Government evolving and how we can become the public service of the future. 3750 We have two documents before us today: one from the Single Legal Entity Sub-Committee, focusing on practical operating models and the legal status of Government; and a new public service project report that looks at how we operate in our existing structures, how we behave, how we work together and how we can become empowered to work differently. At the centre of both of these reports is the need to think more broadly about how we can 3755 progress the reform of the Isle of Man Government and our evolution into a new public service. Our new public service should be underpinned by the guiding principles of working together as a unified team that is empowered, has a shared purpose and true willingness to work differently. We cannot simply rearrange deckchairs on the Titanic or restructure or rename without thinking about what services our Island needs and how best to organise ourselves to deliver them. At this 3760 stage, I am reminded by that old adage that form follows function. If we were building a new Government we would not begin laying the foundations without a fully thought out blueprint that sets out how we will achieve our outcomes, realise our goals and communicate our purpose. I ask Hon. Members to consider what is at the cornerstone of our Government. Is it the idea of a single national Government? Is it ministerial portfolios based on national outcomes, or is it 3765 simply the delivery of efficient and effective public services? Do we focus on our form following function or how to make best of what we already have? Again, no matter where you are on the reform continuum or in which political direction you lean, the people of the Isle of Man are at the heart of everything we do. I am sure Hon. Members will agree that that is a given for us all. We have all been through unprecedented times in the last 3770 year, and I am sure I am not alone in saying that these challenging events have been a catalyst for reflection, taking stock and thinking about what happens next. We are at a crossroads as individuals and as a Government and as an Island. Now is the time to decide: do we continue to pursue the incremental reform that will empower our workforce to use their specialisms and skills to deliver the exceptional public services we already have or do we relay our foundations? 3775 With that, Mr President, I beg to move.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Thomas.
Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks. 3780 The President: Thank you. Hon. Member, Mr Robertshaw.
Mr Robertshaw: Thank you, Mr President. 3785 It is really good to have this debate and I thank the Minister for Policy and Reform very much for creating this opportunity. My first comment would be that it is not a question of should it be the single legal entity or effectively the new public service or, in Mr Thomas’s day, one public service. It is a continuum. It is a progression that we are going through and it is a question of what the pace is, what the degree is and what should come next.
______2594 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
3790 But before we start I think it would be nice to have a bit of fun at my expense, I suppose is the right way to put it. They say that politics inevitably always ends in failure; well, I am the perfect example of that! (Laughter) I have sort of gone back to front. Most people come to this House and end up in a Department and then may very well progress to being a Minister. I actually did it the other way round! Almost immediately after getting into the Keys, within a year, I became a 3795 Minister. Thereafter, it has been downhill all the way! (Laughter) But it has been a fascinating and important journey. There are other peculiarities as well. I have never been a departmental Member and never believed in it and I will talk about that shortly. Also I have another peculiar role in terms of Policy Review Committees. I think it was an accident, I do not think anybody intended that I should end 3800 up the way I did, but effectively I am on the Environment and Infrastructure Policy Review Committee, the Economic Policy Review Committee as Chair; I encouraged Tynwald to set up the Constitutional Legal and Justice Committee, which you did, and some tremendous work has now been achieved under the fine chairmanship of the Hon. Member of Council, Mrs Jane Poole- Wilson. As a consequence of those memberships, I am on the PAC and I had the privilege, on the 3805 invitation of the Treasury Minister, to be in an advisory capacity on Sir Jonathan Michael’s review of the Health Service. Then prior to that, of course, in the last House I was Minister for Social Care. So effectively, my review role covers DEFA, DoI, Department for Enterprise, Treasury, Cabinet Office, GTS, FSA, Gambling Supervision Commission, the justice and legal system and the Attorney General. So I have a different role. I have ended up with a different role, which looks across the 3810 whole landscape of Government, rather than being a specific departmental Member. Of course I hope I have mentioned the PAC – did I?
A Member: Yes, you did.
3815 Mr Robertshaw: Yes, and the PAC’s tremendous work as well. That original experience as Minister for Social Care, which was an extraordinary time – and for those who do not know, the Department of Social Care did cover children and families, housing, adult and elderly care, the Social Security system and the mental health system. I was almost a brand new Member and it was a terrible shock to me to realise – and I hate to say this, but – 3820 Government did not work. It did not work because it did not focus on the citizen, it did not put the citizen first, and it was not anybody’s intention that that would be the case, but that is actually how I saw it and that effectively started to form my mind around what on earth do we need to do to put the citizen first? Because that is our job: we got elected here, effectively, not to be departmental Members 3825 or Ministers, but we got elected to represent the people in the system of government; and yet my profound experience in Social Care was that that was not the case and I started to analyse all of that. It ended at one stage in the highly infamous big debate, which I took out … was never sort of fully understood, but it was this whole aspect of how the citizen saw the Government that was 3830 there to serve it; and in reality it was very clear very quickly that there was not a coherent recognition of the citizen on the part of the Departments. In fact, in other words, an individual person would be understood in terms of one bit of them in one Department and another bit in another Department. So it was a little bit like a Department for the leg, a Department for the arm, a Department for the head, but nobody ever knew what the person was and who they were! And 3835 isn’t that essentially what we are supposed to be about? So that was the challenge that I felt faced us all. Anyway, it became pretty clear reasonably quickly that it was a fault line in the system that the Social Care Service was separate to Health and we pushed Mental Health into the Department of Health as quickly as we could, but then thereafter we moved Social Care into Health, as you should 3840 have done; because that started to create the first step of real cohesion around the individual, but it was an early step. ______2595 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Then momentarily, in time, I was Minister of the Department of Community, Culture and Leisure, which had just been closed down. That was four weeks, I think. Then the concept of a centre came into being and I had the privilege of being the first Minister for Policy and Reform 3845 and my focus from that point on was how was it possible to put the citizen first? I spent a year doing that, and then it started to cause certain tensions in the Council of Ministers, and it was clear that we were at a particular stage in that House that was not the appropriate point for significantly addressing reform, because it was four years in and it was a very difficult House because we were dealing with a huge loss of revenue. It was £200 million a year and that was 3850 much of the focus at that time; and each Minister was significantly engaged in the issues regarding that related to their Departments. So the concept of reform at that stage was rejected and I consequently stepped back from that, because that was my role, that was what I was supposed to be doing. I had only intended to stand for Tynwald for five years and so I fully recognised the fact that at 3855 the end of the five years I would finish in politics, and I said so. But the more I thought about it the more I worried that unless we grasp this issue of what really good government looks like – really good Government looks like … and why shouldn’t we in the Isle of Man, with our population and our extraordinary parliament, achieve really good government? So I thought, well, I will give it one more go and I will come at it from another angle. It was up 3860 to the electorate and I produced the famous ‘Little Book of Government Reform’ and I went round knocking on doors and people wanted to talk to me about everything in the world, as you all know happens. I said, ‘No, no, no. Please read that manifesto and if you do not agree with it, please do not elect me,’ and I did not expect to. I remember on the night congratulating those I thought had got in and much to my wife’s disgust I was elected, which she was not too pleased about! 3865 So these five years then, effectively, for me have been focused hugely on what I think should happen, and one of the areas that I have concerned myself with is the Policy Review Committees; and for those who do not know, Policy Review Committees were new in the previous House – brand new. Mr Speaker, myself, I think Mr President, and the previous President, Clare Christian, and somebody else, I think – I cannot remember who the other one was. Was it Mr Gawne? I 3870 cannot remember. Anyway up to that stage – and I am sorry this speech is going to be quite long, but bear in mind it is nearly the last one you are going to have to suffer from me, so –
The President: Yes, but we are finishing this evening! (Laughter) 3875 Mr Robertshaw: Hopefully! So up to that stage all we had was select committees, and select committees are very important and we have seen some good select committees – for example, under the leadership of Mr Shimmins, the Member for Middle, we saw some good work there, and there are others. 3880 But they focus intensely on one particular area, produce a set of proposals, bring it to the floor of Tynwald. But the big failure was that there was no coherent continuing parliamentary mind on areas that we are all concerned with on an ongoing basis, and that essentially was the idea behind the Policy Review Committees. And in the first five years of their formation they only really focused on well established policy that had perhaps gone a little bit – or seriously – wrong. But in 3885 this House, one of the issues was to try to move it forward into being a set of committees that looked at emerging policy. Even though historically that was not supposed to be the case, that is what actually happened. But the intention was also to move away from the yah-boo politics (A Member: Hear, hear.) and make the policy review work constructive and, wherever possible, helpful – on occasion definitely critical, where necessary, but nonetheless part of the changing 3890 progression that should be taking place in this Hon. Court. I think we have made some really serious steps forward in that regard. The other extraordinary thing that has happened is the COVID crisis, which I think has helped to start bringing Government together because in the crisis that is exactly what had to happen. I ______2596 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
think that in many respects – I do not want to assume things on the part of the Minister for Policy 3895 and Reform, but I think that was the basis upon which the new public service was built. In other words, the new public service concerns itself about how people should think and act, but on the other side is the need for structural change, and I do not argue for the big bang; other jurisdictions have tried that and crashed quite badly. I would argue that we are already on a journey here towards migrating towards a single, much more unified Government than was 3900 previously the case. There are perfect examples in some of the Departments to show that. But what is a single legal entity? Let’s get down to basics. What is it? I will describe it first of all by saying if we were already a single Government would anybody have the daft idea of breaking it up into eight independent legal entities? The answer is nobody would because there is not a good reason why it is the case; it is just history, it is nothing more than that. 3905 Moving to a single legal entity does not mean big bang change overnight – far removed from that. If you move from where we are now to a single legal entity, the morning after there would still be the same Departments, the same Ministers, the same structures. That would be where it started. The fundamental essence of a single legal entity is that it allows Government to change the way it responds. There are key issues. It is the separation of operation from strategy and 3910 policy. In fact that is starting to happen, isn’t it? I mean the work that Sir Jonathan Michael has done in creating Manx Care is actually separating operation from strategy and policy. So we may not be doing it in one big bang, we may just be starting to try to do it Department by Department, but the inevitability of it – and its needs to happen – is happening before our very eyes. 3915 We had a Beamans review of the Department of Education. The problem with the Department of Education: it meant well, it was trying to do the right thing, but it was fundamentally departmentally focused and everything was ancillary to that rather than the Department of Education’s absolute priority being the schools. When Beamans came in they recognised that and you started to get that separation between the operation and strategy, albeit still in the same 3920 Department. The latest Beamans report does exactly the same thing. I am not surprised; I could have almost written the report before they came to the Isle of Man. But what they did was they separated operation from strategy and then, in my opinion in failure, left it all in the same Department thus actually complicating it. 3925 So the essence of a single legal entity is to end up with the same number of Ministers and the same number of Departments, but the Departments primarily and significantly become operational delivery units with their Minister and with their COO – not their CEO, because if you have got an operational Department sitting under the umbrella of a whole Government, a single Government, you do not need CEOs as such. 3930 What we try to do at the moment, what we have done historically, is we have tried to make each Department capable of everything within their sphere: legislation, strategic thinking, operational delivery, the lot! That is where we have been falling down and we have been banging at each other when things go wrong, when in fact what we should have been saying is: should we really expect, in a population of 83,000, to have each area capable of so many different things in 3935 a competent way? And the answer is: it is beyond the Departments. It is not their fault. We fight in here over failings made in Departments and never stop to say to ourselves: are we being fair to that organisation? And the answer is that we are not. In our population, in our size, in our Government, we only have the capacity and the money to have one strategic thinking body, probably one legislative group, rather than them being 3940 distributed right the way through the Departments. What we should be saying to what should be the COO and is currently the CEO is that your job is to deliver operationally those responsibilities within your sector and the Minister’s job is to be sure that that operational delivery is arriving in front of the citizen in a coherent and successful way. But the other jobs – the other incredibly important jobs that need to happen – need to start being assembled in places of competence.
______2597 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
3945 When it concerns strategic matters we need help and it is our ability at the strategic level to make sure that we can go out and find that help. We have got a brilliant range of people on the Isle of Man that we do not tap into really. We have got external bodies who can help us and we have got our own minds about what we believe should happen. At that higher level we should be forming our strategic thinking. It should not be delivered just through one Department, the 3950 strategic thinking, the main policies that we form need to have coherence right across the piece. When we get to the point where we have got a fairly good idea of what it is that we are trying to achieve that is the point at which you turn back to the operational Division and say, ‘This is what we are mindful to do. This is what we believe is right. What do you think?’ and the operational Division will say, ‘Well, actually, that is good and that is good, but that will not work 3955 and we do not understand this.’ So you refine your strategic thinking, your higher-level policy thinking until it actually fits and works and then it migrates into the Department. The key issue is not to have a big strategic body, highly paid and permanently in post. What you should have is a secretariat, one or two key players and people capable of going out and finding those who can advise us best. I think it is an arrogance on our part that we should come 3960 from the public place that we are elected from and imagine that we have the best ideas. We may have passionate beliefs about things, but we should have the humility, once we understand what we passionately believe in, to go and make sure the best advice available is delivered to us. I do not think that party politics does anything else other than that and they still make mistakes, but there is a whole myriad of think-tanks, both sitting inside party politics, for example, in the UK, 3965 and externally. I do not imagine for a second that a successful political party would simply decide that they wanted to do something because the officers said they should or that they thought it was a good idea. Policy formation is a pretty complex process when done really well. Where are the resources at the present time that are available to the political process, the Ministers concerned or those in Departments? The answer is, well, they are limited and they tend 3970 to come from below. I am going to just give you a few examples of one Department that suffered this invidious position, and that is the DoI. Here are four examples of how policy formation has occurred in the DoI unsuccessfully and cost millions, or could have cost millions. Four areas: the Harbours Strategy, Lord Street, the Promenade and the ferry terminal – all current stuff! 3975 The Harbours Strategy came to this Court and was agreed. The Harbours Strategy, we were told, would cost in the region of £80 million and we passed it and we were told at that time that this had the support of the consultants, Royal Haskoning. The Policy Review Committee picked this up and had a look at it and spoke to Royal Haskoning in an oral session – it is on Hansard – and said, ‘Where did this come from?’ and we were told an £80 million project emerged from an 3980 A3 sheet of paper given to Royal Haskoning, which they then had to, I would say, justify. So the question asked of Royal Haskoning was, ‘Well, would you have done this if you had been brought in at the beginning?’ and the answer was no. Yet this Court passed it because it believed that it was supported by the consultants. What you were seeing there was operational officers inside DoI seeing an idea of theirs migrate up through the system and be accepted by this Court in an 3985 improper fashion, because that is how, generally speaking, policies are formed in this Government, in our Tynwald. Lord Street: one of the first reasons I considered many years ago wanting to stand was because Lord Street was a mess and, as I am about to depart exit left within a few weeks, it is still a mess and until the other day when it was announced Parade Street car park was closing, we could not 3990 even run it as a car park. Why did that happen? That happened because poor DoI again was asked to deliver on a major multi-million pound project and they were not capable of doing it. It was not DoI’s fault. In the end I think there have been four attempts at this and each one has fallen down. I remember one of the failed project efforts to get a multi-million pound project happening in Lord Street was passed, first of all, to DoI and then down to a line officer who was asked to, as it 3995 were, liaise and manage a multi-million pound scheme, and he could not do it; and it was not his fault but the DoI got massively criticised for that. ______2598 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The ferry terminal: the ferry terminal in Liverpool … So Lord Street has cost us nothing, but it certainly learned us nothing, put it that way. If we had succeeded years ago in getting a multi- million pound project going, it would be delivering all sorts of revenue streams to the Government 4000 and to the wellbeing of the Isle of Man that it is not, apart from being an eyesore. Then you have got the ferry terminal. The ferry terminal, as I recall, started at £25 million and very recently the Minister for DoI stood up and said that one of the cost increases that has occurred, occurred because of scouring – the potential for scouring, which was going to cost about £5 million, and that the DoI only became aware of the fact that this was a problem around about 4005 Christmas time when, as I understand it, as I recall –
The Minister for Infrastructure (Mr Baker): Hon. Member, could I make a point?
Mr Robertshaw: Yes, of course. 4010 Mr Baker: Thank you, Mr Robertshaw, I appreciate you doing that, and if I can just clarify that? (Mr Robertshaw: Yes.) It was known from day one that there was going to be a scouring issue and when the land was acquired from the Peel Group it was explicitly acquired with the knowledge that the Department 4015 was going to have to provide a scheme to protect the quay wall to the satisfaction of Peel, as the landlords. What was not known was the design of that or the specification of that, and that has been subsequently influenced by the Steam Packet Company’s choice of vessels. So it was a known unknown at the time that the land was acquired, obviously well before my time as Minister, (Mr Robertshaw: I understand.) and what there was not at the time was the ability to define that 4020 solution, so it was a condition subsequent to the requirement for acquiring the land. Hopefully, that is helpful.
Mr Robertshaw: It is, thank you very much, and I thank the Minister for that clarification. But effectively what I need to tell him, because he was not there then, was a number of years ago his 4025 Department was told very clearly that the scouring issue would be a problem and that the design type associated with the terminal needed to be constructed in a way that protected that. It was understood by the officers in his Department a number of years ago and, had the design been adequate and recognised that issue, he would not be facing the problems he now – as a much more recent Minister – is facing; and is costing, as he has explained to us, an extra £5 million. 4030 I do not blame the Minister and I do not blame the Department, what I am trying to recognise here is the fact that, yet again, we were asking officers inside an operational Department to act above their competencies. So it is not the Minister’s fault, it is not DoI’s fault, it is the way we run things. We ask operational Departments to do everything – major strategy, big designs, capital works – when they actually cannot do it. And then when they cannot do it, we criticise them. So 4035 it is not a question of criticising the Department or the Minister or having rows about it, it is saying ‘What is it that we have got to do to make sure that we have central competence in Government to deal with these issues?’ Which is why, so strongly, I support the concept of a properly devised capital unit in the centre, and not in DoI, which is why the Beamans’ Report is faulty. (A Member: Yes.) 4040 I had an hour and a half with Beamans explaining what the issues were with DoI and why they were in the difficulties that they were, and there was a great deal of understanding between Beamans and myself; and then a few days later it dawned on me what was going to happen, because Beamans were requested – and why wouldn’t they, under the current structure? – by the Chief Minister, quite rightly, to go and have a look at DoI and tell us what is wrong. But their remit 4045 was limited to the DoI and therefore they gave a solution which was contained within DoI, and they created a complex structure with a COO doing operational and above that something else with an EO, which makes it more complicated, more expensive and will not deliver. What should happen is DoI, with all its complexity, should become a much more simple operating Division of ______2599 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Government with a COO; and the Capital Projects Unit needs to be brought into the centre – 4050 whatever the centre is. And then of course we have the Promenade. The problem with the Promenade is not DoI’s fault, it is the fact that we started from the standpoint of a reasonably major roadworks that migrated up from an operational organisation and actually turned out to be a very significant engineering project, which has caused DoI and everyone else huge concerns, and damaged 4055 businesses and taken far too long, regardless of COVID. You get to the point where you cannot beat DoI up any more, (Interjection) because – I know – (Interjection and laughter) it is just not right. The point about, back to the issue of the Harbours Strategy, again that was not the DoI’s fault, that was the way we run things and that we attribute these responsibilities to operational 4060 Departments and expect them to be able to deliver, and they cannot. I would love to go through all the Departments, but I will whizz through one or two. The DHA in many respects is emerging as a Department (Interjection) with indications that it is starting to work the way it should work, and the way it needs to work, in the sense that DHA essentially is a very small centre with operating divisions that happen to be the Police, Prison and Fire Service, 4065 etc., with their own lead, responsible officers, and DHA effectively is the responsible co-ordinating body. I am the first to say, and admit, and apologise, that when the Chief Minister first appointed Mr Cregeen, the Member for Arbory, Castletown and Malew as the Justice Minister, I thought, ‘Ooh, I don’t know …’ Well, how wrong have I been? Because the Constitutional and Legal Affairs and Justice Committee, which is a form of policy review committee, has found a new way of 4070 working with the new Justice Minister. That relationship is a manifestation of how I think the future should look whereby Departments actually work with the Policy Review Committees in such a way that both gain. We do not have to be opposite each other, we do not have to be in conflict, but what we do is we bring two different perspectives to the same issue and resolve them before it ever gets to the floor of Tynwald. That 4075 is a healthy process. That is why we have two eyes because we have to see in 3D, and a policy developing system where you have got that capacity can only be for the greater good. So I commend the Minister for DHA, or the Minister for Justice, and congratulate him and his staff, because I say to Hon. Members there lies the future and that is absolutely terrific. DHSC, we will zip past quickly, because that has been through a major process of review and 4080 change, and what has happened? Operation has been separated from strategy and policy. So it is beginning to happen before our eyes, naturally. It is not forced, it is the result of common sense and application of a great deal of good thinking. I do have concerns about the relationship between DHSC and Manx Care in terms of sections 6 and 8 of the mandate, but the Minister has assured us on a number of occasions, effectively, that it is a process under constant review. My 4085 view before I depart, Minister, is that unless sections 6 and 8 change significantly, within a couple of years I think that could be a problem. But again that is part of the future. DEFA, I think, is more or less fine as an operating division, except this issue of regulation. Now, that is a mess, and you need your regulators completely separate from the Departments – R&I, everybody, needs to be collected separately under the umbrella of not a particular Department, 4090 but ultimately under the umbrella of Government as a whole. The Department for Enterprise are making progress. They have got their agencies – (Interjection) Pardon? Okay. They have got their agencies and I would think now, however, the time has come to say that I think the children have grown up and it is time they left home, and DfE needs to start to shrink. (A Member: Hear, hear.) The Department of Education, Sport and 4095 Culture we have touched on already, and they have already had that separation. So the process, this very important process, of separating operational from strategy and policy is actually happening before our eyes, but there will come a point – and I do not know when it will come, you guys will decide – that we really need to say, okay, let’s recognise what we are doing and let’s consolidate it under one Government and have this group of operational divisions, and 4100 keep our Ministers. ______2600 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Personally – and I have always said this, but forgive me for repeating it – I really am uncomfortable with the departmental allocations and delegations that new Members get. You will not like this, but I am going to say it anyway, and I will not be here long, so you can talk about me when I – 4105 The Speaker: You have been here long already! (Laughter)
Mr Robertshaw: And that is, that departmental responsibilities mistrain politicians. It trains you into being a manager of a small section of Government, when your job in this place is to be 4110 concerned about everything; and you become over-possessive and over-protective of an area which is where you are almost acting as a manager. We are not managers, we are politicians, and we should be all working together to devise our policies rather than trying to be responsible for one small part. That has the effect, I think – and again you will not like this – of mistraining people as they migrate up to a ministerial role, where they become almost an extension of the 4115 Department and nothing more, when they are actually politicians working with other politicians to deliver overarching strategy. So in my world, as you migrate towards a single Government, I would approach it differently. I would have the Ministers and the Chief Minister just as we do now, but I would eradicate departmental memberships, except in the Treasury, and have Deputy Ministers in each 4120 Department, so there is a Minister and a Deputy Minister. The Deputy Minister would be learning, would be understanding the whole panoply of services right across the Department and also be learning from the Minister how to actually act well as a Minister. If I was the Chief Minister – which I will never be – I would be moving those Deputy Ministers around from one area to the other. I would also be saying that it would be important to be both a Deputy Minister and sit on a 4125 policy review area somewhere else, because that would give you the broadest possible reach in terms of understanding how Government works and how we need to respond to it. So, over a period of years, this Hon. Court will become more and more competent, because we have to find a way of making our extraordinary parliament and our incredibly wonderful place, even better, and there is a wonderful opportunity in this Court to achieve that. 4130 At the moment – well, we are starting to move now, but we were stuck. We moved into ministerial government about 30 years ago now, is it?
The Speaker: It was 1987.
4135 Mr Robertshaw: Oh, 1987, just over. And we sort of got stuck then, because the way Ministers and new Members were coming in was adjusting their thinking in the wrong way and almost, as it were, being captured to some degree by the Department. This current Council of Ministers has tried very hard to form a Programme for Government. I think we all recognised that it was complex, overlarge and sometimes difficult to follow. I would 4140 put it to you that when you come back in that you all sit down together, even before you choose the Chief Minister, and decide what the top seven, eight, nine or 10 big policies are going to be before you go any further. (A Member: Hear, hear.) And then decide who your Chief Minister is going to be, and then your Ministers. But also be careful who is in your policy review side of things. I am pleased that the Emoluments Committee recognised the importance of that work in the 4145 way there would be balanced income now between departmental side and policy review work, (A Member: Hear, hear.) and that is a fabulous opportunity to bring Tynwald together much more closely than the ‘them and us’ thing which is to some extent the yah-boo politics. It does not belong in here and yet we have to have the ability to scrutinise and to be critical. (A Member: Hear, hear.) I think you have got a fabulous opportunity when you come back in, not to declare a 4150 single legal entity straightaway, but understand where it is that you are trying to get to and how you can continue this process of reforming this precious parliament, and to be an exemplar for the rest of the world. ______2601 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Thank you, Mr President.
4155 The Speaker: You did not save much for the memoirs!
Mr Robertshaw: Pardon?
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Shimmins. 4160 Mr Shimmins: Thank you, Mr President. Of course we should have a single legal entity. I am going to address my remarks to all of the different things that we are talking about in the Order Paper because they are all quite similar so, rather than repeat, please just accept this one version. But of course we should have a single legal 4165 entity, it is a no brainer. It really is. But that alone, Hon. Members, will not necessarily fix things. The bureaucracy in the Isle of Man Government is partially down to the structures. So anything which breaks down silos and the various fiefdoms that exist in this sprawling organisation will of course help. However, in my view, as long as you retain the same culture then things actually will not necessarily improve. You will just have silos within the same legal entity. So let’s not kid 4170 ourselves, Hon. Members. My observations would be that there are far too many levels in the Isle of Man Government. (A Member: Hear, hear.) It is a very sprawling organisation but has also got multiple layers of management, and the structure should be much flatter with fewer layers of management. (Interjection) If we look at the reports which have been commissioned and received by the Council 4175 of Ministers, they tend to recommend more layers, Hon. Members, and more people. (A Member: Hear, hear.) I just get very frustrated about that and I would suggest to you, Hon. Members, they are written by consultants from the United Kingdom who are time-served in the UK Civil Service. That is a completely different scale. What we are seeing is highly paid consultants who are lifting and shifting a model, which serves 60 million people, to serve a small island nation which has 4180 85,000 people. I question, Hon. Members, where that approach of continually adding more people and more layers to our different Government structures is sustainable, and if we look at the public service – and it is the public service, there is a clue. Government Departments are here to serve and that is what we are here to do. Unfortunately, at times, Isle of Man Government Departments confuse 4185 self-interest with the national interest and I can give you various examples of that. I have seen and experienced senior Isle of Man Government public servants, at executive level, construct really unbelievable arguments about why functions must be carried out by their Department, that they cannot be outsourced to someone else who does that, or combined with something else. It has to be done in this silo. 4190 By the way, for me, it grates every time when I hear an Isle of Man Government chief executive or an Isle of Man Government Minister use the word ‘my’ Department. For me this is indicative of a cultural shortcoming. It is not your Department. It is the Island’s Department which you temporarily have the responsibility and privilege of leading. Let’s be quite clear about that, Hon. Members. That needs to change, that kind of culture which, in my view, also has too much 4195 self-importance, too much bureaucracy, too much emphasis on rank. Other effective serving organisations do not have that. They do not call people Mr or Mrs, or by their rank or title. That is indicative of an old-fashioned culture. If you go and work for a truly customer-focused organisation there are not reams and reams of offices with secretaries sitting outside them. Everyone is on the floor. There are organisations 4200 in the Isle of Man who have that, there is only one office and that is the Chief Executive’s office. There are lots of meeting rooms which people can borrow, but the trappings of rank and privilege have been taken away because we are all in this together. We are all in and focusing on serving the people who we are responsible to.
______2602 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Honestly, Hon. Members, do you see that when you walk around Government Departments 4205 and organisations? What I see is lots of offices. Lots of people with their doors closed. I do not see lots of modern floors with people collaborating. So if we are going to become – which I think we all want – one single legal entity focused on delivering public services, then there are some other really important things which need to change. And that is not just about the design and layout of offices, it is about how people behave, it is about their raison d’être, in my view. 4210 A few other observations I would make: in my view, too many senior civil servants have been in the same job for too long. (A Member: Hear, hear.) So in other large organisations, senior people are rotated because it is recognised that these are senior leaders and they go stale after a while. It is very rare for someone to be in a senior executive role for five years or more. I do not see people rotated around Isle of Man Government Departments and I think that is unfortunate, 4215 is how I would describe it. In addition to reviewing and reducing the number of layers in the Isle of Man Government, I think you also need to look at the span of control. So there is a very large number of managers and supervisors who are only managing or supervising one or two people in the Isle of Man Government. You might say, what’s the problem with that? Well, as well as being very inefficient 4220 actually what that encourages is more silos-within-silos. It encourages more bureaucracy because you have got all of these multiple layers actually managing relatively small numbers of people; and what you see as organisations look to become more efficient, more effective, is reduce the number of layers but increase the span, perhaps to five or six maximum direct reports, and then you get a more responsive organisation. It becomes more focused on delivery rather than internal 4225 machinations. The public I speak to, they get frustrated about inefficient delivery. They get frustrated about bureaucracy. It frustrates the hell out of me, I have to say, the time I think it takes to get things done round here. So this is just observation. Another observation would be performance management. There is a lack of effective performance management in Isle of Man Government, 4230 in my view. If you want to change culture and focus on delivery, you need to improve performance management. I just do not see focus on that at all. So, in summary, Hon. Members, I am going to be brief, because of course I would say yes to the single legal entity but that alone is not really going to change things much, actually. You are just changing some letterheads and some signs outside buildings, to be frank. My experience has 4235 been actually observing different teams in different large organisations, I have seen some incredibly high-performing teams which have delivered despite different legal entities, despite some very dysfunctional structures; and I have also seen a fair number of large teams working in the same legal company, but abjectly failing. The difference for me when I look at those teams – and you might sense this as you wander around different Departments and you get a feel of 4240 culture – is how well they are led, what their motivation is like, and that really makes a difference. So I would suggest to you, Hon. Members, that of course we want to improve the Isle of Man Government and how it delivers. Focusing on their structure is interesting but actually, arguably, there are much quicker wins and you will deliver a lot more benefit to the people that we serve if you tackle culture. Thank you. 4245 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Baker.
Mr Baker: Thank you, Mr President. I am brought to my feet by two very detailed and rich contributions from the Hon. Member for 4250 Douglas East and the Member for Middle. It may surprise both of them, and many sat in this Hon. Court, that there are many aspects of what has been said that I do agree with, and particularly the closing remarks made by the Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins. He is absolutely right that structure is part of the situation that determines outcomes, but culture and organisation is far more significant, and it is about how people work together towards a common 4255 goal. There has never been a less appropriate phrase for me than ‘one single legal entity’ because ______2603 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
actually it is not about a single legal entity, and in fact all the moves towards delivering a single legal entity actually mean you end up with lots of legal entities. So that does not actually work. It is not about the legal structure and in the corporate world, where I have spent most of my working career, you have all sorts of different corporate structures 4260 across different jurisdictions, and you focus on what your purpose is and what the objectives are, and that is what drives the performance of the organisation. So I think the culture is really important. But it is not just culture within Government, it is also within parliament as well. What we do in here and in the House of Keys and in Legislative Council has a big influence on how Government officers and Departments and Boards behave, because 4265 what we focus on drives behaviour in those areas. For me, we cannot simply just talk about Government in the narrow sense, we need to look in the broader sense and talk about what the roles and responsibilities of parliament and the associated elements play in that as well. So if there is a journey to go on, which I believe there is – and I would echo the comments of Mr Robertshaw that we are on a journey – we have to replicate that within the walls of Tynwald and the associated 4270 elements, whether that is in terms of scrutiny, whether that is in terms of questions or whether that is in terms of the way that it operates when the Court and the House are sitting. So we cannot just look at this in isolation. I would also argue that we are missing a trick if we do not reflect on what actually has happened during the pandemic period, where actually there was that sense of purpose; there was the ability 4275 to get things done quickly; there was that ability to rotate resources between different parts of Government just to get the job done, whether it be to build an oxygen plant at the Health Service or to get a vaccination centre established, or to find a way of actually getting the right people on and off the Island in a controlled manner within the restrictions. That saw public servants, from whatever background, being adaptable and being committed, putting in hours and hours and 4280 hours of selfless service to deliver for the public good. We cannot allow a debate here which is focusing on the negatives about all the things we are getting wrong, to ignore the positives that have been achieved due to the commitment of people in the public service. Of course there is room to improve processes; there is room for reducing bureaucracy and making organisations perform better. That happened during the pandemic when normal rules of 4285 operation were not in place. It was acceptable to go and just find a solution. You did not have to have a three-month procurement process and 27 different sign-offs to get an oxygen plant up and running. You were able to focus on what the objective was, because it was needed by the public. There was an overriding sense of purpose, in the same way as there is when the Isle of Man weather events cause the DoI staff and the Manx Utilities staff, and Manx Gas and the Fire Services 4290 and everybody else, just to all work together to keep the Isle of Man operational. Trees being cleared off roads and power cables restored. It is about that overriding sense of purpose. So we have to not beat ourselves up and talk as if we are a failed state here. Of course we need to be aspirational, we need to be setting our standards up to be better. That is what the public wants and that is what the public requires and we have to be prepared to embrace different ways 4295 of doing things. So with that, Mr President, I am going to draw my remarks to a close, but what I would say in closing is that it is also about how the Council of Ministers operates, and how collaborative or not that organisation is, because that sets the tone in the same way as a board of directors sets a tone in the corporate world. All of these parts have to fit together and we need to take a holistic view 4300 on all of them. We are on a journey and the people of the Isle of Man expect us to continue on that journey.
The President: Now, Hon. Members, I have three more Members – four more Members, wishing to speak in this General Debate. It seems to me that, after that, we could usefully move 4305 on to the other debates which, after all, are on the same theme. So would the four Members please bear that in mind, keep their remarks as concise as possible and we will get through the business this evening. ______2604 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mr Henderson, please.
4310 Mr Henderson: Gura mie eu, Eaghtyrane. I have always believed in the single legal entity theory and certainly for single legal organisation, to push the boat out even further for my ultimate objective in strategic management strategy, and it makes eminent sense. Hon. Member, Mr Robertshaw, spoke at length as to those reasons and it has always been a 4315 wish of mine to have a Council of Ministers that operates at strategic level, disengaged from departmental defencism and departmental politics so that national strategic policies are discussed and Ministers are fully engaged at that level and not in the business of defending each other’s Departments or fighting their corner for a budget. That to me is what a big chunk of single legal entity is about and single organisation. 4320 It is to get away from the departmental imperialism, as I have always called it, and break the barriers down, get the communications going. The Hon. Member Mr Baker has hit it right on the head: when we have faced a national crisis everyone has pulled together and suddenly departmental barriers have semi-dissolved; everyone was pulling together and everyone was talking very quickly and decisions were being made more rapidly than normal and the whole thing 4325 rolled on – all credit to the Government in the way that was progressed. That is my vision, Eaghtyrane, and it is something I strongly believe in. What I think is being missed here – I think the Hon. Member Mr Baker again touched on it, but I think the point I want to labour, Eaghtyrane – is the fact that all public services globally, certainly governments, suffer from the same symptoms, in that they are public services and the parliaments 4330 connected to them are just that, democratic organisations. The private enterprises that the Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins, spoke about that he is used to operating within, they are not operating in the same environment as a public service, which is under permanent scrutiny by a democratically elected parliament. And there lies a monstrous canyon of a difference! Unfortunately, we have got to blame our political system to an extent for the observations, 4335 and negative observations, we are making now; and I do not blame anyone in here, Eaghtyrane, it is a fact of life in a democratic parliamentary set-up. If we just take a brief look at what happens in here on a weekly basis – or a monthly in Tynwald, weekly in the Branches – we are continually placing Government Departments under unmitigating scrutiny. Week in, week out, we have scrutiny committees, we scrutinise this, we want scrutiny of that, we want scrutiny of the other – 4340 shed loads of questions, by the hundred at times that the Hon. Member for Ramsey, Dr Allinson, was alluding to earlier with regard to the possible extension of Question Time. All that and as much as we want to have all the scrutiny that we possibly want, to the point where we are so transparent we are invisible – that seems to be the vision we are aiming for sometimes, Eaghtyrane – and then we want detail, we want data, we want information. ‘Why 4345 won’t this Department answer that?’ ‘Why can’t I have this?’ ‘Why can’t I have that?’ The pressure is snowballed downhill back into the Departments. Then the other effect of all of that and the glaring spotlight of the press on whichever unfortunate section of the Government Department is under the spotlight, the pressure then – it is the accountability factor – then processes start to slow down. And it is a well-known factor, 4350 Eaghtyrane. It is not just Henderson’s theory of motivation or whatever; it is commonly observed. Then the procedures are put in place to check, double-check – ‘No, I cannot make that decision. It has to go to my line manager.’ ‘Sorry, I am the line manager, but it has to go to senior management because that needs to be checked. That was said last week, that was in the paper.’ So we have actually built a huge convoluted scrutiny system all by ourselves, as have other 4355 parliaments, that are causing a lot of what has been described here this evening, Eaghtyrane. I think we need to take that on board when we are discussing single legal entity, when we are discussing organisational structures; the one which Mr Shimmins was describing in classic management terms – Governments are long tall structures, if you want to spread them out, yes, you do have to break the cultures, but you have to look at possibly how we do things in our ______2605 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
4360 parliaments, our democratic structure as well so that pressures and the way we do things change so that we are working more flexibly and nimbly with our interface with the public departments which we are scrutinising or working upon. I think that that is really worth bearing in mind, Hon. Members, because we are half the equation in this situation. To an extent, we are causing the problems we are trying to fix. So there needs to be a balance put into the picture as well and 4365 certainly the points that Mr Robertshaw made are well made, sir, and with that I will sit down.
The President: Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge.
Ms Edge: Thank you, Mr President. 4370 I did feel like just standing up and saying it must be really difficult for people that work in Government when they have got a lot of people in here who have never worked in Government basically telling them how it should be. However, what I really want to focus on, Mr President, and I did touch on this a little bit earlier, was that the original Scope of Government in 2006 would have actually achieved what we are 4375 talking about today. It talked about just having chief operating officers and the concern with regard to this report is we have got the retired head of our OHR Department leading this project up, so are we getting any significant change here or not? I am going to save the bit about that to be my final comment. However, Hon. Member for Middle, Mr Shimmins, touched on an awful lot of things and with 4380 regard to structure and managers being paid management grades without actually managing anybody. We have got hundreds of them, Mr President. We have got failed individuals who get promoted to management grades so that they can continue in a role perhaps just sitting on the outside. But I think really and truthfully, having been a civil servant for the majority of my life, the 4385 situation that previous Governments have got the Civil Service into are not actually separating regulation and performance … the regulation needs to be separated from the individual Departments and when the Department is trying to do everything it does make it difficult, and I certainly feel that the ministerial government has got a lot to answer for, for what has really gone on in the last 30 years. 4390 I think it was Mr Speaker who said that it was 1987, the ministerial system … it was actually 1986 –
The Speaker: Or 1990, depending on where …
4395 Ms Edge: But I think no matter what system you have got, if you have not got the right calibre of individual heading whatever the service is that the public expect you are never ever going to succeed. I personally completely agree with the Hon. Member for Middle. I think all CEOs should be on fixed-term contracts, because if they are not performing there is an opportunity and it is something that I would be pursuing. 4400 Hon. Member for Douglas East, Mr Robertshaw, talked about numerous projects. Projects do not help a single legal entity. What has been wrong with the majority of projects on the Island that have failed is we have demolished something before we have decided what we really want in that space, so that is why we have got voids around Douglas. You cannot blame officers for that; politicians have decided to do something. I just feel sometimes I do not want to stand here and 4405 rubbish any of our officers, but we have clearly gone very wrong since the days of Fred Kissack and Mary Williams as something seriously changed within Government and I can only put that down to lack of appraisals and nobody being held to account. We should be holding those individuals to account, and we are here to introduce policy, to look at policy and make it better for people. When I hear comments with regard to you go into a Department and you do not … we 4410 should be going into the Department and making sure that is the best possible policy for the individuals. And many people do that. Certainly, I have had experience of a Department, I have ______2606 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
had experience of a Statutory Board and they are both very different vehicles for delivering service to the people of the Island. I do actually feel that a single legal entity really, you could call it going back to a board structure 4415 in a sense, and I would much prefer to see board structures with lay people as part of our Government and make-up because we would have professional people sitting on these boards that would be holding everybody to account. To me, we have moved that way. We have moved that way with Manx Care. Obviously, the Meat Plant is sitting completely separate, but it has got a professional board sitting on it. 4420 I do feel that to me that would be a better way forward, because what I have experienced in this administration is policy which politicians, actually – I am going to have to say it – the Council of Ministers will not let policy progress if they do not want it to progress because it is not going to get them re-elected, that particular policy. So to me, the ministerial system is where it fails. Certainly there are many policies that were suggested when I was in a Department that I think 4425 would have helped the people of the Isle of Man, like a fixed rental policy over five years that local politicians could not use to get re-elected and national politicians could not use to be re-elected; and that was not brought forward. The hon. mover of this motion knows that that was something that I wished to try and achieve, and I had local authority commissioners tapping me on my shoulder saying, ‘Now, now, we don’t want a policy like that. That doesn’t help us get votes.’ That 4430 is absolutely appalling for the people of the Isle of Man that that is the sort of system we are currently in, and that is where services have been diminished for individuals. The point that I really want to end on, following up who is heading up this project, is I actually believe that senior officers within Government will be loving this as it will keep the wheel turning for longer for them. Not like Laxey Wheel, of course, but it will keep the wheel turning and then 4435 we will introduce something new and it will just keep going and all the time we are in here for five years, hopefully some Members will come back, but if not it continues to just keep turning. We do need to have change and we need to make sure that what we bring forward is a review of the Council of Ministers and the ministerial system required. Thank you, Mr President. 4440 The President: Hon. Member for Ramsey, Mr Hooper.
Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President. What is interesting is that no one has really talked about the Report itself. (Laughter) I am quite 4445 surprised actually, that no one is being asked to approve anything (A Member: Yes.) and I am quite surprised to see it was a General Debate, if I am honest. The only recommendation in the Report is there should be some workshops with Tynwald Members and Council of Ministers to talk about some of the things they suggest. And just a piece of advice to the Minister for Policy and Reform: if you genuinely thought the thing we did last week was a workshop, you probably need to take a 4450 good long, hard look at yourself. It really was not; it was almost a waste of everyone’s time from my perspective. The one thing the Report lacks, actually, it makes a lot of assertions. We have heard a lot of those today, a lot of politicians telling us, ‘Yes, we’ve got all the answers here. This is what you should do, do what I want you to do, because I’ve got the solutions.’ But actually I have not seen 4455 any evidence here. The Report is quite lacking in that, there is not a lot of detail and there are no numbers. An earlier report, for example, mentioned that doing this moving to an arm’s-length model would reduce expenditure. I think it said they would save about £1 million or something, when actually we know for a fact that Manx Care in and of itself has cost us millions. Now, I am not saying that that is a bad thing; I am saying that actually what is important is value, not cost; 4460 and yet that is a statement from the earlier version of a report talking about a single legal entity that I have managed to find no evidence for at all. No evidence that backs up the assertion that we would lose 25 policy officers if we did this kind of thing. Where has that come from?
______2607 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
This Report is the same, actually, lots of quite well-meaning, well-intentioned statements that this is going to be great and this is going to be positive, and we should arm’s-length everything 4465 because it is fantastic; but actually there is no real evidence that backs up a lot of these statements, not even any comparatives where they say, actually they have done this in another jurisdiction and it worked or it did not, not even really an assessment of some of the current structures that we already have that work very much in this way. I will talk about a few of those in a minute. 4470 But, despite this, despite there being no real evidence in the Report, it still sort of makes sense. I think inherently you kind of feel it probably is taking us in the right direction. But the one big gap in the Report is that it does not really talk about budgets. (A Member: Yes.) Now, the word ‘budget’ does appear in the Report a few times, but always in the context of, ‘Well, you would need to transfer the budget to an organisation to do x, y, z because you are going to be taking it 4475 off the Department.’ But actually budgets are where a lot of the problems lie. So we have heard talk earlier of inefficiencies and having to get things approved at multiple levels, and everyone being involved in these decisions, and that is absolutely the case. It really is. You see it inside DfE with the Agencies. So the Agency Board wants to do something – these are the entrepreneurial, decision-makers that we have said ‘Look, we want you on board’, and they 4480 say ‘We’d love to do this. We think it is going to be great for the Island. It is a great plan. Can we have some funding to do it?’ It goes through the Agency Board, some of the things go through the Department for Enterprise, not everything, but some do, that is a second stage of approval, but then everything goes to Treasury and that is where everything dies. Treasury is a place where good ideas go to die. (A Member: Hear, hear.) And if you talk to people on the Agency Boards, this 4485 is the feeling that you get actually, ‘Why is this happening?’ Yet you contrast that with the way that Treasury have handled ERG, for example, that has been fantastic, because that is a single decision point. (A Member: Yes.) Everyone is in the room, everyone is in the same place, that is where you make the decision. And that is where the funding lies, you do not have to go and ask somebody else for permission for funding. If you compare that 4490 to, say, the Climate Change Transformation Board they do not actually seem to hold the budget, so they approve something which then goes off to another part of Government in the Treasury or CoMin for further approval. Actually, if they held the budget, they could make these decisions themselves. It comes back really to what Mr Henderson was talking about in terms of empowering staff at 4495 the right level. (A Member: Yes.) So actually it is not just staff you need to empower, you need to empower the decision-makers at the right levels (A Member: Hear, hear.) in terms of how you pay for some of this stuff. So we have got models that work, that have worked, and models that do not work. Yet the Report is kind of silent on all of this and I think if you do not fix some of these issues with how we assign budgetary responsibility for things, how we pay for things and who 4500 makes these decisions, it does not matter what structure you have got, if I have still got to go to 15 different committees to get approval for something it is never going to go anywhere.
A Member: Too many vetoes.
4505 Mr Hooper: This is where I want to talk a little bit about some of the arm’s-length bodies that we already have, because there are issues with some of them. They are not all the same issues, some of them are around accountability; so it is very difficult now to get a straight answer out of the Health Department about Manx Care. I will give you an example and the Health Minister, hopefully, will not mind me sharing this. About three months ago I sent him an email request from 4510 a constituent about capsule endoscopy, and the question was actually, ‘What’s going on? We’ve been told that we can’t have this particular treatment.’ The Minister’s response was, ‘No, no, no, the policy is it should be fine. I don’t know what’s gone on here, I will find out for you.’ Three months later, still waiting for a response from Manx Care. But that is fine, I do not mind waiting for a response, but actually no one has talked to my constituent about it. No one from ______2608 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
4515 that organisation has picked up the phone and said ‘Really sorry, but this is what has happened and we will try and get to the bottom of it for you.’ I know that they are looking at it and I know they are working on it, but actually that is a real problem with that because I cannot table a Question on the floor for the Minister and say, ‘What on earth are you playing at?’ Because the Minister’s response will be, ‘I am doing everything I can, folks. I am trying my best.’ Great, that’s 4520 brilliant. It does not get me anywhere. So if we do start externalising some of these roles and some of these jobs and some of these organisations, I think Members have to be alive to what Mr Baker was talking about and actually the nature of scrutiny will have to change. (A Member: Yes.) It will leave this room and will end up in Committees. Again, I am not saying that is bad or good, but it will be different. I think we 4525 have to acknowledge that, and again the Report does not really talk too much about the flipside of this, not just how Government operates but how we make sure Government is operating and make sure it is delivering. So on the one end of the accountability, arm’s-length spectrum, you have got an organisation like Manx Care that it feels at the moment is a law unto itself. Then, right at the other end, you 4530 have got the way housing is delivered across the Island. Now, Housing is so tightly controlled by DoI policy that there is absolutely no point in having an arm’s-length local authority delivering it. So I have got constituents who, for whatever reason, do not meet one or other of the criteria enshrined in law by the Department of Infrastructure two and a half years ago. It was a bad policy then, it is a bad policy now. And what is happening is you have got constituents who, I don’t know, 4535 say they are moving to the local area with a partner, they have got a young family, they are not there for three years they have two and a half years, perhaps, two years 10 months – we are nearly there, nearly at that threshold. The family breaks up, so the one partner who may meet the criteria leaves because it is better to have the kids in the house, they can stay because they have got school and all the rest of it. Great! Can’t do that, sorry, Department policy is three years or 4540 you do not qualify at all and you have got to get out of the house. So you go to the local authority and say you can see that the circumstances around this case are such that actually you need to apply some common sense here and the local authority says: ‘Yes, I’d love to. We agree with you, it makes sense, but unfortunately the people that have written this policy, who have no involvement with this case and really are not that interested, there is no way I can change this, 4545 you have to go to the policymakers.’ So you have got, on the one hand, an organisation like Manx Care that we are essentially giving free rein to; and on the other hand you have an arm’s-length body that is so tightly controlled that it may as well be an extension of the Department. So actually neither of those functions work really well. They do not, however great the operational delivery is, and the local authority, 4550 however good the Departmental policy is – actually, if there is not some kind of break between the two why are we bothering to put a management structure in between them? How is it going to help anyone? We are paying people to administer and oversee a policy that is set somewhere else that they have got no input into. That makes no sense. We have to be really careful, I think, when we talk about arm’s-lengthening some of our bodies 4555 and actually creating new management structures, when really the solution to a lot of this is not about a new structure. It is about changing the culture and changing the way we empower decision-makers and changing actually the way we deal with some of these policies. It is about changing the way that we do things. We have seen this throughout COVID. We have seen that we have not changed any of the 4560 structures of Government; we have not got new Departments and new committees. We have literally just gone, ‘Let’s change the way we do things, let’s just get out there and focus on outcomes instead of worrying about 15 different approvals and three different committees, and let’s just do it differently.’ So actually if we had been having this debate two years ago, I would have been much more on board with saying ‘Let’s get on with some structural change.’ But here 4565 and now can anyone really say that in the last 12 months things have not been working better?
______2609 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
And if they have then really we should be looking to embed some of that, instead of trying to come up with new and inventive ways of moving the deckchairs on the Titanic. I will give you another example, actually, that is not really COVID-related that we have done, and Mr Shimmins is probably going to shoot me for this. But the Development Corporation was a 4570 Department for Enterprise initiative, it was a Department for Enterprise Programme for Government action, but I think we realised very early on that it was not going to get anywhere unless we had Treasury support. You need that if you are going to develop something, especially something that is quite innovative like the MDC was. So, quite early on, I realised we needed a man on the inside and so Mr Shimmins was my man on the inside. (Laughter) And you bring them 4575 in, you bring the people in, (Interjection) you bring the decision-makers (Laughter) into the room, and you actually drive forward whatever it is you are trying to achieve in a collegiate way. There was not a new committee, there was not a new structure, a new Department. It was literally just getting the right people in the room together to have those conversations and to drive this forwards. And that was quite successful, it was driven forward very quickly and produced a 4580 very positive outcome. We did not need to reinvent the wheel here, Hon. Members, and that is the kind of thing we need to be thinking about. Not necessarily worrying too much about structure and the way that we build things. Actually, it is sometimes just about saying, ‘Let’s apply some common sense to some of this.’ Empower our front-line staff and empower our decision makers and make sure that we are getting the right outcomes. 4585 So whilst this Report is an interesting intellectual exercise I do not feel for me that it really does enough around some of these questions. It does not really explain to me how outcomes are going to be better as a result of a new structure and moving things to arm’s-length. Undoubtedly, some things at arm’s-length will be better but equally, undoubtedly, some things at arm’s-length will be worse. So the proposal in here that says we should arm’s-length every single service delivery body, 4590 that I cannot understand. It does not provide for any of this common sense realism; actually, it is not going to work in this area. We have tried it with some things, some shared services work and some do not. We know that, so why are we going to reiterate and go through that whole exercise again? The last thing I will say on this – there are other things I would like to talk about, but I am saving 4595 some of them from Mr Moorhouse’s motion later. (A Member: Thank you.) We are a small jurisdiction and that has come up a few times. We are a small jurisdiction, but we are a jurisdiction. We are facing many of the same challenges as the UK, as other larger jurisdictions, and this idea that because we are smaller means we have less to do I think is quite flawed. (Two Members: Hear, hear.) I think for me this comes up, and I think Mr Robertshaw covered this quite well when 4600 he talked about these UK consultants coming over and giving us these reports. The Beamans Report on Education was a really good example of this. Actually, they talked about a new structure which was for all intents and purposes an academy trust model. When I put it to them that this is what they were proposing, they said, ‘No, no, we didn’t intend to do that.’ But, as Mr Robertshaw says, they come from such an embedded culture that naturally they are going to recommend what 4605 they know, whether it is intentional or not. I said, ‘Why is this not an academy structure?’ And the reasons they gave were: academies employ their own staff and they have got their own governing boards. And I thought, well, yes, that is what you are proposing here, that is how Manx Care works. But the main reason they gave was that academies are independent, they are responsible not to the local education authority 4610 but directly to the Department of Education. They said that with such confidence, I had to say yes, but our schools are directly responsible to the Department for Education. We do not have a local education authority on the Isle of Man. They had not comprehended that, I do not think, that our structure is different to the UK. So instead of going in and saying actually so what might work in the Manx context … it is almost 4615 like your default is to lifting something from a larger jurisdiction. And so whilst we are definitely facing some of the same challenges, I do not think the same solutions are necessarily right for us. We need to bear that in mind, that we have to deliver on some of these things that are important ______2610 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
to us and some of these challenges. We cannot lose sight of the fact that, whilst we are small, we are our own place; and trying to imply in any way that because we are small it means we have less 4620 to worry about … 10 policies, I think was talked about earlier. Can you imagine if the United Kingdom government turned round and said, ‘We have got 10 policies this year. That’s what we are going to do, and we’re not going to worry about, say, healthcare because our 10 policies this time round are going to focus entirely on climate change.’ I just think that would be mad. So yes, we need to be more focused, but let’s not forget that there is a massive amount of 4625 work out there and we need to make sure that Government is properly resourced and structured to do that. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Thomas. 4630 Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President. Can I start as the Chair of the Council of Ministers’ Sub-Committee on the Single Legal Entity, following Mr Robertshaw’s motion, by thanking colleague members of the Committee and the office who are all sitting around me – Mrs Corlett, Mrs Barber, Mr Robertshaw, Mr Boot and the 4635 three key officers who supported us throughout, and the other officers behind them. It has been a privilege to get to work as a forum understanding the idea better and then coming up with the recommendations. The second thanks I want to make is to Minister Harmer, the Minister for Policy and Reform, because despite difficulties and hesitation to publish this report that was finished but not signed 4640 off back at the end of 2019, Mr Harmer came up with a way forward to publish that Report; and, although the only recommendation after long discussion in 2019 was to make a recommendation that we began a series of workshops, eventually we did have a workshop and heartfelt thanks for eventually putting this Report in the public domain. Then the third and the most heartfelt thanks are to Mr Robertshaw, because we have been 4645 sparring partners and allies in this for nearly eight years – nine years perhaps. The first phone call I had from this Hon. Court was from Minister Robertshaw about half an hour after I was elected. I was still in the Woodie, as it happens, and Minister Robertshaw (Laughter and interjection) offered me a job as a new-style departmental Member. We started talking about it exactly then. I then shadowed Minister Robertshaw and learnt a great deal from him in those first couple of 4650 months, making up my mind whether I wanted to be a new-style departmental Member. And now, looking back, he was right. There is a lot to learn from having an all-encompassing view of policy as a policymaker in those early days, rather than going in and becoming a pseudo-manager with a delegation that suggests you are all-important, but in reality you are not so important. So I appreciate that, and when I got into this Hon. Court, as in so many issues I started my 4655 campaign using Questions and using motions and using speeches, and one of the people I used to pick on was Minister Robertshaw in terms of his Big Debate and his conversation. I also asked about the single legal entity. So you will find the first Question from me to Minister Robertshaw was in November 2014, all about what had been going on for the single legal entity secretly in the Council of Ministers. We had an exposition in that Answer back in November 2014 of all of the 4660 work back to 2006 to the Scope and Structure of Government, and later on we engaged with each other greatly along those lines. So I was very stimulated by some of the things that Mr Hooper said, and lots of other contributions, but I will perhaps focus a bit too much on Mr Hooper’s in a moment, to try and make some points that I think are worth recording in this General Debate. But, firstly, just so 4665 Hansard records it, Hon. Members and the public should remember that this Report is the second one that the Single Legal Entity Committee wrote. There is a very important report that was laid before Tynwald in July 2017 entitled ‘The Continuing Evolution of the Isle of Man Government?’ But the question mark somehow got missed off the Order Paper, so it became the Continuing Evolution of the Isle of Man Government and in ______2611 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
4670 actual fact what has happened since 2017 is that question mark being taken off was actually deserved, because although we hypothecated a question about the continuing evolution, the evolution has actually happened incrementally since 2017. I know Mr Robertshaw will take some satisfaction as his political career in this place comes to an end, from having worked out that if you do not go for a big bang, Big Debate approach, but do 4675 things intelligently and incrementally and practically and justify them rather in terms of a theoretical report justifying every change, but actually secure change in Health; and secure change in Infrastructure; and secure change in Education; and secure the independence of the regulators; and secure the independence of the arm’s-length operating companies like Manx Utilities, like the Isle of Man Post Office, like the Isle of Man Steam Packet, you have achieved a lot more than you 4680 would have if you had had a report. So just to move on to some things that Mr Hooper said, if you go to pages 33 and 34 of the June 2017 Incremental Reform Report, there are some lovely circles – and circles are a bit of a thing at the moment, and pictures of circles … (Laughter and interjection) There are some lovely circles, but the four or five of us took a long time preparing, and it is circles about what the future 4685 One Public Service might look like. Basically, we wanted to capture the idea that at the centre there was one legal entity, which was the Council of Ministers serviced by what functions needed to be done by it, but certainly having policy based around outcomes and so on; and around that there were the bodies that needed to be independent, so we never actually wanted one legal entity as such. 4690 In Scotland, where they have a single legal entity approach, there are 50 legal entities around the government as the policy-making body; and then beyond that you have some new arm’s- length bodies. And here is the killer. It might have been in Treasury that the idea was come up with for the Manx Development Corporation, it might have been in Enterprise, but in actual fact, the Manx Development Corporation called the Economic Development Agency is identified in the 4695 Single Legal Entity report back in June 2017. It is a great idea, but the thing about great ideas is they come up all over the place from great people all the time, and they look roughly the same. Something to learn in politics is it is amazing what you can achieve if you do not try to take credit for it. It is amazing what you can achieve if you try to build consensus around change and the consensus around reform and so on. 4700 So there is another big idea at the moment, which is community hubs, and that was the fourth circle back in our report back in June 2017. The community hubs were in local authorities. That is quite clear from those two diagrams on pages 33 and 34. So let’s just celebrate a good idea that has come eventually, rather than trying to go round and score points on all of these sorts of things. I just wanted to close, then, with some big ideas that I think came out of our four-or-so years 4705 working together in our report, and we tried to encapsulate in that short workshop last week and also in our Report. The first one is that we carried out a second consultation following on from the public consultation that I will summarise in a moment. Quite a few Members who have spoken today also made submissions, which are very similar in 2017 to our Members and departmental consultation. As they have said today, minds are hard to change. 4710 So Mr Watterson, Dr Allinson, Mr Ashford, Mr Baker, Mr Henderson, Mr Peake and Mr Shimmins all made excellent submissions, which made us think back in those days, and I really appreciate those submissions. The general public were asked about it and I think it is quite important to record in this debate what the general public told us about this idea back in 2016 before this House of Keys and this administration even started. They told us that 74% of them, 4715 three-quarters of them agreed there was merit in establishing Government as a single legal entity. However, just over half of them, 57% of them believe that that single legal entity should have operating expertise around them, and three-quarters of them agreed that the legal entity should replace the existing legal identities. So I think that is an idea that we now just have to implement. Mr Henderson was ahead of his time in the sense that he has always believed in that; so was 4720 Mr Watterson in the sense that the DHA was an early example of an entity that had lots of arm’s- length bodies operating underneath it. I do remember one of those senior operating officers in ______2612 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
the Department of Home Affairs telling me Minister Watterson was the best Minister he had ever had, because he learned soonest –
4725 The Speaker: I did not hear that, sorry? (Laughter)
Mr Thomas: He learned soonest the limits of his own powers as a Minister and as a politician. It was his job to do policy. It was the job of that person who has given me the information, to manage things, and there was a clear input to separate the policy and the operations. 4730 That was my third point. So the public agree with it, there is not actually one legal entity in this system, there are many; and it can be about arm’s-length bodies and there are successful examples of it. I like the way that the new public service is going but I do put on record one question for the people who are supporters of it, which is that it is great to empower people, it is great to have a 4735 new culture, it is great to flatten organisations, but what we have got to make sure is we do not end up with little people with big egos just basically operating against the political will. I am a big supporter of where necessary … and in my foreword to the Report that is before us today, I challenge us in respect of Bus Vannin, and that is the challenge I put down on the table. Is it right that the Bus Vannin policy gets changed all the time to make it very difficult for operations? 4740 Probably not. But on the other hand, is it right to have one person set Bus Vannin policy? I would be much happier, as I suggest in the forward, personally, if we have a board around something like Bus Vannin and other parts of Infrastructure. Then the final learning point, which has been hinted at by all sorts of people today, is about the role of a politician in this. As politicians we all know we have lots of different roles as part of 4745 our job of being a politician, being a Member of Tynwald elected or indirectly elected. We all know that. So, for instance, as Ministers at the moment we become the Department. That is an old Manx mantra: the Minister is the Department, the Department is the Minister. And you end up saying, as Mr Shimmins observed – and I never did it – my Department, or my Government. I used to get teased by my former colleague in Douglas West that I always, right from the word go in the first 4750 ever press conference I did with the Chief Minister, talked about ‘the Isle of Man Government’, ‘the Isle of Man Government’, ‘the Isle of Man Government’, and whenever he phoned me he always used to say, ‘How is the Isle of Man Government, Chris?’ Because he just thought it was so striking that I was doing that all of the time. I think that is something that we all need to think about as Ministers. 4755 I was the first Minister to have the privilege to be a Minister without portfolio, without a Department – I think. There might have been others, but I was the first one I have come across to date, and it was –
The Speaker: It was Eddie Lowey, wasn’t it? 4760 A Member: He was the first, yes.
Mr Thomas: Was he? Okay, the second one then. (Laughter)
4765 The Speaker: Then John, then Chris – (Interjections and laughter)
The President: Keep going!
A Member: Keep going! (Laughter and interjections) 4770 The President: You are nearly done now, I suspect, Mr Thomas, are you?
______2613 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mr Thomas: But inside a departmental structure, that is the point I was making. Minister Robertshaw was not, because he started off before the Cabinet Office was formed as a legal entity. 4775 (Interjection by Mr Henderson) So it was only in 2016. The Chief Minister then became the Minister for Cabinet Office, after the Cabinet Office was formed in 2016, so that was the point I was going to make. I was offered the job of departmental Member in the Cabinet Office after 2016 … but the rest is history. The Chief Minister decided to have a departmental Member and to assume the Minister of the Cabinet Office on a continuing basis. 4780 The next role we have, as politicians, is as departmental Members, and we have covered that point quite extensively, started off by Mr Robertshaw. The other role that we have, and I assimilated very much about this from what Mr Henderson said, because obviously Mr Henderson has got a slight issue with Questions, and I do perceive that the Manx public see Questions probably because of the way that the media reports them all the 4785 time, as being about scrutiny. But there is no reason why Questions cannot be for other reasons. Questions could be about developing policy. There is no reason why we have to have a government and an opposition system. There is no reason why we have to have scrutiny and policies so separated as they are in other places. The great beauty of the Isle of Man is we have got our own system and these things are wrapped together much more. That is certainly 4790 something that is going to need to be thought of in this sense. Then, finally, the role of politicians has often been to be on external bodies like boards and the like, and certainly over the last five years lots of us have had a chance to think what it really means to be a politician on a board, and when it is appropriate to be a politician on a board, and whether you are doing harm by being on the board. Mr Hooper raised the very good point which is that we 4795 have got to come up with a new system of accountability, but the new system of accountability does not necessarily need to be having a politician to answer Questions about everything. There could be new mechanisms. If politicians want to effect change they could do it through doing what Mr Hooper does, which is bring a motion to effect change; or to ask a Question to make people think about the policies 4800 that need changing. Manx Care is being very dynamic about thinking through how we can have new systems of accountability. That comes to the final role and this is where I slightly was a bit surprised about what Mr Hooper said, which is in terms of being the representative of the constituents, and I think this will intensify for us all in the next few months as the election progress intensifies. In other words, 4805 what Manx Care is talking about is patient liaison and setting up a system to actually follow up those issues. We have set up in this administration the Commissioner for Administration to follow up public policy issues, and we have to all think about ourselves to what extent we are there to actually go and kick civil servants for members of the public, and we have to think about the extent to which we are there to get special treatment for constituents. What we are there to be is public 4810 representatives. We are there to make sure the policy is right. We make sure we are there to get fair treatment for constituents and to have proper treatment of constituents, not necessarily to go and be the personal representative against the Civil Service and the public service, (Two Members: Hear, hear.) to kick ass. So thank you very much, Mr President. 4815 The President: Mr Harmer to reply.
The Minister for Policy and Reform (Mr Harmer): Oh, okay. Thank you for an excellent debate and I would like to thank everybody that has contributed 4820 and I think it has been really useful. I found the workshop really useful. A lot of the ideas that came out of the workshop have been aired today. Firstly, I think the Hon. Member for Douglas East spoke very well about how it is a continuum. It is an evolution. It is about the citizens being put first and it is about outcomes. I thought that was really useful.
______2614 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
I also noticed that … and this is why I think we have got so much to learn from COVID and how 4825 things have happened in COVID that have not happened before. One of the key things is around task-and-finish groups. The people who have done a task, like the Hon. Member for Ayre and Michael talked about the oxygen plant – done it, completed it, finished it, moved on. Different people. If you take the homeless situation during COVID, exactly the same approach. My only fear is 4830 that actually, as COVID retreats, some of those old habits and old structures all come back again and we revert back. That is why the new public service talks about shared progress and working differently, working together, empowered delivery and about having agreed risk – because risk is another key issue. But I do also agree personally with how actually having structures in silos does not work, from my view, because you have to have common goals. I thought that was absolutely 4835 important. I will be brief, just to summarise the key issues. I think Mr Robertshaw talked about the Programme for Government and big policies and about the bigger picture. That is what we are here for and one of the key things and one of the learning points I think from the Programme for Government, and also mentioned by Mr Shimmins, is how it needs to be streamlined into actually 4840 what we are going to change; and we also have to split between business as usual, which is your operating and your policy, which is what we are here to do, which is strategy. Very clearly different. When we get sucked in … and I have to reflect, because I think my view is changing on departmental Members. When you actually reflect, we are not here to manage. We are absolutely 4845 not here to manage; what we are here to do is to produce change. What is really interesting is all the big things that have hit this administration have not come from the Department but have come from without. So if you take climate change, if you take Brexit and if you take COVID they are things that have come across the departmental structure and have required multi-agency and a different way of working. 4850 Personally, again, I support a lot of what Mr Shimmins talks about ranks and privilege, that I struggle with, I think there is a massive project actually. This is a personal view. I struggle, coming from the private sector seeing lots of different grades and structure. I do not think that … and, interestingly enough, if you look at actually how people have worked over the last year in COVID, those structures have disappeared as things just needed to get done. What you have seen, really 4855 interestingly, is when people feel empowered you also see your sickness levels drop and you see engagement. There are massive amounts that we can learn from that and about being productive as a Government, provided we take on board exactly what has happened. But if we have structures that are acting against us, then we have got a problem. So we do have to look at structure as well 4860 as culture, because what I think the structure does is you expand out, you have this agreed risk and the structure just pulls you back into the same old patterns. We have to be absolutely clear about that. Again, I thank Member of Council, Bill Henderson, about the vision. It is about delivery. I think he hit on one problem and the issue is: are we going to spend our lives on delivery, or are we going 4865 to spend our lives on scrutiny? There is a fine balance, there is a balance that you need both, and that is why I think actually the Climate Change Transformation Board, ERG that came out of COVID, Active Travel, those kinds of things give delivery mechanisms. There are lots of examples, and this is new. I think we have been very different. And if you have also noticed – just going back to Mr Robertshaw’s point – that our Departments have shrunk, they do not have quite so many 4870 Members. This is a journey, it is evolving and I think it will continue to evolve. I thank Ms Edge for her comments. She was very concerned about the wheel turning round. I think this is absolutely an opportunity. We have got fresh people looking at this, fresh people looking at it within OHR, but it needs departmental co-operation that again has to take the learnings from COVID and pull those forward.
______2615 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
4875 I thank Mr Hooper for his comments. He made a very strong point, and this is probably one disagreement where I have with Mr Robertshaw, when he talked about finance and the Treasury having to have lots of Members … My worry is will they be a stop to everything? That is a question that I would place, because the one thing that has worked incredibly well has been the ERG. The ERG has worked incredibly well. Why? Because it can make decisions, it can make things happen 4880 and it has got the budget to do it. I think again, personally – and I am speaking personally here – but I think there is a model, a lot to be seen from that. So I would absolutely agree with that. I also think there was a comment about arm’s-length bodies. We have seen different ones and we have got to now take a temperature check. I think that came across in the workshop that we 4885 need to take our time to see what is happening with Manx Care and the Steam Packet, reflect on that and also reflect on how existing bodies … I think I agree with some of the comments on some of those, the relationship with local authorities. Chris Thomas talked about it being a long journey and really what hit home for me is, everybody thinks if I have got the ideas like discovering penicillin or something like that … It does 4890 not work like that. Politics works through consensus and it does not really matter … Who cares who had the idea? It is about building something together. I have always strongly believed that, so I think that was a very good point. I think the point about Bus Vannin is interesting, because what we should be doing is setting the policy because there is social policy, educational policy. That is a group policy coming together. 4895 We have the legislation, but policy fills that gap. This is also important, again in my view, with regulation, that regulation is the law, yes, but you also have to have policy. The trouble is because we do not have policy the tendency is to micromanage within a Department, and then become managers again. If you get the legislation and policy right, then you do not have to do the micromanagement. 4900 So I think there have been lots and lots of views there. This Hansard is going to be really useful. Those workshops are really useful. I think this is, as the Member for Douglas Central said, a continuing journey. This is the Isle of Man Government taking the next step. So with that I would thank every Member for the debate, and I think it is a real positive step. Thank you, Mr President. 4905 The President: Now, Hon. Members, that concludes the General Debate.
Standing Orders suspended to complete all remaining business
The President: We move on to Items 34, 35 and 37. Now, Hon. Members, bearing in mind that those two debates plus the debate at Item 38 – Item 36 is not to be moved on the Order Paper – of course there is no way we will get these three 4910 debates completed by eight o’clock, when the session will end or you will choose to extend. So it occurs to me that we might take Item 37 at this point and review the position at eight o’clock. Is that acceptable? Mr Speaker.
4915 The Speaker: Maybe I could just float an idea and suggest that we propose the motion now that we sit to finish, and put that motion to the Court.
Mr Shimmins: Mr President, can I just object to that proposal? I think if these are important motions we should give them proper time. We have had a long day. We should come back 4920 tomorrow if we do not finish by eight o’clock. ______2616 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mr Cregeen: I would second Mr Speaker’s motion.
A Member: Yes.
4925 The President: That we finish now. (Laughter and interjections)
Mr Cregeen: No, no. (A Member: Hear, hear!) We take the vote now to finish the Order Paper tonight.
4930 The President: We take the vote now to finish the Order Paper tonight? (Mr Cregeen: Yes.) Right.
Mr Cregeen: So we can judge the …
4935 The President: Well, we can make that decision now, rather than at eight o’clock, and then Members know where they stand. I put that motion to the Court that we complete the Order Paper this evening. We will go straight to our electronic vote; 22 votes, combined, required.
Electronic voting resulted as follows:
In Tynwald – Ayes 22, Noes 10
FOR AGAINST Mr Ashford Mrs Corlett Dr Allinson Mr Greenhill Mr Baker Mr Hooper Mrs Barber The Lord Bishop Mr Boot Mrs Lord-Brennan Mrs Caine Mrs Maska Mr Callister Mr Mercer Mr Cannan Mrs Poole-Wilson Mrs Christian Mrs Sharpe Mr Cregeen Mr Shimmins Ms Edge Mr Harmer Mr Henderson Mr Moorhouse Mr Peake Mr Perkins Mr Quayle Mr Quine Mr Robertshaw Mr Skelly Mr Speaker Mr Thomas
The President: We have 22 for, 10 against; so we complete the Order Paper tonight.
______2617 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
34-35. Council of Ministers’ collective responsibility and papers – Establishing good practice for future – Motions carried
The Hon. Member for Douglas Central (Mr Thomas) to move:
34. That Tynwald is of the opinion that: (i) Except when the Government Code exceptions apply, Ministers should be bound by collective responsibility on all matters included within each administration’s Statement of Intent of its Policies and Priorities, Programme for Government and annual Budget, and in addition any matters relating to (a) the good governance of the Island, (b) national security or defence, (c) public safety and (d) the economic or fiscal stability of the Island that are determined by a majority vote of the Council of Ministers to be of national importance; (ii) The standing Council of Ministers Sub Committees have an important role to play in co- ordinating and prioritising policy to ensure it is aligned to the overall strategic aims of the Council of Ministers, and in reviewing new policy proposals to refine them before they are presented to Council for approval; and (iii) Council of Ministers should appoint either standing or ad hoc Committees, which may include non-ministerial members, to consider and report on specific issues.
35. That Tynwald is of the opinion that, notwithstanding any statutory powers to the contrary, as a matter of good practice: (i) Documents of the 2016-21 Council of Ministers and Departments should be made available to the incoming administration after the 2021 General Election; (ii) Normally, each item on the Council agenda should have a matching Council Paper to form the basis of the discussion; and (iii) The Chief Minister should consult the Council of Ministers in respect of whether to divulge information about the proceedings of the Council of Ministers under section 6(2) of the Council of Ministers Act 1990.
The President: In that case, Mr Thomas, please, to move Items 34 and 35 together. 4940 Mr Thomas: Thank you, Mr President. I rise to move both the Council of Ministers’ collective responsibility and joined-up working motion in my name, and the Council of Ministers’ documents and information motion in my name. I have discussed these with Minister Harmer and a couple of others and will be pleased to 4945 discuss further with anyone during the debate and would have been pleased to discuss further before the debate, following the e-mail I sent out with the main arguments I am going to make, which I am going to summarise, even compared to the e-mail now. So basically, what we have all got to understand is that we have a Government Code, which is a Government document which was made by the Council of Ministers, most recently at the 4950 beginning of 2017 as this new Government started its work. It is a Government Code. We are a Court of Tynwald, we are a parliament, but we can of course make declarations about what should be in any Government policy, including in its code. So the first motion and the second one are declaratory Tynwald resolutions. Let’s make that very clear: in no way does it bind the next Government; in no way is it anything more than a 4955 Tynwald declaratory resolution. It would be a bold Government that would not take into account and operate according to the Tynwald resolution, and that is why I bring this motion. But in no way are we seeking to restrict the next administration, in the sense that this administration immediately started to make sure that Members could join it by revisiting key parts of the Government Code, and that is where I start with the first part of the first motion.
______2618 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
4960 Basically the first part of my first motion summarises the collective responsibility part of the Government Code: paragraphs 1.26 to 1.34, particularly paragraphs 1.28 and 1.29, which were actually amended at the beginning of the last administration, four and a half years ago as that Council of Ministers was put in place. So specifically what I am asking Tynwald to prove is that it is of the opinion that:
Except when the Government Code exceptions apply …
– and those exceptions have been in place for a great number of years and were in previous versions of the Code.
… Ministers should be bound by collective responsibility on all matters included within each administration’s Statement of Intent of its Policies and Priorities, Programme for Government and annual Budget, and in addition any matters relating to (a) the good governance of the Island, (b) national security or defence, (c) public safety and (d) the economic or fiscal stability of the Island that are determined by a majority vote of the Council of Ministers to be of national importance;
4965 That was absolutely crucial at the beginning of the last Council of Ministers. Two parts to it were absolutely crucial. The first one was that the collective responsibility for Ministers did not bind everybody to everything, it just bound people to what was of national importance; and secondly, that it was the Council of Ministers that decided what was of national importance. To move on to the second two parts of the first motion. They are about how Council of 4970 Ministers’ committees operate. The first one is that:
The standing Council of Ministers Sub Committees have an important role to play in co-ordinating and prioritising policy to ensure it is aligned to the overall strategic aims of the Council of Ministers, and in reviewing new policy proposals to refine them before they are presented to Council for approval …
Secondly:
Council of Ministers should appoint either standing or ad hoc Committees, which may include non-ministerial members, to consider and report on specific issues.
Neither of those two elements were changed at all back at the beginning of 2017. What they have enshrined is what has happened for a great number of years, which is that the Council of Ministers, like any board, has to have sub-committees to work, so the standing sub-committees 4975 of Council of Ministers were set up in Minister Robertshaw and Minister Watterson’s time when they were Ministers, under a Council of Ministers minutes back in 2012. What has happened in the last administration is that there are now a plethora of types of arrangement committees, and that is something that for the public record I have drawn out in Written Question 38, in this month’s Tynwald sitting, in which I got a very good Answer prepared 4980 by the executive office of the Cabinet Office, I believe, just from working out what it covers. The legal and political bases for the establishment and operation of not only Council of Ministers’ committees and working groups, but also the Chief Minister’s committees and working groups, the transformation project boards and the champions, as well as cross-Government operations and committees that are set up under other bases. 4985 What is interesting is that the body that has been celebrated as being a success because it is geared towards outcomes, apparently, the Economic Recovery Group, is not actually mentioned in the list that I was provided with Question 38; and there are other Committees that I know exist and meet regularly, important committees, that are not actually mentioned. So that is what the Government Code says; it talks about how the Council of Ministers should 4990 organise and what I am putting down is that this Court is of the opinion that what the Government Code says is correct, and I would hope that future Council of Ministers will reflect on how it organises its sub-committee work, because, to me, we all want to minimise bureaucracy and
______2619 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
unnecessary duplication, and we want to have a rational system of committees and clear responsibility and clear accountability, rather than a plethora of arrangements that are made. 4995 The second motion that I am pleased to take together is even shorter and even simpler. Essentially, again, it is a Tynwald declaratory resolution and it basically puts into words in this resolution what already exists in the Government Code. The first one is:
Documents of the 2016-21 Council of Ministers and Departments should be made available to the incoming administration after the 2021 General Election;
That normally happens, I am sure, but to me it is important that Tynwald basically decides at this sitting that it wants Ministers to see all of the documents that were there available and have 5000 been worked on and that they will not be, for whatever reason, not made available to the incoming administration. Secondly, the Government Code already says that normally each item on the Council agenda should have a matching Council paper to form the basis of the discussion. Certainly, COVID has been difficult and it has been hard for public servants, but we have heard quite a lot in the last 15 5005 months or so that there has just been an officer report rather than a paper; and when evidence has been sought under freedom of information or under some sort of parliamentary process we have been told that officers reported that. To me, it is good to have a paper attributable to a decision that is there on record. So I am just asking this Court to reaffirm what is in the Government Code, which is that normally each item on the Council of Ministers’ agenda should 5010 have a matching Council paper as a matter of good principle. Finally, the law says that the Chief Minister should consult the Council of Ministers in respect of whether to divulge information about the proceedings of the Council of Ministers under section 6.2 of the Council of Ministers Act. I would hope that the Chief Minister is first amongst equals, as Chair of the Council of Ministers 5015 would decide rather than unilaterally, but in consultation with the Council of Ministers, that the Chief Minister chairs about whether or not to make information about decisions and about research public. With that, Mr President, I beg to move.
5020 The President: Hon. Member, Ms Edge.
Ms Edge: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks.
The President: Hon. Member, Dr Allinson. 5025 Dr Allinson: Thank you very much, Mr President. Just two questions for the mover. The first one is why? We have got two motions in front of us which he says are declarations which do not bind the next administration to do anything, so why are we discussing them at the end of this administration? Because I have tried to look for the 5030 trapdoor, that I have become familiar with Mr Thomas’s motions and I cannot find any, so either I am thick or he is even cleverer than I thought he was! (Laughter) The second question is, in terms of collective responsibility, which he has gone on about here, how does that apply to backbenchers who sit on Council of Ministers’ sub-committees, because that has been an issue, and the Hon. Member knows that it has been an issue; and how he sees 5035 that developing in the next administration? Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Hooper.
5040 Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President.
______2620 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
My first question was exactly the same as my hon. colleague’s: why? What is the benefit in having these declaratory motions? The Hon. Member has not explained it in his e-mail, which he says set out the rationale for his speech, but actually just reproduced the Government Code verbatim. So I do not really understand. I have asked him this question twice in recent days. Why 5045 are we having this debate? What is he seeking to achieve? And both times he has just given me the brush-off, and I did not hear any of that ‘why?’ in his opening remarks. So what is the purpose of these declaratory motions? The second thing I would say is actually, I fundamentally disagree with almost all of the first part of the first one. Yes, it is the Government Code, but I would fundamentally disagree with that 5050 as well. He is saying that it would be a brave Government that ignored this post-election. So my party does not have a party whip, we do not have collective responsibility. Partly that is because in the last five years I have served with five different Ministers in various forms and not once have any of them tried to impose collective responsibility on me. I think they know what would happen if they did. But they have not done it and it has not been necessary, because we have always found 5055 a way of working through whatever disagreements we may have had. So it is just an unnecessary system. So what if my party is returned with a significant mandate at the election and actually that is our position, we do not believe in collective responsibility; do we not have then a public mandate to ignore this Tynwald motion that Mr Thomas says we should be brave if we were to ignore? I 5060 mean the statement makes literally no sense. The second issue I have with this is the second part of the motion that talks about the role of the policy committees. We have just had a very long debate around single legal entity, cross- Government co-ordination, cross-Government policy development, cross-Government policy ownership. That is what matters actually. Part of the problem with the current system is you have 5065 Departments that own the policy that go through this committee structure where they try and filter it and try and get some kind of agreement before things get filtered back out to the Departments to go away and do the job with some more policy fiddling as we go. So actually this position that is being set out in the Government Code that says, actually the committees exist purely to co-ordinate and prioritise, not to develop and own policy, that is a 5070 huge problem. We have just spent two hours talking about how that is not working and we need a new system and we now have a motion here in front of us saying, ‘Just bin that off, actually. Let’s just go back to the current approach of silo policy development with a bit of co-ordination at the top.’ So again, I will not be supporting that part of the motion. The third element is actually around backbenchers on these Council of Ministers’ committees. 5075 There has been one occasion in the last five years where a particular Minister tried to enforce collective responsibility on me; it was Mr Thomas, as Chair of a Council of Ministers’ sub- committee, the Environment and Infrastructure Sub-Committee, in fact. He tried to enforce collective responsibility on all the backbenchers on that Committee at the time – myself, Mr Shimmins and Dr Allinson, as Chair of the MUA. And at that point all three of us said, ‘You’re 5080 having a laugh! We’re off!’ (Laughter) I think the language was probably a bit more fruity than that, if I am honest, Mr President! (Laughter) So again, he is basically trying to get Tynwald to say the only way you can be part of Government is if you play ball. I fundamentally disagree with that as well. So I have not heard why this is a necessary debate. I have not heard why any of these things 5085 are a good idea. Why do we need collective responsibility at all? Explain that. If we are to be declaring that it is a good idea, tell me why it is needed. I have not heard anything on that, Mr President. Thank you.
5090 The President: I call on the mover to reply.
Mr Thomas: Thank you. ______2621 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
It is a very helpful debate and it achieved exactly the purpose that I set out for it. I knew that Mr Hooper would have an opinion on this. Of course there is a, it is not a trapdoor, but there is 5095 some sort of plan. I think the CEO of the Department of Infrastructure spotted this about some of the way I used Tynwald earliest back in 2013-14, and there is a campaign behind this. So let’s go through some of the issues raised. The first one is that there is nothing in this motion about departmental members and collective responsibility, that is all in a different chapter of the Government Code. So I am not even going to respond to that, because I am going to stick to what 5100 is in front of you; that is entirely separate. I will deal with the Council of Ministers’ sub-committees a bit later on, but this has nothing whatsoever to do with the chapters in the Government Code, except for chapter 1, which is the one on the Council of Ministers and so on. The second point is it was actually the former Leader of Liberal Vannin Party who basically is 5105 responsible for the words on collective responsibility that are before you today. So either Liberal Vannin has changed its policy in that time or it was a compromise that the Leader of the Liberal Vannin Party was able to make on her own basis, because obviously Liberal Vannin has always been in Government since the party was created, which is something that the public does not realise, and pretty much all members of Liberal Vannin have always been in Government as well. 5110 I did a bit of a recollection about that. Therefore it is important that we understand what collective responsibility is about. Mr Speaker wrote an excellent report when Mrs Beecroft moved a motion seven or eight years ago about collective responsibility. Mr Speaker took responsibility for actually summarising why collective responsibility was in place for Government, so that there is a coherence in terms of the 5115 Budget and in terms of legislative priorities and in terms of policy priorities, and that argument makes sense to me. It is absolutely important that a group of people come together as a team to actually work on achieving things rationally to deliver the outcomes that that team of people have agreed on collectively. So I do believe in collective responsibility amongst the Government Members. It seems like 5120 that will not go so far as departmental Members in future, because if the Manx public is cynical about the motivations of public cynicism about the motivations of politicians is right, which I do not think it is, but if it is right, now we will not get an uplift after September for departmental membership, we will be much more about policy and getting things done and getting policy delivered. 5125 So to me, the essence of achievement in politics is to achieve something in terms of public policy outcomes. It seems to me you should be working together with people who agree with you on what you want to achieve. So I have got no problem whatsoever in supporting the fact that Government should be united as one about what they are trying to achieve. The problem moments for me in the last five years for this Government have been when some 5130 Ministers had pre-declared positions about some pretty major issues of Government, and they were given permission not to go along with collective responsibility around those pretty major issues; whereas some other Ministers had some issues on pretty minor points and it was decided by the Chief Minister that that was a dismissal issue. So to me, what the public has got a right to expect is that Government will be collectively bound 5135 around a Programme for Government and the Statement of Intent for the Government and before that the Chief Minister, and also around what is in the Budget. In terms of the trap, as Dr Allinson referred to it as, yes, I would be surprised if this issue does not become an issue during the Election, and I would be surprised as the next Government is formed that what is actually inside the policy framework is not a major issue. So that is why I am 5140 bringing this motion at this time. In terms of committees, I do think we ended up in a more chaotic situation than we needed to. To me, as in Tynwald with Tynwald committees, we are a lot better off with one system which is applied and varied as necessary rather than the Chief Minister setting up his own Committee alongside a Council of Ministers’ committee. He can, using the Government Departments Act; not ______2622 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
5145 using the Council of Ministers’ Act, but using the Government Departments Act anybody can delegate anything to anybody. The Economic Recovery Group, which is apparently a great success, is not even listed amongst the Council of Ministers’ committees. There are all sorts of committees that are out there, which we were trying to rein in. So now we will deal with the last point, the last misunderstanding, the assertion that this 5150 Minister asked the Members of the Council of Ministers’ sub-committees to understand that they were bound by collective responsibility. Well, it wasn’t … I mean I was the messenger, but that was a Council of Ministers’ decision. It is perfectly logical, I do not disagree with it. It is perfectly logical. What happened next, of course, was that departmental Members and other Members of 5155 Tynwald stopped being members of the Council of Ministers’ sub-committees and then they became Members by invitation of other groups, and we have ended up with a disjointed, potentially dysfunctional system. So I beg to move. If this motion is not passed we will be in a situation where Tynwald is of the opinion that there will be differences with the Government Code and that in itself will be 5160 interesting, so I am pleased I brought this motion and I am very intrigued to see how the vote goes and the record that is there is going to be helpful. Thank you very much, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Members, I put, first, Item 34. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The 5165 ayes have it.
A division was called for and electronic voting resulted as follows:
In the Keys – Ayes 23, Noes 1
FOR AGAINST Mr Ashford Mr Hooper Mr Moorhouse Dr Allinson Mr Baker Mrs Barber Mr Boot Mrs Caine Mr Callister Mr Cannan Mrs Christian Mrs Corlett Mr Cregeen Ms Edge Mr Harmer Mr Peake Mr Perkins Mr Quayle Mr Quine Mr Robertshaw Mr Shimmins Mr Skelly Mr Speaker Mr Thomas
The Speaker: Mr President, in the House of Keys, 23 for, 1 against.
______2623 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
In the Council – Ayes 5, Noes 2
FOR AGAINST The Lord Bishop Mr Greenhill Mrs Lord-Brennan Mr Henderson Mrs Maska Mr Mercer Mrs Sharpe
The President: In the Council 5 for, 2 against. That carries. Item 35. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
36. Manx public satisfaction poll – Item not moved
The Hon. Member for Garff (Mr Perkins) to move:
That Tynwald is of the opinion that the Chief Minister should commission a Gallup-type poll in September 2023 to gauge the satisfaction of the Manx public with the administration.
The President: Item 36 will not be moved.
37. Size, structure and cost of Government – Adjusting to meet Island’s needs – Amended motion carried
The Hon. Member for Arbory, Castletown and Malew (Mr Moorhouse) to move:
That Tynwald is of the opinion that the size, structure and cost of the Island’s Government must be adjusted to be more reflective of the Island’s current needs and ability to fund it; and calls on the Council of Ministers to report on how this can be achieved, with an implementation plan, by January 2022.
The President: Item 37. Hon. Member, Mr Moorhouse to move. 5170 Mr Moorhouse: Thank you, Mr President. For a moment, I want to focus on where we are now and how things can be refined to be more reflective of the Island’s current needs and our ability to fund it. Historically, when a review of the size, scope and cost of Government is called for there is a 5175 pressing need to cut costs, to reduce the size and simply to identify what can be done now. I was tempted to focus on doom and the ultimate calamity that could befall us. However, I do not want to create barriers and it is that desire to simply defend what we have. From my perspective, this is an opportune moment to carry out this review. This is not being forced on us. The wolf is not at the door. The intuitive need to simply cling on to empires is hopefully going to be less prevalent 5180 than it usually is when this type of review is carried out, from the flexibility shown during the pandemic. I really do hope that this motion can enable different and potentially completely innovative outcomes to be achieved. What is the role of the Government in 2030? We do need to look at the future: what is the best structure to meet the needs of the people, but also to enable the system to work for ______2624 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
5185 everyone, all stakeholders? Over the last five years, I have asked a range of Questions about the increase in size and cost of the Island’s Government. Clearly, attempts have been made to control the size and cost of central Government, but it is getting bigger. How big can it get? This century, several reports have been produced on the topic, but the size of Government continues to increase. I do not want to reach a crisis point like that which was experienced a 5190 decade ago. I am not advocating a slash-and-burn policy but a realistic assessment by each Government Department to carefully evaluate what services are currently being delivered and whether the staffing requirements truly reflect this. The latest Beamans Report has focused on one specific Government Department; now is the opportune moment for a wholescale reassessment of the relevant Isle of Man Government. What goes where; how things are done; 5195 and what should be being done by central Government. I am sure this will continue to be an interesting debate, and from my perspective the timing is perfect because it bridges two administrations and it will potentially produce an increased chance of success. I hope that the debate will bring different examples and allow us to throw out different thoughts. In terms of the Government, it is currently huge. It is potentially perfectly justifiable, 5200 but I do worry that the Department of Infrastructure is simply a microcosm of the wholly inappropriate superstructure that we currently have. I was in Infrastructure and while there I have to state there was a realism. There was a clear acceptance that because of the public-facing nature of the Department any issue will quickly become visible to all the Island’s people, and we have heard tonight examples about the promenade and various other things – things that we see, 5205 things that go into social media, instant hits. Most of the other Departments are able to operate quietly, but is their performance actually any better? (A Member: Not now.) Many useful examples are being shared today. The UK is a useful comparison as the size of local authorities changes, as the role of Government changes. A key reason why I brought the motion is timing: the Island should review the current situation 5210 while the economic data remains positive; and while many Members will come back re-energised, and also new Members will enter Tynwald. From my perspective it is far better if the decision of this magnitude is made with care and without the need to rush. The core analysis must focus on where we are in terms of size, structure and cost. Can things be simplified? Can de-layering take place? Can things be done in a better 5215 way? We need a fast-moving, responsive Government and I worry that we are becoming too big, too costly and too much of a problem for the Island’s people. Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Ms Edge. 5220 Ms Edge: Thank you, Mr President. I beg to second and reserve my remarks.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Harmer. 5225 The Minister of Policy and Reform (Mr Harmer): Thank you, Mr President. I will be very brief. I have just got a small amendment. We have talked a lot about sizes and the single legal entity. I think the size and structure very much is dependent on the Programme for Government and I think the two things should be connected together, so I have just put a small 5230 amendment that it ties in with the Programme for Government. Thank you, Mr President. I beg to move:
To leave out all the words after ‘calls on the Council of Ministers’ and to insert the words: ‘to include this workstream in a new Programme for Government by January 2022.’
The Speaker: Happy to second, Mr President. ______2625 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The President: Happy to second the amendment? Right. 5235 Mr Hooper.
Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President, I will try and be quite brief. I am quite broadly supportive of this motion, but it does have a particular issue that I would just like to talk about. The motion really only asks us to look at our current needs, that language 5240 ‘current needs’, it does not does not say future needs, it does not say what are we going to need tomorrow, it just says, ‘What do we need now?’ That is quite problematic, actually, because it undermines a lot of policy-making, it undermines this concept of things like early intervention. We need to invest now to stop the bigger problem later on. If we do not spend now, because we do not need to spend it right now, actually you are going to have a heck of a problem further down 5245 the line – and we are seeing that in Healthcare and in Education that actually what we are responding to now is a future need, not a current need. So what we have is a big problem that has built up because we did not do that 10 years ago when we should have done. I would also like to ask the Member moving, when he talks about ‘need’, is ‘need’ what he is talking about? Or is he talking about better outcomes and best in class delivery? Because again in 5250 his remarks, he seemed to be talking more about better outcomes for people, not getting what we need; and there is a whole different conversation around that, I think. Earlier on today, somebody mentioned Castle Rushen High School. (A Member: Yes.) Now, clearly, we need a replacement secondary school, we need post-16 education, but if I was to take the words of this motion quite literally, we need post-16 but it is probably more affordable to 5255 provide that centrally. So do we do that? Because it meets our need and it is affordable, but actually is it desirable? Is it appropriate? Probably not, actually, in the grand scheme of things. So again, the motion is quite limited in the context of how it is worded in respect of need, and I would just be very keen to make sure the Council of Ministers, if they are going to support this and take it forward, and the next Tynwald is going to be looking at this as part of the Programme 5260 for Government, to make sure that we are not just looking at delivering a functional service delivery. Sometimes we have to be aspirational. Sometimes we want to say: ‘Actually, those UK benchmarks are inadequate. We need to be modern. We need to futureproof. We need to think further ahead.’ That goes far beyond these kind of simple considerations of need. I think the other question then, the flipside of that conversation is when you start breaking 5265 down the difference between cost and value, and outcomes and cost, because all these things are quite subjective and I think what the Hon. Member is talking about is the level of service that the public expects. So the public might expect a bobby on the beat. We expect that, but actually we do not necessarily need it, but it is part of the Isle of Man approach, it is what makes the Isle of Man a better place to live than most parts of the UK. So actually some factoring-in the public 5270 expectation in some of this work is also quite important. Then, when you start talking about cost and value, how do you determine what is affordable? Government revenue is about £1 billion, we spend about £1 billion, so surely that is affordable, we have raised enough money to cover the cost of our expenditure. Right? That is probably okay. I do not think that is a good way of measuring affordability, necessarily, because we could 5275 double the size of Government and just raise more money to pay for it. It is still affordable. Or should we be looking at affordability in terms of how affordable is it for the economy? How affordable is it for individuals who are paying for all this? Again, not really specified how we are supposed to assess this level of affordability. But the one thing I would like to take away and the one reason I am quite happy to support 5280 this motion is actually the Hon. Member, when he talked about this motion, he talked very much in terms of shrinking down Government to be more appropriate for what we need. But actually I do not think that is what he is really saying, I think what he is really saying is ‘Let’s start by determining what we need and then let’s figure out how we are going to pay for it.’ That is
______2626 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
completely reversing the way we do things at the moment. At the moment we raise money and 5285 then we figure out how to spend it. We saw that in the National Insurance review, all the proposals were about how to change the revenue-raising side of things. No one was talking about how you are going to spend it. That is a new way of thinking; that is a new approach to Government. Actually, what is the service level we want? What is the outcome we want? How are we going to pay for that? How are we going to 5290 fund it? How do we make sure we do that in as effective and efficient a way as possible? That is what I am hearing, broadly. (Interjection) So I am quite happy with that. I am quite happy with that approach that says, ‘Let’s do something different.’ I would like to thank Mr Moorhouse, Hon. Member, for bringing this quite bold motion and this call for perhaps a better way of doing things and I am more than happy to support him. 5295 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Mr Baker.
The Minister for Infrastructure (Mr Baker): Thank you, Mr President. 5300 Just at the moment before Mr Hooper started to speak, I wrote down ‘needs versus wants’, and it seems as though we are very much in tune. Even though Mr Hooper I do not believe has children of his own, those of us who have know that our children tell us ‘I need that’, and most of the time they do not need it, they want it. That is where we are as an Island a lot of the time. There is a big difference between what our needs are and what our wants are. 5305 In order to move forward, we have to be able to differentiate between those two things and to really understand what it is that we are desiring and why it is, and what the alternatives are if those things are not provided by the Government. To do that, we have to have some real conversations with the public of the Isle of Man that we only have a certain amount of resources to work with and if the requirements are to operate within those parameters then something has 5310 to give. At the moment, we keep adding and adding and adding, and those things are often for very good reasons, but we have driven GDPR, we have driven Freedom of Information, we have driven Equality, Health and Safety. All of these things add cost to delivery. All these things are relatively modern constructs that have affected us. People’s expectations of service are to have world-class service and that is great, we should be aspirational. We had a good discussion earlier 5315 on about our services for our youth and we should be aspiring for better for those people. But that has a cost. There is no magic wand here that can just somehow streamline the organisation – press a button and it will all be okay, or automate so that everything is 20% more productive. It does not happen like that. Whether we have a single legal entity or a new public service, or one public service or any other combination, these things have to be created. 5320 Mr President, in my previous career in business, it was very easy when you were in growth mode to invest to provide better service. The answer to everything was, yes, agree with that person, invest in that piece of machinery, grow your business. It was equally easy when you were absolutely up against the wall with no money and all you had to do was fight to survive, because the answer to everything was no, you could not have that person, you could not invest in that 5325 machine, you had to make do and mend. The really difficult time was when you were betwixt and between, when you had been in a growth mode, but the market had changed and actually you really could not afford to keep doing those things that you had got used to doing. Equally, when you were coming out of a period of consolidation the opportunities were there for growth, but you did not have the resources, the people, the money to actually take those forward. Those were 5330 really difficult times and you had to be really clear in backing the right propositions, in filtering your opportunities and making sure that you took the ones that were really going to give you the payback. Mr President, that is where I see that we are going to be coming out of this year, out of COVID, in a world where the international economy is changing, the tax environment is changing. We are
______2627 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
5335 going to have to make some really smart choices and to do that we are going to have to take our people with us. We are going to have to make sure that every pound is well spent. To conclude, it is about the word value, not cost, that needs to be the driver of how we move forward. (A Member: Hear, hear.) We need to make sure we are looking forward. We cannot just slash and burn. We cannot just say that we are doing something for the very short term. We have 5340 to think long term. We have got a fantastic, successful Island here and it is our duty to be the custodians of that to pass it on to the next generation in better shape than we found it; and these sorts of decisions really do require some really considered thought and some smart decision-making. With that, Mr President, I will support the motion, I will support the amendment from Mr Harmer which 5345 ensures that this is embedded into the future Programme for Government, and I thank Mr Moorhouse for bringing it.
The President: I call on the mover to reply. Hon. Member.
5350 Mr Moorhouse: Thank you, Mr President. Thank you, Ms Edge, for seconding the motion; and thank you, Minister Harmer, for finding a positive way forward. Mr Hooper was able to identify the real crux of this in terms of getting something that is inspirational, something that is future-proofed, something that is of value going forward. I really 5355 think that is a valuable thing to consider and hopefully it can be captured and taken forward. We need to do something different, we need to be responsive. We proved we could do that during the COVID pandemic, and we need to take that energy, that thought, that different way of looking at things and move forward with it. Minister Baker spoke about the differentiation between need and want, and that is important. 5360 It is easy to have ideas, whilst the hard bit is actually getting down and really finding the solutions that can be taken forward to make the Island even better. Thank you to everyone who thought about this and contributed to this and the earlier debates. Thank you, Mr President.
5365 The President: Hon. Members, I put the amendment, first, to the vote. Those in favour of the amendment moved by Mr Harmer, please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. I put Item 37, as amended. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
38. Tynwald Commissioner for Administration case TCA 1909– General Debate
The Hon. Member for Douglas North (Mr Ashford) to move a General Debate on the Tynwald Commissioner for Administration Report on case TCA 1909.
[TCA 1909] is relevant to this Item.
The President: We turn now to the final Item on our Order Paper, General Debate, Tynwald 5370 Commissioner for Administration case. Hon. Member for Douglas North, Mr Ashford to move.
The Minister for Health and Social Care (Mr Ashford): Thank you, Mr President. Now, many Hon. Members within this Court may see this as a bit of a niche subject to be bringing forward for debate, but it is one that actually has a real life impact on people; and the 5375 more that I have looked into this the more I have found situations where people have been ______2628 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
affected one way or the other over this issue. It is clearly too late in this administration’s life to be able to assess and tackle the problem, but this is an issue I want to highlight ahead of the next administration, so that due consideration can be given as soon as the administration is formed later this year. 5380 The fundamental issue that I have found is a disconnect and deviation that has developed over many years and in fact even decades to be perfectly honest, as far as I can see, around the requirements for building control applications and the process that they follow and the process for planning applications. The fundamental issue is that once a planning application is approved and a building control application is lodged for work to commence, there are no checks that the 5385 building control application is in line with the planning application that was agreed. So someone can receive planning permission for a structure, then lodge a building control application which deviates from the approved planning permission. Once the structure is complete from a building control perspective, in order to be signed off it is only compared of course to the building control application not to the planning permission. 5390 So it is perfectly possible for someone to build in breach of planning, receive building control sign-off and if not discovered within the planning objection period of four years, until something goes wrong, to effectively have permission to remain and then having permanent detriment to the neighbours and the environment around it. That is what occurred in this case. But it appears, Mr President, that this is far from unique. The more I have looked into this, the 5395 more I have found other cases where this has occurred over the years. Like I say, this may be a niche subject, as I said at the start, Mr President, but it is a fundamental one that has a real life impact on people with stress, financial hardship and even effects of health and wellbeing as the result in some cases. As to will he look to review how planning is dealt with in the future, this is something I believe 5400 needs to be addressed. The general public cannot be expected to be building control or planning specialists, or the Police Force in their own right. In this modern digital age it should not be beyond the realms of reason for building control applications to be compared to planning applications by the competent authorities responsible, and prevent the stress, financial worry and hardship that issues such as this, however few, can cause to individuals. I can understand years ago where, in 5405 order to do so, you would have had to have building control authorities, possibly even employing people to go up to the dusty realms of planning and dig out their plans to compare, but we can now do it online. In this particular case, this has had a major impact on a couple who were just trying to be good small-time landlords, who had invested in property and wanted to offer others a home. As a result, 5410 they have suffered stress, anxiety and health impacts and it has actually put them off property investment for life; not to even mention the financial loss they have suffered. So I would urge anyone here who may be in this Hon. Court in three months’ time to consider this as part of the changes the next administration needs to consider. Like I say, it may be a niche subject, Mr President, and it may not affect a large number of 5415 people, but for those that it does affect it has real-life impact, and I hope it is one that can be resolved to ensure that in future no more individuals – who are simply wanting to go about their daily lives, invest in property and give other people a home – have to suffer as a result of the disconnect between planning applications and building control approvals. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) 5420 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Peake.
Mr Peake: Thank you, Mr President. 5425 I rise to second this General Debate that my colleague from Douglas North has brought to us, and it just highlights really the opportunity we have got for some change with some technologies, perhaps. I must admit when my colleague brought this to me, it was news to me as well. It is one ______2629 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
of those things that you just assume happens. So it is with great interest that I am here to support this General Debate. 5430 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: The Hon. Member, Mr Boot.
The Minister for Environment, Food and Agriculture (Mr Boot): Thank you, Mr President. 5435 It is a niche subject and it is one that obviously has implications, but I would firstly wish to state my agreement that there is a benefit in looking at the ways in which building control approvals and planning approvals can be better aligned. At the moment they are disparate authorities. DEFA is responsible for some building control, Douglas and Onchan are responsible for theirs, so there is a slight disconnect there. 5440 Many people confuse the remit of Planning and the remit of Building Control. Planning controls development in the public interest and considers, by way of example, potential loss of privacy, etc. Building Control, however, secures the structure of the building, health and safety welfare and convenience to the people about buildings. The Hon. Member’s constituent’s case is an interesting one, it is centred around the issue of 5445 damp ingress into one property considered to be caused by works on another. A dormer had been built larger than that approved and although it is not known what caused the damp it is unlikely that it was the size of the dormer that caused the damp issues the neighbour suffered, and it is more likely to have been associated with the construction methodology. It could equally have been a completely unrelated defect, bearing in mind the problem manifested itself a number of 5450 years after the construction was completed. Therefore, a change in legislation and/or a procedure to highlight the larger dormer would not in itself have prevented the problems which arose. I note the Report acknowledges that there is a time limit of four years regarding the planning matters under discussion and, importantly, that the Commissioner considers there was no evidence to support a finding of maladministration. I also note the scope for improvement in the 5455 website guidance on this matter and I have instructed that these changes are made forthwith. However, I have sympathy with the complainant and the Commissioner’s findings, and as such I think it would be appropriate for the next administration to consider whether having building control authorities check alignment with planning approvals, and also whether there is scope to improve the consistency of building control operations between different authorities. 5460 We will need obviously to include Douglas and Onchan Commissioners in this review, as they are the building control authority for their respective areas. Thank you.
The President: Hon. Member, Mr Hooper, please. 5465 Mr Hooper: Thank you very much, Mr President. We have had two people so far say this is a niche area. I would like to assure both of those Hon. Members that it is not a niche area. This Report actually highlights a number of issues in the planning system that some of us have been trying to highlight for a few years, so I am really happy 5470 the Minister has brought this as a debate. The issue that he has identified is that building control and the actual plan are not aligned. But also the issue identified in here is that actually no one checks that what was built itself aligns with the plan, not just that building control did not check, no one checked what was actually built; and then there is no check that what was actually planned, and even if it was built in accordance with 5475 the plan, is that doing what it is supposed to do? Has it been built correctly? Were the plans okay? This is a real problem, actually. (A Member: Hear, hear.) I have seen a number of these cases up in Ramsey where you have got a plan that says one thing and a development that does something else, even when something has been built in accordance with the plans. I will give you a specific example which is to do with a flood maintenance issue, actually. So it was built in ______2630 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
5480 accordance with the plans and everything was signed off. No one actually goes and checks it is working as intended. So the area floods quite regularly. No one knows who is responsible for this because Building Control’s responsibility ends at the curtilage of the building. The MUA’s responsibility ends as soon as you hit the surface. There is a massive distance there between who is responsible for what, where anything could go wrong. Actually the planning system just allows 5485 that to happen; there is no follow-up, there is no inspection. So this is not a niche subject. The other issue that is identified in this Report is the four-year time limit. There are a number of time limits built into our legislation at two, four and 10 years, I think, depending on the circumstances. The number of times that I have come across that particular reason as why planning are unable to take action, I think Members would be surprised actually at the length of 5490 time it takes to try to rectify some of these issues and sometimes you end up (Interjection) beyond the time limits. So people know, ‘Well, if I do it and no one notices for a while, it will be fine.’ That is generally the accepted approach on the Isle of Man in terms of planning enforcement. So this Report highlights all of these problems, actually, but they are not new. These are not unknown problems. The Department has been well aware of some of these issues. In fact I know 5495 this to be true, because when they published their most recent Operational Policy on Planning Enforcement, we had a very similar conversation about all of these issues, and a number of Members highlighted some of these problems that were going to happen when they stopped even responding to complaints that were considered a low-level of harm. We all knew this was going to happen and, lo and behold, these things happen. So actually it is 5500 changes, it is not just the law itself, it is changes in what the Tynwald Commissioner refers to as the operational policy. Those things have had a negative effect as well. It has been this administration that has made those changes, and that has not been a positive experience I think for anybody. There is another issue as well in terms of some of this. The Planning Department have stopped 5505 notifying the property owners, as well, when a planning application goes in. So I have got a situation where a constituent has found out someone has put in a planning application for something that is on their land. If they had gone to Planning and said, ‘You could have told me about this. I would have objected because this is my land.’ They do not notify people and the planning gets approved. The person builds on the land and the response from Planning is, ‘Well 5510 now you have got to take civil action to get it removed. Sorry.’ So, yes, obviously if someone has been given planning permission, they are going to assume that gives them permission to build, which clearly it does not, and we all know that, but actually not everybody does. People naturally assume, if I have got permission from the Planning Department it has been okayed. These are wide-ranging problems with our planning system and 5515 our Planning Enforcement approach, and it is not really … I do not blame the officers for this, I think they work really hard, but they are I think quite understaffed and under-resourced for the work they have got to do, and that then is reflected through the Department policy that really limits the type of enforcement action that they undertake. I completely agree with the Hon. Member, there should be more checks done, I think, not just 5520 between Building Control and Planning, but actually between the development and Planning, and between Planning and who owns the land. Actually, there just needs to be a more responsive approach to Planning Enforcement more generally. (A Member: Hear, hear.) So I cannot do anything other than completely endorse the Hon. Member’s comments except to say, please do not think this is a problem that is unique or niche. This is a bigger problem, I think, 5525 than maybe you appreciate.
A Member: Agreed.
A Member: Hear, hear. 5530 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Thomas. ______2631 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Mr Thomas: Okay, very briefly, then. It will be helpful when the new Government comes in to look back to the reports and the recommendations it made, and also that the Tynwald Committee has made in the 2011 to 2016 5535 administration, because this was flagged up in the Envision Report. It was flagged up in the Tynwald Select Committee on Planning and Building Control twice, because we picked up a petition for redress of grievance which was about this, then we made a report and it was put on to the Environment and Infrastructure Policy Review Committee, but that Committee has been very busy and has not had a chance to look at it in this administration. So that is the first point. 5540 It goes back even to the Poacher’s Pocket in Ballasalla, (A Member: Yes.) because it was a recommendation back in 2006 (A Member: Hear, hear.) in the Poacher’s Pocket. So it is not new, it happens all over the place. That is the first point. The second point is, if we do manage to move forward, there are two points to take into account if Government does decide to actually go in this direction rather than 5545 the direction we have been going in operationally in the last few years. The first point is in 2014, when I first joined the Department of Infrastructure and DEFA, one of my tasks was to actually talk about and execute the Building Control merger between Douglas, Onchan and Government because at that time Government was really short of building control officers and Douglas was already lending Government a building control officer, so why wouldn’t you build on that and 5550 work out a new rational way of organising for Building Control? But things changed and staffing changed and it got to, I think, it was not necessarily going to be a Government function, there were three options on the table. One would be it could continue to be a local government function led by local government people; another one was that it could be a Government function; and the third one was that it could be a hybrid between the two worked out collaboratively. That was one 5555 of the most positive proposals I saw from an officer inside Government in 2014, and very disappointed at the time. The second point is if we do manage – and this is where I give a compliment to DEFA and the officers in DEFA, in a backhanded way. But if we do manage to get to the situation whereby we have Building Control drawings and Planning drawings linked together, why don’t we be more 5560 ambitious and link it into more applicants systems? So we actually have the architects, and many of the architects do work electronically now with Planning and Building Control, but why don’t we encourage people to actually link it in that way? And after we have finished the planning and building control processes, why do we not we link it into Mental Health and Emergency Services, and Rates, and all those other things that could do with accurate information about what is going 5565 on in the properties like they do in really rationalised countries? I have owned property in a couple of other places and in those other countries you did not have one bathroom in a flat above a bedroom in the flat below, because everybody knew where the bathrooms were because you did have to record very basic stuff. So the bathrooms were all built in a stack so that the plumbing was rational and the sewerage was rational and the 5570 emergencies were rational because they were all stacked up. So with that I fully support the idea of optimisation, but it could be more imaginative and expansive, firstly; and, secondly, it could usefully involve delegating this function outside Government to an arm’s-length body which could even be merged local authorities in this particular function. 5575 The President: Hon. Member, Ms Edge.
Ms Edge: Thank you, Mr President. I used to work in the Surveyors Department in Onchan Commissioners, where we did both 5580 Building Control and Planning. In fact, it was when Building Control really took off in the Isle of Man, and Mr Bob Brown changed the focus of buildings in the Isle of Man and made sure that they were built to the appropriate standards. I am pleased it is a General Debate, but it is a shame it is not something that we can vote on to make sure there is change. ______2632 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
However, obviously the Minister has said that he will make sure there are changes, but one of 5585 the things that I have found, speaking recently to the officers in Onchan who do both functions, they do planning and they also do building control, which I personally think is the right way, but an awful lot of the authorities it went off to DEFA and I think for the smaller authorities, yes, that could work, but certainly in the larger ones. I attend their meetings and I see what plans are going through and one of the big concerns for me – and whether this can come through from the 5590 Department just as a point – is that the local authority elected members are making decisions on planning applications, and they have no experience of how to even look at a plan … like a lot of people. So I wonder if the Minister could also include that as an element, because that certainly needs to be included in any review with regard to building control or planning. The other one really is the separation of enforcement and whilst Onchan can do planning and 5595 they can do building control, if they go to a site and they see it is not getting built in line with the planning application that has been approved, they cannot do the enforcement. To me it would be a far more joined-up approach if they can do the enforcement immediately. And then also, just to follow on from the hon. Member for Douglas Central, it is perfectly sensible then for those officers to also report to the Rates Department saying there has been an increase in the size of this 5600 property. In the time I was in Onchan Commissioners, the gentleman that used to do the rates for Government, many a time he would come in and say, ‘I need to check to see … I don’t think these are paying their rates right.’ It would be far more of a through process if they were all joined up and it would certainly ensure the right revenue and the right processes were being followed for 5605 individuals who were doing it. So it is great that the Minister has brought it forward, but I totally agree with the Hon. Member for Ramsey as well, it is a bigger and broader issue, and it does need to be sorted to make sure it is right for the Isle of Man. Thank you, Mr President. 5610 The President: Hon. Member, Mr Cregeen.
The Minister for Justice and Home Affairs (Mr Cregeen): Thank you, Mr President. On the point from my hon. friend for Ramsey, Mr Hooper, about adverse possession, as 5615 somebody who had to deal with adverse possession on the Poacher’s Pocket, it is a costly thing when somebody tries to take your land. What I would advise people is to have a look at your house insurance because it often covers adverse possession. One of the things when I was speaking to Building Control, they said it is an issue because at times they have gone to properties and there are two sets of plans. It is also a problem for builders 5620 when there are two sets of plans because you have got your building control and you have got an architect’s plans, so sometimes there is a difficulty there. I hope that the Minister for DEFA can actually just confirm one point. I do not know whether he meant whether or must do something. I hope he means that they must do something rather than review it and whether it will be done. I just hope that he could clarify that a bit for me that 5625 when the officers are looking at this they must do something rather than whether there should be something done. Just make it a little bit firmer. The other point is that going on these planning applications, and I am dealing with one at the moment out at St Mark’s about where people position planning applications. They have put it on a tree where there is ivy … How is anybody going to see that on a road? And yet the planning 5630 application goes through and the neighbours do not know about it! I am grateful to the Chairman of the Planning Committee and to Minister Boot for listening to my concerns on this and there may be just a simple solution that the applicant has to show when they go to the planning application where that sign was displayed. Because, like my friend and colleague from Ramsey said, the planning application goes in and the first you know about it could
______2633 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
5635 be when the builders turn up on your doorstep. So the positioning of that application has to be somewhere where people can actually see it. The one that I am dealing with is on the way from St Mark’s to the Braaid. They are going to take away possibly the best part of 38 elm trees! Now that is a huge canopy there, and that will really distort when you drive down there. Nobody knew about it. The authorities did, but the 5640 neighbours did not, because you are driving down a road and you do not see the application. But going back to this, I really feel sorry for those people who suddenly come across a different development than what they thought they were getting because the Planning and Building Control have done their job, because the plans they have got marry up to what is getting built, but it may not be what has gone through on the planning application. 5645 Thank you, Mr President.
The President: Mr Speaker.
The Speaker: Thank you, Mr President. 5650 Just in terms of signposting, the Report before us today is not the only Tynwald Commissioner for Administration report on Planning and Building Control. I refer to a case in Gelling’s Avenue, Port St Mary, where a house was built 2.5 metres taller but was not considered by enforcement to be material – 2.5 metres taller than planned, because they did not have the plans with the ground levels on it. 5655 In the next street, however, a householder was denied planning permission for being able to change their front door, so that is material. (Laughter) And we wonder why confidence in this area is at an all-time low. (Mr Quine: Hear, hear.) There is a lot to sort out here. So when the Minister is reviewing this in the next administration I would like him to just take those examples and roll them into his consideration. 5660 Thank you, Mr President. (Interjection)
The President: I call on the mover to reply, Mr Ashford.
Mr Ashford: Thank you very much, Mr President. I will be as brief as possible. 5665 Can I start by thanking my seconder, the Hon. Member for Douglas North, Mr Peake – a sign of Douglas North working together here in practice. In relation to the comments by the Minister, Minister Boot, can I thank him for recognising the disconnect, and he is quite correct as we go through the Tynwald Commissioner for Administration Report for anyone who has read it, we cannot say for certain that the problem of 5670 the damp was actually caused by the dormer, but the problem is where you have a neighbour who will not allow you on to your land to look at it, the only answer to find out for certain is to spend thousands in the courts fighting it to actually get on to the property – thousands that many people do not have. So, in fact, the likelihood is they may never know what actually caused the issue. In relation to Mr Hooper and he says it is not a niche area. It is one of those moments where 5675 you want to say I am grateful to the Hon. Member and I am glad it is not a niche area, but it is not something you just say you are glad about because it clearly means that there is impact happening out there. Obviously I represent Douglas North, which is quite a built-up area anyway, and when I was a Douglas Councillor I represented Victoria Ward, which was also quite a built-up area. So I think that maybe I have been lucky in the fact I have not come across quite so many of these issues 5680 as some other Hon. Members have. But it is clear that there are issues that need to be tackled and I again am grateful to the Minister for stating that this will be looked at in the round in the next administration. In relation to the Hon. Member for Douglas Central, Mr Thomas, I thank him for his comments. I always worry when the Hon. Member for Douglas Central starts off by saying ‘very briefly’, 5685 Mr President, (Laughter) but he did honour his word and he was very brief. I thank him for laying
______2634 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
out the different options that have come forward in the past and his suggestions around digital linkage as well, as digital is something I am very passionate about myself. The Hon. Member for Douglas Central did ask me to say, he mentioned about complimenting DEFA and then sort of missed a bit of it out, but he did want me to mention around the fact that 5690 DEFA is making systems more electronic and is working forward in that. In relation to Ms Edge, the Hon. Member for Onchan, can I thank her for sharing the first-hand experience that she has had and talking about the joining-up of the system, and I am sure that the Minister has taken on board those comments. In relation to Mr Cregeen, adverse possession is a costly thing, it can run and run and run, and 5695 if the other party is willing to spend money, then it can get exceptionally costly and it can come down to who can outspend the other one in some cases. In relation to Mr Speaker, I am sure the Minister will be glad that there seems to be confidence he will be the Minister in the next administration, for DEFA, (Laughter) and I think again it shows some of the disconnect there currently is in the system. 5700 But from the sounds of the debate today, there is a real opportunity and a real will to look at this and to actually move things forward. The Hon. Member for Onchan, Ms Edge, said it was a shame there was not a motion attached to this but, to be honest, we are so late now in the administration that any form of motion would not have actually achieved anything anyway. I thought it was much better to have a General Debate where everyone can air their views and get 5705 them on record to give a direction of travel to that new administration. So can I thank everyone for their contributions, Mr President; and what I thought started off as a niche subject I think has turned out to be a very worthwhile debate. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) Thank you, Mr President. 5710 The President: Hon. Members, that concludes the General Debate and, indeed, our business for this sitting.
Farewell tribute to retiring President of Tynwald, Hon. S C Rodan OBE
The President: Mr Speaker.
5715 The Speaker: Mr President, Hon. Members will not be insensible to the fact that the conclusion of this sitting represents your final regular sitting, in Douglas at least, as President of Tynwald, marking the pinnacle of a very long and distinguished career in politics. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) Not just Manx politics, as recent attendees at the Commonwealth Dinner were recently treated to the secret history of President Rodan (A Member: Hear, hear.) from your time in politics 5720 as the President of the Scottish Young Liberals; parliamentary candidate for Moray and Nairn in the UK’s 1979 General Election; and even chained to the gates of Waverley Station (Laughter) – a time, as you put it, from when flares were in fashion. (Laughter) Somehow, in the midst of all of this political activity, you managed to qualify as a pharmacist, practising in Elgin and Bermuda, where you were in the Bermuda Pipe Band – another interest 5725 which you brought to the Island, being involved in the Cair Vie Manx Pipe Band and latterly the Ellan Vannin Pipes & Drums. You are, Mr President, ever willing to play the pipes at the drop of a hat – notwithstanding the protestations of others. (Laughter) In terms of cultural references I could also mention renditions of Albert and the Lion, perhaps, but am also reminded of the famous evening at the Filipino Association Dinner when you tried 5730 your hand, or should I say feet, at the traditional art of Tinikling – a YouTube video, Hon. Members, which is still available (Laughter) and I highly recommend for your enjoyment. But it does go to ______2635 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
show, Mr President, your willingness to join in, as well as to support others, and I know that the Filipino Association, amongst many others, hold you in high regard. When you came to our Island in 1987 you threw yourself into Manx life, activating the Laxey 5735 Clean Sweep Campaign to improve the village, which in turn led to a clean sweep when you stood for the Commissioners in 1991 serving four years, including two as Chairman. In May 1995 you were elected to the House of Keys for Garff in the last by-election under the Single Transferable Vote, triggered by Dr Edgar Mann’s elevation to Legislative Council. You have since won a further four general elections, including polling almost 93% of the vote in 2011 – a 5740 result even Vladimir Putin could only envy! (Laughter) Your career in Government has been a colourful one, starting in the Estates and Housing Division, then Planning, before your first ministerial appointment as Minister for Education in 1999, during which time you instigated pre-school nursery units and the behavioural unit. As we all know, the reward for hard work is more hard work and in 2004 you took over from your 5745 predecessor in that chair, Mrs Christian, as Minister for Health and Social Security. This is where you coined your immortal contribution to Tynwald Balls that: ‘The cost of incontinence pads will be absorbed by the Government’. (Laughter) I did start to try and count how many parliamentary Select and Standing Committees you have served on over the years, and I easily got to 30 and stopped counting. You have certainly been 5750 busy! These have varied from subjects as wide and varied as the Queen’s Jubilee, Ministerial Government, Immigration, Civil Legal Proceedings and the obligatory national service on a Steam Packet Committee – twice! (Laughter) Having served with you on the Select Committee for Immigration almost 15 years ago, I can testify to your skills as a canny political operative in the Chair, skills that served you well during your decade in the Speaker’s Chair. 5755 The role of Speaker of the House of Keys is indeed a special job, and I recall the fondness for it that you exuded when handing over to me as your successor. It is clearly something you have been very proud of, and rightly so; and I might say, in political times, far less benign than I have enjoyed during my tenure. However, I suspect that one of your most cherished accomplishments in the House of Keys was 5760 securing votes for 16- and 17-year-olds here on the Island, once again putting us ahead of many other countries in the world. Having noted your extensive service, you now find yourself as the Father of the Court, a title that will soon pass on to Mr Henderson who joined in 1998. However, as you have reminded other Members on occasion, behind every successful man is 5765 a surprised woman, (Laughter) and it is hard to imagine a better support to you throughout your time in this Court than Ana. She has been forever at your side at parliamentary functions, as well as being your long-suffering constituency message-taker and resident therapist! I know Tynwald would also like to thank her for the role she has played in Team Rodan. (Members: Hear, hear.) You have also represented the Island capably on Commonwealth Conferences on numerous 5770 occasions, as well as at the Plenary Conference in Sri Lanka in 2012. But it is perhaps your leadership of expeditions to Edinburgh that are most likely to stick in the minds of Members. Sadly, I have not had the pleasure, but I do believe a mixture of celestial and spiritual navigation is employed when the evening has turned from labour to refreshment. I have also mentioned your association with the Filipino Association, but you have also served 5775 for many years with the Royal British Legion as President of the Laxey and Lonan Branch, and latterly as Isle of Man County President. You have also been very involved with the Laxey Fair over the years, as well as the Laxey and Lonan Heritage Trust and the Great Mines Railway. And I know they have all been grateful for your support. However, it will inevitably be your family that will be getting an increased share of your 5780 attention after your time in Tynwald, with your grown-up daughters and grandchildren, and I am sure there will be many more family occasions which you can now find time for. Mr President, the summit of your political journey, though, must be your time as our fourth President of Tynwald, during which you were awarded the Order of the British Empire by Her ______2636 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
Majesty the Queen for services to our Island. During the last five years you have presided over our 5785 deliberations with fairness and good humour, with an encouraging demeanour in relation to brevity and with a strong discouragement to repetition. (Laughter) Mr President, you might not miss us, but we will definitely miss you. (Members: Hear, hear.) Hon. Members, I ask you to show your appreciation to our President, the Hon. Steve Rodan, MLC.
Members stood and applauded. A gift was presented to Mr President.
5790 The President: Well, Mr Speaker, Hon. Members, thank you very much for your kind and generous remarks and that beautiful gift which I will treasure always. Thank you, Hon. Members, for your political friendship over the years and especially for having me as your President these past five years which has been an enormous privilege. If serving as President of Tynwald is thought to be one of the greatest privileges a Manx-born person can have, 5795 you can imagine it is even more so for an adopted Manxman, if I can use that phrase; who, on arriving here 34 years ago, had not the slightest inkling where fate would lead. I do not know, Hon. Members, where 26 years has gone as a Member of this Hon. Court. You arrive one day as the newest, greenest and certainly one of the youngest individuals in the Court and suddenly you find yourself the longest-serving Member, an analogue politician in a digital age 5800 in my case. (Laughter) Hair no longer dark, as you will all one day experience yourself (Laughter) and about to join those other birds of passage who, having flown into Tynwald, sooner or later fly out. In the words of T E Brown, evoking childhood on an idyllic summer’s day:
And when you look back it’s all like a puff, Happy and over and short enough.
I am grateful for the opportunities that have come my way, and Mr Speaker kindly informed 5805 you about my beginnings in Scottish politics and in student politics, which was very naughty of him, (Laughter) but that is Mr Speaker. (Laughter) If I were to offer any word of advice it would be this: if you see a door opening, go through it. You will always be sorry later if you did not. On that basis, I have been very thankful for the fulfilling experience of being involved in the political life of the Island and have met so many interesting people, colourful characters, both 5810 inside and outside of Tynwald – and you will need to wait for my memoirs when I say a bit more (Laughter) about the ones inside. But there were certainly a few. I am grateful to have represented the constituency of Garff and thank the people of Laxey, Lonan and Maughold for having me as their MHK through five elections. Also those supporters, friends and campaign workers, and as those of you defending your Keys’ seats in September will 5815 well appreciate, no candidate gets very far without them. Having served in Government Departments as Minister and as a Member, as Mr Speaker has alluded, I have worked with many able civil servants and others in the public sector, and I pay tribute to them. Quite simply, they are the other side of the same coin as us, as politicians. We are all colleagues dedicated to moving the Isle of Man forward as best we can. Thank you to them. 5820 Being on parliamentary committees over the years has been a pleasure – just as well, (Laughter) because as Speaker I was on nearly 20 of them at any one time! I am grateful that the Keys were prepared to have me twice as their Speaker and in that role, as in President, to be able to fly the flag for the Isle of Man. I also pay tribute to the staff of Tynwald, those who support us so well keeping the wheels of 5825 machinery going. The Clerks, both past and present – and I would congratulate Jonathan King on taking up the reins and who will uphold the standards set by our outgoing Clerk, Roger Phillips. (Several Members: Hear, hear.) And also to the office staff and messengers.
______2637 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
When I arrived at the office it was not in the same place, but there was the clatter of typewriters – and some of you may remember – and staff and Members were allowed to smoke! 5830 (Interjections) So there were cigarettes and pipes going, and cigars. It seems hard to believe, a changed era, even 25 years ago. Thank you, Mr Speaker, for mentioning my wife and family – Ana, the lady at the back – because you will all know how important the family is when you take up the task of being a Member of Tynwald. It is you who wants to do it, (Laughter) spending the hours on papers, 5835 preparing for meetings, going out to evening meetings, visiting constituents, doing your duty, long hours – which, especially at weekends, could otherwise be very well spent with your family. Quite often it is they who pay the price in supporting your ambitions, so my advice is look after them too. And, as Mr Speaker said, behind every successful man stands an astonished woman. It would be quite incorrect to put it the other way round, but I think the sentiment is there. 5840 As President, unable to take part in the political cut and thrust any more, this can be somewhat frustrating, but as all my predecessors confirm it comes with the territory. But, as President, I have had more time to reflect on Tynwald’s structure and longevity, on the careful balance between its Legislative Branches, the roles of the House of Keys and the Legislative Council, and the way they have evolved, and its capacity to adapt to constitutional and societal change, and have concluded 5845 that Tynwald’s value lies not only as a centuries-old element of the Isle of Man’s unique heritage, but I believe the key to whether or not the people of this Island move forward with confidence into the future. Founded in the days of the Vikings, sitting for centuries in Castle Rushen in the medieval Court, surviving the English civil war, the Island’s purchase by the British Crown, then virtual colonial rule 5850 and then into the modern era, Tynwald Court has always proved resilient. And no more so than over the last 15 months, as the Island has itself been tested in a time of trial by COVID, when Tynwald rose to the challenge, Members working from home, sitting virtually to deal with hundreds of pieces of necessary legislation. Well done! Having our own Parliament meant we were never absorbed as a county of England but stayed 5855 a nation, to have legislative capacity of our own, unlike those other islands off the British coast, who simply send one MP to Westminster – and one can think of Orkney, Anglesey, the Isle of Wight. This has allowed the Isle of Man over the years to create its own fixed economic and social structures as a basis for the progress, welfare and security of our people and, crucially, to react quickly in the face of challenge, whether from COVID, banking failures, international changes in 5860 tax standards, or anything else. So that is why I have always said, and will always say: Tynwald is the most precious asset the Island has; and those men and women who at any one time serve as its Members – and we are all birds of passage, as I say – always fair game for the media of the day, always accountable, rightly, to the people who put us here, and if at times things do go wrong, my goodness, we also get an 5865 awful lot right! Politicians come and they go, as I say, but Tynwald as an institution which we hope will always be here with its traditions, but still adapting and moving with the times, here long after we are gone. So those members of the public, the community who exercise their right to criticise and have a go at their representatives, the politicians of the day, have a go! But be thankful also that 5870 we live in a country with institutions which allow you the freedom to do that. (A Member: Hear, hear.) The opportunity, Hon. Members, to serve in Tynwald, whether the years be long or short, to serve the people of this Island as legislators and policy-makers as you do now, Hon. Members, is one of the greatest responsibilities and privileges that any man or woman who loves this Island 5875 could have. (A Member: Hear, hear.) It has certainly been mine. Thank you again, Hon. Members and Mr Speaker, for your touching words; and whatever the future may hold for you individually, whether inside or outside this place, I wish you the very, very best. (Members: Hear, hear.)
______2638 T138 TYNWALD COURT, WEDNESDAY, 16th JUNE 2021
The Council will now withdraw and leave Mr Speaker to conduct such business as he puts 5880 before the Keys.
Members stood and applauded.
The Council withdrew.
House of Keys
The Speaker: Hon. Members, there being no further business to put before the House, the House stands adjourned until next Tuesday in our own Chamber at 10 o’clock. Thank you.
The Court adjourned at 9.02 p.m.
______2639 T138