----------------------------

Catching up on my newspapers I have just noticed J. Quayle’s letter (Examiner, February 28) stating hope of more efficiency when our abattoir is taken over by a new operator.

I share Mr Quayle’s hope that it will reduce live export for slaughter. I have a penchant for that old favourite dish of liver, bacon and onions but the Manx ox liver I prefer, never seems to be available.

It’s all been exported. We then import lamb’s liver (for instance) from New Zealand. Where is the economic sense and compassion in that? Where is my so-called ‘customers’ choice’?

I prefer Manx produce and it’s not there. Hasten change, common sense and fairness for animals and customers alike.

J Harrison

Onchan

----------------------------

Your report on the 2016 census (‘Population Time Bomb’, Manx Independent, March 9) highlights that the Isle of Man population has become older since 2011 and that this raises concerns about public services and pensions.

However, before older people are once more described as ‘economic threats’ or ‘burdens’, it is important to put the additional 418 people over retirement age into context.

Population ageing is not a new phenomenon. Increasing longevity has been described for decades and any sensible government would have planned and saved for this long ago.

In addition, older people, those over 65 years old, are net contributors to the Manx economy, adding more in value than they cost in health, welfare and pensions.

Research in England and Wales in 2010 showed that older people made a net positive contribution of £40 billion to the UK economy that year, and those contributions would increase over time.

This was made up of direct revenue from taxes plus the value of indirect contributions such as voluntary work, providing free childcare for grandchildren and unpaid caring for chronically ill relatives, together with subsiding their children and families (UK studies show that a fifth of grandparents help provide the deposit for house purchase and a third are funding everyday costs, especially for grandchildren).

Research in Northern Ireland, a relatively poor country, in 2014, showed that they will be £25 billion better off over the next 50 years as a result of the contributions made by older people.

Research by the Isle of Man University of the Third Age (U3A), presented in 2015, showed that it was probable that older people on the island contributed over £40 million in value more than they cost each year. In addition Manx residents were on average better prepared financially for retirement than those in the UK.

None of this reduces the need to grow the economy, increase the working population, and thus increase government income. Older people will play a part in that future through continuing suitable work, through investment or through their considerable, often unrecognised, voluntary contributions. It is therefore imperative that government includes older people in the national planning process and supports all those third sector organisations providing services to older people.

The Isle of Man U3A is a self-financing, self-help cooperative offering a wide range of continuing learning for older people in a sociable and fun way. We are helping maintain well-being and independence for the older population. If you are interested in joining, visit our website isleofman.com/u3a, or phone 801032.

Dr John K. Wardle

Vice-Chairman, Isle of Man U3A

Peel

----------------------------

When we first moved across ten years ago, one of the many delights of the island was the charity shops. Packed full of interesting and useful stuff – clothes, books, household equipment – and always bustling.

In recent years, many have been given makeovers – now they have designer shelving, loads of space, very little stock to buy and nowhere near as many people. Some are blessedly unimproved - an honourable mention for Age IoM in Port Erin - but I was saddened to go into the relocated Hospice Shop in Peel recently. It looks very up-market, but has much less stock than at the old location and, worst of all, it no longer stocks books.

John Woodman

Douglas Street

Castletown

planning

A better view of turbine position

With reference to the carefully positioned view of Bradda Head taken from near Ballaman, I think that a view of the southern headland of Port Erin bay including Ballaman and the former Marine Biological Station would be better. This would enable your readers to make a balanced judgement of the proposal to erect three wind turbines at Ballaman.

Kathleen Trustrum

Port Erin

----------------------------

I read with interest the letter submitted to last week’s Examiner by Hugh Davidson, which addressed the planning battle taking place over the application to erect a number of 60ft high wind turbines on the Ballaman site overlooking Port Erin Bay.

Mr Davidson recited the extraordinary history of this planning battle, and noted that the applicant, billionaire John Whittaker, has now seen fit to persist with a further revised application, despite an unprecedented level of objections being received from all sides regarding his previous applications.

Bodies such as Manx National Heritage, Port Erin Commissioners, Port Erin Traders, each of the local MHKs and many private citizens have made clear their opposition to the scheme, with the massively detrimental impact that wind turbines would have on a site of such natural beauty.

Concerns also have been expressed in relation to the danger to aircraft on the approach path to Ronaldsway, and the adverse impact on wildlife that the scheme would inflict.

And yet, here we are again with yet another iteration of this application, through which the applicant is clearly seeking to utilise the planning process to grind down the hundreds of organisations, public representatives and individuals that are opposed to such a development. And all for what purpose?

The Ballaman site has been subject to literally dozens of planning applications over the past 10 years, and is now a massive complex of buildings including a helicopter hangar and a heliport.

The planners have historically been extremely tolerant in granting applications for such intensive development, but now wind turbines? These wind turbines would only generate approximately £6,000 of electricity per annum – not even enough to keep the lights on at the heliport, and of no benefit whatsoever to the wider community.

It is time that the planning committee put a stop to this abuse of the system, and made it clear to Mr Whittaker that NO further tweaks and re-modelled applications will be accepted for this scheme, no matter how much money he throws at the process to try to force his will through, in callous disregard to the rest of us who also inhabit this beautiful island and care deeply about its very special natural beauty.

David K. McGarry

Bradda Road

Port Erin

----------------------------

I was born in Ramsey, 4 Corlett’s Court, a small terraced house off Water Street. I went to the board school in Albert Road.

On November 11 each year, Armistice Day, we were walked down to the courthouse.

The schools lined up with their backs to Water Street.

The ex-servicemen gathered on the Market Place, formed fours and marched up to the cenotaph lining up with their backs to the Mitre Hotel.

The courthouse area was crowded. As there were iron railings around the area people stood on the pavements outside. The service was conducted by the Reverend Mark Harrison, vicar of St Paul’s.

Who would have thought then that in a few years some of the small boys shivering in their short pants, knees turning blue with the cold, would have their names engraved on that cenotaph?

To me, that area is sacred. Hallowed ground, not to be altered in any way.

If our government has no further use for the old courthouse, they should give the whole area to the town of Ramsey.

The youth of Ramsey bought that ground with their lives in two great wars.

The people of Ramsey should decide what is best or the most appropriate use for the old courthouse.

It is beyond belief that any government would be so greedy, so thoughtless, so uncaring as to try to make money from the sale of hallowed ground.

There are only a few World War II veterans left. In a few years we will all be gone.

We have always hoped that future governments would encourage the remembrance of our friends who did not return. After the apparent contempt our government has shown for Ramsey’s fallen, I have grave doubts.

Without wishing to bore you, may I finish with a quotation I saw in a book years ago. ‘Here dead lie. We who did not choose to live and and shame the land from which we sprung, life to be sure is nothing much to lose but young men think it is and we were young.’

Bob Quayle

Little Mill Road

Onchan

----------------------------

Open letter to Kate Beecroft MHK, Minister for Health and Social Care

I wrote, in a personal capacity, to Malcolm Couch [chief executive of the Department of Health and Social Care] on March 4, which I copied to you, with regard to the patient transfers.

TravelWatch have now, inevitably because of the huge public concern, also become involved. All our enquiries so far have merely been referred to the Statement issued by the department, which gives the broad outline of the process undertaken, but have ignored many of the real concerns we have raised, and questions asked.

We understand that there is a degree of confidentiality in any tender situation, but feel that there are many issues which do not intrude on this in any way, and which the many users of the service, as well as the taxpayers, are anxious for further information in the light of the disquiet following the recent decision.

On such a contract, catering exclusively for the most vulnerable of our residents, often at the most difficult time of their lives, we would argue that the 50/50 weighting of costs v quality of service is inappropriate, and this particular contract would merit a higher scoring for the latter.

We are advised by Treasury that departments are free to request that the quality element can prevail over cost on a case by case basis, and that such a request would have been considered on its merits.

In any case, the weighting of costs v service levels needs clarification as to how the service weightings are combined with the financial costs to produce a ‘winning’ tender.

There are different ways of doing this, and if the arithmetical process is not defined in the documents issued to tenderers before submission, then the evaluation process is open to challenge.

However, the determination of the quality of the service offered remains of the highest concern, and the attached detailed summary of what we understand to be the basic requirements of any satisfactory tender process is attached. We would be very grateful indeed if the information requested could be made available as a matter of some urgency, in view of the timescales involved.

The Patient Transfer Information Sheet summarises what we understand to be the basic requirement of any satisfactory tender process, but in addition to these, there are a number of basic questions, which have been brought up by concerned users and carers, which we have been asked to help find answers to, as far as the evaluation of quality of service is concerned.

Were the views of the Users of the service - the patients - taken into account, and how?

Was due consideration given to the extraordinarily high levels of satisfaction recorded with the current operation?

Did any officers of the department or those others involved in the tender evaluations visit Liverpool to discuss the challenges of this operation with the airline’s handling agents and the specialist care providers at the airport? (Note: TravelWatch have asked this question on two previous occasions , without response)

How is the quality of the service provided to be monitored?

What is the fallback position should any problems be encountered in the operation of the contract? (This is a question raised by many users, conscious of their vulnerability in such a situation)

It would also be helpful to know whether there are plans for the patient transfer office to open earlier each morning?

We understand that it is currently not manned until 9am, although the first PTS aircraft lands at Liverpool at 8am, which means that there is no-one available to deal with any problems arising from the not uncommon disparities between notified and actual patient numbers.

We are advised by the agents at the airport that the current contractor takes it upon themselves to organise additional cars and routeings as required.

Up to seven different hospitals can be involved, and occasionally some patients may need to be picked up from Manchester Airport at short notice if the Liverpool flight is full, as well as the occasional Heysham requirement.

During service disruption, considerable flexibility is essential.

Are the department satisfied that any potential contractor can meet these requirements, including the supply of approprate vehicles for those patients with restricted mobility?

On a separate matter, we have some concerns over reports that tenderers were invited to offer a quotation on an all-inclusive fee, rather than on a ‘per journey’ basis.

We understand that this based on the expectation of a decline in the number of patients travelling in the future, which is no doubt based on statistical evidence, but, even accepting this, would this not be a significant temptation to any contractor to consolidate journeys wherever possible , or to hold returning patients for the later flights, rather than, as at present, making considerable efforts to return those who are released from any of the hospitals in sufficent time to catch the 5.20pm departure rather than having to wait until 1950 – one of the most appreciated assets of the service, as we are sure you appreciate.

We do understand that there are a number of questions raised, but we really believe that these are of very real importance to all those who use the patient transfer service.

Overall , we believe that it works very well and is hugely appreciated, as a result of the great efforts put in by many of the PTS staff, and by staff at both airports, by the airline, and by the transport contractors.

This high level of service is vital considering that the users are among the most vulnerable of our residents - the old, the fragile, the sick, and sometimes the emotionally shattered, often travelling alone, and very reliant on the care given throughout their journey.

We are sure that, given the current level of interest , as well as with recollections of the absolute debacle and distress experienced when this contract was moved from the specialist provider to a local taxi firm some years ago - an experiment which lasted, we seem to recall, only some six weeks - that every care will be taken to ensure that any new contractor will meet at least the current standards of service which have proved so valuable. We expect the performance to be closely monitored during the early weeks.

We look forward to hearing from you, and you may be interested to know that there is a TravelWatch public meeting on Saturday next.

No doubt this matter will rank very highly in the public’s interest.

You may wish to join your fellow Minister, Ray Harmer, in attending, and you would be most welcome. Alternatively, we would be happy to pass on your department’s responses to the questions which they have raised with us, as outlined above.

Terry Liddiard

TravelWatch IOM

----------------------------

It would be good if the behemoths of building on the Isle of Man, i.e. Dandara and Hertford Homes especially, tidied and dealt with the eyesores that they are sitting upon before indulging themselves by building yet more housing, when the property market for many would-be sellers is practically static and the population is falling. If the present building rampage continues, there will be no area in the island unaffected by these megalithic entrepreneurs with their insistence on crammed-in properties bounded by flimsy wooden fences that rapidly rot, and barely a dustbin space between them.

Dandara has owned the increasingly derelict Royal Hotel at Port Erin for some years. It will soon be in a state of danger, it is certainly an eyesore.

Hertford owns the former Bay Queen in Port St Mary and uses it more or less as a dump, a sad contrast to the crescent of well cared for Victorian and other properties on the rest of the promenade. I realise that Hertford are advertising potential apartments in this building, but when will any actual construction begin?

Then there is the Castletown Golf Links Hotel, a sad decaying reminder of days gone by when diners and golfers enjoyed the idyllic setting and the quiet romanticism of this once popular hotel. Must it moulder for ever? How and why is this allowed?

I do not know of the owners of the Ocean Castle site in Port Erin, another building of architectural merit that was ripped down impulsively and is now a weed riven waste land, an eyesore for visitors and residents alike.

Could our government, clearly devoted to the new build brigade, please show a little backbone and get these derelict sites dealt with, and soon please? My island home is not what it was.

I shall not even touch upon the Castle Mona.

Judith Newbold,

Athol Court

Port Erin.