...........

I am writing to give you a feel of the attitude of the government and MHKs to the disabled.

I went to Howard Quayle’s farm to speak to him face to face and told him I thought that charging to use a disabled park in the multi storey parks was wrong as I have a trike.

If I park in a space on the street and someone parks too close I cannot get back into it, so I have not much choice other than using a disabled space. His reply was that’s the way it is, you will have to pay.

And the lack of drop kerbs means you have to plan your route to go anywhere or you come to a kerb and have to go back the way you came.

I went to Douglas Head and had to wheel up the road to get on the pavement as the only drop kerb is right at the top of the road by the turning circle.

Paul Sullivan

Braddan

It is exactly 12 months since I wrote a letter to the Isle of Man Examiner expressing my disgust at the shameful increase in the ‘standing charge’ on my gas bill.

Up until I decided to write the letter (April 28, 2016) my standing charge for an average two monthly (60 days) gas bill has been in the region of £9.

The then increase to the standing charge by Manx Gas brought this figure up to a staggering £60, and I said at the time that the government – Office of Fair Trading – should hand their heads in shame in agreeing for this so happen.

Twelve months passed until two weeks ago I received two letters from Manx Gas advising me of a revised banding entitled me to a 32.36p per day reduction to my standing charge (I was highly delighted).

The second letter I opened said that my revised banding was to increase the standing charge by 32.36p per day.

On contacting Manx Gas I was given to understand that there had been an administrative error and that I should discard both these letters and that I would receive a third letter within days.

The third letter arrived and needless to say there was going to be an increase in standing charge across the next 12 months.

An increase of 32.36p per day for a two-monthly bill (60 days) would amount to a further £19.40, bringing my standing charge charge to almost £80 for a 60-day period. (£480 per annum).

I can only describe this standing charge as totally obscene and it seems beyond belief that the government/OFT have again been duped by Manx Gas.

As the Office of Fair Trading has again failed to act then the government should at once appoint an ombudsman to oversee and investigate these improper practices made by unscrupulous authorities.

I am again mystified why more complaints have not been made and can only assume consumers are too busy to study a breakdown of their gas bill. Examine the back of the bill and see the actual gas consumed as opposed to the standing charge.

Surely there must come a time when one must consider to change over to an oil-fired system as much more reasonable alternative, especially taking account of the low cost of crude oil and also with the standing charge.

D. Hindley

Port Erin

On Saturday, May 20, I somehow managed to drop my iPhone in Walpole Avenue, Douglas.

When I realised it was missing some time later, the inevitable panic set in and we tried to call the phone with the expectation it would be long gone.

In hindsight the panic was not needed because this is the Isle of Man where community spirit clearly still reigns.

The phone was answered by an officer at police headquarters who informed us that it had been handed in short time beforehand.

Unfortunately the person who found the phone and went to the effort of handing it in did not wish to leave their details.

So to whoever it was, thank you so much. You saved me a lot of heartache and you epitomise the reasons why this island is such a unique and great place to live.

Mrs N Griffiths

Governor’s Hill

environment

What about the horse tram dirt?

I note that The Examiner this week carried an article in which the government requested that the public should be vigilant about cleaning up after their dogs foul. As a responsible dog owner myself I totally agree.

Perhaps the government would also like to advise Douglas Corporation that horse ‘fouling’ on Douglas promenade in this day and age is totally unacceptable.

Gordon Drake

Vicarage Park

Braddan

I have just received my latest bill from Manx Telecom and I am shocked to find the monthly line rental charge has leapt from £14.45 to £17.45 – an increase of more than 20 per cent!

How can they possibly justify that?

D A Reynolds

Clifton Drive

Ramsey

I was out fishing in my boat recently and was taken aback by the site of the dredger Admiral Day, which is currently dredging the outer harbour in Peel, dumping its load of silt in a position close inshore off the scallop shell dump at the back of Peel Hill.

Mr Geoffrey Boot, the Minister for DEFA, happened to call me about some other matters so I bent his ear about how close inshore the dredger was dumping the silt.

Mr Boot explained that the site at the scallop shell dump was chosen because it is already heavily polluted with scallop shells and they didn’t want to impact the offshore fishing grounds.

He explained that the licence to dump had been issued by the Cabinet Office and said that he would arrange for the documentation including a map of the dump site to be sent to me. I wrote to him shortly after our conversation and suggested to him that his statement that the dump site was already heavily polluted with scallop shells suggested that scallop shells are in some way heavily polluted and asked him if he had any evidence to support this. I’m still waiting for his reply.

I was eventually provided with a copy of the licence and map showing the location of the dump site by the Cabinet Office.

I replied to the Cabinet Office and queried why the licence had been issued by the Cabinet Office.

They replied and said: ‘Most of the requests to deposit at sea come from the DoI itself in respect of dredging operations in its harbours.

‘In order to prevent conflicts of interest, a decision was taken to remove the ability for the DoI to licence itself. As a result, the powers to issue a licence where the DoI or one of its contractors are the applicant for a licence have now been vested in the Cabinet Office through the Transfer of Functions (part two of the Water Pollution Act 1993) order 2017.

I replied and said: ‘I cannot find anything in the Act which refers to an application by one of the departments contractors for a licence being referred to the Cabinet Office. Indeed the Act is very clear that it is an application by the DoI for a licence to discharge which has to be referred to the Cabinet Office under section 19A. The Act makes it very clear also that applications by anyone else, including persons contracting to the DoI, have to be made under section 19 to the DoI and the DoI is responsible for the issue of such licences. In this case the applicant was Wyre Marine Services Ltd and the licence should have been issued by the DOI. The licence issued by the department of the Cabinet Office is, therefore, in my opinion ultra vires and is invalid. Do you agree?’

I’m still waiting for a reply.

Importantly, however, close examination of the map showing the dump site reveals that the dump site is not as Mr Boot suggested to me off the scallop shell dump where I had observed the dredger dumping its load. The site is an area extending seawards with a 0.5nm radius from the southern end of the scallop shell dump to Contrary Head and not off the scallop shell dump.

I’ve copied this letter Mrs Ann Reynolds, the director of ports, and suggested that if she wishes to trace the track of the dredger she can do so on AIS.

The ship log should also provide her with details of the dumping operations. I’ve suggested to her, however, that as the current licence is in my opinion ultra vires and invalid in any case, she might wish to consider issuing an instruction to the Admiral Day’s captain to stop dumping operations until such time as the matter is regularised, which will, of course, require a fresh application with supporting documents to be submitted to her department and a fresh licence to be issued by her department.

Curiously an examination of the conditions of the licence shows that the dredger is licenced to dump 11500 cms of harbour bed silt/sand/gravels from position A. Position A isn’t, however, referred to on the accompanying map, which itself isn’t mentioned anywhere in the licence.

On a technical note a friend of mine has calculated that if all of the silt were to be contained within the dumping area this would result in a raising of the sea bed by some 8cm and would obviously decimate fish stocks in this area.

My friend has commented also that there isn’t anything in the licence conditions which limits dumping to slack water periods (high water and low water), with the likely result that the silt will not be contained within the dumping area. I can see Fenella Beach’s blue flag status taking a bit of a battering

Let’s see what happens.’

Trevor Cowin

Poortown Road

Peel