Following the publication of my letter in the Examiner of August 1 ‘We’ll have to dig deep in pockets’, Chris Thomas MHK issued his response letter that appeared in the Examiner on August 8 in which he said: ‘You don’t seem to be aware of public documents before writing about Isle of Man Ferry Terminal

‘Please see the Isle of Man Ferry Terminal at Liverpool report from last year which provides you with details of risks, expenditure as well as basic background.’

Unsurprisingly, in the above comment Chris Thomas’s crystal ball gazing ends with conjecture.

As it happens, I was aware of the public document he refers to which states: ‘The project development was re-approved specifically in July 2019 Tynwald with comments from members at the vote as follows:- ‘We have lift off!’ ‘Another major step for Man!’ and ‘Hear, hear’.

Only Mrs Beecroft voted against.

I think everyone would have been extremely ecstatic if our government could have had the ability to deliver on the overall budget of £38.054m for the ferry terminal which was approved by Tynwald in July 2019.

The forward of the report referred to by Chris Thomas clearly shows us that as far back as 2018 our government was fully aware of the inherent problems with this project and that it was fraught with danger.

The department recognised from the start that this would be a hugely challenging project; the development was in another country, and the project was outside its experience.

Despite choosing internationally-recognised businesses to support it in managing the project, the department has faced very significant challenges,”

Despite these stark warnings, nevertheless in March 2018, our government still decided to dive headlong into this money pit of a vanity project, and ploughed on regardless, rejecting all opportunities to cut our losses on this project, it appears to me from an early stage we could have called it a day on this folly as costs started to spiral out of control.

Summary of the cost up to date -

February 2019 - initial target cost of £24,091,543 with an overall development budget of £31,300,000

July 2019 – Tynwald approved contract target cost of £27,647,778 and a total development budget of £38,054,000.

Tynwald – December 2021 in putting forward his motion for additional expenditure for the ferry terminal Tim Crookall sai: ‘The final expected outturn figure comes to £70,625,921, an additional increase of £32,621,921’ and ‘The department had real concerns but no real certainty as to costs. It is only now that we have any sort of confidence that the figures being given by the project team are an accurate statement of the likely cost’.

Really? Well that confidence was soon to be shattered.

Tynwald July 19, 2023 – In Tynwald . Motion by Dr Allinson that Tynwald authorises the Treasury to: (1) apply a sum of up to £10million from the general reserve to the capital contingency budget and; (2) to expend such sums from the capital contingency budget as may be required in respect of the Isle of Man Ferry Terminal, Liverpool capital project.

In the event, Tynwald agreed to an amendment by Mr Speaker that the debate be adjourned until November 2023.

However, within a week of the Tynwald Motion (1) and (2), on July 25 2023 on Manx Radio Alf Cannan said the cost had risen from £25m up to £90m.

So it appears that Motion (2) to expend such sums from the capital contingency budget as may be required, will be required ASAP and I guess the sky will be the limit!

So, the initial target cost of £24m has now risen to £90m.

Who had the finger on the purse strings? Who was responsible for overseeing this project? Will anyone be held accountable?

I dare say we’ll never get answers to these questions.

Alf Caine

Strang Road

Braddan

This letter first appeared in the Isle of Man Examiner of August 20, 2023

Share your views with our readers.

Write to: Opinions, Isle of Man Examiner and Manx Independent, 18 Finch Road, Douglas, IM1 2PT or email:

Don’t forget to include your name, FULL home address and a daytime phone number even if you want to be anonymous in print.