Ayre and Michael TIm Baker/Alf Cannan

Did not speak

Did not speak

Mr Baker: We have to put this debate into context. We have already acknowledged that our retail, which is the heart of our town centre, is struggling against both the threat from the internet but also, importantly, from something that has not been mentioned yet: out-of-town shopping.

We need to be really careful about the decisions that we make about our town centre, to make sure that we do not end up with a hollowed-out town centre that does not have a reason for people to come there. As part of this debate, we need to reimagine what our town centres are all about. We have got to look forward, not backwards, but be very mindful of keeping the Isle of Man special and that does include our heritage assets.

It is easy to lose in this debate that this is actually a debate about the reconstruction of the Promenade, not about the future of the horse trams, although clearly they are all interlinked.

I want to add my congratulations to the Minister for bringing forward this motion at this early stage, without spending money, so that we can get clarity before we spend money. That has to be a part of making a financially responsible Government, and I know we all sign up to that objective. Of course, the reason we have got ourselves into the situation we have is because we have tried to get on and do things without a clear agreement about where we are trying to get to, which is always the road to problems.

I support the horse trams. I think they are a key part of what makes the Isle of Man special and we must retain them. However, let’s be clear, what we are talking about here is proposing a possible reduction in the length of track that they run. We are not talking about their scrapping. We are not even necessarily talking about eliminating the piece of track from the War Memorial area down to the Sea Terminal. What we are saying is that we are going to lay, now, the track from the War Memorial to Summerhill and we are leaving our options open around the southern end.

This is not a debate that is in isolation. Horse trams, parking, traffic flow, future transport solutions, Douglas Masterplan: these are all independent elements of the decisions that we are making now. We have to get a balance between these various groups.
One thing that is really clear, I think, to all of us is that whatever we decide, there are going

to be objections. It is just a question of who those objections come from and how vociferous they are. The fact that there are objections does not mean we cannot make a decision. Indeed, it is all the more reason we have to make a decision. That is what we are in this Court to do.

The proposed solution put forward by the Minister is based on seven design principles, which together secure the future of the Promenade in physical terms. They provide a good, invested future for the horse trams. They deliver really tangible improvements around the cultural quarter, which has the potential to provide a new and vibrant focal point to our capital – something which I think is sadly missing. You travel to other European or UK towns and cities and they have all invested in those things in a big way over the last few years. We need to catch up. We need to invest in our capital.

It also, importantly, provides future opportunities to extend both the horse tram and the MER service and, potentially, the foundation for a really exciting future light rail electric tramway concept, which could really revolutionise how we travel around not only Douglas but our Island as a whole, and how the commuter areas around the north and south of Douglas transport people into the heart of the town, which will change the way people work; it will change leisure; it will change all aspects of how we live.

If we simply continue with what we have got and spend £23 million, that is £23 million on effectively reconstructing the Promenade and putting everything back as it was, so there is no 3490 change. My question is, what have we gained? Yes, we have addressed the physical structure of the Promenade, but we have missed a massive opportunity.
Some would argue we would be far better by continuing to do what we have just done in the northern area every single year – and I think we could probably do it for about 200 years before we had spent the £23 million. I am not suggesting that would address the physical issues around 3495 the Promenade, but in financial terms – and Mr Peake talked about prudent management – that would seem to fall into that category.
This proposal from the Minister is quite bold. It will upset those who are not prepared to change, but we have to move forward, as the Member for Middle said. The Victorians: they created this; they did not stand still; they were innovating and they were entrepreneurial. We 3500 have to be imaginative. We have to look forward, not back.

This proposal does depart from what we have right now, but it provides a much better arrangement for Douglas and for our Island in the medium to long-term. For that reason, I am going to be supporting it and I encourage this Court to get behind it. Our electorate very clearly signalled they were fed up, in September, of inaction and the inability to make things happen. We have got an opportunity to show that that is not the case now, and for that reason I ask that this Court supports the motion.

Thank you.