Mr R W Henderson

How he voted:

Member	July 2016	December 2016	January 2017
	Malarkey Amendment In recommendation 6, to remove the words: ‘War Memorial’ and to insert the words: ‘Sea Terminal’.	Ashford Amendment In (ii) to remove the word ‘Broadway’ and insert the words ‘the Sea Terminal’
Mr R W Henderson	FOR	AGAINST	?

What he said:

Member	July 2016
Mr R W Henderson	Did not speak.
	December 2016
Mr R W Henderson	Mr Henderson: Gura mie eu, Eaghtyrane. I do not envy the Shirveishagh for the Department at all (A Member: Hear, hear.) in trying to move this project forward, and trying to have a pragmatic view with regard to what needs to be done and how to do it. You have every sympathy from me on that, sir. I think it is very bold of the Minister to bring it here in a revised guise, Eaghtyrane, in an honest attempt to try and get the whole thing moved forward. I have to say, Eaghtyrane, with increasing annoyance and anger, that I have to put up – along with the people of Douglas, year in and year out – and suffer driving on that Promenade carriageway, with the damage it does to cars over a long-term period – watch the cracks get bigger, watch the holes in the road get bigger, watch the sunken areas develop and deepen. This has been going on, not for the last few years, but for 25 years – the disintegration of the surface of that Promenade. And possibly the first signs of it were maybe 30 to 35 years ago, if truth be known, when the warning signs were there. Here we are in 2016 arguing over parking spaces and horse trams. The real issue, which has not been addressed to any extent from any input I have heard so far, is the crumbling carriageway, the substructure of the crumbling carriageway, and the voids underneath the foundations which have been found by radar over the years. There is an argument as to, ‘Oh well, there were some voids found and other voids not found’ and all this nonsense. The point is, Eaghtyrane, there are undoubtedly voids under the structural foundations of that carriageway. They have been discovered. What I want the Minister to do when he comes back to respond is how close are we to a carriage failure, whereby a car will hit a collapsed lump of road and go out of control and crash? That is what I want to know. I want to know how close to the nail we are here with health and safety issues. On numerous occasions, I have watched the likes of taxis over-accelerating on the Prom, and hitting the bumps and the lumps and the depressions, and it has struck me that we must be mighty close to a health and safety issue. I want to know what other country would keep a carriageway open in that condition on health and safety grounds? Should it not be shut? That is where I think we are going and that is why I think we need to do something now in relation to the reconstruction of the Promenade. But I would like you, Minister, to tell us exactly what state those foundations are in underneath the tarmac. You said they were crumbling, the old concrete slabs, and so on. To me, that is pretty serious and it is time to stop dithering about parking spaces and trams and wonderful shopping ideas and all the rest of it. Let’s do the main bit and then, Eaghtyrane, the Minister can clarify for us how easy it would be to put a bit of rail back afterwards. I am sure after this debate, if a bit of rail did not go back, the Department will jolly well ensure in the future it will be going back on heritage grounds, amongst other things. I support the idea in theory of the full length of the Promenade Horse Tramway line. I support, in theory, the fact that it should be constructed to hold a light electric railway. If we can do that, that is the common sense way to progress something like this, if we are going to dig the whole Promenade up in the first instance. But it may be, Hon. Members, that the first thing we need to do is attend to the health and safety status of the carriageway in general, before something serious does happen and then we are forced into urgent action that we may not wish to have done, and at additional cost. That is what has always worried me about this. The point with the parking that keeps coming in ... I do not know how much of a red herring we are being thrown here by the shopkeepers and the commercial sections in Douglas, as to how bad this would be. I fully understand the loss of parking would have an effect, and I know what consternation was caused with the parking charges regime that came forth from this Department, from another Minister. However, are there other ways to look at the parking issues? Is the Promenade wide enough in other areas, such as we see the size of the footpath at the Palace Hotel running along there, for instance? Can we not nibble some of that off, or buy a bit, if it belongs to the Palace Hotel group, for want of a better word? There are large chunks up near the Queen’s Prom with very wide footpaths, and on the seaward side you could conceivably nibble some of the footpath and the garden off to give yourself a widened carriageway that would answer some of the parking problems – at least to my loose understanding. I think there are other out-of-the-box thinking ideas with regard to giving yourself some more space along the Prom that could be used there and built into any sort of planning. It might alleviate some of the parking to an extent where it is mitigated enough to drop that argument, Eaghtyrane. I would put that to the Minister, to look at those. I have put it to his officers on a couple of occasions, and the ideas were put down on the grounds of, ‘We don't own the land. We can't do that. There is this, that and the other problem.’ However, I re-put the ideas and, if it costs a little bit to get a few metres of footpath back into our ownership to help solve some issues or a passing place loop for the tram track, so be it. I think it is worth a look at, and if it would help solve one or two of the thorny issues surrounding this, Eaghtyrane, I think it is well worth a look at. In referring to my notes, Eaghtyrane, I think I have drawn out the main point about the health and safety issues that I am bothered with. I have come to the point, actually, where it is so bad on that Promenade, let's just do the carriageway and think about the horse trams later. That is the point I am nearly at. How long are we going to drag it on? The other thing that has not been mentioned, and I just throw this in – it may cause some amusement – is animal welfare. I have heard nothing about the welfare of the horses. Being a fanatical conservationist in the background of all this, since I was a lad I have watched the horses dragging tons of those metal boxes up and down the Prom and I have seen the state of the animals when they get to the end of the track, especially a fully laden tram on a hot day – the horse is wrecked. I want to know are we going to continue with the good care that we have seen from Douglas Corporation? Will there be veterinary checks? What kind of stabling facilities? I know we have heard about temporary situations, but I want to know what happens to the animals inside: watering and so on, cooling-off periods, if we going to go down this track, if I can call it that, Eaghtyrane. So with that, I will finish. Gura mie eu.

Member

July 2016

Mr R W Henderson

Did not speak.

December 2016

Mr R W Henderson

Mr Henderson: Gura mie eu, Eaghtyrane.

I do not envy the Shirveishagh for the Department at all (A Member: Hear, hear.) in trying to move this project forward, and trying to have a pragmatic view with regard to what needs to be done and how to do it. You have every sympathy from me on that, sir. I think it is very bold of the Minister to bring it here in a revised guise, Eaghtyrane, in an honest attempt to try and get

the whole thing moved forward.

I have to say, Eaghtyrane, with increasing annoyance and anger, that I have to put up – along with the people of Douglas, year in and year out – and suffer driving on that Promenade carriageway, with the damage it does to cars over a long-term period – watch the cracks get bigger, watch the holes in the road get bigger, watch the sunken areas develop and deepen. This has been going on, not for the last few years, but for 25 years – the disintegration of the surface of that Promenade. And possibly the first signs of it were maybe 30 to 35 years ago, if truth be known, when the warning signs were there. Here we are in 2016 arguing over parking spaces and horse trams.

The real issue, which has not been addressed to any extent from any input I have heard so far, is the crumbling carriageway, the substructure of the crumbling carriageway, and the voids underneath the foundations which have been found by radar over the years. There is an argument as to, ‘Oh well, there were some voids found and other voids not found’ and all this nonsense. The point is, Eaghtyrane, there are undoubtedly voids under the structural foundations of that carriageway. They have been discovered.

What I want the Minister to do when he comes back to respond is how close are we to a carriage failure, whereby a car will hit a collapsed lump of road and go out of control and crash? That is what I want to know. I want to know how close to the nail we are here with health and safety issues. On numerous occasions, I have watched the likes of taxis over-accelerating on the Prom, and hitting the bumps and the lumps and the depressions, and it has struck me that we must be mighty close to a health and safety issue.

I want to know what other country would keep a carriageway open in that condition on health and safety grounds? Should it not be shut? That is where I think we are going and that is why I think we need to do something now in relation to the reconstruction of the Promenade. But I would like you, Minister, to tell us exactly what state those foundations are in underneath the tarmac. You said they were crumbling, the old concrete slabs, and so on. To me, that is pretty serious and it is time to stop dithering about parking spaces and trams and wonderful shopping ideas and all the rest of it. Let’s do the main bit and then, Eaghtyrane, the Minister can clarify for us how easy it would be to put a bit of rail back afterwards. I am sure after this debate, if a bit of rail did not go back, the Department will jolly well ensure in the future it will be going back on heritage grounds, amongst other things.

I support the idea in theory of the full length of the Promenade Horse Tramway line. I support, in theory, the fact that it should be constructed to hold a light electric railway. If we can do that, that is the common sense way to progress something like this, if we are going to dig the whole Promenade up in the first instance. But it may be, Hon. Members, that the first thing we need to do is attend to the health and safety status of the carriageway in general, before something serious does happen and then we are forced into urgent action that we may not wish to have done, and at additional cost. That is what has always worried me about this.

The point with the parking that keeps coming in ... I do not know how much of a red herring we are being thrown here by the shopkeepers and the commercial sections in Douglas, as to how bad this would be. I fully understand the loss of parking would have an effect, and I know what consternation was caused with the parking charges regime that came forth from this Department, from another Minister. However, are there other ways to look at the parking issues? Is the Promenade wide enough in other areas, such as we see the size of the footpath at the Palace Hotel running along there, for instance? Can we not nibble some of that off, or buy a bit, if it belongs to the Palace Hotel group, for want of a better word?

There are large chunks up near the Queen’s Prom with very wide footpaths, and on the seaward side you could conceivably nibble some of the footpath and the garden off to give yourself a widened carriageway that would answer some of the parking problems – at least to my loose understanding. I think there are other out-of-the-box thinking ideas with regard to giving yourself some more space along the Prom that could be used there and built into any sort of planning. It might alleviate some of the parking to an extent where it is mitigated enough to

drop that argument, Eaghtyrane.

I would put that to the Minister, to look at those. I have put it to his officers on a couple of occasions, and the ideas were put down on the grounds of, ‘We don't own the land. We can't do that. There is this, that and the other problem.’ However, I re-put the ideas and, if it costs a little bit to get a few metres of footpath back into our ownership to help solve some issues or a passing place loop for the tram track, so be it. I think it is worth a look at, and if it would help solve one or two of the thorny issues surrounding this, Eaghtyrane, I think it is well worth a look at.

In referring to my notes, Eaghtyrane, I think I have drawn out the main point about the health and safety issues that I am bothered with. I have come to the point, actually, where it is so bad on that Promenade, let's just do the carriageway and think about the horse trams later. That is the point I am nearly at. How long are we going to drag it on?

The other thing that has not been mentioned, and I just throw this in – it may cause some amusement – is animal welfare. I have heard nothing about the welfare of the horses. Being a fanatical conservationist in the background of all this, since I was a lad I have watched the horses dragging tons of those metal boxes up and down the Prom and I have seen the state of the animals when they get to the end of the track, especially a fully laden tram on a hot day – the horse is wrecked. I want to know are we going to continue with the good care that we have seen from Douglas Corporation? Will there be veterinary checks? What kind of stabling facilities? I know we have heard about temporary situations, but I want to know what happens to the animals inside: watering and so on, cooling-off periods, if we going to go down this track, if I can call it that, Eaghtyrane.

So with that, I will finish.

Gura mie eu.