A Call for Accountability in Patrick

It has been an interesting week in local politics, and significant change may be on the horizon. I have submitted a Standing Order for our next meeting to discuss a mission statement and a program for the four years remaining in this term.

To the residents of Patrick: your input is vital. This program must reflect your priorities, even if your priority is that such a program should not exist at all.

The Problem with the Pen

One issue that has become clear this week is that minutes are often open to interpretation. The old expression “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world” and of course many men rock the cradle too, now — feels uncomfortably apt when it comes to how minutes are kept in many parishes. It has certainly been at the forefront of discussion in Peel.

Too often, minutes can be shaped in a way that makes actions appear better or worse than they actually were. The result is an endless waste of time debating what was or wasn’t said, rather than dealing with the substance of the matter.

A Move Toward True Accountability

To end these disputes and ensure real accountability, I believe we must move toward audio or video recording our meetings. A recording is the only true, objective record of account.

However, true accountability only happens when people take an active interest in the things that matter to them. I encourage you to come along, discuss these topics, and let me know your views through whichever means is easiest for you.

A couple of other things have caught my attention regarding the management of our local waste site:

PS. The Scrap Metal “Giveaway”

Metal is not being properly recycled at the WCAS site. Different types of scrap metal have considerably different market values, yet currently, these materials are being almost literally given away to collectors as a mixed load. By failing to sort high-value metals, we are quite simply throwing money away.

2. Site Logistics and the “Totter”

Furthermore, the recycling containers should be positioned next to the “totter” (the salvage/reuse area) on the site. Better placement would encourage more efficient sorting and ensure that items with value are captured properly. Outside outstanding issues already raised.

The Energy Sovereignty Dilemma

Sometimes I notice a “big oil” barrage on social media, often led by figures like Trump, suggesting that all the world’s problems can be solved just by producing more oil. But “oil” is really just a placeholder for energy; that is the real name of the game. It’s about ensuring you have enough when you need it. Currently, the world is facing a deficit, and history shows this won’t be the last time.

The Nuclear and Fusion Reality

Some believe building more nuclear fission reactors is the answer. While possible, the lead times are massive, and the safety concerns, especially as potential targets during conflict are significant.

The real “game-changer” is commercial fusion, which is finally turning the corner. We are seeing a massive shift from lab science to industry:

  • Helion Energy is already constructing a plant in Washington to provide fusion power to Microsoft’s data centers by 2028.
  • Commonwealth Fusion Systems is on track to demonstrate net energy gain with its SPARC reactor by 2027.
  • Even the UK Government just launched a 2026 Fusion Strategy, backing the sector with £2.5 billion to lead this “new energy revolution.”

Once fusion is scaled, the energy crisis as we know it will cease to exist—but it will require us to fully commit to an electric society.

Controlling Our Own Destiny: The Solar Mandate

We often fail to think about the future because we assume a “drill, baby, drill” approach allows us to relax. But imagine how different life would be if every government had one coherent policy: every building being built or having its roof repaired must be converted to solar.

We are finally seeing the first steps toward this:

  • In England, the new “Future Homes Standard” (finalized March 2026) will soon make solar panels and heat pumps the default for nearly all new builds.
  • The Isle of Man is pushing for 30MW of local renewable generation by the end of this year to gain “full control” over its own energy supplies and stop relying on volatile imported fossil fuels.

If we utilized the daytime sun on every rooftop to power our lives, we wouldn’t be at the whim of global energy crises. We would finally control our own destiny.

The Friction of Accountability: Why Local Governance Shouldn’t Be a “Quiet Club”

Public service is often described as a thankless task, usually undertaken by volunteers or those with a deep-seated desire to help their community. However, there is a dangerous misconception that because local representatives are often “part-time,” the standards of their work should be anything less than professional.

Lately, I have been reflecting on just how difficult it is to uphold the principles of accountability within a small local authority. It is a painful learning process, and it requires a thick skin.

The “Duty of the Record”

At the heart of any democracy is the public record—the minutes. These are not just notes; they are the legal history of how public money is spent and how decisions are made. If the minutes are inaccurate, incomplete, or “sanitized” to avoid controversy, the public loses its ability to hold its representatives to account.

Insisting on accuracy is often seen as “being difficult.” It creates friction. It makes meetings longer. But as public servants, our primary duty is to the residents, not to the comfort of the boardroom. If we cannot get the record of our meetings right, how can the public trust us to get the big decisions right?

Transparency vs. “Private Sessions”

There is a growing, concerning trend toward moving difficult discussions into “private sessions.” While the law allows for privacy in specific cases—such as personnel matters or legal advice—transparency must remain the default.

When public business is moved behind closed doors without a strict legal necessity, it risks becoming a “quiet club” where accountability is traded for convenience. A board that is afraid of public scrutiny is a board that is failing its mandate. We are elected to serve in the light, not to orchestrate outcomes in the dark.

The Road to Outstanding

My ultimate goal has never been about “winning” an argument; it has been about service. I firmly believe that our parish has the potential to move from ‘satisfactory’ to ‘outstanding.’ However, this transformation requires a board that is willing to acknowledge its own errors, correct its records, and prioritize transparency above personal defense.

If the price of moving our services forward is my own departure, provided the public record is corrected and our governance is set on the right path then I am prepared to pay that price. True public service is not about holding onto a seat; it is about ensuring that the systems we leave behind are better, more transparent, and more effective than the ones we found.

The High Price of Standing Up

Advocating for higher standards is not a popular path. It often results in internal pushback, procedural maneuvers, or even formal warnings intended to stifle dissent.

I acknowledge that this pursuit of accuracy can be intense. It is a challenge to balance the need for collaboration with the absolute necessity of procedural integrity. However, the alternative, silence in the face of mediocrity, is a far greater risk to our community.

Moving Forward

The residents of Patrick deserve a local authority that is beyond reproach. We should welcome the friction of debate and the scrutiny of the public. Accountability isn’t a burden to be managed; it is the very foundation of the trust the public places in us.

If we want to move our community forward, we must first ensure we are standing on a foundation of truth and transparency. Anything less is a disservice to the people we represent.

Excellent Service Isn’t a Myth—It’s a Choice

I know that many of you are very concerned about the provision of services in Patrick, particularly the ongoing situation at the Western Amenity Site. I share your concerns. While a reasonable service is expected, I believe we should be aiming for an outstanding service.

Excellent Service Isn’t a Myth—It’s a Choice

Before the laughter starts and the endless tirade of jokes about services across the Isle of Man begins, I want to highlight something important: I have seen what excellent performance looks like, and it is achievable. I wrote extensively about this in a blog post on my site last month.

So, where does that leave us?

The government has published a Waste Strategy 2025-2035 (available on my site), and I have highlighted the most important sections of the report below. Arguably, one could say that if the public throws their support behind this, we should see better services, as many improvements will finally be legislated.

However, legislation alone will not produce excellent services. That requires much tighter oversight from Local Boards.

Currently, the will for that oversight just isn’t there. In my observation, local boards only make changes when there is “blood in the streets”—figuratively speaking. If you want better services, you need to make it very plain to your commissioners that you demand improvement. You probably need to remind them at every occasion you get—at least once a month.

What a drag, hey? But it’s the only way things move.

Below is a summary of the report below.

The new Waste Strategy 2025-2035 introduces several proposals that directly affect waste management in the West, particularly concerning the Western Civic Amenity Site (WCAS) and regional disposal facilities like Wrights Pit North.

The key proposals in relation to the West include:

1. Transformation of Civic Amenity Sites

The strategy aims to standardize and secure the future of the four regional civic amenity sites, including the Western site:

  • Legal Duty: The Department of Infrastructure (DoI) proposes making the provision of Civic Amenity Sites a legal duty for Local Authorities to ensure the service is secured for the long term.
  • Performance Standards: The DoI intends to introduce set service levels and performance standards to address the current differences in service provision and recycling opportunities across the four regional sites.
  • Mandatory Reuse Centres: The strategy proposes that all sites, including WCAS, incorporate reuse centres where items like electrical goods can be collected for reuse rather than disposal.
  • New Governance Model: A waste service governance and oversight model will be developed to report on compliance with these new standards.

2. Regional Landfill Changes (Wrights Pit North)

The West is currently home to Wrights Pit North, one of the Island’s two operational landfill sites:

  • Expected Closure: The strategy notes that Wrights Pit North, which currently accepts asbestos, plasterboard, and contaminated soil, is expected to be full within the next five years.
  • Shift to the South: To replace this capacity, the Government plans to construct a new engineered landfill facility at Turkeylands (in the South), which will have an estimated lifespan of 20 years. This suggests a major shift in where Western waste of this type will be disposed of in the future.

3. Regional Recycling and Collections

  • Expanding Recycling Duty: The strategy proposes making it a duty for Local Authorities in the West (and elsewhere) to recycle materials that provide an environmental and economic benefit.
  • Review of Kerbside Items: A review will be conducted to determine the most appropriate items for kerbside collection to minimize environmental damage, which will then inform regional service levels.
  • Drop Banks: For rural or hard-to-reach areas in the West where kerbside collection isn’t feasible, the strategy encourages the use of local drop banks for key recyclables.

4. Financial and Operational Accountability

  • Polluter Pays Principle: The strategy reinforces that those who generate waste should bear the cost, which may influence how local rates in the Western parishes are calculated for waste services.
  • Cost Efficiency: While Local Authorities remain responsible for household collections, the DoI suggests that rationalizing or combining services between authorities could achieve better economies of scale and efficiency.

The full waste strategy report is here:

9.2 Waste StrategyDownload