We Asked, You Said, We Did

The Isle of Man Financial Services Authority invited feedback on proposals to amend certain aspects of the insurance valuation and solvency framework, including amendments to the regulatory capital calculation.

The Authority received 10 responses to the consultation paper. The responses were supportive of the changes being proposed.

The Authority prepared a consultation response document, which provides a summary of the feedback submitted and responds to all questions raised. The Authority will now prepare the final Insurance (Fees and Solvency)(Amendment) Regulations 2024 to be laid before Tynwald.

The Department of Home Affairs invited feedback on the policy principles for the proposed National Infrastructure Security Bill.

The public consultation opened on the 5 February 2024 and closed on the 25 March 2024. The Department received 53 responses to the consultation, 48 of which were received via the consultation hub. The 53 responses comprised:

• 36 Members of the public
• 7 Private Companies
• 6 Government Departments, Offices or Boards
• 1 Industry Body
• 1 Local Authority
• 2 not identified

There was a consensus from the responses received on the need for legislation.

Amongst the feedback, there was agreement on the need for a competent and technical authority, as well a general agreement on the key sectors that would constitute the national infrastructure. Furthermore, it is apparent that some sectors on the Isle of Man already comply with compliance regimes similar to those set out in the policy principles and that this must be accounted for when drafting legislation.

The Department is grateful to the individuals and organisations who responded to the consultation. All responses received have now been analysed and used to create a consultation summary report, which has been published on this page.  This report also includes commentary in places where relevant and where respondents indicated that their response could be published or published anonymously.

The report summarises the responses received and sets out the next steps the Department intends to take following this engagement. These will include further research into the options for establishing a Competent Authority (ies) and a Technical Authority as well as finalising which sectors should be included in the definition of the National Infrastructure.

The work in this area will help make our Island safer and we are committed to ensuring that those who may be affected have, through this consultation, and will continues to be involved in the detailed proposals. 

We Asked - As part of the Built Environment Reform Programme ('BERP') and to facilitate the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture's (DEFA) core functions changes are proposed to the following secondary legislation which is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 ('the Planning Act'):

• the Town and County Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 ('the DPO'), and
   
• the Town and Country Planning (Application and Appeal Fees) Order 2021 (as amended in 2023) ('the Fees Order')

Public Consultation ran from 17.11.23 to 26.01.24. The consultation was via the consultation hub and Publicity included: E-mails to MHKs/MLCs, Government Departments, Local Authorities and the Planning User Group Distribution.

There were 49 responses to the survey (given Data Protection respondents were not required to provide details).

The available report is a summary of the responses and the issues they raise (appendix 1 gives overall results and appendix 2 gives detailed comments). The consultations results will inform the final iteration of the Order, which will be laid before Tynwald.

The Isle of Man Financial Services Authority invited feedback on proposals to update the Depositors’ Compensation Scheme framework and to introduce a Single Customer View mechanism.

The Authority received 10 responses to the consultation paper, including views on the level of coverage for individual eligible depositors.

We prepared a consultation response document, which provides a summary of the feedback submitted. The Authority will now prepare the Financial Services (Deposit Data) (Amendment) Rule Book 2024 for Tynwald approval. A draft Financial Services (Deposit Data) (Fees) Order will be subject to a separate consultation.

The Department consulted between the 10 November 2023 and the 08 December 2023 around a potential change to the 'general attendance' requirements for Licensees and Responsible People.

The Department received 53 responses to the consultation. 34 responses were from businesses or organisations, 15 responses were from individuals and within the remaining 4 responses, the respondent did not indicate which group they belonged to.

A full summary of responses received, and actions proposed to be taken because of these responses is available.

The overarching trend that can be seen from aggregate responses to this consultation is the view of an extensive number of those respondents that the approach to general attendance should be one of greater flexibility.  These views would, in essence, see licensees able to make a considered choice about how to determine when they can be absent and risk assess those circumstances themselves using their own experience and good judgement to make such a decision. A proposed package of measures has been prepared to bring forward such changes, and support good practices associated with them.

However, this enhanced flexibility does of course come with its own potential risks, and therefore the proposed approach set out below also refers to a 6 month 'pilot period' in which any changes brought will be monitored.

The Department has proposed a package of measures that would, if approved by Tynwald, see enhanced flexibility and an associated risk managed approach to absence come into effect on 22 July 2024.

The documents contained within this package of measures can be found on the Tynwald Register of Business and are titled (and numbered) as follows:

• The Liquor Licensing and Public Entertainments (Amendment) Regulations 2024 [SD 2024/0176]
   
• The Liquor Licensing and Public Entertainments (Approval of Code and Guidance) Order 2024 [SD 2024/0177]
   
• The Isle of Man Licensing Forum Code of Practice and Guidance on Liquor Licensing [GC 2024/0006]

To ensure that this approach works and continues to maintain the Island's high standards with respect to the licensed hospitality industry and in accordance with the Licensing Objectives found at section 57 of the Liquor Licensing and Public Entertainments Act 202, the following further next steps are proposed.

If the Liquor Licensing and Public Entertainments (Amendment) Regulations 2024 and the associated Liquor Licensing and Public Entertainments (Approval of Code and Guidance) Order should be approved by Tynwald at the July sitting, a “pilot period” will follow between these measures becoming operational, and the end of the year (December 2024). This 'pilot period' will allow oversight of issues within the proposed approach and information about any incidents (whether requiring formal enforcement or not) that might take place in that period will be actively gathered by the Department and reviewed.

Additionally, feedback from members of the licensed hospitality industry, or the wider population of the Island, will be welcomed during this period and can be provided to the Department via the Isle of Man Licensing Forum or directly.

The findings of the review of the 'pilot period' will be published on this page following its conclusion, along with any additional next steps arising from that review.

Results updated 18 June 2024

The purpose of the consultation by the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA) was to seek views on whether the Isle of Man Government should ban or regulate the use of electronic collars for dogs and cats. Any ban or regulation would involve introducing secondary legislation made under the Animal Welfare Act 2023.

There were 715 responses to the consultation. 28 responses were removed as they appeared to be duplicates based on names, email addresses and in some cases IP addresses being identical. This left 687 unique responses. When asked, 670 respondents said they were individuals and 10 said they represented an organisation. 7 did not answer this question.

Do you think it should be an offence to attach to a cat or dog an e-collar that only emits distracting puffs of air or non-aversive behaviour changing pheromones/chemicals?

The majority of respondents did not think this should be an offence (72.93%).

Do you think it should be an offence to attach to a cat or dog an e-collar that only emits a noxious spray?

A small majority of respondents did not think this should be an offence (52.98%), as compared to the 46.58% who felt it should be.

Do you think it should be an offence to attach to a cat or dog an e-collar that delivers a noise or vibration (but no electric shock)?

The majority of respondents did not think this should be an offence (86.75%).

Do you think it should be an offence to attach to a cat or dog and e-collar that delivers an electric shock?
The majority of respondents did not think this should be an offence (78.60%).

Do you think it should be an offence to attach to a cat or dog an e-collar capable of delivering an automatically triggered electric shock as part of a containment system?

The majority of respondents did not think this should be an offence (71.03%).

If attaching an e-collar is made an offence, do you think it should also be an offence to be responsible for a cat or dog which has an e-collar attached?

The majority of respondents did not think this should be an offence (75.98%).

The Department is grateful to those individuals and organisations who took time to respond to the consultation and tell us their views.  There were a significant number of responses that appear to be from outside of the Isle of Man borders. The Department is aware that there are significant concerns about the use of electronic collars in dogs and cats and will do further work to explore this area further.

The new Animal Welfare Act 2023 has its Appointed Day Order due to be laid before Tynwald at the May 2024 sitting, meaning the Animal Welfare Act will come into operation on the 1 June 2024. This Act introduces a duty of care to ensure owners and keepers meet the needs of their animals as to the extent required by good practice. These needs include those necessary for an animal to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns, and its need to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease. Animal Welfare codes of practice for dogs and cats will soon be published by the Department for the purpose of providing practical guidance in respect of achieving, maintaining, and demonstrating good practice in the care of kept animals.

The paper set out the Department of Infrastructure's proposals to change the existing harbour dues and charges for vessels, passengers and goods with effect from the day after they are approved by Tynwald. The proposals in the consultation will revoke and replace the existing fees.

The public consultation opened on the 20 October 2023 and closed on the 17 November 2023. The Department received eight responses to the consultation. All of the responses were received via the Consultation Hub. The eight responses comprised:

• 6 members of the public
• 1 private company
• 1 Local Authority

The Department has analysed and considered all responses received and where respondents indicated that their response could be published or published anonymously, these responses have been uploaded to the Consultation Hub.
The Department is currently undertaking a full and detailed review of next year's harbour dues and charges in respect of facilities and services provided by the Department for vessels, passengers and goods using a harbour and the responses received to last year's consultation will be considered as part of this review.

The purpose of the consultation by the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA) was to seek views on the draft Animal Welfare Code of Practice for Horses, ponies, donkeys and their hybrids.

The Department for Environment, Food and Agriculture received 45 responses to the consultation. Of these, 41 responses were from individuals and 4 Responses were representatives of society/ company/ charity.

• 61.7% said the code covered everything required
   
• 14.9% said there something in the code they disagreed with
   
• 19.2% said there was not enough detail in the code
   
• 93.6% said the code was understandable

The Department is grateful to those individuals and organisations who took time to respond to the consultation and tell us their views on the proposed Animal Welfare Code of Practice for Horses, Ponies, Donkeys and their Hybrids. Following the consultation, as described above, changes have been made to the code. Most people felt the code was understandable, covered what was required and contained enough detail.

The purpose of the consultation by the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA) was to seek views on the draft Animal Welfare Code of Practice for Rabbits.

The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture received 20 responses to the consultation. Of these, 18 responses were from individuals and 2 Responses were representatives of a society/ company/ charity.

• 55% said the code covered everything required
   
• 30% said there were things in the code that they disagreed with
   
• 65% said there was enough detail in the code
   
• 100% said the code was understandable

The Department is grateful to those individuals and organisations who took time to respond to the consultation and tell us their views on the proposed Animal Welfare Code of Practice for Rabbits. As stated above some minor changes have been made to the code.

The purpose of the consultation by the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA) was to seek views on the draft Animal Welfare Code of Practice for Cats.

The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture received 100 responses to the consultation. Of these, 98 responses were from individuals and 2 responses were representatives of society/ company/ charity.

• 55% of responses said that the code covered everything required
   
• 20% of the responses said there were things in the code that they disagreed with
   
• 80% said that the code had enough detail
   
• 94% said the code was understandable

The Department is grateful to those individuals and organisations who took time to respond to the consultation and tell us their views on the proposed Animal Welfare Code of Practice for Cats. As stated above some minor changes have been made to the code to address some of the concerns. Whilst some of the responses to the consultation are outside of the scope of the code, the Department will look at addressing some of the other concerns in future policy development, e.g. micro chipping of cats.

The purpose of the consultation by the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA) was to seek views on the draft Animal Welfare Code of Practice for Dogs.

The Department for Environment, Food and Agriculture received 128 responses to the consultation. Of these, 124 responses were from individuals and 4 Responses were representatives of society/ company/ charity.

• 56.8% of respondents said that the code covered everything required
   
• 19.7% of respondents said there were things in the code they disagreed with
   
• 76.5% of respondents said there was enough detail in the code
   
• 97% said the code was understandable

The Department is grateful to those individuals and organisations who took time to respond to the consultation and tell us their views on the proposed Animal Welfare Code of Practice for Dogs. As stated above a number of changes will be made to the code to reflect some of the responses received to the consultation. Whilst some of the responses to the consultation are outside of the scope of the code, the Department will look at addressing some of the other concerns in future policy development.

As part of the Built Environment Reform Programme and to facilitate the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture’s (DEFA) core functions (Registered Buildings) changes are proposed to the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 (‘The Planning Act’). The changes will:

• Provide clarity around the definition of development which will mean better understanding for building owners on what can and can’t be done without planning approval (these changes, together with planned secondary legislation, will provide an opportunity to ensure very minor works can be excluded from needing approval)
   
• Remove the requirement for concurrent planning and registered building applications for the demolition of unregistered buildings in Conservation Areas which will streamline the administration of the planning process both for applicants and the Department
   
• Ensure routine maintenance works to roads and watercourses do not require planning approval
   
• Introduce enabling powers for the potential introduction of fees (through secondary legislation) in relation to discretionary services, such as the provision of pre-application advice
   
• Clarify the scope of Registrations for historic buildings to allow these to be amended and to allow for exclusions (having clearer and more targeted controls will remove unnecessary restrictions for owners of such buildings on making some types of changes) and make changes to the appeals process to simplify and streamline it and
   
• Improve and future proof the provisions for Permitted Development Orders

Public Consultation ran from 04.08.23 to 27.10.23.  The consultation was via the consultation hub and Publicity included: E-mails to MHKs/MLCs, Government Departments, Local Authorities and the Planning User Group Distribution List and circulation within Construction IOM; and a press release. 

There were 36 responses to the survey (given Data Protection respondents were not required to provide details). 

The available report is a summary of the responses and the issues they raise (responses to each question and general points raised are set out in appendix 1 and appendix 2 contains some of the more detailed/technical comments and responses to these).  The consultations results will inform the final iteration of the Bill, which will be introduced to branches. 

The Central Registry sought views on a number of proposals relating to reforming the legislative framework for Land Registration. The consultation set out proposals for amendments to the law on adverse possession, triggers for Land Registration, dispute resolution and updates to the Land Registration Act.

47 responses were received.

There is strong support for amendment to the adverse possession law to protect the interests of registered owners.

Many respondents also expressed support for widening the triggers for first registration. However, support for those proposals was more mixed. It is likely that the practicalities of the increased triggers will require further consideration as to whether they are all appropriate to the Isle of Man’s circumstances.

There is support for considering how disputes are resolved in the Land Registry. It is likely that legislation to formalise resolution processes will be required.

Further information on the feedback received can be found in the consultation review report below.

The General Registry intends to bring forward the following changes in a Land Registry (Amendment) Bill.

Therefore, the Central Registry intends to bring forward the following changes in a Land Registration Amendment Bill:

• Amendment to the Law relating to Adverse Possession of registered land to reflect the law in England and Wales but retaining a 21 year qualification period. In addition, further consideration may be given to amendment to the Law in relation to all property
   
• The Land Registry proposes widening the triggers for first registration of property to add new triggers for deeds of gift, assents, new mortgages and remortgages. The Land Registry does not propose adding triggers in relation to agricultural subsidies and in relation to the freeholds of apartment buildings at this stage. In addition, the Land Registry proposes that a power to allow further triggers to be added via future secondary legislation is to be included
   
• Amending the dispute resolution procedure in the Land Registration Act and the Land Registry Rules with the intention to provide clarity and increased resolution options. This will be achieved by an update to the Land Registration Rules. It not our intention to introduce the power to provide a preliminary opinion but rather to allow dispute resolution solutions which avoid the need for costly hearings. It is our intention to provide legislation that costs in disputed Land Registry matters would generally be paid by each party unless there were exceptional circumstances and also limited
   
• Legislating for changes in co-ownership status will be introduced
   
• Introducing a requirement for deeds relating to registered land to be submitted promptly
   
• Amending the legislation relating to rectifications pursuant to the Land Registration Act.

In July 2023 Cabinet Office published the Preliminary Publicity for the Strategic Plan review. The Strategic Plan sets the high-level planning policy framework for the sustainable development of the Island, and the Preliminary Publicity stage represents the first statutory step in a comprehensive review of this important statutory planning document.  

Aside from a focused review in 2016, the Strategic Plan remains largely unchanged since its original adoption in 2007. The Strategic Plan review provides the opportunity to review the Island’s Spatial Strategy and embed climate change policies in the Plan, as well as to reflect some of the core strategic objectives set out in ‘Our Island Plan’ to build a secure, vibrant and sustainable future for our Island and specifically deliver one of the key elements identified in the ‘Building Great Communities’ Programmes. 

Because of the wide-reaching implications of the Strategic Plan review for all members of the Island community, Cabinet Office invited comment from interested parties and stakeholders on the published Preliminary Publicity documents. These documents comprised a Main Consultation Document as well as a series of Evidence Papers which looked at specific topic areas in greater detail. All published evidence papers were available on the Consultation Hub and via the Cabinet Office website.

The Strategic Plan Preliminary Publicity consultation ran between 21 July and 29 September 2023 and attracted 209 responses. The vast majority of responses were received either via email or online via the Consultation Hub. A small number of physical response forms and letters were also received.

The 209 respondents comprised:

• 153 members of the public
• 5 private companies (excluding developers and built environment professionals)
• 11 developers or built environment professionals
• 14 Local Authorities or politicians
• 6 Government Departments or Statutory Bodies/Boards
• 8 special interest or community groups
• 7 who identified as ‘other’

Cabinet Office has analysed all responses received and is in the process of producing a consultation summary report which will look at the themes which emerged as part of the consultation responses.

Schedule 1, Paragraph 3, of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) requires Cabinet Office to publish a Draft Plan no more than 12 months after the completion of the Preliminary Publicity. This means a draft plan shall be published by 28 September 2024.

The responses received as part of the Preliminary Publicity consultation will directly inform the Draft Strategic Plan which will, in turn, be subject to a further round of consultation ahead of public inquiry.

The Department of Infrastructure received two petitions from local residents in 2020, identifying problems and seeking the implementation of traffic calming and pedestrian safety measures in the area, including 20mph restrictions. A feasibility study was carried out with a number of options suggested. Feedback was sought from key stakeholders, the general public particularly residents and businesses in the scheme area about the proposals and any other issues that are affecting the area regarding making our streets suitable for all residents, pedestrians and road users.

592 responses were received by the Consultation Hub. Responses were also received by email, paper copies and from the drop in sessions.  These are reported on in a separate section in the consultation response document which is available as a downloadable document on this page.

To what extent do you support the introduction of a 20mph speed limit within the area?

77% of respondents said they supported the introduction of a 20mph speed limit within the area in some form.

The scheme proposes traffic calming measures on Alexander Drive and Mount Bradda. To what extent do you support the use of traffic calming in these areas?

• 33% supported the idea of traffic calming on Alexander Drive and Mount Bradda
• 15% said they supported the idea but would suggest other areas in addition
• 10% said no but would like to suggest alternative areas
• 41% did not support traffic calming in these areas

To what extent do you support the addition of new road crossings, including zebra-like side road crossings, in the area?

• 57% were supportive
• 30% said no
• 11% unsure to the addition of new road crossings including zebra-like side road crossings in the area

Please indicate below the extent to which you support the improvements to popular walking and cycling routes in the area:

• Improvements to the existing walking route from Ballakermeen Drive to Ballakermeen High School:
  • 55% yes
  • 24% no
  • 17% not sure
• Walking route improvements on entry to Ballakermeen High School:
  • 58% yes
  • 19% no
  • 19% not sure
• Footway improvements on Hawarden Avenue:
  • 58% yes
  • 20% no
  • 18% not sure
• Traffic-free zone linking into residential and school area from Peel Road:
  • 29% yes
  • 50% no
  • 18% not sure

Please indicate below the extent to which you support the one-way road and no entry treatments:

• No entry treatments on residential streets (two-way traffic on street itself):
  • 27% yes
  • 49% no
  • 17% not sure
• One-way restriction on the access road next to Woodbourne Square:
  • 33% yes
  • 43% no
  • 13% not sure

The Department would like to thank the public, particularly the residents in the scheme area, for their engagement and welcomes all the free form comments giving their reasons for supporting or not supporting any of the suggested options.

The Department has considered the responses to the engagement carefully and has published a consultation response which is available as a downloadable document on this page. This consultation report summarises the responses received and sets out the next steps the Department intends to take following the engagement.

We will use the feedback given by all stakeholders to help us develop a Living Streets Scheme for the area. It is hoped that the detail design stage will start this year, but this will be dependent on funding.

The Department for Enterprise asked for views on specific proposals to temporarily remove the requirement for Work Permits across all roles, occupations and economic sectors given the ongoing skills shortages and low levels of unemployment.  Feedback was also sought on a replacement registration process, the level of fee to be charged for such registration and maintaining the current position on persons with certain criminal convictions being required to still follow the full Work Permit process.

253 responses were received (250 via the consultation Hub and 3 separate written responses).  The majority of respondents supported the proposals as set out in the consultation.

• 170 respondents (67%) expressed their views that there were no specific sectors or occupations where the requirement for a work permit needs to be retained
• 205 respondents (81%) supported the principle of requiring an employer to register non-Isle of Man Workers in replacement of a work permit application
• 233 respondents (92%) supported the principle of maintaining the existing provisions in respect of persons with certain criminal convictions
• 163 respondents (64%) supported the retention of a fee, to be paid at the time of registering a non-Isle of Man worker
• 151 respondents (60%) supported, on balance, the overall proposed approach.  Of those respondents who did not support the proposed approach, a further 26 (10%) expressed views that the proposals did not go far enough and the whole process should be removed / revoked.

Therefore, overall, there was a significant majority of respondents in support of further reform to the Work Permit system, with the specific proposals of the Department also receiving majority support.

The Department has considered the responses to the consultation carefully and has published a consultation response which is available as a downloadable document on this page.  This consultation report summarises the responses received and sets out the next steps the Department intends to take following the consultation which concluded with a significant majority of respondents expressing the view that further reforms to the work permit system were required, with the specific proposals set out by the Department also receiving majority support.

The required legislative amendments will now be prepared and the Department intends to bring these forward at the October 2023 sitting of Tynwald.

Subject to the will of Tynwald, the Department intends to implement the revised process as soon as practicable following approval and clear guidance will be made available for both employers and employees, with the changes widely publicised ahead of implementation, if ultimately approved.

We asked for your opinions on the principles of secondary schools uniforms in Isle of Man schools to inform a review of the current uniform policies that are in place.

School uniform is a key element in promoting the ethos of a school, providing a sense of belonging and identity and setting an appropriate tone for an education setting. It is acknowledged to deliver important benefits to students, schools, families and the wider community.

By creating a common identity amongst all pupils, regardless of background, a uniform can offer many benefits, some of which include:

• Improved concentration and orderliness in the school environment
• Acting as a social leveller
• Promoting equality and a sense of togetherness
• Helping to identify students outside of the school site
• Highlighting people on school sites who should not be there
• Promoting pride and belonging for students in their school and local community

Schools work hard to maintain high standards in compliance with their published uniform requirements, helping all stakeholders understand what is expected from students and as a result encouraging and supporting the benefits a uniform offers.

A public consultation was open for four weeks in January and February 2023. A total of 1,162 responses were received, with 1,044 identified as key stakeholders. Included in the respondents were teachers, students, parents and uniform providers.

50% of respondents stated that uniform ‘could be made more cost effective’.

50% of respondents stated that uniforms ensure students are not singled out because of what they are wearing.

In answering the question ‘what role does school uniform have in the ethos and culture of schools’:

• 62% of respondents stated it shows students as representatives of the school in the community
• 50% of respondents stated it fosters a sense of belonging
• 50% of respondents stated it allows a predictable selection of clothing for students who may find this stressful

When considering costs, 60% of respondents stated that the number of branded items in a school PE kit should be minimised. The full consultation results have been uploaded and can be viewed on the 'files' section below.

Following review of the consultation results, no change to the existing Department’s School Uniform Policy Guidance from July 2021 are considered necessary.

Individual schools set their own Uniform Policy, in line with the guidance issued by the Department.

The consultation results have been reviewed and considered by all Secondary School Headteachers. Please find in the 'files' section below a summary of planned changes to the school uniform, to be implemented in the academic year commencing in September 2024 (subject to approval by the schools’ Governing Body).

Opinions on school uniform and the appropriateness of the questions to be asked as part of the consultation were sought from school leaders and student focus groups. The points below came out as part of this research and may be of benefit to interested parties:

• Schools would like parents/carers to know that they are happy to be approached if concerns arise about the acquisition of uniform. In the past, schools have been able to donate new and/or pre-worn uniform/footwear to families in their communities who are unable to acquire items for whatever reason
   
• Families can apply to the Department for uniform assistance from the available educational endowment provided by a benefactor – more information and an application form is available from the DESC's homepage under downloadable documents
   
• Schools referenced parents/carers raising concerns about the cost involved in replacing items of lost uniform. Schools seldom experience items going missing permanently, but each school is left with a considerable volume of unnamed lost property each academic year. When lost items are clearly labelled with the student’s name, they are often quickly returned to the owner
   
• Lost items that cannot be returned to their owner are kept for an appropriate length of time by schools and may be donated to other families if not claimed
   
• PE departments have a stock of items that they lend, or sometimes donate, to students who may not have access to the required items for lessons

Following engagement with retailers and public bodies, a consultation on the Vapour Products Bill 2023 commenced on Friday 23 December 2022 and concluded on Sunday 29 January 2023, although responses submitted by 1 February 2023 were accepted by the Department.

This was achieved using online survey published on the IoM Government consultation hub. This survey sought views on the main policy goals the Bill was intending to support, quoting parts of the Bill where appropriate, as well as seeking general feedback on the Bill and suggestions for future policy development. To assist the completion of this survey an early draft of the Bill was published at the same time, along with a downloadable copy of the consultation questions.

The Department received submissions from 308 people to this consultation, of which:

• 294 responses were from members of the public
• 5 were from vapour products retailers
• 5 were on behalf of public bodies
• 1 was from a manufacturer of tobacco and vaping products
• 1 was from a Manx Advocate
• 1 was from a Member of Tynwald
• 1 was from a Trade Union

These responses set out in these submissions can be broadly categorised as: 

Broad agreement with the proposed contents of the Bill

These responses to the Bill were generally in agreement with the proposed contents of the Bill, answering YES to all of the consultations main questions. These responses often expressed concern over vaping by large number of children (17 responses) or vaping in schools (16 responses).

Where feedback was given it was to suggest technical improvements to the drafting of the Bill (e.g. 7 responses suggesting minor corrections to the Bill), or expressing concern as to its enforceability, while still respecting the broad policy goals the Bill is intending to achieve.

Notably, these responses were supportive of the need for better regulation of vapour products labelling (92 responses) and health warning labelling (14 responses), which could be introduced in line with UK regulatory controls (supported by 4 responses) or IOM specific legislation (11 responses).

These responses also highlighted the potential difficulties and costs on retailers of complying with the proposed regulatory controls with suggestions for alternative controls on displays (8 responses) and simply requiring vapour products to be sold from behind the counter (7 responses).

Further controls are needed for vapour products

These responses to the Bill were supportive of the proposed measures, but suggested these could be extended.

The main focus was on removing vapour products from being visible at the point of sale (97 responses) or having the sale of vapour products regulated in a manner similar to tobacco (85 responses).

68 responses expressed concern potential impact of vaping on an individual's health (68 responses), and the effect on the persons around the person vaping, 78 responses also suggested the use of vapour products in public places should be regulated.

Making vaping less visible was also supported with responses advocating for partial or complete bans on vapour product advertising (34 responses), controlling advertising of such products to children (21 responses) and regulating the flavour of such products to make them less attractive (19 responses)

These response were also opposed to there being any exceptions for allowing the sale or supply of vapour products to persons under 18 (62 responses) by their parents or anyone else, with 16 responses expressing concern as to the existing exceptions for the supply of tobacco by parents to persons under 18.

There was significant concern expressed in 68 responses as to the health impact of persons' vaping and those around them, and respondents suggested the age for buying vapour products should be increased to 21 or 25.

Low to no regulation required for vapour products

In this category responses to the Bill were of the view that no legislation is required (19 responses) or more evidence would be needed to support legislation (19 responses), along with the view that vapour products as harmless (5 responses).

These responses were often of the view that retailers were taking sufficient voluntary measures to control the sale of vapour products (7 responses), with no need for lockable cabinets (10 responses), and there was little need for regulatory controls or enforcement powers as a consequence.

Some feedback indicated support for voluntary controls (7 response) or took that view that age controls only needed from 16 (6 responses) in line with voting age restrictions.

Stricter controls required on vapour products, tobacco and tobacco products

This category of responses to the Bill argued for complete, or near complete, bans on the sale and use of vapour products (38 responses).

Such suggestions often extended to a complete, or near complete, ban on the sale of tobacco and tobacco products as well referencing the approach taken in New Zealand and Singapore.

These responses often made the case for stricter regulatory controls than the UK (15 responses), greater enforcement generally (15 responses) and in schools (15 responses), supported by broader enforcement powers for the police (5 responses).

From a retail perspective, if the sale of vapour products was allowed it would only be for persons over 21 (4 responses) or 25 (4 responses) or only for supporting smoking cessation (4 responses).

These views were formed based on the perceived health risks posed by vaping and smoking, the social nuisance value of such activities.
A detailed summary of responses document has been compiled and published on the consultation webpage.

Having considered the consultation feedback, and undertaken further engagement with key stakeholders, a number of amendments to the Bill have been identified and agreed by the Department.

These amendments were:

• Amending the title of the Bill to refer to 'Vaping Products', rather than 'Vapour Products'
   
• Clarifying the definition of vaping products, to ensure the Bill only applied to such products and not to items such as batteries or medical devices
   
• Providing that persons acting on 'reasonable belief' that a person is over 18 are not committing an offence under this legislation
   
• Enhancing the controls on the display of vaping products in light of feedback from the consultation, removing advertising of vaping products in retail premises, and only allowing the products to be displayed to persons over the age of 18
   
• Ensuring the police have the necessary powers to seize and dispose of vaping products being used by persons under 18 in public places
   
• Making a number of minor technical changes to improve the drafting and formatting of the Bill. A revised Bill incorporating these changes is in the process of being drafted and will be introduced into the House of Keys at the earliest opportunity

Furthermore, Public Health will:

• Engage with DEFA on regulating the use of single-use vaping products under the powers provided by the Climate Change Act 2021
   
• Undertake further engagement with young people with respect to vaping products

The Treasury sought views on the Sanctions Bill 2022.

12 responses were received.

Overall no major issues with the Bill were raised.  The issues raised are set out in the consultation response document.

The Treasury is grateful to all who responded to the consultation.

A Consultation Response document has been prepared which provides a summary of responses and corresponding amendments to the Sanctions Bill 2022.

The Treasury plans to finalise the revised Bill and introduce it to the branches of Tynwald in 2023.

The Treasury sought views on 10 key policy proposals concerning the Public Sector Payments Bill.

58 responses were received.

Each of the policy proposals set were supported by the majority of respondents. Issues raised by respondents are discussed in detail in the Consultation Response document.

The Treasury is grateful to all who responded to the consultation.

A Consultation Response document has been prepared which provides a summary of responses and proposed next steps.