We Asked, You Said, We Did

The Isle of Man Financial Services Authority ('the Authority'), issued a Call for Input seeking engagement and views on the nature, prevalence and provision of Family Office-type services being offered ‘by way of business’ in or from the Island.

The Authority received 17 responses to the Call for Input. The majority of these responses favoured a continuation of the current treatment of Family Office-type services being offered in for from the Island.

The Authority has prepared a response document, which provides a summary of the feedback submitted to the Call for Input. No change to the treatment of Family Office-type services is proposed at this current time. The Authority is currently reviewing its wider exemptions and exclusions framework, and further consideration around Family Office type activity will feed into this wider project.

Additional public and stakeholder consultation and engagement will be undertaken where necessary.

The purpose of the consultation by the Department of Home Affairs was to seek public views on policing in the Isle of Man to help shape the Constabulary's focus, priorities and where resources are directed to.

There were 324 responses to the consultation. The results are attached below, as a Summary of Responses document.

The Department is grateful to all those who took time to respond to the consultation. The results have been considered and used to inform the Policing Plan 2024-25, alongside what we heard at the Constabulary roadshows, consultation with the Chief Constable, Community Safety Partnership, reporting from the Constabulary and other research. 

The Isle of Man Financial Services Authority invited feedback on proposals to update and integrate the Insurance Regulations 2021 with simplified elements of the Insurance (Special Purpose Vehicles) Regulations 2015 and Guidance Notes for Insurance Special Purpose Vehicles into a combined single document: the Insurance Regulations 2024. The consultation also includes additional proposals relating to fast-track authorisation, regulatory sandboxing and potential restrictions on activities undertaken alongside regulated insurance activities.

The Authority received 11 responses to the consultation paper. The responses were generally supportive of the changes being proposed but queried how certain aspects might be implemented.

The Authority prepared a consultation response document, which details the feedback and responds to the questions raised.  In addition the Authority has revised its proposals and is issuing a second consultation (CP24-05).

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 purpose of the consultation by the Department of Education, Sport and Culture was to seek stakeholder and public views on areas considered appropriate for update in the proposed Education (Amendment) Bill. The consultation ran for 6 weeks from 27 March to 10 May 2024

There were 509 responses to the consultation. The results can be found attached below.

The Department is grateful to all those who took time to respond to the consultation. The results will be considered and used to form the policy principles which will result in amendments to the existing Isle of Man Education legislation.

The Isle of Man Financial Services Authority ('the Authority'), in conjunction with the Department of Home Affairs and the Treasury, invited feedback on proposals to amend certain aspects of the of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Framework. This included updating certain definitions and terminology throughout the legislation, and also the introduction a new activity into the Designated Business regime.

The Authority received 8 responses to the consultation. The responses were all broadly supportive of the changes being proposed.

The Authority prepared a consultation response document, which provides a summary of the feedback submitted and responds to any questions raised. The Authority will now prepare the final Designated Businesses (Amendment) Order 2024 and the Proceeds of Crime (Business in the Regulated Sector) (Amendment) Order 2024 for approval by Tynwald.

The Isle of Man Financial Services Authority ('the Authority'), in conjunction with the Department of Home Affairs, invited feedback on proposals to introduce a new Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Code, the Travel Rule (Transfer of Virtual Assets) Code 2024 ('the Travel Rule Code'). The Travel Rule Code creates a legislative framework to implement the expanded scope of the Financial Action Task Force’s ('FATF') Recommendation 16 regarding virtual asset transfer obligations.

The Authority received 1 response to the consultation. This response was supportive of the introduction of the Travel Rule Code.

The Authority prepared a consultation response document, which provides a summary of the feedback submitted and responds to any questions raised. The Authority will now prepare the final Travel Rule Code which is scheduled to commence in October 2024.

The Isle of Man Financial Services Authority ('the Authority') invited feedback on the potential options in connection with the regulation of crypto-asset activities.

The Authority received 16 responses to the consultation. The results of the consultation were inconclusive. The most frequently selected ‘best’ option was to maintain the current approach under the Designated Business (Registration and Oversight) Act 2015. In addition, those in favour of some form of regulation in principle often highlighted some significant barriers and risks.

The Authority prepared a Feedback Statement, which provides a summary of the feedback submitted. Taking into account the feedback that was received, the Authority has decided that the best course of action is to maintain the current approach under the Designated Business (Registration and Oversight) Act 2015 for the time being, but to keep the matter under review. The Authority will continue to monitor developments in international standards and regulatory frameworks in other jurisdictions. Any future proposals to change the regulatory perimeter would be subject to further consultation.

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. 

The Department for Enterprise sought views on adding new persons and bodies to the list of 'prescribed persons' workers may whistleblow to. The consultation specifically asked for feedback on adding a number of UK medical regulators and Members of the House of Keys/Members of Tynwald to the list.

The consultation opened on 5 January 2024 and closed on 1 March 2024. There were 55 responses to the consultation.

There was overwhelming support for the proposal that a number of UK medical regulators should be added to the list of prescribed persons, with 89% of the responses in agreement.

On the issue of whether MHKs or Members of Tynwald should be prescribed persons, 56% of the respondents agreed with the proposal that MHKs should be added to the list, while 49% agreed that Members of Tynwald should be added.

Respondents also suggested a number of other persons or bodies to take on the role of prescribed person.

The Department is grateful for the responses received from the consultation. The Department’s next steps are as follows.

Question 1 - Adding medical regulatory bodies to the list of prescribed persons

There was wide support for adding the UK medical regulatory bodies to the list of prescribed persons, and adding them to the list will reinforce the whistleblowing framework in the Isle of Man. The Department has been liaising with those regulators and with Manx Care to ensure that practical arrangements are put in place to support the regulators operating as prescribed persons for the Isle of Man.

Some of the responses questioned why the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) was not on the list of the bodies to be added. The Department is currently working with the NMC and Manx Care to have NMC operate as a prescribed person in the Isle of Man.

Questions 2 and 3 – Adding MHKs/Tynwald members to the list of prescribed persons

Questions 2 and 3 sought views on adding either MHKs to the list of prescribed persons or adding all Tynwald members. Though a majority of the respondents supported adding MHKs and similarly adding Tynwald members, a number of issues were raised by Tynwald members themselves.

It is of particular importance to note that in response to the consultation the Tynwald Standards and Members Interests’ Committee published, in February 2024, a short report which considered the issues around MHKs or Tynwald members being prescribed persons. The report made no recommendation but it raised a number of issues in relation to MHKs/Tynwald members being specified as prescribed persons.

On the one hand, whistleblowing to Tynwald members may already qualify as a protected disclosure in some circumstances under section 55 and 56 of the Employment Act 2006. Individuals may be more likely to make a disclosure to a Tynwald member given their public status.

On the other hand the Department accepts that there are good reasons why MHKs/Tynwald members should not be prescribed persons. The feedback to the consultation, and the Tynwald report, set out some of those reasons. For instance, the Department considers that persons are normally prescribed as those to whom a whistleblowing disclosure should be made because those persons (or bodies) have existing powers to deal with a disclosure, and those persons are prescribed for those issues alone. For example, the Department for Enterprise is a prescribed person for the purposes of any disclosures about payment of the minimum wage because the Department has powers to investigate breaches of the minimum wage under the Minimum Wage Act 2001. In contrast there is no statutory framework which sets out how Tynwald members would deal with a whistleblowing disclosure, and Tynwald members have no statutory powers to deal with such disclosures. Practically speaking, it is likely that the only thing a Tynwald Member would be able to do would be to pass such a disclosure to another prescribed person that had specific powers to deal with the issue.

In addition, Tynwald members do not have the same office resources that MPs in the UK benefit from, and, given that many Tynwald members have roles within the Government, e.g. Ministers, Political Members or Board Members, Tynwald members may find themselves conflicted in dealing with protected disclosures.

For the reasons above the Department does not intend to add either MHKs or all Tynwald members to the list of prescribed persons, but will engage with the Clerk of Tynwald’s office to ensure that adequate guidance is made available to Tynwald Members in respect of Whistleblowing procedures.

Question 4 – Adding any other bodies to the list of prescribed persons

As previously stated, the Department will consider further the suggestions for bodies to be added to the current list and will bring forward an updated Order for approval by Tynwald in autumn 2024.

More information can be found in the review of responses document below.

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 purpose of the consultation by the Office of Fair Trading was to seek feedback on the proposed secondary legislation under the auspices of the 2021 Competition Act.

The public consultation opened on the 1 December 2023 and closed on the 26 January 2024. The OFT received 17 responses to the consultation and 3 direct emails. All of the responses to the Consultation Hub were comprised as follows:

• 12 members of the public
• 3 on behalf of an organisation
• 2 other

The OFT is grateful to all those who took time to respond to the consultation. As a result of the consultation, modifications were made as follows:

• After an investigation has been undertaken the process for determining the calculation of a penalty has been simplified
   
• Mergers will now be assessed going forward, with the form itself having altered slightly
   
• The threshold for a merger assessment has been rephrased to provide greater clarity. If any of the undertakings involved has a revenue threshold above £20m, a merger assessment will be triggered
   
• In terms of merger thresholds in order to prevent dominance, the level set has been reduced from 40% to 25% threshold of market share

The OFT has prepared final versions of the secondary legislation, two of which will be laid before Tynwald and the remaining three will seek Tynwald approval.

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 Health and Care Transformation Programme* invited feedback on two alternative options of paying for Nursing, Residential and Home Care.

We presented the ‘Mixed Model’ (based on the Jersey ‘threshold and cap’ system) and the ‘Free Personal Care’ Model (based on the NHS-style Scottish model) for feedback.

Both options would increase Government’s contribution towards the cost of ‘Personal Care’, making it available to more people than it supports today.

Both models would enable more people to protect more of their assets and income and would provide the option for more people to receive their care at home (if safe and appropriate for them to do so).

However, if Government pays more towards care in either new model, the additional cost to Government will fall to society to pay. This means that people will pay for it throughout their life instead.

The consultation gave you the opportunity to say which model you think would provide a better way of paying for care in the future (or if you would prefer to keep the current model) and enabled you to give your feedback on details regarding the model design.

The public consultation opened on the 10 November 2023 and closed on the 12 January 2024. The Department received 1227 responses to the consultation, including almost 5000 free text comments.

It was one of the top 10 highest response received for a Government consultation in recent years, demonstrating how strongly many people feel about this issue. This volume of responses, with so many of you taking the time to share your experiences, suggestions, concerns and ideas has proved invaluable as a source of insight into your views. Thank you for taking the time.

The downside has been that the level of detail and complexity of many comments led to a much slower turnaround time for the small team to finalise and publish the results than they would have liked. Our apologies for the delay and thank you for your patience waiting for us to share the results.

The overwhelming opinion was that the current model of paying for care needs to change.

The ‘Free Personal Care’ model was selected as the preferred model by the majority of respondents, albeit by a slim margin.

A significant majority felt that there should be a limit or ‘cap’ to how much an individual should spend on care from their personal assets and income and a number commented that the proposed example thresholds** in the Mixed Model were too low or that there should be a sliding scale proportional to income and assets rather than a standard threshold applicable to all.

Many referenced that more needed to be done to support more people on middle income levels (that is, people with income levels above that which would make them eligible for income support in the current system but not enough to make them ‘high net worth’) to help them protect some of their assets.

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. The report also includes example comments from those who agreed that we could publish their responses.

In addition to summarising the responses received, the report highlights recurring themes and preferences and sets out the next steps the Department is considering to take following this engagement. This includes detailed financial modelling and the development of some of the most popular ideas raised in the report to test their feasibility – financially and practically.

We will keep you updated on this work via our webpage: Nursing, Residential and Home Care Project at gov.im (opens in a new tab). If you should have a specific question in the meantime, please contact Francesca DeHaven via healthandcaretransformation@gov.im

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 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.

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 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.