Cronyism Allegations Engulf Isle of Man’s Green Agenda: Earthscope, Ivy Mason, and Government Ties Under Fire
The Isle of Man’s environmental credibility is under siege.
What began as a celebrated push toward Net Zero has morphed into a tangled web of insider influence, opaque partnerships, unanswered questions and unaccountable decisions.
At the centre of one storm: Earthscope Isle of Man, Ivy Mason Ltd, and a growing chorus of critics accusing the government of institutional cronyism.
Earthscope: A Family Affair with Government Contracts
Earthscope Ltd, the ‘social enterprise’ delivering carbon literacy training to over 400 civil servants, is registered at the home of Rob Mercer MLC—Chair of Tynwald’s Environment & Infrastructure Policy Review Committee.
The company is run by Mercer’s daughter, Sarah Mercer, and her partner Matthew Warren. Despite this direct family link, Mercer MLC has never declared Earthscope in the Tynwald Members’ Interests Register.
Instead, he claims to have disclosed the relationship via a “related party transaction” buried in the government’s annual financial statements. Critics argue this is a deliberate sidestep of public accountability, especially given Mercer’s influential role in overseeing environmental policy.
Sarah Mercer describes herself as an ‘activist’ and ‘climate communicator’. She has been involved in Extinction Rebellion actions in Edinburgh, London and the Isle of Man and was Comms Coordinator for the Isle of Man Green Party.
It strains credibility to suggest there is no influence or overlap between the household and the company’s public-facing activities. Mercer’s role as Chair of Tynwald’s Environment & Infrastructure Policy Review Committee places him at the very heart of climate policy oversight—while his daughter’s enterprise delivers government-funded carbon literacy training to hundreds of civil servants.
FOI Requests Stonewalled
Multiple Freedom of Information requests probing Earthscope’s funding, selection process, and contractual arrangements have been refused by the Isle of Man Government. The refusals—citing exemptions for policy formation and commercial sensitivity—have only deepened public suspicion.
Despite a lawful Freedom of Information request and a detailed internal review, the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture (DEFA) has failed to produce core contract documents relating to its engagement with Earthscope Isle of Man.
DEFA claims it does not hold the supplier’s original proposal, signed purchase order, or any evaluation records—despite these being explicitly required under its own procurement rules. The department also refuses to confirm whether other bids were received, even though the contract was reportedly activated before the advertised deadline, raising serious concerns about fairness and transparency.
Further scrutiny reveals DEFA has not requested any records from Earthscope, despite contractual obligations to retain and provide them. It also withheld legal advice without disclosing basic metadata, and declined to assist in locating related documents held by other government bodies.
Transparency advocates say the government is hiding behind bureaucratic shields to protect favoured entities. “When a company linked to a sitting MLC is receiving public funds and training contracts, the public deserves answers—not stonewalls,” said one campaigner.
Systemic Weaknesses in FOI Response
- Timeline Manipulation Ignored: DEFA has not explained why Earthscope’s submission was treated as binding before the bid deadline, nor whether other bids were received.
- Misuse of ‘Not Held’: DEFA claims critical records don’t exist but offers no audit trail or rationale. It refuses to ask Earthscope for documents it is contractually obliged to retain.
- FOI Act Misapplied: DEFA wrongly claims it can ignore new issues raised during internal review, contradicting the FOI Code of Practice and Section 37.
- No Schedule of Withheld Documents: Legal advice was withheld without metadata, blocking scrutiny of the exemption.
- Inadequate Advice and Assistance: DEFA gave vague references and refused to contact other departments for relevant records, outsourcing the burden to the requester.
Business Isle of Man: Platforming the Inner Circle
Adding fuel to the fire, Business Isle of Man recently published a promotional article authored by Ailsa Harrop and Naomi Atkins—co-founders of Ivy Mason Ltd and former staff in the Government’s Climate Change Team.
The piece, “There’s More to Sustainability Than Net Zero”, positions Ivy Mason as a new authority on green business, despite its founders’ recent exit from government ‘climate’ roles.
The timing and visibility of the article have sparked accusations that Business Isle of Man is actively promoting a closed circle of insiders—those who’ve left public service only to reappear as private consultants with privileged access.
“It’s a Revolving Door of Influence”
One former civil servant described the situation as “a revolving door of influence—where former government staff rebrand as private enterprises and are immediately platformed by the same departments they once served.”
The same pattern appears with Earthscope, which has been repeatedly featured by Net Zero and Biosphere Isle of Man, despite lacking transparency around its funding and governance.
Public Trust in Decline
With Mercer’s family ties to Earthscope, FOI refusals, and the elevation of Ivy Mason by government media, many are questioning whether the Isle of Man’s green agenda is being driven by public interest—or private relationships.
Net Zero’s 2024–2025 Annual Progress Report continues to cite “co-benefits” as justification for funding decisions, but critics say this language is vague enough to mask preferential treatment.
Calls for Investigation
Watchdog groups and members of the public are now demanding a formal inquiry into the relationships between Earthscope, Ivy Mason, and government departments. Some are calling for Rob Mercer to recuse himself from any environmental oversight until full transparency is achieved.
Mark Kemp has spent over 20 years investigating matters of public interest. Mr Kemp has been pressing Government Departments for answers on a number of issues.
‘My thanks to Manx.News for reaching out.
As a taxpayer and stakeholder in the Isle of Man, I have spent over 20 years investigating matters of public interest, particularly those involving the use of public funds. In 2016, during the Vision Nine tender, I submitted written evidence and was invited to attend a closed meeting, which I declined. I firmly believe that public spending and investigations should always be conducted with full transparency and I remain committed to those principles.
After attending a two-day Carbon Literacy training course, I sought to understand how training providers of this type were appointed. I therefore submitted a Freedom of Information request to clarify the procurement process behind the contract.
Unfortunately, accessing this information has proven difficult. It should not be this hard for the public to obtain clear, basic details about how their money is being spent. This is not the only case I am examining where securing documents, transcripts, and other relevant information has been challenging.
In this instance, the Department has not yet provided key documents, including the supplier’s original proposal, the signed purchase order, and any evidence of a competitive procurement process. The contract timeline also raises important questions with the provider reportedly appointed before the official deadline for other bids had closed closed (FOI response 4741801). It is essential that such matters are reviewed carefully and impartially to maintain trust in public procurement.
The public deserves clear answers and for the reasons stated, I have referred this matter to the Information Commissioner for independent review.
This statement is made strictly in my personal capacity and in accordance with my rights under the Isle of Man Human Rights Act 2001, including the right to freedom of expression. It does not represent the views of anyone else.’
The Isle of Man’s environmental agenda is increasingly at risk of being hollowed out by a lack of transparency and oversight. Without rigorous accountability, its climate initiatives risk serving as a polished veneer for entrenched networks, selective access, and unexamined privilege—where public funds and influence circulate among a familiar few, shielded from scrutiny.
10 Comments