IOM Covid removing restrictions

[AcousticallyChallenged]

35 minutes ago, pongo said:

@Roger Mexico - the vast majority of anti-government noise is from people who inherently are anti-government whatever the policy and whatever the issue. If it wasn't about Covid, it would be about something else.

And it's not especially democratic in the sense that it is not representative. It's just the loudest mob voices. As usual.

What’s your basis for this? 
 

I’d make an assumption that you’re conflating anyone who is disagreeing, either way into one group whereby they must simply be anti-government.  
 

I’d argue that’s quite a bold assumption and that actually, Covid has been a catalyst to a lot more introspection into our island and government, as well as into governments elsewhere. Look at Hancock’s fiasco yesterday with free school meals. Piers Morgan becoming a voice of reason is a frightening prospect, and current reality. 
 

Ordinary people are questioning approaches, and more importantly, which lessons are being learnt from different approaches. 
 

If you dig back, I’m sure you’ll find that actually, attitudes changed based on risk factors. Usually the winds changing to be followed by CoMin later each time. As it got worse in our nearest neighbour, a lot of people were calling for whole house isolation, and more testing. Funnily enough, you can no longer isolate with non travellers. 

[dreamon]

5 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

I think you'll find most so called anti-government rhetoric is focused on government-stupidity and government-selfishness.

In recent times - under Brown, Bell and now Quayle - all too many government spending decisions have hardly been effective, efficient nor economic. Can you name ONE major IOM Govt project that has ever been delivered on time and to budget?

And remember the "Scope of Government" reports of 2006 and then 2012? The whole of government and all of its systems needs a top to bottom overhaul. Nothing has been done, in fact instead it continually spirals out of control offering little or no value for money.

And in this pandemic, how many non-essential government staff have been furloughed during this latest lockdown? Like the first - NONE. There are hundreds that could be - just for starters we don't need steam trains and museum staff. Yet government expect many in the private sector to survive on £280 pw or nothing and then to pay any extra taxes to make up any government spending shortfalls - including a large chunk to cover bloated government and CS/PS pensions government awarded themselves.

Pissing away £1million on a diesel train is one thing. But the main difference with covid is that stupid government decisions (such as not bringing in second week testing when it was obvious to many it was needed) costs lives and livelihoods. And you think people are just going to take that quietly?

Excellent post!!!!!

[asitis]

If there is one good thing to come out of this whole shambles, it is that perhaps more people are looking at Government and the way it works, as their decisions now affect everyone. I am anti wasting money, and anti people in charge who quite clearly are not suited to be so, and are never held accountable for their actions. Government need to realise that now, thanks to technology, they are open to scrutiny like never before, and without doubt, cannot now resort to the usual tactics of sweeping under the carpet, inaction, commercial confidentiality and bullshit, as it is readily analysed by lots more taxpayers who do have skin in the game ! Until Government divest itself of egos, an aversion to the light of day being shone on them, and a CS that is under political control then we will continue to be sceptics with good reason. 

 

[Banker]

A large amount of groundswell building up against the government’s poor financial support for individuals & businesses so expect questions at the next press conference and in Tynwald next week 

[asitis]

Maybe the VAT payment isn't, to coin Mr Teare " Not actually public/ taxpayers money "

[Beelzebub3]

1 hour ago, pongo said:

@Roger Mexico - the vast majority of anti-government noise is from people who inherently are anti-government whatever the policy and whatever the issue. If it wasn't about Covid, it would be about something else.

And it's not especially democratic in the sense that it is not representative. It's just the loudest mob voices. As usual.

Pongo, you are at it again, the majority of folk are not anti-government,they are opposed to some of the stupid decisions made by the CM and his cohorts ie voting against more testing/getting rid of DR Glover/ reading out private letters at briefings etc that to me is constructive criticism not anti-goverment rhetoric.

Edited January 14, 2021 by Beelzebub3
spellcheck

[piebaps]

38 minutes ago, Banker said:

A large amount of groundswell building up against the government’s poor financial support for individuals & businesses so expect questions at the next press conference and in Tynwald next week 

At the start of this lockdown a short 3 week period was envisaged. The MERA for all its faults was already on the shelf and probably (I'm guessing here) could be reactivated quickly as a way to get £600 to the guys and gals that needed it, in the shortest possible time.

Now that it seems more likely that the lockdown may need extending (based on the 14 days clear test) a rethink is probably already underway for wider support. Its a shit time for a lockdown (not that there's a good time) right on the back of Christmas when many non-office workers have just had a pretty lean month in any case. I have faith that Alf will have something up his sleeve.

The whole covid thing has been a balancing act between health and economics right from the start. As many have already said on here, if you get the economics wrong then health can suffer too. Government must see that.

There endeth a rare semi-serious post.

Obvs if we got rid of the English and declared ourselves to be part of Guernsey, we'd be fine.

[The Duck of Atholl]

52 minutes ago, asitis said:

If there is one good thing to come out of this whole shambles, it is that perhaps more people are looking at Government and the way it works, as their decisions now affect everyone. I am anti wasting money, and anti people in charge who quite clearly are not suited to be so, and are never held accountable for their actions. Government need to realise that now, thanks to technology, they are open to scrutiny like never before, and without doubt, cannot now resort to the usual tactics of sweeping under the carpet, inaction, commercial confidentiality and bullshit, as it is readily analysed by lots more taxpayers who do have skin in the game ! Until Government divest itself of egos, an aversion to the light of day being shone on them, and a CS that is under political control then we will continue to be sceptics with good reason. 

 

Unfortunately the very nature of the civil service is to to the bidding of Government. I know several ducks and drakes in different departments who get strung out by the whim of the political member in charge. A favourite is to have to drop everything  and prioritise something because it has "gone political". This usually means that the member in question is desperate to impress with an initiative that will end up being half baked or a constituent has been on the phone complaining.

The latter seems wonderful in principle as it appears that everyone has a politician and thereafter a Government department at their beck and call. Unfortunately it leads to government by facebook or phone 

[piebaps]

21 minutes ago, Beelzebub3 said:

voting against more testing

No. They didn't. Read Hansard from 18 November. https://www.tynwald.org.im/business/hansard/20002020/t201118 RHG.pdf

This is what the vote was on

"further urgent consideration should be given for all arrivals to be tested for COVID-19 with additional testing to take place at intervals after arrival within the 14-day isolation period"

The motion was passed too. If Shimmins (who proposed this) wanted testing done then the motion should have reflected this. It didn't, it just asked that they think about it.

 

[Banker]

5 minutes ago, piebaps said:

No. They didn't. Read Hansard from 18 November. https://www.tynwald.org.im/business/hansard/20002020/t201118 RHG.pdf

This is what the vote was on

"further urgent consideration should be given for all arrivals to be tested for COVID-19 with additional testing to take place at intervals after arrival within the 14-day isolation period"

The motion was passed too. If Shimmins (who proposed this) wanted testing done then the motion should have reflected this. It didn't, it just asked that they think about it.

 

That’s splitting hairs , it was obviously the will of Tynwald for more testing to be done with Comin against & Howie & Ashie ignored it. 

[Beelzebub3]

2 minutes ago, piebaps said:

No. They didn't. Read Hansard from 18 November. https://www.tynwald.org.im/business/hansard/20002020/t201118 RHG.pdf

This is what the vote was on

"further urgent consideration should be given for all arrivals to be tested for COVID-19 with additional testing to take place at intervals after arrival within the 14-day isolation period"

The motion was passed too. If Shimmins (who proposed this) wanted testing done then the motion should have reflected this. It didn't, it just asked that they think about it.

 

They clearly did not give it further urgent consideration towards testing, as it did not happen, they may as well have voted against it.

[The Duck of Atholl]

6 minutes ago, Banker said:

That’s splitting hairs , it was obviously the will of Tynwald for more testing to be done with Comin against & Howie & Ashie ignored it. 

You may be right but that decision was one for CoMIN. You may from time to time  see in  contracts an agreement to consult with certain parties before an action is taken. It is used to give the party consulted with some comfort that their views will carry some weight when in actual fact it is just a lip service clause.

[Andy Onchan]

57 minutes ago, asitis said:

Maybe the VAT payment isn't, to coin Mr Teare " Not actually public/ taxpayers money "

In the same way that the BBC licence fee refund is not really IOM licence-holders money. 

[Uhtred]

2 hours ago, pongo said:

@Roger Mexico - the vast majority of anti-government noise is from people who inherently are anti-government whatever the policy and whatever the issue. If it wasn't about Covid, it would be about something else.

And it's not especially democratic in the sense that it is not representative. It's just the loudest mob voices. As usual.

Who wrote that for you Howard, because you wouldn’t be able to manage that alone?

[Non-Believer]

26 minutes ago, The Duck of Atholl said:

Unfortunately the very nature of the civil service is to to the bidding of Government. I know several ducks and drakes in different departments who get strung out by the whim of the political member in charge. A favourite is to have to drop everything  and prioritise something because it has "gone political".

Are you sure that you have all this the right way round.....? 🤔