IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Uhtred]

29 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

Jesus.

I wonder what else Hetty has been 'categorically' telling us, that's a load of old guff.

 

Quite a bit I’d venture.

[NoTail]

I personally don't blame the steamy worker. He/she can't be locked in isolation for a year or more, it would not be human. Probably not legal either. 

[Max Power]

1 minute ago, NoTail said:

I personally don't blame the steamy worker. He/she can't be locked in isolation for a year or more, it would not be human. Probably not legal either. 

Not at all, but some sort of rota allowing a proper isolation period could be drawn up. Two weeks on, two weeks isolation two weeks holiday or something along those lines. 

[Barlow]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

From the start (or at least from when Quayle recovered) it seems to have been marked by magical thinking: "If we test as few as possible, then we won't find any and that means it isn't there".  It's like a small child thinking they're invisible if they shut their eyes really tight.

It was then made worse by the row with Rachel Glover (which was triggered by this sort of attitude).  The thinking seems to have now developed as:

Rachel set up testing

Rachel isn't our friend

Therefore testing is a bad thing.

Furthermore by insisting on charging for tests, they have now got it into their heads that doing more testing is somehow giving away for free something they should be charging for.  So again tests are kept to a minimum because they're seen as valuable.

One thing linking all this is a general tone which it would be unfair to describe as "childish" - unfair to most children that is.  

I say again - Alf Cannan, Treasury Minister, should start every Council of Ministers meeting or any Covid Committee etc with a clear loud statement of how much lockdown costs.

Then let business begin. It will hurt bad but we are in a pandemic.

[Gladys]

30 minutes ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Exception certs are issued by the Government.

They are issued, specifically, by the Cabinet Office. 

Is Dr Ewart part of the DHSC?

It's OK  I have answered my own question. 

Edited February 18, 2021 by Gladys

[Gladys]

56 minutes ago, Numbnuts said:

Mind blowing really. Talk about left hand not knowing what right hand is doing . But hey , we always knew IOM Government were inept . This Covid situation and needing action and joined up thinking has shown what a waste of space most are . 

It's not even a case of that, the left hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. 

[TerryFuchwit]

42 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Not at all, but some sort of rota allowing a proper isolation period could be drawn up. Two weeks on, two weeks isolation two weeks holiday or something along those lines. 

That's delusional.

[quilp]

What ideas or outcomes do you see then Tel, serious question. 

[TerryFuchwit]

4 minutes ago, quilp said:

What ideas or outcomes do you see then Tel, serious question. 

 

Firstly, to even think that people working on the SP should be in isolation when not working is selfish, deluded and quite unbelievable really.  The staff are human beings ffs.  With lives and families.

No matter how you do it, we cannot get away from the fact that the boat needs to go back and forward every day and there is going be a "risk" of covid arising from it.    Be that from passengers or staff.

We cant treble the staffing.  We cant avoid the fact we import most of our product form the UK.  

The best the SP can do is have protocols to minimise the risks.  PPE.  Cleaning.  Avoiding undue contact.  It makes sense at this point to vaccinate the staff.  It isn't the silver bullet but it won't do any harm.

And equally as important is for people to stop having Beaker style meltdowns over covid.  We need to accept it is here and we are going to have to live with it.

 

[Max Power]

28 minutes ago, TerryFuchwit said:

That's delusional.

Not delusional at all, there needs to be something sensible proposed. You can't just have people wandering home and possibly infecting their families. That piece of paper might protect you from prosecution, that's about all! 

[Roger Mexico]

21 minutes ago, Gladys said:

They are issued, specifically, by the Cabinet Office. 

Is Dr Ewart part of the DHSC?

As you have since discovered Public Health has been part of the Cabinet Office since last April (the move was planned pre-Covid), but you're not right that the Cabinet Office is responsible for all exemptions.  In fact all Departments can issue them for keyworkers, though some are more prolific than others.

We actually have the figures for December and January[1] because Edge asked a Written Question in this week's Tynwald (#24):

Chief Secretary 5

DEFA 2

DfE 46

DHA 0

DHSC 82

DoI 50

The DHSC have been explained before as specialists coming over and locums and agency workers filling needed roles.  As well as specialists dealing with vital infrastructure (such as ,er, heritage railway rails) the DoI will include port and transport staff[2].  But the DfE's high number is rather a mystery, presumably those who qualify by knowing the right people.

 

[1]  Earlier Department splits are available in earlier questions, from memory the pattern is similar.

[2]  Though once issued an exemption does not need to be renewed for that person.

[Gladys]

Thanks Roger, I was having the horrible thought that in one room the Cabinet Office were issuing exemption certificates  whilst in the other Dr Ewart was wondering how they dealt with  the issue. 

[Cambon]

54 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Not delusional at all, there needs to be something sensible proposed. You can't just have people wandering home and possibly infecting their families. That piece of paper might protect you from prosecution, that's about all! 

So, vaccinate them. Simples.

[quilp]

It might be simple but the jury is out on whether transmissibility is affected by the vaccine. Vaccinating them all won't stop them passing on the virus who isn't vaccinated. There is no 'bigger picture' here to look at. Vaccinate them by all means, but the risk to others still exists, albeit with possibly less potential. 

[Roger Mexico]

55 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Thanks Roger, I was having the horrible thought that in one room the Cabinet Office were issuing exemption certificates  whilst in the other Dr Ewart was wondering how they dealt with  the issue. 

It's all still fairly odd.  If you look at Moulton's questions at the media conference, Ewart complains that the statement from the Steam Packet doesn't match with the policy document sent to them "jointly from DHSC and the Cabinet Office on 21st January".  But there's nothing to say that Steam Packet has agreed to (or even read) such a document.  And if it's only a policy document, presumably it has no legal force, so why should they?

But of the course the most extraordinary thing about that remark is the date.  It's taken them nearly a year to get round to realising that there ought to be some rules to prevent Covid getting onto the Island via one of the most obvious routes.