Lxxx Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 22 minutes ago, piebaps said: From Keys questions on 10 November "I can confirm that our records show that 557 people have arrived on the Island with permitted entry under Section 10A (2)(b) of the Emergency Powers Coronavirus Entry Restrictions No. 2 Regulations 2020. This is the exemption category that relates to individuals that have a contractual obligation to enter the Island, such as a mortgage, tenancy or contract of employment" Most of them will be teachers to try and plug the rather sad and embarrassing gap in our education provision we have at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 1 hour ago, NoTailT said: ALL HAIL MICHAEL JOSEM. https://michaeljosem.com/iom-health-minister-claims-to-have-destroyed-his-anonymous-letter/ The anonymous letter has been DESTROYED. It's complete bullshit. And it's not even competent bullshit that might fool some people. No MHK would destroy a letter in any such circumstances for all sort of obvious reasons, including self-protection. And if such a letter did exist there are all sorts of perfectly valid ways to avoid it being released under FoI, such as protecting the identity of individuals. And if they were going to release it, all they really needed to do was to release the full text of the letter (redacted to protect personal details) , which of course we already have because that is what was read out. These people have completely lost it. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trmpton Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 1 hour ago, Gladys said: Why would you, as a MHK, destroy mail received at your private address? They wouldn’t. If it turns out this letter never existed and he made it up and read it out in a press briefing, then heads need to roll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 1 minute ago, Roger Mexico said: It's complete bullshit. And it's not even competent bullshit that might fool some people. No MHK would destroy a letter in any such circumstances for all sort of obvious reasons, including self-protection. And if such a letter did exist there are all sorts of perfectly valid ways to avoid it being released under FoI, such as protecting the identity of individuals. And if they were going to release it, all they really needed to do was to release the full text of the letter (redacted to protect personal details) , which of course we already have because that is what was read out. These people have completely lost it. Literally. I'm sure the anonymous writer is not amused that the Minister destroyed their letter (if it was sent in by someone). They've f*'d it here. Well and truly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 35 minutes ago, Lxxx said: Most of them will be teachers to try and plug the rather sad and embarrassing gap in our education provision we have at the moment. Well if there's at least 279 teachers who have come over, we don't need to worry about shortages there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 You know what baffles me? How would they get his home address? It's not on the Tynwald website like some MHK's addresses are. It is out there, but you have to look for it. Surely any sensible human would email that crap in, be it from a personal email address or otherwise. Nothing. makes. sense. These incompetent liars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, NoTailT said: You know what baffles me? How would they get his home address? The author lives there. 3 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 Just now, TheTeapot said: The author lives there. I was trying to give the slimey liar the benefit of doubt in such a situation that MAYBE - just MAYBE - he didn't write the damn thing. But I can't help but follow your damn logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trmpton Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, NoTailT said: You know what baffles me? How would they get his home address? It's not on the Tynwald website like some MHK's addresses are. It is out there, but you have to look for it. Surely any sensible human would email that crap in, be it from a personal email address or otherwise. Nothing. makes. sense. These incompetent liars. To be fair. The only people I can think of who would email an anonymous letter from their personal email address are HQ and DA. A letter to a home address would be expected, but you wouldn’t destroy it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman34 Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 I think the letter burned when placed in the pocket of his pants 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 9 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: The author lives there. I laughed, but I don't actually think it's true in this case. It was clear at the press conference that even Ashford wasn't stupid enough to come up with this ridiculous and counter-productive scam and he was unhappy with having to do it. This can only have been dreamt up by Quayle and the DHSC and/or CO civil service - the mixture of spite and self-regarding pomposity is characteristic. Though of course if Ashford had any guts he would have told them what to do with the letter. Ashford's home address is in the phone book by the way (assuming he hasn't moved). Though I suspect the home-delivery thing is to do with being able to claim it has been destroyed - anything delivered 'officially' to the office definitely shouldn't be destroyed under all sorts of codes and even laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 Government "honest with public" insists Chief Minister https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/government-honest-with-public-insists-chief-minister/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 Some enterprising MHK needs to be at this like a dog with a bone now. It will be remembered come voting time and it's a opportunity for one of them to grab the limelight here and expose the incompetents while it is fresh in the memory. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 Just in case anyone thinks @Josem is making the whole thing up, the response has appeared on the FoI site and here it is in all its glory: The Department of Health and Social Care (the ‘Department’) can confirm that the Minister received the letter you refer on Thursday 29th October 2020. The letter was posted to Minister at his home address. When Minister receives any personal correspondence of this nature, to his home address, it is usual practice that this is destroyed. Prior to the Isle of Man Government Coronavirus Briefing (the ‘briefing’) held on 30th October 2020, the Minister sought clarification from the sender for permission to read the letter at the briefing to be held on 30th October 2020, the sender agreed as long as the Minister did not share their name, subsequently the letter was read out in its entirety less for the identity of the sender who requested anonymity. The Department can confirm that post briefing the original letter was destroyed by the Minister so therefore not held as defined under section 8(2) of the Freedom of Information Act (the ‘Act’) by the Minister and/or the Department. However pursuant to s15 of the Act to provide advice and assistance the briefing is available within the public domain via YouTube at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=kJGN4hk0BSc&list=UUAJ6- In addition and accompanying this response is a typed transcript created on the 12th October 2020, unfortunately there are 2 [two] parts which are inaudible, these inaudible comments are at Time Frame: 18:51-19:07 and Time Frame: 19:15-19:18. The accompanying typed transcription is marked.............[Inaudible]................ to reflect the above. Presumably they mean November, though they've forgotten to include the typed transcript any way. They can't even get the simplest things right. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Just in case anyone thinks @Josem is making the whole thing up, the response has appeared on the FoI site and here it is in all its glory: The Department of Health and Social Care (the ‘Department’) can confirm that the Minister received the letter you refer on Thursday 29th October 2020. The letter was posted to Minister at his home address. When Minister receives any personal correspondence of this nature, to his home address, it is usual practice that this is destroyed. Prior to the Isle of Man Government Coronavirus Briefing (the ‘briefing’) held on 30th October 2020, the Minister sought clarification from the sender for permission to read the letter at the briefing to be held on 30th October 2020, the sender agreed as long as the Minister did not share their name, subsequently the letter was read out in its entirety less for the identity of the sender who requested anonymity. The Department can confirm that post briefing the original letter was destroyed by the Minister so therefore not held as defined under section 8(2) of the Freedom of Information Act (the ‘Act’) by the Minister and/or the Department. However pursuant to s15 of the Act to provide advice and assistance the briefing is available within the public domain via YouTube at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=kJGN4hk0BSc&list=UUAJ6- In addition and accompanying this response is a typed transcript created on the 12th October 2020, unfortunately there are 2 [two] parts which are inaudible, these inaudible comments are at Time Frame: 18:51-19:07 and Time Frame: 19:15-19:18. The accompanying typed transcription is marked.............[Inaudible]................ to reflect the above. Presumably they mean November, though they've forgotten to include the typed transcript any way. They can't even get the simplest things right. That response was not written by the data governance people who usually reply to FOI's. Nota chance. Look at the legal language being used and phrasing 'the briefing'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.