Spat between Chief Minister and Dr Glover

[Andy Onchan]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

We feed into it I suppose.  But I think Andy's point Is more to make the IOM a good place to set up biotech, specifically genome sequencing, as another business stream, apart from finance, gaming etc.  

The message sent out with the RG debacle is likely to have been very damaging to such businesses who may have been thinking about setting up here. 

If IOMG treats one of their own like that, what would they do to an outsider? 

Correct Glad.

My guess is that most professionals in R&D in sectors like biotech are highly paid. Having these people move to IOM will create some initial pressure on social infrastructure but they will certainly pay their way in tax & NI collected. 

For the life of me why IOM doesn't have an IP registry is beyond me. If Jersey can do it, why can't Mann? 

IOMG really does have a cock-eyed approach to business development and almost backward in outlook. It's not as if they have to go through multiple government departments to set something like this up. We keep hearing about how nimble Tynwald & the executive are but the opposite seems to be true.

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Andy Onchan said:

Not according to the map that accompanied the article. (I did try to convert the article to an image so that you could see all the graphics but couldn't get it below the 1.95MB limit).   

Presumably it was a variant on this map from the COG-UK website:

Which includes Liverpool University which our samples currently go through.  There are a number of Trusts who are members, so I can't see why DHSC couldn't be.  There might be a bit of legal adjustment required, but some of that had to be sorted out anyway when Rachel was involved so the sending of samples to Liverpool was regularised.

[Andy Onchan]

13 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Presumably it was a variant on this map from the COG-UK website:

Which includes Liverpool University which our samples currently go through.  There are a number of Trusts who are members, so I can't see why DHSC couldn't be.  There might be a bit of legal adjustment required, but some of that had to be sorted out anyway when Rachel was involved so the sending of samples to Liverpool was regularised.

This one:

[Pipsqueak]

2 hours ago, Gladys said:

We feed into it I suppose.  But I think Andy's point Is more to make the IOM a good place to set up biotech, specifically genome sequencing, as another business stream, apart from finance, gaming etc.  

The message sent out with the RG debacle is likely to have been very damaging to such businesses who may have been thinking about setting up here. 

 

i think IOMG are getting the gear to be able to actually do it themselves and then  undercut RG to  drive her out of business and take it all for themselves.   

[Happier diner]

Just now, Andy Onchan said:

This one:

Interesting that Orkney and Shetland and Outer hebrides have something

[Andy Onchan]

1 minute ago, Pipsqueak said:

i think IOMG are getting the gear to be able to actually do it themselves and then  undercut RG to  drive her out of business and take it all for themselves.   

As I said cock-eyed.

[Roger Mexico]

14 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

This one:

There probably should be a light green dot in the Irish Sea for the Nobles Path Lab, but as we're not NHS/PHE, it wasn't included.  

[code99]

3 hours ago, Gladys said:

But I think Andy's point Is more to make the IOM a good place to set up biotech, specifically genome sequencing, as another business stream, apart from finance, gaming etc.  

The message sent out with the RG debacle is likely to have been very damaging to such businesses who may have been thinking about setting up here. 

If IOMG treats one of their own like that, what would they do to an outsider? 

I agree.

It seems to me that it has always been hard for the IOMG to attract top class science based enterprises to the Island. Any really good start-up can normally find a government somewhere who will offer it direct and indirect assistance if it substantially locates itself in that jurisdiction. Therefore in the best of times, this Island is in competition with other countries to attract good businesses.

The Dr Glover debacle has made this challenge even harder. It has planted a hillside of red flags in the sights of every possible future biotech business thinking about establishing itself here. So much for our fabled ''freedom to flourish'' slogan. That slogan now sounds incredibly hollow.

[Gladys]

1 hour ago, Andy Onchan said:

Correct Glad.

My guess is that most professionals in R&D in sectors like biotech are highly paid. Having these people move to IOM will create some initial pressure on social infrastructure but they will certainly pay their way in tax & NI collected. 

For the life of me why IOM doesn't have an IP registry is beyond me. If Jersey can do it, why can't Mann? 

IOMG really does have a cock-eyed approach to business development and almost backward in outlook. It's not as if they have to go through multiple government departments to set something like this up. We keep hearing about how nimble Tynwald & the executive are but the opposite seems to be true.

This was a sector they were keen to develop, and a good one that has less of the odour of purely finance based business.  As you say an IP register or some tie up for accreditation  to create something analogous to the ship registry which gives some assurance as to the facility meeting certain industry standards would give international credence.

But no, when a home grown expert is dismissed as not meeting whatever accreditation standard (which R G disputes) what validation of the sector has been given?

[Ham_N_Eggs]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

when a home grown expert is dismissed as not meeting whatever accreditation standard (which R G disputes) what validation of the sector has been given?

Maybe this is the problem? Had she happened to have been off Island then she might have been taken more seriously. The trouble is we will never know why they took the decisions they did but over the next couple of years we will see the impact this has had this and other potential new sectors (could our budding new cannabis sector disappear in a puff of smoke?).

[Gladys]

3 minutes ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Maybe this is the problem? Had she happened to have been off Island then she might have been taken more seriously. The trouble is we will never know why they took the decisions they did but over the next couple of years we will see the impact this has had this and other potential new sectors (could our budding new cannabis sector disappear in a puff of smoke?).

Indeed.  Biotech is an important economic diversifiedr, particularly as the world becomes more hostile to offshore.  Biden is introducing reporting of funds in and out of accounts, beyond the existing balance reporting, adding more cost and process. BEPS, substance and all those things currently targeting offshore is not so relevant to biotech, which could be a sector that provides employment.

A strong biotech sector would be complementary to development of medicinal cannabis applications. 

But of course, that implication of the cack-handed response was not even considered. 

[Pipsqueak]

9 minutes ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

s (could our budding new cannabis sector disappear in a puff of smoke?).

thats the idea usually.

[Uhtred]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

...that implication of the cack-handed response was not even considered. 

Of course it wasn’t. Why? Because the Quayle administration hasn’t a strategic bone in its body. These are people keen to read anonymous letters and dodge inconvenient questions, not ask themselves ‘What are the potential long term, wider, implications of this decision? Why can’t they pose that question? Because they lack the competence and intelligence to do so, or to perform as a entity that links disparate components of the economy in a structured series of policies and decisions. They don’t comprehend those linkages or how to make them work in tandem. The single defining moment for me of the last five years was Quayle’s catastrophic press call in relation to the jet VAT issue. No grasp of the issue; no clear message; no anticipation of the likely media questions/responses; cringingly inept communications. (Hello Covid).  Is that individual likely to consider the implications of a crack-handed response Gladys? (Or ideally start by avoiding the crack-handed response in the first place). Not a chance in hell. 

[The Voice of Reason]

The Telegraph article kindly provided by Andy shows exactly why we cannot do this sort of stuff alone. There is a great number of resources and funding (£20m) required as well as the economies of scale that this brings.

The IOM much as we would wish,  cannot do for example cancer research on its own. We have to align ourselves with others who have the resources and capabilities to do it and provide as much help and data that we can. That does not diminish the contribution we can make but is merely an acknowledgment that we are a small jurisdiction that does not have the infrastructure to change things on its own.

Just because Dr Glover is a “ home grown expert” in this field does not mean the IOM should ploughing its own furrow. The data feed into Liverpool is valuable in itself and means we can share the benefits.

I am sure we have plenty of home grown experts in other fields who have made important national ( British) and international contributions in science and other fields without all this hoo hah

[Gladys]

18 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

The Telegraph article kindly provided by Andy shows exactly why we cannot do this sort of stuff alone. There is a great number of resources and funding (£20m) required as well as the economies of scale that this brings.

The IOM much as we would wish,  cannot do for example cancer research on its own. We have to align ourselves with others who have the resources and capabilities to do it and provide as much help and data that we can. That does not diminish the contribution we can make but is merely an acknowledgment that we are a small jurisdiction that does not have the infrastructure to change things on its own.

Just because Dr Glover is a “ home grown expert” in this field does not mean the IOM should ploughing its own furrow. The data feed into Liverpool is valuable in itself and means we can share the benefits.

I am sure we have plenty of home grown experts in other fields who have made important national ( British) and international contributions in science and other fields without all this hoo hah

You miss the point entirely.