IOM DHSC & MANX CARE

[cissolt]

9 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

The Tribunal accepted that this was a cock-up by Government Technology Services (though it said Ranson's reaction of sabotage was perfectly understandable).  The fact it happened at midnight on New Year 2020 might well suggest some more general problem or that her phone had been set up like that because technically she had only been employed initially for a year.  It's not clear if other people's phones were hit as well.

But even if that was true you would expect there to have been an enquiry into what happened.  Especially as an outbreak of Covid was announced at a quarter to midnight, causing a new lockdown.

So her phone was wiped 15 minutes after the announcement?

How many government workers do you know work after 4pm let alone at that time any day of the week? If it was millennium eve I could understand.

I don't believe GTS have automated phone wiping policies in place, they do have remote wipe abilities though.

[ptarmigan]

Lawriee Hooper looked and sounded so uncomfortable in that interview. It’s not sitting comfortably with him at all. And he’s not a hugely political animal so he’s being told they have to do this…..but for what reason? 

[Shake me up Judy]

This is all about keeping certain individuals from having to face an enforced holiday in Jurby.

Hooper should resign after that car-crash interview with Moulton. Embarrassing.

Edited August 20, 2022 by Shake me up Judy
To add

[2112]

7 hours ago, Dirty Buggane said:

1)Please god, make it go away. 

2)nothing he has not got a clue.

My bets' on the first

It’s not going away. A real leader would get a grip of things, admit that errors and wrongdoing has occurred and correct things. Accepting that a disclosure tribunal taking place with good grace and participating fully is essential.

Either IOMG and DHSC are stupid, ignorant, totally thick or corrupt? My theory is they thought they could do things and get away with it because it’s a cultural thing, but things got out of hand. 
 

 

[2112]

30 minutes ago, ptarmigan said:

Lawriee Hooper looked and sounded so uncomfortable in that interview. It’s not sitting comfortably with him at all. And he’s not a hugely political animal so he’s being told they have to do this…..but for what reason? 

He not a politician. I’ve seen better village commissioners, and for a man that represents a party that constantly preaches morality and it’s party followers that swamp social media, must be furious. Hooper should go, give Alf a headache, have a long period of quiet reflection - till 2026. 

Edited August 20, 2022 by 2112

[Mysteron]

6 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said:

This is all about keeping certain individuals from having to face an enforced holiday in Jurby.

Hooper should resign after that car-crash interview with Moulton. Embarrassing.

It'll be interesting to see if it does become a criminal enquiry. 

In the event it does, I wonder how many who've already resigned/shuffled off in relation to this matter, think that by having done so, they've somehow magically dodged the bullet of being ultimately held accountable? 

Quite a few I'd wager. 

If arrestable offences are involved - which I believe have no statutory time limits - they will discover they were wrong to believe that by resigning, they acquired a teflon protection in return. 

 

 

[Two-lane]

14 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

Is it that bad? Really?

This is just one of the comments from the tribunal:

Z471 was a note of a meeting of the Senior Medical Leadership Team (SMLT).
That committee had not existed at the date of the note. The committee had been
created only some days later than the date on the note. Additionally, the
template for that note had never been used until towards the end of March 2020.
The metadata produced as Z474 showed that this document had only been
created on 20th January 2022 – just four days before this Hearing.

 

So what is the status of the tribunal - would presenting false information count as perjury?

[Dirty Buggane]

8 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

This is just one of the comments from the tribunal:

Z471 was a note of a meeting of the Senior Medical Leadership Team (SMLT).
That committee had not existed at the date of the note. The committee had been
created only some days later than the date on the note. Additionally, the
template for that note had never been used until towards the end of March 2020.
The metadata produced as Z474 showed that this document had only been
created on 20th January 2022 – just four days before this Hearing.

 

So what is the status of the tribunal - would presenting false information count as perjury?

I think this is why they are shitting themselves, they have committed prisonable offences. They obviously thought this was going to be like an internal plan to get shut of some one (Ranson) and meet up after for a g & t and congratulate themselves on job well done. Tough, this shit show has backfired big stylie, and some one might not just get slap on wrist, but wave their job and freedom and one would hope their pension rites. Oh please

[Augustus]

Extremely ill-advised to agree to an interview when it was clear from the start that he would be constrained in what he could say. He wanted to have his cake and eat it and failed miserably.

[Roger Mexico]

7 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

Is it that bad? Really? 

Well someone was sent to jail only two months ago for forging documents in a fairly petty fraud.  This is possibly about fraudulent documents actually being produced to a court (which is what the Tribunal is).  And what is more in a situation where there would almost certainly be conspiracy involved, which is taken more seriously than if there is just one person involved.  And government officials should be held to the highest standards, even more so that others in positions of trust such as compliance officers.

On the other hand large portions of the Manx government, possibly including those who control what goes to court, will work very hard to make sure that such things never appear in the open and no official is ever held responsible for their actions.  At any cost - which they expect the rest of us to pay for anyway.

This is really a decision for the politicians.  It's not for them to back the civil service, whatever they do and they must alter the rules that make it seem they should (most of which are recent inventions anyway).  No doubt Hooper was told that the DHSC 'had' to try to avoid the disclosure hearing, but he should have called their bluff.  They certainly won't help him  when things go wrong.

[Roger Mexico]

1 minute ago, Augustus said:

Extremely ill-advised to agree to an interview when it was clear from the start that he would be constrained in what he could say. He wanted to have his cake and eat it and failed miserably.

To be fair to Hooper, at the start of the interview Moulton says that the had Hooper in to do an end-of-year interview (like the one with Stu that's already up) and decided to ask Hooper about this story that had just come up.  I suppose Hooper could have done a 'No comment' interview, like a Anagh Coar scally discovered with a kilo of weed and £5,000 in used tenners, but it never looks good.

[MrGarrison]

5 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Well someone was sent to jail only two months ago for forging documents in a fairly petty fraud.  This is possibly about fraudulent documents actually being produced to a court (which is what the Tribunal is).  And what is more in a situation where there would almost certainly be conspiracy involved, which is taken more seriously than if there is just one person involved.  And government officials should be held to the highest standards, even more so that others in positions of trust such as compliance officers.

A good comparison and that was basically to try to save a very small amount of money in a divorce settlement not to completely hoodwink an employment tribunal. But the man will never work again in the finance sector with that sentence on his record and the same standards should apply in the public and private sector. As you say there is likely an element of collusion and institutional corruption here which would be even worse. Hooper must have been mad to sign the approval IMHO. He clearly feels uncomfortable in that interview. He needs to learn that it isn’t the job of Ministers to rubber stamp what his officers want.

[Non-Believer]

55 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

Is it that bad? Really? 

If it is falsification of now legally accountable documents then that's no less a crime than it would be were it divorce, finance or whatever, surely and should potentially carry a jail sentence. Attempting to block proceedings to prevent disclosure at this stage in the matters is born of nothing more than the sort of puerile arrogance we come to expect from IoMCS.

What on earth Hooper hopes to achieve by putting his name to this is beyond reasoning, if the blocking fails he has to go. His first duty is to the taxpaying electorate, maybe he needs reminding of that. Not the self serving scum in the situation he has inherited.

[Shake me up Judy]

If he's got any sense he'd bale out now while he's relatively untainted. He's swimming with sharks here.

[Numbnuts]

Its all a shitshow and clearly the whole system is corupt to the core. The culture has grown over the years and now the policies have come home to roost . All very sad that its happened but even sadder that we have no one with the necessary fortitude to say , stop , this has to all stop . 

Sadly I think too many in authority have something they know on others. Lets face it , many on here have 'info' on behaviour and practices that our elected representatives allegedly are involved in or bad life choices. Maybe this case will break the back of the problem and we can start afresh but it would seem the intention is to fight it. That I feel tells you all you need to know about all this .