IOM DHSC & MANX CARE

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Roxanne said:

That was a sobering listen. She's right, every one of them is either still in place, transferred, or sitting on a huge payout or pension. Not one of them has faced any retribution for their actions and worse, our government has knowingly covered the whole thing up.

What Moulton didn't really make clear was that Ranson's statement was issued by the BMA, not by herself, so that it has gone to all the UK media, not just the locals.

Regarding the payoffs we can make some guesses about the sums from that FoI we discussed earlier this year.  To quote from what I said then:

[The totals] cover "payments [for] loss of office such as MARS, voluntary redundancy, compulsory redundancy and severance payments", they wouldn't include amounts awarded by tribunals either.  The 2022-23 figures are only up to December 2022 because Manx Radio asked on 24 January and the Cabinet Office spent a lot of time trying to delay them asking for meaningless clarifications.

And you can see why because the 2022-23 figures must cover the aftermath of the Ranson tribunal and shows £1,194,148.45 for the Cabinet Office alone just for those nine months.  That will cover the departure of Conie as head of HR as well as Greenhow, but it's still a fairly eye-watering sum.  I suspect it doesn't include Ewart who would have had a retirement package (should would have been about 63 and so entitled to one) and of course other people may have left for other reasons - though there's only 27 in total across all public service.

The other interesting figure for this year is for DHSC which is £244,738.00.  This presumably would include the CEO Karen Malone - indeed it might just be for her.  This is after the Manx Care split, so DHSC only has about 40 employees (indeed the total figure covering Manx Care's many hundreds was less than the DHSC's).

So it's quite possible that Greenhow got say half a million and the others around £200,000 if not more.

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Rox, 

Re your statement that MF is your only benchmark for public feeling. 
Then I am afraid you are being misled.

I have respect for ( most) contributors on here but let’s take for example, the trans issue. Most of the pubic feeling is OK if you feel like your gender is the opposite of your biological sex, crack on, dress how you like, act how you like, have surgery if you want but in our eyes you are still of the biological sex/ gender you were born as.

But on this topic contributors on here are much more aggressive, suggesting that men transitioning ( or transitioned) into women should be able to compete as women. This is clearly not what the majority of people ,outside the confines of MF believe.

There are many more issues that contributors on here are at odds with the general mood. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, it stimulates debate and is a contrast with the Facebook community.

Returning to D Ashford whilst most on here seek to demonise him, he was part of a team that held Covid at bay, for some time. He did what he thought was right, and the IOM Govt was largely in step with the way other countries dealt with the pandemic.

He never held himself out to have a magic wand that would instantly destroy and get rid of Covid.

Now the downside of MF is that having written my last sentence I will be accused of licking his arse, being up his bottom and all sort of unpleasantries.

 

If the team held covid at bay and they did what they thought was right, why did they exclude a medic who recommended earlier closure of the borders? 

What held it at bay was the Irish Sea.  

[The Voice of Reason]

1 minute ago, Gladys said:

If the team held covid at bay and they did what they thought was right, why did they exclude a medic who recommended earlier closure of the borders? 

What held it at bay was the Irish Sea.  

And what some thought were draconian measures. Mount Murray par example.

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

And what some thought were draconian measures. Mount Murray par example.

But let's not forget that was after Abbotswood. 

[asitis]

7 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Now the downside of MF is that having written my last sentence I will be accused of licking his arse, being up his bottom and all sort of unpleasantries.

Not at all, just a real bad judge of a thoroughly unpleasant and disingenuous man, whose self opinion and ambition knows no bounds !

[Jarndyce]

17 minutes ago, Moddey Dhoo said:

The professional interactions of Murray, Ewart, Magson snd Ranson were described as 'four ferrets fighting in a bag'

More precisely: three ferrets organising themselves to attack, undermine and discredit the fourth.

[Jarndyce]

19 minutes ago, Moddey Dhoo said:

Someone needs to ask  what role he had in the key appointment of Angela Murray who was utterly unsuited to the role of interim DHSC CEO then Manx Care COO.

A known bully, put in charge of a department where bullying was an issue - what could POSSIBLY go wrong??

With Magson off the island more than on it, Murray was effectively her “attack dog” on-site.

[The Voice of Reason]

11 minutes ago, asitis said:

Not at all, just a real bad judge of a thoroughly unpleasant and disingenuous man, whose self opinion and ambition knows no bounds !

OK,I can live with accusations of being a bad judge of character ( although I would deny it)

But the personal  nasty abuse I have received on here for putting forward an alternative view has not shown Manx Forums in a good light as being a debating chamber.

 

[747-400]

Alf’s credibility ebbing away with every minute he remains silent. 

Wonder what JPW has to say about it all. She is supposed to be the brains im the place. 

Edited May 3, 2023 by 747-400
typo

[alpha-acid]

20 minutes ago, 747-400 said:

Alf’s credibility ebbing away with every minute he remains silent. 

Wonder what JPW has to say about it all. She is supposed to be the brains im the place. 

There will be no response because they can still appeal,  obvious, maybe not to most on here

[Non-Believer]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

What Moulton didn't really make clear was that Ranson's statement was issued by the BMA, not by herself, so that it has gone to all the UK media, not just the locals.

Regarding the payoffs we can make some guesses about the sums from that FoI we discussed earlier this year.  To quote from what I said then:

[The totals] cover "payments [for] loss of office such as MARS, voluntary redundancy, compulsory redundancy and severance payments", they wouldn't include amounts awarded by tribunals either.  The 2022-23 figures are only up to December 2022 because Manx Radio asked on 24 January and the Cabinet Office spent a lot of time trying to delay them asking for meaningless clarifications.

And you can see why because the 2022-23 figures must cover the aftermath of the Ranson tribunal and shows £1,194,148.45 for the Cabinet Office alone just for those nine months.  That will cover the departure of Conie as head of HR as well as Greenhow, but it's still a fairly eye-watering sum.  I suspect it doesn't include Ewart who would have had a retirement package (should would have been about 63 and so entitled to one) and of course other people may have left for other reasons - though there's only 27 in total across all public service.

The other interesting figure for this year is for DHSC which is £244,738.00.  This presumably would include the CEO Karen Malone - indeed it might just be for her.  This is after the Manx Care split, so DHSC only has about 40 employees (indeed the total figure covering Manx Care's many hundreds was less than the DHSC's).

So it's quite possible that Greenhow got say half a million and the others around £200,000 if not more.

The sum of money that this entire, odious, disgraceful business has cost the Manx Taxpayers is absolutely beyond belief.

Lucrative reward for failure that might even include contribution to loss of life, how the hell do we ever get into the situation where we are signed up to paying people for this sort of performance, let alone the sums involved? The Govt and administration of this Island is unfit for purpose.

[slinkydevil]

The weather is going to get better soon. Let's have a riot when it's nice.

[Roger Mexico]

There was reference made earlier to an FoI just released on the legal costs (so far) to the Manx Government.  It's worth quoting in full:

"Please provide the total cost of engaging legal teams for the two High Court appeals in relation to the Dr Ranson tribunal in 2022, the disclosure hearing in summer 2022 and the remedy hearing in January and March 2023"

Regarding the Dr Ranson v Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) Employment Tribunal, to separate out the legal costs in relation to Appeals only would require the DHSC to undertake research into and analysis of the information that it holds, which a public authority is not required to do under the Freedom of Information Act 2015.

The DHSC can confirm that total legal costs (net of VAT) to date including Appeals are £676,184.51, contained in that figure is £31,500 which are costs of legal services for representation of Dr Ranson (regarding Appeals) payable by DHSC pursuant to Order of the Court.

Please quote the reference number 3052525 in any future communications.

To that eye-watering amount will need to be added some of Ranson's costs and probably some from their own side not yet invoiced (and the 20% VAT on top of the combined figure will be mostly 'lost' as the KCs etc will be registered for VAT in the UK).  But the insult added to injury is saying a detailed breakdown "would require the DHSC to undertake research into and analysis of the information that it holds, which a public authority is not required to do under the Freedom of Information Act 2015". 

Because of course "analysis of the information that it holds" is exactly what a Department is supposed to do for FoI.  True there is a qualified exemption if doing that analysis will take too much time/cost over a specified limit, but they must have done the calculations anyway to come up with the total figure and the outside lawyers will have supplied detailed costs.  Presumably they're trying to disguise just how much went on the appeals.

[2112]

5 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

There was reference made earlier to an FoI just released on the legal costs (so far) to the Manx Government.  It's worth quoting in full:

"Please provide the total cost of engaging legal teams for the two High Court appeals in relation to the Dr Ranson tribunal in 2022, the disclosure hearing in summer 2022 and the remedy hearing in January and March 2023"

Regarding the Dr Ranson v Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) Employment Tribunal, to separate out the legal costs in relation to Appeals only would require the DHSC to undertake research into and analysis of the information that it holds, which a public authority is not required to do under the Freedom of Information Act 2015.

The DHSC can confirm that total legal costs (net of VAT) to date including Appeals are £676,184.51, contained in that figure is £31,500 which are costs of legal services for representation of Dr Ranson (regarding Appeals) payable by DHSC pursuant to Order of the Court.

Please quote the reference number 3052525 in any future communications.

To that eye-watering amount will need to be added some of Ranson's costs and probably some from their own side not yet invoiced (and the 20% VAT on top of the combined figure will be mostly 'lost' as the KCs etc will be registered for VAT in the UK).  But the insult added to injury is saying a detailed breakdown "would require the DHSC to undertake research into and analysis of the information that it holds, which a public authority is not required to do under the Freedom of Information Act 2015". 

Because of course "analysis of the information that it holds" is exactly what a Department is supposed to do for FoI.  True there is a qualified exemption if doing that analysis will take too much time/cost over a specified limit, but they must have done the calculations anyway to come up with the total figure and the outside lawyers will have supplied detailed costs.  Presumably they're trying to disguise just how much went on the appeals.

To add a bit of sarcasm to your post, at least in some respects the island will benefit from the legal costs paid out - it will get back some VAT through the revenue sharing, and I’m sure our financial bods will think of a way to fiddle even more. 

[Holte End]

2 hours ago, 747-400 said:

Alf’s credibility ebbing away with every minute he remains silent. 

Wonder what JPW has to say about it all. She is supposed to be the brains im the place. 

Don't forget Dr Allison was a member of Comin at the time too, Alf isn't the only one who remains silent.