IOM DHSC & MANX CARE

[Non-Believer]

40 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

The trouble is that there's no real sign that many of them want to change the current situation which suits them personally.

Coupled with being led up the garden path by their CS masters who will be equally happy for things to remain just hunky dory as they are.

[Moddey Dhoo]

9 hours ago, Gladys said:

Agreed, there is no balance and usually in journalism there is an opposing view. 

They are illuminating, but you have to temper what you are hearing by noting there isn’t someone from the other side of the debate.  Possibly for good reason as anyone speaking for the other side may feel constrained by the 'sub judice' rule.  It is more akin to investigative reporting than balanced reporting. 

The best you can draw on them is that they are quite detailed observations and opinions, (under legal advice apparently of what they can say), but they are only opinion pieces.  They are not a fair and balanced analysis - they may be bang on target, but they may not.   

Also, do remember they each have no real skin in the game.

Having said that, they are a refreshing change to the normal journalistic endeavours here. 

There has been almost exclusively one narrative in the public domain since the outset. Notably Dr Ranson issued suit against Dr Alexson for trying to change it. While I have no doubt Dr Ranson was bullied and her exit very poorly handled, much of the relevant back story has never been told.

[Roxanne]

10 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Oooh “ Paul and Chris “ is it rather than Messrs Moulton and Robertshaw?

I watch those videos and to be fair they do provide an insight into what has happened.

But, and it’s a big but, these pair speak in tandem. They both condemn the Government and egg each other on as to how corrupt the Government are.

Normally in a journalistic debate you would expect someone with an opposing (or at least a differing) view to be invited to give their opinion.

In his pomp Paxman had people from all sides of the argument on his show. And he would often destroy those who held an unpopular opinion. But at least they had their chance

I accept that maybe Moulton couldn’t find anyone who would be prepared to come on and provide an alternative view.

But most political interviews or discussions in that case would have a caveat that “we invited x,or someone who disagreed with the award, for comment but they declined”

Very one sided videos. No doubt people will come on here saying there is only one side.But that is rarely the case.

 

Yes, they're not perfect by any means, but, they're all we've got.

It's worth a mention that Paul Moulton was the only person during those awful Covid briefings to challenge the government. He didn't do it particularly well and who could blame him knowing what they are capable of when someone challenges their actions. He was ridiculed, maligned and marginalised but he still kept at it despite being shut down at every opportunity.

There's not one other media outlet that summarises the current situation and questions it as these pair do. Yes, I would very much like to see a different viewpoint in there as well but who is going to pout their head above the parapet? I would suggest no one, and doesn't that tell you something about our 'open and transparent' government?

So, for the meantime, I appreciate their content as it is. If they egg one another on about how government is corrupt then I would suggest that it's because there's plenty of evidence to support that view. If their videos allow other people to see what's going on then that's ok with me. 

[Roxanne]

10 hours ago, Ringy Rose said:

Alf was one of the loudest voices in COMIN during the pandemic.

How big a carpet will he need?

Do you know, I actually can't remember much about him during Covid. I was probably too fixated on the gruesome threesome. 

Please would you refresh my memory?

[Jarndyce]

6 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

It's worth a mention that Paul Moulton was the only person during those awful Covid briefings to challenge the government. He didn't do it particularly well and who could blame him knowing what they are capable of when someone challenges their actions. He was ridiculed, maligned and marginalised but he still kept at it despite being shut down at every opportunity.

This.   Barely a briefing went by without the Two (or Three*) Stooges having a go at Moulton, sometimes even before he had asked his questions.

(*the occasional third being Ewart, of course…)

[Omobono]

all I can say  is thank God for Moulton, !    without him there would be nothing coming  out from Government ,  Manx Radio is a Joke  and full of stooges trying to cover for the clangers dropped by Government , and I have given up on the  local newspapers long ago  who seem to have an agenda all of their own and favour certain local politicians and interests ,

[asitis]

39 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

Yes, they're not perfect by any means, but, they're all we've got.

It's worth a mention that Paul Moulton was the only person during those awful Covid briefings to challenge the government. He didn't do it particularly well and who could blame him knowing what they are capable of when someone challenges their actions. He was ridiculed, maligned and marginalised but he still kept at it despite being shut down at every opportunity.

There's not one other media outlet that summarises the current situation and questions it as these pair do. Yes, I would very much like to see a different viewpoint in there as well but who is going to pout their head above the parapet? I would suggest no one, and doesn't that tell you something about our 'open and transparent' government?

So, for the meantime, I appreciate their content as it is. If they egg one another on about how government is corrupt then I would suggest that it's because there's plenty of evidence to support that view. If their videos allow other people to see what's going on then that's ok with me. 

Agreed, if one of our politicos or senior CS, feels sufficiently sullied by these productions they should be frothing at the mouth to go on and defend their positions. The fact they are not speaks volumes ! 

[WTF]

9 hours ago, Gladys said:

Agreed, there is no balance and usually in journalism there is an opposing view. 

 

when you can't actually give a point by point rebuttal  as we have seen i  recent years there is no real point in being there.

[Two-lane]

1 hour ago, Moddey Dhoo said:

Notably Dr Ranson issued suit against Dr Alexson for trying to change it.

The only reference I can find to that is here:

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/former-medical-director-unlikely-to-work-again/

"It was revealed that Dr Ranson has filed a defamation claim against Treasury Minister Dr Alex Allinson for comments he made in a media interview, describing his words as "creating an alternative and damaging narrative"."

Does anyone have a link to the media interview in question?

[Roxanne]

Quote

She also alleges those who haven't been honest during these proceedings are 'the most senior people', adding "the public and I should have been able to trust them".

This is really bad. 😕

[2112]

The MLP have been making much noise in the NPM calling for an inquiry. They have been anonymous really and have taken days after the judgement to get off the fence. Yes I would love an inquiry, but it has to be judge led by a UK judge (or KC Barrister), not a usual Manx tame lawyer/establishment stitch up affair. The second issue will be the costs involved. Also with an inquiry, you can be guaranteed that CM Cannan et al will resurrect the subjudice nonsense. An inquiry may appeal to some as a means of kicking the can down the road and keeping on procrastinating against meaningful action. 

Edited May 5, 2023 by 2112

[Roxanne]

1 minute ago, 2112 said:

The MLP have been making much noise in the NPM calling for an inquiry. They have been anonymous really and have taken days after the judgement to get off the fence. Yes I would love an inquiry, but it has to be judge led by a UK judge (or KC Barrister), not a usual Manx tame lawyer/establishment stitch up affair. The second issue will be the costs involved. Also with an inquiry, you can be guaranteed that CM Cannan et al will resurrect the subjudice nonsense. 

Quote

 

In a statement, the party said it was ‘deeply concerned about the treatment of Dr Ranson’ .

It added: ‘We believe that this case raises serious questions about the treatment of civil servants even within higher positions and that some of the accounts given suggest a lack of professionalism and accountability by others in management. It is unacceptable that any employee goes through such unfair or unjust treatment, especially when working for the betterment of our community and although we are frustrated the actions of some have led to already stretched public funds being spent compensating for mistakes we are glad that justice appears to have prevailed.

‘We urge Tynwald to take a closer look at the management of the departments and bodies under their control and ensure that those who have acted improperly are reprimanded where appropriate and proper protocols are in place to prevent anything similar happening again. We can’t afford this being kicked into the long grass to happen again and are asking for Tynwald to declare an investigation at their next sitting.’

 

 

[thommo2010]

5 minutes ago, 2112 said:

The MLP have been making much noise in the NPM calling for an inquiry. They have been anonymous really and have taken days after the judgement to get off the fence. Yes I would love an inquiry, but it has to be judge led by a UK judge (or KC Barrister), not a usual Manx tame lawyer/establishment stitch up affair. The second issue will be the costs involved. Also with an inquiry, you can be guaranteed that CM Cannan et al will resurrect the subjudice nonsense. An inquiry may appeal to some as a means of kicking the can down the road and keeping on procrastinating against meaningful action. 

surely the employment tribunal is the enquiry? what more needs looking into?

[Roxanne]

2 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

surely the employment tribunal is the enquiry?

2112 is wrong. They are not asking for an inquiry stating that it would be too expensive.

They are asking government to investigate the management of the departments and bodies under their control and ensure that those who have acted improperly are reprimanded where appropriate and proper protocols are in place to prevent anything similar happening again.

[forestboy]

6 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

2112 is wrong. They are not asking for an inquiry stating that it would be too expensive.

They are asking government to investigate the management of the departments and bodies under their control and ensure that those who have acted improperly are reprimanded where appropriate and proper protocols are in place to prevent anything similar happening again.

“Reprimanded “. I think heads should roll.