IOM DHSC & MANX CARE

[Ghost Ship]

6 hours ago, Two-lane said:

 

 

I've not had the benefit of listening to the Tynwald speeches, but watching that first video Robertshaw seems to be suggesting that Rob Callister is being hung out to dry here?  Is that right?  Plus the Tynwald standards committee have instructed him (Callister) that he can't mention in Tynwald something he's told them about when giving evidence previously?  Have I understood that correctly?

Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick here, but did the people who were smirking at RC on Tuesday after he asked the question about delegated authority not fully understand the significance of the question?

[joebean]

16 hours ago, Thomas Dalby said:

Shocking as many of the details of the judgment were, I am not sure there is a more serious accusation than that the government concocted documents. It seems an odd thing to assert but not pursue

But, of course, this was found not to be the case by the rigorous investigation of ExPol 🙄 It is curious that this was not investigated by the Police but by a friendly and less credible contractor. 

[Thomas Dalby]

7 hours ago, Ghost Ship said:

But after the final whistle has gone (in this case the tribunal's decision on liability) there's no point in playing on, is there?

Or maybe Dr Ranson and her legal team felt that after the DHSC and its two chief witnesses had buggered up their own case (by trying to defend it in the first place  😆) that pursuing it any further would have looked like gratuitous bullying.  Which would have been ironic in the circumstances.

Or maybe she'd simply had enough

I don't think that however many straws you grasp at that you'll persuade many people that Dr Ranson was the one at fault in this farce...

I’m not saying Dr Ranson was at fault, she was appallingly treated. Just surprised that the most serious accusation of all was not pursued

[Thomas Dalby]

33 minutes ago, joebean said:

But, of course, this was found not to be the case by the rigorous investigation of ExPol 🙄 It is curious that this was not investigated by the Police but by a friendly and less credible contractor. 

The Govt were not the ones making the accusation or doubting the Expol report. Anyone who is can still take evidence to the police

[Holte End]

6 hours ago, Ghost Ship said:

I've not had the benefit of listening to the Tynwald speeches, but watching that first video Robertshaw seems to be suggesting that Rob Callister is being hung out to dry here?  Is that right?  Plus the Tynwald standards committee have instructed him (Callister) that he can't mention in Tynwald something he's told them about when giving evidence previously?  Have I understood that correctly?

Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick here, but did the people who were smirking at RC on Tuesday after he asked the question about delegated authority not fully understand the significance of the question?

So what was the significance of the question, there was none, I did listen, Rob Callister clearly  didn't know that he had signed documents about delegating authority. If he had known, he would have followed on with questions like, to whom has the delegated powers authorisation, who signed the  papers to which Nasty Mr Hooper is alluding too. If Mr Hooper has mislead Tynwald like the pompous arse Chris Robershaw is saying, Rob Callister should put a complaint into the Tynwald Standards Committee, or he should put an emergency question into Tynwald and make sure they have no choice but to Investigate the issue. I think Rob Callister was shocked that the statement made by Mr Hooper was clearly an attack on Mr Callister nothing more or less than to take the blame away from his Department.

[Shake me up Judy]

All Ministers sign delegated authority papers on appointment. That's standard. That has nothing to do with the way Callister was side-stepped by his Chief Executive in going for the second appeal. That Chief Executive should be walking right now. Rob Callister's no genius but he was the Minister and ALL political decisions must go through the Minister.  

[Wake Up Call]

The biggest signal you have is Tim Glover's refusal to work with Government.

Tim showed great enthusiasm  with his airport responsibilities and determination to see improvements.

Has he witnessed something too dark or dishonest to be involved with?  

[offshoremanxman]

1 minute ago, Wake Up Call said:

Has he witnessed something too dark or dishonest to be involved with?  

No he looks like he’s simply crapped his pants when he’s looked at the potential liabilities he’s sat over and how some of the old ladies who voted for him might not approve so he’s off before anything can possibly stick to him. I think it’s incredibly poor granny farmer behaviour. 

[buncha wankas]

3 hours ago, joebean said:

But, of course, this was found not to be the case by the rigorous investigation of ExPol 🙄 It is curious that this was not investigated by the Police but by a friendly and less credible contractor. 

If I recall correctly expol (ex police) were brought in by DHSC to try and find blame to attribute to Abotswood staff for the deaths, it didn’t work so they sent file off to police, that didn’t work either.  Point  is they referred it to police in that case but not in this case, Hooper is a puppet and should not be a politician, politicians should be leaders not CS puppet. 

[Roger Mexico]

13 hours ago, Thomas Dalby said:

19 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

But who should do the pursuing?  

The people making the claim

Really?  If you were burgled, would you be happy if, when you went to the police, they told you to hire and pay for your own detectives and forensics teams and lawyers to bring a private prosecution?  All in a situation where the burglars controlled access to the Courts (though not the Courts themselves).

It's possible that Ranson or her team have reported to the police or the Tribunal has - or maybe one of its members, it's not even clear the Tribunal would have the legal right to do that.  But it's not clear exactly what criminal charges can be brought, I've pointed elsewhere to how rare perjury charges are for instance.  And the police will be unwilling given that the people who control the prosecutions are so involved in the whole affair.

There's no point in Ranson bringing a civil action, because that would require her to show some sort of financial loss and those matters will have been seen to be resolved by the Tribunal decisions.

In the end this is a matter of (alleged) government corruption and it can only be resolved by political action, because politicians are the ones who are supposed to control the government.  And with a few exceptions they have so far shown themselves to be unwilling to disturb their comfortable lives and take action.

[Non-Believer]

34 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

In the end this is a matter of (alleged) government corruption and it can only be resolved by political action, because politicians are the ones who are supposed to control the government.  And with a few exceptions they have so far shown themselves to be unwilling to disturb their comfortable lives and take action.

+1. The integrity of IoM Government has been questioned and found wanting (to say the least). But our elected are part of that integrity, some of them have been found to be complicit and they're as thick as thieves within the whole system that has given rise to it.

Few of them will be willing to put their heads above the parapet and start questioning and criticising the establishment that gives them such a comfortable existence, £71k a year and still amassing the bennies with time off for schools now as well. Far better to remain schtum and help hold the corner of the big rug up.

This is why this business must be investigated by external authority. Tynwald is incapable of policing itself.

[Weliveinhope]

I wrote to my MHK and, sadly, from the way I was eventually cut short, I dont have confidence that everyone will be pushing for radical change. I still think this is the start of something, but until the mindset changes, I think we may be some way off.

Would be interested to hear Stu's take with regard to what he thinks of the last few weeks and whether he agrees with the gist of Glover's argument etc, and whether this is a battle worth fighting.

[Two-lane]

12 hours ago, Ghost Ship said:

After listening to that excerpt I wish I had the technical skills to do a Bruno Ganz "Downfall" video for Youtube.

Cannan had a frothing-at-the-mouth moment there. However, note there was more than one "Hear Hear" in the background.

Cannan stated: "I expect those people who have used that language to give full and proper evidence to a High Court  judge of their allegations"

Glover actually said: "Why not call for a UK-led investigation or simply invite the police in to investigate".

Cannan is not being very truthful.

Glover's comment about "the full power of the state" and Wannenburgh's comments about "being vindictive" and "out for revenge" are correct. Cannan and his supporters are way off target by criticising those comments.

At the end of that clip, Cannan's mind wandered off into The Island Plan. I do not see what relevance that has to the behaviour of the gov. during the Ranson affair.

 

 

 

[cheesypeas]

2 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

No he looks like he’s simply crapped his pants when he’s looked at the potential liabilities he’s sat over and how some of the old ladies who voted for him might not approve so he’s off before anything can possibly stick to him. I think it’s incredibly poor granny farmer behaviour. 

You're like a broken record. How many times do you want to repeat this view? 

[offshoremanxman]

58 minutes ago, cheesypeas said:

You're like a broken record. How many times do you want to repeat this view? 

As many times as I deem it appropriate.