Andy Onchan Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 25 minutes ago, Jarndyce said: Are you suggesting that a new House would fix the errors of the old? Anyway, manifesto promises and doorstep assurances don’t count for much in this age of political disingenuousness. They’ll tell you what you want to hear, get your vote, then do the opposite. Exhibit 1 - Hooperman. It might. What other method or process can you suggest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 16 minutes ago, quilp said: Change is not progress. Well, change is not a guarantee of progress…but it’s a start… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 2 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said: 27 minutes ago, Jarndyce said: Are you suggesting that a new House would fix the errors of the old? Anyway, manifesto promises and doorstep assurances don’t count for much in this age of political disingenuousness. They’ll tell you what you want to hear, get your vote, then do the opposite. Exhibit 1 - Hooperman. It might. What other method or process can you suggest? I wasn’t really disagreeing with you - short of storming the Winter Palace, there are not many levers available. I suppose I just don’t have much confidence that a new House would grasp the MC nettle. And actually do something about it… 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 2 hours ago, Jarndyce said: Never. Tynwald voted the system in - admittedly, they were asleep at the wheel, but it’s hard to imagine them admitting the scale of the error that they made that day. Not just them admitting...even if they did, you are then still saddled with all these people who were recruited to administer Manx Care. And being PS, it's very hard to get rid of them without more huge expense in redundancy and payoffs. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 Calling Roger M.... Who, if anyone, in Tynwald voted against the creation of Manx Care and the model now in place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 1 hour ago, Jarndyce said: Well, change is not a guarantee of progress…but it’s a start… Is it though? The start of what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 7 minutes ago, quilp said: 1 hour ago, Jarndyce said: Well, change is not a guarantee of progress…but it’s a start… Is it though? The start of what? Okay - to paraphrase Andy’s response above: what would YOU suggest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said: Calling Roger M.... Who, if anyone, in Tynwald voted against the creation of Manx Care and the model now in place? If anyone voted against it, I’ll eat my bunnet! Over to Roger M… Edited September 12, 2023 by Jarndyce 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Gay'n Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 51 minutes ago, Jarndyce said: If anyone voted against it, I’ll eat my bunnet! Over to Roger M… Manx Care Bill third reading in the Keys 3 November 2020 "The Speaker: I put the question that the Manx Care Bill 2020 be read for a third time. Those in favour, please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it." No votes against. Third reading in LegCo 1 December 2020 "The President: Thank you, Hon. Members. I put the question that the Manx Care Bill 2020 do pass. Those in favour, say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it." No votes against. Royal assent 16 March 2021. Bingo. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said: “The ayes have it. The ayes have it." No votes against. “The bunnet is safe. The bunnet is safe.” So nice for my wild allegations to be demonstrably accurate and precise! Edited September 12, 2023 by Jarndyce Font! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 45 minutes ago, Jarndyce said: If anyone voted against it, I’ll eat my bunnet! Over to Roger M… No one votes for or against as far as I can see. All stages of the Manx Care Bill 2020 (you'll have to scroll down due to the unfriendliness of the new website) seem to have gone through without division: House of Keys: First Reading;23.06.2020; Second Reading; 30.06; Consideration of Clauses; 27.10: (Amended Cl 11, Cl 12, Cl 13, Cl 22, Cl 36, Cl 37, Cl 38); Third Reading; 03.11 (Mr Ashford) Legislative Council: First Reading;10.11; Second Reading and Clauses; 24.11: (Amended Clauses: Cl 4, Cl 11, Cl 12, Sch 1, 32); Third Reading: 01.12 (Amended Clauese Clauses): Cl 9, Cl 26, Cl 40, Sch 1) (Mrs Sharpe) Tynwald Royal Assent: 16.03.2021 [Their typos]. More significantly they seem to have gone through without much discussion either. Even the clauses stages are mainly government amendments, trying to correct their mistakes, nodded through. There's not even much in the way of pious agreement or promises of a radiant dawn. It's all just going through the motions. And no doubt a sigh of relief at having got rid of a lot of responsibility and no longer having to help out those pesky constituents with their problems. Of course part of the reason is the timing. As usual everything had been left till last minute, Royal Assent was only two weeks before Manx Care was due to come into being. So the obedient politicians had to do what they were told unquestioningly as "There was no alternative". Which is how most of them seem to like it. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 2 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: More significantly they seem to have gone through without much discussion either. I’d be surprised if they even read it, far less seriously considering the full financial and service implications of what they were approving. ”Health of the nation, biggest responsibility of any government, etc, etc” - yeah, whatever… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 Just now, Jarndyce said: I’d be surprised if they even read it, far less seriously considering the full financial and service implications of what they were approving. ”Health of the nation, biggest responsibility of any government, etc, etc” - yeah, whatever… Plus the fact that the Govt was due to receive a rather large invoice from Sir J. Michaels, (or had already received), it would be a little unseemly to have commissioned that rather expensive report and then be seen to be voting it out, they might have been accused of wasting money or something. After all, the non-experts in Tynwald couldn't be expected to question his expertise, what could they possibly know that he didn't? Much better to stay schtum and nod. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 2 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: After all, the non-experts in Tynwald couldn't be expected to question his expertise, what could they possibly know that he didn't? Much better to stay schtum and nod You’re right, of course - but it does beg the question: how much basic common sense do you need to see that duplicating management function in DHSC and MC might just increase the wages bill? Couldn’t just one of them have had the gumption to find out that the system had been discredited in the UK as too expensive; and ask - “is this wise”? or even “how much will it cost?” 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Gay'n Posted September 12, 2023 Share Posted September 12, 2023 37 minutes ago, Jarndyce said: “The bunnet is safe. The bunnet is safe.” So nice for my wild allegations to be demonstrably accurate and precise! Some wisdom from McKinsey in 2017. "The tendency of teams to give a disproportionate amount of attention to trivial issues and details was made famous by C. Northcote Parkinson in his 1958 book, Parkinson’s Law: Or The Pursuit of Progress. As the story goes, a finance committee has three investment decisions to make. First, it discusses a £10 million investment in a nuclear-power plant. The investment is approved in two-and-a-half minutes. Second, it has to decide what colour to paint a bike shed—total cost about £350. A 45-minute discussion cracks the problem. Third, the committee addresses the need for a new staff coffee machine, which will cost about £21. After an hour’s discussion, it decides to postpone the decision. Parkinson called this phenomenon the law of triviality (also known as the bike-shed effect). Everyone is happy to proffer an opinion on something as simple as a bike shed. But when it comes to making a complex decision such as whether or not to invest in a nuclear reactor, the average person is out of his or her depth, has little to contribute, and will presume the experts know what they are doing." 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.