Ashford: Should he stay or should he go?

[Whiskey]

49 minutes ago, 2112 said:

You would have thought he would have kept a low profile. Why go in a suit? He wasn’t part of the event or overseeing the event. Does he not have any smart casual wear? 

He’d look good in a leather jacket that only comes out for two weeks in June.  

[code99]

15 minutes ago, Wavey Davey said:

What he is basically saying is that he is a very bad judge of character. He clearly trusted someone implicitly who should not have been trusted implicitly at all. 

Surely, the old maxim “Trust, but verify” must apply to DA. Unfortunately, he was not even able to do that, let alone lead! The man was a massive disappointment as a Minister. He should have realised all of the skulduggery that was going on, on his watch, for months. He failed Dr Glover, he failed Dr Ranson and in doing so he failed the IOM public.

[Roger Mexico]

12 minutes ago, Wavey Davey said:

What he is basically saying is that he is a very bad judge of character. He clearly trusted someone implicitly who should not have been trusted implicitly at all. The same as Tim Crookall trusting a load of people who are clearly going to destroy his reputation too at some stage as they are literally cretins. 

It's actually worse than that.  It's not that he was a bad judge of character (though he probably is[1]), it's that he didn't see judging character as even being part of his job.  He saw the role of Minister as doing what he was told by the CEO and explaining decisions to the public.  Like so many modern politicians he wanted the trappings of power, but not the faff of actually making things work and certainly not the responsibility when they go wrong.

This is certainly encouraged by the Ministerial Code and all the other rules and regulations that the Civil Service have put in to protect their own positions over the last 20 or so years (eg the ridiculous Tynwald sub judice rule).  But a lot of politicians were only too happy to play along with it for an easy life and Ashford is a bit of a throwback to that type.  I suspect this is unlike most of his current CoMin colleagues and even  someone like Crookall appears a bit restive[2].  Whether Cannan has the determination to break down these restrictive rules and the silo mentality they encourage, is another matter.

 

[1]  Presumably he was on the panel that appointed Magson and was happy with her proposed part-time presence on the Island among other things.

[2]  Note how often he says that something is what he has been told by the civil servants, rather than just stating it as the truth.  Very wise given the sources of his information, but a definite change from the past.  I've heard other Ministers, such as Edge, use similar formulations.

[The Voice of Reason]

1 hour ago, 2112 said:

You would have thought he would have kept a low profile. Why go in a suit? He wasn’t part of the event or overseeing the event. Does he not have any smart casual wear? 

“Politician vilified on local social media for wearing a suit and not trackies “

Do you not realise how petty that sounds?

[Kopek]

Would you say the same if he wore a tracksuit to a funeral?

[Boris Johnson]

30 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

It's actually worse than that.  It's not that he was a bad judge of character (though he probably is[1]), it's that he didn't see judging character as even being part of his job.  He saw the role of Minister as doing what he was told by the CEO and explaining decisions to the public.  Like so many modern politicians he wanted the trappings of power, but not the faff of actually making things work and certainly not the responsibility when they go wrong.

This is certainly encouraged by the Ministerial Code and all the other rules and regulations that the Civil Service have put in to protect their own positions over the last 20 or so years (eg the ridiculous Tynwald sub judice rule).  But a lot of politicians were only too happy to play along with it for an easy life and Ashford is a bit of a throwback to that type.  I suspect this is unlike most of his current CoMin colleagues and even  someone like Crookall appears a bit restive[2].  Whether Cannan has the determination to break down these restrictive rules and the silo mentality they encourage, is another matter.

 

[1]  Presumably he was on the panel that appointed Magson and was happy with her proposed part-time presence on the Island among other things.

[2]  Note how often he says that something is what he has been told by the civil servants, rather than just stating it as the truth.  Very wise given the sources of his information, but a definite change from the past.  I've heard other Ministers, such as Edge, use similar formulations.

Can John Wright please explain the Tynwald sub judice rule/ rules to us plebs please.

I notice he has been very quiet on this matter.

[John Wright]

20 minutes ago, Boris Johnson said:

Can John Wright please explain the Tynwald sub judice rule/ rules to us plebs please.

I notice he has been very quiet on this matter.

You’ll have to search back. I posted a screen shot of the rule and pointed out how much wider it was than the judicial/contempt of court rule. Roger Mexico did as well.

[Boo Gay'n]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

[1]  Presumably he was on the panel that appointed Magson and was happy with her proposed part-time presence on the Island among other things.

Magson was another decision that tracks back directly to Jonny Michael, I have been told.  For those who have read the tribunal judgement, it jumps out that the benighted one refused to be involved or give any statement.  Draw from that whatever conclusion you wish.

[WTF]

2 hours ago, Whiskey said:

He’d look good in a leather jacket that only comes out for two weeks in June.  

the same as all the local 'bikers' with showroom condition bikes from the 70's and 80's with personalised plates that do maybe 200 miles TT week before going back under canvas for another 11 1/2 months.

[2112]

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

“Politician vilified on local social media for wearing a suit and not trackies “

Do you not realise how petty that sounds?

You dress for the occasion, using common sense. Was he there in an officious capacity - an inspector role? He is a mere back bench MHK not holding CM Cannans hand, unless he is holding something for Rob Callister? Does he not possess a pair of jeans and a polo shirt, and a pair of boots or trainers? Smart Casual. 

[finlo]

2 minutes ago, 2112 said:

You dress for the occasion, using common sense. Was he there in an officious capacity - an inspector role? He is a mere back bench MHK not holding CM Cannans hand, unless he is holding something for Rob Callister? Does he not possess a pair of jeans and a polo shirt, and a pair of boots or trainers? Smart Casual. 

Please tell me he was wearing a waistcoat!

[Roger Mexico]

41 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

Magson was another decision that tracks back directly to Jonny Michael, I have been told.  For those who have read the tribunal judgement, it jumps out that the benighted one refused to be involved or give any statement.  Draw from that whatever conclusion you wish.

Wouldn't surprise me and it would explain why he was so unhelpful to Ranson when it was clearly his duty to take what she said seriously, rather than prioritise keeping Ashford happy and ignorant.  Not that Ashford needed any encouragement.

It would be interesting to find out if we are still paying Michael £90,000 a year for giving such helpful advice (we certainly were up to April 2021)

[The Voice of Reason]

3 minutes ago, 2112 said:

You dress for the occasion, using common sense. Was he there in an officious capacity - an inspector role? He is a mere back bench MHK not holding CM Cannans hand, unless he is holding something for Rob Callister? Does he not possess a pair of jeans and a polo shirt, and a pair of boots or trainers? Smart Casual. 

I’m a great believer in wearing whatever you feel comfortable with, not whatever others think you should wear ( unless for example an offensive slogan on a t Shirt)

Are you Gok Whan ( or whatever his name is) ?

[2112]

22 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I’m a great believer in wearing whatever you feel comfortable with, not whatever others think you should wear ( unless for example an offensive slogan on a t Shirt)

Are you Gok Whan ( or whatever his name is) ?

I agree to some extent, but I wouldn’t go to that environment or scene dressed up in a full suit, waistcoat, shirt and tie. If he was there in a political capacity - Rob Callisters bag handler yes I can accept him wearing a suit. Incidentally I would wear formal dress if I were going to the theatre, opera or classical music show. If I were going to a rock or heavy metal gig, then I would dress for the occasion - not a suit! 

 

[Gladys]

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

“Politician vilified on local social media for wearing a suit and not trackies “

Do you not realise how petty that sounds?

Quite.