Should Ashie keep his MBE for leadership of the department during the Covid-19 pandemic?

[asitis]

So not speaking with her is fine whilst employed here, the man is an utter talentless, pompous buffoon !

[Jarndyce]

4 minutes ago, Holte End said:

All this man has to say is 'Sorry" and he can't even do that

Yebbut, that would be like putting on the public record that he was responsible for something; that he had done something requiring an apology - he’ll NEVER do that…

[Two-lane]

"Mr Ashford hopes those responsible reflect on their actions:"

[asitis]

Just now, Two-lane said:

"Mr Ashford hopes those responsible reflect on their actions:"

I'll add deluded to my adjectives too !

[Mercenary]

30 minutes ago, Holte End said:

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/govt-owes-dr-ranson-a-great-apology/

All this man has to say is 'Sorry" and he can't even do that.

 

Well at least Ranson has a £3m settlement in lieu of an apology. The Manx taxpayers just have a £6m hole in their public services due to this debacle at the hand of the DHSC & AGCs..

[Roger Mexico]

3 minutes ago, Holte End said:

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/govt-owes-dr-ranson-a-great-apology/

All this man has to say is 'Sorry" and he can't even do that.

That's genuinely astonishing.  It would cost him nothing to say sorry, both to Dr Ranson and to the Manx public for all the expense and loss of reputation and depriving them of the services of a fine Medical Director.  As I keep on pointing out he's had an easy get out from the start[1] - blame everything on Magson and apologise for being misled and relying on her entirely.

I think the reason he doesn't is that it would undermine the entire way Manx government operated then and now.  Ministers are there only to be puppets of their CEOs, they're supposed to rely on them entirely and not question what they are told, no matter how ridiculous, harmful or incorrect.  Doing what a Minister should do: challenging what they are told; getting information from others in the Department and outside; formulating genuine policy that is more than bland bullshit - all this is forbidden under the current way of working.

 

[1]  Not actually a true one, but one that might have convinced some people and stop him digging this hole.

[Shake me up Judy]

A bit of humility can go a long way and Ashford could've helped lead IOMG out of this hole that just keeps getting deeper. Make no mistake, it'll happen again. Of that there is no doubt. But next time there won't be someone with such deep pockets and professional back-up to take them to the cleaners.

[cissolt]

Let's not forget the absolutely stunning statement at the tribunal. Ashford was married to the graph showing the wrong covid data and refused for it to be changed.  The arrogance of this imbecile knows no bounds.

[Boo Gay'n]

4 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

I think the reason he doesn't is that it would undermine the entire way Manx government operated then and now.  Ministers are there only to be puppets of their CEOs, they're supposed to rely on them entirely and not question what they are told, no matter how ridiculous, harmful or incorrect.  Doing what a Minister should do: challenging what they are told; getting information from others in the Department and outside; formulating genuine policy that is more than bland bullshit - all this is forbidden under the current way of working.

I'm going to disagree with you on some aspects of this post.

It used to be the case that CEOs were more or less omnipotent, but that clearly isn't the case now.  If we go back to the time of St. Kate, we learned that to oust a chief executive, the minister and all departmental members had to sign, in effect, a 'no confidence' letter.  Rob the Gob wouldn't do it, and generated another energetic media storm with him at the heart of it.

Think about how many CEOs in the last 10 years have left under cover of euphemistic press releases.  My guess is that all of them were dumped via the mechanism above.  It started with Killip, Charters and Corlett as a trickle, and then became a flood.  How many DHSC leads have there been since 2014, for example?

The problem is, and please forgive this extreme analogy, it is like the second Iraq war - there was no plan for what came afterwards - which was complete chaos in the event.  It's all well and good having assertive politicians if they know what they are doing and have a clear vision of what sort of senior public servant will deliver positive change for the island, but, meh, they haven't a clue.

I'm not trying to defend the mediocre crop of civil servants that we always seem to have.  But at the same time, I'm not going to pretend that challenging politicians are the answer either.

[Anyone]

He really is the gift that just keeps giving. He needs some of Robs media training. Thing is he was the minister , he was in charge , all of this happened on his watch. And he knew nothing about it? If he really did know nothing about it why would anyone ever want him in a senior government role again? Irony is he will get another ministerial appointment and a senior one at that.

[hampsterkahn]

Mr A’s MBE was awarded for services during the Pandemic presumably because he was the minister in charge, very much involved and holding a position of ultimate responsibility.

Despite this level of involvement at a time when   the very serous issue involving Dr Ranson at its fore, he appears  to have only  vague recollections of the problem to the extent being quite dissociated from it, denying this ministerial responsibility and consequently seeing no need for a personal  apology.

- Perhaps he was not involved  to the level his MBE nominator’s thought.

Listening to Mr Ashford  on the radio, I was reminded of how his evidence was  regarded during  the Tribunal:

Under the heading:

‘ Minister Ashford and Credibility

sectiom 80.

‘Mr Segal summarised  the evidence of the  the Minister as “ practised and diplomatic seemingly guided by the principle of deniability of  anything potentially inconvenient unless/until objective evidence was was available to the contrary “.

Mr Segal’s  written submissions provided examples supporting his observations.’ 

What a damning indictment of anyone’s credibility.

 

 

 

Edited May 20, 2023 by hampsterkahn

[Cassie2]

1 hour ago, hampsterkahn said:

 

1 hour ago, hampsterkahn said:

Minister Ashford and Credibility‘ Mr Segal summarised the evidence of the Minister as “ practised and diplomatic seemingly guided by the principle of deniability of anything potentially inconvenient unless/until objective evidence was was available to the contrary “.

Mr Segal’s written submissions provided examples supporting his observations.’ 

What a damning indictment of anyone’s credibility.

We shall see whether serious criticisms and blame point to him when the two reviews have reported.  For many people they won't need to wait as there is already enough really damning material in the public domain for them to be in no doubt about severe blame attributable to him. 

He should have already handed back his MBE. And very much more importantly he should already have resigned as an MHK. 

But of course Pub quizmasters, bar operatives, chewing gum machine experts and amateur 'coders' don't earn quite as much as an MHK though do they?

Edited May 20, 2023 by Cassie2

[Blade Runner]

20 hours ago, Boo Gay'n said:

I'm going to disagree with you on some aspects of this post.

It used to be the case that CEOs were more or less omnipotent, but that clearly isn't the case now.  If we go back to the time of St. Kate, we learned that to oust a chief executive, the minister and all departmental members had to sign, in effect, a 'no confidence' letter.  Rob the Gob wouldn't do it, and generated another energetic media storm with him at the heart of it.

Think about how many CEOs in the last 10 years have left under cover of euphemistic press releases.  My guess is that all of them were dumped via the mechanism above.  It started with Killip, Charters and Corlett as a trickle, and then became a flood.  How many DHSC leads have there been since 2014, for example?

The problem is, and please forgive this extreme analogy, it is like the second Iraq war - there was no plan for what came afterwards - which was complete chaos in the event.  It's all well and good having assertive politicians if they know what they are doing and have a clear vision of what sort of senior public servant will deliver positive change for the island, but, meh, they haven't a clue.

I'm not trying to defend the mediocre crop of civil servants that we always seem to have.  But at the same time, I'm not going to pretend that challenging politicians are the answer either.

This totally matches my old experience of dealing with the CS.

I could never work out why seemingly smart and educated, even decent  (sometimes 🙂 )   people were sh1t scared of their "Minister"

I did not deal with many CEOs but their next/ second in command were always saying we "have to do X Y or Z " to keep THE Minister happy and therefor keep their immediate or near immediate boss happy.

I could write a book, badly, I cant spell, about this.

It was the same on every government paid for contract I ever did on the island. They had Micro Management attempts from Ministers to keep local voters happy that they went through their departments CEO to undertake this micro management which is really not a good use of people on a salary of £100K,  time.

One example that sticks in my mind was a Gov contract my company won to reconstruct footpaths to an estate of commissioners houses on the island. - Not a complicated job - just a bit of breaking out and formwork/ pour concrete.

The Minister in the constituency the work was happening in, took it upon them selves to get involved in nearly every house path reconstruction.

We made a fortune, on the contract because we had so many easy ways to claim for "non possession of site" "Unforeseen access" problems and just lots of run of the mill building contract claim, due to the Ministers involvement.

All of these claims would not have happened if the Minister had not got involved and bullied their CEO to win a few votes.

Does this still happen?

THIS WAS 10+ YEARS AGO..................

Edited May 21, 2023 by Blade Runner

[The Voice of Reason]

13 minutes ago, Cassie2 said:

But of course Pub quizmasters, bar operatives, chewing gum machine experts and amateur 'coders' don't earn quite as much as an MHK though do they?

No they don’t. But in general terms ( let’s take Ashford out of this) I, nor anyone else should have a problem with someone who has once worked behind a bar ( as I and many others have)  moving up the social mobility ladder, sometimes  described  as “ bettering themselves” ( a horrible phrase).

It’s not like you can just become an MHK by submitting your C V for consideration.

 

[Two-lane]

2 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

It’s not like you can just become an MHK by submitting your C V for consideration.

But you don't have to pass a common-sense test either.