Is the Isle of Man Government becoming despotic?

[buncha wankas]

1 hour ago, John Wright said:

It’s you. It’s not all wages. There’s the costs of the various CQC inspections and reports. Do they pay the HR and Treasury partner services? The medical and pharmacy advisers won’t come cheap, either. Neither will top level commissioners and policy developers.

The maths in your 4th paragraph, even on your figures is wrong anyway.

say there are 5 approx at £120,000 and another 6 at £80,000 ( remember wages will be nearly 20% lower due to employers NI and superannuation contributions ) and CQC has been quite busy, say £500,000. That’s half gone on 11 people and inspection.

Also it doesn’t seem to be 35, but 38 ( including Rogers additional one ), 40 if they’re paying for the finance & HR function. So, 1.7 million between 27 or 29. That’s still approx £60k each, which is £50k wages, plus add ons. 
 

I may have underestimated CQC

Why would DHSC pay for CQC that’s a Manx care overhead and directors should only be on 60k  only CEO would be on the 120k if that as he is only interim.  HR And Finance and attorney generals will be shared services. Most of the roles apart from inspections team who will be in the 25 to 45k spectrum as administrators.  

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, buncha wankas said:

Why would DHSC pay for CQC that’s a Manx care overhead and directors should only be on 60k  only CEO would be on the 120k if that as he is only interim.  HR And Finance and attorney generals will be shared services. Most of the roles apart from inspections team who will be in the 25 to 45k spectrum as administrators.  

It's DHSC job to monitor what Manx Care do and what they are paid for.  So if they (rightly) subcontract inspections to CQC, then it's DHSC who should then pay for it.  John is probably wrong in thinking the amount will be included in employee costs though as they are more likely to be in the figure for Agency & Contracted Services at about £0.22 million.

Regarding the breakdown of employee costs, elsewhere the Pink Book provides a breakdown of the Budget by Department:

Health & Social Care

Basic £ 2,656,000

Overtime £ 15,000

Employer NI £ 231,000

Employer Pension £ 315,000

Other £ 92,000

Total £ 3,309,000

[Roger Mexico]

To return to the original topic, I said earlier that idiotic shenanigans like the letter sent to Moulton might attract attention from off-Island.  They've certainly attracted the attention of one English KC - the Chair of the Covid Review, Kate Brunner

Cease and Desist Letters

It is an important principle that Government actively encourages cooperation with the Independent Review, and that principle has been reflected in correspondence with Government employees. That principle applies equally to those outside Government who may want to share information, analysis and concerns with the Review. Where a Department issues a cease and desist letter, or indeed any correspondence which seeks to restrict what individuals say about a topic which falls within my Review, it is important that it is made clear that Government is not seeking to restrict that person’s full and frank cooperation with the Review. I have asked for that message could be conveyed to the recipient(s) of any such correspondence and I have written to the Review’s Sponsors to ask that this message is conveyed to Government Departments.

It will be interesting to see if Moulton gets a follow-up letter from Callin Wild (I suspect they'll want to send one and the DHSC won't want them to).  Unfortunately far too many of our senior civil servants think they are (and should be) above the law.  And too many of our politicians are prepared to indulge them.

[John Wright]

33 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

It’s just more proof of the general  arrogance that got them into the whole Ranson situation in the first place. They should never have decided to contest the Tribunal. They should have paid her off and then tied it up under an NDA. But because they know best and think they can bully their way out of it again the whole thing has now gone interstellar. Yet they still don’t learn to the point that the KC in charge of the Inquiry has to issue that. 

The government really ought not to use NDA. It’s no better than cease & desist or SLAPP

[offshoremanxman]

9 minutes ago, John Wright said:

The government really ought not to use NDA. It’s no better than cease & desist or SLAPP

But when they pay them off rather than go to court it’s pretty much always done under a compromise agreement / NDA. They should never have pursued the Tribunal with Ranson. 

[buncha wankas]

27 minutes ago, John Wright said:

The government really ought not to use NDA. It’s no better than cease & desist or SLAPP

NDA only prevents non disclosure of the sum paid, it doesn’t prevent person discussing their experience 

[Gladys]

Just now, buncha wankas said:

NDA only prevents non disclosure of the sum paid, it doesn’t prevent person discussing their experience 

Depends on the terms, sometimes you cannot even refer to the existence of a NDA. 

[John Wright]

3 minutes ago, buncha wankas said:

NDA only prevents non disclosure of the sum paid, it doesn’t prevent person discussing their experience 

No

[Two-lane]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

To return to the original topic, I said earlier that idiotic shenanigans like the letter sent to Moulton might attract attention from off-Island.  They've certainly attracted the attention of one English KC - the Chair of the Covid Review, Kate Brunner

Cease and Desist Letters

That was not part of a document published earlier in the inquiry (say, as an overall statement would be).

It is part of the update published on 20 July 2023.

 

[Two-lane]

2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

from Callin Wild (I suspect they'll want to send one and the DHSC won't want them to). 

The timing makes it clear that the Moulton letter is being referred to. What powers does Brunner have if the gov. ignores her?

 

[John Wright]

6 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

What powers does Brunner have if the gov. ignores her?

None whatsoever. And she makes that clear.

Id really like to see what Moulton wrote to Cabinet Office. Just shows how poor a journo he is. Journo 101 includes  training on how to avoid defamation.

[buncha wankas]

15 minutes ago, John Wright said:

None whatsoever. And she makes that clear.

Id really like to see what Moulton wrote to Cabinet Office. Just shows how poor a journo he is. Journo 101 includes  training on how to avoid defamation.

He has done a great job covering this case, better that FM or Manx Radio doesn’t make you bad at anything just because you don’t avoid accusations as you well know.

[John Wright]

Just now, buncha wankas said:

He has done a great job covering this case, better that FM or Manx Radio doesn’t make you bad at anything just because you don’t avoid accusations as you well know.

He isn’t an investigative journalist. He just blindly and uncritically presents stuff that people bring to him looking for a platform.

If you put PM in front of a closed door he wouldn’t have clue how to open it.

[Two-lane]

Things are not getting better. Hooper says he is not involved, but hints he knows that what is in "The offending email" is defamation - but says no more - nudge, nudge.

Wright says he does not know what is in the email and concludes, therefore, that Moulton is a crap journalist.

Brunner starts throwing her weight around, knowing that the gov. is going to give her an Arkell v. Pressdram (thanks to RM) - I doubt that is going to do much for her reputation.

I am going to have to resort to the universal solvent - alcohol. Solves any problem.

 

[buncha wankas]

6 minutes ago, John Wright said:

He isn’t an investigative journalist. He just blindly and uncritically presents stuff that people bring to him looking for a platform.

If you put PM in front of a closed door he wouldn’t have clue how to open it.

Rubbish