Is the Isle of Man Government becoming despotic?

[offshoremanxman]

25 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

[1]  In any case Callister claimed he was available (and verifiably so) and in any case hadn't signed the delegation, so none of the delegated decision made in his time would have been legal.

I have been told previously that Officers are potentially personally liable when they unilaterally act without delegated authority? 

[english zloty]

4 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

I have been told previously that Officers are potentially personally liable when they unilaterally act without delegated authority? 

Technically correct. That is why the ministerial decision process is there. At the least the officer(s) should be anticipating a call from PAC.

[Boo Gay'n]

On 7/26/2023 at 2:24 PM, Roger Mexico said:

I'm not even sure that acting within role would be a valid reason.  Especially when the wisdom and even the legality of actions taken are currently the subject of an official inquiry.  The head of which has just made it clear that she will not take kindly to any attempts to suppress discussion with lawyers letters.

What they are objecting to is apparently something in a private email about a past event, so they can hardly claim that such allegations would somehow affect the current running of good government.  Call me old-fashioned, but I don't believe public money should be used to fund private quarrels.

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/govt-not-trying-to-stop-reporters-inquiries/

All Alf wants PM to do is think about how he goes about his enquiries.  That's alright then!

[Roger Mexico]

18 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/govt-not-trying-to-stop-reporters-inquiries/

All Alf wants PM to do is think about how he goes about his enquiries.  That's alright then!

Even the short clip from  Cannan is fairly extraordinary.  Apparently Moulton's real crime was actually "naming senior officers", something he should apparent consider very carefully before doing.  Obviously the possibility of holding these sacred beings to account is a complete abomination.  The fact that the names and actions are derived from publicly available documents doesn't matter - even mentioning these holy creatures is blasphemy.  

It's worth pointing out just how anonymous Manx civil servants are allowed to be.  Names, never matter how senior, are never mentioned in Tynwald and civil servants at any level rarely appear in the media.  We don't even see those who are responsible for 'communications'.  This isn't true of other countries (even the UK) where such public involvement will be seen as part of the job.  Of course when the publication of names happens to suit those in charge (for example in the Expol Report), that's just fine.

Cannan also complained that Moulton is seeing 'government conspiracies'.  But a conspiracy consists of people working together for a common aim and you'd hope that working together is what government is supposed to do.  In this particular case the three CEOs and the DHSC were the ones on whom the Callin and Wild letter was written.  Is Alf suggesting that they all independently instructed the law firm and the latter decided to put it all in the same letter to save paper?

What distinguishes a conspiracy is that the aim is illegal or bad in some way and some of us think that trying to stop journalists investigating important matters is bad.

 

[The Phantom]

9 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

 

It's worth pointing out just how anonymous Manx civil servants are allowed to be.  Names, never matter how senior, are never mentioned in Tynwald and civil servants at any level rarely appear in the media.  We don't even see those who are responsible for 'communications'. 

 

Interesting point.  It seems that there must be 100s of these CS drones seemingly actively obstructing and destroying the infrastructure and finances of the Island for their own gain and/or due to their own incompetence. 

However, I don't think I know anyone that works in the CS.  Does anyone else?  Do they purposely keep a low profile, do they all live in some hallowed gated community somewhere (probably without potholes)?

It's probably a good thing though, I can't imagine I'd have anything good to say to any of them. 

[Non-Believer]

3 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

Interesting point.  It seems that there must be 100s of these CS drones seemingly actively obstructing and destroying the infrastructure and finances of the Island for their own gain and/or due to their own incompetence. 

However, I don't think I know anyone that works in the CS.  Does anyone else?  Do they purposely keep a low profile, do they all live in some hallowed gated community somewhere (probably without potholes)?

It's probably a good thing though, I can't imagine I'd have anything good to say to any of them. 

It's certainly a proper little society all of its own, particularly at senior levels, you only have to look at the brotherhood of town clerks for further confirmation of that too.

[Shake me up Judy]

All Moulton did was to name public officials. The clue is in the word public. They weren't private individuals. He didn't libel or accuse them. That got him a SLAPP order that wasn't even authorised by a Government minister. Alf needs to get a grip.

[Roxanne]

41 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Even the short clip from  Cannan is fairly extraordinary.  Apparently Moulton's real crime was actually "naming senior officers", something he should apparent consider very carefully before doing.  Obviously the possibility of holding these sacred beings to account is a complete abomination.  The fact that the names and actions are derived from publicly available documents doesn't matter - even mentioning these holy creatures is blasphemy.  

It's worth pointing out just how anonymous Manx civil servants are allowed to be.  Names, never matter how senior, are never mentioned in Tynwald and civil servants at any level rarely appear in the media.  We don't even see those who are responsible for 'communications'.  This isn't true of other countries (even the UK) where such public involvement will be seen as part of the job.  Of course when the publication of names happens to suit those in charge (for example in the Expol Report), that's just fine.

Cannan also complained that Moulton is seeing 'government conspiracies'.  But a conspiracy consists of people working together for a common aim and you'd hope that working together is what government is supposed to do.  In this particular case the three CEOs and the DHSC were the ones on whom the Callin and Wild letter was written.  Is Alf suggesting that they all independently instructed the law firm and the latter decided to put it all in the same letter to save paper?

What distinguishes a conspiracy is that the aim is illegal or bad in some way and some of us think that trying to stop journalists investigating important matters is bad.

 

I’ve just listened to the ‘Perspective’ Podcast with Phil, Alf, Paul, and Tony Brown (why Tony Brown?)

The only really common sense and useful thing uttered by TB was that in the olden days he would have just picked up the phone and had a word on PM (for example).

Why doesn’t this happen anymore? Why do we need to spend money from the public purse to engage outside advocates to send cease and desist letters? Why can’t Alf just pick up the bleeding ohone?  

[Roger Mexico]

20 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

I’ve just listened to the ‘Perspective’ Podcast with Phil, Alf, Paul, and Tony Brown (why Tony Brown?)

The only really common sense and useful thing uttered by TB was that in the olden days he would have just picked up the phone and had a word on PM (for example).

Why doesn’t this happen anymore? Why do we need to spend money from the public purse to engage outside advocates to send cease and desist letters? Why can’t Alf just pick up the bleeding ohone?  

Or why can't he just just realise that it's not his job to interfere with how the media reports things?  If Moulton has got something factually wrong, then correct it factually and publicly.  Rather than making vague claims of 'inaccuracies' without ever saying what they are.  (Not only does Hooper's 'interview' provide no new information, most of what he says doesn't even make much sense as English).

I'm not sure the old way of Tony Brown having 'a word' was much better, just a cheaper form of intimidation in some cases and probably not practical today due to the ubiquity of recording devices. 

[Banker]

The emails Moulton wanted are being published 

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/foi-that-triggered-row-between-reporter-and-govt-published/

[cissolt]

1 hour ago, Banker said:

The emails Moulton wanted are being published 

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/foi-that-triggered-row-between-reporter-and-govt-published/

Thanks Banker.

What part of Dan Davies job description or qualifications allows him to tone down medical advice before presenting it to politicians?

 

[Non-Believer]

14 minutes ago, cissolt said:

Thanks Banker.

What part of Dan Davies job description or qualifications allows him to tone down medical advice before presenting it to politicians?

 

Assumed knowledge and qualification. Rife within senior IoM PS.

Edited August 1, 2023 by Non-Believer
typo

[asitis]

2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

If Moulton has got something factually wrong, then correct it factually and publicly.  Rather than making vague claims of

In fact a point by point rebuttal would be helpful !

[Roxanne]

52 minutes ago, cissolt said:

Thanks Banker.

What part of Dan Davies job description or qualifications allows him to tone down medical advice before presenting it to politicians?

 

I just knew his name would be written all over this. 

[Roxanne]

3 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

I'm not sure the old way of Tony Brown having 'a word' was much better, just a cheaper form of intimidation in some cases and probably not practical today due to the ubiquity of recording devices. 

Do you think?  Maybe I’m in danger of donning my rose tinted spectacles but i seem to remember lots of occasions where things were sorted out in the nod and the wink. A bully to me a far more likely to wield their power passively rather than face to face or by telephone. In the olden days when email was getting going, I’d get into some long winded cyclical discussions with staff/parents/heads and my boss would say, ‘just pick up the damn phone or drive in to see them. Somehow it always got sorted. Sending a cease and desist (or it’s equivalent) would have been ridiculous. What was I paid for if not to sort it out? 
 

ETA. Of course, not that it needs to be pointed out but I wasn’t CM or a minster but even so common sense surely still stands? 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Roxanne