Is the Isle of Man Government becoming despotic?

[Kopek]

What are the odds on Ms Brunner  standing down with the usual, '' ...in the interests of the inquiry.................''?

[Cueey Lewis And The News]

9 hours ago, ian rush said:

I think it was a waste of time and money getting that QC when we could’ve had Paul and Chris us all where it went wrong and how. 

Agree I think Paul is making himself look like a complete tit on this. He’s gone so far down the conspiracy rabbit hole over the Ranson claims that he can’t possibly be objective on anything. His legal counsel, whoever that is, seems to be fairly shit as well. His whole case seems to be about how his legal counsel says that her claimed actions might look. The only good thing about this is she might throw the towel in and call for a public inquiry as she had enough but Paul is starting to look like a typical conspiracy knob over this. 

[2112]

8 minutes ago, Cueey Lewis And The News said:

Agree I think Paul is making himself look like a complete tit on this. He’s gone so far down the conspiracy rabbit hole over the Ranson claims that he can’t possibly be objective on anything. His legal counsel, whoever that is, seems to be fairly shit as well. His whole case seems to be about how his legal counsel says that her claimed actions might look. The only good thing about this is she might throw the towel in and call for a public inquiry as she had enough but Paul is starting to look like a typical conspiracy knob over this. 

As IOMTV in all fairness, Paul Moulton whatever anyone may think, and the rights and wrongs of the Ranson Review, is in effect, the islands alternative media outlet. We have most of the media, Radio and Printed Press which suck up to IOMG, in part reliant on advertising and subvention in order to operate. I agree with what you say, but whilst Paul Moulton comes across as a bit over dramatic, I do believe he has grounds for concern. 
 

As for the Brunner KC review into Covid, I think it would be better if it’s a full public inquiry, with full legal powers to compel witness attendance. I think IOMG should get a decent High Court judge to chair it - as far removed from IOMG interference as possible. 
 

What would be funny would be Rt Hon Dr Professor Ashford taking the stand, under oath, having to answer serious questions, truthfully. Box Office stuff. 
 

 

[thommo2010]

21 minutes ago, Cueey Lewis And The News said:

Agree I think Paul is making himself look like a complete tit on this. He’s gone so far down the conspiracy rabbit hole over the Ranson claims that he can’t possibly be objective on anything. His legal counsel, whoever that is, seems to be fairly shit as well. His whole case seems to be about how his legal counsel says that her claimed actions might look. The only good thing about this is she might throw the towel in and call for a public inquiry as she had enough but Paul is starting to look like a typical conspiracy knob over this. 

Legal counsel are only there for the money so will be happy for Moulton to carry this on as long as possible 

[Cueey Lewis And The News]

8 minutes ago, 2112 said:

As for the Brunner KC review into Covid, I think it would be better if it’s a full public inquiry, with full legal powers to compel witness attendance. I think IOMG should get a decent High Court judge to chair it - as far removed from IOMG interference as possible. 

To be honest I think Paul has spent too much time in the company of people who are convinced that a conspiracy exists that he is convinced that a conspiracy exists and simply will not be convinced otherwise. He’s been living in a constant echo chamber for three years and now comes across as a bit of a crank. I’m not sure he’s that well advised legally either. Another one who went over the edge during the pandemic who can’t let go. And all about a few words or sentences claimed to be removed from a PowerPoint presentation.

To me the decisions made on closing the borders weren't just about public health. They were about balancing public health with economic, social, mental health and many other aspects. They were political decisions that had to be made. It wasn’t just about saving some old biddies. We threw a whole generation under a bus over the lockdown period and tanked the economy blindly listening to public health experts who would have had us all locked in our own houses for years if politicians hadn’t intervened and made decisions around the edges. And there is much worse that needs to be uncovered in this review than if a PowerPoint was or wasn’t amended. But Paul is well down the conspiracy tunnel now that he simply can’t be objective in any way. Hopefully though he has tainted this process enough to cause requests fir a public enquiry. 

[John Wright]

Well, this is Ms Brunner’s take

Chair’s Update — 6 November, 2023

I have been made aware this morning of public comments made by Mr Moulton in which he makes various allegations concerning the conduct of the Review, in particular relating to conversations between us on Sunday 23rd July 2023.

My consistent position throughout the process has been that the Review will be best-placed to consider both the events of the weekend of 13-16 March 2020, and the Government’s handling of the pandemic as a whole. Those events will be considered independently, without fear or favour, and without any direction from Government, members of the public or members of the press.

In July 2023, actions by Mr Moulton and by Government led to a number of people expressing concerns about participating in the Review. Where there are risks to the Review process I raise those with the relevant people. I communicated with Government, as I explained in press releases in July. I also communicated with Mr Moulton on 23 July. When I explained the situation to Mr Moulton he agreed that it was in the public interest that witnesses were not discouraged from participating in the Review, and was content to pause his reporting about the early pandemic, but wanted there to be a public statement to explain why he was pausing that reporting.

Following that conversation I drafted a press release which is attached and which reflects our conversation. After further communication from Mr Moulton’s advisor and Mr Moulton I removed reference to Mr Moulton in the subsequent press release issued on 29th July 2023. My message remained the same: a request to all to be mindful of the fact that I am conducting an independent review about a very sensitive period in IOM recent history.

For the sake of clarity, when I spoke to Mr Moulton I did not suggest the Review was in danger of collapsing, nor have I ever done so. Neither did I seek to prevent Mr Moulton from pursuing his Freedom of Information requests to the Isle of Man Government. That is a matter for Mr Moulton and the Government, and in conversation with Mr Moulton as well as a previous press release I have made my position on that issue clear.

Given Mr Moulton’s recent comments, I am happy to provide the draft press release as a contemporaneous record of the Review’s intentions regarding the conversation with Mr Moulton on 23rd July 2023.

I repeat that this Review is a rigorous and independent investigation. My thanks again to the many individuals who have provided information and insight to the Review over the last year. I look forward to delivering my report to Tynwald and the Manx public in due course.

 

[John Wright]

And this is her side of PM’s claims that she tried to shut him down, his smoking gun, his bullet or revelation that will bring the enquiry down

INDEPENDENT REVIEW PRESS RELEASE

There is considerable social media and other activity which is affecting my ability to conduct this Review.

My request of all news outlets and Government and the Manx public is to be mindful of the fact that I am in the middle of conducting an Independent Review about a very sensitive period in IOM recent history.

That is a general plea, but in particular, I request :

(i) that if Government issues any correspondence which seeks to restrict what individuals say about a topic which falls within my Review, it is made clear that Government is not seeking to restrict that person’s full and frank cooperation with my Review; and

(ii) that journalists delay investigation into what happened in relation to Government decision-making over the weekend of 13-15 March 2020 until after I have reported.

It is in the interests of the Isle of Man that my Review can carry out its work unfettered. I have, to date, had very good cooperation from both inside and outside Government and the Review is making good progress. Recent events and associated social media commentary have made a number of people express concerns about participating in the Review, or withdraw participation, or request legal representation (which is not permitted). Information about who is, and is not, participating in the Review is confidential until I report, but I should stress that those expressing new concerns about participating include significant witnesses who are not Government employees.

I can assure anyone who has yet to participate that this Review is meticulously independent. I am not acting in any way for Government: I am reviewing the Government’s actions in an impartial way. Witnesses have the option of speaking to me confidentially, as many have done, and I will entirely respect that confidentiality. Material which I gather is stored on a database which Government does not have access to. I liaise with Government via Sponsors in relation to matters such as budget, and via a team which pulls together Government material and provides it to the Review. I do not provide information which I gather to Government. My report will be published independently. There is more information on the website and in the privacy notice about how the Review handles material. I hope that this allays any witness’s concerns, but they are free to contact me at any time in confidence to discuss the Review’s procedures.

I am aware of a FOI request relating to the weekend of 13-15 March 2020. Generally, information about what material the Review has gathered is confidential until I report, but I can provide reassurance that I have material which is requested in that FOI, I have a great deal more information about what happened that weekend than has been requested in the FOI, I am alive to issues about that weekend, and I am robustly investigating what happened that weekend.

I have spoken directly to Paul Moulton who has been carrying out an investigation into what happened over the weekend of 13-15 March 2020. I have directly requested that he delay his investigation and commentary on that weekend until after I have reported. I relayed the position above to him. I made clear that I had no legal powers to stop his investigation and that I respect the freedom of the press, but that recent events and social media activity was affecting my Review. Mr Moulton has kindly agreed that it is in the public interest that he delays further investigation and commentary, and to await my report, and I am grateful to him. I am reporting this communication with his agreement.

My thanks again to all who have cooperated with the Review. I very much hope that this message will be heeded and that I will receive continued cooperation to allow me to report in a fair and robust way at the end of the year.

[End of statement]

[Cueey Lewis And The News]

40 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

Legal counsel are only there for the money so will be happy for Moulton to carry this on as long as possible 

I doubt it will be paid for. Probably another conspiracy lawyer doing it for free. 

[P.K.]

1 hour ago, 2112 said:

As for the Brunner KC review into Covid, I think it would be better if it’s a full public inquiry, with full legal powers to compel witness attendance. I think IOMG should get a decent High Court judge to chair it - as far removed from IOMG interference as possible. 

A lot of the problems are because of the lack of trust the general public have in the government.

You can hardly blame them. Mr Bell "deliberately misled" Tynwald and then went on to become CM!

Talk about sending out the wrong message...

[NoTailT]

We all know Paul loves a bit of dramatisation. But having now watched his video, I don't see any of it as particularly far-fetched. We know - from the Ranson case and other matters - that we're led by incompetent self-righteous oafs.

[Two-lane]

Trying to put in words the contents of a telephone conversation can be difficult - the tone of voice etc.

From the two posts above by John Wright:

6 November statement:

58 minutes ago, John Wright said:

For the sake of clarity, when I spoke to Mr Moulton I did not suggest the Review was in danger of collapsing, nor have I ever done so. Neither did I seek to prevent Mr Moulton from pursuing his Freedom of Information requests to the Isle of Man Government.

Previous press release:

54 minutes ago, John Wright said:

I have spoken directly to Paul Moulton who has been carrying out an investigation into what happened over the weekend of 13-15 March 2020. I have directly requested that he delay his investigation and commentary on that weekend until after I have reported.

The process of inquiries is way above my head - but my conclusion of this part of the affair is that Brunner should have sent a letter to Moulton, rather than have an unrecorded, unofficial, telephone conversation with him.

[WTF]

i don't see why moulty should delay an 'investigation' , maybe just making his findings public,   its like saying you can only enter with your search warrant officer once i've hidden everything i don't want you to find.

Edited November 7, 2023 by WTF

[2112]

Would a full independent public inquiry chaired by a retired UK senior judge, not be better, and possibly afford full legal status. Possible witnesses and media types such as IOMTV would be obliged to remain silent, also the judge heading the inquiry wouldnt be able to contact witnesses beforehand. From what I can read into Paul Moultons spat with the Covid Review is very much influenced by IOMG ‘involvement’. If IOMG start sticking their oar in, the review is somewhat ‘biased’?

[Cueey Lewis And The News]

1 hour ago, Two-lane said:

Trying to put in words the contents of a telephone conversation can be difficult - the tone of voice etc.

And the only people who will know what was said on the call would be her and Moulton so I can’t really see any smoking gun other than her admitting in a draft press release that ‘I have spoken to Mr Moulton’. So it’s no smoking gun really as nobody can prove if she said the inquiry was due to collapse or not. If people were genuinely being put off from engaging with the review because of his social media activity then it probably made sense for her to have a chat. Equally she subsequently puts in writing that ”I have directly requested that he delay his investigation and commentary on that that weekend until after I have reported. I relayed the position above to him. I made clear that I had no legal powers to stop his investigation and that I respect the freedom of the press, but that recent events and social media activity was affecting my Review.” Which is consistent with what she says she said on the phone - that she couldn’t do anything to stop him but would he consider stopping as it was resulting in people expressing concerns about about coming forward to her team.

The only question I would have on this is that it’s awfully like the Ashy shredded letter claims that people were being de-motivated and upset by claims being made by Dr Glover. These sort of claims are a classic IOM Gov passive aggressive bullying technique so it might be more likely that Brunner was sold a line by Cabinet Office and tried to intervene in a proactive way to try to preserve the integrity of the review if she believed (or was sold the line) that Moulton activities prevented some people from coming forward. On that basis I hope that this does now trigger a public inquiry. 

Edited November 7, 2023 by Cueey Lewis And The News

[Andy Onchan]

 Could someone please remind me what happened over the weekend of 13-15 March 2020?