Moghrey Mie Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 https://www.tynwald.org.im/spfile?file=/business/opqp/opqp/2024-PP-0055.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 The accredited journalists bit looks interesting !l 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beelzebub3 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 Mr Ashford asking a lot of questions since becoming a backbencher, he was not as inquisitive as a minister with his feet under the big table. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Buggane Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 STILL hanging on in there for his point by point rebuttal, now all the court cases and inquiries are complete surely he can not be hiding behind sub justice. Can He, I still will not be holding my breath. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 9 hours ago, Beelzebub3 said: Mr Ashford asking a lot of questions since becoming a backbencher, he was not as inquisitive as a minister with his feet under the big table. Aren't they all though? Quiet as mice when they're given ministerial status but after they've resigned or been emptied they suddenly become very industrious with the spades when there are buried bodies to be exposed. Thomas and Edge are two other prominents. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 10 hours ago, asitis said: The accredited journalists bit looks interesting This is the document: https://www.tynwald.org.im/spfile?file=/business/sto/Documents/2023-PP-0101.pdf I do not understand what he is getting at with this. Annex 2 is on page 85 or 94 depending how you count. Standing Order 3.37 is easily found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 8 minutes ago, Two-lane said: This is the document: https://www.tynwald.org.im/spfile?file=/business/sto/Documents/2023-PP-0101.pdf I do not understand what he is getting at with this. Annex 2 is on page 85 or 94 depending how you count. Standing Order 3.37 is easily found. Reading that thanks, it is a good job we don't have any real investigative journos (PM excepted) they would be asked to leave at the drop of a hat ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 We've not heard much from PM in a year or more. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 7 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: We've not heard much from PM in a year or more. Black ops? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Buggane Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 Bought off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred the shred Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 I heard he had gone travelling but it was on social media so ……someone had asked the same question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 11 hours ago, Beelzebub3 said: Mr Ashford asking a lot of questions since becoming a backbencher, he was not as inquisitive as a minister with his feet under the big table. As I've said before the convention is that Ministers don't ask other Ministers questions. I suppose it's because it makes it look as if they're not on speaking terms outside the Chamber. But of course asking a question in Tynwald or Keys isn't about finding out for yourself, it's about finding out for the public, so it's a stupid convention, but one they are expected to stick to. Even though it means that if both your MHKs are Ministers (as in all three Northside constituencies) there's no one to ask for you. Hence Moorhouse and recently Ashford asking about anything, including constituency matters in places they don't represent. Unfortunately Ashford's question too often seem to be designed to show how clever and well-informed he is (they fail) while Moorhouse's are designed to show how many questions he asks (well that succeeds). Anyway here's the latest league table: Moorhouse 129 Ashford 78 Thomas 76 Christian 19 Caine 19 Edge 16 Glover 14 Faragher 10 Watterson 8 Wannenburgh 5 Corlett 2 Haywood 2 Maltby 1 Mercer 1 It's not much different to the 2022-23 Session with Moorhouse way ahead (he asked at least four questions every time) and Ashford trailing behind. There have been 380 questions asked - well ahead of what the pro-rata from last year would have been at this stage. The difference of course is Thomas, who is snapping at Ashford's heels, though rather more focused. Although Edge was only sacked a month ago, she's also making up for lost time. I think Cannan is learning something about tents and urination. But as striking are the absentees (apart from CoMin). Nothing from Peters or Smith (again) and again from Callister. Is he hoping if he's a good boy they'll let him back in CoMin? Others have pretty low productivity as you can see, though some are more productive with Written Questions. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 2 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said: We've not heard much from PM in a year or more. It's less than that, but his last Facebook post was in November, and from memory the last YouTube was about then as well (it's lost among all the Archive stuff). He last Tweeted late December when he was in Wellington, New Zealand, so maybe he's hiding away on a sheep farm, fleeing the IOMG hit squad. It is rather worrying, but being legally gagged seems more likely than being bought off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 11 hours ago, Dirty Buggane said: STILL hanging on in there for his point by point rebuttal, now all the court cases and inquiries are complete surely he can not be hiding behind sub justice. Can He, I still will not be holding my breath. The point by pont rebuttal was to do with Dr Glover, IIRC. Not sure that situation has seen the light of the courts, or was even fully aired at the PAC although, again IIRC, DA said the department's response to her was in their evidence to the committee. So, I would not be expecting any further on the point by point rebuttal. But point taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.