ian rush Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 Is the senile old windbag still making his own findings based on what St. Rosalind has told him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 1 hour ago, Gladys said: He has stuck at probing the issues for what, 3 or 4 years? I'm not sure what you mean by probing? If you mean chewing the fat with Moulton I guess he has, although we're not particularly short of armchair politicians, and he did sweet FA during his two terms as an MHK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlebushy Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said: Yes just like say, Angela Rayner at one time was only experienced as a care worker. ( She would probably have been rubbish at running a pub quiz) Because of course people don’t get life experience and as a consequence become more able, learn new skills and assimilate new ideas do they.? Are you saying that once a pub quizmaster, that’s all you’ll ever be good for? In Ashford's case, absolutely fucking YES. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 (edited) 9 minutes ago, littlebushy said: In Ashford's case, absolutely fucking YES. Well I guess there’s many different types of people on here, ranging from those who want to discuss and debate the various issues with others to those who just want to demonstrate their prejudices in a vulgar manner. Edited July 9 by The Voice of Reason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 3 hours ago, code99 said: My point to Stu Peters but in his usual bombastic manner he fobbed me off. The committee I was press-ganged onto had one job: select and retain a completely independent and suitably qualified KC, give him the brief and stand back while he did his work and wrote his report. This was made public the same day it was delivered to Tynwald with no amendments or rewrites. It was never part of our job as a committee to discuss his methodology, question or influence him, become involved in the Ranson case or the subsequent actions. He was given free rein to take evidence and report as he saw fit. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlebushy Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 21 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: Well I guess there’s many different types of people on here, ranging from those who want to discuss and debate the various issues with others to those who just want to demonstrate their prejudices in a vulgar manner. 21 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: Well I guess there’s many different types of people on here, ranging from those who want to discuss and debate the various issues with others to those who just want to demonstrate their prejudices in a vulgar manner. You asked the question, I gave you my honest opinion. Ashford has been shown repeatedly to wriggle and squirm for his own self preservation. Even when he resigned...he had done nothing wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Stu Peters said: The committee I was press-ganged onto had one job: select and retain a completely independent and suitably qualified KC, give him the brief and stand back while he did his work and wrote his report. Is being "press-ganged" onto a committee the best basis for selection and serving on that committee? One might have thought that the best qualifications might have been aptitude, qualification and genuine concern and/or interest in the subject? Edited July 9 by Non-Believer Typo 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code99 Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 11 minutes ago, Stu Peters said: The committee I was press-ganged onto had one job: select and retain a completely independent and suitably qualified KC, give him the brief and stand back while he did his work and wrote his report. This was made public the same day it was delivered to Tynwald with no amendments or rewrites. It was never part of our job as a committee to discuss his methodology, question or influence him, become involved in the Ranson case or the subsequent actions. He was given free rein to take evidence and report as he saw fit. Thank you, but this does not answer " there were a number of failings identified, but what action has been taken to address them? " Are you able to elaborate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 (edited) 4 hours ago, Gladys said: One lasting impact (and that is not to lessen the impact endured by individuals) Robertshaw quotes is how the handling of the Ranson case is impacting on recruitment into the health service. That has to be a major concern, particularly in a highly competitive recruitment market, but what is being done to address it? The issues with recruitment here have nothing to do with what Magson did to Ranson and everything to do with the same issues we all face: expensive housing and expensive trips off the island. Magson, having developed amnesia about her time here, is now a very very senior manager at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust. And they don’t have problems with recruitment. Edited July 9 by Ringy Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 8 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said: The issues with recruitment here have nothing to do with what Magson did to Ranson and everything to do with the same issues we all face: expensive housing and expensive trips off the island. Magson, having developed amnesia about her time here, is now a very very senior manager at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust. And they don’t have problems with recruitment. You could add to that a wildly incompetent HR department. My daughter interviewed and was offered a job in early April, the offer email advised her not to give notice to her current employer until the pre-employment checks have been completed. She's still waiting! Nothing tricky about the checks, she's in good health, Manx worker, references responded by return. It will be over six months from job offer to starting when it could have been less than half that if they got their finger out. How many find another job in the meantime? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 I must pursue a degree in music. Apparently it's a sure-fire path to lucrative senior positions in Healthcare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 52 minutes ago, Stu Peters said: The committee I was press-ganged onto had one job...................... stand back while he did his work and wrote his report. I wonder what made them think of you for that job 😜 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 9 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: You could add to that a wildly incompetent HR department. My daughter interviewed and was offered a job in early April, the offer email advised her not to give notice to her current employer until the pre-employment checks have been completed. She's still waiting! Nothing tricky about the checks, she's in good health, Manx worker, references responded by return. It will be over six months from job offer to starting when it could have been less than half that if they got their finger out. How many find another job in the meantime? Has she chased them up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 11 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: Has she chased them up? Constantly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 55 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Is being "press-ganged" onto a committee the best basis for selection and serving on that committee? One might have thought that the best qualifications might have been aptitude, qualification and genuine concern and/or interest in the subject? To be fair to Stu, he actually voted against himself being on the Committee (has this ever happened before?) but the government were so desperate to keep Christian (and possibly Mercer) off the Committee that they voted him on anyway. Presumably they wanted to make sure that the Committee was steered to choose someone who wouldn't present things in a bad light. 1 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.