Hooper has resigned

[Ringy Rose]

1 hour ago, Banker said:

John Wannenburgh has posted a detailed analysis of what needs doing on Facebook either we pay more taxes, we accept reduced services or we charge for things like A& E like Guernsey. 

That’s the truth of the matter and that’s where the honest conversation needs to be had.

Healthcare is expensive. Either you pay in tax or you pay at the door or you pay in insurance premiums.

My view is that the best way to fund it is through tax as it’s the most equitable. Charging at the door disproportionately impacts poorer people- £150 at the door of A&E is a lot of money for some people and nothing for others- and charging via premiums disproportionately affects ill people and old people.

I’d start with 2% corporation tax and increasing the tax cap by £50,000.

As for Moffatt talking about privatisation, the only way Manx Care EVER made sense as an operating model was if it was a prelude to privatisation. And who was the Treasury Minister who was so adamant we needed Manx Care?

[The Phantom]

On 10/15/2024 at 3:51 PM, cissolt said:

Joney has also resigned, not sure if she got to make a fancy speech though 

 

I'm suprised she didn't write it on a placard and march up and down outside Govt Offices. 

1 hour ago, Banker said:

John Wannenburgh has posted a detailed analysis of what needs doing on Facebook either we pay more taxes, we accept reduced services or we charge for things like A& E like Guernsey. 
more taxes is not palatable but the alternative is a worse service 

I'm gaining some respect for Mr W actually. 

"We've had to make the difficult decision to raise taxes".  No, that is the easy decision.  The difficult decisions are those Mr W mentioned and of course cuts to the CS bloat. 

[Ringy Rose]

5 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

The difficult decisions are those Mr W mentioned and of course cuts to the CS bloat. 

I’ll ask the same thing I always do: where would you make the cut?

The easy thing to say is “cut civil service bloat”. Sounds great. The hard thing is to say exactly which people should lose their jobs. Wannenburgh has never answered that question either.

It’s like “red tape”, everyone always says we should cut it but can’t ever manage to point at exactly which regulations they disagree with.

Edited 2 hours ago by Ringy Rose

[Roger Mexico]

1 minute ago, Ringy Rose said:

I’ll ask the same thing I always do: where would you make the cut?

The easy thing to say is “cut civil service bloat”. Sounds great. The hard thing is to say exactly which people should lose their jobs.

It's easy to say.  It's just hard to do because we have a servile political class that will do whatever their civil servants recommend and even if they had the will, most lack the skills to downsize effectively or to find out how to do so.  It's also because the whole system is set up to keep things that way and, though they have the power to change it, they lack the will and skills to do that as well.

[Banker]

5 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

I’ll ask the same thing I always do: where would you make the cut?

The easy thing to say is “cut civil service bloat”. Sounds great. The hard thing is to say exactly which people should lose their jobs. Wannenburgh has never answered that question either.

It’s like “red tape”, everyone always says we should cut it but can’t ever manage to point at exactly which regulations they disagree with.

Start in cabinet office the biggest bloated office ever at 3/400 or whatever it is now. Bin the communications team as jersey have done and tell departments to deal with press releases etc.

[Boo Gay'n]

13 minutes ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Who is he saying Hooper's consort is? There's no way he can provide minutes because Comins minutes are secret.

It is a strange noun to use, and I immediately thought 'duvet consort' followed by 'what about the lovely Rachel?' (Mrs H).

In context, he must be referring to Joney - 'a companion, associate or partner'.

[The Phantom]

2 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

I’ll ask the same thing I always do: where would you make the cut?

The easy thing to say is “cut civil service bloat”. Sounds great. The hard thing is to say exactly which people should lose their jobs.

I would admit, without having some sort of review to measure efficiencies, ROI etc it would be difficult to say where to cut.  Thing is, has anyone actually tried to review any of this?  We're being told that Depts are trying to make cuts or become more efficient, but I've seen no evidence. 

First port of call would be any retirements would have to be looked at to see what they do and if they should be replaced. 

Although in my mind I would just wander around in an extremely blasé fashion firing the most slovenly looking of the staff and anyone that was signed off sick for longer than a week for anything other than a mortal wound. 

Much as it pains me, I would have to say a significant portion of Daffers' Green Team could go.  We're not going to turn into an apocalyptic wasteland with their absence.  A lot of DED also could go - the Island's economic success over the years was driven by the Private Sector, not Govt employees having jollies around South Africa or Gaming Conferences. 

 

[Auntie Depressant]

We could at the very least put a block on new recruitments while working out where the axe would fall on current positions? 

[Auntie Depressant]

2 hours ago, Declan said:

Credit where credit is due. Gaslightlng Hooper by accusing him of gaslighting takes it to a new dimension. 

Projection has always been Cannan’s super power. 

[Ringy Rose]

15 minutes ago, Banker said:

Start in cabinet office the biggest bloated office ever at 3/400 or whatever it is now

Cabinet Office includes the government IT service and the HR department. Strip those out and they don’t spend that much. Crown and External Relations costs £2m a year and the “Government Reform Team” are about £2.5m. I’m still not sure what the point of the latter is but cut it all and you’ve still not even touched the sides of the Manx Care or DESC budgets.

Bin of the whole of the Department for Enterprise- all of them- and you’ve saved £10m in employee costs. That’s not going to do much for Manx Care is it? It’s less than 1% on income tax.

My point isn’t that government is a well oiled machine- I’ve never worked in a big organisation that is- but that the obvious “bloat” is actually relatively small. Sack all of DEFA and you’ve saved £9m in pay; lovely, but Manx Care’s wages bill is £231m.

Edited 1 hour ago by Ringy Rose

[Auntie Depressant]

20 hours ago, HeliX said:

 

Yes yes yes, but apart from that what have they actually done. 

[Moghrey Mie]

I wonder what the three marketing people are doing the rest of the year.

https://www.gov.im/media/1385214/iom-government-conference-2024-sponsorship-packages-220824_compressed.pdf

[Cambon]

How about giving Manx Care an extra £100M this year, but tell them now that it is out of next year’s budget, and that ghey have 12 months to make the relevant cuts in management, starting with Manx Care! 

[Non-Believer]

1 minute ago, Auntie Depressant said:

We could at the very least put a block on new recruitments while working out where the axe would fall on current positions? 

There has been such a restriction, supposedly for many years. Depts were circumventing it via all sorts of means and continuing to increase their numbers, often without the knowledge of their Minister. This was brought up in in Tynwald about 3 years ago now and nothing appears to have been done about it.

There was also a committee set up to examine Govt headcount, guess what? Nothing heard from since.

[Auntie Depressant]

1 minute ago, Non-Believer said:

There has been such a restriction, supposedly for many years. Depts were circumventing it via all sorts of means and continuing to increase their numbers, often without the knowledge of their Minister. This was brought up in in Tynwald about 3 years ago now and nothing appears to have been done about it.

There was also a committee set up to examine Govt headcount, guess what? Nothing heard from since.

This was the ‘staff capping’ ruling, no? I think that’s well and truly and thing of the past. Brought in to put a stop to so many CS being employed and circumvented by hundreds of temporary zero hour contracts being issued instead.