Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Ham_N_Eggs last won the day on July 21

Ham_N_Eggs had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

838 Excellent

About Ham_N_Eggs

  • Rank
    MF Addicted

Recent Profile Visitors

1,569 profile views
  1. From antibody studies only approx 8% of the UK have had Covid19 so it's not surprising that people don't know anyone who has had it since 92% of the UK is Covid19 free. That will change with this next wave if people don't take it seriously. Unfortunately there are a lot of vested interests pushing some very dodgy agendas to stop people taking it seriously. Have a read of this well researched piece.
  2. If the flu killed you then yes because death certificates certify the cause of death. What people seem to be conviently forgetting is that the biggest comorbidities are diabetes, being overweight, and heart disease. These are things that people can live with not just for years but for decades. Sometimes in the case of diabetes an entire lifetime. It's not like most of these people were about to die the next day.
  3. It is amazing how easily people are willing to use this misleading data. Even the data I used is largely meaningless because it doesn't span over 12 months. But it does paint a rather different picture than the 1% figure.
  4. Sounds like they've taken a very small period of time rather than the whole year because.... Based on the latest data set published by the UK gov of deaths for the year from Jan 1st to 31st August, there have been 194,806 deaths of which 41,501 tested positive for Covid19 using the gov's metric but according to the death certs 57,200 had Covid19 mentioned. So a conservative figure of 21% or based on death certs 29%. Bear in mind the first death from Covid19 wasn't registered till 7th March so if I ran that again excluding January and February it would be 148,279 deaths and respectively 28% and 39%. Either way very much not 1%.
  5. Because it wasn't Thomas's questions... Did you not read my first point? Specifically it was question two. Rob referred to himself as an interim appointment of the DoI. The answer: "The appointment of a member to a Departments is made under section 2(1) of the Government Departments Act 1987, which states: The members of each Department (other than the Minister) shall be appointed by the Council of Ministers, and shall hold office during the pleasure of the Council of Ministers. Any references made to an appointment of a member to a Department on an interim basis would be in respect of the anticipated length of tenure or particular remit rather than the legal basis for the appointment. Consequently no members have been formally appointed to Departments on an interim basis by the Council of Ministers during this or any previous administration."
  6. It wasn't Thomas's questions: The Hon. Member for Arbory, Castletown and Malew (Mr Moorhouse) to ask the Chief Minister (Minister for the Cabinet Office) – What actions are being taken by Ports Division to ensure that those people arriving on the Island by private plane or boat are adhering to landing requirements and what issues have occurred with arrivals since the Island moved to Stage 4 of the Government’s strategy on managing external links? 2. The Hon. Member for Onchan (Ms Edge) to ask the Chief Minister – How many times he has appointed an interim member to a Government Department; and what powers he used to do so?
  7. The awkward questions were probably the ones attacking him or areas he looks after personally. I doubt it he is acting as an agent for CoMin. He's pretty transparent.
  8. Then how would the information have ended up in the public domain? Which ones in particular did you feel could have been asked via email? Did you feel some of the questions were set out to embarrass you? Like, as other observers have pointed out, you tried to embarrass Edge when she misspoke during a debate and you asked a question in the summer recess about the price of postage stamps. Your lack of self awareness on this issue is staggering.
  9. That's probably more to do with the matters connected to the alleged super injunction.
  10. The reason he is allowed to wear the uniform is because he went on the Armed Forces Parliamentary Scheme which is run by the weapons manufacturers to totally not lobby Parliamentarians back in 2010. ETA I see someone has already mentioned this so just ignore my post.
  11. If only. Too tall and they are, in true DoI planning style, set a couple of inches into the pavement. Just can not for the life of me work out what they're for.
  12. Does anyone have any idea what the smaller black square poles are in-between the new lights? They seem fairly random and out of place.
  13. You don't need to be in the position to do that. It's fairly obvious it's not needed. In fact I've already made a suggestion of a way forward earlier in this thread. I just don't get your point of view. Why would you want to take her away from where she is good to put in a position where a) she might not enjoy b) risk her old position being filled with a CoMin pick depriving tynwald of a decent legislator. Anyway we are at impasse we should just agree to disagree on this one.
  14. So you would take one of our most impressive legislators away from legislating? I just don't see the logic in that.
  15. I don't underestimate her I think she is one if not the best politician in Tynwald which is my point. You don't then move her to a position where she is hamstrung. Ask yourself what do you think the President actually does? What do you think the President can do? What reform do you think the President can push through without a) being able to debate anything in the chamber and b) vote? You may want to understand the role and it's limitations before recommending that Mrs Poole-Wilson go for it.
  • Create New...