Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man

Tricky

Members
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

60 Excellent

About Tricky

  • Rank
    MF Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Micky - just a quick message to express my sorrow for your sad loss.
  2. Be fine as long as they don't exceed 40mph.
  3. What concerns me is this 'protect the NHS' malarkey. I understand it, and agree with it, but only to a point. When we say 'protect the NHS', whilst we may currently be supporting the services on offer, what we are not doing is supporting the financial platform that it is based upon. The longer this goes on, the 'protect the NHS' mantra will shift from minimising workload to regenerating the economy to 'support the NHS'.
  4. Some did, and brought the virus back to the island with them via private jet.
  5. Spain & Cheltenham? No mention of foreign stag do's yet then...
  6. All, having had problems for over 8 years now (on and off), I have a pretty good grip on the symptoms, controls etc, but yes, I am aware, it is serious. Without wishing to sound melodramatic, for the last 4 months, since being referred by my GP, I wonder if every day I wake, it will be my last - at no point over the previous 8 years, have I felt my life in danger, aside from the last 4 months, even with some pretty bad experiences during that time. That is the simple truth of the matter, in respect of how I feel. Some days, I am fine, other days, a 100 yard walk, my head is spinning and I have to sit down before I fall down. Needless to say, as these last 4 months have went by, I have become more concerned as each day has went by, particularly the days where symptoms are present. In this time however, I have looked into private care. There is still private cardiology available at Nobles, but i'm not paying a premium to see the same doctor who was unable to give a confirmed diagnosis, removed my implantable loop recorder and resisted the urge to fit a pacemaker, despite this being the recommendation of Dr Tibitanzl, immediately prior to him and his team moving on. Since the removal of the ILR, I have been discharged and with that, I simply haven't been able to see, or speak, to anyone. When I was under the care of Dr Tibitanzl, I had direct access to his right hand nurse, Lynne Whittaker, at any time, day or night. My GP's last words to me upon seeing him 4 months ago, following a shrug of the shoulders "If Tibi couldn't figure out what was wrong, what chance have I got - I will write to cardiology, but be warned, it may take a while", followed by an embarrassed giggle - not exactly what I needed to hear at the time. Since then, I have discussed private (both here and across), and the costs are eye watering, given the history of being unable to diagnose the conditions - had god knows how many ecg's, ekg's, brain scans, tilt table tests, exercise stress tests, holter monitors, loop recorder, basically the full hit, so i'm having to look to pay to have all of those tests undertaken again if I go across for private, and being self employed, the lost earnings makes it even more difficult. Since meeting with my GP 4 months back, I have been saving all income I can to enable me to afford to go private (across), and yes, have that raft of tests all over again. Getting on to my GP today was the final straw, before committing to spending what could amount to my life savings to try and get a grip of whatever is going on. Anyway, given how long I have had to deal with this, I have come to terms with the fact that there is a problem, they don't seem to be able to figure out what is wrong, so i'm left to live with it as I don't have that many resources available to me to take it a great deal further. Its not that that gets me though - that's my life and I deal with it. What gets me is not having access to speak to anyone when my symptoms change, and those I can access shrug their shoulders, write a letter, then I get radio silence, until I kick up a stink, to be told "yeah, see you in 20 months". Thank you for the support, advice & well wishes. Seriously, i'm cool with it, but hopefully not 'cold' with it any time soon. What I wanted my posts to convey however, was the effects of the political posturing are having at the sharp end. Care for those in need has been exchanged with ego's for those with greed - what good is noise if there isn't action? I'm sure mine isn't an isolated case, and there will be many worse off than me (though I could share more personal experiences which really would make you cringe), and i'm certainly not posting for any sympathy votes. As said, I just wanted to give a real life account of how poor the situation actually is, and how, I believe, focus on what is most importance has been lost. Again, thank you to all whom have taken the time to comment.
  7. Working on that now, having had a ding dong with GP on the phone. I agree - once in there, spot on - as it was when I was under the care of Dr Tibitanzl some year back, who's service was second to none. Since his departure, you can't get into the place to see anyone!
  8. Just to bring this debacle to the fore in real world terms. I had an appointment with my GP several months back, with complaints of severe dizziness (to the point of repeatedly falling over), palpitations, and various other symptoms. I have a history of a heart condition, which cariology have been unable to conclusively diagnose for over 8 years. The instructions I have from Cardiology are at the first signs of any symptoms, speak to GP to arrange a referral. So, a letter of referral was sent to the hospital - some 4 months or so later, I haven't heard a peep, but with symptoms worsening, I contact my GP again to find out what on earth is going on. Several phonecalls later, I find out I have to wait for another 14 months, so basically 20 months before I get to see anyone. 8 years without a diagnosis, symptoms worsening to the point where daily functioning is becoming difficult, if not impossible. Frankly, I don't really care to debate the political waffle, as too many people involved are clearly focused on issues which they deem far more important that actually delivering a service to the public, issues such as covering their arses and regurgitating political spin. As a core community service, and based on actual front line experience of the piss poor service on offer, I have to say, the whole shambles is an absolute bloody disgrace, and those involved ought to be ashamed of themselves.
  9. Quite possibly the only time anyone has walked out of there with any goods at all, given the regularly reported piss poor service in there...
  10. I believe that is what's technically known as a 'PR stunt'
  11. Yes and no. The Framework is set out by Treasury, with a heavy degree of political input. Having spoken to some in DOI procurement regarding this (formally and informally), it is clear that procurement staff feel their hands are somewhat tied, and are very frustrated with the situation. In addition, there is a degree of political influence that runs prior to the points system. In effect, the points system, in some cases, is being used to include or exclude certain contractors prior to tender. When you add this to the requirement for MACCS accreditation, it is clear that there are 'favoured' contractors who get the lions share of the work, and the deck is well and truly stacked against others, who may well be more suited to the task at hand. You could liken it to having chosen a candidate for a full time job before the position has been advertised, and writing the job description to fit the chosen candidate. In this case, I don't see the point of having a points based system as it is a waste of resources, and is very dishonest in nature by suggesting that the system is solely points based in the first place. In many cases, the points based system is being used as a tool to manipulate a decision making process to a desired outcome, and is then used as the justification for such an outcome to absolve those whom steered the decision of all responsibility if/when something goes wrong. In respect of the Promenade, it seems apparent that the main flaw is in the design (with possible further faults 'on the ground). In effect, problems were 'built in' to the job at the design stage, therefore before tenders were awarded. This problem should have been picked up, but it clearly wasn't - reading through the Capital Procurement guidance notes, it is clear that it is the responsibility of the respective Government dept to ensure that this does not occur. In this case, the fault initially lies in the 'procurement' of the designers (who do not go through the tender process), and the failure of DOI to notice the design failure and deal with it before putting the contract out to tender.
  12. In relation to all of the above, I would first ask the question, were the chosen contractors capable of delivering a result as per specification? I would suggest that in at least two of the above, the answer is no. In which case, the jobs are either being over-specified in lieu of the pool of contractors 'available', or the contractors don't have the abilities to deliver on the contract specifics. Both points clearly amount to the same thing - a fundamental disassociation between the project brief and the result. There is a pattern of failed projects, with the failures ultimately due to procurement. Said procurement is operated within a framework which is irrelevant and unfit for purpose.
  13. One of the single biggest issues in Government is the absolute barmy procurement policy/procedures, and the insistence of the IOM Government to use locals. The Government want to employ locals to do works in pretty much every situation, which is fine if the measure of success is rooted in making everyone feel all 'warm and fuzzy' and there is an absolute acceptance of substandard works. If it is a proven fact that the competence and resources can be fulfilled locally, great, i'm all for that. The problems begin however when people start biting off more than they can chew (far too common), and the government happily provide the meal via taking a seat for lunch at the MACCS restaurant. If the government wish to procure people to take on large, complex tasks, where there is no proven history or track record of success, the procurement net must be spread further afield. Results have to come first i'm afraid, and if local companies (and I mean from design stage, not just workers on the ground) can't complete works to the required standards, they either have to up their game, or face losing out on jobs from the cash cow that is the IOM Government. I'll reference the abomination that was Gansey/Shore Road to reinforce this point.
×
×
  • Create New...