Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 747-400

  1. 8 minutes ago, Kopek said:

    Maybe because of her position in the hierarchy Ewart is being allowed some dignity in how she chooses to go?

    Possibly a role that can’t be let go off immediately? There is no deputy that can fill in. 

  2. 4 minutes ago, Gladys said:

    Is that true?

    The silence around her position is deafening. 

    My joke. 

    But Dr E is the remaining candidate on my list to go. 

    Maybe Monkeypox will keep her job safe for now. 

  3. 56 minutes ago, Bandits said:

    I think we can all guess that there will be further actions arising from the Ranson tribunal now if they’re f**king out the head of HR. 

    This afternoon Henrietta is currently blocking any number who calls her mobile 🤔

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
  4. 4 hours ago, Numbnuts said:

    Seemingly , and I've been impressed with Claire Christian as at least she asks questions which some haven't done in their first 5 years never mind this term .

    Me too. I was just going to add her name. 

    She seems to work damn hard, knows her stuff, and is willing to speak up. 


    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
  5. 2 hours ago, cissolt said:

    The longer he carries on the worse the fallout will be.  At least Manx radio seem to have woken up to the issue

    Exactly this.

    If he wielded the axe at the weekend, it would no longer be today’s headlines. 


  6. Just now, 2112 said:

    A proper leader would listen to all sides, the pros and the cons, not siding with one party. Whether someone had a music degree is irrelevant, Magson who had faults must have been experienced to apply for the job/secondment. 

    So true. And it is so strange (to me) that in a crisis, she failed to assemble her best team. A true leader would call on all brains, ensure diversity of opinion, and ensure their team was delivering well beyond the sum of the individuals.

    Why she failed on this is bewildering.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  7. 1 minute ago, snowman said:

    It's totally relevant and necessary

    Then also add her MBA (more relevant to her being Interim CEO; I think everyone would agree 😎).

    Just to be clear, I think her behaviour was despicable and hope further actions are taken agsinst her, but I am also a stickler for accuracy). 



    • Thanks 1
  8. 11 minutes ago, Kopek said:

    I simply mean it could be 'indication' to others in the service that past behaviour is no longer acceptable.

    Create a new role of Senior Medical Officer???

    Certainly create a senior leadership role for her, allowing her to do what she wanted in cleaning things up. 

    There must be enough room for that. 

    • Like 1
  9. On 3/24/2022 at 7:44 PM, TheTeapot said:

    I pointed out that electing Glover was pointless cos we already had one MHK who asked shit questions and would likely get back in, and that we didn't need another.

    Slate Moorehouse all you want, but at least he isn't completely bland, wet, soft, just completely uninspired

    With Glover you get two for the price of one. ”The lovely Jane Glover MBE” contributes to and supports his facebook posts. 

    The 25th MHK. 

    • Like 1
  10. 33 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

    The proceedings started 26th Jan and the link says that additional documents were still being submitted throughout the proceedings. 

    I wonder if the delay was because the docs are now with Manx Care?

    I remember at the PAC hearings DA talking about bundles of documents still to be supplied as they now sit with Manx Care.

    • Like 1
  11. 55 minutes ago, rachomics said:

    Don't believe the Manx Radio take on my evidence session.

    My witness statement and evidence was in three parts: 1. The science that I carried out during my time at the DHSC which proves one of Dr. Ranson's whistleblowing claims; 2. The occasions I met Dr. Ranson during my time at the DHSC, and 3. My experience of the DHSC. 

    For some reason, Manx Radio concentrated only on the first 2 minutes of my 60 minute evidence session regarding a tweet put forward by the DHSC as "proof" that I should be personally discredited in order to discredit my science.

    I wonder why the DHSC would want me to be discredited given the science is empirical and has no opinion, just data 🤔

    I think MR did mention some examples of your experience with DHSC (but I am sure you had plenty more!)

    There sure are some powerful, unnamed individuals at the DHSC.

    If it weren’t so serious it would make a good TV series. 

  12. 1 hour ago, Gladys said:

    I have to say, in defence, that the minutes could have been prepared based on contemporaneous handwritten notes just that they hadn't been typed up.

    The problem with that is that the handwritten notes will inevitably be in the author's shorthand and may not carry the nuance of the actual meeting. So, are they reliable?

    Not best practice by any stretch, but not quite the same as falsifying a document.  

    Perhaps what happened was the clerk of the meeting took notes but didn't type them up. If that was the case, you would either produce the handwritten notes, heavily caveated that they were exactly what they were and not seen or confirmed by the attendees, or you say there are no approved minutes of the meeting.


    Thanks, that’s certainly a feasible possibility. 

    But, does the CS still have clerks to do minutes and why were they never written up. 

    In any case, the clerk could confirm that her shorthand had been correctly transcribed (presumambly only she or another clerk could type them up?)


  13. 10 minutes ago, Gladys said:

    Very good point.  It would also be good if a directive went out to the IT staff not to tamper with any of the network data and to report immediately if requested to do so.

    I should imagine the AG's office is feeling pretty pissed off at the moment. 

    Unless it was a highly sophisticated IT hack, it should be easy to check against backups and/or see when the latest version was saved on the current drive. Or even indeed if the version presented to the tribunal matches that backed up. 


    I would have thought 🤔

  14. 14 minutes ago, Gladys said:

    So, James Boyd reminded the panel that the case was not about the government's handling of the pandemic but about the decision not to move Dr R to Manx Care.

    From what has been covered in the press, no one is really looking at the handling of the pandemic, but the handling of a senior professional in the DHSC. 

    What an odd thing to say, or be picked up as significant by the reporter.

    One thought … because Dr Glover was also interviewed in relation to her struggles to get her views/recommendations heard by those making decisions,  and people automatically think pandemic….?

  15. 2 hours ago, Dr. Grumpy said:

    Bloomin 'eck! If the dhsc did concoct the minutes, why didn't they think of altering the meta data? Arrogance? Incompetence? Or a bit of both?

    Be good if specific names were ultimately revealed rather than tarnishing the whole DHSC with the same brush 

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  16. 1 hour ago, 2112 said:

    You have forgotten that the ones who caused the issue, was one who came up with an amendment. To me it’s a case of look at me, I’m solving an issue which didn’t need dealing with, and I can safely tell my constituents of all the good things I’m doing. It will go well with Christmas 2022 card to the good folk in Douglas South. 

    April can’t come soon enough then these minstrels will soon know what’s hit them - cost of living, increased fuel charges, increased VAT, NI increase etc etc. Never mind the answers……….. What’s the question?

    If it wasn’t placed on the Order Paper then there wouldn’t be an Amendment. 

    You should be asking where it was on the Order Paper. 

  17. 5 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

    Yeah, right? We'll never get those couple of hours back from something that has generated more polarised public opinion than I can ever remember.

    More public interest and engagement than the Island plan!!

  18. 4 hours ago, Gladys said:

    I am still trying to work out why she should crawl back under her stone.  When she came out from under the stone she set up the island testing facility.  What we don't know it what happened subsequently to trigger the animosity. Seeing some of the other doctor's allegations, it does seem that being outside of the DHSC clique is not a nice place to be.

    Who is the DHSC clique though, given that there seems to be such a high turnover at the senior mgt team level?

    If the senior team was a constant I could better understand. Or is it typical behaviour of CS leaders 🤔

  19. 2 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

    This really is institutional rather than to do with any elected leaders. 

    And seems not limited to the Manx CS, given the key player (who remained in England) and the main cast of the production have moved over recently or the last few years.

    • Like 1
  20. 8 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

    I’m not so sure with hindsight. Neither of them acted like grown ups but I think I now believe Ashford (who is weak let’s face it) was tricked into reading the letter by someone high up in the DHSC and then bottled it and destroyed it when he realized he’d been had. But that let the genie out of the bottle and she is clearly the type who goes on the rampage when threatened. Whoever set it up was quite clever though. And I’d guess it’s one of the three main ladies who are now behaving like tramps fighting over a bag of chips.

    Everytime I heard Ms Magson speak she really drilled the team work culture they wanted to instill. 

    The letter was very much on that theme. 

    • Like 2
  • Create New...