Jump to content

Spat between Chief Minister and Dr Glover


Manx Bean
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Banker said:

Saw that , her accusations seem to be that he’s on the payroll of IOM advertising, not sure that makes it for government propaganda 

It would, if true, raise questions about impartiality and conflicts of interest surely? It would certainly explain the apparent 'chumminess' in the recent video.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, finlo said:

Just as he was getting under their skin he's been bought off!

In just the same way as eager but newbie politicians are. A former MHK has explained that the buy off can be by ego, vanity, money or a mix thereof.

 

Edited by Barlow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Gladys said:

Tents and direction of piss come to mind. 

Are we back on the urinals subject, Gladys..? 😂

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manx politics doesn't work if people start asking difficult questions or rocking the boat. That's why opposition never gets off the ground. The whole shebang works on consensus, patronage, cosy deals and arrangements, lack of proper scrutiny etc. The real decision making and policy is not directed by the politicians. People like Moulton asking awkward questions are either 'subsumed' or squashed (Like Roly was).  

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

Are you taking into account the fact that it never worked from the moment it was handed over to DBC? Who then also paid up over a sob story that the "manufacturers" would go bust if they didn't?

Your hero squandered an eighth of a million of ratepayers often hard-earned money. Try taking that into account.

“Your hero”?

I don’t have a hero so I don’t have to take anything into account.

I agree that the purchase of the chewing gum remover does not appear to have been the best decision, albeit with the best of intentions. With hindsight public and private enterprises, I and you ( I am sure) have all made decisions that haven’t worked out the way we would have wanted.

The corollary of course is that there has been expenditure of hard earned ratepayers money that has reaped dividends (before anyone inevitably says “ give an example” let’s say the refurbishment of the Villa Marina/Gaiety. This facility is undoubtedly an asset to the Island, whether or not profitable in financial terms)

I can’t comment on the “sob story “ as I have no evidence of its veracity. Be interested if you could provide some.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

The corollary of course is that there has been expenditure of hard earned ratepayers money that has reaped dividends (before anyone inevitably says “ give an example” let’s say the refurbishment of the Villa Marina/Gaiety. This facility is undoubtedly an asset to the Island, whether or not profitable in financial terms)

You are aware that the Villa has been owned by the Government since 2000?   And that the refurbishment took place after that?  And that the Government has owned the Gaiety since 1971?

So your best example of the beneficial use of ratepayers money is something that happened two decades ago and that the Corpy didn't do.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

“Your hero”?

I don’t have a hero so I don’t have to take anything into account.

I agree that the purchase of the chewing gum remover does not appear to have been the best decision, albeit with the best of intentions. With hindsight public and private enterprises, I and you ( I am sure) have all made decisions that haven’t worked out the way we would have wanted.

The corollary of course is that there has been expenditure of hard earned ratepayers money that has reaped dividends (before anyone inevitably says “ give an example” let’s say the refurbishment of the Villa Marina/Gaiety. This facility is undoubtedly an asset to the Island, whether or not profitable in financial terms)

I can’t comment on the “sob story “ as I have no evidence of its veracity. Be interested if you could provide some.
 

Thing is, you learn from your mistakes and you also learn from others' mistakes.  

But more than that is the belief that winning an election suddenly endows you with superhuman powers.  What so often seems to be missing is a willingness or ability to correctly seek and interpret advice and apply a bit of prudent scepticism. There also seems to be a trait of following the advice which confirms preconceptions rather than that which has been fully scrutinised and questioned. 

For example, even though we seemingly had a cast of thousands in the gold and silver teams, (spreading the responsibility thin and wide), what we didn't have was a core team with appropriate knowledge and expertise to bounce things off, give a different perspective and view,  despite Tynwald requiring just that. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

You are aware that the Villa has been owned by the Government since 2000?   And that the refurbishment took place after that?  And that the Government has owned the Gaiety since 1971?

So your best example of the beneficial use of ratepayers money is something that happened two decades ago and that the Corpy didn't do.

David got confused between his time in DBC and HOK. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...