Jump to content

Spat between Chief Minister and Dr Glover


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Ms Glover following her flounce and histrionics has been welcomed back into the fold.

And we should be glad, not mocking her. I was stupid once about her, but have been educated to my shame. Give her her due.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

With respect, you are. Without @rachomics on island PCR testing for covid would not have happened when it did, if at all. Of course, Rizwan Khan and Steve Doyle were vital too - sorry don’t know Dr Sh

I quite enjoy Manx Forums. There's nothing wrong with a bit of satire.  Happy to defend myself, wherever that may be. I grew up knocking around Willaston so while you may believe that someone wit

This is what is so extraordinary.  Except it now appears they had since Wednesday morning to get the response correct and they still managed to come up with something that made a staged denunciation a

Posted Images

1 minute ago, Scotty said:

And we should be glad, not mocking her. I was stupid once about her, but have been educated to my shame. Give her her due.

Indeed, the sort of person who makes a real contribution not someone in coat tails poncing about on the hill going look at me.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, manxman34 said:

 3 times a sexist.

 

Fucking awful Commodores song.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I note the letter could not have been a personal letter, even though it was sent to Mr Ashford's home.

It was from an employee and started off "Dear Minister".

Not "Dear David" or even "Dear Mr Ashford".

Edited by Barlow
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Barlow said:

I note the letter could not have been a personal letter, even though it was sent to Mr Ashford's home.

It was from an employee and started off "Dear Minister".

Not "Dr David" or even "Dear Mr Ashford".

Juan was very poor on Moulton show yesterday. Pandering to Ashford at every opportunity.

I personally agree that this wasn't a letter from a constituent (although they may have been). It was a letter from a DHSC employee to their Minister of said department. It is therefore very different and I still believe that such letter - being a grievance - should be recorded against a personnel record.

That doesn't mean the FOI Josem submitted would produce anything else. But the destruction still seems highly inappropriate to me. I don't agree that its the media trying to make something out of nothing.

Edited by jaymann
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that the FOI request brought out was that the letter was destroyed. David Ashford is wondering why anyone would want to see a redacted letter which he said was read out in full.

Well, did he read it out in full? We don't know. And it could have been useful to see the letter, even in a redacted form. For example, we are told that Ashie received it the day before - but when was it dated?

The government advisor/s who backed this move needs their arses kicking severely. Although considering all the flack, I imagine Ashie will be doing that anyway, but I doubt he will ever be able to gain back his adulated reputation.

 

 

Edited by Barlow
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore, I do not believe the whole letter was read out, or rather broadcast.

If you watch the relevant part of the briefing, when questions start (click below) you will not that there is a cut/freeze in transmission for about 30 seconds in total. (at about 19:46) and a little further along there is another cut. 

So there are sections of the reading out of this letter that were not broadcast. 

So - another very good reason to ask to see the letter, or for that matter, just the text of the body.

 

Edited by Barlow
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Barlow said:

One thing that the FOI request brought out was that the letter was destroyed. David Ashford is wondering why anyone would want to see a redacted letter which he said was read out in full.

That emphasises just how stupid destroying the letter was.  They could have just issued the text which had been read out and redacted anything else.  Josem didn't ask for a photo of the original or anything - text is normally all you get with an FoI.

Now they have to pretend that destroying was normal, even compulsory.  Which makes no sense and could even be illegal in some circumstances.  They just don't know how to stop digging.

  • Like 5
Link to post
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...