Jump to content

IOM Government Refugee Policy Consultation: Nefarious or Incompetence?


Bobby Barca
 Share

Recommended Posts

I recently completed the IOM Government Refugee Policy Consultation questionnaire (available for completion until 13th December and is available at: https://www.gov.im/news/2022/nov/01/consultation-will-inform-islands-longer-term-refugee-policy/). 

 

This is the first time I have completed any IOM Government consultation, and I have to say I was shocked at how poorly constructed the questionnaire wasIt is a basic of any questionnaire that the questions are neutrally worded and do not include leading questionsUnfortunately, this consultation fails miserably in this regard given that most questions are NOT neutrally worded and ARE leading questions, all with a very clear bias towards refugee support.

 

I feel we should all be concerned about this flawed process no matter what your views on refugee support are if this is the manner in which IOM government conducts its consultations, given the implications of such a flawed process also potentially being implemented on future (and perhaps past?) consultations also. The IOM Government has stated that they deem the results of this consultation to be an accurate picture of residents views (they have clearly failed in this regard therefore) and will use the results to prepare government policy on the matter.   

 

I really have to wonder if this defect I am outlining is due to incompetence within the government or whether something more nefarious is at play here (ie the biased nature is down to manipulation so that the “desired answers” are gleaned by the cabinet office or that there is some other hidden agenda behind it).  I am inclined to learn towards incompetence given many of the questions are also poorly worded, badly framed and too open ended in parts. Either way, given that the consultation is biased by being riddled with non-neutral and leading questions, the results can only be adjudged as null and void. 

 

So I am just wondering what views others have on this who have completed the questionnaireDid anyone else pick up on this or am I way off the mark regarding the flawed construction of the consultation questionnaire?!   

 

P.S. This post is around the querying of the process the refugee policy consultation has followed. It is NOT A POST TO AIR AND DEBATE YOUR VIEWS ON THE PERCEIVED RIGHTS/WRONGS AND ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES CONCERNING REFUGEES, so it would be appreciated if you could keep all responses to the matter of the questionnaires construction please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bobby Barca said:

I recently completed the IOM Government Refugee Policy Consultation questionnaire (available for completion until 13th December and is available at: https://www.gov.im/news/2022/nov/01/consultation-will-inform-islands-longer-term-refugee-policy/). 

 

This is the first time I have completed any IOM Government consultation, and I have to say I was shocked at how poorly constructed the questionnaire wasIt is a basic of any questionnaire that the questions are neutrally worded and do not include leading questionsUnfortunately, this consultation fails miserably in this regard given that most questions are NOT neutrally worded and ARE leading questions, all with a very clear bias towards refugee support.

 

I feel we should all be concerned about this flawed process no matter what your views on refugee support are if this is the manner in which IOM government conducts its consultations, given the implications of such a flawed process also potentially being implemented on future (and perhaps past?) consultations also. The IOM Government has stated that they deem the results of this consultation to be an accurate picture of residents views (they have clearly failed in this regard therefore) and will use the results to prepare government policy on the matter.   

 

I really have to wonder if this defect I am outlining is due to incompetence within the government or whether something more nefarious is at play here (ie the biased nature is down to manipulation so that the “desired answers” are gleaned by the cabinet office or that there is some other hidden agenda behind it).  I am inclined to learn towards incompetence given many of the questions are also poorly worded, badly framed and too open ended in parts. Either way, given that the consultation is biased by being riddled with non-neutral and leading questions, the results can only be adjudged as null and void. 

 

So I am just wondering what views others have on this who have completed the questionnaireDid anyone else pick up on this or am I way off the mark regarding the flawed construction of the consultation questionnaire?!   

 

P.S. This post is around the querying of the process the refugee policy consultation has followed. It is NOT A POST TO AIR AND DEBATE YOUR VIEWS ON THE PERCEIVED RIGHTS/WRONGS AND ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES CONCERNING REFUGEES, so it would be appreciated if you could keep all responses to the matter of the questionnaires construction please. 

Why don't you send your comments to the consultation team ? Would seem a bit of a better course of action than asking for the depressed massive on here for random comments, perhaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Bobby Barca said:

This is the first time I have completed any IOM Government consultation, and I have to say I was shocked at how poorly constructed the questionnaire was

I did access this but did not get beyond the first page due to the need to supply unnecessary information regarding the person completing it. They do this with most consultations but not all. 

Having also read some of the outcomes and then the reports of the findings they do not always reflect an accurate interpretation of the data extracted. Good luck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bobby Barca said:

I recently completed the IOM Government Refugee Policy Consultation questionnaire (available for completion until 13th December and is available at: https://www.gov.im/news/2022/nov/01/consultation-will-inform-islands-longer-term-refugee-policy/). 

 

This is the first time I have completed any IOM Government consultation, and I have to say I was shocked at how poorly constructed the questionnaire wasIt is a basic of any questionnaire that the questions are neutrally worded and do not include leading questionsUnfortunately, this consultation fails miserably in this regard given that most questions are NOT neutrally worded and ARE leading questions, all with a very clear bias towards refugee support.

 

So I am just wondering what views others have on this who have completed the questionnaireDid anyone else pick up on this or am I way off the mark regarding the flawed construction of the consultation questionnaire?!   

 

P.S. This post is around the querying of the process the refugee policy consultation has followed. It is NOT A POST TO AIR AND DEBATE YOUR VIEWS ON THE PERCEIVED RIGHTS/WRONGS AND ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES CONCERNING REFUGEES, so it would be appreciated if you could keep all responses to the matter of the questionnaires construction please. 

I’ve done the questionnaire. Whilst it is a bit clumsy, amateurish  and a bit of a pigs ear I didn’t find it had a very clear bias towards refugee support as you suggest in that you had the usual options from strongly agree to strongly disagree)

There were plenty of free form boxes to express your views ( probably too many). 
 

So yes I think you are off the mark.

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...