censorship

Of course it won't. Questionable professional practices are no bar to climbing the greasy pole right to the very top, as we'd all know if someone with the full story decided to recount a certain senior legal officer's pathway to success.

Nah, there's never any cops down there and you can't report any incidents because no one answers the phone. 'Crime' stats can only be monitored if 'crimes' are reported and recorded - the first being near-impossible, the second actively discouraged. Unless you tailgate a cop car, then they go full Columbo meets Inspector Morse on your ass.

The police statement has, to some extent, confused matters further. They contend that in the evening the festival becomes a magnet for the inebriated, including minors, which leads to violence and public order offences. The best way to control this, they say, is for the festival to take greater responsibility for preventing such behaviour and for a licence to set rules to control what is permissable. They say they have examples of drunken lawlessness going back many years. But... My understanding is many of these incidents happen outside the defined area of the festival and would, therefore, not be subject to control by the organisers even with a licence. Further, the festival does not sell not promote the sale of alcohol so cannot be held responsible for people getting drunk. Essentially they are saying we have a problem with people who drink too much, underage children and people being supplied with alcohol who are not old enough or are already drunk, and that these people gravitate towards a popular community event in the evening. Rather than addressing the year-round issue of alcohol abuse and sales which are contrary to licensing laws, the best thing to do is disrupt events that attract them and inconvenience the rest of the community. They also say this is the biggest event to police outside the TT. If one day of small scale festivities contained in a clearly defined area in a near-empty town, which includes brass band performances, parade of floats, face painting and children singing, is the second biggest thing they have to deal with each year then frankly I have no idea why the chief constable is bleating about major challenges and lack of resources. It's a village fete for fuck's sake, not the Isle of Wight Festival.

Should that read 'I totally agree with whatever the police do, always'?

It's almost as if the police wanted something to force organisers to take greater responsibility for attendees' behaviour in the evening, such as making the event subject to licensing laws and conditions that hadn't applied for six decades, and the ever-obliging attorney general's chambers were only too happy to produce a revised legal opinion to suit. It's good to know both bodies are independent and could not be suspected of collusion.

Found the resources to excrete that didn't they. An overly long statement blaming everyone else for a music-related event going wrong, issued after several days of silence? Do the police have the same PR people as the Hope and Glory Festival organisers?

It comes from a deep-rooted hatred of waste and privilege, and isn't restricted to the police. There are so many arms of government which are costing us huge amounts of money and simply failing to deliver. Common to them all are staff strutting around like they are special, people pursuing avenues of self-interest, for promotion or job retention, to the disservice of their actual role, institutionalised arse-covering, a belief they have so much power they answer to no one, poor quality people working towards a huge pensions and not service delivery, piss poor management and a culture of "that'll do". Among the most public of these, and potentially the most important, are the police, social services, health services and the attorney general's chambers, which is why I have repeatedly criticised them. But it doesn't stop there, as anyone who has dealt with infrastructure or economic development will well know (or education for that matter). I don't think it is unreasonable, on a public debate forum, to raise concerns about a public service, and to repeat them when the situation continues, or worsens.

Yes I am, have you not been paying attention? For several months I've highlighted that in my opinion the constabulary is failing in its duty to the public, due to a mix of poor management, poor quality staff, lack of training and prioritising of self-interest. We've seen so many examples of this, of which the handling of Castletown is just the latest. Unfortunately, the constabulary can do what it likes because it has strangely strong connections with supposedly independent organisations, like the Island media and the attorney general's chambers. Many places would be deeply concerned when the police force seem able to dictate editorial policy, social care policy, prosecution policy, etc, etc, but it appears to be entirely acceptable in the Isle of Man.

Whether the police were right or wrong in their application of the law, the way this has been handled is a communications disaster for the force. It gets worse when the chief constable claims its all scurrilous nonsense and a statement will tell the truth, because trying to defend a balls up makes you look stupid. It gets even worse than that when they can't cobble a statement together some four days after the announcement went out, and 24 hours of the chief constable himself said there would be a statement. This may be down to one individual making a bad call, but that's okay because they are never held to account (see comments on action against officers in whose care a man died). Personally I think its down to the management of the force. They have exposed what utter twats they are, and are going to seek to justify that twattish behaviour in this statement. If it ever happens.

The police have made twats out of themselves, again, over this. Massive over reaction to try and justify their existence, underlining what a shambolic shower of shite our police force is. All of it. if the chief constable attempts to justify or defend this it will show him as out of touch, snivelling, weak, pathetic and incapable of effective leadership. Although if he does, no doubt some of the sycophants from the attorney generals office will lend support frankly, the buck stops at the top, this is a public relations disaster which has damaged the force and its relationship with the town, its local authority and all sensible people. The chief constable should resign or be removed from post.

This seems pretty simple to me. In order to protect those 'deserving' of protection, the law must be equally applied to all. The need for access to social and psychological reports ahead of sentencing, and for the possibility of reduced time served under certain circumstances, seems pretty obvious really. I'm sure we all know of cases, or have read about them, where someone has made a silly mistake, perhaps due to the influence of alcohol or drugs, or a mental health issue, and ends up in trouble. It is right that their situation is properly assessed before sentence and that the time they serve can be reduced for 'good behaviour'. Properly handled, those who make a mistake can be rehabilitated and become valuable members of society. The downside to ensuring these measures are available for the 'deserving', is that they must equally be available to all people within the system, so those you deem 'undeserving' have access too.

No, they aren't.

I'm struggling to follow the syntax in this sentence - can anyone translate?

Phew, it's not just me then. She is utterly insufferable in every single respect. Not just in her cringe-inducing TT TV appearances, her brain-melting radio show or her self-indulgent, egotistical social media feeds, but in real like too. She is often surrounded by a clique of sycophants from the Manx artistic mafia - you know the ones - joining in the mutual ego masturbation and when you happen upon this stomach-churning love-in you quickly realise that speaking openly about what a bore she is, and how completely devoid of personality she is, is a HUGE mistake. Thank god for the anonymity of MF! While I appreciate MF has to protect its own interests, I think its a shame people can't tell more of her 'story' publicly, cos its a right giggle. Hopefully someone will see the chance to make a few quid by trotting off to a tabloid with it. I appreciate she's only a small part in minor coverage of a niche sporting event on a seldom-watched channel, but if The Sun was allowed to play with it I'm sure they'd run an 'ITV presenter XXXXX her XXXXXX with XXXXXX' headline. It may only be ITV4, but it's still ITV. The sad thing is, she'd probably thrive on the publicity. 'Who needs a reputation when you've got this many Twitter followers'.

Why is it a silly idea? Well, again it is only my opinion, but given we have google, manx.net, isleofman.com, miquando, the phone book, Facebook, friends and family, etc etc etc it seems like investing public money in an already over crowded market place. Again. But having never worked in radio, advertising, digital marketing or anything similar I wouldn't claim to be an expert.

No, the harp music was added. Just like the ridiculous pipe music was added to yesterday's piece on the tourism presentation. It seems to happen on every piece she does. Maybe it is the latest thing, maybe some people like it. I don't, and am just expressing that opinion. There's really no need to get quite so animated about it. If we were at school anyone would think you fancied her...

Must be a quiet week newswise. It's back to bash the 'Nations Station'. AND.....look who's back, the ex employee/failed job applicant, our good friend, with an always balanced and well measured argument....lets hear it for.....you know who you are! Yes sweetie, that's right... She did it again this morning - why did a perfectly straightforward piece about a lung disease organisation need ot have intrusive harp music played all over it? Why?

This online directory is clearly a silly idea, but I'd agree to them running with any time and money-wasting idea they like if they could just stop the woman who occasionally does reports on Mandate using music to introduce every single item she does. There was one yesterday about tourism, because someone had been over to give a talk about Facebook or something, and it started with a blare of bagpipes - or similar - for no reason at all. Manx Radio, please explain to her that we don't need to have a bed of music on every news item she does (and get her to do some research, prepare questions and listen to answers, you know, the basics) and we all forgive all the online directory, MR+, TT365 failures.

I'm pretty fed up with the girl who has been doing the business news on mandate this week. Is she on work experience or an intern? The subject matter tends to irrelevant, non-Isle of Man or simply dull and she insists on playing music at the start and end of each section, like that enhances it or something. If she's training, someone needs to give her some guidance.

I'm sure the Law Society has never had any negative opinions of the shiny new AG have they?

It is a puzzle. However, I was delighted to hear the IOM Law Society so wholeheartedly support the appointment of our new Attorney General. Glad to hear there are no concerns among that august body regarding the successful candidate's suitability.

Well it would be nice if they reimbursed those people who having seen the forecast a couple of days ago pre empted the Steam Packet announcement and changed their reservations with increased costs. They have - why not check the facts before spouting ill-informed bollocks?

Passengers are already hedging their bets and changing bookings but Dick Turpin (Steam Packet) is really ripping them off with excessive fees for a change. what is the fee?

Their purpose is to move people, vehicles and freight to and from the Island. They do that, therefore are fit for purpose. Idiot

Would that be in the middle of the Manx Grand Prix race week or, to put it another way, the second busiest period of the year for the ferries? Isn't it well understood that in any form of travel as availability reduces price increases?