Is it too much to expect ministers to be in charge and accountable? This is the question posed by a letter writer in The Examiner. At last this is being questioned publicly within mainstream. Of course, I doubt that IOM Newspapers will be clamouring to investigate the matter but it is encouraging to see that this issue is receiving attention.

The lengthy letter (I would include the writer’s name but he might not appreciate forever appearing on Google searches) lays out the writer’s insights into child protection on the island. That is to say it happens on the island but:

The island’s child protection guidance and instructions now reach our frontline social workers from a UK website. This website has become the only authentic source for the correct behaviour when dealing with children at risk or perceived to have a welfare concern.

Yes, folks this is democracy today. You vote for a puppet it seems. The writer asks when ministers will seize back control and adds ‘ Is it too much to expect ministers to be in charge and accountable?’.

The letter is well worth reading (not that I particularly wish to boost the sales of an otherwise weak and watery publication). The writer details the extent to which civil servants have taken over and how ministers are left with little influence on affairs.

Prior to Chris Robertshaw’s re-election he spoke out publicly about the state of affairs in government and how he had observed a “copy and paste from UK legislation” method of work. Now it seems his hands are tied. But is he also gagged? It is quite obvious that ministers are ‘advised” by civil servants. (And I have heard it stated that some ministers don’t like to take on the risk of litigation if they ignore advice) Why don’t they speak out and tell the public how things really function in the IOM Government? Could it be because they wish to retain their position and pension?

Please consider this: If our ministers are not in control and if we have imported social workers who follow instructions from a UK website provided by unelected and unanswerable persons in the UK then how far down the road are we? Far too far. Worse still, how many of these are Common Purpose graduates? If ministers are little more than puppets then we need to get our hands on the strings and rein them in. Exactly when and how did we lose control of our right to self-government?



  1. A recent comment on Manx Forums also speculates at CP presence in government. However, this suggestion was demolished by the usual contributors. Without FOI it is difficult to obtain information about money spent on courses or whether we have cp graduates in government. Perhaps we should ask the head of the civil service commission, who has recently supplied answers in Tynwald about the civil service and who also mentioned TRAINING, as I recall.

  2. Here is a video showing evidence of collusion between apparently independent sources. Even as a kid when I copied homework I changed things a bit – enough to make it my own. These guys did not bother.

    It suggests politicians just read the script they are given and this is true the world over. Even in the Isle of Man there does seem to be mounting evidence that only a very small amount of our legislation is genuinely home grown.

    Martyn Quayle was given the job of fronting “child protection” legislation and goofed and paid for it with his seat but the implementation has continued anyway as if his being there or not there does not make any difference.

    If the politicians are irrelevent then lobbying them to change things is also irrelevent.

    What is relevant is who is really pulling the strings?

  3. The problem is a large amount of questions about CP on these websites is that CP members try to pour conspiracy theory on any comments, and call anyone asking those questions, nutters or right wing europhiles, and those who have no idea what is really happening, the truth will get out eventually, I am neither a nutter or europhile, cant get into politics as they are almost all more interested in power and money and their own situation rather than caring about their constituents. As I have said publicly, politicians are allowing quango’s and some civil servants to get to make secondary legislation which avoids detailed scrutiny of major changes in our daily life.

  4. Daniel the answer is the bankers by using over regulation ( to protect the public) Hector Sants Is the perfect example, regulator turned poacher for a job with bankers Barclays for £3.5 million a year. He has been the CEO of the FSA SINCE 2005 and right through all the so called credit crunch. He also got a knighthood in this years awards.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s