“These requirements demonstrated that our approaches to the role would differ and I felt the Deputy was not taking into account the wide-ranging responsibilities that arise from working within government."
Doesn't this sound assured and statesmanlike? It is wonderful how, as George Orwell noted, political language can actually say the reverse of what is meant.
Bailiwick Express notes:
Among his requests, which were described as "unusual" by the Health Minister, was confirmation that the Government would publish up-to-date minutes from its scientific advisers meetings on covid in line with a proposition he successfully pushed through the States Assembly in summer, but was not fully enacted.
And Kevin's own email (now published) has this at the forefront:
"As I mentioned to you and the Chief Minister failure to fully respond to my proposition and fully produce the STAC minutes with the issues around communication, which I also spoke to in my VONC speech is unacceptable. This has to be the first issue I have to try rectify. If this is going to cause an issue I would understand but I have to follow this up."
"My final option which I have considered is bringing the proposition back the assembly. I feel so strongly about being transparent especially with communication and if I can bring that change ASAP then this is a move I can fully justify and agree to."
Translation of Health Minister: You must accept the fact that you would be effectively gagged from raising such issues. And we are not going to publish the minutes. And when we use the term "wide ranging" it actually means "narrow ranging".
Small wonder that while the Vote of No Confidence was won in the Chamber, outside confidence is still ebbing in the shambles that passes for decision making. An example is mask wearing.
The law on compulsory wearing of masks is in place... It’s just not active yet! Never put off to tomorrow what you can put off to next week seems o be how the Health Minister operates. And he was saying... If you refuse to wear a mask, you can be fined. If you say you are exempt on medical grounds – no proof needed at present – this will be sufficient as otherwise it would be a breach of privacy about your medical history.
I couldn’t believe what I was hearing! That’s like exemptions on seat belt legislation which means if you are stopped by the policy, you just say "I have a medical exemption.... but I don't need to show you! That law doesn't work like that and neither should mask wearing! Totally bonkers!
Your doctor may say you don’t have to wear a seat belt for a medical reason. They’ll give you a ‘Certificate of Exemption from Compulsory Seat Belt Wearing’. You must: (1) keep this in your vehicle (2) show it to the police if you’re stopped.