Health ministry takes a year to respond to FOI request
(CNS): The Ministry of Health and Wellness took more than a year to release a heavily redacted single email record in response to a freedom of information request by an individual seeking documents relating to a job application made to the Mosquito Research and Control Unit. Further delays in response to the Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) meant that it took almost two years from the date of the request to resolve the issues in dispute.
The ministry’s refusal to release most of the information the applicant wanted was upheld by the OMB during the appeal on the basis that disclosure of the responsive email would cause prejudice to the ministry as the document contained confidential discussions of opinions during a recruitment process, and the concerns of civil servants.
But the OMB found that more information which related directly to the applicant’s personal details should have been released under the Data Protection Act.
“Although the appeal under the FOI Act was ultimately unsuccessful, the law recognises that applicants still have the right to access their own personal data,” Ombudsman Sharon Roulstone said about the appeal. “This includes the opinions and views of others about him, but not information that is focused on the recruitment process, rather than the applicant.”
Unlike records released under the FOI Act, which can be made public, personal data disclosed under the DPA is only given to the applicant.
The Ombudsman also noted that as well as “the significant, unjustified delays” incurred by the ministry in responding to the applicant and to the OMB during the appeal, the ministry, which has the burden of proof, chose not to make submissions for the hearing, eventually clarifying that it would rely on previous emails.
The OMB also found that the ministry had not always properly applied the law during the process of this very lengthy request.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: Government oversight, Politics
#worldclassmyass
😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂
At least they responded to that one. I’m still waiting for a response for the one I submitted more than two years ago to a government department. When I called to speak to the FOI person in the department, she asks me “what do you want that information for?” and got irritated when I wouldn’t tell her. I could have raised a stink, but 2 months later the information was useless to me. #world class my ass.
Same. My previous FOIs were all sucked past the event horizon into the nothingness of space. Even after emails that confirm receipt of FOI. There is determined opposition to truth-telling in the civil service.
FOI has become a box-ticking hoax that is intended to show how transparent and progressive the Cayman Islands Government is. The civil service didn’t buy into it, so it did what Cayman’s civil service always does when it doesn’t like something – refuse to comply. Since there is never any repercussions for non-compliance (except for suspension with full pay that could last for years) there’s no incentive for civil servants to do something they don’t like to do (and that includes answering those annoying telephones). The fact that people like Franz continue to suggest that Cayman’s civil service is #worldclass is nothing more than an ironic punchline to a bad joke.
the cig is the biggest lawbreaker in cayman and the one thing they’re all good at is shutting up and doing nothing
Must have a bad bite because the mozzies are terrible
Wow!!! Luck you – one (1) year!!!. Five (5) years gone now, I asked FOI 16 questions. Got a lame excuse only!
No man, this is a serious problem with MRCU.
I am a generational Caymanian with a scientific degree and research experience. I applied for two positions within MRCU that I was more than qualified for, and have years of real-world working experience. I’m not a freshman straight out of uni.
I didn’t even get an interview!! Straight up no?!
I got hired elsewhere as a civil servant, so this isn’t a general government thing. I’d sign my name, but you know how it goes as a ciwil serwant.
A qualified Caymanian, not hired by Generational Caymanians.. How sad.
I am not surprised a year ago the Ministry was still working on keeping us safe from covid.
Lol
And you are still here. They did their job whether you will acknowledge it or not. Give credit where it is deserved.
I have heard Franz unfairly criticized for many things; however, his continued refusal to do anything about this inept Chief Officer is a legitimate indictment for his lack of effective leadership. How many more failures, how many more black eyes before she is finally put in the SRIU with the other bunch?
8:46 You are joining the club of unfair criticism.
what reason did the Ministry give for the delay?
never take a position on a matter without the facts.
leave our DG alone.
no one should be crucified based on a headline or finding by any oversight body until there is a full investigation.
Obviously the Ministry took a year to deal with this FOI request. However do we know why?
we are took quick to crucify without knowing all the facts.
I can guarantee you that our DG won’t make that stupid mistake.
Let me guess, probably take another year uncovering the facts as to why this happened, and then another year on garden leave while he ponders what to do with the information.
This is not an isolated incident of failing to timely deal with issues, just look at the headlines concerning this Ministry since the Chief Officer took the helm, are all these stories false? When was the last time you read a story about Wes Howell or Gloria McField-Nixon? These are admirable Chief Officers who show up daily and do their jobs. The public knows who is who, and are sick and tired of this “soon come” mentality.
Gloria “admirable Chief Officer”? Say wha’?
The Ombudsman’s full investigation report, referring often to “significant, unjustified delays”, is available on their website if you wish to see it: https://ombudsman.ky/images/pdf/decisions/FOI_Decisions/Hearing%2096-202100364.pdf
“The OMB also found that the ministry had not always properly applied the law during the process”
Ministry within the Civil Service acting outside the law is probably the most concerning aspect of this.
So many instances of disregard for the law, people, human rights plus all the general bad-mindery in this country which advertises itself as some premiere jurisdiction.
When such actors wish to do you harm they can dig up every single legal crevice and apply it to destroy you though, together with their band of cronies while giving out golden handshakes, golden parachutes and all kinds of other unwarranted benefits/perks to keep their enterprise going – which by the way, disproportionately affects poor people, especially poor Caymanians, owing to the tax regime in Cayman. The poor are taxed more than the rich… if that doesn’t indicate what this country thinks about its people then nothing will.
What do I mean? OK – hypothetically – a gallon of milk costs $10. In that $10 is $3 tax (here, called import duty). The poor person has $100. They have spent 3% of their money on tax for that milk. The rich person buys the same milk, but has $1,000, they have spent 0.3% of their money on the tax for that milk. Now, this applies to (almost) everything that is purchased in Cayman.
It is economic genocide.
It’s interesting when you see the children of the “crew” getting jobs and positions they have no business having – square pegs in round holes to put it lightly. Their parents are designating other people “unfit” with “behavioural issues” while their offspring are the worst offenders – but are well protected.
Any qualified (this is a key word and I use it to refer to education/experience only) Caymanian who applies for a job who doesn’t get it should be required to have written reasons for that decision, signed by an officer of the entity – both public and private sector – as per law. A lot of situations such as this would fall away.
Not referring to any entity/person/thing specifically but if the shoe fits…
Anyone that raises their head above the parapet and voices their concerns are victimised and subjected to punitive action.
It’s a racket that’s endemic throughout government with the emphasis on punishing and silencing anyone rocking the boat and covering up and protecting toxic and/ corrupt or incompetent managers.
On another note. Is the Minister going to sit back and allow the HSA to continue to be overun by one nationality? Also need to weed out their bad Managers so that they can retain other nationalities on staff.
Except that milk is duty free (no $3 tax in your $10 gallon of milk).
This is where your analysis breaks down. Cayman’s duty system has a number of exemptions for ‘staple goods’, like milk. So its the equivalent of a ‘progressive’ tax system. – We can have a lively debate on the comparative effectiveness and regressiveness of various tax/duty systems, but that’s different from your disproved assertion that the CI duty system is inherently regressive by its very nature.
Um, hence the “hypothetical”. Fine, change it to a packet of chicken, or a gallon of gas, or a pair of jeans pants. If none of those work then go through the entire duty schedule and pick whichever item you wish, the result is the same.
Nice try though, there is no way around the fact that the tax system disproportionately affects lower earners. It is the exact opposite of advanced economies where higher earners pay more of their earnings in tax.
And, if we expand your analysis to incorporate your assertions on “staple goods” that also supports the argument that the tax affects lower earners disproportionately – so by your fallacy I can also conclude that you think poor caymanians are only deserving of staple goods?
You know, there is a very significant word to describe what is covertly happening in Cayman.
“apartheid”
No, the 3% was the clearly hypothetical part (for example and easy calculation purposes), not the tax upon what (poor) people are buying. As said, we can argue about the effectiveness, but whether you tax what people spend, or what people earn, you are taking their money and one is not more regressive by nature than the other. Otherwise the earnings taxes would not have carve outs at the bottom, just as Cayman’s spending tax does.
And if you think that higher earners automatically pay more in taxes than low earners, in advanced economies, then you aren’t paying attention to all of the legal tax avoidance that occurs in those advanced economies where, in the end, the middle earners pays more (relatively) than a well structured high earner. (And of course the low earners are by the tax structure exempt in some form.) Whatever the tax system the economic burden disproportionately falls upon the poor, that is the social problem.
I did note your qualifier that higher earners pay more of their earnings in taxes, but paying a bit more of your earnings is meaningless when the relative tax burden limits the low and middle earners to only being able to afford basic goods. Just like a consumption based tax system assumes with the exemption of basic goods.
And as for your conclusion that I am suggesting poor Caymanians should only be able to afford (deserve) staple goods that is as weak a straw argument as if I were to conclude you are suggesting that poor people in advanced economies are able to afford caviar simply because the state is not taxing their earnings as heavily as it taxes the people who do brunch on caviar.
Neither of those systems are apartheid (until we reintroduce debtors prisons) and we do the real oppression of apartheid and similar a disservice by suggesting our social imbalances are as bad as theirs was. Yes we do have social imbalances. But the tax structure is neither the source of the problem nor the solution. For if it were there wouldn’t be the same discussion occurring in all of those advanced economies with progressive earnings taxes.
Way to lose the forest to focus on a tree.
Firstly, the whole staple goods listing is rather outdated and certainly doesn’t cover a comprehensively nutritious diet, let alone other actual necessities.
Secondly, consumption based taxation will always be regressive in impact by the simple nature of increased discretionary income as income rises.
Having a handful of duty-free goods that were once considered staple (also, who is buying lard these days?) will in no reasonable view transition our duty system into the equivalency of a progressive tax.
No argument that the staple goods list needs review. We can absolutely have a productive discussion about the details. But taxing expenditure (a value added tax, or sales tax, if you prefer) is not regressive by the simple nature of increased discretionary income as income rises. By that logic every tax system is regressive since the citizens have increasing discretionary income as income rises regardless of how much the state takes off the top. (Until we get to a communist fully controlled economic model of course, where we tax everyone back to the same net income level so there is no increase in discretionary income as income rises.)
If all I can afford is milk and bread and corned beef there is no functional difference if that is because the state taxed all other foods but them (sales tax) or the state did not tax me because that was all I could afford (income tax).
Nor will the tax system affect how much discretionary income I have left in the grocery store after my non-discretionary food budget is spent. (In the income tax system I got left enough money only to buy the staples, in the consumption tax system I have only enough money to buy the staples because the rest is taxed out of my income.) What affects my amount of discretionary income is my level of income above my expenses or for our sakes above the poverty line, the line below which you are subsisting on staples and above which you have the discretion to buy something else as well. A progressive tax system, regardless of whether it is a consumption or an earnings tax, targets itself at citizens above the poverty line and exempts the ones below. A regressive one would have no carve-out.
You might try to argue that Cayman’s import duties have only two categories free & taxed, so are minimally progressive. (No argument from me there.) Compared to places with more levels to their income tax. But most places usually break it down to three or four categories, not many more, for practical purposes. Which could be done with a scaled consumption tax, i.e., more levels to the import duty. But that’s implementation details. Disproving that one is inherently progressive and the other inherently regressive.
Milk is duty free.
https://online.gov.ky/cols/faces/colshtc – search for HTC code 0401
Another world class coverup by the heads of our civil service.
There needs to be a root and branch review of the recruitment process within civil service. Too many examples of nepotism with people being recruited who’s only qualification are that they’re the friends or relatives of the manager.
Where is the transparency in how public funds are spent employing the people and how do we stop the abuse?
Its a huge problem and it needs to be addressed before the effects spiral out of control.
Good to see he speeding up his process then ?
The MRCU is a s*#! Show. Just look at their planes for one, one pilot, no management and disgruntled work force. The Chief Officer has not a clue
Dr You know who campaigned for years to get rid of first Petrie then the American guy and now he’s the boss he’s realizing things are not as simple as he thought.