Last week OnTheWight reported on the award-winning rail journalist who was snubbed by Isle of Wight MP Andrew Turner’s advisors.
In response to the article about how Phil Marsh had been treated, Nick Finney, the MP’s transport advisor, emailed him on Sunday copying in OnTheWight, CP, IWR and the MP, Andrew Turner in.
Nick’s email is reproduced in full below. Philip Marsh’s reply, which makes for interesting reading, will also be published. Ed
Dear Philip,
I have just seen a story published by onthewight about our meeting which was arranged for Thursday based on a number of inaccuracies and misrepresentations.
You know your request for a meeting with Andrew and myself arrived whilst I was away, When I returned, Carole (who was still on leave) telephoned you, and it was agreed that we (you and I) would meet on Wednesday or Thursday the following week, because you would be at your Isle of Wight home.You said (I was present) that your local knowledge was excellent because of your links to the Island. Carole told you that Andrew would be in Westminster, but you asked to meet me anyway saying a quote from Andrew could be added later. Carole offered the use of an office in the Riverside Centre. This was for your convenience because you said in your e-mail you would be on your houseboat in Odessa on Wednesday and Thursday, She said she looked forward to meeting you (a courtesy, as she would be in the Riverside building herself), and left her colleague, XXXX to make final arrangements with you. XXXX (responding to an e-mail you sent referring to meeting Carole and myself) assumed that Carole was included in the meeting.
Andrew’s office was then contacted by Simon Perry who said you had asked him to attend as you told him you lack local knowledge. This e-mail was forwarded to Andrew and me. In view of what you had said previously We thought this was strange, and also wondered why you had asked onthewight to attend rather than the County Press or Isle of Wight radio. Carole (at Andrew’s request) asked you why. Simon Perry then withdrew from attending the interview, as you apparently told him Carole was ‘very nervous’ about him attending. At no time did you consult me about the partisan involvement of one local media outlet. That in itself was discourteous at the least and unprofessional .
You did send some highly technical questions in advance, but as we were due to meet on Thursday they had not been answered in writing and probably wouldn’t have been answered. You said they were based on Andrew wanting Island Line to be outside the franchise (something he has never said). They were also premature given the fundamental need for an independent expert to be appointed by the Council and supported by the DfT.
When Jonathan Bacon announced on Wednesday that they had appointed Christopher Garnett to lead the review into the future of Island Line, Andrew and I decided that it would be inappropriate to Pre-empt the discussion and process which would now occur so I e-mailed you to postpone the meeting at 4.52pm, offering the possibility of meeting you at a later date.
You apparently did not pick up the e-mail and turned up for the meeting, When Carole heard this she telephoned you to apologise that you had been inconvenienced. You told her that the evening before your editor was ‘incandescent’ because the interview had been ‘bounced’, when she pointed out that you said you had not received the e-mail postponing the appointment, you became hectoring and rude (you described it as ‘harsh’). You have now apparently given an extremely distorted account of these events to Simon Parry of onthewight.
I am copying this to onthewight so they can correct their story and also to other local media. I will happily copy it to your ‘five editors’ if you give me their contact details.
Finally, as a volunteer adviser, with some experience of freelance journalists, I have to say that your whole approach seems to me to have been designed to denigrate the office of the IOW MP. You changed your approach, first demanding answers to detailed technical questions, many of which were irrelevant at this stage of events. Then you sent in a further demand that we be prepared to answer questions about location and ability to manufacture light rail units on the Island since that was the main point of the story.
Andrew Turner has tried for nearly a year to persuade the IOW Council to face up to the need for a strategy to improve transport connectivity for the Island.He has recognised the urgent need to modernise the Island line in light of the Government’s declared priorities. He has urged solutions to be explored which could improve passenger experience whilst closing the gap between costs and revenue. Christopher Garnett’s appointment is a game changer. Now we have a professional independent expert able to coordinate the wishes of islanders with practical recommendations and solutions.
There are a number of e-mails undermining your claims, two are below, Whether Andrew sees you or not is a matter for him, I will confine my contribution to the many other trade journalists i know whose approach is more believable.
Nicholas Finney
Article edit
The name of the secretary working in Andrew Turner’s office has been redacted from the article and comments. On reflection, it is not fair for her to be pulled into the discussion. Ed
See more on the Garnett Report.
