LoneWolf Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 I see something of a circular argument here; the politicians (i.e. the standing members) got in through the votes of the electorate, the candidates came from and were nominated by the electorate - so who is to blame for apathy? You need to read up on Marx if you really want that question answered Gladys. maybe you would be better advised to ask "whose interests does apathy serve?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 So we're now only a few hours from polls opening, the campainging is pretty much over, so what would you change about the build up and procedures of elections on the Island? Some decent candidates in onchan who can be arsed to actually go out and meet people. Personally, I would like to see all the candidates be given a maximum size for manifestos, all delivered to the post office by 12 noon on the same date and then all posted out together. Yeah, fuck freedom of speech eh mate? Lay down the law on manifestos! p.s. the first suggestion might mean I don't have to rely on my neighbours supplying me with copies of manifestos for those two candidates who childishly decided not to send me or my family a copy of theirs even though mine had already been published and posted. Cos you're a likely voter for your opposition right? Doesn't seem childish to me, seems perfectly sensible. Are you going to be a nob like this if you get elected? This is what politics is, you going to cry about it every time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Make 'Manx Studies' a compulsory subject in schools (one lesson per week) from year 7 onwards - including local history and the development and working of the political system. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinnieK Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Personally, I would like to see all the candidates be given a maximum size for manifestos, all delivered to the post office by 12 noon on the same date and then all posted out together. Yeah, fuck freedom of speech eh mate? Lay down the law on manifestos! Invoking free speech to rail against a purely procedural idea is a bit over the top. How is that idea a limitation of free speech? The doctrine of free speech refers to the content of what's being said and a person's right to say it, and the above idea doesn't restrict that, it merely coordinates the delivery of manifestos to the electorate. It could be argued that a maximum size on manifestos might restrict a candidate with a particularly comprehensive one, but this depends on the limit the restriction places on them. Secondly, such a candidate could easily issue a separate policy document that they themselves deliver separately of the manifesto that goes into the issues they're concerned about in more depth. *Edited to correct a confusing and sinister typo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 I would have liked to change my apathy. Not my apathy toward voting - that's a given, and probably permanent. I'd like to have changed my apathy to my idea of putting my own election signs up saying "Don't vote, get drunk instead". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
When Skies Are Grey Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 I think those elected should be given an annual review, like the majority of us in employment, to guage how well they have actually done against their electioneering promises. This shoud be measured in an agreed statistical way and the outcome then publically recorded and disseminated. Also agree to the "none of the above" box on the ballot paper. Not sure if this already happens but the number of "none of the above" votes should also be declared with the candidates figures. At least that way you can see whether they got in because of true popularity or the fact that they were the best of a bad bunch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teapot Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 And why were we sent voting forms in the post, only to be told on Manx Radio that we don't need them to vote?! Because it keeps someone, somewhere in a job!! Didn't the schools use to get the day off for the election because all the polling stations were in school. I'd bring that back - perhaps a holiday for everyone on the election day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teapot Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 I think those elected should be given an annual review, like the majority of us in employment, to guage how well they have actually done against their electioneering promises. This shoud be measured in an agreed statistical way and the outcome then publically recorded and disseminated. Also agree to the "none of the above" box on the ballot paper. Not sure if this already happens but the number of "none of the above" votes should also be declared with the candidates figures. At least that way you can see whether they got in because of true popularity or the fact that they were the best of a bad bunch! Both excellent ideas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teapot Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 I know what i would change. I think the MHK's should only be able to hold office for 2 terms, i am sick of the career politics on the island its a way of keep the keys fresh. The 16 year old voters i think is a bad idea most are too busy getting p*ssed to care. Totally agree with this suggestion! The way it is at the moment they could dispense with public meetings and manifestos and just send out a CV a week before the election, they're just applying for a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombay Bad Boy Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 what would you change about the build up and procedures of elections on the Island? I'd like to see the results determined by either a. a series of intense Dance, Dance Revoltion faceoffs; or b. a monkey in a white suit rolling dice to determine the outcome of the election. Rap Battles. working of the political system The political system works? Oh well, what're we all complaining about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lectro Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Given the size of the island - the population of a small to medium UK town, I think there are far too many wards and far too many MHKs. Plus I think it's stupid that I'm restricted to vote for the few candidates who are in my ward - I'm not going to vote for any of them as the choice is awful. I would however vote for other candidates who are representing other wards. As mentioned before, a proper televised debate at the Villa over a few nights to be shown on the BBC (we pay our licences and we have to suffer the UK party politics so give us an hour at midnight). All candidates must attend. All candidates to give full disclosure of business interests. All current MHKs are required to list what they've actually done (positives and negatives) during the previous 5 years. The 16 year old vote - It was good to try something new but it obviously doesn't work. Mandatory voting. While I feel a bit uneasy about this (I don't like to be told what to do) I think that it should be introduced. It could be rolled out in conjunction with the census every 5 years. There should be as mentioned by others an option to vote for "none of the above" - but your vote should be cast. Rather than have a polling day - have it over a week so that people who have to go away on business at short notice can still vote. It doesn't need to be at manned polling stations - use the Post Offices and banks. Present your ID, sign for your voting slip, place your vote in the sealed box, get your cash out, pay a bill and off you go. Ban all those roadside "vote for me please so I can have a job" signs. They're unsightly and uninformative. Here's a question - has a MHK ever been sacked? Aside from Corkhill who reluctantly resigned as Chief Minister but continued in his MHK job has anyone else fallen on their sword because of their poor performance as an MHK. God knows a lot of them should have. Another question. Is there an independent body that review the actions and performance of the MHKs? Well there should be. All of us in our working lives are subject to performance reviews and assessments and we're accountable for the quality of our work... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave the Cardboard Box Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 I'd like to see the results determined by a monkey in a white suit rolling dice to determine the outcome of the election. So you too have discovered who God really is? I thought I was the only one he revealed himself to. Nice suit though.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempus Fugit Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 what I would like to see is government which isn't restrictive in nature, 'can't do this, can't do that', how about really making it 'freedom to flourish' and say 'you can do this, can do that' MHK's need to change, in that they are elected to represent the voters who put them there, but when they become MHKs they suddenly change (after their newby brainwashing session) and say we're not here to pander to the electorate (as I believe was said at one election meeting), we're here to govern them (turncoats) and you have to wait 5 years to get rid of them, and some of them come back for more as if nothing has happened MHKs with entrenched attitudes are useless, they will not take up valid complaints from constituents, they just defend the establishment. also, no MLC's as ministers MHKs not to be just spokespersons for public servant chief executives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Here's a question - has a MHK ever been sacked? Who would sack them? They're elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Invoking free speech to rail against a purely procedural idea is a bit over the top. How is that idea a limitation of free speech? Limiting a manifesto's size is a serious limitation of free speech. This isn't a procedural issue, a candidate does not have to produce a manifesto at all. He can stand in strand street and bellow his policies if he likes. You can't regulate this stuff. The doctrine of free speech refers to the content of what's being said and a person's right to say it, and the above idea doesn't restrict that, it merely coordinates the delivery of manifestos to the electorate. Not if a candidate has more to say than Babbs proposed minimum manifesto size. It could be argued that a maximum size on manifestos might restrict a candidate with a particularly comprehensive one, but this depends on the limit the restriction places on them. Secondly, such a candidate could easily issue a separate policy document that they themselves deliver separately of the manifesto that goes into the issues they're concerned about in more death. Er, whats the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.