Chinahand Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Is there a general list anywhere of MHks email addresses? I've never found one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 I got them Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Toytown politics. Public confidence for the next term, ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 What so disgusts me about this is that there is no choice for us to even comment on. I think it is an incredible surrender by the other candidates. Democracy in action my arse: back room deals and back scratching. Is this what we are reduced to. Its pathetic. This way everyone can be mates with Tony; no opposition candidates; no one having to risk putting an alternative opinion. I don't get why people are so angry. Nobody professed to want Rodan, Shimmin or Cannan - that happens and then people call it a fix that Brown gets the vote. You also claim this is not democracy in action but if you take the IOMOnline Poll it clearly is a "none off the above" who 60% of respondents actually voted for are getting the vote. What we are seeing is electronic demumocracy at its best. Did anyone see the article in the Times today:- http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,21...2488760,00.html If you organise these bullshit polls to test public sentiment, bullshit results is what you get. All they are trying to do - badly - is keep us happy by doing what they think we want. And its backfiring ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 IMO, Tynwald was held to ransom by eleven members who refused to vote for the candidares who were brave enough to stand for election - probably the same ones who were so eagerly urging us all to use our votes in the General Election in the interests of 'democracy'! That, apart from anything else, makes them utter hypocrites! What is worse, however, is that they have managed to get their own way. Although twenty members voted for the candidates on offer, a group of eleven decided who our Chief Minister should be. Just explain to me, if you can, how this is, as Geoff Corkish claims, "democracy in action". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 Disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john shimmin Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Dear Chinahand, Thanks for the gauntlet, happy to pick it up. I always said publicly that I would allow my name to go forward, as there were realistically a limited number of candidates likely to be electable by the Members of Tynwald. I never assumed or expected to be elected, however I have strong views on how I see the Island has to change in order to address some difficult times ahead and felt it appropriate to put these views up for consideration. The electorate of the Island selected 24 MHK's and I had no idea whether the previous or new Members would agree with my view of the future. When the Members received my statement I was available to all to discuss my views and some took that opportunity. I am aware that a number of my colleagues are very hostile to my opinion and I would never expect their support - especially when some of my policies were quite contentious. I also know that as I was not prepared to guarantee anyone a position should I be elected (other than my commitment to stability by maintaining Bell and Gawne in Treasury and DAFF, which was a decision not discussed prior to it appearing in my statement - remember Gawne was Rodan's proposer). It was evident early on that there was a view that Mr Brown was a stronger candidate and I am sure conversations to this effect were taking place prior to Tuesdays vote. This explains the initial spoilt papers as some Members wanted 'None of the above', added to Mr Cannans supporters who evidently also fell into this camp. Not really a surprise in political circles. In order to lead a Government you require a degree of support, trust and confidence. Only seven Members of Tynwald expressed their support for me in the first ballot and therefore indicating a first preference for my vision. There is no credibility or mandate in such a low vote therefore I chose not to stand again. It is conceivable that were I to have stood I would have picked up more votes than the 12 I received in the final ballot, but I was not prepared to compromise myself or do deals to engender extra support. I am content with having allowed the House to assess my ability and vote accordingly. I believe anyone with such modest initial support would be damaged in credibility from their first day of office and I do not believe it would have been good for the Island (or myself) to be in such a position. In regard to the next stage, that was a matter for all other Members to consider if they believed they had the experience and support to be put forward- the fact that only Mr Brown has come forward would indicate that there is a lack of depth of suitable candidates at this time. I apologise to the forum for such a lengthy response, but do feel my decision needed some clarification. Regards, John PS For those doubting Thomas' out there I have had absolutely no contact with Mr Brown before or after making my decision and I have not been involved in any deals of any description. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccm Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Top marks to John Shimmin for coming on here and replying. Respect. Now what about David Cannan's suggestion the CM should be elected by the public? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addie Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Well, what a good reply from John Shimmin. You were up front and transparent throughout the general election. I admire that. Maybe other politicians are fearful of that approach? Who can tell. The whole selection process of the Chief Minister is a disgrace. Time for the end to secret ballots, spoiled papers and transparent electronic voting. Good luck to you John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 I would have had more respect for John if he had fought all the way. There's an obvious lesson in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 Thanks for taking the time to post John. And, as Addie said - good luck. Crawler! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I would have had more respect for John if he had fought all the way. There's an obvious lesson in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 And if he had lost with only 7 or 8 votes he would have been castigated by some for carrying on when he had little chance of winning. Would they have also questioned his decision making and judgement on the basis that "surely he knew how the wind was blowing in which case why did he stand, or if he did not know then surely that is a reflection on his lack of judgement" Either way the politicians are at times damned if the do and damned if they don't. I would have liked to see an election but I also agree with Shimmin and Roden that having tried and failed to get elected then if they did not have a suitable level of support there was no point in flogging a dead horse. Presumably they have a much better feeling of the level of support behind the scenes. If the vast majority are in favour of Brown then whether we the public believe he is the best choice the quicker it is done the better. What I personally will be peeved off at is if there are again a large number of spoilt papers especially if they are the same people who spoilt the first time round. I appreciate we will never know but if your are not happy to vote for any of those standing then they should have got off their backside and stood themselves. I get the feeling that some MHK's would prefer not to have to vote then they can always carp from the sidelines and say well at the end of the day I did not vote for him I would have had more respect for John if he had fought all the way. There's an obvious lesson in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ushtey Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 As disappointed as I am in the way this issue seems to have resolved itself, I have to give John Shimmin credit for giving an honest and public response. It would be nice to hear from some of the other candidates and MHKs who voted/spoiled papers. Personally I am disappointed he didn't stick it through, but that's because I think he would have done a good job in a diffcult five year period. More important than the CM though is the Council around him, I hope it's up to the task. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 People do great things by focusing on their possibilities, not by dwelling on their limitations. Henry Kissinger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.