Resignations From Liberal Vannin

[Lost Login]

I don't know if I am an arsehole or a half-wit. Never mind, I am a member of LV and have read ther constitutiion on the website. It clearly states the executive will serve for three years and then be elected at conference.

 

Tthe constiution on the web site says they the members of the NEC will be elected for a term not exceeding 3 years. As written the term can therefore be any period up to 3 years rather it is a fixed 3 year term. This does not answer the question which is whether they were elected per the constitution.

 

instead, the executive have three years in this embryonic organisation to prove their worth as well as do the hard work of sorting out the business side of things and gather info and experience to ensure a successful party. Only once that is done will their success or otherwise, be judged by the membership in an open election. Some people weren't happy and felt unable to accept that constitutional position and decided to leave the party. That is their right and privilege.

 

That to me is damning in that if a political party requires three years to sort out the business side of things etc etc what on earth is it doing trying to seek support, votes, funding etc. Get yourself sorted out as a political party first and then go for the support of the electorate not the other way around as otherwise what the hell are electorate voting for apart from an ego trip for PK and his coronies.

[Skeddan]

Which brings me back to the point as to why these people and Bill Malarkey left LV. If they are so smart why couldn't they effect change within the party?

I think Lost Login's post explains that, and also perhaps explains the frustrations. You can't effect change within a party if the executive is entrenched. You can only leave.

 

The point you raise though could be re-stated: when they left, why didn't they form a new party? (e.g. like the Social Democrats split from Labour - later to join with Liberals).

 

However with numbers to make a successful split, and leaving PK rather lonely, one does have to wonder why change could not have been brought about. Leaving the party to go independent is no real threat. Setting up an alternative to LV is. That would have provided leverage to be able to effect change, with PK still leading, but not directing.

 

Without knowing details, it strikes me that no one in this was a particularly shrewd political operator, nor does anyone come out of it looking very good. Maybe that is part of the 'experience gathering'? (Being able to hold a party together is pretty essential skill for a political party - and looks like none of the top people had this).

[Pat Ayres]

May I just say, I have never met this person before in my life.

[manxman8180]

From an outsiders point of view, following the resignations today, the comments of Babb this morning and ultimately having a look at their website, it just looks like the whole thing has ran out of steam.

 

No recent updates or press releases, only one since February. Even the what's on page has events from May and June. I've no doubt it will flare up again ahead of our next General Election, but it won't have made any ground. People will still use it use the PK 'ticket'.

 

Although, PK hardly makes for an inspirational leader. Community MHK, of course, he'll stand up and say whatevere he has heard down the pub.

 

Give a blind man a gatling gun and he would stand a chance of hitting someone in a crowd. But he'll still be blind. What we need is politicians with the sense to see the solution, rather than just finding fault.

[Albert Tatlock]

No recent updates or press releases, only one since February.

I thought they had a poetry reading in Laxey in Sept, or was that from last year?

 

Anyhoo, here's my first entry:

 

There once was a group 'Liberal Vannin',

That lived on the Isle of Mannanin,

They met once for a week,

But fell deep in shit creek,

Now there's hardly a woman or man in.

[Declan]

Peter threw a party

but Bill had enough of that Malarky

and the Lib-Babb pact

is no longer en tact

all commissioners went home

and now Peter's on his own

[Skeddan]

What we need is politicians with the sense to see the solution, rather than just finding fault.

No doubt about that. But to get that, something needs to change. What?

 

OK, so the calibre of politicians needs to be better. What do you see as the solution?

 

• Raise salaries so attract top talent? - golden handshakes, bonuses, seven digit salaries?
  
• Change the rules as to who is eligible to run to widen the net?
  
• Have a cabinet appointed by the Chief Minister and subject to scrutiny and fault finding by legislature US style?
  
• Have talent scout and auditions for 'Tynwald Idol' - with contestants making it to finals put through training programme?
  
• Make politics more desirable for those want to attract? (e.g less unfair criticism and personal attacks)
  
• Have party system to help them get elected rather than depending on being a 'man of the people'?
  
• Mentoring, knowledge and skills transfer?
  
• Network building?
  
• Exchanges and secondments – short term attachment for improving working practices?
  
• Targeted conferences and seminars? – bringing in international experts in areas - e.g agroeconomics
  
• Public and civil society projects aimed at capability building at grassroots level?
  
• Educational programmes in schools covering critical thinking, 'citizenship' politics, law, management science, history?
  
• Investing in expert advice and ensuring skills and knowledge transfer?
  
• More opportunities to develop experience to progress to political career? - changing the pathways to Tynwald
  
• Mentoring and development at early stages of political career?
  
• Start to develop a culture which seeks constructive solutions rather than just finding fault?
  
• Less blamestorming, more brainstorming?
  
• and so on and so on....
  

Stick your neck out - make 'maverick suggestions'. What have you got in mind?

[sarahc]

I don't know if I am an arsehole or a half-wit. Never mind, I am a member of LV and have read ther constitutiion on the website. It clearly states the executive will serve for three years and then be elected at conference. To do otherwise would leave the party open to abuse by a member using their group of friends to be elected to a position of power and possible corruptly use that position to reward their friends by treating them somehow, ( normal politics for the IOM) instead, the executive have three years in this embryonic organisation to prove their worth as well as do the hard work of sorting out the business side of things and gather info and experience to ensure a successful party. Only once that is done will their success or otherwise, be judged by the membership in an open election. Some people weren't happy and felt unable to accept that constitutional position and decided to leave the party. That is their right and privilege.

The question to me is whether they will stand for election as independants now and will they repay the loan they sought and received from the party to fund their election?

 

On a funnier note, the question put during the debate on radio, "will they become the Malarkey Party?" priceless.

 

 

So who are the shadowy financial backers?

[Albert Tatlock]

I am a member of LV and have read ther constitutiion on the website. It clearly states the executive will serve for three years and then be elected at conference.

3 years is far too long to wait for a formal election, IMO, it turns what is supposedly a 'constitution' into what is effectively a 'memorandum of understanding' that those setting up the party can run it their way for the first three years. Internal elections should have been held in the first year. That approach sounds pretty illiberal and undemocratic to me - especially when the party is supposedly out to attract talent.

 

I don't pretend to understand what is going on within the party, but I heard the comment 'unelected executive' on the radio. Manouvering those against you out of the party, whilst refusing them an internal election to effectively determine the direction of the party, is the remit of banana republics.

 

Higher calibre people will simply be discouraged from joining through all of this, and so I predict the party will die on it's feet soon and be only a party in name, and certainly won't grow - unless they get things sorted out, but I think things have probably gone too far and too public already for that.

 

To me, it's all analgous to Dennis Skinner running the labour party. I can understand the frustration if people have to wait 3 years to attempt to enact change, but there again maybe the likes of Steve Babb et al should have tried harder and considered the quote: “To succeed inside a political party, one must cultivate an ability to sit still and remain polite while foolish people speak nonsense” (Blackwell).

[Lost Login]

3 years is far too long to wait for a formal election, IMO, it turns what is supposedly a 'constitution' into what is effectively

. I can understand the frustration if people have to wait 3 years to attempt to enact change,

 

What hits me is that it appears to be approximately 3 years from now before an election as from what I have read it is intended to be in 2011. Since the part was founded in 2006, even allowing for an appointed executive not being in place to post election etc then we are probably looking at an unelected executive in place for between 4 & 5 years depending on when any election is held.

 

For a party that is led by an individual who continually calls for openness, accounatability, a fully elected Government etc it seems odd that the party is the exact opposite of what that individual calls for in respect of the government

[Pat Ayres]

Party started in 2006, elections for the executive in 2009 at the latest.

[sarahc]

Party started in 2006, elections for the executive in 2009 at the latest.

 

So who are the financial backers?

[Pat Ayres]

Request this from the website.

[John Wright]

3 pages of nothing

 

Who has resigned? then we might be able to coment usefully, sensibly?

 

There was no party egm or agm to adopt the constitution posted to the site, standing candidates had to agree to abide by it

 

Like wsie on policies

 

2 years after the election and no agm or egm or conference in any recogniseable form, hardly surprising there is drift and dissatisfaction

[Pat Ayres]

Must bite my tongue and not mentiion *****.

There are e-mail addresses on the site, why not just ask if you really want to know.

It will only be fair if you ask the other MHKs where there funding comes from and where they really live, besides their registered addresses.

Pity you can not accept there is a group of people willing to spend their own money and time in the pursuit of a dream of democracy and fairness on this island, without some mysterious financial backer to pay for everything. If I decide to spend up tp 20% of my income in such an endeavour why should I be critisised for it? There are some willing to spend their own money in the greater good, some don't and they move on seeking greater glory. That's life.