[BBC News] Islands' autonomy to be reviewed

[oldmanxfella]

on the iom we are not in recession, house prices are still rising. enjoy!

 

Well posted Allan Bell

[Dunroamin]

About time too..............now we can look forward to being subsumed into Lancashire and all being taxed at up to 50% and our offshore finance industry destroyed. Why is this good?

 

Well, half the poplulation would have to leave as there would be no work for them and the rest would have to pay their tax but welcome EC subsidies as a disaster area and to keep alive a populated IOM!

 

This would mean lower transport costs (because of subsidies), less police (could not afford them and why have them when the population has halved), lower housing costs (there would be thousands of houses on the market at less than half price), more availability and less cost of workmen to do those DIY jobs, less traffic.........................sounds good to me.............well apart from that 50% tax rate and the high council taxes and the restricted travel (due to no one wanting to sail of fly here) and the lack of representation!!

 

Our share under the Common Purse arrangement is supposed to be our share of the total net take from VAT collected from the UK and the IOM. As we already have an overly adequate collection agency of our own....where would be the loss, other than customs posts that do not could when you travel from one EC country to another, were we to tell them to f... off?

[triskelion]

You have some odd priorities you hick.

[Jimcalagon]

BBC - UK Government imposes direct rule on Turks and Caicos

 

UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

 

Britain has imposed direct rule on the Turks and Caicos Islands after an inquiry found evidence of government corruption and incompetence.

[...]

Politicians are accused of selling crown land for personal gain.

 

Bloody hell - the IOM has no chance then!

[manshimajin]

Can we look forward to a headline:

 

IOM Imposes Direct Rule On UK

 

The Isle of Man has imposed direct rule on the United Kingdom after an inquiry found evidence of political corruption and economic incompetence.

[...]

Politicians are accused of using taxpayer money to fund their own houses and lifestyles, starting illegal wars, failing to apply money laundering rules and not being able to say boo to a banker.

 

Ben-my-Chree offloads Provisional Government in Heysham....

[queenie]

I totally agree with john wright's post (21).

 

The Island's motto is after all : Quocunque Jeceris Stabit.

 

The Manx are historically adaptable, the early suffrage of women was apparently because of a lot of the men of the Island were away at sea for one reason or another (fishing, merchant navy etc).

 

I hope our MHK's adapt or even proffit the Island from this new challenge.

[Cronky]

Also covered in the Guardian:

 

UK seizes control of Turks and Caicos over sleaze allegations

 

And here's how they did it:

 

Chris Bryant, the foreign office minister, said: "After careful consideration I have instructed the governor to bring into force today an Order in Council which will suspend ministerial government and the house of assembly for a period of up to two years, to allow the governor to put the Islands' affairs back in good order. This is a serious constitutional step which the UK government has not taken lightly."

 

Am I right that, if the UK, every took a similar view of the Isle of Man that they could suspend Tynwald by 'Order in Council'?

 

Because, in the latest edition of Money Media Lord Bach Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, with responsibility for the Crown Dependencies, was asked:

 

Do you see a time in the future inwhich the Isle of Man might be completely independent of the UK?

 

to which he replied:

 

I think this is entirely a matter for the people of the Isle of Man. Should there ever be a significant majority of people who wanted such a move the UK Government would of course work with them to consider it.

[Cronky]

Also covered in the Guardian:

 

UK seizes control of Turks and Caicos over sleaze allegations

 

And here's how they did it:

 

Chris Bryant, the foreign office minister, said: "After careful consideration I have instructed the governor to bring into force today an Order in Council which will suspend ministerial government and the house of assembly for a period of up to two years, to allow the governor to put the Islands' affairs back in good order. This is a serious constitutional step which the UK government has not taken lightly."

 

Am I right that, if the UK, every took a similar view of the Isle of Man that they could suspend Tynwald by 'Order in Council'?

 

Because, in the latest edition of Money Media Lord Bach Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, with responsibility for the Crown Dependencies, was asked:

 

Do you see a time in the future inwhich the Isle of Man might be completely independent of the UK?

 

to which he replied:

 

I think this is entirely a matter for the people of the Isle of Man. Should there ever be a significant majority of people who wanted such a move the UK Government would of course work with them to consider it.

[Politician]

Am I right that, if the UK, every took a similar view of the Isle of Man that they could suspend Tynwald by 'Order in Council'?

 

Because, in the latest edition of Money Media Lord Bach Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, with responsibility for the Crown Dependencies, was asked:

 

Do you see a time in the future inwhich the Isle of Man might be completely independent of the UK?

 

to which he replied:

 

I think this is entirely a matter for the people of the Isle of Man. Should there ever be a significant majority of people who wanted such a move the UK Government would of course work with them to consider it.

The two positions are not incompatible.

 

The UK has overall responsibility for the good governance of the Isle of Man. If it believed corruption were endemic here, it could, on the advice of the Lieutenant Governor, suspend Tynwald until reforms had been introduced. However, this decision would need to be acceptable to both the international community and local residents. In the case of Turks and Caicos, it was probably the right decision, as the island's government was institutionally corrupt and was beginning to intimidate voters to the point where true democracy was no longer possible.

 

However, to achieve independence, all the Isle of Man would need to do is approve such a move in a referendum. Turks and Caicos had a pro-independence government in the seventies, and prior to the 1980 election it was agreed with the UK government that independence would take place in 1982. However, power changed hands at the election, and an anti-independence party took control.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

The two positions are not incompatible.

 

The UK has overall responsibility for the good governance of the Isle of Man. If it believed corruption were endemic here, it could, on the advice of the Lieutenant Governor, suspend Tynwald until reforms had been introduced. However, this decision would need to be acceptable to both the international community and local residents. In the case of Turks and Caicos, it was probably the right decision, as the island's government was institutionally corrupt and was beginning to intimidate voters to the point where true democracy was no longer possible.

 

However, to achieve independence, all the Isle of Man would need to do is approve such a move in a referendum. Turks and Caicos had a pro-independence government in the seventies, and prior to the 1980 election it was agreed with the UK government that independence would take place in 1982. However, power changed hands at the election, and an anti-independence party took control.

 

It is interesting, as I don't see corruption being a bad thing at all, more often it is a good thing. From my perspective it is good when such corrupt leaders undermine power. And then it isn't so good when the UK government comes to the rescue to reimpose it. Though what were saying about intimidation of voters in respect of maintaining a true liberal democracy? Was the electorate being forced to vote?

[Politician]

Though what were saying about intimidation of voters in respect of maintaining a true liberal democracy? Was the electorate being forced to vote?

No, not at all. It would be more accurate to say that the lines between some members of the islands' government and organised crime were starting to become blurred.

[VinnieK]

It is interesting, as I don't see corruption being a bad thing at all, more often it is a good thing. From my perspective it is good when such corrupt leaders undermine power.

 

They don't undermine power though, if anything they consolidate it in their own hands, undermine their own accountability, and restrict access to that power to a select few who can offer them personal gain in return for it being exercised in their favour.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

It is interesting, as I don't see corruption being a bad thing at all, more often it is a good thing. From my perspective it is good when such corrupt leaders undermine power.

 

They don't undermine power though, if anything they consolidate it in their own hands, undermine their own accountability, and restrict access to that power to a select few who can offer them personal gain in return for it being exercised in their favour.

 

They undermine it by focusing more or exclusively on their personal financial gain, those who are corrupt are less interested in using that power over the people.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

It is interesting, as I don't see corruption being a bad thing at all, more often it is a good thing. From my perspective it is good when such corrupt leaders undermine power.

 

They don't undermine power though, if anything they consolidate it in their own hands, undermine their own accountability, and restrict access to that power to a select few who can offer them personal gain in return for it being exercised in their favour.

 

They undermine it by focusing more or exclusively on their personal financial gain, those who are corrupt are less interested in using that power over the people.

I would be more concerned about living in a country where there is no corruption whatsoever I as would come to the conclusion that important of power is far more significant to the politician.

[VinnieK]

They undermine it by focusing more or exclusively on their personal financial gain, those who are corrupt are less interested in using that power over the people.

 

But their power, however it may be exercised in the pursuit of personal gain is de facto used over the people. Even were this not the case, by denying access to the political system to anyone but those with something to offer, he or she is exerting power over the populace - in this case it comes in the form of a closed door.