Eddie Lowey's Comments

[VinnieK]

All I was trying to say is that this is nothing to do with GOVERNMENT it is to do with PARLIAMENT

 

It's of course true that in the strictest terms government is not the same thing as parliament, and yes it's true that this might very well have nothing to do with the government: I can quite happily imagine it being a case of Lowey, in a rare moment of lucidity, realising that his comments had the possibility constituted some kind of gaffe and asking someone to strike his comments from the record.

 

But still, it's easy to see why people do conflate government and parliament. It's a simple consequence of the dominance of the former through sheer size (42% of the HoK), and departmental membership (where the proportion is closer to 90%) that people should begin to view them as one and the same, even if it is sometimes unfair. If government wishes to avoid being seen in such an unremittingly negative light or be blamed for everything, then it needs to weaken itself and provide us with a parliament worthy of the name.

[censorship]

good point, well made

[Chris Robertshaw]

All I was trying to say is that this is nothing to do with GOVERNMENT it is to do with PARLIAMENT

 

It's of course true that in the strictest terms government is not the same thing as parliament, and yes it's true that this might very well have nothing to do with the government: I can quite happily imagine it being a case of Lowey, in a rare moment of lucidity, realising that his comments had the possibility constituted some kind of gaffe and asking someone to strike his comments from the record.

 

But still, it's easy to see why people do conflate government and parliament. It's a simple consequence of the dominance of the former through sheer size (42% of the HoK), and departmental membership (where the proportion is closer to 90%) that people should begin to view them as one and the same, even if it is sometimes unfair. If government wishes to avoid being seen in such an unremittingly negative light or be blamed for everything, then it needs to weaken itself and provide us with a parliament worthy of the name.

 

 

The importance of rebalancing the relationship between our Government and our Parliament is a terribly important issue which does not really enjoy the traction it deserves in public. I completely agree with your comment. Even the media dont always get it - when I first got elected I was interviewed and asked how I felt about being elected to Government - I had to tell the interviewer I had not been elected to government. This failure to differentiate is however understandable when so many Tynwald members are in government and paid extra for being so.

 

The credibilty of the Hansard Record which is the theme of this thread is also extremely important because there should never be a question of the record being 'tailored'. I have this afternoon asked about the matter and have been told that there is an investigation under way. We will have to wait and see.

[piebaps]

Nice one Chris.

[VinnieK]

Thankyou, Chris.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing what the investigation turns up. Ideally the precise rules (assuming they exist in an official, codified format) governing the recording and publication of Hansards would be made available to the general public so people can better evaluate how serious discrepancies between debates and the official record actually are.

[Blade Runner]

again, I have no problem with questioning the role of parliamentary members in the writing of Hansard, or the management of Hansard by parliament. The issue I haev is that a couple of people have screamed government conspiracy. Government and parliament are NOT the same thing. This may be a parliamentary conspiracy theory, or a mistake, or within the rules or whatever and it should be looked into.

All I was trying to say is that this is nothing to do with GOVERNMENT it is to do with PARLIAMENT

 

I admit that my choice of the word Government was lazy and as you quite rightly point out I should of said Parliament.

 

That is what I actually meant, it is just the word that comes into my mind and a lot of other peoples when we comment on Parliament.

 

I stand corrected!

 

I am no mad conspiracy theorist, the tinfoil hat is a fashion statement , I just wish that we residents of this island were treated with more respect in so far as being trusted with more information on how it all works and how decisions are reached in Parliament.

 

I also understand that with the Government being made up of Independents that they will be less inclined to give us this information as unpopular/ bad decisions will reflect on the individual, with possible consequences at the next election, and that they can't hide behind the Party as in the UK.

[censorship]

Blade - no offence intended, or taken I hope. fully understand the point you are making, and agree.

[Blade Runner]

Blade - no offence intended, or taken I hope. fully understand the point you are making, and agree.

 

I better take the pins out of that doll now then.

 

No problem and none taken, are you feeling OK?

[Terse]

I should of said...

I should have said...

 

[Pedantic, I know...but important nevertheless).

[joebean]

Why would anyone want to withold Mr Lowey's comments from the official record? Why would this be worth censoring Hansard? Possibly to save the Island from being embarrassed by his silly remarks. Possibly because the Tynwald club wants to strike from the record the evidence that Mr Lowey is an ignorant and stupid old fool that they have appointed to waste our money by attending LegCo.

 

Take your pick.

[Theodolite]

.

The credibilty of the Hansard Record which is the theme of this thread is also extremely important because there should never be a question of the record being 'tailored'. I have this afternoon asked about the matter and have been told that there is an investigation under way. We will have to wait and see.

 

If you can't trust Hansard what can you trust?

 

We need to know what the provided reasons are for this matter as it is clearly in the public interest.

 

It looks like there have been a couple of thousand views of this thread in the last couple of days. It shouldn't be swept under the carpet.

[mannin1]

It will be interesting to know if CM Brown did make the statement concerning MEA Accounts as alledged by Cannon in the keys today.

Mr Cannon quoted Hansard, but will it back him up?

IMO we should be extremely concerned that the official records are being interfered with in this manner.

Concerned yes! Suprised-Not really, from our parliamentarians who are too afraid to give the public a Fit For Purpose Freedom of Information Act!

[Declan]

5. The Hon. Member for Douglas South (Mr Malarkey) to ask the Chief Minister:

605

Whether he considers the loss of £414,000 by the retail division of the Manx Electricity Authority for the

year end April 2010 as acceptable and, if so, why and, if not, if he will state what he intends to do about

it?

 

610 The President: Question 5. Hon. Member for Douglas South, Mr Malarkey.

Mr Malarkey: Mr President, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name, sir.

The President: Again, the Answer is in the hands of the Chief Minister.

615

 

The Chief Minister (Mr Brown): Mr President, it is unfortunate that the Authority sustained a trading

loss, as identified. However, I have asked the MEA to examination their accounting practices relating to their

retail business to ensure that only the real costs associated with the retail operations are identified in their

account breakdown to ensure a truer figure is set out.

 

620 As Hon. Members are aware, Government is developing policies that will support our town and village

centres and their businesses, as well as providing improved access to Government and Government services at

a local regional level. This includes examining how we can better utilise existing facilities and, where

appropriate, maximise Government facilities in the regions by merging, where possible, the MEA, Post Office

and some Government services into one building to secure regional services in at least all of our town centres.

 

625 A key consideration in developing this policy is the independent report by Roger Tym & Partners, which

indicated that there is a strong link between the MEA retail outlets and the sustainability and regeneration of

our four town centres into the future and also Government's desire to secure post office facilities throughout

the Island, sir.

 

630 The President: Mr Watterson, Hon. Member.

 

Mr Watterson: Thank you.

 

I would just appreciate if the Chief Minister could read out the first paragraph or so of his Answer,

because it sounds suspiciously like, 'If you are not happy with the figure, you fiddle the figures.'

 

635Mr Cannan: Absolutely. Creative accounting!

 

The President: Chief Minister.

 

640 The Chief Minister: Well, not being accountants, sir, I do not understand that, but maybe the Hon.

Member does.

 

Can I just say that what I have asked for is to ensure that costs that are put against retailing are actually the

true costs relating to retailing and not, again, being loaded the other way.

 

Source

 

As far as I can tell, the CM believes asking MEA to recalculate the loss because he doesn't accept it, is not creative accounting. But Cannon does. Hence the row today. It's about how you interpret the bold bit above.

[Jimcalagon]

[Declan]

Today's exchanges -

 

590 The Speaker: Mr Cannan.

Mr Cannan: Is the board of the MEA conscious of the comments of the Chief Minister at the last sitting of Tynwald – the suggestion that there may have been – may have been – creative accounting in assessing the losses of the retail business –

 

The Chief Minister: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

That comment was never made by me.

 

600 Mr Cannan: The comment made, which is on Hansard that –

 

The Chief Minister: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

That comment was not made by me.

 

605 The Speaker: The point has been made. Mr Cannan.

Mr Cannan: In the matter of the creative accounting suggestion, what action –

 

The Chief Minister: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

610 This really is not correct. The Hon. Member is distorting words that were said and if he wishes to verify it,

I would ask him to circulate those comments where I said about ‘creative accounting’. I did not. sir.

 

The Speaker: Mr Cannan, we have had three points on the same issue.

 

615 Mr Cannan: The suggestion was made that the accounting system for the retail businesses was less than

the audited accounts suggested. What is the view of the board of the MEA?

 

The Speaker: Mr Gill.

620 The Chief Minister: I never said that.

 

Mr Gill: Thank you, Vainstyr Loayreyder.

I certainly do not wish to be drawn into any debate about accusations of creative accounting – that is not

my interpretation.

 

In terms of the MEA board’s position, the MEA board are very well aware of the Early Publication of

Hansard and the comments contained therein and we have been in correspondence with the Chief Minister to

clarify the situation and will continue to do that, sir.

 

I feel this shows the short-comings of David Cannan. He's raising a valid point - the highlighted section of my earlier posts suggests that the CM doesn't agree with the calculation of the MEA shops' loss and thinks it should be recalculated. Now that's a serious matter (it prompted the Elected Dictatorship thread on here or, if you accept the CM's position the MEA's accountancy practises need reviewing). So what we need to know from the Chairman of the MEA is has evidence been found to support the CM's allegation, but Cannon talks about "creative accounting" that's his interpretation and words, not the CM's. The CM uses this choice of words to make a pedantic point and derail the question. But all Cannon needed to do was read out the CM's original comments and ask if anything had been found to substantiate them.