Capt W E Johns Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I wonder if the UK thinks that all this is 'good government'.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
player Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Well Andy, you might be able to get a bus from Port St Mary to Onchan but you can't get a bus from PSM, PE or anywhere down south straight to the hospital. It's a two bus journey.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
censorship Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I wonder if the UK thinks that all this is 'good government'.... Where they have a government they didn't vote for thanks to backroom deals and a parliament so rife with corruption they won't even pay for thier own duck houses, moar cleaning and hob nobs? The UK wouldn't know good government if it wore a bright yellow T-shirt with 'Good government' written on the front while repeatedly kicking the UK in the balls and screaming 'I'm good government'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
censorship Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Do you not feel that there is an interesting parallel here with the ongoing Douglas East court case, and Allan Bell's attempt to influence the vote for CM by offering rewards and largesse in return for votes ? He has no national mandate to do so, and as yet is only elected by the people of Ramsey. You can replace Allan Bell and Ramsey with Peter Karran and Onchan and this is still true. Does anyone thing Beecroft and Zac whatisname would be backing Karran if they weren't in his party and looking for personal advancement in government? Does anyone seriously think Karran hasn't been doing some behind the scenes horse trading? I don't think Bell can be singled out for criticism here - it is the way, probably wrongly, this system works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 @tynwaldinfo Policy statements of Mr Bell http://t.co/LZbDqigf and Mr Karran http://t.co/SmuHAPcb if elected Chief Minister on 11 October. I'm quite impressed by Bell's, much that I'd like see, including an attempt at humility! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Fri, 07 Oct 2011 One of the candidates for Chief Minister has revealed who would be on the Council of Ministers if he was elected. Peter Karran's fantasy CoMin line up sees Juan Watterson as Treasury Minister, Chris Robertshaw would head up Social Care and Brenda Cannell would get the ministerial post at Education. A few former ministers would get their jobs back too. Tim Crookall and Leonard Singer would also be chosen to head up departments. Tynwald sits on Tuesday to elect a Chief Minister. Mr Karran and Allan Bell are the only two MHKs in the running. From energy's site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Those who would see it as no more than equivalent to the backroom deals and horsetrading of the Coalition government in the U.K. need to think again. They are nationally elected parties with the mandate of the whole electorate. Unless I am missing something, the very existence of Coalition Governments is down to the fact that no one 'Party' achieved a sufficient 'mandate' from the electorate. Add to this that, there are great swathes of the UK that did not vote Tory / Lib Dem, so to claim any national mandate from the whole electorate is frankly ludicrous. Now, I accept that there are various arguments for political reform on the Island, and the failings in the current system. However, given the very system that they are working with, then what is being claimed with regards to Alan Bell seeking 'support' is exactly what you would expect to see. I can assure you now that PK will be doing exactly the same thing. In fact, if you took it a bit further, if PK did become Chief Minister, he would look to appoint his party members to some form of office. In essence, they have pledged their 'allegiance' to the LVP (and therefore him) in return for their support in the elections(and vice versa). How is that different to horse trading amongst elected politicians? Whilst LVP did well to get three MHK's, they were utterly rejected in the various other constitencies in which they stood. Therefore, do they have any greater 'National Mandate'? It is a coalition in it's purest form. Deal making and bargaining is an essential part of it. +1 +2 +3 and +4 ! We really need to "get over" this idea that we could directly elect the CM. AFAIK it is impossible without massive changes to our whole constitution which is never going to happen in our lifetimes. ETA after reading Declans links to policys, As I have already said I am pro Bell but that document, especially in comparison to the other gives me hope of a good future for the island. I especially like that he has admitted that the last administration was very poor at communicating their policy's, or really their reasoning behind their policy's. If the new Gov do that, then the FOI may be an expensive waste of time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Those who would see it as no more than equivalent to the backroom deals and horsetrading of the Coalition government in the U.K. need to think again. They are nationally elected parties with the mandate of the whole electorate. Unless I am missing something, the very existence of Coalition Governments is down to the fact that no one 'Party' achieved a sufficient 'mandate' from the electorate. Add to this that, there are great swathes of the UK that did not vote Tory / Lib Dem, so to claim any national mandate from the whole electorate is frankly ludicrous. Now, I accept that there are various arguments for political reform on the Island, and the failings in the current system. However, given the very system that they are working with, then what is being claimed with regards to Alan Bell seeking 'support' is exactly what you would expect to see. I can assure you now that PK will be doing exactly the same thing. In fact, if you took it a bit further, if PK did become Chief Minister, he would look to appoint his party members to some form of office. In essence, they have pledged their 'allegiance' to the LVP (and therefore him) in return for their support in the elections(and vice versa). How is that different to horse trading amongst elected politicians? Whilst LVP did well to get three MHK's, they were utterly rejected in the various other constitencies in which they stood. Therefore, do they have any greater 'National Mandate'? It is a coalition in it's purest form. Deal making and bargaining is an essential part of it. +1 +2 +3 and +4 ! We really need to "get over" this idea that we could directly elect the CM. AFAIK it is impossible without massive changes to our whole constitution which is never going to happen in our lifetimes. Never say never! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinnieK Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I'm quite impressed by Bell's, much that I'd like see, including an attempt at humility! I'm not convinced by it. Maybe I never will! Hopefully I'm just some old buffer who's seeing shadows that aren't there. However, there's an awful lot in there which remind me a great deal about New Labour's early days in the 90's, both in terms of style and substance. I expect it to end in much the same way. Here's how I read it: "Revisit the report on Scope and Structure": The danger is that this is just a maneuver to stall further reform. Set up a committee and drag the process out, much as was done with FOI until it's someone else's problem. "A slash and burn approach to downsizing government too quickly will be very damaging... there can be no ring fenced sacred cows in the review process": We're going to cut a shedload of services an amenities, without really addressing the bloat of the Civil Service, and in the name of continuing to pump money into dependent industries like Construction and throwing money at any flash harry in a suit who promises to put a Manxman on Pluto. "To stimulate further economic activity we must build on the very effective and cooperative relationship we have with our business community": See above. Subsidies, tax breaks, expect also to see the work permit system under pressure or even attack. "Greater coordination across Government with regard to training and retraining has already begun. We must build on this to raise the skill levels in our workforce and also to help tackle the growing issue of youth unemployment": An end to things like student grants (see 2), possibly accompanied by a rapid expansion of training and vocational programmes designed in part to satisfy business, and in part to pull the New Labour trick of getting kids off the unemployment register for a few years - this will be our '50% in university' moment. "To build that essential trust I would propose to introduce the Freedom of Information Bill": Means nothing. Brown promised the same thing when he was elected. I fully expect it to go the same way. "The construction industry is a very important element of our economy and is struggling as a result of the economic slowdown and the reluctance of banks to lend. We should use this opportunity to utilise their spare capacity to address our housing problems": More subsidies for the builders. Rather than letting prices find their own level, and finding some way to wean both the construction industry of government money, and the government off construction employment numbers gradually, we're just going to pour money into building houses, then helping buy them for people, propping up a dying sector until it finally collapses (by which time it will be someone else's problem, politically speaking). "I still believe that we need a definitive review of the scope and structure of Local Government": See 5, freedom of information. This has been promised for donkey's years. Sounds good, but soon gets mired in details, untintentionally or not and quietly abandoned. "I have been dismayed at the amount of time spent in the last House navel gazing with respect to internal constitutional matters": You can all **** off if you think you're getting a reform of LegCo, an elected CM, or any serious attempts to dilute the power of CoMin in the Keys; I've done very well out the way things are, thank you very much. "This is not the time to be distracted by yesterday's squabbles or overbearing egos": Despite the apparent humility, I can't help but think this really means "Anyone who stands in my way will be accused and harrassed with charges of playing the politics of the past until they shut the hell up" (copyright, B. Obama). "I would hope that all Members who wish to contribute will be given the opportunity to do so and I would hope to also draw on the very extensive experience we have within our midst outside of Government": I'll listen to you, but basically the private sector is king from here on in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I think the private sector should be king and the island would do well to make itself a business friendly development area with relaxed planning for income generating industry and enterprises. I am not talking about industrial estates on the boundary's of villages but due to our landscape we have lots of places that could be developed without any impact. I had recently a reason to go to the main sewage works at Santon and that is an example of what I am talking about, it is a long way off the beaten track and not overlooked unless you look for it but there is room down there for a couple of Spring Valley industrial estates without any detriment to most peoples lives or views, whats wrong with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinnieK Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I think the private sector should be king and the island would do well to make itself a business friendly development area with relaxed planning for income generating industry and enterprises. Surely there's a considerable difference between being business friendly, and the government being at the beck and call of business interests. Business should of course be cultivated, but the entire purpose of doing so is so that it may be harnessed and to the benefit of the state. Also, not everything which is good for business is good for people. For example: the current set up of the Film Industry: great for the film industry, perhaps less so for the people funding it. Similarly, the runway extention and numerous capital projects both you and I have repeatedly criticised as a monumental waste are wonderful news for the construction industry and dependent businesses, but would you class them as good ideas? 'Business being king' will result in nothing more than short termism which promises cheap (or even free) capital with few strings attached, primarily at the cost of society in terms of both taxes paid and public services compromised in order to fund the whole circus. What of Bell's cherished Tax Cap? Apparently it's good for business, especially if combined with attempts to help those many tycoons rushing to our shores to build their McMansions, but as we've seen the figures simply don't stack up. I'm certainly not arguing against being 'business friendly'. I'm arguing against Bell's vision of what that phrase means, which I strongly believe follows the mode of Brown's government only with even more excess thrown in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I'm certainly not arguing against being 'business friendly'. I'm arguing against Bell's vision of what that phrase means, which I strongly believe follows the mode of Brown's government only with even more excess thrown in. In other words intervention? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc.fixit Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Does anyone reckon Roden for C/M ?????????????/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightening McQueen Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 "This is not the time to be distracted by yesterday's squabbles or overbearing egos. I do not have all the answers and I will make mistakes. I am only human." A leopard can't change its spots! If AB becomes CM, will the Royal Anthem become more significant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman8180 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 If AB becomes CM, will the Royal Anthem become more significant? Thanks for your valuable contribution. Obviously a relic from, thankfully, a bygone era on this Island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.