The Lisvane Review

[alpha-acid]

22 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

You sound like Stu Peters. Just because something is a bit difficult doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do it and it certainly doesn't mean it can't be done.

Half the world were crown possessions at some point - they have modernised and so should we.

No they weren't they were Colonies different thing altogether

[Max Power]

26 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

You sound like Stu Peters. Just because something is a bit difficult doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do it and it certainly doesn't mean it can't be done.

Half the world were crown possessions at some point - they have modernised and so should we.

We are not ruled from London, other than the common purse agreement, which may or may not be a benefit, we are pretty much independent. The King just signs off whatever laws our government passes.

What would be the advantages of not being a Crown Possession? 

[P.K.]

1 hour ago, A fool and his money..... said:

 The nonsense that is all our democratic legislation requiring royal assent is a far greater barrier to our democracy than any member of Legco.

Has any Manx legislation failed to gain Royal assent in modern times? 

Because I believe the last refusal was in 1708...

[Beelzebub3]

1 hour ago, Roxanne said:

So, would you have preferred that the work the MHK did to prepare for this motion should have been abandoned? 

Of course the government are in trouble. Of course they are going to be under scrutiny. Of course it’s going to cost us millions.

On the basis of your argument would you suggest that all MHKS and government Ministers down tools and stop working toward their goals because the government is in a mess?

I’m interested to know how you think that may play out to suit your point of view.

And what’s your gripe about Sarah Maltby in all this again? Apart from her being a woman, of course.   

 

It would save us a fortune if they downed tools!

[Stu Peters]

50 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

You sound like Stu Peters. Just because something is a bit difficult doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do it and it certainly doesn't mean it can't be done.

Half the world were crown possessions at some point - they have modernised and so should we.

I have no problem addressing difficult issues, I do it every day. But there’s a difference between difficult and impossible or pointless - I don’t have the time or inclination to tilt at windmills to prove to my constituents that I’m working hard.

[HiVibes]

11 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

I have no problem addressing difficult issues

What to spend all that unearned dough on...

[NoTail]

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

We are not ruled from London, other than the common purse agreement, which may or may not be a benefit, we are pretty much independent. The King just signs off whatever laws our government passes.

What would be the advantages of not being a Crown Possession? 

I don't think that's the case. If we were to pass an undesirable law (to UK) then it would be blocked by the Privy Council before getting to the Crown. For instance if we were to legalise drugs it has been made clear that such a law would not be allowed. 

[Max Power]

1 hour ago, NoTail said:

I don't think that's the case. If we were to pass an undesirable law (to UK) then it would be blocked by the Privy Council before getting to the Crown. For instance if we were to legalise drugs it has been made clear that such a law would not be allowed. 

When was that NT? 

[A fool and his money.....]

2 hours ago, P.K. said:

Has any Manx legislation failed to gain Royal assent in modern times? 

Because I believe the last refusal was in 1708...

Precisely. It's completely pointless anyway, and it belongs in the 18th century.

[Gladys]

Did the UK govt not insist that we repeal legislation making homosexual acts illegal? 

Not quite the same as Royal Assent, but they have intervened on the past, that we are aware of.

Broadcasting was another instance where we backed down.

Watching the Fast Show at the moment, and the IOM gets some side swipes.  That must be nearly 25 years ago. 

 

[P.K.]

38 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Precisely. It's completely pointless anyway, and it belongs in the 18th century.

Talking of pointless to be fair you have the equivalent of a UK town council passing legislation as if it's a sovereign state - which unfortunately comes at quite a £cost. 

Strange but true it always reminds me of Grand Fenwick...!

[A fool and his money.....]

21 hours ago, P.K. said:

Talking of pointless to be fair you have the equivalent of a UK town council passing legislation as if it's a sovereign state - which unfortunately comes at quite a £cost. 

Strange but true it always reminds me of Grand Fenwick...!

I agree to a point. The legislative freedom that we have is to be cherished, although I agree it is rarely (very rarely) used for anything worthwhile that justifies the cost.

I think it's important to remember though that we have no democratic power at all in the UK, let alone all that old fashioned crown bollocks. Democracy may not always give the outcomes you want, but at least it gives some voice to the people and its importance shouldn't be dismissed lightly.

ETA For the record I do not agree that size is any barrier to sovereignty. A government has the potential to look after its people well and play its part in the world regardless of its size. Our size could be a distinct advantage in terms of our government if we were to lose our costly delusions of grandeur and those of our nearest neighbour. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by A fool and his money.....