Lisenchuk Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Well if he comes round my way I will! Because of my late decision to stand, it isn't going to be possible to get out to many people by knocking on doors. I'm actually still working next week, then only taking a couple of weeks off before the election. However, if anyone who lives in Douglas South would like to contact me, I'll be happy to arrange to visit you at a convenient time. I've had a couple of people text me to arrange a visit so if you'd like to wait a few days, so as to protect your Manx Forums identity, then email me keith.fitton@manx.net, phone/text 235043 or contact via Facebook https://www.facebook.com/DouglasSouth2016/ I don't live in South Douglas. I have no opportunity to vote for you or any other in that constituency. If you are elected what are your plans to introduce,and how long do you think it will take before we have valid democratic system in place? Edit To Add: or should I just assume you as a Douglas South local representative only? A sort of over paid Local Councillor,shall we say. Well, first off, I'm going to try and avoid making promises I may not be able to keep. What I would like to do, what I intend to do and what I'll actually be able to achieve are three different things. If elected, I'm certainly not going to be the Chief Minister, so what I could achieve will depend largely upon who the new CM is and what their programme for government looks like. In terms of improving our democratic system, I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by Lord Lisvane's report as I fully expected it to be a cosy establishment 'everything is fine'. In fact he's produced a decent report in my opinion. There are some areas that I disagree with and would like to see further action. I don't think the Bishop should have a role in government and I'd like to see Legislative Council reduced in size. I'm also concerned that the proposed committee to recommended nominations for new LC members would become an establishment committee in itself, 'recommending the right people'. But, in general, I can accept the parts of the report that I disagree with, if it meant getting the important aspects through. Key among those would be (in my opinion) MLC's not able to be Ministers or Department Members and sitting MHK's not being eligible for nomination to MLC. As for 'how long'? I think that there are times when our government spends forever navel gazing rather than actually making a difference. They appeared to spend more time discussing whether or not they should pay for parking than they did on important issues like a definition of 'fuel poverty' & how many pensioners are in it, or the increased need for food banks on the Isle of Man. So although Lord Lisvane suggested that his recommendations could be a 'pick & mix', I would rather accept it in entirety and get on with it, rather than spend forever arguing over pet interests and getting nowhere. If that means that I would keep my mouth shut regarding the Bishop remaining, in exchange for getting the rest of it through, then that's a pragmatic response that I would be happy with. So as an example of the original point, what I would like is for the Bishop not to have a position in government but what I would do, is accept his position if it meant even more important issues got through in a timely manner. A reasonable and balanced response. I'd be pretty happy to see you elected with that approach to getting the important matters moved on. what I would like is for the Bishop not to have a position in government but what I would do, is accept his position if it meant even more important issues got through in a timely manner. A perhaps necessarily pragmatic stance,though I'd like you to arrange for his cross to be turned upside down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 I've now received three manifestos. Including ones from both sitting members. One of those is only semil literate, full of basic spelling and grammar errors, lots of we must do x, y and z, but with no costing or methodology. Stupid statements that are tautologous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 I've now received three manifestos. Including ones from both sitting members. One of those is only semil literate, full of basic spelling and grammar errors, lots of we must do x, y and z, but with no costing or methodology. Stupid statements that are tautologous. And to what extent are you surprised by this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 It was much worse than I expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 It was much worse than I expected.You sir, are an optimist. Edited to add - IMO both South Douglas representatives are abject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamHandwich Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 I hope you're not referring to Legoland, the Sea Life Centre or Centre Parcs. How we fund them is a mere detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whimsy Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 Well if he comes round my way I will! Because of my late decision to stand, it isn't going to be possible to get out to many people by knocking on doors. I'm actually still working next week, then only taking a couple of weeks off before the election. However, if anyone who lives in Douglas South would like to contact me, I'll be happy to arrange to visit you at a convenient time. I've had a couple of people text me to arrange a visit so if you'd like to wait a few days, so as to protect your Manx Forums identity, then email me keith.fitton@manx.net, phone/text 235043 or contact via Facebook https://www.facebook.com/DouglasSouth2016/ I don't live in South Douglas. I have no opportunity to vote for you or any other in that constituency. If you are elected what are your plans to introduce,and how long do you think it will take before we have valid democratic system in place? Edit To Add: or should I just assume you as a Douglas South local representative only? A sort of over paid Local Councillor,shall we say. Well, first off, I'm going to try and avoid making promises I may not be able to keep. What I would like to do, what I intend to do and what I'll actually be able to achieve are three different things. If elected, I'm certainly not going to be the Chief Minister, so what I could achieve will depend largely upon who the new CM is and what their programme for government looks like. In terms of improving our democratic system, I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by Lord Lisvane's report as I fully expected it to be a cosy establishment 'everything is fine'. In fact he's produced a decent report in my opinion. There are some areas that I disagree with and would like to see further action. I don't think the Bishop should have a role in government and I'd like to see Legislative Council reduced in size. I'm also concerned that the proposed committee to recommended nominations for new LC members would become an establishment committee in itself, 'recommending the right people'. But, in general, I can accept the parts of the report that I disagree with, if it meant getting the important aspects through. Key among those would be (in my opinion) MLC's not able to be Ministers or Department Members and sitting MHK's not being eligible for nomination to MLC. As for 'how long'? I think that there are times when our government spends forever navel gazing rather than actually making a difference. They appeared to spend more time discussing whether or not they should pay for parking than they did on important issues like a definition of 'fuel poverty' & how many pensioners are in it, or the increased need for food banks on the Isle of Man. So although Lord Lisvane suggested that his recommendations could be a 'pick & mix', I would rather accept it in entirety and get on with it, rather than spend forever arguing over pet interests and getting nowhere. If that means that I would keep my mouth shut regarding the Bishop remaining, in exchange for getting the rest of it through, then that's a pragmatic response that I would be happy with. So as an example of the original point, what I would like is for the Bishop not to have a position in government but what I would do, is accept his position if it meant even more important issues got through in a timely manner. The Bishop does NOT have any position in Government. He has a position in the Parliament. You would expect prospective candidates for the job would understand the difference between Government and Parliament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 Well if he comes round my way I will! Because of my late decision to stand, it isn't going to be possible to get out to many people by knocking on doors. I'm actually still working next week, then only taking a couple of weeks off before the election. However, if anyone who lives in Douglas South would like to contact me, I'll be happy to arrange to visit you at a convenient time. I've had a couple of people text me to arrange a visit so if you'd like to wait a few days, so as to protect your Manx Forums identity, then email me keith.fitton@manx.net, phone/text 235043 or contact via Facebook https://www.facebook.com/DouglasSouth2016/ I don't live in South Douglas. I have no opportunity to vote for you or any other in that constituency. If you are elected what are your plans to introduce,and how long do you think it will take before we have valid democratic system in place? Edit To Add: or should I just assume you as a Douglas South local representative only? A sort of over paid Local Councillor,shall we say. Well, first off, I'm going to try and avoid making promises I may not be able to keep. What I would like to do, what I intend to do and what I'll actually be able to achieve are three different things. If elected, I'm certainly not going to be the Chief Minister, so what I could achieve will depend largely upon who the new CM is and what their programme for government looks like. In terms of improving our democratic system, I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by Lord Lisvane's report as I fully expected it to be a cosy establishment 'everything is fine'. In fact he's produced a decent report in my opinion. There are some areas that I disagree with and would like to see further action. I don't think the Bishop should have a role in government and I'd like to see Legislative Council reduced in size. I'm also concerned that the proposed committee to recommended nominations for new LC members would become an establishment committee in itself, 'recommending the right people'. But, in general, I can accept the parts of the report that I disagree with, if it meant getting the important aspects through. Key among those would be (in my opinion) MLC's not able to be Ministers or Department Members and sitting MHK's not being eligible for nomination to MLC. As for 'how long'? I think that there are times when our government spends forever navel gazing rather than actually making a difference. They appeared to spend more time discussing whether or not they should pay for parking than they did on important issues like a definition of 'fuel poverty' & how many pensioners are in it, or the increased need for food banks on the Isle of Man. So although Lord Lisvane suggested that his recommendations could be a 'pick & mix', I would rather accept it in entirety and get on with it, rather than spend forever arguing over pet interests and getting nowhere. If that means that I would keep my mouth shut regarding the Bishop remaining, in exchange for getting the rest of it through, then that's a pragmatic response that I would be happy with. So as an example of the original point, what I would like is for the Bishop not to have a position in government but what I would do, is accept his position if it meant even more important issues got through in a timely manner. The Bishop does NOT have any position in Government. He has a position in the Parliament. You would expect prospective candidates for the job would understand the difference between Government and Parliament. I'll bet Fitton's not alone among prospective candidates in his ignorance on that matter Whimsy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 The Bishop does NOT have any position in Government. He has a position in the Parliament. You would expect prospective candidates for the job would understand the difference between Government and Parliament. Except technically you are the one who is wrong. There are numerous definitions of 'government', but most of them include the legislature as well. People talk of the "branches of government", including the parliament (or different houses thereof). The Bishop isn't currently a member of the executive branch of government, but he's still a member of it. Incidentally even that is only very recent, because until not that long ago the Bishop used to be an ex-officio member of the Education Department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 The Bishop does NOT have any position in Government. He has a position in the Parliament. You would expect prospective candidates for the job would understand the difference between Government and Parliament. Except technically you are the one who is wrong. There are numerous definitions of 'government', but most of them include the legislature as well. People talk of the "branches of government", including the parliament (or different houses thereof). The Bishop isn't currently a member of the executive branch of government, but he's still a member of it. Incidentally even that is only very recent, because until not that long ago the Bishop used to be an ex-officio member of the Education Department. Perhaps there is a need to differentiate with an upper and lower case G - whereas the separation of powers (parliament - executive - judiciary) is seen to be an essential feature of "good government" (lower case) there are of course those in parliament - certainly in the U.K. for example - who are most certainly not a part of the (upper case) Government, that is, they do not exercise executive power. The distinction here on the rock is much harder to appreciate because virtually everyone in parliament is also in the Government. Interestingly, there seems to be an increasingly evident trend to refer to the three components combined as essential for good governance - leaving the term government exclusively to define the executive, which in my opinion is a correct approach. As for the judiciary, if you asked the First Deemster "Are you a member of the government?" I think he's likely to say "No". Anyway, it still pisses me off when people say that next week we're "Voting for the government"... no we aren't, we are electing people to the House of Keys, a branch of our parliament! They may subsequently also become part of the government... though Christ help us if they do! Edited to add - I've just found this U.K. parliamentary commentary (below - taken from a larger document). Note the use of the upper case (G)overnment and the clear indication that parliament and Government are different things - I agree with that approach! Perhaps there is a government, and the Government. *************** In the United Kingdom and other common law jurisdictions, however, the theory of separation has enjoyed much less prominence. In the UK, the major offices and institutions have evolved to achieve balance between the Crown (and more recently the Government) and Parliament. The system resembles a balance of powers more than a formal separation of the three branches, or what Walter Bagehot called a fusion of powers in The English Constitution. ***************** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisenchuk Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 Whimsy: The Bishop does NOT have any position in Government. He has a position in the Parliament. You would expect prospective candidates for the job would understand the difference between Government and Parliament. He'd have a position outside on the pavement if I had any choice in the matter......we all have our crosses to bear,I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red duh Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Why can't the people of the Isle of Man and its government (big g or small g) see that it is just wrong to have an unelected person sat in the government/parliament with voting powers? You folk are going through this rigmorale of voting in a general election and yet some guy is already there, past the post and smug, waiting to cast his vote and have his say if he so wants. It is beyond pathetic, it really is, and makes an absolute mockery of the whole shebang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red duh Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Just to add, I realise of course that there are the Bishop's colleagues on the Legislative Council that much the same could be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwell Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 I've now received three manifestos. Including ones from both sitting members. One of those is only semil literate, full of basic spelling and grammar errors, lots of we must do x, y and z, but with no costing or methodology. Stupid statements that are tautologous. I have it too. I don't know whether to read it or not because it won't alter my vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 One quote. "if the UK Government reduces their standard VAT rate to below 20%" as an illustration: Analysis: The standard UK VAT rate is 20% If it is reduced it will be below 20% The words "to below 20%" add nothing and are unnecessary. They are prolix and a tautology. In addition UK Government is singular not plural so it should be "reduce" Honestly, every line is like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.