Onchan or not

[Declan]

2 minutes ago, Rushen Spy said:

Oh, well that's it then. It can't be a problem, because "Declan" on Manx Forums can't see it. Case closed.

So what's the solution to this non-problem?

[Ham_N_Eggs]

22 minutes ago, Declan said:

So what's the solution to this non-problem?

Rob Callister will propose a private member's bill to fix the boundaries. Of course it will probably still leave him in Garff.

[Declan]

So Onchan will end up with less representation per head than Garff?

[Rushen Spy]

38 minutes ago, Declan said:

So what's the solution to this non-problem?

Restore the electoral lines to parish lines. And it is a real problem if you would bother to consider the demographic implications in terms of representation in Tynwald.

[Rushen Spy]

13 minutes ago, Declan said:

So Onchan will end up with less representation per head than Garff?

Nobody is forcing anybody to live in Onchan.

[Neil Down]

4 hours ago, Rushen Spy said:

Nobody is forcing anybody to live in Onchan.

Is that because you live there TJ?

[woolley]

4 hours ago, Rushen Spy said:

Nobody is forcing anybody to live in Onchan.

Aren't they? I thought they were. Why do so many live there then?

[Non-Believer]

2 minutes ago, woolley said:

Aren't they? I thought they were. Why do so many live there then?

It's the Island's quarantine area for those leaving Douglas. Refugees from the DOI war zone.

[woolley]

5 hours ago, Declan said:

I don't really see the problem. Everybody on the Island is represented by two mhks and each constituency has roughly the same number of voters. That's fair.

And that is the only reason it was done. It was the least worst of a lot of bad options to arrive at 12 roughly equal size 2 seat constituencies. It might be more interesting to suppose a dastardly conspiracy, but there simply isn't one.

[Chris C]

5 hours ago, Declan said:

So what's the solution to this non-problem?

I agree,  I  can't see it's a problem either way.  Living in Onchan but being part of a rural constituency,  or the alternative of being in Onchan constituency and being less represented per head in the House of Keys. Surely neither makes much difference. 

You've got to put this into the perspective of the the representatives you'll get in either case and what they've achieved for their people - and use this as a benchmark for how much you care about the "problem" ie very little. 

[Ham_N_Eggs]

1 hour ago, Chris C said:

I agree,  I  can't see it's a problem either way.  Living in Onchan but being part of a rural constituency,  or the alternative of being in Onchan constituency and being less represented per head in the House of Keys. Surely neither makes much difference. 

You've got to put this into the perspective of the the representatives you'll get in either case and what they've achieved for their people - and use this as a benchmark for how much you care about the "problem" ie very little. 

They could have easily solved it by calling the constituency Garff and North Onchan. It's a bit of a none problem like Malarkey getting Douglas West changed to Douglas South. 

[Roger Mexico]

3 hours ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

They could have easily solved it by calling the constituency Garff and North Onchan. It's a bit of a none problem like Malarkey getting Douglas West changed to Douglas South. 

Well if you look at the map a better name would be Garff and East Onchan.  Though they did suggest putting Birch Hill in with Garff instead at one stage, which would have fitted your idea.  But unfortunately when the constituency names went out for consultation[1], no one actually seems to have made such a sensible suggestion. 

And despite all the fuss, only one person objected to the old Douglas South becoming Douglas West because they claimed it was to the South (even though it is actually to the West) and Malarkey, having missed his chance, then went to all the trouble of putting a separate bill through Tynwald, just to change that one word.  He probably regards it as his finest hour.

 

[1]  This was another example of the low cunning with which Sally Boulton managed the whole process against the usual problem that there are 24 MHKs who think the current situation must be perfect because it elected them and so absolutely nothing must be changed.  She did a special consultation on the names, knowing that they would obsess with that because it was the trivial part and ignore the more important part about where the boundaries actually were.

[Uhtred]

16 hours ago, Rushen Spy said:

Nobody is forcing anybody to live in Onchan.

Really...? Jeeesus...I thought they were all being forced to.

[Uhtred]

4 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Well if you look at the map a better name would be Garff and East Onchan.  Though they did suggest putting Birch Hill in with Garff instead at one stage, which would have fitted your idea.  But unfortunately when the constituency names went out for consultation[1], no one actually seems to have made such a sensible suggestion. 

 This was another example of the low cunning with which Sally Boulton managed the whole process against the usual problem that there are 24 MHKs who think the current situation must be perfect because it elected them and so absolutely nothing must be changed.  She did a special consultation on the names, knowing that they would obsess with that because it was the trivial part and ignore the more important part about where the boundaries actually were.

I’m sure you’re right about that - distract the natives with something shiny but of no consequence so as to then be left alone with the substance. Clever woman.

[hissingsid]

People in Onchan should know their representatives and not have to vote for people they do not know, do not want to know and are only interested in the neighbourhood in which they reside.