Banker Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 19 minutes ago, All Right said: It’s going to be hard for the next CM to control Tynwald though if they can no longer buy people off with board or ministerial posts for increased pay. Can you imagine anyone dumb enough to go on the DOI next year when it makes no difference to their pay whether they do or not? Some departments could well find themselves without political members. People like power & doubt there will be many turning down chances to influence policy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Right Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Banker said: & doubt there will be many turning down chances to influence policy That’s sort of my point. There you can most certainly influence nothing policy wise so who would bother? It would just give you a bad name for absolutely no benefit (fiscal or otherwise) to yourself. Edited November 25, 2020 by All Right Typo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, Banker said: People like power & doubt there will be many turning down chances to influence policy Policy in itself doesn't seem to be an issue as that's driven by the executive, mostly. The main problem is politicians curbing the executive's excesses in implementing them. The executive are, seemingly, untouchable when it comes to managing either their own finances or that of thew taxpayer funding their projects. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 7 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said: Policy in itself doesn't seem to be an issue as that's driven by the executive, mostly. The main problem is politicians curbing the executive's excesses in implementing them. The executive are, seemingly, untouchable when it comes to managing either their own finances or that of the taxpayer funding their projects. Think you're confusing legislative (politicians in Tynwald), Executive (CoMin and Departments at political level) and Administration (Civil Service - those who implement). However our system makes that error very easy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, John Wright said: Think you're confusing legislative (politicians in Tynwald), Executive (CoMin and Departments at political level) and Administration (Civil Service - those who implement). However our system makes that error very easy. I know what I mean! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 There would have to be an 'obligation' to do Dept work, policed by their colleagues. It may be that Dept find they don't require many members now? However it would allow more scrutiny committees and that would be the benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 22 hours ago, rachomics said: May I ask what I’m supposed to be apologising for? I would rather do science than debate potholes, the prom, flumes, teachers pay or anything else that might be on the current agenda with the words “Would the honourable member agree with me...” put before it. It’s my choice. Well I did suggest that you should acknowledge that the working life of an MHK was more than just about debating potholes which could appear to be look like you were being flippant. You have complied somewhat grudgingly by including the debate on teachers pay which you may think seem to add a bit of gravitas to your understanding of the role of an MHK. There was no request for an apology from me just a request that you should acknowledge that the role of an MHK is more than debating potholes. Then you try and deflect attention from this discussion by bringing up the archaic nature of the way the Court goes about its business. It is indeed your choice to practice science and you may be quite good at it but like sports etc it should be kept out of politics (and please don’t protest that it was not you who brought it into it) Perhaps this whole business can now be put to bed and you can accept the thanks due for your contribution in these difficult times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 9 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: Well I did suggest that you should acknowledge that the working life of an MHK was more than just about debating potholes which could appear to be look like you were being flippant. You have complied somewhat grudgingly by including the debate on teachers pay which you may think seem to add a bit of gravitas to your understanding of the role of an MHK. There was no request for an apology from me just a request that you should acknowledge that the role of an MHK is more than debating potholes. Then you try and deflect attention from this discussion by bringing up the archaic nature of the way the Court goes about its business. It is indeed your choice to practice science and you may be quite good at it but like sports etc it should be kept out of politics (and please don’t protest that it was not you who brought it into it) Perhaps this whole business can now be put to bed and you can accept the thanks due for your contribution in these difficult times If anyone was previously unsure of the meaning of ‘condescending’... 3 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Uhtred said: If anyone was previously unsure of the meaning of ‘condescending’... Not sure you are correct there. I have communicated with Dr G, ( via PM ) and have No issue with her at all. However, she keeps prodding some MHKs for a reaction and getting one. Looks like a game at a rather serious time in our lives. Hope I am wrong. Edited November 25, 2020 by Scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Right Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 1 minute ago, Scotty said: Not sure you are correct there. Seems quite accurate to me. It’s the most condescending post I’ve read in a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Right Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 9 minutes ago, Uhtred said: If anyone was previously unsure of the meaning of ‘condescending’... Mansplaining I believe. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, All Right said: Mansplaining I believe. All you new posters can easily put us in our place then. Well done Better than the confused folk then 😂I Edited November 25, 2020 by Scotty 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcousticallyChallenged Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 21 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: It is indeed your choice to practice science and you may be quite good at it but like sports etc it should be kept out of politics Surely, science, as by very definition being "a systematically organized body of knowledge on a particular subject." is fundamentally important to the decision making of politicians. Of course, look at a high profile politician like Trump, and you see what you end up with when you have a politician who sees science as optional. It sounds to me like you have a bee in your bonnet and are trying to belittle Dr Glover as you disagree with her. Though you are right, MHKs don't just debate potholes, they consider teachers wages, decide border policy on a whim, shake some hands and shred letters too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Right Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Just now, Scotty said: All you new posters can easily put us in our place then. Well done It’s called coherent debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said: Surely, science, as by very definition being "a systematically organized body of knowledge on a particular subject." is fundamentally important to the decision making of politicians. Of course, look at a high profile politician like Trump, and you see what you end up with when you have a politician who sees science as optional. It sounds to me like you have a bee in your bonnet and are trying to belittle Dr Glover as you disagree with her. Though you are right, MHKs don't just debate potholes, they consider teachers wages, decide border policy on a whim, shake some hands and shred letters too. Really No vote wins there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.