General Thread for the election (old Electioneering starting early thread from Local News)

[Fluffy123]

18 hours ago, Whatnonsence said:

No one sits on the backbenchers even less so shouting the odds. Immediately their  through the door they are drinking from the trough. That’s the system that has prevailed since the invention of the Ministerial system, one party state by patronage according Peter Karran, who would argue given how the system has developed.

 

 

Interesting views. I remember the criticism of one Douglas south candidate who took departments last year - while the other was congratulated for being a back bencher (on here - not in real life clearly) 

[Whatnonsence]

18 hours ago, Fluffy123 said:

Interesting views. I remember the criticism of one Douglas south candidate who took departments last year - while the other was congratulated for being a back bencher (on here - not in real life clearly) 

Fluffy I think Robertshaw and Chris Thomas are free from departmental responsibilities. They are therefore able to vote freely.

[manxman34]

1 hour ago, Whatnonsence said:

Fluffy I think Robertshaw and Chris Thomas are free from departmental responsibilities. They are therefore able to vote freely.

Free from departmental responsibilities by choice?

[buncha wankas]

Taking the piss out of Callister for his unbearable ‘me me me commentary’. Latter taking leaf out of creatin Cretney self promotion technique

Bugger me now my own MHK has started with his own self promotional ‘dear diary’

To much time on their hands. 

[Whatnonsence]

11 hours ago, manxman34 said:

Free from departmental responsibilities by choice?

or design Manxman? No idea why.
Chris Thomas was sacked, not sure why Robertshaw is in the wilderness.

[Fluffy123]

16 hours ago, Whatnonsence said:

Fluffy I think Robertshaw and Chris Thomas are free from departmental responsibilities. They are therefore able to vote freely.

Several are. But that’s not my point. My point is dammed if they do dammed if they don’t (on MF not IRL. Obviously) 

[Whatnonsence]

8 hours ago, Fluffy123 said:

Several are. But that’s not my point. My point is dammed if they do dammed if they don’t (on MF not IRL. Obviously) 

Either way Fluffy they are ineffective in our system of government unless a number of them gathered together singing of the same hymn sheet with effective  policy and reform. 

[code99]

5 hours ago, Whatnonsence said:

Either way Fluffy they are ineffective in our system of government unless a number of them gathered together singing of the same hymn sheet with effective  policy and reform. 

I agree, but, in the absence of any formal political opposition a move of this kind will always be weak.

In order to get elected the MHK candidates will weave all sorts of popularist stuff into their manifestos. But, as we all know, for the most part, much of what is said in a manifesto is not worth paper it has been written on. My longstanding view has always been that one of the root causes of our seemingly undemocratic political system is the so-called ‘collective responsibility’ requirement which forces (especially) Ministers, and other MHKs to a lesser extent, to toe line with whatever the Council of Ministers decides. I believe that the ‘collective responsibility’ is inherently an autocratic/ anti-democratic practice because it enables the Council of Ministers to ‘get their way’ everytime, and only very rarely to face serious opposition. They can behave in a way which is similar to the behaviors of medieval lords and barons who used to rule this ‘Kingdom’. They can get away with minimum transparency and accountability.

‘Real’ democracy only happens here every 5 years when there is an election and even then, the common people do not have a right to democratically elect the Chief Minister (aka - the Chief Baron). From memory in the last election HQ came second in his own constituency, but they foisted him upon the entire population – we as people have no say in who is the Chief Minister of the country with a smaller population than some suburbs in London.

Together with senior Civil Servants the CoMin are a largely unaccountable cabal of rulers who will do everything they can to maintain the status quo/ stay in power. The decisions are largely taken behind the closed doors. Many FOI requests have sections that are redacted when they are eventually released. Anybody who challenges this ‘collective’ power (e.g., Dr Glover) risks being smeared and even threatened with “negative publicity”. Our press is not strong, independent and willing enough to hold them to account.

I am not proposing Westminster or American style of government for our country, but I am in favour of reforms which allow the electorate to evaluate the performance of their MHKs against what they promised in their manifestos. This simple idea, however falls at the first fence – ‘collective responsibility’. As soon as an elected representative falls under the cloak of ‘collective responsibility’ they have to put aside any personal aspirations and promises. Currently, Ministers oppose to something are required to resign. I believe that we would all be better off if this ‘undemocratic’ dynamic of Manx ‘democracy’ was challenged. IMHO, all MHKs should be held to account on a regular basis, not just once every 5 years when they stand for re-election. I am also in favour of ditching the ‘collective responsibility’ when it comes to Tynwald. This ‘cloak’ prevents Ministers from openly debating their thoughts and ideas in Tynwald. We need to find a way to create a bit more transparency around the political decisions being made.     

Edited April 5, 2021 by code99
typo

[asitis]

I think it illustrates the shield they enjoy from "collective responsibility" when I think in answering a question about the schools, HQ felt it necessary to start with " We took the collective decision .......... "

To stress something, which everyone knows is the case, at the beginning of the answer portrays a distinct impression that he knew it was flawed and the collective was going to save them!

[SleepyJoe]

14 hours ago, Whatnonsence said:

or design Manxman? No idea why.
Chris Thomas was sacked, not sure why Robertshaw is in the wilderness.

He quit - I think because CoMinDara would not reduce it's massive edifice to his masterplan of two or three effective departments of government

He was/is probably correct in his thinking, but obviously you cannot do away with the jobs of your own inhouse electorate

Edited April 5, 2021 by SleepyJoe

[piebaps]

47 minutes ago, asitis said:

I think it illustrates the shield they enjoy from "collective responsibility" when I think in answering a question about the schools, HQ felt it necessary to start with " We took the collective decision .......... "

To stress something, which everyone knows is the case, at the beginning of the answer portrays a distinct impression that he knew it was flawed and the collective was going to save them!

Allinson explained in some detail the reasoning behind the decision. Based on what we know now, its easy to second guess it. The Hansard is here https://www.tynwald.org.im/business/hansard/20002020/t210309.pdf. At that time though, based on what they knew its difficult to argue that they should've closed the schools.

I was listening to this and while HQ definitely said "collective" I was certain the Doc said "unanimous". I recall it because it made my ears prick up at the time. Hansard however has "ragheaded" the word off the records (assuming my cloth ears heard it of course).

[TheTeapot]

6 minutes ago, piebaps said:

 At that time though, based on what they knew its difficult to argue that they should've closed the schools.

 

The same day they met virtually?

[Rhumsaa]

On 4/5/2021 at 1:32 AM, Fluffy123 said:

Several are. But that’s not my point. My point is dammed if they do dammed if they don’t (on MF not IRL. Obviously) 

I agree

But you're speaking as though MF (not IRL obvs) is one collective viewpoint which it is not, it's a forum that has multiple people (and multiple personalities) all putting their tuppence in (or not) so you can easily choose conflicting views across a period of time and discussion threads.

I've been guilty of making those sort of sweeping statements myself because even on a thread that appears to have a strong majority of opinion in a certain direction you can't then transpose that across to another discussion unless you make sure it's the same posters.

[Andy Onchan]

On 4/2/2021 at 8:18 AM, The Duck of Atholl said:

I don't think anyone should run if they aren't prepared to take up a role in COMIN. I think there are a fair few candidates like the idea of being elected and then spending the entire term shouting the odds from the backbenchers. Anyone can do that.

 

Some of the current lot can't even do that.

[Rhumsaa]

Steve Rodan is definitely retiring

https://www.three.fm/news/isle-of-man-news/president-of-tynwald-to-retire1/