John Wright Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 21 minutes ago, code99 said: I accept that in certain circumstances what you say can be true. The last thing we need is more cronyism. However, I believe that as the world becomes more and more technical and specialist, if the people who are appointed as Ministers are to 'hold their own' against the so called experts in the civil service, these people need to bring expertise with them. For example, there is Clare Barber MHK, who is a qualified nurse, and she is a member of the DHSC. If what you said was always correct, then, based on your logic, she should not have been appointed at all. It seems to me that these types of rules either do not exist or have not been applied consistently. That rather depends on what her area of delegated authority is. She isn’t a minister, just a political member. ( It’s said to be policy responsibilities for culture and transformation and Chair of the Regulatory Improvement Forum and Vice-Chair of the DHSC Quality & Safety Committee ) And I’ve not said there was any rule. I’ve just pointed out why the assumption that previous experience may mean you should be thought of as a shoe in isn’t necessarily correct. Mr Gawne, a farmer by family background, was Agriculture minister for a while, Betty Hanson was Tynwald chair of the Board of Education having been a teacher herself and her husband being a serving headmaster. Im just pointing out the odd attitude of wanting our politicians to micromanage, and then being hypercritical of political interference when they do. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 AG's always a lawyer. Or is that different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, Declan said: AG's always a lawyer. Or is that different? AG isn’t a politician - he’s the government’s lawyer/legal advisor, and must, therefore…be a lawyer! Indeed, qualified as a Manx advocate. He sits in Tynwald (and in CoMin) ex officio. And by convention never asks questions (in Tynwald) - only answers them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 24 minutes ago, Declan said: AG's always a lawyer. Or is that different? As chief legal adviser to the government and an employee, not elected, with a non voting seat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 46 minutes ago, Roxanne said: There was also an ex teacher as Minister of Education. I can’t remember his name. Tall chap, but of a Munster look about him. It was thought that as an ex teacher he would have a good handle on things but frankly, it didn’t go so well. He was good at his job but the background he brought with him worked more against than for. It seemed that after that they had a change of heart re previous experience and Ministerial positions. Ron Cretney. But I think he was long retired and it was only for a very short period in 1990/1. He only did 3 years in the Keys 88 to 91. Think he retired in 1980/81. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code99 Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, John Wright said: Im just pointing out the odd attitude of wanting our politicians to micromanage, and then being hypercritical of political interference when they do. I have implied nothing of the sort. What I am saying is that in a modern often technically complex world, it is not always possible for politicians to become subject matter experts 'by learning on the job' and therefore it is best, if they bring expertise, qualifications and acumen with them, when they are appointed. Otherwise, they will get 'trounced' by the "Sir Humphrey Abblebys of the civil service". For example, if we had a Minister for Infrastructure with an engineering background, who knows, the Douglas Prom might have been finished by now. Wouldn't it be great if we had Ministers with those type of experience running our departments. But we don't, do we? Apart from having expertise, which is what I have mainly been talking about, there are also moral 'qualities' that I would like out Ministers to have. These are exemplified by the 'Seven Nolan principles of public life', which are; selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. I think that most of us would also like our Ministers to exhibit these personal qualities. If they were all following these principles, then issues like having conflicts of interest or having improper behaviours would rarely occur. Still, we are where we are and we have who we have. And, we can always hope for better. Edited May 12, 2021 by code99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 3 hours ago, Rhumsaa said: It'd be a different matter if RTC had a tent emporium I suspect Or a barber shop. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 22 minutes ago, code99 said: I have implied nothing of the sort. What I am saying is that in a modern often technically complex world, it is not possible for politicians to become subject matter experts 'by learning on the job' and therefore it is best, if they bring expertise, qualifications and acumen with them, when they are appointed. Otherwise, they will get 'trounced' by the "Sir Humphrey Abblebys of the civil service". For example, if we had a Minister for Infrastructure with an engineering background, who knows, the Douglas Prom might have been finished by now. Wouldn't it be great if we had Ministers with those type of experience running our departments. But we don't, do we? Apart from having expertise, which is what I have mainly been talking about, there are also moral 'qualities' that I would like out Ministers to have. These are exemplified by the 'Seven Nolan principles of public life', which are; selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. I think that most of us would also like our Ministers to exhibit these personal qualities. If they were all following these principles, then issues like having conflicts of interest or having improper behaviours would rarely occur. Still, we are where we are and we have who we have. And, we can always hope for better. But that’s exactly what you’re suggesting. And it’s a common attitude here. So, how do we achieve the situation you want. Do we have a change in the franchise so we have a teachers seat, an engineers seat, a medically qualified seat, a farmers or fisherman’s seat, a business consultants seat, and economists seat? Otherwise how do we ensure we elect people with the qualifications you say are needed? You really are confusing the role of minister. It’s not their job to be an expert in the field covered by their department. That’s the job of civil servants and outside experts. You’re describing a technocracy, not a democracy. And who is going to be qualified to vote for these paragons of their professions, all of us, or just voters qualified in each departmental sector? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 (edited) 35 minutes ago, code99 said: For example, if we had a Minister for Infrastructure with an engineering background, who knows, the Douglas Prom might have been finished by now. The previous minister presiding over that disaster has a degree in engineering from Cambridge. Edited May 12, 2021 by TheTeapot 3 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted May 12, 2021 Share Posted May 12, 2021 5 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: The previous minister presiding over that disaster has a degree in engineering from Cambridge. Quite right. And astonishing. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manx Bean Posted May 13, 2021 Share Posted May 13, 2021 9 hours ago, TheTeapot said: The previous minister presiding over that disaster has a degree in engineering from Cambridge. He hid it well, didn't he? 3 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted May 13, 2021 Share Posted May 13, 2021 (edited) bah Edited May 13, 2021 by Barlow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted May 13, 2021 Share Posted May 13, 2021 12 minutes ago, Barlow said: bah B.eng I think. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code99 Posted May 13, 2021 Share Posted May 13, 2021 (edited) On 5/12/2021 at 8:59 PM, John Wright said: You really are confusing the role of minister. It’s not their job to be an expert in the field covered by their department. That’s the job of civil servants and outside experts. You’re describing a technocracy, not a democracy. If anybody listened to Kathryn Magson's testimony to the PAC yesterday, they would probably conclude that we already live in a technocracy. Mrs Magson has a formidable personality, and she did not give straight answers to any questions. It seems to me that some senior civil servants are able to run rings around our politicians. This dynamic is not good for our democracy either. Edited May 13, 2021 by code99 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleepyJoe Posted May 13, 2021 Share Posted May 13, 2021 For the record. Has it been posted before? 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.