2112 Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 Just now, Gladys said: I often 75% agree with your posts, but on this it is 100%. The lack of a fast damage limitation exercise is woeful. What do you really expect, CM Cannan learned from the Master of doing fcuk all and King of Dick Waving, ex CM Quayle. Cannan is not a leader, he is useless. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 5 minutes ago, Two-lane said: There is outrage on this forum because of this case, but I do not think that you should view this as an isolated, extreme, occurrence. There have been many other comments here and in the press about bullying and harassment in government but none have generated this level of response, not because the incidents were less severe but because they were not so unambiguously and publicly documented. A while ago I made this post about an brief encounter I had with Malcolm Couch: "A couple of years ago at the endoscopy public meeting in Ramsey, after the meeting was over I attempted to engage Couch in polite conversation. For a few minutes he just stared at me with a blank face, until eventually, without saying a single word, he turned his back on me and walked away. In have never come across such a pig-ignorant person. I was astounded that someone like that could have been given such a job - because he did not get like that overnight, and I doubt that behaviour was reserved for just me." I have the opinion that this attitude is prevalent throughout government, and that include the MHKs. They are all people who feel they are superior to others. The attitude of the MHKs who refuse to comment on this case - quoting some irrelevancy - are adopting the same attitude as Couch. They are turning their back on you and walking away. You are irrelevant. Their behaviour is insulting. I don't think anyone is looking at it as an aberration, but it is the first time the gritty, sordid details have been published. Years ago, (back in the mid 80s) people felt the accessibility of politicians was one of our defining features. Where else could you meet your most senior politician (it wasn't CM then, I think) or Head of Treasury on Prospect Hill and engage with them? They were visible, accessible and accountable. Not so now, which is such a shame because they are all (and I mean all MHKs) swept up in a kind of arrogance (or fear?) of position, forgetting the basics that they serve one master, the Manx public. That no-one seems to be questioning the sub judice edict and what it really means or applies to, just reiterates the point. Who gave that advice and on what basis? The term "busted flush" comes to mind. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 I expect Sub Judice is a stalling tactic until they figure out how to firefight this ! They just might have the impression this pile is a little too big to fit under the carpet ! 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 2 minutes ago, asitis said: I expect Sub Judice is a stalling tactic until they figure out how to firefight this ! They just might have the impression this pile is a little too big to fit under the carpet ! Of course it is, but it is an example of the disdain they have for us and that it is swallowed hook, line and sinker by the MHKs gives you a fair indication of what is so wrong with this island. The damage limitation is not intended to protect the island and its people, but the system which has so patently and disastrously failed. Yet no one, absolutely no-one, has stood up and said "we have got this and will deal with it effectively in your and the island's best interests". Not one single MHK. No, it will wait a week. This reply should really be on the other thread. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 When the Ranson story was officially reported in the press on Thursday, IOMG had a press release on Facebook, with JPW grinning like a Cheshire Cat in the presence of Lord (Eric) Pickles who was on the island. The poor bugger had to endure a Skelly tour of the Tynwald Building. Im sure he would have been bored to death with our politicos dick waving. If only he got to hear the truth, which he could inform the Westminster authorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 43 minutes ago, Gladys said: Of course it is, but it is an example of the disdain they have for us and that it is swallowed hook, line and sinker by the MHKs gives you a fair indication of what is so wrong with this island. Your comment implies that the MHKs are naive enough to believe what they are told. That will be true for some. The rest know what is going on. The toe-the-line attitude is determined by two things: money, and ego. 60K per year is a pretty high amount for people who otherwise would otherwise be post-persons or bus drivers. They have no choice. Others, perhaps Allinson is an example, who could earn more elsewhere but they believe they are the only one who can truly lead the IoM. They could start a revolution, but an easier path is just to not create waves and wait for their turn. So we have 8 ministers who will do what the Chief Minister says, otherwise they are no longer a minster. And there are another 15 MHKs who will do what the Chief Minster says, otherwise they have no chance of being made a minister. (Maybe Chris Thomas is an exception). [The IoM has a block vote ratio of 9/14 vs 23/627 in Westminster. Is this relevant? ] 4 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cissolt Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 6 minutes ago, Two-lane said: Your comment implies that the MHKs are naive enough to believe what they are told. That will be true for some. The rest know what is going on. The toe-the-line attitude is determined by two things: money, and ego. 60K per year is a pretty high amount for people who otherwise would otherwise be post-persons or bus drivers. They have no choice. Others, perhaps Allinson is an example, who could earn more elsewhere but they believe they are the only one who can truly lead the IoM. They could start a revolution, but an easier path is just to not create waves and wait for their turn. So we have 8 ministers who will do what the Chief Minister says, otherwise they are no longer a minster. And there are another 15 MHKs who will do what the Chief Minster says, otherwise they have no chance of being made a minister. (Maybe Chris Thomas is an exception). [The IoM has a block vote ratio of 9/14 vs 23/627 in Westminster. Is this relevant? ] True, not many current mhks would hope to earn more than that in regular life. Civil servant equivalent of a heo or higher? I hoped some of the newer intake would have more shown more moral fortitude. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Flint Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 Only another four years and then you can empty them all out 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 5 minutes ago, cissolt said: True, not many current mhks would hope to earn more than that in regular life. Civil servant equivalent of a heo or higher? I hoped some of the newer intake would have more shown more moral fortitude. Why would the back benchers not question this? They have nothing to lose, they can't be ousted. That is the point of them, isn't it? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandits Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 1 minute ago, Gladys said: Why would the back benchers not question this? They have nothing to lose, they can't be ousted. Money and displaying future suitability for a role. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 6 minutes ago, Derek Flint said: Only another four years and then you can empty them all out We can't even attract bar staff let alone decent politicians! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 I have raised my concerns with my MHK. He was receptive but not vocal. I just hope he is keeping his powder dry. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 2 minutes ago, Gladys said: Why would the back benchers not question this? They have nothing to lose, they can't be ousted. That is the point of them, isn't it? Because they want to be ministers. I believe Rob Callister has stated that he was disappointed not to be made a minster at the last reorganisation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandits Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 2 minutes ago, Two-lane said: Because they want to be ministers. I believe Rob Callister has stated that he was disappointed not to be made a minster at the last reorganisation. Most people in Onchan were disappointed that he wasn’t the Messiah either. Topped the poll but basically it seems the support is only on Facebook. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted May 14, 2022 Share Posted May 14, 2022 5 minutes ago, Two-lane said: Because they want to be ministers. I believe Rob Callister has stated that he was disappointed not to be made a minster at the last reorganisation. Is an inabilty to ask questions (like: "Why is this sub judice?") a pre-requisite for aspiring ministers? (Sorry - that's a daft question, isn't it?) 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.