Legco 2021

[slinkydevil]

[Ramseyboi]

24 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Don't be ridiculous.  It's not time-limited, anyone elected would be able to stand again in 2022 and all those recently elected to fill a casual vacancy (Wild, Poole-Wilson, Sharpe) did exactly that and got in again.  There were enough people who stood for the Douglas South by-election with an even shorter period in office as well.

Well, I wouldn’t give my job up for a year in the hope I might get back in at the start of 2022 and I am generally regarded as a bit of a risk taker.

[Ramseyboi]

20 minutes ago, slinkydevil said:

He wouldn’t dare, and I doubt anyone would want to put their name to proposing or seconding him.

[Andy Onchan]

2 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

Well, I wouldn’t give my job up for a year in the hope I might get back in at the start of 2022 and I am generally regarded as a bit of a risk taker.

He's retired isn't he?

[Roger Mexico]

11 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

He wouldn’t dare, and I doubt anyone would want to put their name to proposing or seconding him.

To be fair to him, Josem said on the previous thread about this: "I think it would be indecent for any person who was unsuccessful in September's general election to put themselves forward as candidates for the casual vacancies for the Legislative Council."

(Also a reminder that you need four MHKs to back you for nomination, not two)

[Stu Peters]

There's a lot of talk about 'failed MHKs' and 'the old boys club' in selecting members for LegCo.

My view is that for what purports to be a 'scrutiny of government legislation' role, a former MHK is probably best equipped for the job. The option is that MHKs vote for someone with little or no experience of the arcane world of Tynwald processes, protocols and procedures and has zero public mandate. At least someone who even only stood as MHK has subjected themselves to public scrutiny, whereas some nominations in the past have appeared to be more about ticking boxes than choosing the best person.

[Ramseyboi]

17 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

He's retired isn't he?

Yes he is.  What’s that got to do with anything unless you are trying to reinforce the point I am making?

[Ramseyboi]

15 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

Yes, but we’re not talking about him, we’re talking about Ramseyboi. Again. 

Of ffs, no we are not.

Someone asked why there were less nominations than the last time and I gave a possible explanation and pointed out that personally I wouldn’t risk it and maybe others have the same thoughts.

 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Ramseyboi

[Andy Onchan]

1 minute ago, Ramseyboi said:

Yes he is.  What’s that got to do with anything unless you are trying to reinforce the point I am making?

But he hasn't given up a job (outside of being an MHK and he retired from IOM Bank before he did that job). You make it sound like everyone has to conform to your norms. And that ain't the case, old fruit.

[Andy Onchan]

10 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

There's a lot of talk about 'failed MHKs' and 'the old boys club' in selecting members for LegCo.

My view is that for what purports to be a 'scrutiny of government legislation' role, a former MHK is probably best equipped for the job. The option is that MHKs vote for someone with little or no experience of the arcane world of Tynwald processes, protocols and procedures and has zero public mandate. At least someone who even only stood as MHK has subjected themselves to public scrutiny, whereas some nominations in the past have appeared to be more about ticking boxes than choosing the best person.

Gosh.... that's some forward planning Stu! 😁

[Declan]

I would worry about Quayle seeking a LEGCO post so soon after standing down as CM. It would look very much like dodging the electorate, then wanting to scrutinise his successor. 

[Ramseyboi]

13 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

But he hasn't given up a job (outside of being an MHK and he retired from IOM Bank before he did that job). You make it sound like everyone has to conform to your norms. And that ain't the case, old fruit.

Erm? It was about why there is only one nomination and I said it’s because the pool of people who would want or be able to do it is very small.

Bills circumstances which mean he can stand are nothing to do with that point.

Did you actually read the thread old fruit?

[Chris C]

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

He'd become very critical of Govt over one or two points towards the end of his term, finances IIRC? Perhaps he feels he can make more of a difference as an MLC?

Well he could hardly make less

[Omobono]

2 hours ago, Peter Layman said:

In his 2016 manifesto, Shimmins stated that his priorities were economic growth, reducing the public pension deficit, reducing the size and scope of government and maintaining quality of life for residents.

I can see why he didn't bother going for re-election

So where did he go wrong then ?     because none of these election promises  have ever been debated ,never mind achieved  failure on all  three  accounts , and his claim to fame was he orchestrated the closure of most of the Isle of Man bank  rural branches ,

[Peter Layman]

1 hour ago, Stu Peters said:

There's a lot of talk about 'failed MHKs' and 'the old boys club' in selecting members for LegCo.

My view is that for what purports to be a 'scrutiny of government legislation' role, a former MHK is probably best equipped for the job. The option is that MHKs vote for someone with little or no experience of the arcane world of Tynwald processes, protocols and procedures and has zero public mandate. At least someone who even only stood as MHK has subjected themselves to public scrutiny, whereas some nominations in the past have appeared to be more about ticking boxes than choosing the best person.

were you laughing to yourself when you typed that?