More uselessness from DBC

[Amadeus]

2 hours ago, FANDL said:

You are 100% right. It should not take days to work your way through deliberately Kafkaesque documentation to ascertain what a motion was actually about and consequently who actually voted for or against it. They certainly seem to have an aversion to open democracy at town hall. As for the 2024 elections - it’s again helpful to point out that of the 11 who voted for this 3 got in on uncontested seats. 

As pointed out to you on Twitter already, the actual debate was public. Just the way this motion ended up being recorded wasn’t very clear and I understand how it looks. I also agree that we should aim to make things easier to understand and follow. 

[Amadeus]

1 hour ago, CallMeCurious said:

I maintain there should be a minimum number of votes required for any seat. After that, then as long as eligibale voters in wards are evenly split then those with the most votes, regardless of ward, win until all the seats are filled. 

 

You need 10 signatures to stand and they have to be residents from the constituency. If you don’t have those you can’t stand. 

 

[Amadeus]

1 hour ago, CallMeCurious said:

Turkeys don't vote for Christmas and politicians rarely tell the truth.

I’d be happy to vote for LGR even if it would mean getting rid of my own job there. It’s already a younger and more assertive council and believe you me that there is internal pushback against some of the things we are being told or presented with.
 

Thing is that there are some people who will always complain no matter what we do and them bring the usual “private sector would do it so much better” argument. Well I work in the private sector and always have. The two are very different worlds and while I agree that public institutions could still learn a lot from private ones, anyone who says they’d wipe the floor with everyone in a week doesn’t know what he’s talking about. 

[Banker]

23 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

Actually I do very well know what I’m talking about and I’d never take on any role linked to an organisation like that where I didn’t have sacking powers. Most of the problems stem from the fact that as you can’t pedal people out of the door (or at least motivate them by the potential prospect) they think they’re untouchable. You could fix most of the problems in the public sector by taking the private sector approach of - if you don’t do you job you could well find yourself out on your arse. 

Absolute bollocks!! No organization or firm has rules where some dictator can sack anyone they want, you obviously don’t run anything or you would know the law & consequences on breaking it.

[WTF]

27 minutes ago, Banker said:

Absolute bollocks!! No organization or firm has rules where some dictator can sack anyone they want, you obviously don’t run anything or you would know the law & consequences on breaking it.

you'd better tell alf and rob.

[Apple]

MHKs and Commissioners are not technically employed by Tynwald or the local authority. As elected representatives they can not be sacked as suggested above. 

They do have to abide by standards of behaviour (Nolan) though for which any breaches that can attract sanctions. Not being allowed to take part in business being the ultimate one, and that has to be the collective decision of the council or Tynwald.

The people who elected them want them there and to represent them, despite what others may think. Some people call that democracy. Maybe it is ?

[Steady Eddie]

23 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

This makes no sense.  The next Corpy elections will probably be in April 2025; the next Keys election isn't till September 2026.  If a councillor doesn't re-stand in 2025, they will presumably lose any advantage they have from their local government work - though, as I've pointed out before, if you look at who gets elected as MHKs and who doesn't, there may be little in the way of advantage in LA service anyway.

Didn’t Jon Joughin do that last time? Resigned on council then stood down and came back to canvass as MHK. 

[Roger Mexico]

16 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

Didn’t Jon Joughin do that last time? Resigned on council then stood down and came back to canvass as MHK. 

Technically no.  He didn't stand again in July 2021 in the Council elections (his wife stood in his place but she didn't get elected - and I doubt he would have done), but he remained Mayor and so a member of the Council.  But in any case it would still have been only a gap of a couple of months rather than the longer one in 2025-6 which was my real point.

[NoTailT]

Hypocrite 101. Commissioners (DBC is basically one) have no place in national issues but MHK's have a place in local issues, in a seat they don't reside in. Right.

 

[Moghrey Mie]

Presumably commissioners can say they want improved public transport for their residents.

[NoTailT]

3 minutes ago, Moghrey Mie said:

Presumably commissioners can say they want improved public transport for their residents.

Not in - what I like to call - LawrieLand.

[Roger Mexico]

7 minutes ago, Moghrey Mie said:

Presumably commissioners can say they want improved public transport for their residents.

And Commissioners as a body have the legal right to be consulted on a whole range of topics, including I suspect public transport (though how much anyone, who should have been consulted, was when Longworth was around is another matter).  So it's a perfectly valid thing for an election candidate to raise.

But Hooper seems to joined in completely with the government mindset where the civil service decides what is best for themselves the public, the latter should just grovel in gratitude and any attempt to disagree or even have a view is treated as the most offensive impudence.  He's been a real disappointment as a Minister.

[BriT]

10 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

He's been a real disappointment as a Minister.

He’s hardly an isolated case. Garff has a mixed blessing in Oswald Mosley in that you never hear from him which is a good thing. But then you get all angry because he’s paid £70K a year to basically do or say nothing. At least Hooper makes his views known. 

[majkul]

Which buses (when they run?), go past wherever they dump the rubbish? And will they allow you to carry a couple of bags on board? Hear me out, I'm no Baldrick, but I've got a cunning plan!

[manxchester]

17 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

And Commissioners as a body have the legal right to be consulted on a whole range of topics, including I suspect public transport (though how much anyone, who should have been consulted, was when Longworth was around is another matter).  So it's a perfectly valid thing for an election candidate to raise.

But Hooper seems to joined in completely with the government mindset where the civil service decides what is best for themselves the public, the latter should just grovel in gratitude and any attempt to disagree or even have a view is treated as the most offensive impudence.  He's been a real disappointment as a Minister.

Spot on. I actually voted for him due to a lack of viable other candidates but no chance I will again. Apart from the way he comes across on social media the one time I reached out for help (about bringing a much needed business to Ramsey) he couldn’t have done less to help. Obviously sees himself as a “national” politician now rather than one elected to represent Ramsey.