Jump to content

Bishop V Hooper


Fred the shred

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Andy Onchan said:

May be I'm wrong but I haven't heard of either Faragher or Hooper saying they want the bishop out on religious grounds. They're saying it's undemocratic.

Faragher has sort of suggested that today in a real meltdown thread on Twitter by Devon Watson who seems to have gone berserk making all sorts of inflammatory statements about the Bishop representing gay haters and that net flicks is more popular than the church etc. It’s real quality stuff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

[1]  Not only is the President only elected by MHKs, only an MHK (or the current President) can be elected as President.

The Speaker is also elected by MHKs - but I have no idea what he does, apart from wear nice clothes (presumably paid fpr by me).

Michael Moyle stood for election to LegCo, but was not chosen. One would have thought an ex-lawyer would be useful, but obviously he did not have the required capabilities.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

In which case why aren't they demanding that all of LegCo is elected.  There's probably more Manx people involved in choosing the new Bishop than in selecting the other nine[1], that's how ridiculous and undemocratic the current situation is.

The fact that no one proposing getting rid of the Bishop is keen on further reform shows the whole thing up for the pathetic virtue-signalling this is.

 

[1]  Not only is the President only elected by MHKs, only an MHK (or the current President) can be elected as President.

It seems to me that is why LegCo voted against the motion in Tynwald. Pure self-preservation. If they have done a good enough then they shouldn't fear the electorate.

47 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

The Speaker is also elected by MHKs - but I have no idea what he does, apart from wear nice clothes (presumably paid fpr by me).

At least he is elected by the electorate firstly. 

On that point, having a Speaker denies an elected Member a voice in the Keys. They should have the President cover all these chambers. The only change they would have to make is either scrapping LegCo or making it sit on a different day.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

The Speaker is also elected by MHKs - but I have no idea what he does, apart from wear nice clothes (presumably paid fpr by me).

Well the main job of the Speaker is controlling the meetings of the House of Keys.  But there's no real objection to the Keys electing a Chair[1] from among their number, that's normal for most such organisations.  The problem is that there are ten people sitting in Tynwald with no democratic right to be there.

 

[1]  They used to be called Chairman till the middle of the 18th century, when as usual they decide to copy whatever the English did

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, for the sake of a heated debate, suppose we sack everyone tomorrow (including most civil servants I presume from threads like this). What do we replace them with to run the Island better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

So, for the sake of a heated debate, suppose we sack everyone tomorrow (including most civil servants I presume from threads like this). What do we replace them with to run the Island better?

That’s not what is being proposed though is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

So, for the sake of a heated debate, suppose we sack everyone tomorrow (including most civil servants I presume from threads like this). What do we replace them with to run the Island better?

You are an MHK. The electorate is paying you a pretty substantial amount of money.

Your response seems a little petulant. 

Do you regard the current arrangement as acceptable? If not, what is *your* recommendation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

What do we replace them with to run the Island better?

Not you Dear!!!

In an argument like this, you have to separate the 'Hot Heads' from the serious reformers and then the 'who' becomes 'why'???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From past debates on Legco reform, even MHKs are not in favour for fear it will usurp their authority from the ballot box.

there would have to be a considered debate on the constitution of a second chamber preceeding any debate on reform.......

......but then, that debate would still have MHKs stuck in their 'we have priority' mindset?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Kopek said:

Not you Dear!!!

In an argument like this, you have to separate the 'Hot Heads' from the serious reformers and then the 'who' becomes 'why'???

I’ll make a coffee and wait for the grown-ups to post.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Stu Peters said:

I’ll make a coffee and wait for the grown-ups to post.

This is a post from someone who is paid £71,000 per year. It is a perfect example of the level of commonsense and intellectual capability of the average MHK.

"wait for the grown-ups to post" .. FFS.

I could have had a more intellectual conversation with my children when they were 5 years old.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...