Roger Mexico Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Shake me up Judy said: Because you couldn't have a situation where you vote for your MHK in one constituency but vote for your local authority in another. Except we already do. All those people in Onchan District who vote for Garff MHKs and some others down Tromode who vote for Douglas North ones. The trouble is that Onchan is too big for two MHKs but too small for four. Ramsey isn't as populated but is in a similar position and too big for two. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 I wonder if you could do - Ramsey West & Ayre Ramsey East & Maughold Garff & North Onchan Peel North & Michael Peel South & Glen Faba Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 31 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Except we already do. All those people in Onchan District who vote for Garff MHKs and some others down Tromode who vote for Douglas North ones. The trouble is that Onchan is too big for two MHKs but too small for four. Ramsey isn't as populated but is in a similar position and too big for two. Thanks for the correction Roger. I did wonder myself as I typed that. Hardly democratic but then again it's the IOM. A dog's breakfast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 (edited) Gerrymandering Edited November 10, 2023 by TheTeapot 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted November 10, 2023 Author Share Posted November 10, 2023 26 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said: Thanks for the correction Roger. I did wonder myself as I typed that. Hardly democratic but then again it's the IOM. A dog's breakfast. The thing is too that the Northern areas proposed to be handed over to Ayre (Clifton Park/Thornhill aren't particularly on the northerly "outskirts" of the town, they are quite well within the built/populated area of the town. That will mean any new electoral boundary cutting quite deeply into the current town map IMHO. Allinson is already protesting about "lack of representation" arising from the proposals but surely it just means that those affected would be represented by different MHKs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 24 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: it just means that those affected would be represented by different MHK Exactly. Its not an issue. People might not like the idea of it, but if they actually step back and think about it it makes absolutely no difference to anyone. We don’t like change yessir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 No, I disagree. If your property is rated and collected in Ramsey then you should have the same electoral representation as everyone else in the town. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omobono Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 nothing wrong with the old constituencies when Rushen had 3 keys representatives some 2 seat others 1 , at least the electorate had an affinity of where they lived , the local issues and who their keys representative was , all this woke smoke and mirrors to try to make sure each constituency as a similar number is Bollocks some rural areas will never have enough to justify 2 keys members , , thats why some MHK's are so out of touch with whats going on locally , and the constituents never see them , Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 We've reached peak woke outrage. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 3 hours ago, Shake me up Judy said: No, I disagree. If your property is rated and collected in Ramsey then you should have the same electoral representation as everyone else in the town. Why? What difference does it make? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 3 hours ago, Omobono said: nothing wrong with the old constituencies when Rushen had 3 keys representatives some 2 seat others 1 , at least the electorate had an affinity of where they lived , the local issues and who their keys representative was , all this woke smoke and mirrors to try to make sure each constituency as a similar number is Bollocks some rural areas will never have enough to justify 2 keys members , , thats why some MHK's are so out of touch with whats going on locally , and the constituents never see them , Well. They will if we just shuffle the boundaries a bit. Which is exactly what’s being suggested. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted November 10, 2023 Share Posted November 10, 2023 One MHK per constituency , one vote per person. That's it. The most popular candidate wins. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted November 11, 2023 Share Posted November 11, 2023 6 hours ago, Shake me up Judy said: No, I disagree. If your property is rated and collected in Ramsey then you should have the same electoral representation as everyone else in the town. You do - on Ramsey Commissioners who are the people who collect and spend the rates. (Technically you don't because Ramsey has two wards, but in practice there doesn't seem to be much difference). Who represents you in the Keys is another issue. In fact you could argue that having such overflow is to the advantage of a community because it gives them more MHKs to represent them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted November 11, 2023 Author Share Posted November 11, 2023 7 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: You do - on Ramsey Commissioners who are the people who collect and spend the rates. (Technically you don't because Ramsey has two wards, but in practice there doesn't seem to be much difference). Who represents you in the Keys is another issue. In fact you could argue that having such overflow is to the advantage of a community because it gives them more MHKs to represent them. But one can foresee some difficulties or conflict here. Let's for example take next-door-neighbouring households A and B. A is in Ramsey, pays Ramsey Rates, is represented by Allinson. B is in Ramsey, pays Ramsey Rates but has to expect Alf Cannan to have knowledge (or interest) of local things that happen well outside his previous "patch". There will be a sense of lack of "local" representation for B, methinks, we all know the standard of expectation of attention to parish pump matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyDave Posted November 11, 2023 Share Posted November 11, 2023 19 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: But one can foresee some difficulties or conflict here. Let's for example take next-door-neighbouring households A and B. A is in Ramsey, pays Ramsey Rates, is represented by Allinson. B is in Ramsey, pays Ramsey Rates but has to expect Alf Cannan to have knowledge (or interest) of local things that happen well outside his previous "patch". There will be a sense of lack of "local" representation for B, methinks, we all know the standard of expectation of attention to parish pump matters. You mean like at the boundary of different constituencies all over the island? It’s not an issue unless people chose to make it one. It’s exactly what already happens in Douglas/Onchan/Middle etc. 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.