Mhk's/mlc's, Are They Beards?

[mollag]

Within our Gov, any thoughts on whether our MHK's are active ministers or are they just fronts for civil servants who formulate our policies between themselves?

 

If they are then who exactly are our masters?

[dooahhdoo]

Paging Crumlin and Manxchatterbox to a possible conspiracy theory thread.

[mollag]

You can safely unpage, i offer no conspiricies i just wonder sometimes where the policies our esteemed politicians trumpet come from, is it career civil servants or maybe consultants or even, i know this is silly, from the MHK's themselves.

[ans]

Been watching Yes, Minister repeats on Challenge by any chance?

[Mission]

Not me sir, can someone please explain the reference to beards - oh and are they silver beards or just regular beards?

 

Mmm beards - don't ya just love hate them???

[mollag]

If a gay man marries a woman for appearences, she is known as a beard, a disguise hiding the real face within.

[Mission]

So like, are you saying they've got stuff hidden in the closet then???

 

Never trust a man with a beard... ever!

[TheTool]

Well i never knew that but i do have a pic of a certain female MLC who might be the puppet master pulling all the strings

 

 

Women with beards next it will be chicks with d*cks haha

[mollag]

Cool, i thought it was Lon Chaney just after midnight!

 

What i was thinking was that if the elected mhk's are only fronts for the guys who make the policy, why dont we dump the mhk's and directly elect experianced people into the relative positions as is done in the USA.

 

Police Chief, mayor, traffic commisioners etc. At least then we can see the stall and see whats on offer before its all done and dusted.

[TheTool]

Mollag i am with you on this one it is very clear that the MHK's and MLC's are failing in there duties.

 

MEA

 

Iris

 

Hospital

 

Wedding Cake Building

 

Prison

 

Etc Etc.

 

I have always said that we should have experts in each field doing the ministers jobs the MHK's should be looking after the people.

 

Sad thing is you have idiots running the isle of man, spending what ever they want and nobody loses thier job in fact nobody is yet to be punished for and bad practice.

 

 

P.s don't you think that pic looks a bit George Micheal haha

[Chinahand]

My perspective is that the inmates are running the asylum at multiple levels.

 

The current generation of politicians are out of there depth and not able to control the executive as a result the executive ignores "the will of Tynwald" and does what ever it wants

 

Actually on a more Machievellian level the Executive bends the will of Tynwald any which way it likes. The executive is able to do this by the fact that it hands out its pennies and perks to nearly every MHK via department memberships etc (don't forget even Mr Karran is a member of DAFF). The only way to get any influence is to tow the executives line ... and surprise surprise nearly everyone does.

 

But also the executive aren't able to control their civil servants. The civil servants without a good executive to reign them in let the checks and balances slip and when the wheels fall off they know the minister is going to back them up cos its the minister who'll be first up against the wall.

 

I wouldn't just blame the politicians and see the civil servants as our saviours ... my understanding is that things don't get done and too much is swept under the carpet by civil servants not bothering.

 

Our political system is a perfect set up for nepotism, corruption, influence peddling the lot. But how to reform it? Thats a problem ... When it comes to revolutions you don't just need destruction; you also need construction and rebuilding anew isn't easy.

[mollag]

Totally agree, restructuring of our system would need the turkeys voting for xmas, and as we have little to no organised political bodies, its hard to see where it would come from.

 

It is often trumpeted that the IOM has no political parties but there is a downside to this, no pressure groups from the public leaving the field open for vested interest groups, farmers, financial, industry etc who all do well from the public purse.

 

 

We desperatly need some accountability within the public sector.

 

 

What got me started on this was the recent proclimation that waste charges would rise for the public but drop for industry.

 

I wonderd who came up with that solution, why did he, did he consult anyone other than industry and what was the MHK's input.

 

I often try to imagine the previous encumbents reasons.

 

Civil servant

 

Right Mrs * we want you to raise the rate to the public for waste disposal by a gazillion percent to pay for the incinerator

 

Mrs *

 

Fuck off, i would be out on my ass next election

 

CS

 

Nah weve sussed that, we will ship you on to Tynwald so you will not be held accountable

 

Mrs *

 

Well ok, but can i talk down to people like they were naughty children.

 

CS

 

Certainly, cos thats what they are.

[ButterflyMaiden]

My perspective is that the inmates are running the asylum at multiple levels.

 

The current generation of politicians are out of there depth and not able to control the executive as a result the executive ignores "the will of Tynwald" and does what ever it wants

 

Actually on a more Machievellian level the Executive bends the will of Tynwald any which way it likes. The executive is able to do this by the fact that it hands out its pennies and perks to nearly every MHK via department memberships etc (don't forget even Mr Karran is a member of DAFF). The only way to get any influence is to tow the executives line ... and surprise surprise nearly everyone does.

 

But also the executive aren't able to control their civil servants. The civil servants without a good executive to reign them in let the checks and balances slip and when the wheels fall off they know the minister is going to back them up cos its the minister who'll be first up against the wall.

 

I wouldn't just blame the politicians and see the civil servants as our saviours ... my understanding is that things don't get done and too much is swept under the carpet by civil servants not bothering.

 

Our political system is a perfect set up for nepotism, corruption, influence peddling the lot. But how to reform it? Thats a problem ... When it comes to revolutions you don't just need destruction; you also need construction and rebuilding anew isn't easy.

 

ChinaHand : I think, on reflection, you might want to qualify this critique. ( You are usually so sensible !!)

 

The Island doesnt have such a bad system and, in my opinion, it is well past time we started

 

celebrating the Island s positive attributes rather than offering unqualified (context: not limited or restricted)

 

opinions on various and sundry perceived shortcomings.

 

We have to accept, in the absence of a party political system,and in the context of a democratic

 

parliamentary system, a Government can only operate by consent of its Parliament. In those circumstances,

 

it isnt so unreasonable to suppose consent will be limited, in one way or another, by patronage. This doesnt

 

amount to corruption and it isnt in any way indicative of politicians losing control of the executive. In

 

particular, there is little or no evidence to support your assertion that the executive ignores the will of

 

Tynwald. You might do better arguing the lack of a party political system tends to blur the distinction

 

between executive and Parliament. This, if true, would be grounds for concern. However, I am not

 

convinced. Furthermore, the high profile and patient indulgence granted to loose cannons, such as Mr

 

Karran, suggests the Island's Parliamentary system functions reasonably well. You might do well to compare

 

this with policy results in your own location.

 

I would also argue that it is, patently,not the case that things do not get done. The list of over budget

 

projects would suggest, if anything, that maybe too much is being done at once. Shades of Idi Amin and

 

Kampala perhaps, I dont know.

 

Nevertheless,the Island matches or exceeds UK standards in all the major indicators. For example, I can

 

personally vouch for the exceptionally high standard of health care available to families resident

 

on the Isle of Man.

 

As for corruption, nepotism and influence peddling, I believe the Island does much better than the majority

 

of locations on God's earth. For example, compare us with China !!

[Chinahand]

ChinaHand : I think, on reflection, you might want to qualify this critique. ( You are usually so sensible !!)

 

I'll try! Sorry if you thought I wasn't being sensible, but there you go!

 

The Island doesnt have such a bad system and, in my opinion, it is well past time we started celebrating the Island s positive attributes rather than offering unqualified (context: not limited or restricted) opinions on various and sundry perceived shortcomings.

 

I don't think the Isle of Man is THAT bad, but I do think it should be improved and do not think it is a good thing to pretend that all is ok when it isn't. You've raised a comparison with China and there the media is forced to celebrate the positives; to do so and to ignore the negatives is no formular for successful government. I am at heart an opptimist, but I do not think that it is "past time" to criticise our government when many people see chronic and unresolved problems.

 

We have to accept, in the absence of a party political system,and in the context of a democratic parliamentary system, a Government can only operate by consent of its Parliament. In those circumstances, it isnt so unreasonable to suppose consent will be limited, in one way or another, by patronage. This doesnt amount to corruption and it isnt in any way indicative of politicians losing control of the executive. In particular, there is little or no evidence to support your assertion that the executive ignores the will of Tynwald. You might do better arguing the lack of a party political system tends to blur the distinction between executive and Parliament. This, if true, would be grounds for concern. However, I am not convinced.

 

I think there is a large overlap between us in what you say here; you are saying it positively I am saying it negatively, but I think it is clear to all sides that the current system blurs lines of responsiblility and creates what you are calling "patronage".

 

I'm afraid I do disagree with you about evidence for the executive ignoring the will of Tynwald ... questions have been asked recently about ministers deliberately refusing to table an early day motion to enact legislation which they do not want. I worry that this will become a hot potato in the near future.

 

As I am reasonably out of touch: can any of our Tynwald watchers tell me what the answer was to this question? I'd really like to know if it was answered openly or politically ... [stupid of me to not expect the latter I realise]

 

I think there are very clear "grounds for concern" at the moment. The Island is a very different place than it was 20 or 30 years ago, but when it comes to our government I feel very much that it is "business as usual" and I do not think that way of working is efficient anymore; hence the increasing problems.

 

I would also argue that it is, patently,not the case that things do not get done. The list of over budget projects would suggest, if anything, that maybe too much is being done at once. Shades of Idi Amin and Kampala perhaps, I dont know.

 

I think here you aren't understanding my point. The MEA had monthly and quarterly meetings with the DTI and Treasury civil servants throughout the construction of the powerstation (this is standard procedure and has been ongoing for years). They also submitted quarterly financial reports on capital spend and progress reports on the capital projects. DTI civil servants were seconded to liase with the Skyward Committee.

 

I hope this allows you to understand why the MEA were absolutely shocked when everything blew up. The MEA believed that they were working with the consent of and in cooperation with the government. What the heck were these civil servants doing?

 

Yes things are being done, by subcontractors etc. But the oversight of these works is failing; lets be honest it isn't the politicians who are immediately responsible for this frontline oversight its the civil servants.

 

I know of various cases where civil servants have simply not wanted to make a decision and have provarocated. Meetings have been delayed and the whole thing strung out over months at great cost. I can remember one meeting where the civil servants thought it had been a very positive meeting; our side found that very ironic as the only result was to delay the project by well over 6 months!

 

As civil servants don't want to make decisions they employ consultants at great cost to "make recommendations" for them .. and there is a very dangerous interplay between these consultants (who know on going business requires providing recommendations in line with what the civil servants want) and the civil servants who know they are paying the consultants to provide advice they want.

 

I've posted my worries about telecoms in another thread

Link

and know what happened when the MEA wanted to enter the telecoms and satellite communications business; part of the PKF report dealing with this was censored and if and when the whole story comes out I would not be surprised if the word corrupt was used.

 

Another question for our Tynwald watchers: Tynwald was meant to have made a decision on the lighting of the MEA’s fibre optic cable: have they yet, or has it been pushed aside YET AGAIN!

 

I cannot think of a clearer example of parliamentary and government incompetence than stopping the MEA utilizing this multimillion pound asset. Using the cable will improve telecoms communications between the IOM and the rest of the world, provide revenue for a utility which needs that revenue and will lower costs for Manx based telecoms users; but will reduce revenue for a monopoly vested interest on the IOM. Our politicians at the moment seem to be siding with MT and have not made a decision on this in the FOUR years the asset has been available to use. You have to ask the question as to whether this is due to the people being involved being fools or knaves.

 

As for corruption, nepotism and influence peddling, I believe the Island does much better than the majority of locations on God's earth. For example, compare us with China !!

 

Butterfly I cannot think of a more rediculous comparison. The Isle of Man claims to be one of the foremost off shore centres in the world. It says it does not need the regulatory support the EU the OECD etc provides its member states. It cannot be seen to be anything other than whiter than white. Its existence as a financial centre relies entirely on the stability and integrity of the system it has independently created [hence recent trips by MHKs etc to Washington, Dubai and Brussels].

 

The Isle of Man must be bench marking itself against the best of the best; and I sincerely mean that. If our legal system and financial regulation cannot compete against the City or Luxemburg or Litchenstien then our long term future is not secure. It is absolutely vital that the regulatory environment on the Isle of Man is not seen to be influenced by vested interests; and that the politicians creating, and civil servants enforcing, the regulations are absolutely top notch.

 

The rampant corruption in China is of course a tragedy, but to ignore our own problems would be an even greater tragedy.

 

You’ve asked me for specifics; I’ve given you them, as far as I am able, given the professional confidences I have; to me they provide more than enough of a whiff of a problem to say something must be done.

[mollag]

I dont think the IOM system is the worst in the world merely that policy decision making has become too far removed from the electorate and that responsibility, or the buck, is passed then there is no one culpable.

Mount Murray is a classic with not a soul penalised, i expect the MEA to be something similar.

 

Re a democratic system, not really, we have a system with some democratic elements in it, but not trully a full system of checks and balances.

 

For example recently a member was elected to Tynwald with no representation from the public whatsoever, he needs not even return to the public for re election, he was not even a member of the Keys,yet he may soon be in control of elements of our life.

Personally i would insist on the old dictum, no legislation without representation.