Jump to content

Ramsey Candidate seeks to balance Tynwald and work


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 418
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

50% of Dr Allison's time has got to be worth 100% of Leonard Singer's. The man is an appalling and brazen leech who should be shuffling off to his subsidised retirement flat feeling thankful and very

I'd rather see Allinson in Tynwald for 1 hour a month than that slimy little oxygen thief Singer there 24/7.

Anyone who can smile for the camera after stapling his ear by mistake gets my vote.

 

Grianane - very good summary

 

I was disappointed that Eddie Teare allowed the attack on Singer to carry on as long as it did. I'm no fan of the man but it wasn't what I was there to hear, struck me as being more about grandstanding by the questioner.

 

I thought Dr Allinson handled the questions about his split role well and whilst I agree with you that I suspect his split role won't last I felt he acknowledged that and said he would see how it went and change if necessary. Seemed a sensible approach to me.

 

Hooper took a leaf out of the Wilf Young book of politics and vowed to not achieve or promise anything but fight against the shackles of government. He also said he was going for coffee with lots of prospective MHK's in order to work together with them all. That struck me as being a bit of a dichotomy. He seemed to set his stall out as not being in Government but being on the outside criticising/scrutinising? Very LibVan in that regard.

 

Agree completely with your assessment of Crowe and McDonough.

 

I also agree that Bell was most underrated in his time as an MHK. I fear that if Hooper gets in he will become the Peter Karran of the north and just become a disenfranchised voice of discontent. I may be wrong in that regard though and with precious little choice on the table it feels very much a case of tossing a coin between Singer and Hooper for 2nd place behind Allinson.

I'm not a Ramsey voter but really enjoyed reading such balanced and well written assessments as this, and that of Grianane. Interestingly, a friend of mine went to the meeting intending to vote for Hooper and came away with quite a different view - reflecting exactly your "Karran of the North" observation - felt that Hooper would become a professional complainant and government "knocker" leaving Ramsey on the outside, looking in.

 

 

Nah, Mr Hooper would be wasted on the outside of government

 

Any intelligent CM would put his expertise to work in a high spending department - maybe DOI - straight away

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Grianane - very good summary

 

I was disappointed that Eddie Teare allowed the attack on Singer to carry on as long as it did. I'm no fan of the man but it wasn't what I was there to hear, struck me as being more about grandstanding by the questioner.

 

I thought Dr Allinson handled the questions about his split role well and whilst I agree with you that I suspect his split role won't last I felt he acknowledged that and said he would see how it went and change if necessary. Seemed a sensible approach to me.

 

Hooper took a leaf out of the Wilf Young book of politics and vowed to not achieve or promise anything but fight against the shackles of government. He also said he was going for coffee with lots of prospective MHK's in order to work together with them all. That struck me as being a bit of a dichotomy. He seemed to set his stall out as not being in Government but being on the outside criticising/scrutinising? Very LibVan in that regard.

 

Agree completely with your assessment of Crowe and McDonough.

 

I also agree that Bell was most underrated in his time as an MHK. I fear that if Hooper gets in he will become the Peter Karran of the north and just become a disenfranchised voice of discontent. I may be wrong in that regard though and with precious little choice on the table it feels very much a case of tossing a coin between Singer and Hooper for 2nd place behind Allinson.

I'm not a Ramsey voter but really enjoyed reading such balanced and well written assessments as this, and that of Grianane. Interestingly, a friend of mine went to the meeting intending to vote for Hooper and came away with quite a different view - reflecting exactly your "Karran of the North" observation - felt that Hooper would become a professional complainant and government "knocker" leaving Ramsey on the outside, looking in.

 

Nah, Mr Hooper would be wasted on the outside of government

 

Any intelligent CM would put his expertise to work in a high spending department - maybe DOI - straight away

 

Exactly. He'll be on the outside moaning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems Hooper is damned if he gets in and damned if he doesn't by some of you. If he gets in and becomes part of the club, you'll decry him as another turncoat who was only in it for his own advancement. If he gets in and challenges the establishment, you'll decry him as another moaner not in the club. What a strange dichotomy. You realise it makes no sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just reading the thread. Am I understanding correctly that Eddie Teare (Treasury Minister) chaired the meeting ?? If so surely that is unacceptable particularly if a sitting member was present.

 

That aside, what a poor choice Ramsey appear to have. None of them fill me with any confidence so in many ways I am beginning to think that Singer is in fact the best choice given his experience. I wonder if Tim Baker (Ayre & Michael) might regret not standing in Ramsey given that he now appears to be in a two horse race with young Carlos Phillips for second place in the next door constituency.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting night at the Ramsey requisition meeting which could have been improved if steady Eddie had kept a better rick on the candidates who mostly pull the political trick of saying what they wanted rather than answering the questions.

 

Only two of the candidates were supported by their partners attendance (McDonough and Singer being single of course) and Dr Allinson cast a lonely image arriving at the venue last amongst the candidates on his own.

 

The meeting kicked of with some promise with Leonard being verbally assaulted over his occupancy of subsidised public sector housing and his advancing years, I hadn't realised he's 73, it seemed to floor him and to be honest it probably raises the question as to whether if elected he'd survive the full term. The attack should have been halted earlier than it was and there was clearly a lot of animosity towards him from the audience perhaps indicating that he has lost some of his earlier support. His repose was decent apparently he makes a voluntary addition payment to the commissioners for his sheltered housing rent, and he's entitled to be there - its just the system thats wrong.

 

The only other real individual challenge was to Dr Allinson as to how he intended to balance continuing as a GP and being a constituency MHK and an active member of Tynwald. He explained an intent to work as a GP Mondays and Fridays and on Thursday evening, explaining that Dr Mann had successfully managed both in Garff, and listing a whole load of minor functions he performs which he suggested he would step back from if needed - to be honest I can't believe he spends as much time as he infers on such a load of irrelevant functions - no wonder you can't get a GP appointment.

 

It strikes me that Dr Mann was a different Doctor in different times when Doctoring was a true vocation and surgeries ran on evenings and Saturdays and the GP was expected to turn out on call 24/7 to people homes to deal will sick kids and ailing grand-parents. Dr Allinson falls into the modern model of GP (which interesting he has been leading propagator of) - Monday to Friday 9-6 surgeries only and he's kidding himself and the voters if he thinks he can really do both.

 

An interesting sub-thread to this was how the Ramsey Group Practice intends to manage his absence (even if he just goes part time) and how the GP's will be able to provide an acceptable service to Ramsey and the North, although it wasn't elaborated on I was left wondering what the contractual obligation of the partner Doctors is to provide GP services and how they perform against their contractual obligations. I can see the potential for a shed load of hurt if Dr Allison gets elected as there doesn't seem to be any real leadership at the Group Practice which could be relied upon to manage his loss. It's going to be the GP services users who will suffer - ironically exactly those people who will be voting for him.

 

Overall Lawrie Hooper seemed to be talking the most sense, although he'll need a lot of fellow thinkers to get elected if there's to be a root and branch review of Government and its finances. He has the potential to be elected although as a Lib-Van member I think he'll be in the minority and will inevitably struggle because of it.

 

The final two candidates didn't really shine, neither were challenged by the audience - possibly as they're not really seen as credible candidates - Nick Crowe focused on his being a local boy, the inevitability of putting up income tax, economic doom and gloom and the promise to take tough decisions and get on with things. He certainly didn't come across as the right wing homophobic he has been presented as on the forums. His main theme is the reintroduction of a Ramsey Marina Scheme with private investment, considering the past disquiet over the Marina proposals it was interesting that there was no dissent from anyone in the audience - perhaps the town has realised that the boat was well and truly missed when the last scheme was kicked out.

 

John McDonough just failed to shine, there's just no substance to the man and he struggled to string more than a few words together. IMO a vote for him is not just a waste of a vote but a waste of paper and ink.

 

 

This election is going to be a turning point for Ramsey, despite what people think Allan actually managed to get quite a bit done in the past few years, this lot will put the town well and truly in the political wilderness that the north of the Island is fast becoming.

I see fron the Election supplement in the paperJohn McDonough is the only candidate (Island wide) who is anti the horse trams. For that reason alone I wouldn't vote for him!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Westminster has two MPs who are practising GPs - James Davies (Vale of Clwyd, 56,000-odd constituents) and Philip Lee (Bracknell, 77,000-odd constituents). I can't see how it is impossible to combine being an MHK (representing a tiny fraction of that number) with a part-time GP's practice. We might all wish or hope that being an MHK is a full time job, but if it is, how do they find the time to line their pockets further by being ministers/members of departments as well as being MHKs?

 

The bigger disgrace is, of course, the Legislative Council, where (I think) they get paid the same as MHKs and don't have any constituents to keep happy (apart from those in the Keys, I suppose). I start daydreaming about pitchforks when I think of these people. They are so universally awful that it is hard to single any of them out for particular criticism.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Westminster has two MPs who are practising GPs - James Davies (Vale of Clwyd, 56,000-odd constituents) and Philip Lee (Bracknell, 77,000-odd constituents). I can't see how it is impossible to combine being an MHK (representing a tiny fraction of that number) with a part-time GP's practice. We might all wish or hope that being an MHK is a full time job, but if it is, how do they find the time to line their pockets further by being ministers/members of departments as well as being MHKs?

 

The bigger disgrace is, of course, the Legislative Council, where (I think) they get paid the same as MHKs and don't have any constituents to keep happy (apart from those in the Keys, I suppose). I start daydreaming about pitchforks when I think of these people. They are so universally awful that it is hard to single any of them out for particular criticism.

 

I think you could probably be a comparatively effective MLC and devote one day a week to the role.

 

An MP does get support to run an office, including secretarial support and the back up of a party on scrutiny of policy. An MHK is effectively on his own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramsey being banished further into the political wilderness would probably suit some of the denizens of the town hall.

 

would it?

 

how interesting

Link to post
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...