Jump to content

Isle of Man News and Politics


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Your well-worded analysis of LV describes how they have always been, but remains valid. They are a party of complaint, moan and whinge and have never offered credible, thoughtful and progressive policies in respect of anything at all. Whilst this has always been true, it has been thrown into ever starker relief since Beecroft took the helm. A woman obsessed by critising services (e.g. health) but when given the chance to deliver was a miserable failure. She embodies LibVan. In that respect therefore she is an ideal leader; a loser individual at the helm of a loser party.

I think PK did have policies, thing is he’d have been better of staying in MLP and developing them there.

He ended up with some very strange bedfellows.

But then he was, for years, a one man opposition, the conscience of the nation. Difficult job. And many of the things he raised and questioned and criticised were justified. 

Thats why we need parties, or electoral platforms, and an opposition and back benchers running select committees who are not on the Government Payroll. Inclusion or Coalitions of everybody appear institutionally corrupt.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sounds like you’ve done it many times Howard, the alt accounts that is.

Why unfortunately? Did you want it to be true? 

The irony  

Posted Images

Indeed JW, had Tynwald agreed to the LIsvane recommendation that there'd be no political members for any departments then we would have at least some opposition by now:

Quote

29. I do not believe that the system of Departmental Members is remotely sustainable. The issue of patronage, and the perception or reality that Members are receiving significant salary enhancements for a role that at worst may be unnecessary, is a reputational liability.

30. Perhaps the most difficult element to defend to the wider world is the fact that, whatever may be claimed for the ability of Departmental Members to free themselves of Government responsibilities and criticise other parts of the same Government with true independence, it is the case that 26 out of 30 eligible Members of Tynwald, or 87%, are in Government.

31. This lack of evident separation of roles between Parliament and the Executive means that the Isle of Man may be seen to fall short of the highest standards of parliamentary governance. This has wider reputational risks.

32. I therefore recommend that the present extensive system of Departmental Members should end. Ministers should be capable of running their Departments with significantly less political support, and they should empower and support officers to a much greater extent. There should be no more than one Departmental Member per Department, and an appointment should be made only where it is clear that substantial responsibilities will be assumed in recognition of the salary enhancement. 

3

Money is at the root of this issue, nothing more. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, John Wright said:

And how Howard can suggest that LV has only been going “a couple of months” and has had 5 people elected in 15 years has done well, but is an irrelevance?

I was talking about the new Green Party, John.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Uhtred said:

Your well-worded analysis of LV describes how they have always been, but remains valid. They are a party of complaint, moan and whinge and have never offered credible, thoughtful and progressive policies in respect of anything at all. Whilst this has always been true, it has been thrown into ever starker relief since Beecroft took the helm. A woman obsessed by critising services (e.g. health) but when given the chance to deliver was a miserable failure. She embodies LibVan. In that respect therefore she is an ideal leader; a loser individual at the helm of a loser party.

As I have posted many times before if you are not an arse kissing toady in it for the extra cash "a safe pair of hands" you have little else to do but pick holes in the efforts of others. Which in Tynpotwald is not exactly difficult. As to Beecroft being given the bums rush from the poisoned chalice of politics all I seem to be able to glean from the open government and vibrant manx press is that she upset some scribbling servants. Frankly anyone who upsets the pencil-heads must be doing something right. But some actual facts of the matter would help formulate a valid opinion.

This made me laugh " have never offered credible, thoughtful and progressive policies in respect of anything at all" because if there was a complete and utter cretin with a strategic portfolio absolutely the very last thing anyone should do is to do their job for them! You give the direction and it all goes according to plan they will take the credit. If it goes tits-up they will make sure you take the blame.

Fuck that for a game of soldiers....

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, twinkle said:

 

5 hours ago, John Wright said:

appear institutionally corrupt.

APPEAR corrupt!! FFS spit it out,they are fucking corrupt.

It was Peter Karran himself who, I believe, introduced the term 'institutionally corrupt [system of government]" into Tynwald.

All the smart arses were humphing and harring and breaking spleans and accusing Peter Karran of treason and heresy etc. and saying he was bringing the chamber into disrepute. In one case the President (who had fallen into the same trap before) informed them there was a difference between 'corruption' and 'institutional corruption'. But whatever, no one likes the 'c' work in Isle of Man government do they.

 

Edited by gettafa
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, gettafa said:

Can you clarify your reasons behind calling her toxic (or whatever)? I agree she won't be very popular just now with all those people who managed to grab a wheelbarrow full of cash from the so-called Film Industry, and others on the take worried that the spotlight might be coming their way. Fuck-off rich and greedy landowners for example. 

I can give lots of reasons Bernie but you’re boring me now with your incessant rants over the last few weeks. She is simply a horrendous member of Keys who should pack up and create a by-election at the earliest possible opportunity. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

I can give lots of reasons Bernie but you’re boring me now with your rants. She is simply a horrendous member of Keys who should pack up and create a by-election at the earliest possible opportunity. 

I would like to know why.

I confess I've never met the woman but I'm wondering what terrible things she has done to be so vilified on here? It can't be incompetence because as far as I can tell thar's endemic in Tynwald. Almost a pre-req it would seem.

So why is there so much passion on here directed against her?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, P.K. said:

I would like to know why.

I confess I've never met the woman but I'm wondering what terrible things she has done to be so vilified on here? It can't be incompetence because as far as I can tell thar's endemic in Tynwald. Almost a pre-req it would seem.

So why is there so much passion on here directed against her?

She’s just a bitter and twisted woman kicking out because she thinks she been treated bad - it’s not about bad policy, or politics, or a lack of accountability in IOMG, it’s just about the sense of injustice she has over how she has been personally treated. The film loss situation was over 10 years ago, Mount Murray which she has also resurrected is even longer. There’s not even anyone in Keys now who was involved with it all so she’s basically just shit stirring to rock the boat. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

She’s just a bitter and twisted woman kicking out because she thinks she been treated bad - it’s not about bad policy, or politics, or a lack of accountability in IOMG, it’s just about the sense of injustice she has over how she has been personally treated. The film loss situation was over 10 years ago, Mount Murray which she has also resurrected is even longer. There’s not even anyone in Keys now who was involved with it all so she’s basically just shit stirring as she’s a woman scorned. 

So in answer to my question  "I'm wondering what terrible things she has done to be so vilified on here?" your answer is to give your opinion of her current attitude? Well, of course, you're entitled to your opinion as are we all. I was hoping for tangible evidence of why she was binned out of Health and why there is so much venom directed from here in her direction.

I have to say that a close look at the drive and motivation of the denizens of Tynwald would probably turn up some unsettling answers. So to pick on a single entity is somewhat unfair. But it is, after all,  just an opinion....

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Andy Onchan said:

Indeed JW, had Tynwald agreed to the LIsvane recommendation that there'd be no political members for any departments then we would have at least some opposition by now:

Money is at the root of this issue, nothing more. 

The problem is, having identified that issue, he ducked how to solve it without seriously disadvantaging the majority of members and mistook LegCo for an opposition rather than a revising legislative division  of what is really a unicameral assembly and then he ducked how to make LegCo democratically elected by saying it shouldn’t be.

I know it’s popular to say we have too many representatives, but to have a functioning and answerable democracy we need a sufficient number of back benchers and opposition members to hold the executive and administration to account.

Otherwise, and if only Keys members can be ministers and chairmen of trading entities, and Keys can simply over rule LefCo, CoMin will always be able to “buy” enough votes in the Keys to prevail. Lisvane, ultimately, was just proposing replacing one institutionally corrupt set up with another.

Edited by John Wright
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, P.K. said:

So in answer to my question  "I'm wondering what terrible things she has done to be so vilified on here?" your answer is to give your opinion of her current attitude? Well, of course, you're entitled to your opinion as are we all. I was hoping for tangible evidence of why she was binned out of Health and why there is so much venom directed from here in her direction.

I have to say that a close look at the drive and motivation of the denizens of Tynwald would probably turn up some unsettling answers. So to pick on a single entity is somewhat unfair. But it is, after all,  just an opinion....

I’ve explained once. If you don’t agree fine. But dragging up stuff that happened 20-30 years ago is irrelevant really when nobody in Keys now was around at that time. It’s just getting back at COMIN & the CM for how she feels she has personally been treated by noisily muck-raking. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, John Wright said:

The problem is, having identified that issue, he ducked how to solve it without seriously disadvantaging the majority of members and mistook LegCo for an opposition rather than a revising legislative division  of what is really a unicameral assembly and then he ducked hw to make LegCo democratically elected.

Thank you for that.

I did wonder why the obvious nettle of patronage, placemanship and cronyism wasn't grasped.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

I’ve explained once. If you don’t agree fine. But dragging up stuff that happened 20-30 years ago is irrelevant really when nobody in Keys now was around at that time. It’s just getting back at COMIN & the CM for how she feels she has personally been treated by noisily muck-raking. 

So you can state categorically that Tynwald learns from it's mistakes that then result in safeguarding legislation?

I have to say I have no idea what she is like as a constituency MHK although Amy Burns was less than impressed. Which is probably a compliment!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, P.K. said:

So you can state categorically that Tynwald learns from it's mistakes that then result in safeguarding legislation?

I have to say I have no idea what she is like as a constituency MHK although Amy Burns was less than impressed. Which is probably a compliment!

The Tynwald of any time is a collection of people who create a consensus. If those people change ‘Tynwald’  becomes a different collection of personalities and ideas. Throwing something at them which happened 20-30 years ago when none of the current members were even in government is just childish. It’s shit-stirring, nothing more. Nothing less. 

  • Like 1
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...