Jump to content

Ashford: Should he stay or should he go?


Newsdesk
 Share

Ashford: Should he stay or should he go?   

136 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closes on 06/30/2022 at 08:57 AM

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

It’s called democracy. I understand you have a problem with Mr Ashford but to say that the majority would rather he continues gives a hint as to what is wrong with the current system is a bit disturbing. 
There are a number of things I would like to change but recognize that I am in the minority. Frustrating though it is I accept I have to live with them.

Why is it disturbing?  Party politics would remove the granny farming and popularity competition that GEs tend to be here.  Individuals are elected on  promises that they have no hope of delivering because they are one of 24.  There would also be checks and balances by the party, by that I mean a proper party not the current lose association of people with vaguely aligned views we currently have, rather than the patronage we currently have.

If you cannot see that DA had little choice, if he did have a choice, given the outcome of the Tribunal added to the Dr G issue then it is no wonder the chancers and charlatans perpetuate.   

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gladys, I'm not sure that an organised Party would be rid of the cliches you refer to.

If they played their cards rightly, they would indeed target Grannies and present a different manifesto to Somerset Road than to Willlaston ?

That's the way I would tackle it? You?

If they were to attain a majority  or near so, would they then behave in the same way as the current Comin?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

“You” may have got your way in that mob rule prevailed. The majority would rather Mr Ashford had continued in the role.

No they wouldn’t Alf. You should have sacked him earlier than this

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VoR is expressing an opinion that is probably right for North Dlas and Ashfords  supporters for his performance in covid meetings but he ignores the difference in roles of an  MHK and a Govt minister.

I don't think it is Mob Rule, rather than a vociferous minority, given the general apathy of the Manx voter, to advance a solution that the said majority had not thought about?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s a basic lack of political philosophy. Lots of it is bet hedging and indecision, with a focus on operational stuff.

Part of me is glad we’re comfortable enough not to be polarised with money, no white privilege, anti-woke, climate scepticism vs BLM, woke, militant green etc but it’s so dishonest for so many mhks to grandstand on the shit they do.

on the other hand dog whistlers can get home in many constituencies on the fears of 500 oldies with an average of 20 years left and a house and pension under their arse who read the Mail.
 

Why the fuck would you come back or not want to leave? Any progressive 20 - 40 year old is demographically disenfranchised. And expected to be taxed more on earnings and indirect spend to support a system that’ll be fucked before they reach anything close to retirement age.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

“You” may have got your way in that mob rule prevailed. The majority would rather Mr Ashford had continued in the role.

I think , in fact I know your very wrong with that statement. People who I know who are not usually vociferous have been sickened by the revelations coming out from the tribunal. He should have been sacked as soon as the judgement was made and says it all about Cannan that he wasn't. In fact I would have gone futher and told him he was done as a MHK too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

“You” may have got your way in that mob rule prevailed. The majority would rather Mr Ashford had continued in the role.

It was all his own doing, he was favoured only because he got involved in things he shouldn’t have done as health minister, i’m sure in his eyes he was simply going above and beyond, at one point it seemed any Covid query or Hospital query was typically responded with ‘email David Ashford, he helped me with X’ . Hooper had to remind everyone of what the job role should actually entail and that whilst Ashford might have taken on every little complaint, he would not be doing the same and that the proper channels should be always be followed in the first instance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Kopek said:

Gladys, I'm not sure that an organised Party would be rid of the cliches you refer to.

If they played their cards rightly, they would indeed target Grannies and present a different manifesto to Somerset Road than to Willlaston ?

That's the way I would tackle it? You?

If they were to attain a majority  or near so, would they then behave in the same way as the current Comin?

Yes, they would behave the same, not much from Labour or Lib Van on the issue, Labour make statements that make out the behaviours are in the past, Lib Van just plays dumb.
 

Both parties have members on DHSC.  
There isn’t a rug to sweep this behaviour under, Gov seem to have a trap door to a concrete bunker to sweep it into. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Kopek said:

Gladys, I'm not sure that an organised Party would be rid of the cliches you refer to.

If they played their cards rightly, they would indeed target Grannies and present a different manifesto to Somerset Road than to Willlaston ?

That's the way I would tackle it? You?

If they were to attain a majority  or near so, would they then behave in the same way as the current Comin?

How could a party present a different manifesto depending on the area they are canvassing?  That is the point, there would be a party manifesto. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Numbnuts said:

He should have been sacked as soon as the judgement was made and says it all about Cannan that he wasn't. In fact I would have gone futher and told him he was done as a MHK too. 

Not sure that second bit would have been within your power. It would be a bit undemocratic. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ManxTaxPayer said:

Not sure that second bit would have been within your power. It would be a bit undemocratic. 

They couldn’t even sack Houghton. The worse they can do, like him, is ban them from entering the Court of Tynwald but the public put them there they can’t be sacked I certainly think his MBE should be looked at though on the basis that it’s been proven he actually did very little. 

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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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