Stu Peters

On 4/13/2024 at 11:33 PM, A fool and his money..... said:

It always amuses me when people feel the need to drop a bit of Latin into general conversation. Stu Peters loves doing it.

Always reminds me of Del boy Trotter's use of French in Only Fools and Horses. Bonnet de Douche Rodders, bonnet de douche.

I went to Grammar School. We were taught Latin. I never understood the importance of it then, but I do now. It pisses you off…

8 hours ago, Amadeus said:

This. Increasing income tax to "save" manxcare while pissing away millions on climate change stuff at the same time as cruise ships are actively invited here is ridiculous.

Bit of a volte face? You were mad for this green nonsense and electric cars. Mind you, there's little more eco friendly than a nice old diesel S-Class.

Just now, finlo said:

Now I wonder why that might be?

Because Treasury is trying to balance the books - which I'm sure you welcome - and ALL departments are being asked to help (not just those involved in Liverpool and The Prom overspends). This administration either inherited previous problems are is dealing with the after effects of Covid, Brexit and now Ukraine and recssion. So people might have to avoid potholes for a bit longer.

4 hours ago, Kevlar said:

To be honest I think it’s embarrassing for an MHK to admit on social media that they are so hopeless as an MHK that they can’t even apply influence on the DOI to get a road fixed in the constituency that voted them in. If I was a PSM voter I’d take that post as a clear reminder that I voted for someone who can’t even get a road fixed. 

You seem not to understand a point I've been making for two years - a single MHK can't demand anything. I've been told I should exercise my authority as a DOI member to get the road near me at Mount Murray fixed sooner (something I'm sure would go down well here) and refuse to do so. Fact is, DOI looks at repairs and maintenance and prioritises jobs based on danger, traffic flow, type and estimated cost of repair etc. Like all deparments we're under the cosh financially and can't do everything all at once.

3 minutes ago, Amadeus said:

Stu it’s more about the way some MHKs don’t seem to understand that everything they do is paid for by taxpayers. Instead of saying it isn’t, she should have pointed out the tangible benefits of it. 

As for egaming, no need for Vegas. IoM is represented in Manila next week (and we’re the only small island that matters in this regard). Just hope the guys aren’t as jet lagged as last time  

Yeah, but I wouldn’t ask to go to Manila. Here’s a thought; elect MHK’s every five years and support them instead of instantly trying to pull them down, question their integrity or sanity and call them stupid. I’m going to spend less time on here because it depresses me. That’s not a flounce, but a realisation that colleagues have been right who have been telling me for years that I’m wasting my time trying to explain or debate on social media.

Just now, Wake Up Call said:

Chances are; many of the valid contributors on MF are civil servants or have business contracts with Government and hence remain anonymous. It reflects the culture of government that forums and such commentary like this exist.

Sure, I appreciate that. But it makes it impossible to determine the experience or validity of posters. For all I know half the people on here could be trolling schoolchildren with big ideas but no life experience.

1 minute ago, Dirty Buggane said:

You really have no idea how to read the room

It’s not a room, it’s a bucket. If it was a room, rather than a disparate collection of anonymous serial complainers, I’d make the effort.

This thread should really be titled ‘Manx Crab Syndrome - a perfect example’.

The usual suspects on this forum would be the first to criticise Tynwald members for not engaging more widely.

I’m tempted to see if the CPA will organise an ‘e-gaming for small islands’ conference in Las Vegas just to have you all snapping your claws in furious indignation.

19 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

The point is Dave, since they've been in, they've pissed away £80m on overbudget/failed projects, and raided the reserves from taxpayers to the tune of £40m plus for 2 years to top up a failed government pension scheme. That's the equivalent of the tax increase for 8 years of this tax rise.

In the meantime they have made no attempt at cutting the cost of the civil and public service. In fact they have bloated it further.

It's not a modest tax rise at all.

You will dismiss this no doubt, but this administration INHERITED these problems and is trying to resolve them.

2 minutes ago, Amadeus said:

The people who pay for government can't afford to subsidise it like this anymore. Ever thought of that? Every time you post I'm shocked how much you've become one of the club.

Why? Because I quote facts or because you’re laying down markers for another campaign in 2026?

54 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Are you standing again next time Stu?

ETA apologies if you've already answered this and I've missed it.

Too early to say. Ask me again in 2 years.

10 minutes ago, Kopek said:

.... and I can understand that. Again, my question was, would you be as flippant with your constituents???

Ah, you’ve added. Depends entirely on the circumstances.

4 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Why haven't you fixed my fence yet?

Because you were sitting on it. Health and safety etc.

My constituents usually come to me with real problems or issues and I do my best to resolve or redirect them. MF is a different animal, not least because I have no idea who I’m talking to and whether people are just looking to pick a fight or score points. So if you want a proper answer, email me: stu.peters@gov.im  If you want an opinion or a bit of banter, ask here but be prepared for a less formal response. That might involve inappropriate language or humour. Arf!

What’s your question. If I can answer it I will.

45 minutes ago, Kopek said:

Not answering a question is a typical politician/interviewer situation, you should be well versed on both sides?

As I’ve said before Kopek, MF has always been a bit of fun for me with some robust banter (where I usually come second). I’m sorry if you find my sense of humour too flippant - I enjoy having a smile and hope others feel the same. Becoming an MHK hasn’t made me into a prudish Victorian (except for a day in July). I answered NB’s question about selection quite clearly a day or so ago, but he keeps implying that I’ve avoided it.

2 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

There is no attempt to twist your words Stu.

What is trying to be established is the worth of these trips to the taxpayer and what appears to have been elicited so far is that individuals thus despatched don't even have to have interest or aptitude for the subjects of the trip.

This would suggest that they are simply duties that have to be fulfilled so, "We'll just send anybody we can dick for it. They'll enjoy the trip". 

Which makes the optics even worse under the current economic conditions that the unelected are enduring.

And that’s why I get irritated. My initial comment was that business trips were no fun to me and I’d rather stay at home, and you’ve twisted that into me admitting I had no experience in the topics discussed or interest in the trip. I also explained that I applied to go, nobody press-ganged me. Most days I’d rather stay at home than go to the pub or a restaurant. Doesn’t mean I dislike pubs, food or beer.

14 hours ago, Two-lane said:

In this case it is a fool and someone else's money.

Any MHK made a comment about free parking?

Yes I have said in public and in DOI that I think it should be reinstated. However, the newspaper headline was disingenuous as it made it look as if only politicians got free parking - AFAIK it was made free to all government workers during Covid and never reinstated. I can afford to pay it, many people probably can’t.

39 minutes ago, Kopek said:

Stu P. Do you respond to your constituents in this glib manner? Not the wind up merchants but a seemingly genuine question from someone you don't know?

I try to answer any question quickly and truthfully, unless that involved confidential information. Sometimes I don’t know the answer - I presume the Clerk of Tynwald’s office or the CPA decide who should go on trips, but I don’t know.
 

Unfortunately some answers I give lead to further demands for detail which I’m not in a position or prepared to give, or which I consider vexatious or an attempt to twist my words against me.

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

I think we all know it's basically Buggin's Turn and they're all supposed to trot off to be indoctrinated in the glories of the UK's disintegrating political system at some point and maybe an extra somewhere else.  From memory it's technically paid via the CPA or whatever and I supposed they're obliged to pay the subs.  If they were really interested they'd learn more from 30 minutes on Wikipedia.  As all Stu seems to have gathered from his trips is that there might be a way he can spend even less time at work, I'm  not sure that much understanding of in depth constitutional principles has been gained.

Of course these aren't the same as normal work trips.  There's no intensive courses, intricate negotiations, delivering and defending papers at a conference or long hours spent selling face to face or convincing people at an exhibition. It's more like an upmarket coach tour where you are shepherded around and treated respectfully and everything is arranged.

Like all these activities, it is possible to use them to do useful things on the side - arrange to meet opposite numbers in other countries to sort out mutual problems for example or making useful contacts.  But that requires good preparation and research.

Things have clearly changed since the 60s when you presumably went on them.

22 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

The fact that the best response that Stu Peters can make to my earlier post is a "confused" emoji tells me all I need to know about Tynwald members, their jollies and the selection criteria used to despatch people on them.

I’m sorry, I thought it was a ridiculous post so chose not to engage further. Which is still the case, but now you know why.

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

Can you tell us where you will apply this new understanding of neighbouring parliaments please Stu, will you be trying to make changes to our constitution with this knowledge?

Who makes the decisions on who should attend these trips?

 

I liked that in the Dail there’s a time limit on debates (and have suggested we consider that here), and was surprised to learn that it is widely understood that PMQ’s is theatre rather than serious business. The trips are organised by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association - they ask for expressions of interest and presumably award trips to the best looking and most fun applicants.

14 hours ago, WTF said:

anything in those regs to say that multiple positions cannot be held by the same person ?

That’s a reasonable question, I’ll ask at the next meeting.

9 hours ago, Anyone said:

I would imagine most will stand again. After all they’ll not get anywhere near the dosh they get in the Keys as most of them are , well , let’s face it , not up to it anywhere else. Although they do enjoy their little jaunts to other jurisdictions to see how it is done , or not done. Who cares , it’s a jolly 😎

I’ve been on two, one to Westminster in 2022 and one to Leinster House a month ago. They were both useful in understanding neighbouring parliaments. I would rather have stayed at home though, there is little ‘jolly’ about business travel - but that’s possibly just me.

1 hour ago, newaccount said:

Speaking of the CAA....have they been told the turnstile into the security search area is permanently open?

I don’t know - have you told them? You should if you have a legitimate concern…oh no, maybe not - you’d have to put your real name to something.