Brown For President

[triskelion]

Its not going to be much of a range of policies if you have a set list of objectives you want them to achieve.

 

Terms like "big government" and "much leaner and fitter regime" are vapid psuedo-political hogwash. Its basically a call to cut public sectors jobs for the sake of it, without consideration as to whether that will actually improve the services, their accessibility or affordability. There's nothing inherently unsustainable about a large public sector. Certain aspects of the current structure are obviously problematic - pensions being the biggest one probably, but that doesn't mean the logical solution is a swathe of cuts. Indeed, slashing government spending would serve only to put revenues under further pressure.

[manshimajin]

Terms like "big government" and "much leaner and fitter regime" are vapid psuedo-political hogwash. Its basically a call to cut public sectors jobs for the sake of it, without consideration as to whether that will actually improve the services, their accessibility or affordability. There's nothing inherently unsustainable about a large public sector.

What makes it unsustainable is if there is a shrinking private sector. When the public sector continues to grow as a percentage of the overall economy, as it has done in the UK, if unchecked it ultimately creates an issue of affordability. If wealth generation grows much more slowly than public spending of this wealth there is a long term problem. At present the shift in balance between the private sector as employer and wealth generator and the public sector as employer and wealth spender is not particulalry healthy. If our private sector was growing strongly then we can afford a higher spending pubic sector. Even countries like Fnland which have very high taxes and very high (and excellent) public services get into trouble if their ability to raise tax and excise revenue from the private sector and private employees fails to keep pace with the revenue needed to grow public services.

 

I agree with you that simply cutting costs and services across the board does not achieve better services. But IMO the answer to having excellent public services is to have a strongly growing private sector.

 

To use an old analogy if water is flowing out of a bath at a rate faster than it is flowing in - the bath ultimately empties. The decision then becomes one of increasing the inflow or reducing the outflow.

[VinnieK]

What will be needed post 2011 election is a much more focused approach, with a range of real policies and strategies to bring down the size and cost of government and resolve the pensions time bomb, on one hand, while generating income and new business and economic growth on the other, and the real LEADERSHIP to actually implement them, even though they may be unpopular, in some quarters.

 

Eddie Teare is the man closest to fitting the bill, but he'd need to be a genuine leader (not a manager) and to generate genuine philosophical and practical support from a much more cohesive CoMin team than we have now

 

Has Teare actually shown that he has any of these qualities? All he's really done is propose a couple of easy and largely peripheral cuts (refectory, student grants) and mouth off, with all the thoughtfulness and contemplative disposition of 'a man down the pub', about universities back in t'olden days and alcoholics.

 

Philosophical he ain't, and I have doubts about his ability to lead as well. Apart from his performance in Tynwald, where for most of the time he's acted more or less as just another one of Tony's lapdogs, Teare's a tinkerer: with a cut here, a cut there, he's the embodiment of the old adage of "knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing", not a man of ideas or ideals. I tend to view him more as an example of what happens when people are promoted beyond their talents - in a mid level administrative post where he's guided and reigned in by firm guiding principles and aims he'd probably excell, but is lost in a position near the top of an organization. With the result being a disorganized and poorly thought out barrage of 'little measures' with little true rhyme or reason.

 

Edited to add:

 

Also, I'm not entirely sold on the idea that what we need right now is a 'strong leader' type. The problem with such a figure is that by an large they tend to listen to their own prejudices and conviction more than the arguments or even the people on the ground. Unless they possess a comprehensive experience of all aspects of the public sectore (and indeed beyond it) and an incredibly keen mind, you're liable to end up heading towards disaster in the long term.

 

In fact, as unpalatable as it might seem, Tony Brown is already an example of the kind of 'real leadership' that many cry out for here: he is supremely confident in his own opinions of how things should be done and why, maintains what appears to be a strong grip over his subordinates within CoMin, and (given that so many people call for it) isn't afraid of public opinion or implementing unpopular measures. The RHA was just such a measure, being deeply unpopular both with the public and many in Tynwald, yet Tony stuck to his guns until the very last moment, fending off (or just plain ignoring) criticism of his or his government. Is that really the kind of person we want strutting into the role in 2011? Better instead to have the quieter type, someone who's demonstrated an abilitiy to listen to both sides of an argument and the a reasoned approach towards making a decision based on that, without the tendency to ignore or totally bring opposition to heel. We don't need a strong, dominating leader or leadership so much as we do someone who's independently minded and who has the ability to coordinate and guide the various departments of CoMin as well as being guided by them when appropriate.

 

I know I'm probably going to be shot down in flames for my opinion, but my view is that the closest CoMin has to this is probably Cretney. Given a decent line up for CoMin (the lack of which often being ignored when it comes to discussions like these), I think he'd be in with as good a, if perhaps better chance of pulling it off than the rest of the current incumbants in CoMin.

[Topaz]

What we need in a CM is :

 

Charisma (Greek "kharisma," meaning "gift," "of/from/favored by God/the divine") is a trait found in persons whose personalities are characterized by a personal charm and magnetism (attractiveness), along with innate and powerfully sophisticated abilities of interpersonal communication and persuasion. One who is charismatic is said to be capable of using their personal being, rather than just speech or logic alone, to interface with other human beings in a personal and direct manner.

 

Now Eddie just doesn't have that! Brown does, but his is the darker side of Charisma, like Hitler had.

[- Paul -]

I'd suggest that Hitler was at least capable of making decisions without employing consultants for every action.

 

Brown is a first grade buffoon.

 

Under his so called 'leadership' the IOM has lurched from crisis to crisis without any attempt to think more than five seconds ahead along with a singular failure to confront important issues.

 

The sooner he is retired from any public position the better.

 

The age of bumbling incompetent patronage should go with him.

[mannin1]

[quote .

 

I know I'm probably going to be shot down in flames for my opinion, but my view is that the closest CoMin has to this is probably Cretney. Given a decent line up for CoMin (the lack of which often being ignored when it comes to discussions like these), I think he'd be in with as good a, if perhaps better chance of pulling it off than the rest of the current incumbants in CoMin.

 

 

A few years ago I would have possibly agreed with you, but alas Mr Cretney has seemingly gone down the same path of self interest as the rest of our elected buffoons.

He has still not seen fit to ;revert; to a lot of questions as promised, on an earlier thread as to the capability and Management of one of his departments, Bus Vannin, so what chance for Honesty and Integrity, surely a prerequisite for such a role?

[censorship]

Under his so called 'leadership' the IOM has lurched from crisis to crisis

Forgive me for my ignorance, but can you tell me about the crisis we have lurched between?

[Theodolite]

I would imagine that -Paul- is probably referring to the likes of MEA, IRIS, Corkhill court case (we've all mostly forgotten that particular pecadillo), Reciprocal Health Agreement, VAT Common Purse deficit, etc. (Although none of those ever became an actual crisis because we then had plenty of money to sort them out in one way or another).

 

Back on topic, I find that TB will stubbornly fight the corner for the establishment and/or the Government. Regardless of right or wrong. And that attitude filters down right through the whole Civil Service, as they can do no wrong as long as compliant Tony is in their charge.

[Dodger]

I would imagine that -Paul- is probably referring to the likes of MEA, IRIS, Corkhill court case (we've all mostly forgotten that particular pecadillo), Reciprocal Health Agreement, VAT Common Purse deficit, etc. (Although none of those ever became an actual crisis because we then had plenty of money to sort them out in one way or another).

 

Back on topic, I find that TB will stubbornly fight the corner for the establishment and/or the Government. Regardless of right or wrong. And that attitude filters down right through the whole Civil Service, as they can do no wrong as long as compliant Tony is in their charge.

 

I see a lot of talk over political members being less than capable, but the crux of it is who will stand to make a difference? I have always believed you have to be on the inside to make effective changes, it has to be people who are better candidates than current incumbants politically and importantly they have to appeal to the electorate, an unknown doesn't stand a chance, unless the alternative means that it is a protest vote.

 

Who will stand in Castletown, Ayre, Ramsey to oust the main drivers?

 

Should we look to have a directly elected CM? Should that also apply to President?

 

A previous comment said that a one termer should make changes that will put the island on a level footing, unfortunately I have never heard of a newly elected MHK being made CM! That means you are left with those we have at present.

 

If you are looking for a people person, why not Anne Craine? A leader, Shimmin or Rodan, both have advised that they would like to be CM, Shimmin even announced that before the last election.

 

There are 24 MHK's, can we get 23 other forum members to put themselves forward? Even without having to agree policy and strategy or forming a party!

[censorship]

Back on topic

This discussion is about the possibility of Tony Brown being President of Tynwald. Paul said he had lurched from crisis to crisis under Brown's leadership. I think it is well within the topic to ask him to clarify what crisis he is talking about.

 

I would imagine that -Paul- is probably referring to the likes of MEA, IRIS, Corkhill court case (we've all mostly forgotten that particular pecadillo), Reciprocal Health Agreement, VAT Common Purse deficit, etc.

The MEA started while either Donald Gelling or Richard Corkill. IRIS started a long time before Brown became CM. The Corkill court case happened while Corkill was CM, and concluded while Gelling was CM. The RHC was hardly a crisis. It was badly handled, it threatened the travel plans of some, but it was hardly a crisis.

So, from your list, what we are left with is that the UK demanded a change to our VAT revenue sharing agreement and, as a result, government is having to look at making cuts. This may become a crisis. One crisis, which is bad enough, but it is hardly 'lurching from crisis to crisis' is it?

[Kopek]

The President, whose role is that of a speaker/chairman/referee gets £ 60k/yr. Same as a Minister.

This role could be performed by one of the other Legco members with perhaps, a vote, casting vote or a summary to include his opinion.

It looks like a pension suppliment for a retiring member who wants an easier weeks work.

 

Chief Minister.

Would an elected CM be a better bet? Would take the matter out of the hands of Tynwald, no promoting one of their own about to lose his seat or voting against someone on personal rather than political grounds.

 

It would seem a good bet for a candidate for CM have to have a populist manifesto to stand a chance?

 

This could mean the elected Cm having to stick to his manifesto and not getting the dirty work done or throwing out his plans as soon as elected and making a mockery of the electoral process.

 

However, an elected CM would have a powerful mandate and this could be dangerous in the wrong hands.

[Albert Tatlock]

This may become a crisis. One crisis, which is bad enough, but it is hardly 'lurching from crisis to crisis' is it?

You are Tony Brown...and I claim my 5W light blub.

[Theodolite]

Back on topic

This discussion is about the possibility of Tony Brown being President of Tynwald. Paul said he had lurched from crisis to crisis under Brown's leadership. I think it is well within the topic to ask him to clarify what crisis he is talking about.

 

I would imagine that -Paul- is probably referring to the likes of MEA, IRIS, Corkhill court case (we've all mostly forgotten that particular pecadillo), Reciprocal Health Agreement, VAT Common Purse deficit, etc.

The MEA started while either Donald Gelling or Richard Corkill. IRIS started a long time before Brown became CM. The Corkill court case happened while Corkill was CM, and concluded while Gelling was CM. The RHC was hardly a crisis. It was badly handled, it threatened the travel plans of some, but it was hardly a crisis.

So, from your list, what we are left with is that the UK demanded a change to our VAT revenue sharing agreement and, as a result, government is having to look at making cuts. This may become a crisis. One crisis, which is bad enough, but it is hardly 'lurching from crisis to crisis' is it?

 

Well I was only supposing. P'raps -Paul- can answer for himself.

 

Oh, and whilst we''re at it, what sort of CM starts re-arranging the Departments and all that, and during a time that even your good self admits might become a crisis.

 

.....it will become a crisis, you don't need about 5 O'levels or CSE equivalents to work that one out. (Don't worry, that's me just having a little dig at some highly paid, pensioned and mighty powerful civil servants there)

[censorship]

Well I was only supposing. P'raps -Paul- can answer for himself.

or not

Oh, and whilst we''re at it, what sort of CM starts re-arranging the Departments and all that, and during a time that even your good self admits might become a crisis.

I don't want to become defender of Tony Brown here, but perhaps the Council of Ministers thought the potential onset of a financial crisis was the perfect time to restructure government, with the aim of trimming the fat and preparing government for a new phase. The structure we had was fine while the ecomony was growing without government having to do much, with a new economic phase dawning, it seems perfect sense to prepare the structure of government to meet the new challenges before the crisis breaks, rather than during or after. That said, if that was the intention, they failed spectacularly by allowing the self interests of politicians and civil servants to guide the restructuring so that we have ended up with no savings and no reductions and, essentially, have just renamed what was already there.

The point I was making in answer to Paul's post is that it is easy to bandy about phrases like lurching from crisis to crisis, and make ourselves feel better by lumping all our disatisfaction on Tony Brown, but the reality is the issues which have led to the current resentment have been going on for years.

Blaming Brown is lazy, the problems are systemic and deciding Brown is to blame and if we get rid of him the world will be fixed makes us as clueless as them.

[Lost Login]

The point I was making in answer to Paul's post is that it is easy to bandy about phrases like lurching from crisis to crisis, and make ourselves feel better by lumping all our disatisfaction on Tony Brown, but the reality is the issues which have led to the current resentment have been going on for years.

Blaming Brown is lazy, the problems are systemic and deciding Brown is to blame and if we get rid of him the world will be fixed makes us as clueless as them.

 

Maybe largely true but Brown as Chief Minister is the leader and I have basically seen little leadership from him. e,g for example we know there will have to be major cost cutting and have known this for a good whilst. Brown says they have a five year plan but apparently we are not allowed to see it! Expenditure on cpaital projects continues as if nothing happened, apparently because it has already been announced. Contrast that with the announced cutbacks in the Irish capital program announced yesterday.

 

Couple with this lack of leadership I hear a lot of dissatisfaction about Brown and I have to admit I have no confidence in him as Chief Minister. In fact I view him with little nmore than contempt. That is something I thought I would never say as intrinsically I have a lot of sympathy for politicians if they behave honourably as I appreciaste there is often not a lot you can do.

 

If Brown is replcaed it will not solve problems overnight but a restoration of leadership and increase in confidence in the executive would be a start.