Stu Peters Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Has any effort been made by the newly elected MHKs to 'take soundings' about who their constituents think should be CM and what the key issues are in that decision? I haven't heard anything. The role of CM is very important and the Manx political system would be much stronger and democratic if there is some kind of connection between the electorate and the CM.... At the moment all we seem to have is this thread.... The cynic in my head reckons most of the electorate won't see hide nor hair of their MHK for another 4½ years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Q Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 The cynic in my head reckons most of the electorate won't see hide nor hair of their MHK for another 4½ years... Apologies for my late arrival here. .. even my hubby deserves dinner after working so late !!! Does it really matter ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted October 6, 2011 Author Share Posted October 6, 2011 Headline: Peter Karran: Manxforum's choice for Chief Minister Body copy: Liberal Vannin leader Peter Karran had polled DOUBLE the number of votes of fellow contender Allan Bell in the race for the top job in Manx politics this morning (0900hrs). Meanwhile, Someone Else was showing strongly in second place with almost a third of the votes cast so far... Headline: Someone Else: Manxforum's choice for Chief Minister Body copy: Rank outsider Someone Else is currently leading the poll ahead of fellow contenders Allan Bell and Peter Karran in the race for the top job in Manx politics this morning (0900hrs). While Someone Else was not available for an interview, Allan Bell commented: "Who?" and Peter Karran also seemed surprised at the popularity of this largely unknown contender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I think people are over egging Bell's faults. Yes he can be impetuous & impatient and when he's convinced a decision is correct he tries to cajole rather than persuade people into his view point. But is this enough to rule him out? The other wished for candidates aren't perfect either. The problem I have is the debate we are having is not about the direction the Island should take but about whether somone's personality is too abrasive or whether he looks good in a suit. I would perfer we had two or three serious candidates each putting forward a range of policys and then Tynwald members engage in a discussion with the public about the way forward before deciding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Good point Declan that needed saying. Bell on Manx Radio this morning talking about deregulation of Planning rules, cutting red tape etc and giving his business chums a free crack.... Perhaps his vision for the Island is something along the lines of the free-market business friendly countries of South America in the 1970's ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I have known both for many years, Peter much better than Alan, but I respect both on the whole. Alan stood initially as Mec Vannin, so don't go dissing his nationalist credentials, or his love of the Island, he has done a lot of good, and his stance on gay decriminalisation, and his speech in that debate, come the crunch makes it clear where his human rights and civil liberties views are. As for less planning red tape, we need it, not just for his business chums, but for the 100's of ill housed Manx who will never be able to get a home of their own, either social or first time buyer, if we go on as we are Peter I have electioneered for, knocked on doors, stuffed envelopes and helped, wen I could. I was disappointed when he left Manx Labour, instead of fighting his corner and rebuilding there, I worry about his association with UKIP; but I don't, and you shouldn't, underestimate his intelligence and political guile and skill. He looks longer term, he has had to. He may not be eloquent, we do need a communicator to get across some of the difficult decisions, but he is dogged, determined and what is more speaks in language many understand, even if those of you who speak RP may deride his grammar and choice of words from time to time. We can always send a smooth talker to represent us. He single handedley highlighted the RHA, campaigned for the Mount Murray report etc, he was right about the VAT & Customs agreement. I could list dozens of other examples. Most of all he is right about the islands need for party politics and he has acheived something remarkable there. all those candidates, common policy manifesto. Both are patriots, both are doers and achievers in their own ways. Neither are bean counters who will be totally in the thrall of the civil servants and in particular Treasury. I hope that they are neither of them stalking horses for an as yet undeclared candidate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 The problem I have is the debate we are having is not about the direction the Island should take but about whether somone's personality is too abrasive or whether he looks good in a suit. OK. Turn it on it's head. If the direction to be taken is clearly defined what type of candidate has a better chance of getting the island there. Someone who's personality is too abrasive or someone who looks good in a suit? People talk about "leadership" without really giving any consideration to what it means - or even if it's required. The same goes for "management" when talking about the role of CM. IMHO if the choice of CM, for whatever reason, is ALWAYS going to be a compromise candidate then it's a pretty fair bet that you will always end up with neither. Say what you like about the Maggie's and Blair's of this world of one thing there was no doubt - you knew who was in charge! To me TB had no leadership skills whatsoever, which is probably why he ended up as CM... Because of Mr Bell's political baggage I wouldn't trust him further than I could throw a steamroller. He should have had the decency to resign but didn't. To me that says it all about him. Mr Karran may not be the most articulate speaker in the world but there's no mistaking his honesty. Mr Karran comes in for a lot of criticism over his mo. But anyone who has bubbled up through a large organisation will tell you that having those who are not afraid to tell it like it is are absolutely invaluable. They make the best Reality Gross Error Check you could ever have. For example there would have been no MM inquiry without him, whatever you may feel about that. The role of CM is so unique I struggle with what type of individual would suit it best. So choosing the best of a bad lot is nigh on impossible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I have known both for many years, Peter much better than Alan, but I respect both on the whole. Great post, thanks John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EORH Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 They also have a poll on the newspaper website,and Peter Karran is leading that one,whether the MHKs read this website or the newspaper one they will see that the public vote should be taken note of. It would be a good thing if a public meeting was held with the two contenders present to see if the public want either one or the other,and make the MHKs vote for what the public want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I've been looking at the Hansard for the first round of the CM elections last time. The ballots went: 1st Ballot: Cannan 8, Roden 9, Shimmin 8, spoilt 6 2nd Ballot: Cannan 7, Roden 9, Shimmin 10, spoilt 5 3rd Ballot: Roden 9, Shimmin 11, spoilt 11 4th Ballot: Roden 8, Shimmin 12, spoilt 11 These all add to 31 and Downie was "away from the Island on Government business this morning" (odd in itself you'd think) plus there was a vacancy on the LC (Singer had stood down to fight Ramsey). So I assume the Bishop gets a vote in electing the CM, but the President does not. There is currently a vacancy on the LC as well giving 32 votes again, If they split 16-16 does the President get the casting vote or do they have to keep on trying to get to 17 out of the 32? I also noticed that both the Keys and the LC appointed "tellers". Does that mean in these 'secret' ballots aren't so secret? Especially as I presume voters have to write in the name of their candidate. I also notice that Cannan's supporters mostly then abstained. Were they part of the Brown 'plot' (allegedly) or could this sort of thing happen again, with those 'anti' the establishment sitting it out? Incidentally of those who took part in 2006, 19 are still members (plus Downie) while there are 12 newbies - 4 in the LC, 8 in the Keys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 No vote for Bishop, or AG. President can vote, and clearly did. So there are actually only 32 votes available and it has to be a majority. As we are an MLC, short its 32 and a majority is 17 on the 11th, unless anyone is away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I'm sure Allan can count on all (or certainly most) of the LegCo votes, as unless I'm mistaken I think Peter would like to 'reform' them. I guess on the day they'll know which way to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I also noticed that both the Keys and the LC appointed "tellers". Does that mean in these 'secret' ballots aren't so secret? Especially as I presume voters have to write in the name of their candidate. The ballot papers are all identical and have the candidates names on I believe, but won't have the voter's name on. So it is secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinnieK Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 Alan stood initially as Mec Vannin, so don't go dissing his nationalist credentials, or his love of the Island, he has done a lot of good, and his stance on gay decriminalisation, and his speech in that debate, come the crunch makes it clear where his human rights and civil liberties views are. As for less planning red tape, we need it, not just for his business chums, but for the 100's of ill housed Manx who will never be able to get a home of their own, either social or first time buyer, if we go on as we are That's some pretty weak spin. I'm not sure being a member of Mec Vannin thirty odd years ago, a party which has long since disowned and poured public opprobrium on him, really says much at all about his nationalist or patriotic tendencies. As for the planning bit, it's hard to imagine that the Mount Murray Scandal was actually the fallout from a tireless and noble crusade on behalf of the Island's poor first time buyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 I'm not sure you can read that much into his stance on gay decriminalisation, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.