Requisition Meeting - Douglas West

[Chris Thomas]

 

 

Packed? How many is packed? How many turned up?

 

If the Lib Vannins held their AGM in a phone box that would be packed too.

 

 

,Remember the Lido ? well All Saints church hall is nearly as big as the Lido toilets

 

About 200 turned up, not all of them could get in

IMHO...Even with a 'Packed' requisition meeting, and coming across as good, there are at least 3 major worries I have about Chris Thomas and his campaign.

 

1. I have been to many a requistition meeting over the years, and while these meetings may influence some. These meetings also often contain a large number of people that have, actually, already made their mind up who they are voting for (no doubt including the bees and Cheeky Boy etc.). Candidates tend to turn up with many of their existing supporters/nominees. Also, in my experience, many of the better speakers can still come second or third (e.g. Theo FleurBay was one last time). My points being, even a good requisition meeting: a) can provide a false sense of security to a candidate b) if 200 turn up it is still only a small percentage of the turnout (turnout usually around 1800 at a by election) that represents only around 5% to 10% of the voters on the day.

2. His manifesto. We are currently one week from election day and his manifesto online looks like this:

thomas1.jpg

3. His election messages are appearing complex, and are not prioritised properly. e.g. people are interested firstly in the economy, health, cuts, immigration etc. etc. long before 'governence'.

 

He needs to up his game, or what sounds like the two sound-byte specialists chasing his heels may well overtake him. Analysis is for after the election, far simple messages and prioritisation are for before.

 

ETA: I wonder also who, if anyone, Corkish might be sharing his teller type info with? Was he mates with Gill? Teller info can really give an advantage, in the sense that a candidate knows which third of the houses to visit that are actually likely to turn out, and not waste 67% of his time knocking on doors, generally to no avail.

 

 

.

 

 

.

 

Albert. Tks for feedback. Even with a great group of people helping me, it is hard - and there are only 24 hours in 24 hours. Out door-knocking in a minute. If anyone needs to have met me, please phone or email or message to invite. If a group of neighbours want to invite me together, please do. Several have phoned or emailed to say I do not need to visit them because they already have their mind made up to vote for me. Thanks to them for that, especially letting me know to help me use the coming 6 days to best advantage and for their encouragement. I am trying to get around, trying to have public meetings, trying to use social media as another group of people expect. But most importantly set myself up to work with others as a good public representative from day 1, as I did in council.

 

2. Your post was factually incorrect when you made it - issue is website pointing. My manifesto is at http://www.manxradio.com/uploadedFiles/www/content/features/Chris%20Thomas%20Manifesto.pdf?n=6715. From introduction page I point to this, but some time is needed to move from .pdf or my original text, to online version, so the tab is wrong. Suggestions?

 

3. Good point.

 

The priorities I am stating in my vision for the Isle of Man in 2020 are:

 

• Hold a Referendum on parliamentary reform and reduce the number of politicians
• Give all local people a stake in MEA and issue local bonds
• Tackle the cost of living by dealing with rates, electricity and off-Island travel costs
• Encourage local businesses and training to keep money on the Island
• Facilitate innovation and clusters of businesses
• Review tax and benefits systems together so all contribute to rebalancing
• Merge two departments to create Department of Community, and re-align terms
• and conditions of civil servants and private sector
• Re-build morale in teaching, health and other front-line public services
• Use and maintain what we have, including repairing local roads and pavements
• Build new community primary school
• Substitute a new parking management system for some of the proposed new
• town centre lighting
• Plan better-value, smaller-scale Douglas regeneration
• Develop shared equity, self-build, social and sheltered housing schemes
• Negotiate better reciprocal arrangements for health and pensions, and for a fair share of Irish Sea revenues

 

In Council my priorities are and have been:

 

• To get well-planned better-value smaller scale Douglas regeneration
• To reform the local authority for efficiency and effectiveness, with suitable governance, staffing and financing
• To refinance at least part of Douglas borrowing with local bonds, sharing the arrangements with government and statutory bodies (e.g. initially MEA)
• To revisit local authority pension scheme in the context of my discovery of "incorrect figures" last summer, no tender for professional services for a decade, & incomplete arrangements for participation in governance, in my view

The message on Manx mandate longer summary was helpful. I chose to focus on merging DCCL/DSC in part because of its symbolism in respect of removing one chief executive post, one minister, several departmental members, some bureaucracy, without affecting service or posts closer to the front line. I also mentioned in meeting that town/rural issues were another area - relative cost of village primary schools, bus subsidies given stock of buses etc..

 

Please help me Albert. It is easy to get disheartened.

 

Thanks to all Manx Forum members who have contributed material and thoughts for what is in my manifesto.

[Cronky]

You suggestion to:

 

>>Hold a Referendum on parliamentary reform and reduce the number of politicians<<

 

is crazy.

 

There aren't enough politicians as it is to effectively scrutinise all the complex policy and legislation that gets shoveled at Tynwald. We would end up with something even more autocratic and undemocratic than the present system.

 

One of the major problems with the Isle of Man is the over powerful civil service. Such a policy plays directly into their hands

 

You really haven't though this through.

[Chris Thomas]

You suggestion to:

 

>>Hold a Referendum on parliamentary reform and reduce the number of politicians<<

 

is crazy.

 

There aren't enough politicians as it is to effectively scrutinise all the complex policy and legislation that gets shoveled at Tynwald. We would end up with something even more autocratic and undemocratic than the present system.

 

One of the major problems with the Isle of Man is the over powerful civil service. Such a policy plays directly into their hands

 

You really haven't though this through.

 

You suggestion to:

 

>>Hold a Referendum on parliamentary reform and reduce the number of politicians<<

 

is crazy.

 

There aren't enough politicians as it is to effectively scrutinise all the complex policy and legislation that gets shoveled at Tynwald. We would end up with something even more autocratic and undemocratic than the present system.

 

One of the major problems with the Isle of Man is the over powerful civil service. Such a policy plays directly into their hands

 

You really haven't though this through.

 

I have thought it through Cronky, and raised it at PAG meeting in March so there has been time for dialogue and there still is time for loads of dialogue between now and 2016. Anybody who was there would know that I recognise the issues you raise are massively important, or you can see my slides on the webpage. To dismiss the idea of a referendum following 3 decades of parliament trying to deal with an issue is wrong on at least two counts i) disrespectful of people ii) not recognising that Mr Callister's bill was just the latest of a series of attempts which did not go anywhere so we need to put these whole issues of LegCo and how to develop and scrutinise policy and legislation to bed in another way, and a referendum will be helpful in that. The points you raise might be valid and my comments are:

 

• 33 to 24. Might be beneficial, might not. This is separate issue, I have independent commission to investigate the issues you raise inter alia in 2013 to 2015. See the rest of my manifesto. Scope of commission's work is sketched there.
• Democracy/autocracy. You are completely right - this is an issue in some countries that have smaller parliaments than ours. All these issues have been long discussed. Public currently believes we have too many politicians. Even if we do not have too many politicians, we need to engage the public in dialogue leading up to 2016 so that they are convinced. That is what I hope would be on the petition for redress of grievance in July, or something along these lines.
• Civil service - CoMin. Civil service - Parliament. CoMin - Parliament. I don't think the number of politicians is directly related to any of these things. What you need is a different type of public representative and a different approach to public representation and the parliament-government-civil service relationship. See video of my interview with John Moss about this in 8/2011 (although my comments were shortened, and I was newly involved in public discussion in the Island)

In essence Cronky, I appreciate your post and concern and the main points are that more time of legal draftsmen and parliament cannot be devoted to this topic at the moment, there are more pressing issues, but the public needs to be fully engaged in this debate and dialogue. My suggestion of commission, dialogue, investigation then referendum will take this issue out of parliament, government, civil service to an extent and put it into public, with timeline and nearly costless endpoint given we will be having local elections in April 2016 in any case.

 

Referendum on that day might also encourage participation in local authority elections, another good thing.

 

Have you been following the referendum in Jersey? they were presented with options in a referendum and the questions were prepared after investigation by a commission, just like I propose. The people there decided (although the referendum is of course not binding) to have fewer politicians, larger constituencies and involvement of local politicians in an indirect way. These all seem good suggestions for what next in the Isle of Man. What do you think? I commented on this on my facebook page www.facebook.com/christhomasiom

 

But want to go door-knocking now

[GD4ELI]

Chris,

 

Far too many priorities, you should have three as a maximum. Most you list are just wishful thinking, a few possible.

 

Most of the things you list would only be possible were you chief minister.

[Albert Tatlock]

Chris,

 

Far too many priorities, you should have three as a maximum. Most you list are just wishful thinking, a few possible.

 

Most of the things you list would only be possible were you chief minister.

I agree.

 

Of those that will read your literature (only 20% of the electorate IMO), 80% of people will read 20% of what you are saying and 20% will look into the more detailed explanation on the website and read 80% of that. I'm sure you are more than aware of the old pareto principle, and it certainly applies in elections.

 

Keep your chin up, we are trying to help fine tune that's all. I'll send you a PM with a couple of suggestions late today.

[Chris Thomas]

Chris,

 

Far too many priorities, you should have three as a maximum. Most you list are just wishful thinking, a few possible.

 

Most of the things you list would only be possible were you chief minister.

 

Last post for now GD4ELI. Tks for your advice. I was concerned to call my website www.iom2020.im and to mention Chief Minister's 2011 manifesto in my manifesto because of the perception you hint at. But I chose to do it because I wanted to make the point that any new public representative should make it clear what policies they believe are right for the government of the day, given their role in parliament. I would work on each of these things, and I can make a contribution on each priority from day 1, just as I have done in council. I know full well that it takes working together with at least 16 others in parliament and with others outside parliament to get anywhere near this list. IOM2020. It is not arrogant to suggest a vision I hope, merely a statement that vision and policy matter. Pleased to discuss everything in coming week and thereafter.

[Cronky]

Look, an awful lot of the legislation that Tynwald has to process arises from international obligations - i.e. the ECHR. Some of the stuff that has come at Tynwald in the past ten years is really complicated. Getting it right it really important because things work differently in the Isle of Man as opposed to the other British jurisdictions. To get such matters framed correctly for the Isle of Man context means having elected politicians, who know the island, going through it line by line. You can't do that with just 24 people. Just maybe you could do it with 35 if the individuals were smarter.

 

You say that the >>Public currently believes we have two many politicians.<< Well, that's as maybe but we know the Island is beset by Parish Pump politics. The public need to be properly informed as to the task Tynwald faces. The first priority of Tynwald is policy and legislation - and that's legislation with a big 'L'. Stuff that gets badly drafted and skimped over by politicians has to be resolved in the courts. If the original legislation is bad then it's Joe Public who suffers by being dragged through a badly thought out legal mill.

 

A lot of this is not popular election stuff. But it sure as hell matters.

 

[thebees]

Right then, he needs to be CM. Straight to the top, innit bled? I don't see anybody else with his credentials in the election, in Tynwald. Chris can do all this stuff & he KNOWS what he is talking about, really, he does.

[Donald Trumps]

I really like Chris's idea of building a new primary school on the Nobles Hospital site - Fairfield/TynwaldSt must be about the oldest primary school on the island now

[Lonan3]

I really like Chris's idea of building a new primary school on the Nobles Hospital site - Fairfield/TynwaldSt must be about the oldest primary school on the island now

I thought that had already been agreed.

[slinkydevil]

I really like Chris's idea of building a new primary school on the Nobles Hospital site - Fairfield/TynwaldSt must be about the oldest primary school on the island now

 

It's not his idea though.

[Whimsy]

I really like Chris's idea of building a new primary school on the Nobles Hospital site - Fairfield/TynwaldSt must be about the oldest primary school on the island now

 

Not his idea. It's already happening. It has been in the Pink Book for the last three years.

[GD4ELI]

I really like Chris's idea of building a new primary school on the Nobles Hospital site - Fairfield/TynwaldSt must be about the oldest primary school on the island now

 

I would nominate Ballaugh, built 1877 (I think). Fairfield is from 1890 or so. Frances will know.

[Donald Trumps]

Which ideas went down best at the requisition meeting?

[VinnieK]

You suggestion to:

 

>>Hold a Referendum on parliamentary reform and reduce the number of politicians<<

 

is crazy.

 

There aren't enough politicians as it is to effectively scrutinise all the complex policy and legislation that gets shoveled at Tynwald. We would end up with something even more autocratic and undemocratic than the present system.

Couldn't agree more.

 

One of the most fundamental problems with our government is a consequence of having the executive, CoMin, a part of the legislature (in the style of Westminster). The fact that the legislature is so small then results in the former dominating the latter, something that is then exacerbated further by departmental memberships and the Keys not offering enough in the way of broad experience and expertise to effectively scrutinize and challenge legislation and proposals.

 

Reducing the number of MHK's is a popular and relatively easy move to make, but it is without a doubt the wrong one and will in all probability make the current situation much worse. Enthusiasm for such a reduction is very much a flaw of a kind of 'corporate thinking' that views government and parliament as a glorified layer of management to be trimmed down and made more efficient, but a parliament isn't primarily a managerial entity; it's a deliberative body that has to have a certain 'critical mass' in order to bolster its independence and its ability to do its job properly.

 

There are also those who try and draw comparisons with the United Kingdom and ask why we need X MHKs for a population of Y people. Doing so represents a pretty superficial appreciation of the issue and misses much of the point of what purpose a parliament is supposed to serve. The UK population is of a sufficient size to produce a parliament big enough to do its job with each MP representing a very large number of people. We, on the other hand, have a very small population for a (semi-) autonomous body, and so it shouldn't come as any surprise that we need more representatives per population to function properly.

 

A larger Keys and properly separating the executive from it is the only practical way to address most of the problems that currently make Tynwald such a poor excuse for a parliament, but just enlarging the Keys (at the expense of LegCo if desired, which in my view it is) might provide some improvement. Cutting down on the size of Tynwald is actually less preferable to the current situation and carries a very real chance of us ending up with a body that the executive can bully and manipulate with much greater ease, not to mention one that will have even less breadth and depth of experience to bring to bear when considering government business.

 

Chris, I'd actually go a little further than Cronky and say that this idea is not just ill-judged, but potentially dangerous. Reducing the size of Tynwald brings a real chance of both increasing the level of cronyism within government and undermining its ability to operate as a body independent of the rest of the state's apparatus. What's more, that's something that will in all likelihood prove very difficult to reverse if it does go tits up.

 

EDITED TO ADD:

 

To say that dismissing proposals to hold a referendum on parliamentary reform shows 'disrespect' to the populace is a very weak (and worryingly populist) argument. Referenda best confined to instances whereby dramatic changes to a country and its society are being proposed, such as transfers of sovereignty, changes to the entire model of governance (i.e. from constitutional monarchy to republic), and, most recently, independence.

 

By comparison, it could be argued that the annual budget has more of a direct effect on people's daily lives than parliamentary reform of the kind being proposed, and there's a very good reason we don't host a referendum to approve budgets: the details are often too technical or convoluted to expect, and the public too easily swayed by personal concerns and current feeling to guarrantee a result based on proper consideration, and the risks of a hasty decision too great. So it is also with the issue of changing the size of Tynwald.