In another very long session, Tynwald Court returned to the process of considering matters raised by the Lisvane Review on 18 July 2017, now available on rolling hansard.

The most significant development was discussion of the First Interim Report of the Select Committee on the Functioning of Tynwald – Remit and Work Plan. This report sought to inform Tynwald and members of the remit of the Select Committee, set out a general plan of work, and request “a modest change to our remit”. In particular the Select Committee asked for the authority to consider whether MLCs should be able to vote on the appointment of the Chief Minister, whether the Lord Bishop should retain his vote, whether a sitting MHK should be eligible to be nominated as an MLC, and a number of changes to the draft Bill procedure. The Select Committee took as part of its remit that they should accept in principle that MLCs should not vote on measures exclusively on taxation or appropriation, that MLCs should not be Ministers other than in exceptional circumstances, and that the Bishop should remain a MLC.

The report was only briefly debated. Mr Hooper focussed on two points where he felt that a majority of members of Tynwald were in agreement: that the Bishop should lose his vote, and that MLCs should be prohibited from voting on the Chief Minister. Mr Robertshaw, who had supported the loss of the Bishop’s vote, on reflection felt that the issue needed to go to the Committee. The motion was accepted by 23 to 1 in the Keys, and unanimously by the Council.

Debate may have been so brief because of two very specific motions moved by Mr Hooper further down the agenda.

He moved that Tynwald direct the Select Committee that the Bishop should not retain his vote, and that the Select Committee should consider ways to implement this change: in other words, moving the issue of the loss of the vote from the consider in principle, to the consider implementation section of the Select Committee remit (see my earlier post). Mr Hooper’s principal argument was that the Keys were already convinced that the Bishop should no longer vote, and that as the democratically elected chamber, their judgment should prevail. Mr Malarkey countered that it had been made very clear to past Chief Ministers that if the Bishop lost his vote, the Bishopric would be abolished. Mr Corkish agreed, but further reemphasised his view of the distinctive voice of the Bishop in Tynwald (“and the Bishop cometh free”). Mr Shimmins reemphasised the parallel with the Attorney General as a non-voting member, and was prepared to accept the loss of the Bishopric if that followed from the loss of the vote. Mrs Beecroft drew a sharp distinction between the Bishop’s voice – which she valued – and his vote, which she thought was inappropriate. The Chief Minister, and Mr Cregeen, both emphasised the value of religion and morality in Tynwald.

Mr Hooper then quoted my Law and Religion blog entry on last months debate, and in particular the possible parallels with Jersey, as indicating that losing the vote would not necessarily result in losing the ecclesiastical officer, although Mr Corkish interjected that “No, it is different”, perhaps giving more emphasis to the difference between a Bishopric and a Deanery. The motion was lost in both the Keys (10 to 13) and the Council (2 to 6).

His second motion would have made a similar change in relation to the Legislative Council voting for the Chief Minister – again, moving it from discussion of principal to implementation. Debate was briefer, and the motion was firmly passed by the Keys (17 to 6), but not by the Council (2 to 6), so the motion failed to carry.

So the Select Committee remit will now extend to whether the Bishop should retain his vote, but not whether he should retain his seat. The Select Committee will report back on this as a matter of principle. Additionally, the Select Committee will report back on the principle of MLCs involvement in appointment of a Chief Minister – despite a clear majority of MHKs clearly supporting the principle, and wishing the Select Committee to move to implementation.