A motion to hold an inquiry into reducing the size of the board of Port Erin Commissioners failed when it was discussed last week.
Commissioner Martin Norbury proposed that the authority asks the Department of Infrastructure to set up an inquiry into reducing the board by two members.
He said: ‘This is an opportunity for them (the public) to have fair input. I urge you to find out what a public inquiry might establish. To vote against one could be seen to stifle the democracy we aim to represent.’
Nick Watterson said: ‘I contest the innuendo if we do not go to a public inquiry, we are undemocratic. We were elected to represent the people of Port Erin and not to do so is undemocratic.’
He added if they canvass public opinion ‘every decision we make has the potential to be a referendum’.
He said: ‘I’m not aware the people of Port Erin believe there is a need to reduce numbers ... what is important to me is that someone can come to the table and explain why one number is better than another.’ He said the new Ballakilley development means the population will increase, so commissioners will each represent more residents.
There is no financial gain in reducing the board size, said Godfrey Egee, as members do not claim attendance allowance at meetings. However he said he would like to know what the public thinks.
Gerry Callister said a smaller board makes a quorum more problematic.
An inquiry would cost money, said Phil Crellin. ‘I hope they (the Department of Infrastructure) will turn round and say you are elected, make your own decisions.’
He said nine members is ‘an acceptable number, reducing it reduces the input and different views I hear around this table. I would rather see an open and frank debate (about the proposal) than in inquiry.’
Ged Power said the public is calling for ‘reducing governance.’ Other authorities, in Castletown and Peel, plan to reduce in size and Government in general should be streamlined, he said. Fewer seats mean ‘more chance to have an election, also because of reduced administration it will save time and money.’ More business can be conducted online he said. The decision should be made externally.
Barbara Guy said: ‘I do not think the public are bothered if it’s seven or nine as long as the job is done.’ A smaller board means people are more likely to be ‘swayed’, she said. More commissioners means ‘greater experience’. Relating to online communication, she said: ‘There are still a lot of people who want to see a face ... We do not have to follow what others (authorities) do. If it’s not broken, why fix it?’
Mr Power proposed an amendment, that without an inquiry they reduce the board to seven. The motion and amendment both failed.