The political make-up and constitution of the island was criticised this week at a meeting organised by the Positive Action Group.

The meeting at the Manx Legion Club was attended by David Cretney MLC from the Manx Labour Party, Andrew Newton from the Isle of Man Green Party and Lawrie Hooper MHK from Liberal Vannin.

Mec Vannin were invited but were unable to attend due to their monthly committee meeting being scheduled for the same night.

The first question of the night centred around whether Tynwald was a parliament or a party.

Liberal Vannin MHK Lawrie Hooper said there are clear ’financial incentives to stay inside government’ and labelled Tynwald as a ’one party state’.

Mr Hooper focused on the Council of Ministers in his criticism, saying: ’CoMin acts as a party.

’Taking collective responsibility and applying that to things that aren’t just government business, they act very much like a party formed by the Chief Minister after the election, solely by dishing out favours.’

Mr Hooper explained this was done by offering departments and departmental jobs.

His views were supported by MLC and former minister, David Cretney.

Mr Cretney, who had served 18 years as a minister, said he has seen the situation ’from both sides’.

He explained that he saw being a minister as a compromise but felt the current administration ’doesn’t read Tynwald very well’.

Mr Cretney said he believes Chief Minister Howard Quayle and his ministers have to compromise more. But he argued that the ministerial government system is far better than what went before it.

Andrew Newton of the Green Party agreed and questioned why the Lisvane Report wasn’t enacted. It called for the separation of government and Tynwald.

Mr Newton said there was a ’financial reason to toe the party line’ and said that the issue reflected why party politics has a key role to play in Manx politics.

Mark Kermode, chairman of Mec Vannin, told the Manx Independent that the PAG had announced their attendance despite the party stating it would not go.

He added: ’It is up to PAG to explain why they used our name without verifying our ability to be represented, or much, worse, with the fore knowledge that we could not attend.

’We had a meeting scheduled for that night and it beggars belief that anyone would expect an organisation to kibosh its own scheduled monthly meeting to send a leading representative to that of another grouping.’