28 July 2026
PO Box 986 Douglas Isle of Man IM99 2TB
Isle of Man News Politics

Bid for a Single, ‘Apolitical’ Presiding Officer Fails

A call to investigate the idea of having one presiding officer for all three chambers of Tynwald failed last week.

Under the current system, the President of Tynwald presides over the monthly Tynwald sittings and all the Legislative Council sittings, while the elected House of Keys is presided over by the Speaker, an MHK elected from within their number.

That system has been in place for more than three decades, although the Speaker of the House of Keys position goes back much further.

Last week Onchan MHK Julie Edge tabled a Tynwald motion calling for the Standing Orders Committee investigate the idea that that there should be one “apolitical” presiding officer for all three chambers of the legislature.

The idea was debated just one day after Juan Watterson was elected as the new President of Tynwald.

While the President of Tynwald is largely regarded as impartial in terms of parliamentary business, the Speaker of the House of Keys remains an MHK representing a constituency and is able to vote and operate politically in Tynwald. Some speakers have also chaired important committees that are political.

Strengthen Confidence

Edge said: “An apolitical chair is impartial by the design of stating it is apolitical. That would strengthen confidence in every ruling made from that seat.”

She also wanted the committee report on the concept that no presiding officer should serve more than two consecutive terms and there should be a five-year gap before any attempt to return to such a position.

“These offices carry enormous procedural power,’ she said. “Term limits are not about any individual that is sitting in that post but for safeguarding against entrenchment in the post.

Members’ Pay

A further part of the motion tabled called for an investigation into restructuring Tynwald Members’ pay to “better reflect current responsibilities including membership of government departments”.

She said it was about creating a “fair, transparent process” and “not about more money”.

However, all parts of her motion were defeated after a debate.

Leave a Reply