Do Manx decisions actually matter?

David Lammy MP, British Lord Chancellor

The news that the Assisted Dying Bill is still waiting for Royal Assent, nine months after the Manx parliament passed the legislation, should be concerning to even the most ardent supporter of our current constitutional set-up.

Whilst controversial, the Assisted Dying Bill has gone through all the necessary legislative stages. From its introduction by an elected Manx politician to a robust consultation period where thousands of people voiced their opinion, and from extensive debate in both the Keys and LegCo to its ultimate passage by Tynwald, it has followed a fairly standard course. But despite this, the legislation still sits in limbo, waiting for the UK to give it the "OK".

Why is this the case?

Well, as a Crown Dependency, the UK is responsible for the ‘good government’ of the Isle of Man - a deliberately vague and nebulous concept. Effectively, we are a learner driver, not trusted to go out on the road on our own, with the UK ready to grab the wheel in case we try to go the wrong way round the Quarterbridge.

In practice, this means that through the legislative drafting process, the Isle of Man Government engages with representatives in the UK Government to ensure that the legislation doesn’t potentially put them or us in a tricky spot. It also means that before a bill becomes law, the Crown reserves the right to determine whether Royal Assent should be given. In most cases, the Lieutenant Governor (the Crown’s representative in the Isle of Man) grants Royal Assent locally, but occasionally, sensitive legislation is sent off to London.

This is done on the advice of UK Privy Counsellors - a group of people in the UK including members of the government, judges, and bishops. This list includes the British Lord Chancellor David Lammy (their Minister of Justice), who recommends whether Royal Assent be granted. It is important to note that no Manx politicians, office holders, or officials sit on this council, and what is discussed behind those closed doors remains a secret.

This is the invisible hand of British parliamentary and executive power in practice, helping to steer the Manx ship of state. And this is where the Assisted Dying Bill now sits.

So why is this a problem? 

Well, maybe it’s not. If we see it as the MOJ does, that it’s being done to ensure that the legislation is robust and internationally compliant, then there is no issue. But if that is the case, the fact that it has taken nine months and is still unresolved should be worrying.

We know that the Crown Dependency team in the MoJ is small, but if they and the rest of the MOJ are so under-resourced that a Private Members’ Bill can gather dust for three-quarters of a year, then the system is fundamentally broken and it demonstrates how far we, as a valued member of the ‘British family’, sit down the pecking order. 

At worst, you may be minded to see it as a deliberate attempt to clip the wings and hamstring the power of the Manx parliament against the wishes of the Manx public. 

Or if you’re somewhere in the middle, you may see it as the British going down the path of least resistance, stalling our legislation so they can get the ducks in a row for theirs. 

Whatever the reason, the fact that the UK can do this should be a concern. We are often told that our parliamentary autonomy is important; it’s what sets us apart from a county of England, Wales, or Scotland - our ability to make legislation that fits the needs and wants of the Manx people. But examples like this make it seem that we’re only as independent as is convenient for the UK government at any given time.

Does this mean that in future, a UK Government that opposes a Manx policy - be it on tax, healthcare, or social reform -could simply block it indefinitely? Could they effectively create a "lame duck" chamber, frozen by vague constitutional processes under the pretence of knowing what’s best for the locals?

We hope that MHKs and MLCs will take some time in the next Tynwald and Keys question sessions to ask the Government how it plans to remedy this clear threat to our democratic processes. We need to ensure that such a bottleneck is never allowed to happen again, or we must admit that our "independence" is little more than a polite fiction.