We've been thinking about this word a lot recently as it seems to mean different things to different people - not least to the Liberal Vannin Party in its current rather populist yet strangely policy-less incarnation. So before we go on to the subject of Mr Peter Willers who declared as a Liberal Vannin Candidate today its probably helpful to clarify that the dictionary definition of liberal is generally summarised through the adjective: Willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own or via the noun: A supporter of policies that are socially progressive and promote social welfare, or a supporter of a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.
So in relation to this latest Liberal Vannin candidate to declare we ask if those are the very definitions of being Liberal then where does this actually leave Liberal Vannin as a party given some of the far from liberal candidates it now endorses?
3fm: Peter Willers to stand for Liberal Vannin in Onchan:
Whilst times can change and peoples individual views and actions (and sometimes their whole philosophy on life) can inevitably change with the passing of the years when Mr Willers name came up we were reminded of two main things from the Islands rather inglorious past.
The first was this Guardian report from 2004 which covers the somewhat Kafka-esque court proceedings linked to one Mr Roly Drower who at the time ran the anonymous IOM political gossip website known as manxman.com which published many claims in relation to IOM government and other alleged connected parties - and who ended up on trial for libel via Court proceedings brought by a high profile millionaire who lived in the Isle of Man.
History records that Mr Drower suffered a fatal heart attack in 2008 which some still link to the probable stress associated with the rather blunt and aggressive handling of his libel case and some of the draconian legal tactics used by the millionaire and his legal team.
The original Guardian report is here:
At the end of this Guardian piece Mr Willers, who was the lawyer for the pursuing millionaire at the time, is quoted as saying "What is unfair is to use the internet to hide behind false names and false addresses and disseminate false information" which sounds like a rather Trump-like fake news declaration considering that it predates Donald Trump and the American Trump Administration by almost fifteen years.
Equally in relation to the Islands Mount Murray Inquiry linked to Mr Willers' association with the same Island based millionaire the below also remains on record to this day which readers attention is again drawn to:
Some aspects of Mr Willers' claims were "so improbable that they give the impression of having been invented".
Deemster Corlett concluded that Mr Willers' evidence [to the Inquiry] regarding the alleged agreement of 1989/1990 with Mr Gubay, before the land for Mount Murray had been acquired, was "barely credible". He based his findings in respect of Mount Murray "on inherent probabilities". It was "overwhelmingly probable that Mr Gubay made Mr Willers' share conditional upon his playing a part in the sale of the hotel". It was "wholly improbable that intelligent businessmen would proceed" as alleged by Mr Willers. It was simply "not credible that Mr Willers and Mr Gubay entered into a verbal agreement in relation to the tax credits attaching to the hotel in the terms pleaded by Mr Willers and as set forth in his evidence
In the Judgment Deemster Corlett expressed scepticism of Mr Willers' evidence in 2014 regarding a short undocumented meeting 28 years earlier. Deemster Corlett found Mr Willers' alleged agreement "barely credible" and that he "simply cannot accept that any form of contractual agreement was arrived at between Mr Gubay and Mr Willers on that day". He concluded by finding:
Mr Willers bears the burden of proving his claims. As I have already recorded, in my view the assertion that there was any form of contractually binding agreement reached at the brief meeting between two (then) strangers in April 1986 is simply too improbable to countenance. No doubt some vague and generalised statements were made by Gubay, akin to the type of statements he was wont to make to others, but under no circumstances could they amount to any form of contract.
So we ask .. this was all a very long time ago now but are these the sort of traits you would expect to find in candidates who might be willing to respect and accept behaviour or opinions different to their own? Or of those who are supporters of policies that are socially progressive and promote social welfare or support and promote individual rights, civil liberties, or democracy?
All of which leaves us somewhat bemused to be honest and so we'll leave the answer to those questions with you to arrive at yourself if you are thinking of voting for a Liberal Vannin candidate this September. Between this and the link to the Manx Piss-takers Alliance leader we really cannot fathom what, as a claimed progressive and liberal leaning political party, Liberal Vannin actually stands for anymore. But as with all candidates we wish Mr Willers well and we look forward to reading his full manifesto in due course.
Since this write-up was first published Mr Willers has now declared that he would like to be Chief Minister:
Pictured: The entirely fictional character of Dr Evil
