Daphne Caine may be as welcome in the corridors of power as a wasp at a picnic, but she deserves credit for her persistence over the Syrian refugees issue.

The Garff MHK was narrowly defeated in her bid for a Tynwald select committee to look again at whether the island could take in refugee families. Now she is pushing the government to reveal more about its reasons for concluding that we could not.

She is right to do so.

It is not hard to understand why Ministers were reluctant to re-open this difficult debate, and why they voted against a select committee investigation at last month’s sitting.

Government has already reviewed and confirmed its predecessor’s decision not to offer resettlement. It has put in place alternative measures that increase the Isle of Man’s support for refugees still in the Middle East to £1.5 million.

However, the review took place nearly two years ago and since then new information has emerged. Among the UK communities that have successfully accommodated Syrian families, we learn, is the Scottish island of Bute, in the Firth of Clyde.

Does Bute, population 7,000, have better public services than the Isle of Man, population 85,000? If not, its example seems to torpedo the Manx Government’s central argument that we simply do not have the facilities to care for the survivors of war.

Jersey is also steering clear of the UK Government’s Syrian resettlement programme, although its main objection is different. Under human rights law, it claims, it cannot give special treatment to one nationality of refugees without offering the same to all the others.

This ’floodgates’ scenario has been alluded to in the Isle of Man but not highlighted. It sounds like scaremongering but if this is a valid legal concern it should be taken seriously.

There are enough outstanding questions here to justify an independent review, if only to establish some clarity for the public. It is unfortunate that the Caine motion failed, but not all members saw it as just about scrutiny.

One member, allegedly, has even dismissed the motion as a cover for backbench conspiracy. If true that says more about the member than it does about the backbenchers.

We can still have a degree of scrutiny and accountability, though, if the government agrees to share more of the evidence behind its decision.

It may not be possible to publish all the paperwork, as relevant correspondence between the Isle of Man and UK is classed as inter-government communication and so exempt from disclosure under Freedom of Information.

That official line is being challenged in an ongoing Freedom of Information case in the UK relating to all three Crown Dependencies. It would be interesting to know the UK Government’s view, if expressed, on the island’s suitability to help with the resettlement programme.

But in the meantime there should be nothing to stop the Council of Ministers from producing a much fuller and clearer explanation of its position than has been provided so far.

As with all major government decisions, Tynwald and the public are entitled to know the reasons why. We want to see that conclusions have been reached after careful consideration of the evidence, including expert assessment and advice.

That process is called good governance. It sounds boring but it is important.

Above all, on a question as profound as the potential resettlement of refugees, we would like reassurance.

Show us, please, that our government’s response is driven by more than political fear - of those unpleasant people who believe that charity stops at the Chicken Rock.

**********************

There has been consternation among ministers and members following the shock news that fewer people trust them.

According to the 2018 Isle of Man Social Attitudes Survey, 39% of the public have confidence in the Manx Government compared with 47% last year. Confidence in Tynwald has dropped from 38% to 33%.

And only 22% think the government has clear policies, down from 29%.

None of which is really that surprising.

The relatively positive results in the 2017 survey came from the first year of the new government, a period of heightened optimism and political awareness following the general election.

Hope springs eternal that this lot will be better than the last. By year five there is common agreement that this was the worst government ever, even though most of its individual members will be comfortably returned at the next election.

The endless cycle of expectation and disappointment is part of our Manx way of life.

So the current government has offered up a big hostage to fortune by making public confidence a key measure of its success. What are the odds on them bucking the trend?

Of course cynicism as a default response to government and politicians, whether or not the person knows or cares anything about the subject, is not unique to the Isle of Man. It certainly seems to be a British thing and is widespread in the United Kingdom, where trust in government was running at 36% at the start of this year.

As for having clear policies, this has never been a job requirement for politicians in the Isle of Man. Some have pursued successful careers with no policies at all.

In our ancient democracy being a well-known local personality carries a lot more clout than producing a coherent vision for the future of the nation. You can see this in the traditional Manx manifesto, weak on policy ideas but strong on reassurance that the candidate’s family have been here since the Bronze Age.

When you are trying to be all things to all men in a small community, it is safer to be vague about your priorities, assuming you know what these are.

In the absence of competing parties there is no pressure or platform for politicians to reach out to voters across the island and engage them on the big issues. At election time we have a series of 12 local discussions instead of a national debate.

Once the politicians are in office personal qualities are still what counts. Government policy documents, meanwhile, are written by insiders for insiders, not the citizen in the street.

The Programme for Government may be comprehensive and useful for those working within departments, but only a technocrat would find it clear and straightforward.

Notice that at no stage in our democratic process is there any requirement for politicians

to produce a simple manifesto explaining national priorities to the general public. Small wonder that people struggle to see the wood for the trees when it comes to government policy.

So to finish I offer a Christmas challenge that is fun for all the family. Look at the Programme for Government and identify government’s top five policies - i.e. proposals for concrete change that will make a real difference to you and your island.

There is a lot going on in there, but which are the most important bits?