However, Mr Moffatt issued a warning to the Chief Minister that, although he may start out on a path of reforming Whitley Council in the Keys or Tynwald, it will end up going all the way to the International Labour Organization (ILO) in Geneva.

North Douglas MHK, John Houghton may have proved he is a ‘big boy’ and, realizing his position as Chairman of the Employers’ Side of the Whitley Council was untenable, fallen on this particular sword; the matter is by no way closed.

Chief Minister Tony Brown made the announcement late on in the sitting of Tynwald on Tuesday (17^th Feb); indicating that Mr Houghton had offered to resign if it helped to bring about a resolution to the dispute between the two sides of the Council.

The Employees’ Side have been declining to attend meetings since Mr Houghton made a complaint to the police, which was subsequently dismissed, about alleged insulting comments made by Angus Kelly to Mr Houghton during a meeting.

Prior to Mr Brown’s announcement - and it was a point reiterated by Mr Brown during questioning on the statement - Mr Houghton had been prepared to attend meetings.

Furthermore, Mr Brown had been of the opinion “that with goodwill on both sides that the matter could be resolved.”

So this sudden turnaround of events, although generally welcomed by the Employees’ Side, has surprised Bernard Moffatt, who acts as secretary to the Employees’ Side.

He informed the Manx Herald that, having thought some more about the resignation, he thinks a “squalid deal” has been struck by Mr Brown and Mr Houghton; and wondered what had changed to trigger the resignation and the announcement of an investigation in to the Whitley Council. He speculates it may be something along the lines of - if you resign John, don’t worry I’ll see that the employees’ side get sorted out.

However, Mr Moffatt issued a warning to the Chief Minister that although he may start out on a path of reforming Whitley Council in the Keys or Tynwald it will end up going all the way to the International Labour Organization (ILO) in Geneva.

Mr Moffatt pointed out that in the last 25 years the Employers’ side have never, until now, made any suggestion that the Whitley Council needed reviewing. In fact, he said, the opposite was the case, with never a peep from them as they stood rigidly to the status quo, other than to say there was no need for change.

By contrast, Mr Moffatt explained, 4 -5 years ago the Employees’ side had suggested a reform of the public sector grading scheme, which had been in place since 1988, to no avail; and 2 years ago he had requested a complete breakdown of the numbers of employees and their grades. He said he is still waiting for it.

He said, in case anybody needed reminding, things are different now to when, in the 1980’s, Victor Kneale was pursuing reform, as in those days there was no legislation dealing with trade unions.

He recalled how in 1991 the Employees’ side had been informed they had to register as a union, which had been contested at the time but eventually conceded, and so as a result they enjoy protection, for industrial relation purposes, from “unwarranted administrative interference”. Therefore, claimed Mr Moffatt, this move by Mr Brown may very well be a breach of international labour conventions.

“It seems as though Mr Brown had a ‘revelation’ when he had Mr Houghton in his office and falling on his sword, and if that’s what happened” he continued, “he should come out and say it”.

Mr Moffatt was also of the opinion that Mr Brown, as an act of statesmanship, could have used his “diplomacy skills” in December, under the direction of the President of Tynwald, to have nipped the situation in the bud, but instead has chosen to present a “fait accompli” in Tynwald and with a “purported investigation” to follow.

However, Mr Moffatt in noting this opportunity had been passed up, questioned how, if Mr Houghton’s position on the Whitley Council was untenable, he could remain suitable as the head of the Civil Service Commission and retain his seat on the Tynwald Management Committee.

In closing he inquired of Mr Brown’s thought processes, “Why, when you already have a very serious problem dealing with the fall out of the failure of a disgraced banking system, would you need to open up another ‘front’ in the form of ‘labour relations’”.

The Manx Herald wonders the same thing, but despite making our own inquiries to Mr Brown, over two weeks ago, about his handling of the ‘affair’, we are still waiting for a response.

It appears though to the Herald that, in announcing Mr Houghton’s ‘resignation’, Mr Brown has ducked the issue of having to make a decision whether Mr Houghton deserved to be sacked or not from the position.

Likewise, it appears Mr Houghton’s colleagues are running away from taking any action over his damaging and, to many people, offensive comments, in the House of Keys and on Manx Radio, last week, in connection with the Gender Recognition Bill.

Whilst the Manx Herald upholds the right to freedom of expression, in today’s society, there are some boundaries which, if crossed, the perpetrator should be held to account, in some form or another, for their words or deeds. This is probably even more important if that person is someone who has the honour of sitting as a Member of the oldest continuous parliament in the world; and is expected to set the highest possible example to our society and not the basest.

Perhaps though Mr Houghton believes it is one law for him and another for the likes of Angus Kelly, about whom he made the complaint to the police, and that he can say what he likes with impunity.

The Manx Herald will watch with great interest to see what, if any, action his peers take to address this issue.