Humility to the bitter end.

Below is a press release from “the friends of Graham Power. Below that is a hand delivered letter from Chief Officer Power to the Minister for Home Affairs Ian Le Marquand.

If anybody in this world has good reason to be bitter, vengeful or angry then it is Chief Officer Power. He has been through possibly the most traumatic and stressful time of his life, when he should have been relaxing, taking things a little easy and looking forward to his well deserved retirement.

But instead he has witnessed first hand “the Jersey way”, he has been suspended from the job he has devoted his life to, without even being told why. Has been given no opportunity to contest any allegations made against him and only ever faced brick walls when he has attempted to prove the facts behind his (illegal?) suspension.

But despite this, somehow unbelievably he manages to remain humble which is evident in his letter to the Home Affairs Minister (below).

Chief Officer Power can I, as a “good” Jersey person, apologise to you for the way you have been treated by our government and reassure you that they (not all) are in no way representative of me nor anybody I know.

You can rest assured that there are a growing number of “good” Jersey people who will not stop until the truth is out and the corruption, at the highest level is exposed.

Naturally you have to put yourself and your family first and think about enjoying your retirement, which one would imagine would be as far away from these shores as is humanly possible.

The “good” people of Jersey will wish you all the best in your retirement and thank you and Lenny Harper for not bowing to “the Jersey way” and doing what policemen are supposed to do and that is to apply the law “without fear or favour”.

There is only one request, please write a book on your experiences in the Jersey Police Force, the world needs to know the truth.


MEDIA RELEASE
This release has been issued by friends of Graham Power QPM, Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police.   It is intended to assist editors in reporting matters relating to his suspension.

THE CHIEF OFFICER OF THE STATES OF JERSEY POLICE IS TO RETIRE IN THE SUMMER OF THIS YEAR WHEN HE WILL HAVE REACHED THE AGE OF 63.
THE “NORMAL RETIRING AGE” FOR HIS POSITION IS 60.
In accordance with the terms of his contract, Graham Power QPM has given the Minister for Home Affairs six months notice of his retirement intentions.   His contract requires that he must retire in 2010.

Mr Power joined the police service as a Constable in 1966 and was appointed Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police in 2000 on a five year contract, having previously held a number of senior positions in the Scottish Police Service.   He has twice had his contract extended.   The Home Affairs Committee extended his contract from 2005 to 2007, and in 2007 he was asked by Ministers to work for an extended period beyond his designated “Normal Retiring Age” of 60.   His extended contact is subject to six months notice and ends this year.
Since 2008 Mr Power and friends acting on his behalf have made a series of announcements stating his commitment to retire in 2010.   This is now confirmed by today’s announcement.

In his letter to the Minister for Home Affairs Mr Power expresses his frustration that the investigation by Wiltshire Police into the management of the Historic Abuse Enquiry, which started in 2008, has yet to be concluded.
His letter also praises both the Force and the Island and offers best wishes for the future.

A copy of Mr Power’s letter to the Minister for Home Affairs is attached to this release.
Under the terms of his current suspension Mr Power is not able to speak directly to the media in relation to issues which may be under investigation.   He has however offered the following comment regarding the confirmation of his retirement:
“It has been widely known for some time that I would retire during the course of 2010 and there has been understandable speculation as to the intended date.   In confirming that I will retire before August, I hope to bring the uncertainty to an end and allow all concerned to plan for the future.  How others respond to this information is of course a matter for them.   For my own part I will now be working with my family to plan for a successful retirement in the summer of this year.”
Note to Editors.
Mr Power was suspended from duty in 2008 by the former Minister for Home Affairs, Andrew Lewis, and told that he may face disciplinary action.
No disciplinary action was taken in 2008.
No disciplinary action was taken in 2009.
No disciplinary action has been taken in 2010 and no notification has been given of any intention to take disciplinary action.
Since the beginning of his suspension Mr Power has made it clear that in 2010 he would name the date on which he intended to retire.
Mr Power has always denied any wrong-doing in relation to the investigation of the Historic Abuse Enquiry.  That remains his position today.   No disciplinary charges have been brought against him and no disciplinary hearing has been arranged.



By hand
The Minister for Home Affairs,
11 Royal Square,
St Helier.
Dear Minister,
NOTIFICATION OF THE DATE OF MY RETIREMENT AS CHIEF OFFICER OF THE STATES OF JERSEY POLICE.
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that I have now settled my retirement plans.  I therefore give the required six months notice from today’s date, that I will be retiring as Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police.
You will be aware that I first took up my position in 2000 on a five year “J” category contract, which I completed to the satisfaction of the Home Affairs Committee.   At the request of the Committee I subsequently agreed to a second contract which provided for an extension of a further two years.   This meant that I would be leaving the service shortly after reaching my “Normal Retiring Age” under the Jersey Public Employees Retirement Scheme.  There is no known history of a Chief Officer of the Force working for a significant period beyond the specified retirement age.

You will also be aware that in 2007 I had detailed discussions with the then Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Wendy Kinnard, and her Assistant Minister, Deputy Andrew Lewis, regarding continuity problems which had arisen in the management team, and after some reflection I agreed to sign a third contract for a further three years.   This was not an anticipated event and it took me into the unusual position of serving for a significant period beyond the date when I should have retired.   As you know I have described these discussions in more detail in my statement made under paragraph 2.1.2 of the Disciplinary Code which I provided in July 2009 (Statement of Chief Officer paragraph 56.)    In my statement I made it clear that I agreed to the three year extension with some reluctance for a number of reasons, one of which was “it did not fit well with a number of plans and commitments, one of which was (and remains) family welfare issues in the UK” (paragraph 57.)   You are also aware from my statement that although the contract ran to the end of 2010 “I made no secret of the fact that I wished to leave earlier” (paragraph 61.)

During 2008 it appeared to be right, and consistent with the spirit of the extended contract, that I supported the then Minister through her final months in office.   However, by this time I had concluded that once the new Ministerial team had been selected, it would once again be appropriate to return to the subject of my continued service beyond my retirement date.   I envisaged that these discussions would occur in early 2009 (Statement of Chief Officer paragraph 93.)

As we know, events from my perspective, took an unforeseen turn in November 2008 when I was suspended from duty by Deputy Andrew Lewis, who had taken office briefly as Minister for Home Affairs following the unexpected resignation of Senator Kinnard.   This naturally caused me to reflect on how I should respond to this development against the background of my need to resolve the issue of my retirement.   In coming to a decision, I was influenced by correspondence from your Investigating Officer, Mr Brian Moore, the Chief Constable of Wiltshire, which encouraged me to believe that a resolution in the first half of 2009 was possible.   You will recall that in a live radio interview on 20th November 2009 you personally indicated that shortly after your appointment as Minister you had been led to believe that the final report from Wiltshire would be available by March 2009.   It was with such assurances in mind that I decided to postpone any plans for retirement in 2009 and concentrate on challenging the legitimacy of my suspension and assisting the Wiltshire investigation.   You are aware that since the beginning of my suspension my position has been that I totally deny any wrong-doing whatsoever in relation to the historic abuse enquiry, and that I would vigorously contest any disciplinary allegations which were brought against me.   My position has not changed in that regard.

As 2009 progressed it became clear that anticipated timescales would not be met.   This was reflected in some of the exchanges which took place in open Court during the hearing of my Judicial Review Application in July 2009.   During the hearing I drew the attention of the Court to the likely timescales of the enquiry as they appeared at that time, and questioned whether there was a realistic prospect of a resolution before I reached retirement.   On the matter of my retirement plans, I told the Court that although my contract ran to the end of 2010, I had stated on a number of occasions that I would retire during 2010, without wishing to indicate an intended date at that time.

All of the above is of course in addition to those public statements which I have been able to make, and those made by others on my behalf, which have repeatedly placed in the public domain my commitment to retire in 2010.
I have set out this account of my approach to the question of retirement during the years 2007 to 2009 in order to counter any unfair allegation that I am now acting in a manner which is in any way different from the position which I have consistently taken over a long period of time, both in public and in private.
I now turn briefly to developments in the latter part of 2009, and how these influenced my thinking.   As last year approached its close, it became clear that even the amended assessments of likely timescales made at the time of the Judicial Review had been too optimistic.   It was apparent that the matter would continue well into 2010.   A few days before Xmas 2009, presumably as some kind of attempted gesture of activity before the year ended, I was presented with an incomplete copy of a draft report by Wiltshire Police.   The report made no reference to the evidence of a key witness, who, it was stated, had not been interviewed when the report had been written.   Additionally, areas of the terms of reference relating to the financial management of the abuse enquiry were not addressed.  I was informed that enquiries were incomplete and that a further report was to follow at a later date.   One month later no further report has been received.

I had for some time been anticipating continuing delays of this nature and, in consultation with others, had considered how I might respond in order to bring some certainty to the position.   After giving the issue some thought in the latter part of 2009, I drafted an application to the States Employment Board seeking an amendment to my current contract.   The amendment for which I was minded to apply, was one which would make it clear that the Board would provide whatever extension to my contract might be necessary, if required, to complete the full disciplinary and appeal process; which I estimate could take up to a year, and in addition, to provide for a return to work for a period of at least six months once I had been exonerated.   The latter point is of course important from my perspective.   In my present position there is limited incentive to devote a further year of my time to these matters if there is no prospect of any positive benefit following an outcome in my favour.   I recognised that any application to potentially extend the terms of my contract ran counter to my stated intention to retire during 2010, but I was resolved to explore all of the possible options before a final decision was taken.   I then examined to what extent this possible approach was feasible in the context of retirement planning and family circumstances.   Work in this direction included visits to family members in the UK during the early weeks of 2010, and a fresh assessment of the welfare and related issues which gave me concern when extending my contract in 2007.  Once I had completed this assessment it became clear that any extension of my service in Jersey beyond 2010 was not feasible.
From that point onwards consideration of the issue unavoidably focussed on the practicalities of retirement in 2010, and how this could be most effectively achieved.   One of the key considerations was the decided intention to move to the UK to establish a family home.  From previous experiences in moving home, I am aware that success is heavily dependent on seasonal factors, and that a move in the winter months presents complications to what is already a difficult task.   This is particularly so when re-locating to or from an island.   However, more significantly, it became clear in the early weeks of 2010 that the family welfare issues, which I drew to your attention in July 2009, had become acute and that an early decision was essential.

Running alongside these pressing personal issues was my continuing concern for the well being and effectiveness of the Force, and the value in bringing to an end the uncertainty which has existed since 2008.   Given that my notice period is six months it therefore became imperative that notice of retirement be given as soon as possible, thereby enabling all parties to plan for the future on the basis of my known intentions.
I hope that you will appreciate that the detailed nature of this account arises from a desire to demonstrate that I have tried, at some significant personal and family inconvenience, to assist the Wiltshire investigation and any process which may follow.  Neverthless, I have in the end been frustrated in this intention by constant slippages in timescales, and the approaching deadline by which a retirement decision needed to be taken.   It is a matter of record that I have provided abundant information to the Wilshire enquiry.   My initial statement to the Investigating Officer, submitted in July 2009, was over 62,000 words, and I have expressed a willingness to provide as much further information as the enquiry might require.   However, the passage of time has thwarted these good intentions leaving me with no alternative other than to take the course of action set out at the beginning of this letter.

It might now be appropriate for me to set out a few words summarising my experience in the Force and to offer my best wishes for the future.   Jersey is a fine place with many good people.   It can be justly proud of its police officers, whose dedication and professionalism in the defence of their community has been evident throughout my service.   I have been proud to lead the force and will miss many of the people I have come to know so well.   I am also grateful for their support in the achievements which have been recorded during the decade in which I have been their Chief Officer.   During this time crime figures have consistently fallen, and detection rates have been maintained at a level well above the average for the U.K.   Surveys have indicated levels of public confidence and support for the police which are exceptionally high, and would be a cause of envy in many other jurisdictions.   These findings have been reinforced by independent assessments by H.M. Inspectorate of Constabulary who have consistently published positive reports on the performance of the Force and the quality of its leadership.   I am conscious that none of this could have been achieved without the dedication of the entire workforce, both police officers and civilian.    In my estimation they are not only a beacon of excellence in the public service, but also a model of diversity, as candidates from all sections of the islands community have committed themselves to a career in what I consider to be Jersey’s premier public service.
Throughout my leadership of the Force I have sought to emphasise the values of practical common-sense policing which is tightly focussed on the concerns of islanders.   The most evident symbol of this approach has been the emphasis on high visibility foot patrols at times and places where the risk of crime and disorder is at its greatest.   You may be aware that I have frequently sought to lead by example in this respect by regularly undertaking foot patrols in uniform, and how I have encouraged other senior officers to do the same, irrespective of rank or age.

I am aware that none of these things could have been achieved by the Force working in isolation, and I take this opportunity to place on record my recognition of our many supporters and partners who have worked to maintain the common goal of “making Jersey safer.”   In particular I am grateful to the men and women of the Honorary Police whose support and partnership I have always valued.   I am proud to be one of the joint signatories of the first ever Memorandum of Understanding between the forces, and have been grateful for their support and good humour at major incidents and public events.
At a more strategic level the achievements of the Force have been equally evident.   Independent assessments by the Inspectorate of the International Monetary Fund have reported positively on the vital but often unseen work of the Financial Crime Unit, and their contribution to maintaining the integrity of what is undoubtedly the cornerstone of the Island’s economy.   There has also been sometimes visible, but more often less visible, success in defending the island against incursions by major criminal organisations.

The role of the Chief Officer of the Force requires a wide range of qualities.   In addition to the relevant operational experience and background, the Chief Officer must be able to maintain the confidence and respect of both the Force and all sections of the community.   The position is one which is highly visible. This often requires high levels self assurance, fluency and skill in communicating both with the media and the wider public.   While the role may seem daunting, it is one which offers significant professional and personal satisfaction.   In carrying out my duty of representing the interests of the Island in meetings with the wider policing community in the British Isles, I have met many officers who display evidence of the required qualities, and I wish you success in your search for a new Chief Officer who can rise to this exceptional challenge.
Finally, let me take this opportunity to wish you success in the future in the demanding role of Minister for Home Affairs.

                                          Yours sincerely

                                          Graham Power.
Cc.   Dr T Brain.   Chief Police Officers Staff Association