Thursday, 25 February 2010

Leaving a legacy.

Following yesterday’s, predictable, but extremely disappointing vote on Deputy Bob Hill’s proposition, P9/2010 one has to wonder, what makes the majority of our government tick? What thought process goes through their mind when they read these propositions and decide how they are going to vote? (for those that do actually read them)

For those who don’t read them and just vote how they are told, how are they convinced in to voting that way? What, or who, could have convinced anybody to vote against P9?

This proposition offered all the key players involved in the suspension of Chief Police Officer Graham Power an opportunity to “put the record straight” or in some cases “clear their names” in public. Surely everybody involved would want this……wouldn’t they? So why did the “p9-26” deny this right to these people and the public?

What the “P9-26” can’t be thinking, in my opinion, is that Jersey is going through a very dark period in its history, a period that is going to be looked back on by real “journalists”, Historians, students, teachers, professors lecturers, interested members of the public, and possibly family’s tracing back their family tree, and there’s the rub!

After everything that is now in the public domain involving the very “questionable” suspension of our most senior Police Officer, including the transcripts of his Judicial Review, his sworn affidavit, former Home affairs Minister Andrew Lewis’ response to the affidavit, Chief Officer Power’s dissection of that, the Chief Officer’s letter to the Privileges and Procedures Committee and Constable Juliette Gallichan’s response (without the knowledge of either letter to her committee), the correspondence between Deputy Hill and Chief Minister Le Sueur, the list is just endless……….all in the public domain!!

So what happens? Our government hold a secret meeting and reject a proposition that could bring the truth out and into the public. But because this debate was held in secret, there is no public record that will explain why people voted the way they did.

Unfortunately for those who voted against it, notwithstanding all the evidence that IS in the public domain history might not be very kind to them, or indeed their offspring, or their offspring, and their offspring……………………………..

Our politicians don’t seem to be taking into account the legacy they are leaving for their future family generations. Will they be labelled as “collaborators” in years to come? Only time will tell.

Below are those who voted in favour of an open and transparent public inquiry. On the left hand side of the Blog you will see above the list of the “GST 28” the list of the “P9-26”……………………..For the sake of history, and the next elections!!

POUR:21
Connétable Simon Crowcroft
Connétable Daniel Murphy
Connétable Sylvana Yates
Connétable Len Norman
Connétable Deidre Mezbourian
Deputy Rob Duhamel
Deputy Bob Hill, B.E.M.
Deputy Roy Le Hérissier
Deputy Judy Martin
Deputy Geoff Southern
Deputy Caroline Labey
Deputy Colin Egré
Deputy Paul Le Claire
Deputy Kevin Lewis
Deputy Montford Tadier
Deputy Daniel Wimberley
Deputy Trevor Pitman
Deputy Tracy Vallois
Deputy Mike Higgins
Deputy Debbie De Sousa
Deputy Jeremy Macon

7 comments:

  1. I would never vote for any of them. Most will be out in the next elections because they won't have the back door opportunity like they had last time and thats going to be their biggest worry.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have never been to Jersey and only occasionally visit Britain, but I can promise you this: There is no way any objective observer can read the official statements, take a look at the most basic available evidence published by all parties, and then not see a clear conspiracy.

    The less likely one is to have personal or financial ties to Jersey the clearer this is. It is all but impossible to believe there were not murdered children now, because of the dishonest behavior of the officials trying to put the lid on it.

    That's all there is to it. No one outside Jersey will ever believe the current official version, and the dishonesty of the local media is absolutely breathtaking.

    Billy

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good shout again VFC, but some politicians have just had new houses built.

    Some are starting to think about re-election and are taking reparatory steps to atone for their past errors, and the one's we don't know about, probably just don't give a crap, because they are already rich !!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have to say that I am disturbed about one or two names on the against list!

    Jackie Hilton being the primary one. Bearing in mind the stink she kicked up not so long ago about a pervert who had been abusing kids, she now see's fit to go against her principles set out, therein?

    What in God's name changed her mind ? It is very worrying indeed.

    And by the way V.F.C, you should retain a copy of this list of names for re-distribution purposes, right around election time!!!

    "Rank and reward, have no appeal to a man one with himself."

    ReplyDelete
  5. I could describe several reasons as to why those States members voted against the proposition.

    However - in the interest of brevity - I'll confine myself to the obvious and predominant reason.

    Three-quarters of them are simply morons and ignoramuses.

    It is as simple as that.

    Of the 26 - about three-quarters are simply overblown cretins - a league out of their depth - and the remaining quarter - and we all know who they are - are simply pure, naked, self-interested evil.

    Stuart

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good to the the young ones Macon, Vallois and Tadier doing the right thing!

    ReplyDelete
  7. No doubt your attacks on the actually Government that run this Island is going to do Citizens media and the people involved in it a world of good.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.