Thursday, 3 January 2013

Independence For Jersey.

As a result of Deputy Trevor Pitman's latest BLOG POSTING we thought we'd explore the ramifications/consequences/implications of Jersey cutting ties with the UK and going independent.

As Deputy Pitman has explained in his Posting, Senator Philip Bailhache, and his brother, Deputy Bailiff, William Bailhache, have been exploring the idea of independence since 2007 if not earlier. One must remember that Senator Philip Bailhache was Bailiff (Chief Judge) at the time and his brother William was Attorney General, both positions, supposedly not political.

Philip Bailhache retired as Bailiff and run for election as Senator and was duly elected with the help of Jersey's only "News"paper The Jersey Evening Post. The Senator ran on a platform of "the government spend too much time revisiting already agreed decisions (propositions) in the parliament" and "members should show more respect towards each-other." Yet as soon as he was elected, the first proposition he brought was revisiting and already agreed proposition where he managed to take away (hijack) the independence of the ElECTORAL COMMISSION. The second proposition he brought (through the alleged Chief Minister Senator Ian Gorst) was to overturn a proposition already agreed by the States and attempt to buy Headland at Plemont but that proposition was very narrowly defeated (25-24). As part of that proposition, the Senator, was more than willing to invoke "Compulsory Purchase" or as it has been described by a number of people "Robert Mugabe Land Grab." It was during this debate (and others) that Senator Bailhache (further going against his election campaign) was accused of personal insults against fellow politicians and members of the public. Readers can make up their own mind as to whether the accusations of personal insults are substantiated by listening to THIS. Some readers might be aware that subsequent to the defeat of purchasing Plemont in the island's parliament Senator Bailhache is STILL trying to get his hands on it and cannot accept the "democratically" reached decision. A man with a mission, and by the looks of it, a man with disregard to (what passes for in Jersey) "Democracy."

So back to the question of Independence for Jersey, where Deputy Trevor Pitman explains, in his latest posting, that this was an area the Former Police Chief, Graham Power QPM, was asked to look into by the Bailhache Brothers. Mr. Power had written about this in his 62,000 word interim defence case to the disgraced Wiltshire Constabulary. The Interim defence case that discredited and disgraced BBC refuse to publish despite them having reported on the PROSECUTION CASE.

In it (Mr. Power's statement to Wiltshire) the Former Police Chief writes;

"Such views are not confined to the older elements of the honorary service. They can be found, albeit in a more developed form, in the senior levels of government and the legal establishment where some notable figures favour an eventual severance of links with the U.K. and would see the ready acceptance of U.K. working practices as running counter to this agenda. I recall that in 2007 I assisted a small working group which included, among others, the Bailiff Sir Philip Bailhache and the Attorney General William Bailhache. The purpose of the group was to prepare a draft contingency plan for complete independence. I submitted papers to the group on the implications for law enforcement, and used some contacts from my previous role to offer suggestions as to who outside of the island, could assist in developing such a plan. I provided contact details of key figures in the Scottish Government and Administration including the Scottish National Party. I recall that some of the advice and contacts I provided were in an email I sent, probably in July 2007. This and other experiences reinforced my understanding that there was a tide flowing against closer association with the U.K, and a strong local agenda to develop working models and solutions within the island."

So we are asking just what are the motives of senator Bailhache and what would be the consequences of breaking ties with the UK and becoming independent?

There are an ever growing population that believe we have a corrupt , and politicised, Judicial System on the island. Would Jersey's independence lose us the "safety" of the Privy Council? The European Court of Human Rights? Are either of them any use to us now? How will it affect our currency? How will it affect our relationship with Europe? What impact will it have on our Finance Industry? Is Jersey currently run by the politicians or the Judiciary? Will that change if Jersey is to become independent? Who will benefit from Jersey's independence and who will suffer for it? Would the UK welcome, or contest it? What are the chances of independence becoming a reality? How can it be achieved? Should we be scared (more scared than some of us are now)? Should we welcome independence? Should we do all we can to endeavour this does not become a reality?...............What can we do?



52 comments:

  1. The best thing that could happen to Jersey is for it to break away from the UK and be left for sir Philip to run the island instead of us being told what to do by London all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You have posed a number of good questions VFC most of which I can't answer although if senator Bailhache does get his way then the protection of the privy council will be lost. At least that's how I see it. What implications independence will have for our economy and finance industry is anybody's guess.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good post, I agree with everything you say here.

    I blogged earlier in the year on the subject of independence and said (and maintain) that I will never ever accept a Jersey passport as a substitute for my British one. Were I ever in trouble somewhere else in the world, I would far rather the might of HM Goverment in the UK to look after me than the likes of Chief Minister Bailhache and the law officers.

    http://sammezec.blogspot.com/2012/06/independence-ill-burn-my-passport-if-it.html

    What the Jersey Nationalists (perhaps we could start calling them that?) really want is fewer checks and balances.

    Without the looming spectre of the UK government watching over us with "responsibility for the good governance of the crown dependencies" they would be free to do what they like with Jersey.

    The fact is, the UK government is currently falling well below it's responsibilities to the island. It allows us to have a totally undemocratic electoral system, it allows us to have a lack of separation of powers, it allows us to have a judicial system where associates of those accused are helping decide the outcomes of those cases. And that is before we look at all of the things you and Rico have documented over the past few years...

    The establishment in the island are terrified that one day something might kick the UK's backside into gear and they start playing the role in our affairs that they are constitutionally obliged too. They look at the Turks and Caicos Islands which had their self government totally suspended because of corruption in the local government and see it as a model for what could happen to Jersey. I even recall seeing something in the news about the T&C former Chief Minister being arrested on the run in Brazil!

    Despite how much the Jersey Nationalists try and demonise the UK ( http://sammezec.blogspot.com/2012/04/my-letter-to-jep.html ) at the end of the day, the UK is actually being just and fair towards Jersey. The UK has no desire to act in an imperialist way towards Jersey and subject the locals to their will. As has been shown in the Turks and Caicos Islands, the moment that they sorted out the corruption problems and drew up a constitution that was fit for purpose, the UK left the islands and allowed them to run themselves again.

    In some of his more moderate moments, Senator Bailhache would say that he is not pursuing independence, but more just wants it as an option on the table "just in case". Some might think that sounds reasonable. But if we are to have options on the table, we must also consider how Jersey could facilitate the opposite of independence, which is the full amalgamation of Jersey into the UK (perhaps as a new county) in case something happened.

    It could one day be foreseeable. What if Jersey was struck by a natural disaster? We wouldn't have the money nor capabilities to resolve it by ourselves and it would ruin our economy. Joining the UK would be the only thing to save us. Or not just a natural disaster, but an economic one too, like if the finance industry collapsed.

    It's all totally feasible, but for some reason Senator Bailhache never talks about it as an option like he does with independence. You can only wonder why...

    ReplyDelete

  4. Of course there is the problem of which currency to use or print our own, which would be worthless unlike now as it is linked to sterling which gives Jerseys economy protection because we are a crown dependancy. Why would the EU let us align to the Euro ?

    How about Jersey waters should the French get bolshe again and invade our offshore little islands, or contest fishing limits, to their own advantage of course.

    What if the French ignore fines levied by fisheries, will Jersey go sniffling to the EU or London when they send gun boats to cut the chains on French fishings boats held at the Harbour.

    Jersey is just to small and does not carry enough clout. Most people I speak with prefer Westminster to have the final say in laws dreamt up by this far from efficient and some say partly corrupt small island Government and its just as bad judiciary.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You lose credibility by attacking Philip Bailhache for attempting to 'overturn' a previous decision, and implying that his actions in doing so were undemocratic.

    This is nonsense. Let's suppose Trevor Pitman brought a proposition to hold a judiicial review into some aspect of the child abuse cover-up, and the proposition was voted down.

    If he then brought a fresh proposition to the house asking for the very same thing, you would be applauding him to the rafters and blogging about his tenacity.

    This is how democracy should work: any representative is free to bring any proposition they like, as often as they like. If they can persuade enough people - by fair means - to change their minds, they achieve their goal.

    Some people may well be describing the attempt to purchase the Plemont headland as a "Mugabe-esque land grab". They are idiots.

    The headland is owned by a man worth many hundreds of millions of pounds, who is resident in the Isle of Man, and whose only interest in the site is to make money by developing houses that ordinary working Jerseymen and women can only dream about owning. He has owned - and neglected - the site for years, allowing it to become a total eye-sore. No doubt this was intentional. He will pay no tax on the profit he makes from developing the site, contributing nothing to the island.

    You really think that is comparable with you and your family being hacked to death by a bunch of teenage 'war veterans' who weren't even born when the war had ended, so that your property can be gifted to a political crony?

    The fact is, many ordinary people on this island agreed with the Bailhache proposition even though they can't abide the man or most of what he stands for. They - seemingly unlike you - can look at individual policies and consider their merits separately from their feelings about the person bringing them.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sam Mezec says,

    I will never ever accept a Jersey passport as a substitute for my British one.

    Sorry Sam if your address is based in Jersey they have changed the arrangement at the Passport office.

    I phoned the UK passport office being an Englishman to ask how I renew my English Passport when I am living in Jersey. They told me to get advice from the Jersey passport office.

    I phoned the JPO and was told that because my address is on Jersey at the moment, I must have a Jersey passport as the English passport office will not renew my UK one.

    I argued that as born in the UK I certainly did not want a lightweight Jersey passport.

    Apparently the choice has been removed.



    ReplyDelete
  7. Re;"You lose credibility by attacking Philip Bailhache for attempting to 'overturn' a previous decision, and implying that his actions in doing so were undemocratic."

    Another person who doesn't read ALL the text in the Posting.

    It was Philip Bailhache who stood on a platform, for election, criticising politicians who look to overturn, States decisions and the ONLY two propositions he brings are to overturn States decisions!

    The "fair" criticism of Senator Bailhache is that he totally ignores his election promises and does exactly what he was criticising others for.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous, I should have used my words more carefully. I meant to say I was more talking about British Citizenship rather than Jersey Citizenship.

    Technically a Jersey passport (which I have, stamp and all) is a British passport, just not a UK one, but on the inside it still says British Citizen.

    If Jersey became independent it would have to provide it's own citizenship and a new type of passport.

    When Hong Kong was transferred to China, the British government let many Hong Kong people retain their British citizenship, so I would assume that if Jersey went independent they would let us keep our British passports if we wanted. Especially considering so many islanders are from the UK originally.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The bigger question here is what the heck are the Bailhache brothers doing back in 2007 making plans for independence shouldn't that have been something for the government to be doing and not the judiciary?

    ReplyDelete
  10. It will be interesting to see how many - or few - of our elected reps respond to your call for comment on this issue....

    ReplyDelete
  11. Bridget Shaw gets to taste some of her OWN MEDICINE....

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous @1324 has it, spot-on.

    Of course, it'd only last - well, I might give it, say, 24 hours - but there'd be enough time for a decent wake...

    ReplyDelete
  13. The argument over whether or not independence would be better for Jersey should be about who in Jersey and in UK would benefit and who would lose out.

    It makes perfect sense for the amoral Baillhache Brothers to pursue what ever means they can of protecting themselves and their cronies from the danger of eventual UK interference in their feudalistic rule. Evidence against Jersey's oligarchy from bloggers, and especially the challenges mounted by Stuart Syvret, could legally force a reluctant UK to finally take responsible action against them.

    Would the innocent people of Jersey be left more vulnerable without current ties to the UK? Of course.

    The fishing boundaries are just one example of the danger of losing so much international clout. Would any foreign country grant equal status on any matter of self interest to a tiny independent tax haven? Why would they? The desires of foreigners who benefit from the Jersey finance industry may not be entirely in line with their own governments. Offshore finance is becoming a spectacularly unstable industry.

    What should be worrying is the increasing evidence that the UK is reluctant to act on their existing obligation for oversight. It is not that the UK is bullying so much as ignoring Jersey's feudalism and corruption. It may be that the UK has selfish motives for wanting Jersey independent and would help provide excuses of bullying for Jersey to take that action. After all, the Bailhache brothers' easy disregard of accepted democratic norms can be linked to the complicity of an influential UK power base who could be drawn in to any international exposure of Jersey shenanigans. I have read differing views but have not been convinced yet of much overall UK benefit in remaining tied to Jersey. The clear benefit of the status quo seems to lie with Jersey's citizens.

    Elle

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sir Miles Broomfield4 January 2013 at 09:57

    I think Bailhache should be made the first King of Jersey and that his inner ruling council should be made up of the Constables. All the other politicans should be sacked.

    He should be given Government House and a large private jet at taxpayers expense.

    He would then be free to do whatever he wanted and I for one would most certainly welcome a National Gallery.

    And I hope that a large portrait of Sir Philip is hung above the entrance to remind us all of how great this mans intellect truly is.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I couldn't care less about what Deputy Pitman thinks about Sir Philip Bailhache but what I will say is that I voted for Sir Philip because of his Manifesto and his presentation to the Hustings. All this JEP nonsense is getting silly and I would rather see these critics come up with some decent ideas on how to run the Island rather than drag others down all the time. Its all negative politics.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Re; “I voted for Sir Philip because of his Manifesto and his presentation to the Hustings.”

    Do you not now feel let down by him for ignoring his election promises?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Not at all.
    I read all the supposed dislike of Sir Philip by some of these backbenchers and then wonder what they have actually done for this Island themselves?

    ReplyDelete
  18. So how does that work then? Philip Bailhache says one thing on his election campaign, so you vote for him on that basis, does the complete opposite as soon as he’s elected and you don’t feel let down? You clearly didn’t “vote for Sir Philip because of his Manifesto and his presentation to the Hustings” Or if you did, then you are not being truthful about being let down by him now.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I voted for Sir Philip because I like the idea of independence and I want us to keep the constables amongst other things including his excellent servive as a Royal Court Judge. I would vote for him again without hesitation.

    ReplyDelete
  20. So we’ve now gone from “I voted for Sir Philip because of his Manifesto and his presentation to the Hustings.” To “I voted for Sir Philip because I like the idea of independence and I want us to keep the constables amongst other things including his excellent servive (sic) as a Royal Court Judge.”

    How do you feel about him (as a Royal Court Judge) allowing convicted paedophile Roger Holland to remain a C.O. where Holland went on to abuse while in that position?

    ReplyDelete
  21. "I couldn't care less about what Deputy Pitman thinks about Sir Philip Bailhache but what I will say is that I voted for Sir Philip because of his Manifesto and his presentation to the Hustings. All this JEP nonsense is getting silly and I would rather see these critics come up with some decent ideas on how to run the Island rather than drag others down all the time. Its all negative politics.

    I read all the supposed dislike of Sir Philip by some of these backbenchers and then wonder what they have actually done for this Island themselves?

    I voted for Sir Philip because I like the idea of independence and I want us to keep the constables amongst other things including his excellent servive as a Royal Court Judge. I would vote for him again without hesitation."

    Someone would be better going back to milking the cows rather than the taxpayer?

    ReplyDelete
  22. That's old news and nobody can be expected to see in the future like that.

    ReplyDelete
  23. “That's old news and nobody can be expected to see in the future like that.”

    I’m sure Senator Bailhache will be appreciative of that kind of support. It has nothing to do with “news” and all to do with child abuse, or the prevention of it.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sorry, what is old news?

    Not Plemont or the Electoral Commission. They were and are still current.

    Or are you refering to the Roger Holland scandal?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Apparently to top it all Phil Bailhache Said about Roger Holland, when convicting him leaniently "he will grow out of it", then he went on to reoffend.

    Can any one prove that he did say this?

    Because it too hard to believe.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Are these the most famous/infamous sayings from the soon to be infamous Bailhache Brothers?:

    "So Be It"

    "He Will Grow Out Of It"

    ReplyDelete
  27. “The media are the real criminals” (when referring to the child abuse) has got to be up there with the top sayings. “We will invoke compulsory purchase” (to get Plemont) would be another one.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "A little bit of corruption never did anyone any harm"

    ReplyDelete
  29. In reply to

    4 January 2013 20:16

    "A little bit of corruption never did anyone any harm"

    Thats fine according to you, until they come for your shiny car or loan of your daughter because it's your time to pay back the corrupt favour, and thats all you have to give, or end up in a very bad place.

    So whats it to be, which would you choose, would you lie to the wife ?

    If thats how you want to live move to Russia

    Boatyboy.

    ReplyDelete
  30. If anyone thinks that "independence" and ~Bailhache go together, they are very mistaken.
    What would really happen is that the a legal dictatorship would be put in place, and independence would be the very last thing any of us would ever experience again.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Boatyboy, think you'll find:

    "A little bit of corruption never did anyone any harm"

    was another one of The Bailhache Bros. infamous sayings.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "A little bit of corruption never did anyone any harm"

    That would have been Dick Shenton

    ReplyDelete
  33. For the record I’m not sure either Philip Bailhache, or Dick Shenton, have said those words.

    ReplyDelete
  34. spot on -Anonymous @ 11:58a.m.

    If anyone thinks that "independence" and ~Bailhache go together, they are very mistaken.
    What would really happen is that the a legal dictatorship would be put in place, and independence would be the very last thing any of us would ever experience again.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The "not for publication" comment.

    Agreed on all points thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  36. But Dick did say this:


    From Dick Shenton.

    YOUR front page article (JEP, 11 January) on questions of conspiracy in the long-running saga of the Chief of Police’s suspension needs comment.
    Personally I am sick and tired of the way that much-needed public money is being squandered in this case.
    In an article published by your paper a year or two ago I questioned the way that the Island was being policed. I said that if I was a States Member I would bring a vote of no confidence in the Home Affairs Minister at the time and in a letter set out the attitude of the then Chief and Deputy Chief officers.
    Since that time we have witnessed reports, totally unfounded, that told the world what a horrible place Jersey, our Island, was. There will always be people prepared to believe the worst but in this case they were being helped by police officers who should have known better.
    The truth of the matter, as I found out in representing a private individual, was a force who exceeded authority and used threats and bluster to silence justice. I was warned by advisers that my phone could be tapped and when I reported this to the then Home Affairs Minister, Senator Wendy Kinnard, she did nothing.
    Needless to say I continued with my efforts on the part of the individual but I could not believe that the police force that my father had served in had descended to such depths. The Police Complaints Authority was a joke who could not help the constituent or myself.
    I would love to give evidence on oath of my experience with the Power/Harper police force and perhaps the barrack room lawyers among the States Members will listen to the truth.
    What happened to old-fashioned responsibility for the failure of a company and its staff, when the chief would resign and fall on his sword?
    To Senator Terry Le Sueur and Deputy Andrew Lewis I would offer my support because they are the innocent victims of the failure of the Chief Minister and the Home Affairs Minister to act when they knew the facts.
    With regard to any extra money or cost, I would put it towards extending the winter fuel allowance to all pensioners, rather than waste it on our overpaid officers.

    Article posted on 14th January, 2010 - 3.01pm

    ReplyDelete
  37. You do have to wonder why and by whom Mr Shenton, an ex States member was warned that his phone could be tapped?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Deputy Trevor Pitman, back in 2009, asked the Attorney General if States Members phones were tapped. The ?"ANSWER?"

    ReplyDelete
  39. Who actually has the power to authorise and enable public citizens phones be tapped?

    ReplyDelete
  40. One would believe it would need to go as far up as the Attorney General. That said, this is Jersey, so perhaps a nod and a wink from the right person should suffice.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Hi Voiceforchildren

    Do you believe the police would do this without authority from above?

    The implication in the JEP Dick Shenton article reads to me as if Mr Shenton believed the Chief of Police and Deputy Chief who should of known better, were the culprits of this phone tapping.

    Probably that was the intention in the article.

    ReplyDelete
  42. As mentioned earlier, it would need to come from high up, either officially or unofficially.

    There is one thing you can be damn sure of, if Lenny Harper, or graham Power QPM, had anything whatsoever to do with illegal phone tapping it would have come out by now.

    We have seen the depths that the State Media have sunk to out of sheer desperation in order to get something “to stick” against Mr. Harper and/or Mr. Power. They (State Media) have had to sink to such levels by reporting utter nonsense as to how much Lenny Harper spent on a Prawn Cocktail in a London Restaurant. Phone Tapping would have been a godsend to the “establishment” and their media.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Evidence of the "desperate" reporting from the STATE MEDIA

    ReplyDelete
  44. Put a mark on June the 1st 2013 in your calendar BBC

    ReplyDelete
  45. Independence is a mighty fine idea, I myself want independence FROM 'the Island of Jersey and its Dependencies Inc.'

    I no longer wish to be the victim of the extortion and fraud of the States of Jersey.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Bridget Shaw gets to taste some of her OWN MEDICINE Part 2

    ReplyDelete
  47. A police force absolutely riddled with CORRUPTION

    ReplyDelete
  48. I am not sufficiently close to the debate in the Islands to judge the credibility of any suggestions over possible independence. However, if such a change were to come about, I would be very concerned indeed if Channel Islanders lost the ability to appeal to external courts or rely upon existing judgments of bodies such as The European Court of Human Rights.

    What one might term social legislation in the Islands (things like protection against discrimination) tend to be years, if not decades, behind the UK and just about every other country in Europe. Yet even in the UK I can vouch for the fact that many people are eternally grateful for judgments from both the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights that have dragged the UK kicking and screaming into the latter part of the 20th century / early part of the 21st. Without such interventions, their lives would be very much poorer.

    The ECJ is of less relevance in the Islands (being outside the EU) but judgments of the ECtHR are relevant. If any move towards independence were to be accompanied by loss of recourse to such judgments, some Islanders (and possibly amongst the most vulnerable) could end up paying a high price.

    ReplyDelete
  49. BAILHACHE YOU GOT A FIGHT ON YOUR HANDS IF YOU THINK YOUR TAKING MY NATIONALITY AWAY FROM ME . IM JERSEY ,BRITISH AND PROUD OF IT. I'VE BEEN WARNING PEOPLE THE LAST 3 YEARS ABOUT BAILHACHE AND HIS PLANS. WAKE UP ! HIS A DANGEROUS INDIVIDUAL.

    ReplyDelete