Monday, 6 October 2014

Jersey Referendum Question Debate.

On the 15th October 2014 Electors are being asked to go to the polls and vote in Jersey's first ever General Election. (although a third of the Assembly has already been elected unopposed)

As part of this election there is also a referendum question that electors are being asked to vote on and that is "should the Constables remain as members of the States as an automatic right?" Electors are being asked to tick either the yes box or the no box.

There has been very little media coverage of this referendum, and indeed what coverage it has received has, in some cases, been misleading. This is NOT a question asking if the Constables should be in the States or not. It is asking if they should be there as an automatic right of their Office.

Due to the lack of State Media coverage concerning this crucial referendum vote, VFC invited a member from the "YES" camp, James Rondel (Committee Member for YES campaign 2014), and a member of the "NO" camp, Deputy Sam Mezec, (Deputy St. Helier No.2) to discuss the issues surrounding the referendum question, and hopefully generate some interest in it. Thankfully they both agreed and were appreciative of the opportunity to make their case for and against as I was appreciative of their engagement.

This is not so much an interview but a discussion between both camps. I did not challenge anything said by either James or Sam as it was up to them to make their case and up to readers/viewers to decide who set out the best stall.

Hopefully readers/viewers will find the debate below both engaging and informative and might get inspired to cast a vote on October 15th? The discussion is published in its entirety as this is the service offered by Citizens Media not available with the State Media.

Below the discussion video is Sam Mezec with his "piece to camera" explaining why he believes people should be voting "NO" in the referendum and below that is James Rondel's piece to camera explaining why he believes people should be voting "YES" in the referendum.


  1. The Constables have got a vote in the States but they have not been elected by the public to do so. Is this not undemocratic along with creating an imbalance in the voting system? We see in the JEP how each member votes, usually a day after assembly sittings on Tuesdays. Constables have been allowed these voting rights for years, to the detriment of politicians who have brought propositions for the public good. Who whether middle class or working, pay their taxes for paid politicians to act in their best interests of living on this Island. With the Attorney General also in the judiciary Constables are under his rule. Therefore they are highly unlikely to vote against their boss’s wishes. WOULD YOU?

    1. The clique of Constables certainly seems to have a way of drawing newcomers "into the fold". Simon Crowcroft resisted for many years as a principled progressive. Palot reverted to type virtually immediately.

      Maybe it is the lure of the Freemasonry gravy train or maybe it is something else?

  2. Refreshing to see some actual debate going on and from two well informed individuals on both sides. Actually James Rondel raised a few points that I hadn't considered, so its good to here those.

    Regardless I don't see that the Constables are really in touch with the views of the parish. What they are in touch with is a relatively small number of parochial groupies and cronies who always attend the parish hall meetings and generally talk to much crap IMHO. If you don't believe me go an attend a parish hall meeting and sit at the back. Then you'll see them all rubber necking you with suspicion, and furtively whispering to themselves, "who is this outsider who dares to attend OUR meeting". I also suspect that much of the constables "grass roots" polling is actually done around the dining room table with invited friends, or even possibly, dare I say it, down the lodge?

    These are the real reasons why constables seats go uncontested.

    Well done James and Sam for getting this debate out there. I have taken note James of your points with interest, but on balance I think Sam is right and removing them is the only democratic option.


    1. The Connétable is the head of a corporate body, which is the Parish; this separate legal entity of corporation (the Parish) has been created directly through legislation established by law which has been passed by the Royal Court empowered by letters patent that has been granted by the Monarch.

      The office of Connétable is directly responsible to the Judiciary which has created the corporate divisions of each Parish by Royal Charter (letters patent), and grants a monopoly of power to each Connétable over the specified division of territory (the Parish) which the Connétable represents.

      Originally, this system of corporation in which the body of people in the parish are represented by a head - the Connétable, is part of a feudal system of 'divide and rule', which was created to subjugate the Islands people into divisions which could be easily managed and controlled.

      The office of Connétable has no place sitting in the States Chamber, the Connétable does not represent all of the people of the island when voting, the Connétable's representation to voting electorate is not even equally proportionate across all of the parishes.

      Disproportionate representation created by a divided electorate being forced to vote within the confinements of the old parish feudal system of artificially imposed corporate boundaries is wrong, and has no place in a 21st Century democracy.

      It is no secret that many of the Connétables are also freemasons who's loyalties have been secretly sworn to the Crown, thus further reinforcing control over the current feudal state of corporate governance.

      Because of these facts, it is a "NO" from me.

    2. Thank you Anon for that valuable history and insight. Interesting that you say that many of the Connetable's are known freemasons. It would be an interesting question also to ask at one of the hustings of the Senatorial hopefulls. Which of them would openly like to declare or refute any membership or association with the freemasons.

      I could probably call out exactly who would say no (and I would believe them), yes (unlikely anyone), and would refuse to answer one way or another, or obfuscate (and i can guess the real answer). A bit like Peter denying Jesus three times, although I am not a religious man.


    3. There should be only one type of States Member elected in a free, equal and fair island-wide vote.

    4. Dear JRCbean,

      Perhaps you may wish to spend some time reading through the names in the Jersey Masonic Calendar and Year Book 1998, and see how many persons you can find who are both freemasons and also hold positions within the parishes.

      You may also wish to widen this search to include the Judiciary, Police and Civil Service etc., etc..

    5. Thank you. Will study that with interest. I can already spot a few names I know but don't surprise me.


    6. Dear JRCbean,

      Do not forget, those who have studied law in the United Kingdom may well be members of lodges in the United Kingdom; lodges such as the Chancery Bar Lodge 2456, Gray's Inn Lodge 4938, Western Circuit Lodge 3154 or the Apollo University Lodge no. 357 for present and past members of Oxford University. Such persons will not be recorded in the Jersey year book list of Free Mason's.

  3. There still appears to be a general lack of clarity about the roles of the various categories of States member. This was a fundamental issue within the Clothier Report which recommended that there should only be one type of States Member.

    Sam Mezec made a good point towards the end of the interview when he said that most, perhaps all parishioners are happy with the performance of their Constables as Head of the Parishes whereas a large majority of the public are very dissatisfied with the performance of the States - i.e. States Members in general. I believe this is because the type of individual who wants to be a Constable in the role of Head of the Parish is usually very different to the type of individual who wants to be a States Member. This is why so many Constables have been returned to office without competition.

    It is also undeniable that some of the Constables are well capable of discharging their States role as well as the Head of Parish role whilst others are patently unsuited to this. So I have no problem with the suggestion that there should be one class of States Member and that Constables who want to stand as one of those members should do so in addition to their duties as Head of Parish.

    The argument for "yes" seems to be predominantly based on the Parish representation in the States - i.e. the claim that the Constable is a States Member is somehow of benefit to ordinary parishioners and, if the Constable were not a States Member, parish services would somehow suffer. Here lies my confusion about roles of States Members. We currently have parish Deputies. These are elected directly by parishioners, presumably to represent their interests within the States. This point was not raised directly in the interview but is there a sub text here that the Deputies are not really performing this role? If this is the case, then let us have some honesty and clarity. Common sense would say that if the Constables were not States Members ex officio then the Deputies should be more than capable of representing parish interests - provided that they establish and maintain effective and honest relationships with the Constables.

    1. @9:31
      "...the type of individual who wants to be a Constable in the role of Head of the Parish is usually very different to the type of individual..."
      Yes, Constables are primarily ADMINISTRATORS, which many people do not have an aptitude for OR the inclination to spend their days in that mundane grind.

      In addition they are usually drawn from the clique of parish busy bodies and networkers and control-hungry (e.g. via the hobby bobbies etc.)

      As pointed out by Sam, most people are happy with the Constables' administrative role but it would be difficult to come up with a system tending to draw from (& be representative of) such a narrow portion of the population and so guaranteed to rarely face an election.

      No wonder Bailhache et al love their archaic system
      and even want to reduce the other elected members to "future proof" their power !!!

      Strengthen the Parishes by giving the Constables their undivided attention.

  4. A comment from

    Anonymous4 October 2014 13:06
    "Did you hear Phil Bailhache & others spouting off about democracy on BBC radio bean's election call? What a load of garbage.

    To summarise Bailhaches comments: Democracy & separation of powers is a good idea in theory. Except Jersey has 800 years experience of feudal rule by the elite (Me & my brother) - so why change?

    Also- the Bailiff's position in polite society would be diminished if he were not speaker in the States and head Judge.

    There you have it.

    Appearing to be a very important fish in a little pond is much more important than democracy.

    So Vote for me you fools!

    What a clown."

  5. The highlight of the debate was when James Rondel asserted that the Constables were vital to delivering e-government !

    One suspects that there might be a misunderstanding on the mention of "windows", "virus" and particularly "tablets" :-)

    1. It's a sin to say "DEMOCRACY" without meaning it6 October 2014 at 13:31

      J.R. says "you cannot say ConSTABLE, without saying STABLE"
      Hmmm........ brings to mind a windy old nag one winter away from the "knacker's yard"

    2. You also cannot say CONstable without saying "CON". Such a STABLE CON which has lasted many centuries!

    3. And if they are able to turn on a computer without assistance perhaps they could be Neo-Con-Stables; to reflect both their modernity, their usual politics and their agricultural roots :-)

      Let the parish administrators concentrate on efficient parish administration. If there is genuinely a parish matter which needs bringing up in the states then they could surely pick up the telephone to an INCREASED number of WHOLE PARISH Deputies.
      Having "whole parish" deputies would increase the diversity of parish representation and ensure that all (or nearly all) Deputies faced a contested election.

      Regarding the "STABLE CON"; To be fair to the Constables, they did start accepting this newfangled concept of "democracy" in 1947 after (most of) the Nazis left.

      The extreme left can be equally guilty of gerrymandering election systems. The former East Germany called itself the "German Democratic Republic"
      The GDR had its system for ensuring the "correct" electoral outcome, we have ours. Different admittedly but "same difference" as the saying goes.


    Why doesn't James Rondel, and all of the digital party candidates, be honest with the public and get the DIGITAL PARTY constituted in the states like the Reform Party have .

    Its a dishonest form of electioneering that the "right" are undertaking in . We have a Mr Scott Wickenden, Mr Christian May , and other candiates, + several local 3rd party Digital company lobbyists who are quite clearly lobbying for the Digital Jersey Crew to be represented in the states.

    Its all about E GOV & E HEALTH, and the sooner the advocates of this agenda start being honest with the public the better we will be informed of their plans for jersey.

    Why wont they? thats the question the discerning of us are asking.

  7. Difference between the 2 speakers here, one is acting for ALL of the people in the island, the other is acting for the people who want to keep a strangle hold on making sure we don't have a fully democratic government.

    Doesn't matter how anyone dresses up the submissions, the Yes campaign is truly undemocratic and im failing to see how Mr Rondel can sit there in 2014 and advocate an undemocratic form of government.

    1. @14:39
      James Rondel seems a nice young man but perhaps he is more easily able to swallow the anti-democratic nature of his position if he is one of the beneficiaries of it.

      He is clearly an intelligent man. Surely he cannot really believe that the Constables are the means of achieving reform of the States anytime within the next century. Even James' youth does not make his naivety believable on this issue.

      At one point Mr.Rondel praises the island's justice system WTF!
      Secret trials to protect the likes of proven bullies and purveyors of death threats are okay are they James?

      How about the non prosecution of child abusers and Paedophiles:

  8. The parish that democracy forgot6 October 2014 at 15:21

    It ain't easy voting for change ..........especially if you happen to live in St.Lawrence

    "Deidre Mezbourian was re-elected unopposed as Connétable.
    John Le Fondré and Eddie Noel were re-elected unopposed as Deputies."

    Hence in St. Lawrence there will be NO elections for parish representatives this year!

  9. The "Ah but yes, eh!" campaign is gaining momentum

    "Constables have been identified as the future for ‘e-Government’, indeed, one Constable has already switched from analogue cigarettes to electronic cigarettes. Constables of the island ignite! Or not, as the case may be."

    Through the Parish Assembly, and being available at the Parish Hall (well, of course not all of the time, because they are also full time States Members), the Constable is uniquely placed to be able to understand the 18 parishioners (if lucky) that turn up to these meetings.. These concerns are then ignored, and the Constables vote the way they are told by the Treasury Minister, who will not fund parish schemes unless they votes as he says. As such, the Constables are able to ‘filter out’ the noise of the parishioners who are not experts anyway, and make more sensible decisions.


    The Constables are continually accountable though the ballot box. It is simply not true to say that they are undemocratic, because all Parishes have, at least once in the last 500 years, all had contested elections. Indeed, St Ouen has even had two in the space of only 110 years.

    The removal of the Constables has the potential to de-stabilise Jersey’s Government. The Finance Industry requires a right wing government. The removal of Constables, in favour of Humans who are elected specifically to do the job, would almost certainly lead to a doomsday scenario where all the Banks would leave and move to Sark. This cannot be allowed to happen.

    There is a suggestion that Constables have a “block vote”. We acknowledge this, and so as a compromise, we have consulted with the Constables. They have agreed that only one of them will attend each States sitting, and that he or she will vote for the other 11. This will free the others to do more work in their parishes, thus strengthening the parishes, but making sure that the States still make the right decisions, every time.


    Constables have proven they are reforming States Members. They led the way towards a single election day, a four year term and spring elections. They also removed their own policing powers, which Constabl;e Rondel described as ‘a nail in the coffin for the honorary system.’

    The retention of the Constables is compliant with the Venus Commission, which makes allowances for feudal jurisdictions to do what they want.

    1. Ah but no, eh!" Feudal jurisdictions do not do as they want, they do as they are told...

    2. On first reading of Monty's blog I missed his humorous substitution of "Venus Commission" in the place of "Venice Commission"

      Sadly "Anus Commission" might be even more appropriate
      ...particularly in view of the chronic Constable's and Honorary's historical child protection failures.

      Perhaps Monty was too polite to say that.

      Also rather apt as it is utter 'CRAP' to claim that the ex-officio "rights" of the Constables at present meet the Venice Commission / European Commission for Democracy requirements.

      Please vote "NO". A vote for no does NOT mean the end of the Constables or of the best parts of the parish system.
      Indeed it has the potential to strengthen these, while giving the Constables the right to stand for separate election for the states id they so wish and are capable of performing in both jobs.

    3. Totally Bail-Hached7 October 2014 at 14:12

      Does "Anus Commission" bring to mind Jerseys hijacked "Independent" Electoral Commission"?

  10. Absolute nonsense the young man Rondel talks , you ask anyone in a country parish and they will tell you the same thing i.e Constables have lost touch with their parishes and DO NOT do the job they used to do 10-20 years ago.

    Constables are no longer needed to represent the business of each parish, so what do they do ? they surely don't do politics -- but come in every time for a block vote every time the ministers email them to tell them how important their votes are!

    Constables,,,please to wake up and stop swallowing everything you are told my Ozouf and the like ....these ministers are destroying our island and our way of life... and you constables are allowing him to do it by ommission , ignorance, or not doing or being what you are paid to do ... being politicians!

  11. Its a shame the apathetic Jersey electorate don't have the same passion for politics as the Scottish...


    "Because Gordon Brown is a potato-faced Visigoth who destroys everything he touches, like an epileptic Dalek made out of roped-together burst sofa cushions. I hope he shits out his skeleton in the middle of the night and it runs away to join the circus."

    1. Ah, Scotland's 2nd & 3rd main exports combined
      ......profanity & poetry
      has already passed 10,000 signatures
      only has about 250 to date

      Odd world with odd priorities
      The failure for sufficient people to demand a proper inquiry puts the island's children at continued risk

  12. From February 2008:

    "Although Jersey is a self-governing jurisdiction, which makes its own laws and sets its own tax rates and so forth – like a mini-nation state, – it is, effectively, a single-party state. 98% of political candidates run for office as so-called 'independents'.

    How this manifests itself in practice is, of course, a de facto [ultra] Conservative [Tea] Party – operating on a covert basis working to hidden agendas. Moreover – the ‘cultural’ resistance to political parties has been very carefully nurtured and promoted by the island’s media over the decades – particularly the Jersey Evening Post.

    The reason for this is obvious to anyone upon a moment’s reflection.

    With political parties the voting public actually have a clear choice concerning which political philosophy and manifesto of policies they will be governed by. The electorate has power.

    And that is the very last thing that the Jersey oligarchy wants to see.

    Voter power, you might think, is a very foundation stone of functioning democracy. But in Jersey it is viewed as though it were the second coming of Mikhail Bakunin.

    Instead, in Jersey, people like me trawl around the election campaign trail – trying to sell our wares to the voters – usually on the basis of nothing more substantive than “Hey – I’m a nice guy – my great-uncle lived in this parish – and I like your pub - so please vote for me.”

    In my case I like to imagine I offer a little more substance – but the net result of this approach to democracy is a legislature comprised of a disjointed, directionless rabble which possesses no electoral mandate for a particular political direction or programme of policies.

    Such a lack of focus results in a “let’s make it up as we go along” approach to policy formation. Most members of the Jersey legislature, no matter how well intentioned, are just sitting around waiting to be led – waiting to be told what to do.

    And it is into this policy vacuum that the winds of power rush ....."


    One suspects that the above has changed only in that the Establishment Party is now better organised with more of the candidates being selected or "parachuted in" and then expensively marketed so that the E.P. no longer needs to rely on the innocence and gullibility of those elected.

    Please vote "NO" on the AUTOMATIC/Ex-Officio right of the largely unelected Constables to vote in the States.

    Please also VOTE for the LEAST BAD candidates in the other elections.
    BUT WHO ARE the "LEAST BAD" ...........?

    USE YOUR VOTE. If Bailhache gets elected and especially if he gets a referandum "YES" your democratic rights will be reduced yet further
    ....all in the name of 'tradition'

    1. The site hosting is again under cyber attack and is currently unavailable.

      These cyber attack are usually overcome within a few hours so the site should be back up soon.

  13. Further to Who to vote for #1 (It's your vote USE IT or LOSE IT)

    If you cannot get out to vote on election day you can still cast your votes at St. Paul’s Centre in Dumaresq Street, St. Helier - NO MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE ON THE ISLAND
    St. Paul’s Centre is open for pre-poll voting from 8 am to 6 pm WEEKDAYS up to and including Monday 13th October
    You need a driving licence OR a passport etc as photo ID

    More info at


    Many (myself included) would seek sensible recommendation as to WHO to vote for.

    Personally I am right leaning but I am happy to give a chance to anyone suitable from the centre-left or centre-right, especially if they demonstrate any moral fortitude and any ability to resist by the secret far-right "Establishment Party"

    SARAH FURGUSON is top of my list having well-proven herself (after a shaky start)

    I will probably vote ANNE SOUTHERN because she is a "Reform Jersey" candidate
    Reform Jersey at least is a focus for reform and opposition which may curb unbridled power and begin to hold it to account
    This overcomes my lack of knowledge of her record (including as a civil service/teachers(?) union rep.

    Are there any other REFORM JERSEY senatorial candidates?

    How about john young ? ........ is he OK or OK-ish?

    I should like to use all 8 senatorial votes as I work up the list of the "least bad"

    Which candidates are FREEMASONRY LINKED ?

    VFC (& and informed readers) do you have any suggestions on the least bad?

    PLEASE HELP, and then perhaps follow with recommendations (for or against) the various parish candidates.

    We don't want "more of the same" or the continued cover-up of child abuse.

    1. What I will say, at this moment in time, is that if you don't want more of the same then DON'T vote for theses Establishment Party Members (EPM)

      Philip Bailhache.

      Guy De Faye

      Sean Power

      Lyndon Farnham

      Malcolm Ferey

      Ian Gorst

      Alan Maclean.

      Philip Ozouf.

      Paul Routier.

  14. Replies
    1. Aren't those nodding dogs just soooo cute!

      None of them try to hump your leg
      ....or the kids
      do they?

    2. The video is is a mash by a Jèrriais band member
      The websites associated with the little vid are:

      A sample of his own work is on the "play tag" top right of this page:

      And please permit me a plug for his band

      Jèrriais album "Eune Bordée d'Noué" is available as a free download:

      Thanks "mah luvs"!

      Proof that you can be a traditionalist AND believe in sound democratic principles

      (accepting that some band members may be in favour of "oui" ou "peut etre"

  15. A lighthearted look at the REAL Yes campaign HERE

  16. Readers might also be interested in Rico's latest posting concerning, what could be, a serious security breach or gross incompetence of the JERSEY CHILD ABUSE INQUIRY.

    1. Very unprofessional, if not negligent malpractice to be sending out copies of witness statements by ordinary letter post. These statements should at the very least be sent by recorded delivery which is "signed for" by the recipient, or by courier; the packaging should also be far more robust to make it tamper proof.

      Seeing the terrible condition the envelope that Lenny Harper's statement arrived from the Royal Mail just made me feel sick inside. This will have almost certainly been read by someone who could not help them self or someone that had intentionally helped themselves...

      Shameful, utterly shameful malpractice by the C.O.I.!

  17. VFC, off topic, but just a tip for twitter. If you want your tweets to be more widely read, use the 'dot' notation if you START a tweet with someone's @ name.

    Technical explanation here:

    For example, your recent tweet to '@lewisa1963' would be better sent to '.@lewisa1963' if you are going to start your tweets with someone's twitter name.

    Perhaps you could pass the tip on to other Jersey tweeters?


    QUOTE from 'Gladiator ':

    "Jersey is in the international news again!

    Jerseys voters and Jersey people who are not considering their democratic right of voting for their government they should read this article form Leah McGrath and start thinking quickly before the 15th October. No human being with morales and compassion can accept a white wash with no accountability for child abuse victims in a so-called democratic island. This is the chance for Jersey to get clean but are they going to use it?

    Lawmakers Blast Child-Abuse Inquiry on Tax Shelter Jersey Island
    By Leah McGrath Goodman
    Filed: 9/10/14 at 11:27 AM


    In a letter written August 20 to Oldham and obtained by Newsweek, the victims’ group noted that the island’s “bloggers have been very instrumental in supporting all abuse victims, uncovering many facts which would otherwise have remained hidden from the public.” Meanwhile, it noted that the island’s mainstream media “have been very economical with their facts and in some instances been damning of the whole abuse investigation from the outset, as clearly demonstrated in the bundles of newspaper clippings submitted to the inquiry team and which has been upsetting for the victims.”

    The inquiry is seen as potentially important to a wider inquiry now underway in the U.K. into decades of what appears to be widely reported but under-apprehended child abuse.

    This past summer, 15 members of Parliament signed an early day motion submitted by John Hemming, a Liberal Democrat member of the U.K. Parliament from Birmingham, Yardley. The motion requested that Jersey and other Crown dependencies be included in the U.K. inquiry.

    “[This House] recognizes that the dangers of such cover-ups occurring are even greater in small, quasi-self-governing communities than at a national level, where even though checks and balances are more extensive, child abuse and cover-ups by the well-connected have still occurred,” Hemming said in the motion.

    What a a scandal as well! You can't make it up!

    9 October 2014

    Jersey Care Inquiry: Lenny Harper details leak fears

    The details of child abuse victims may have been leaked after the Jersey Care Inquiry failed to post sensitive documents securely, a former senior investigator fears.

    Ex-Jersey police chief Lenny Harper looked into reports of child abuse on the island in 2007 and 2008.

    Officials sent him his 200-page confidential statement to sign, but he said it appeared to have been opened and was not sent by recorded delivery.

    The inquiry said it was investigating.

    With no doubt The Jersey way of white wash is finished as international media is catching on to the hard work of the Jersey citizen's media which is showing up the public paid media by recognising as an example Neil Mcmurray's Voiceforchildren as an influential blog."

    * The BBC failed to credit Team Voice for the story

  19. Excellent.

    You never told us, Francis Oldham gets hammered internationally, VFC and it's owner gets recognition.

    Well done.

    Will Jersey's paid media be trailing behind yet again, or be out of sight ?,3870.msg59546/topicseen.html#msg59546


    partial quote from BBC's *Girls 'sedated and raped' at home*:
    "She [also] talked about a number of punishments for a range of offences, including swearing, stealing apples or playing with boys from school.

    1-Wetting the bed would lead to girls being beaten with stinging nettles and rubbed with the wet sheets.
    2-They would also be made to go to sleep naked with stinging nettles under them.
    3-Girls would be submerged in an ice bath fully-clothed and only released when they gasped for breath.
    4-There would be weekly public beatings in the yard for the worst-behaved girls.

    Mrs N [who broke down and needed to take a break at least once during her evidence] said when they first arrived at the home, aged six, the girls were told their tongues would be cut out if they told anyone of anything that happened to them." END


    We are all aware that "times change", but there is no getting round the fact that the above was barbarity far in excess of the times and is medieval rather than Dickensian.

    At least 3 of the example punishments are nowadays regularly cited as forms of torture used in police states and war zones (nettles [particularly to gentiles], freezing treatment, partial suffocation/drowning]

    IMO Reading the available material that is finally coming out and which confirms separately made allegations, one gets the impression that if the maltreatment efforts (or a deliberate attempt to silence) resulted in a child's death then few (if any) questions would be asked and the parish authorities would tend to view the potential-snuf as 'one less problem'.

    At HDLG the teeth with roots attached and the surviving fragments of burnt children's bones have still not been explained and unfortunately in those times it was easy to dispose of the entire record of an un-cared for child. This is uncomfortable to even contemplate.

    Clearly the staff across a good many Jersey institutions knew that they could do exactly what they liked to children, whether this was based on sadism, sex and rape or effectively prostitution of minors to outsiders for some form of gain, financial or otherwise.

    It also appears that there were at last a few members of staff across the institutions, from Sacre-Coeur to HDLG who made efforts on behalf of the children beyond the call of duty and showed children love (of the right sort). It seems that within the states system the genuine carers were moved out of the way and abusers were promoted, sometimes to the highest of positions.
    Does this perhaps indicate a systemic problem as suggested by deposed Health Minister Syvret.

    There is more to come and also material that the BBC is not prepared to publish but this BBC "timeline into decades of abuse" is a start:
    Change starts at the ballot box. We are for the moment stuck with the unelected, constables (who are historically highly supportive of cover up) but which members of our COM should we keep?

    1. ..................10 October 2014 at 11:17

      VFC's previous comment:

      What I will say, at this moment in time, is that if you don't want more of the same then DON'T vote for theses Establishment Party Members (EPM)

      Philip Bailhache.

      Guy De Faye
      Sean Power
      Lyndon Farnham
      Malcolm Ferey
      Ian Gorst
      Alan Maclean.
      Philip Ozouf.
      Paul Routier.
      ======END ========

      VFC, Did you forget Andrew Green or is he OK(ish)?


      "Ex. British Army. Senior management roles in NHS and Jersey Health Service.

      Other relevant Roles: Founder Chairman of Headway Jersey
      Ex National Chairman of Headway UK (5 years)
      Chairman of the Island Scout Executive Committee.

      Current Political Role: Housing Minister where I have overseen the reform of the Housing Department into Andium Homes" END [which may or may not be more efficient but is probably closed to any scrutiny or oversight!]

      Senior management Jersey Health Service????!

      Any sensible recommendations gratefully received, including for tactical voting.

      YOUR VOTE COUNTS ....... a vote for a poor candidate works in that it is a vote AGAINST an even worse candidate.

      We will NOT get the government we deserve this time Partially due to the 'Constables automatic seat'. All we can do is lay the democratic foundations for next election in the hope of building a united and prosperous future for the island.

      It's your vote. USE IT OR LOOSE IT ! And please vote "NO" in the automatic-Con-seat referendum.

  21. BBC Jersey radio this morning in a news bulletin said,

    The Committee of Enquiry have spoke with Mr Harper and are taking seriously the issue of his mail being ripped open before leaving Jersey and possibly read giving up confidential names of witnesses and other sensitive private information.

    The spokes person for the CoI went on to say there is no security issue.

    Of course there is a bloody security issue, can the CoI really be taken seriously and where is the proper questioning by the BBC including questions to the post office who handled the mail.

    1. The BBC is not in the business of asking questions, it believes repeating Press Releases is "journalism."

      Of course it's an absolute nonsense that there has been no security breach when a letter arrives already opened. I have e-mailed the Inquiry Team asking questions and intend publishing that e-mail along with any response I might get. I do not expect even having my e-mail acknowledged and almost certainly will not have my question answered as this is the way the Inquiry Team conducts its business.