Sunday, 22 April 2018

None of the Above?

Just as around thirty percent of the island's electorate are, I am taking an interest in the up-coming election, and wondering where to put my X on the Ballot Paper in particular for the Senatorial contest.

It's that time of year, that happens every four years, where the people who are potentially going to be ruling over us for the next political term are all lining up telling us how they are going to make our lives better and sort out all the ills that have plagued local politics since before time begun! Of course it's election time.

I'm not sure how readers feel but - being as long in the tooth as I am - I've pretty much heard, or seen, it all before when it comes to election promises and election campaigns and nothing really ever changes. That's because nothing can change. Candidates (or at least some) go into politics with the best intentions and they are either silenced by having the attractive offer of immediate promotion to Minister/Assistant Minister or silenced by being relegated to the Backbench/Scrutiny where you are silenced by being in the minority. Portrayed by a complicit media as a "Trouble Maker" if you try to rock the boat and ask uncomfortable questions. Nonetheless it hasn't (yet) deterred me from voting although I can see that point being reached for the 2022 elections!

Senator Candidates 2018

After many discussions with people who follow (but don't necessarily vote in) the elections I was minded (and did) e-mail the 17 Senatorial Candidates with a question, that pops up at every election, about a "None of the Above" box on the Ballot paper...............Or not.

I was wondering how readers feel about it and in particular readers who don't vote. If there was a None of the Above box that you could tick - would that entice you to exercise your right and vote? With such a large voter abstention (around 70%) would this option bring more voters out? If not why don't you vote? What would encourage you to vote? Would Party Politics, rather than the complete mess we've got now, bring you to the Ballot Box? Having equal sized constituencies? One type of States Member rather than three?

It could be encouraging to some extent that a number of existing States Members are not standing for re-election including some Ministers and I have not noticed too many tears being shed for their impending absence. In the past our parliament has too often resembled a day-centre for elderly Jersey-folk.

Whatever your political inclinations the election will provide at least some voters ( particularly in the Deputies elections) the opportunity to bring the island's government/parliament a degree of youth and diversity which it has often lacked in the past.

Anyhow, as mentioned above, I have sent the below e-mail to the 17 Senatorial Candidates and will look to publish their answers (if/when I get them) in due course.

"Dear Candidate.

After speaking with a large number of people, across the political divide, there seems to be a recurring theme as to why a number of them don’t vote and can’t be convinced to vote in the up-coming election.

The reasons vary as to why they will not engage in the Electoral Process ranging from the system being broken and their vote/voice doesn’t count. The most recurring theme is that they don’t see anybody, standing for election, worthy of their vote and if there was a “none of the above” option on the Ballot Paper then they would go to the Polling Station and tick that particular box.

For my own position I do, and will be voting, in this election.

Some of you will know me and have granted me interviews for my Blog (link below) in the past and will know that I predominantly campaign for Victims and Survivors of Child Abuse. I also commentate, or write about, political issues that aren’t always related to that particular subject and this is one of those times.

Although there are many other questions I will be looking to be answered before casting my vote I thought this/these question(s) could stimulate political involvement/discussion by publishing it (and possibly your answer(s)) on my Blog.

Every election time we hear all kinds of “guesses” and “speculation” as to why the majority of the population will not engage with the electoral process and why there is somewhere in the region of a 70% voter abstention. The “guesses” and “speculation” are pretty much the same at every election. “People are happy with their lot.” “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it” and many more including the one’s above.

I want to end these speculations and guesses and in order to do that I would support a “None of the Above” box on the Ballot paper. At the very least this option will show us if the electorate is “happy with its lot” or not. It would also open up the voting system for more people which I’m sure you would all agree can only be a positive?

I’d like to ask you, as candidates:
1). would you support, or not, a “None of the Above” box on the Ballot Paper?

2.) Using up to 800 words would you please explain why/why not?

3). If you DO support a “None of the Above” option and are elected/re-elected. Would you bring a proposition to the States to have it included on the Ballot Paper?"(END)

At the time of going to press six Candidates had replied. Replies will form a Blog Posting of their own. Similarly those who don't reply will form a Blog Posting of their own.


  1. If there was a non of the above at this election I would go and cast my vote. The reason I'm not casting a protest vote in favour of a no hopextra candidate is for the simple reason it's not registered as one and in years to come will just be seen as a vote in favor of the no hoper..

    We must have a non of the above.

    Excellent email. Look forward to any replies you get..


  2. I have already on a number of occasions chosen the option to vote by spoiling my ballot paper with the words "none of the above". Its my democratic right if I so chose. Last time this occurred then, only a few days later, a letter appeared in the rag accusing the voters of being stupid since around 2 1/2% (from memory) of papers were spoiled. No understanding of why this may have occurred at all!

    Anyway I think formalizing this with a none of the above option would be a good step forward. Similarly where a candidate is elected unopposed this should be changed so that there is still a formal voting process where you can chose to vote for the candidate or against. Thus giving them a seal of approval or a clear no we don't want you message.

    The problem is what happens when "none of the above" gets more votes than all of the candidates, or far more likely IMHO where a sole candidate for constable gets more no votes than yes? Probably its should force a new election where even with a "none of the above", or a net negative vote no longer applies second time around since it should have forced more viable candidates to think again and stand to break the stalemate.


    1. "a letter appeared in the rag accusing the voters of being stupid"

      For once the rag might have got it at least partially right.

      There is a huge problem with the availability of capable, knowledgeable candidates to whom integrity is not just a word.
      But on at least two occasions one of the few candidates to fit that description has been rejected in favour of the usual suspects.

      Another candidate who they can not now vote for because of the corrupt court debts/superinjunctions.

      "The government you deserve" is a phrase which has been unkindly used.

  3. Good idea and email. Anyone who can't be bothered to reply to you will certainly show themselves not to be worth a vote. May we also know who has replied so far if that is possible?

    1. It wouldn't be fair to name those who haven't replied yet as the e-mail was only sent about 48 hours ago. I can confirm that 10 candidates have replied so far.

    2. If that is 10 out of 17 Senatorial candidates you are doing rather well.

  4. Another good question your brill blog could ask candidates would be as to whether they would support voting being made compulsory. It would be a perfect move to tie this and the introduction of the None of the Above vote together. I am sure this was talked about in the days of the JDA but never happened for some reason. Well worth bringing back now. Our representatives always make excuses not to change our system of government. A 70% none of the above vote would really be a wake-up call wouldn't it.

  5. Why bother. There is nobody worth voting for other than Higgins and Monty when he has had an early night.

  6. Seems to be a lot of people readily attacking those who do stand without throwing their own name into the frame.

    1. True but then we also have some who have proven themselves capable, quite possibly would be prepared to stand, but are prevented from doing so by our bent court and cowardly politicians. And we wonder why less people vote every year.

    2. What on earth is going on with these alleaged problems with Reform Jersey nomination forms? Obviously should have called themselves the Wickenden Party and then they would be fine. Do you know any more about the St. Lawrence incident? All smells fishey.

    3. People who think the Courts are 'Bent' would be hypocritical to stand for the States to pass Laws for these 'Bent' Courts to uphold.

    4. Hardly. Such people would most likely want to change things so we could become a fully functioning democracy. Like Guernsey. But not Sark. LOL!

    5. Re"

      "Do you know any more about the St. Lawrence incident? All smells fishey."

      Rather than smelling "fishy" it's starting to smell a little bit more like "The Jersey Way." Considering writing a Blog about it asking the questions the MSM aren't. In fact I'm not aware that the MSM has asked ANY questions thus far.

    6. Why bother. The MSM didn't ask questions about every political wrong since the days of Norman Le Brocq. That covers people as diverse as Deputy Mathews, Senator Syvret all the way to the Deputies Pitman (the JEPravda's fave people) so they ain't gonna start now are they?

    7. It is impossible for anybody to go into the States and change the Courts.
      Its called a Separation of Powers.

    8. Duh! We don't have a separation of powers do we. And it is entirely possible and should and must happen that both old or outdated laws and bent goings on get sorted by those we elect.

    9. Daren at 15:14
      I can't see anything on here which would class as an "attack".

      If there is then by the same token you have just "attacked" readers who had the effrontery to actually post a comment stating their opinion on this err..... *discussion forum*.

      You are right though, that we need more quality candidates

      Here is a thought on where we still are today:

      "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 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 ....."

      The above is reproduced from:

      ....but you no longer have the option of voting for the writer of that because of bent courts and a gerrymandered system.

    10. At 16.13 your house troll says, 'People who think the Courts are 'Bent' would be hypocritical to stand for the States to pass Laws for these 'Bent' Courts to uphold.'

      Your readers are smart enough to understand this straight away, but, actually, if you oppose stangation and corruption of any part of a polity, the way to change things is seak election. Once elected, such members of your legislature would push for an investigation into the conduct of your courts given the numerous examples of judicial corruption your island has seen in recent years, and would push for a separation of powers, which Jersey noticeably does not have at present.

      It's called democracy. Nothing complex about it.

    11. Thought we've already had States Members complaining about Bent Courts in the States without any success?



    1. Probably best if nobody mentions that both Shona and Trevor Pitman endorsed young Sam to help him first get elected! What an island! A poster on your previous story suggested writing to the visiting election monitoring agency about goings on over the past few years. If anyone has maybe they should now update it to include all of this? Bet you not a single independent candidate will experience any problems. Anyone remember when a former minister now trying to gain election again had left his canabis bust off the form? No? Probably because it didn't get reported then.

    2. Two winks for your birthday23 April 2018 at 17:04

      Was this a minister very fond of Puffin? I didn't say Puff-ing dear boy!

  8. "None of the Above" (NOTA) is recognised in the elections of several countries and although possible, neither a person nor party using that name or style has yet won the election.
    It was abolished in Russia after having stimulated Yeltsin into a rare bout of sobriety. Candidates who change their names by "deed poll" to "None of the Above" and suchlike pop up in UK elections from time to time...

  9. Most people seem to agree that the Class of 2014 have, over the past 4 years, provided us with the worst local government in Jersey's history.

    Could it be that at the end of this incompetent rabble's tenure we are about to get the worst quality of Senatorial election in our history?

    Moz, Stevie, Stephen (wrong country), Gino, Ian, Lyndan, Kristina, Tracey, and a few more too forgettable to even recall appear on the cusp of making that a reality.

    If Sam Mezec can't quieten down his ego for a month and get elected against this bunch he never will. It is yours to lose son.

    Once in please let us see as a consequence you actually stand up against the real power in Jersey. The out of control courts.

    1. More chance of a pig flying. Reform are terrified of standing up to the Bailiff and his henchmen.

  10. Just watched the VOTEJE hustings video from St Clement. So Gorst wants one of our votes so that we don't have to risk our futures! Priceless. Six years as Chief Minister and hasn't even been able to come up with a proper plan on immigration. This man is a joke. Another term of Gorst would be risking our future. Vote Stevie Ocean out of protest. News for you @11.04. Gorst won't tackle the judicial system corruption either so it ain't just Reform.

  11. I was at the St Saviour Hustings but this weakling won't publish my comments because he's a biased Ruin Jersey higher taxes supporter. You can read them on Facebook though, so there!

  12. Andy Jon Sharroc Le Vesconte of London (St Brelads really staying with Hilary)24 April 2018 at 16:24

    Good to see in a JEP poll that Deputy Mike Higgins is the third most active States member. As this was done simply on questions, holding ministers to account and propossitions etc, when you consider all of his island-wide constituent work he is obviously the busiest. What a great politician! Shows that idot on the JEP on line trolling pages what a wally he is calling Higgins lazy.

    1. Higgins for Chief Minister!

  13. Every Islander eligible to vote should have the choice of 92 candidates. Infact the The Jersey Way only gives us a choice of 18 candidates To vote for, but if you are lucky you might get the chose of 22. Big deal (not).

  14. Did anyone else see in tonight's Filthy Rag the story on Philip Ozouf of all people being given a formal apology by the Chief Executive to the States of Jersey?

    The City of London Corporation's Charlie Parker has issued a groveling written apology to the truly dreadful Ozouf for what he terms the 'personal tribulations' Ozouf 'suffered' for what was basically Ozouf's careless and incompetent use of a States credit card. (Your money.) And of course this Ozouf boosting story is given huge right hand page treatment, photo accompanied coverage by the JEP.

    Compare and contrast with any kind of 'apology' offered to Stuart Syvret for his 'personal tribulations' for being right and trying to do his duty for Jersey's child abuse victims and carry out the requirements of your child protection law, but being illegally opposed in his endeavours by the then Chief Executive to the States of Jersey Bill Ogley? Syvret suffered obstructions engaged in by Ogley which were just out and out criminal offences.

    Jez. And some of you people on Jersey wonder why your government is pure shit?

    1. Well the difference is that Philip Ozouf was cleared by the Police, but Stuart Syvret on the other hand was found guilty in both Courts for abusing people under Article 8 of Human Rights and breaking DP Law!
      That's set in stone for the rest of his life.

    2. Bit like that plonker who has that conviction for harrassing that family with death threats because they were friends of Syvret set in stone for the rest of his life. How shameful and embarrassing for his family.

    3. Nobody has convictions set in stone for the rest of their lives if they are classed as Spent, and under Election Law Spent cases do not have to be declared. Then again it is down to what the Court Sentence was.

  15. All decisions to investigate, charge and prosecute Syvret, and the conduct of your supposed 'courts', were ‘ab initio’ unlawful.

    Any decisions to charge, prosecute and try a person can only ever be lawful in Britain if the relevant public authorities carrying out those acts are both objective and meet the test of the appearance of objectivity.

    Not only does all of the Jersey system fail those basic tests generally, in the case of the particular individual cited (Stuart Syvret) all of your apparatus was extraordinarily conflicted. In ways which are so extreme and so overt as to have no parallel in modern British history.

    All such decisions and actions were taken by terminally conflicted institutions, and if that wasn't bad enough, terminally conflicted individuals.

    For example, just imagine the outrage which would be expressed in Britain if Vladimir Putin had a pre existing involvement in child abuse cover ups, but had nevertheless personally involved himself in obstructing and oppressing a democratically elected opponent who was supporting the abuse victims?

    Just as Jersey Bailiff Philip Bailhache in fact did.

    Imagine the unrestrained outrage if Putin then, himself, selected and swore into office the judge who was to hear the anti-whistle-blower 'case' against that opposition member?

    Just as Jersey Bailiff Philip Bailhache in fact did.

    Imagine the global destruction of whatever 'credibility' Putin's Russia may have if, when swearing in his personal choice of judge, the conflicted Putin used the occasion to directly attack, smear and criticise the pro child protection member of the legislature?

    Just as Jersey Bailiff Philip Bailhache in fact did.

    Imagine that the judge, hand picked and personally sworn into office by a child protection failure conflicted Putin, was, themselves, also directly conflicted in the child protection failures and cover ups.

    Just as Philip Bailhache's agent Bridget Shaw was, given her previous career as a Police legal adviser prosecutor with specific duties in respect of child abuse cases, but who had multi examples of failure on her record to bring abusers to justice, and who was involved in catastrophic child protection failures, such as the 'Family X' case.

    Imagine that that judge, hand picked by a child-abuse concealing Putin, just as Bridget Shaw was hand picked by Jersey Bailiff Philip Bailhache, had had questions concerning her conflicts of interests repeatedly put to her in court, but she failed to disclose?

    Just as Jersey Bailiff Philip Bailhache's appointee Bridget Shaw did.

    And just imagine, if a troll who had used Jersey's courts to oppress the pro child welfare member on behalf of his establishment protectors such as Philip Bailhache Bridget Shaw and Applbey Global, had when doing so sworn no less than three affidavits?

    Just as Telephone Boy did.

    And just imagine if Telephone Boy was, in fact, evidencedly shown to have committed gross and sustained perjury in those affidavits, via his own extensive words recorded during dozens of his abusive, trolling telephone harassments of other people?

    Just as Telephone Boy has in fact done.

    Just imagine, if a similar state of affairs prevailed in Putin's Russia, and the entire 'policing', 'prosecution', and 'judicial' system was bent towards the concealment of such perjury?

    Just as the Jersey system is.

    If such a gangster state of affairs as described above were to have played out in Putin's Russia, the British state would, rightly, be in the vanguard of unrestrained condemnation.

    People like Telephone Boy would be well advised to reflect on whether the protection of low thugs like them is more important than the reputation of the British state?

    Personally, I don't think so.

    And sooner or later a fearful lesson is going to be handed down.

    1. It is my understanding that Stuart Syvret was given fair warning to remove various transcripts off his blog but refused to that so eventually ended up in court.
      If anything he left the Data Protection office only one course of action.

    2. Only person who oppressed Stuart Syvret was himself when he flatly refused to give evidence to the COI.
      I recall at least 5 people on this Blog pleading with him to go down there but he refused.

    3. It should be remembered that the law (ab)used to convict Stuart Syvret in the (not so) secret court case was bent and twisted beyond recognition to that of the law which was passed in the States Assembly. It's what's known as JUDGE MADE LAW.

    4. Blame the courts, blame the law, blame the Jsy Care Inquiry, blame the States, blame the pigs, blame the media, blame the troll, blame the Ballache Bros, blame everybody else but yourself for not delivering on promises to take this oligarchy down Stuart.

    5. If the courts are unlawful then you Appeal.
      If you do not Appeal then you cannot complain afterwards.

    6. Yeah that makes great sense! If the courts are unlawful appeal to the unlawful courts!

    7. Actually, 'taking down an oligarchy' is, by definition, an extremely difficult thing to do. If changing the rotted culture of 'The Jersey Way' was easy, why then it wouldn't be an oligarchy. I see Syvret is still Fighting. I expect, for all kinds of obvious reasons, he will win in the long run. Hell, at least he's making the much needed attempt.

      And yes, when that happens, the powerfully evidenced perjuring Telephone Boy, being a no-account worthless, widely despised sociopath, who is the most 'disposable' of the establishment crooks, will be the first of the sacrificial offerings by that establishment faced with no choice other than to demonstrate themselves serious and objective in applying the rule of law.

      And if their spin doctors have not long ago explained that inevitability to them, they urgently need to contract competent spin doctors.

      Perjury is very, very, serious.

      There can be no hiding place from it.

      It undermines the very function of the proper administration of justice.

      Telephone Boy is, in the fullness of time, going to get 4 years for his evidenced perjury, so brazen, crooked, and solidly evidenced is the case.

      Any jurisdiction which fails to take the most firm and merciless action against perjury is, essentially, saying to the rest of the world, 'we don't have a working judicial system. Instead we're perfectly happy when people lie under oath, commit perjury, in court cases, thereby rendering lies in stead of the truth as the 'culture' in our 'court' system.'

      Telephone Boy's affidavits, contrasted with the non-compatible truth as stated by Telephone Boy himself in all of those, most extensive, graphic telephone recordings of his drunken, abusive, harassing, trolling, intimidation, threats of violence and death, in some instances against a disabled man no less, is as stark and clear an 'open-and-shut-case' of unambiguous perjury as you could ever imagine stumbling upon.

      Of course the Jersey mafia will not WANT to move against Telephone Boy; he is after all their troll. But 'events, dear boy, events, and all that.

      For how much longer can the Jersey system, and its protectors in London, in the world's gaze, persist in failing to prosecute and jail their pro establishment crooks? Stark and evidenced crooks?

      The answer is, 'they already played with fire and have deeply damaged themselves in not bringing their villains to justice; instead abusively and unlawfully oppressing and suppressing political opponents', a la Putin's Russia as I observed above.

      Telephone Boy is a worthless, low grade piece of shit, As 3/4 of Jersey people know.

      He is the most easily 'disposable' of the Jersey establishment villains. From our external perspective, if the Jersey Police have not approached Syvret and others by the end of this week, to take formal statements of criminal complaint against Telephone Boy for perjury, we will see that Jersey remains as corrupt as ever. For the time being.

    8. Actually, 'taking down an oligarchy' is, by definition, an extremely difficult thing to do'

      Then why say it?

    9. 'Why say it'?

      Jeez, you were at the end of the line when IQ was being distributed by Our Good Lord.

      It's said because it is true, It is said because Jersey is possessed by a text book example of an oligarchy. It is said because the public good and the Good Lord's justice require good people to oppose oligarchy. Buddy, you may commit yourself to only things which are easy. Thank God and thank our brave forefathers that they don't hold such sissy attitudes. Men like Churchill, Roosevelt, Martin Luther King recognised and faced up to immensely difficult challenges.

      And I give thanks to God and those men that they did.

    10. "He is the most easily 'disposable' of the Jersey establishment villains. From our external perspective, if the Jersey Police have not approached Syvret and others by the end of this week, to take formal statements of criminal complaint against Telephone Boy for perjury, we will see that Jersey remains as corrupt as ever. For the time being."

      Don't say it, DO IT.

  16. Senator Ozouf has since formally withdrawn a complaint he made about how Mr Richardson handled the matter, as well as other affairs, including the release of the FoI report into his expenses.

    The States passed a law supporting freedom of information FOI. So it was released to the public exactly as it was designed for. We got to know what he spent it on. Why is Parker apologising for Gods sake ? Swimming in money thinking he has hit the mother load, and now ahead of himself. Just get a few more friends to come over on big salaries. Jesus power corrupts very easily on Jersey. Come on Charley stick to your personal remit. Clear the swamp the corruption stinks on Jersey.

  17. Evidently perjury is only a serious offence in Jersey according to who committed it. Deputy Higgins has demonstrated this in his tireless work for a wronged individual regarding a planning case. Our Attorney General and our unfit to hold office Bailiff won't prosecute because it would be exposing the corrupt judicial system. Nothing changes. You only need to go on Tom Gruchy's blog and read the press release and myriad comments regarding Bailhache's outrageous behaviour in trying to prevent the Pitmans bankruptcy being ended. Putin's Russia has nothing on the Jersey Way.

    1. Stuart Syvret was charged with evidence solely gathered from his blog so how can anybody be done for perjury?
      It is my understanding the only people who gave evidence were the Lawyers anyway.

    2. These the same trials Stuart refused to turn up to and was then jailed for Contempt?

    3. My understanding of that case is that the four proxies, recruited by the then Data Protection Commissioner (who herself committed startling perjury in the fist suppressive action against Syvret) who were supported by the unlimited funds of the also fatally conflicted Applbey Global (Blanche Pierre / Maguires cover up) did give evidence.

      In what was Britain's first ever secret trial (it predated the England terrorism case) the four proxies put forward by your mafia each adduced and swore affidavits.

      Affidavits are evidence.

      Indeed, extremely significant evidence.

      If falsehoods are written in a affidavit, courts do regard that as more serious perjury than perjury said on the witness stand. In the latter case, some 'heat-of-the-moment' factor may apply. Which does not make that perjury acceptable of course. But when a witness or claimant or defendant has coldy and calmly written at their leisure things in an affidavit which are false, that person is committing perjury at the most serious end of the scale.

      If the consequences of that perjury were serious and dramatic, for example causing the imprisonment of a person because of the perjured affidavits, the court will have no choice other than to impose a very punitive and exemplary custodial sentence on the witness who signed the perjured affidavits.

      No judicial system can have credibility and competence if it tolerates perjury.

  18. Pulling the plug.

    No more comments will be published concerning the corrupt (not so) secret court case. Please stick to the topic (NOTA on Ballot papers)

    On that note I have received replies from 14 of the candidates and am awaiting replies from three of them.

    1. We look forward to you blog on the 14 +? replies from the candidates on NOTA, but until then is there much more to say on NOTA without straying into fresh territory?

      NOTCO ..... None Of The Crown Officers ? These people were imposed on us without us having any say or the opportunity to vote for them (or indeed against them!). NOTA is of comparatively less importance.

      "Pillars of the community" like William Bailhache have been promoted to "First Citizen" in spite of the deeply disturbing baggage they bring with them:

      This may have been said 100 times but such structural flaws in the pillars of the island must be repeated until they are fixed.

      We have very limited morally defensible and non-violent options but silence on these issues amounts to tacit acceptance.

      The tacit acceptance of fake democracy

      The tacit acceptance of state sponsored child abuse

      The road is long and hard and on any journey the scenery only changes every few miles or more.

  19. What stunts will the JEPaedo pull for this years election ?

  20. I would like to write NONE OF THESE across the names of many candidates. Could that be proposed?

    On the election itself Deputy Mike Higgins was very, very good at the No 3 hustings two days ago.

    Jacki Carrel quite good too.

    Reform candidates not that impressive.

    But better than the former police woam and Guy de Faye!

    What a brave and hard-working politician Deputy Higgins is.


  21. Deputy Graham Truscot features in a blog at Tonysmusings.

    Did you know that in a recently published table by the JEP there were five states members who did not forward a proposition and the same five did not ask one question in all the years they sat in the states. Deputy Truscot being one of them.

    Is it not strange then that he thinks that he is such a good speaker that he is happy not to use a microphone so those who may have faulty hearing, like myself, stand more chance of hearing his election speel. Oh when questioned he does not care that some cannot hear his words.

    The point beaing no interaction in the states, but plenty now to try and get re-elected, tosser.

  22. Reading about the new European General Data Protection Regulation coming in next month.
    You cannot even mention somebody without permission.
    RIP Social Media.

    1. Freedom of Speech has been whittled away from Social Media for years and its coming to a head.
      Mind you in a tiny Island like Jersey maybe it is time people spoke to each other in person.
      I've always been amazed at how polite some bloggers are in person yet become the devil incarnate behind a Laptop. Never been necessary.

    2. I thought the blogs over the past 2 years had toned right down.
      Political targets will always be fair game but snide posts against non-political individuals have disappeared. The Care Inquiry has finished and once the 16th May has passed I predict a bit of a ghost town. But hey it will be Summer and we can enjoy the weather.

    3. I certainly hope that the vitriolic personal attacks on people in the public eye by anonymous, cowardly individuals will not be published. Fine if you passionately disagree but, hey, people who are anonymously vitriolic need help and not airtime.

    4. When good people feel protected by the proper rule of law in Jersey they will be able to post under their real identities without the fear of their families being subject to death threats and malicious prosecutions. Overseas readers are taken aback by the proportion of "Anonymous" comments on Jersey blogs and there is good reason for this as those responsible for past failures have been promoted to *literally* run the legal system as chief judge etc, rather than being put out to grass -or in fact prosecuted themselves.

      Do you really see no problem here "Phil"?

      2% to 10% of the population score high on "the dark triad" and delight in anonymously posting "vitriolic" comments.
      This is one of the many forms of trolling. Other forms include attempts to shut down or guide discussion forums.

      Trolls rarely centre their comments around basic democratic principles, the rule of law and the protection of children.

      Proportionality is important in life and our interactions.

      -On the one hand we have a situation where over several generations, many hundreds of the most vulnerable have been subject to neglect, abuse and battery and the most bestial physical and sexual mistreatment

      -On the other hand we have "people in [or out] the public eye" who are/were ultimately responsible for the protection of these children, or who are responsible for the cover up (past or present), or are responsible or cooperative in maintain the failures of democracy and law that contributed to the abuse in the first place.

      Much was made by the JEPeado et al, about the "Adult Abuse" and "bullying" perpetrated by Ex Health Minister Syvret of the highly paid staff and politicians of these £23,000,000 (x10) failures.
      That is, as they say is "history" -the history of the present .....not just of the past.

      Any sense of priority and proportionality would recognise the justification (need even) for harsh words

      Yes Phil, we do "need help" ......but if your priority is the protection of adults, I doubt that we will ever get any from you.

      I doubt that you can even quote one comment off the child protection blogs where a harsh comment on "people in [or out] the public eye" cannot be justified on account of what they *have* or *have not* done - given the gravity of the past and the present.

      The truly "cowardly and vitriolic personal attacks" that are given airtime in Jersey go overwhelmingly the other way -don't they Phil?

  23. With the breaking news about the real possibility of the UK imposing fully transparant company registers on Crown Dependency tax havens it looks like your chum ex-Deputy Trevor Pitman's predictions in a comment about post-Brexit some two years ago will be on the money.

    Doesn't do us much good now but probably does show the truth behind the rats a-scurrying from the sinking good ship HMS Jersey. Never mind Gorst says he will "resist" so that is okay then!

    1. The UK can't impose these rules on us and as the UK gets so much business out of Jersey's Finance Industry it would only be an own goal.
      The story is a storm in a teacup.

    2. @15:49
      This is why the state sponsored child abuse and it's decades of cover up are so perilous for the survival of the finance industry and hence the welfare of all islanders.

      This must be amongst the most vile corruption imaginable and it puts both a legal an moral duty on the UK to ensure good governance and the proper rule of law on the island.

      That they have not done it yet is not down to the loss of income to the City of London (he "Jersey or Jail" system) - that could continue unaffected.
      It is down to the massive "dirt book" that Jersey must have amassed on the financial dealings of the pillars of society and the polity of the UK. In addition there would likely be a number of sex tourists and yachtsman who have forever compromised themselves by partaking of what was made available in Jersey's orphanages.

      The UK has its own mopping up to do to contain it's own child abuse and dirt book system, and being a larger place it is bigger. Jersey is in a different league because proportionally it has a child abuse problem of an entire UK county packed into the equivalent of a small town.

      Interesting times.
      Continued cover up is not the way forward because the cancer just re-establishes itself.

  24. Hi VFC

    I appreciate you want to keep this post on topic, but as Jersey's foremost blog who still allows anon comments, I think it important to readers of the Jersey blogosphere over the last 10 years that the following two articles are highlighted.

    They concern the recent conduct of one Mr Andrew Marolia[2017]TRE167.aspx

    Shocking behaviour

    1. anon@23:19

      Why would it be important to be able to post anonymously on such a trivial subject?

      It's not as if Stuart Syvret has ever been right about anything, ever!
      He is just a cowardly individual who posts vitriolic personal attacks on people in the public eye.

      This is just Tribunal Tittle Tattle about an owner of a chain of beauty salons in Jersey who avails himself of his female employees to maintain a relaxed family atmosphere.

      Those who resist this relaxed family atmosphere are obviously going to suffer reprisals. Do employers have no rights over their staff on this island!

      Being a former nurse he was even able to treat another subordinate for her hickups by using a little known breast manipulation treatment. It is just as well that they were not more severe hickups or something more life threatening or matters might have had to be brought to a swift conclusion
      If only all employers would push it that extra mile for their staff and customers.

      Only the blogs could suggest that this was sexual opportunism or sexual assault or indicative of any concerns whatsoever.

      Instead of making snide and irrelevant comments we should celebrate that Jersey is such a safe place and also the land of opportunity where even a lowly healthcare worker can, within a few short years, get to own a chain of beauty salons in Jersey, including Fabriah Hair & Beauty in De Gruchy’s Department Store, no less.

      What is wrong with you people? Success awaits those who know how to play their cards right.
      This inspiring rags to riches reminds me of Mr Waverley rose to be in political charge of the Police force during those dark years.

      I urge VFC not to give airtime to people who make cowardly comments by not posting under their real name like me.

    2. Hillary from St Brelade1 May 2018 at 10:41

      Hillary from St.Bralade

      I agree with Phil
      At last Jersey bloggers are getting the message and highlighting the real scandals

      It is a travesty that this employer has been victimised by a mere employment tribunal.

      A real court with properly chosen Jurats sitting on the case would never have found this employer guilty. A Jersey court would have ruined the complaiinat and left her bankrupt or deported.

      If only I were not prevented by law and data protection from detailing how this man has been victimised and bullied out of his job

      We must all thank Mr Waverley for helping this moor man back onto his feet after the relentless cowardly attacks by bloggers and the bullying by that Health Minister.

      We must stamp out adult abuse.

    3. The last comment from someone who calls himself Phil is not from me.

  25. This case might be of interest to well informed readers

    "an insincere witness"
    How very embarrassing for the authorities......

    1. The Tribunal found against Mr M, concluding that he was an “insincere” witness, and believed a “happy and relaxed atmosphere meant that he could touch and foist himself upon his employees at will.”

      I don't expect the JEPeado will be reporting on that judgement.

    2. I am strenuously resisting commenting on this. I don't want to get Voice into trouble.

      I have, however, left a comment on the Bailiwick Express article which I think they would be wise not to publish.

    3. Hi Polo

      Your comment was there for a while and clearly the moderator didn't think about it to much when they first allowed it. Would loved to have been a fly on the wall though when they twigged what you were hinting at ;-)


    4. Oh must have been a refresh issue on my browser its back!


  26. James Jon Le Galais1 May 2018 at 11:57

    This really takes the biscuit.

  27. Just watched St Peters Deputy hustings online.

    "Neither of the above"

    1. Went to our St Clement Deputy Hustings. None of the above please if it Susie Pinel. Horrible and uncaring.

  28. Does anyone know which bookies you can find the odds on election candidates? Fancy a small flutter on the Senators' race.

  29. May I just say that I have only just discovered that you are blogging again. I thought you had stopped for good so welcome back. A true beacon of proper, honest journalism in an ocean of fake news dross.

    1. And so say all of us.

    2. Definitely. The best Channel Islands blog ever.

  30. This blog is the social media equivilent of the Guardian amidst a swamp of Suns, Daily Mails and JEPs.

    1. There have been some truly great Jersey political blogs. Stuart's. Trevor's Rico's, Bob Hill's, Tom Gruchy all the way back to old Ted Vibert who started it all so many years ago. But this one is the King of Kings.

      May your fingers never cramp from typing, Sir. May you never say never again even should you temporarily retire again. And, Sir, may your lavatory never run out of JEPs upon which to wipe your noble bottom!

      You are a friend of the people. Dilly! Dilly!

  31. What's happened to the None of the Above follow up Post?

    1. I guess no one is saying anything about it? Would help if we could read even some snippets of what the candidates think. I would like to know who hasn't replied or expressed a view. Not to slag them off. Just to see who thinks engaging with the public is worthy of their time. Could you do that Voice?

    2. I know the rquest said up to 800 words but if someone wanted to just say no, it is not a good idear that would take about two minutes of their time. My point is there is no excuse not to respond. All of the candidates are capable of writing. Hopefully.

    3. I would not bank on all of them even being able to think for themselves. In this they would be no different from many States members over the last 70 years and nearly all of them from this departing States.

  32. I do not know about bookies taking bets on our election. But if they are can anyone tell me which one (I don't want to risk the wife hearing that I have been trawling around a dozen odd bookies!) because I would love to stick a fiver on Stevie Ocean coming 8th as a simple protest vote. Besides, the speeches would make Pryke, Noel and Routier look electrifying! Come on, Stevie! And don't forget to wear that body armour!

  33. Replies
    1. I hyperlinked this because 70 people caught downloading abuse images is seriously ****ing high.
      In an Island the size of Jersey, if these are the people caught, how many haven't?
      The sentences must be shit for so many to do it.
      Then 10 online groomers caught, 6 of which have been caught by paedo hunters.
      That's gonna escalate this year and beyond.

  34. Can't believe that the Pitmans have disappeared off the face of the earth. They have recently been cleared of bankruptcy yet only Mike Dunn has had the decency to let us know. Trevor has not been one to let them get to him. Makes you wonder why he is now keeping so quiet.

    1. Waste of time the Pitmans coming back into the limelight.
      The press will tear them to pieces all over again.
      They have made sensational claims against the Justice system that have gone nowhere and even their Leftie colleagues distanced themselves from their court battles in the end.
      Politics has moved on, and their era with Syvret's has well gone.

    2. You are so bitter Jon. Surely you would want the Pitmans back as it would give you someone else to stalk other than Mezec and Higgins? What gives you away is your attempt to transform proven fact backed up by sworn police testimony in to 'sensational claims'. As for the press 'tearing them apart' this never happened did it. The Pitmans were two of the most high-profile politicians in Jersey's history, particularly Mr Pitman. Perhaps you would prefer that Graham somebody last heard of in 2014, done nothing but now standing against the excellent Deputy Tadier? What must irk you most I would imagine is that you know very well were either of your obsessions to rock up and stand for election again they would get re-elected at the drop of a hat. The fact that the Pitmans as with so many other talented progressives were never given ministerial posts handed out like lolly pops to idiots like Pryke, Luce, Noel, Bryans and Moore explains why our fair island is in a mess. Time to move on and get a life old son.

    3. People who post at 2.17 am like the one above surely need to get a life. No political debate is THAT interesting!

  35. Having a couple of hours to kill, I read through the big red election book / hand out issued by the states. To be honest did not read about every candidate like Pinel and Truscott their dismal lack of holding ministers to account and brown nose voting history told me not to waste my time of course there are others in the same mould as these two.

    There are some interesting new candidates like the self proclaimed gay media study Reform candidate whom was ( for me ) as exciting as a wet dish cloth or the second generation Portuguese female maths teacher who would certaily get a vote if I was able, coming across as bright and capable.
    I chose to read about the new blood that Jersey so badly needs. For me the new chief minister that stands head and shoulders above the rest should be Higgins, with Le Fondre as treasury Minister. Those two in charge would enable the qualities of morality and accountability to be returned to Government at the highest level.

    Those wanting more information on candidates can find it here complete with voting records.

  36. Why do people want to keep on resurrecting old States Members?
    I never agreed in career States Members, you get in, have a go, and if you cannot do anything you step aside and allow somebody else to kick the ball.
    Jersey changes every decade because its population keeps on expanding and those who have failed, and that means all of them including Backbenches should know when it is time to admit failure and do something else.

    1. If we could resurrect the sadly long deceased Norman Le Brocq and JJ Le Marquand that would be a good start. Persuade a few of the living ones back to join them and Jersey would be on the right path to a brighter future.

      When I say right path I obviously mean a left path. The UK will at last have a proper leftist government following the next election. Jersey could then work with them for a fairer, oligarch free future.

    2. Like how many of the useless establishment plonkers who have been given positions of power while much more academically qualified progressives are ignored ahe ever stepped aside after having achieved nothing. You are doing nonsense I am afraid.

  37. Thanks for that gesture I'm worth more than a fiver though and no body armour Two armed units from MI5/6 shadowing me everywhere Stevie Ocean

    1. Only two, Stevie? I think you are taking a big risk!