Sunday, 6 May 2018

Some of the Above. (NOTA 2)






In continuance of the previous PREVIOUS POSTING where an e-mail was sent to all candidates standing for Senator in the Jersey 2018 election. The e-mail asked the question(s) 

"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?"

Sixteen out of the seventeen candidates have now responded and their answers/e-mails (or parts of) are published below.

Firstly I would like to thank the candidates (or those that did) for taking time out of their busy schedules and answering the question(s). Readers (or I) might not agree with some of them but at least they are willing to engage and answer the question(s). 

Hopefully readers will find the answers useful when deciding who to vote for (or not) at the election.

The e-mails/replies are published, from top to bottom, in the order they were received. The first reply being at the top, and last, at the bottom.

Candidate Frank Luce
"Thank you for your email
The reason people do not vote is apathy they see the process will change nothing so why bother?
That was my opinion until the horrors perpetuated by this government have woken me up to try and influence change for a listening inclusive government
Actions speak louder than words if you don't vote there is no need to confirm it in writing

I think it is unnecessary and would not vote for its introduction !
Kind regards
Frank."

Candidate Stevie Ocean

"Hi There
Very Interesting and those who can't be bothered the first to moan !What about in my case i have already achieved reeducating google by have the letters UK from all five of our Islands why because we are nit part of the UK fact that is also the objective with LinkedIn,Twitter,You Tube ,I already have my American Twitter followers starting a petition to make those mentioned recognise we & our other Islands are not part of the UK I was horrified to learn even royal.mail.need re-educating as they also believe the same this can be confirmed on the drop.down menu my address is a private house not here,I'm a man of action not promises or pledges read my manifesto i mean the expanded version I sent it to all media include your good selves and back in 2016 here was confusion of my name on the ballot paper it cost me votes through spoilt papers my fan club were threaten if they voted for me 1000 then so i would have had 1140 minimum finished in 4th place and would have done deal with Simon Cowell &Co so.when i decided to stand i made sure this wasn't going to happen again so a gov dept represented me and I'm not Peter Mac and with my Equity Card as back up proof and i have personal liability insurance of £10 million pounds yes and I made history the 1st person outside the States Assembly to change the law that is history.


Okay this is not Brewster's Millions when he has to spend $30m in 30 day to get his real inheritance of $300m great film how never you could do that copyright infringement and you would be sued a fact so i suggest not even joking tongue in cheek forget it as its not for that purpose as explain abd if you think I don't know what I'm talking about wrong i have be requested to stand on the executive council of equity for the forth time so.my advice drop that angle now its in your best interests and you haven't got millions plus costs doing you a favor

Kind Regards"

Candidate Moz Scott

"Hi Nick

1) I would not support a None of the Above Box on the Ballot Paper

2) Such a box gives a voter an opportunity to vent frustration at 

• the quality of the candidates or
• the political system 

but it would not explain which.

Nor would it provide full information as the apathy that you have identified amongst Jersey’s voters already exists. Many people who do not vote would not bother to tick a ballot paper saying they do not want to vote.

You also do not suggest what is to be done with the additional information that your proposal would provide. It does not solve the problem that already exists.

It is best to focus on the political change needed to make voters feel better represented and to secure a better quality of candidate. The necessary measures to reform the States Assembly and the Council of Ministers are set out in my online manifesto (to be found at http://votemoz.je/). I would add to these a deposit system and a change to the current pay structure for States Members.

3. No, for the reason explained above. I would serve the Island better by focusing on the reforms described in the preceding paragraph.

A box of the nature that you describe could be useful as a way of testing the effectiveness of electoral reforms but would not achieve much in preceding them. 

Kind Regards"

Candidate Gordon-George-Troy

"Thank you for your email. In reply to your question:

1) I would not support a "none of the above box" on the ballot paper
2) We already have a "none of the above" opportunity, those people not voting meet this criteria. A "none of the above" box could cause confusion where a voter would put their cross voting for candidates they like and put a cross in the "none of the above" box, meaning they dont want to vote for the other candidates, this would render the ballot paper invalid.
3) No, I would not bring such a proposition to the States


Gordon George Troy
Candidate for Senator"

Candidate Phil Maguire

"Until recently, I wished there was a "None of the above" on every election form. Now I've modified my position. Instead, I think a candidate should only be allowed into government if they get a minimum percentage (say 10%) of the electorate to vote for them. This is not the number of people who voted but the number of people allowed to vote. So every person who doesn't vote becomes a vote of no confidence and candidates could not get in unopposed - their supporters would have to get off their arses and vote.

Yes, I would love to champion this or a better solution to the shambles we have now

Regards"

Candidate Gerard Baudains

Hello Neil,

No, because it would serve no purpose. If you don’t want ‘any of the above’ then don’t put a cross by their name. Or you could write in ‘none of the above’ yourself, as the ballot paper would not be electing anyone anyway.
A more important point, one which perhaps escapes some, is that you don’t have to select 8 (in the senatorials) – just one if that’s the only candidate you want.

“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”.

That’s got considerably worse since the introduction of ministerial government. My manifesto hopefully explains the situation – ministers, not the States, are now our government and they are led by groups such as the Chamber of Commerce, instead of listening to the public.
To exacerbate the problem, the public realise that whoever they elect, nothing will change. They are right, because unless the candidate they elect becomes a minister, he / she is relegated to the back row where all election pledges, fresh ideas and bringing ‘change’ count for nothing.
We have a dictatorship, and in this election I’m trying to get the message across that unless we elect candidates committed to changing the system, nothing will change and we’ll all be having exactly the same conversation in four years time.

best regards,

Candidate Sarah Ferguson

"Neil

If people are not prepared to vote then they should not complain. Alternatively they should stand for election. People died to get me my vote so I am going to use it.

This year is the first one since I came to Jersey in 1968 when we have a chance to oust the establishment party. So many of them have decided not to stand that we have a chance to get a government which has a change agenda and is prepared to move on it. What is more we have a number of candidates who are not only qualified but also competent to undertake government.

With great respect, I am expected to make decisions and not to duck them – if you don’t vote then you are ducking your responsibility.

Regards"

Candidate Sam Mezec (Reform Jersey)

"1) Definitely not.

2) Voting "None of the Above" is an act of political surrender which does absolutely nothing to make Jersey a better place. If some people are aggrieved that they can't find any candidates they like, and can't even find the "least worst" candidate to support as a compromise, then they should try to do something positive about it, instead of insisting that they have the right to do what is the equivalent of throwing their toys out of the pram at the ballot box.

3) No, and we would vote against one if another member brought one."

Candidate Tracey Vallois


"Good morning Neil,

Thank you for your email.

It is disappointing that there are many that choose not to use their vote but, as you say, this is varying reasons and I have heard a few myself whilst out and about meeting people.

My answers to your specific questions are as follows
1) yes
2) not applicable
3) I would and have placed this on a to do list alongside a couple of issues that islanders have asked me address so far, should I be elected.
Kind regards"


Candidate Ian Gorst

"Dear Neil,

Thank you for your email.

I don’t agree with a law amendment.

I think we face a deeper problem which is not only about quality of candidates, but also about our system, about the number of States Members, about salary levels. These are the issues that the next States needs to make progress on.

Simply putting the option of non of the above will not solve voter turn out issues.

Best regards,"

Candidate Simon Bree

"Dear Mr McMurray,

Many thanks for your email of 21st April 2018, and my apologies about the slight delay in replying.

To answer the questions you posed:

1. I would not support a “None of the Above” box on the Ballot Paper.

2. Having such a box on the Ballot Paper would not, I believe, have any noticeable impact on the high levels of voter abstention that Jersey currently suffers from. People do not vote for a whole range of reasons, as you clearly indicate, but perhaps the two biggest reasons are that they “are happy with their lot”, and that there is no-one on the ballot paper that they would actually vote for. Those who are happy with their lot are unlikely to turn out to vote unless something radical happens on the political scene to make them change their minds. As to the people who do not feel there is anyone they would vote for, so why bother voting at all, this raises the question of the calibre and nature of candidates. To put yourself forward as a candidate is a very serious decision, knowing full well that you will more than likely come under extreme scrutiny – not only for your political views, but also as an individual. I am sure that for some this creates a major barrier to standing for election. But only by having a much more diverse and varied number of people standing, will, I believe, we ever manage to get over voter apathy. I stood for election as a Deputy because I wanted to make a difference to people’s lives, and improve everyone’s quality of life. I did not agree with the way that this Island was being run, so decided to put myself forward. This may sound to some as completely naïve, but it is true. And I would encourage anyone who feels the same, or who is angered by what they see happening around them, to do the same. Give people someone to vote for, if that is what you truly believe is the root cause of voter apathy. Stand up and be counted for what you truly believe in, but be prepared for close scrutiny, and at times, ridicule. But to have a “None of the Above” box on the Ballot Paper is making a mockery of those individuals who are prepared to stand for election, who are prepared to stand up for what they believe in. You may not like or agree with their political views, and you are perfectly at liberty to disagree with them using any form of communication you like, but at least they have put themselves forward for election. We need to find ways to encourage the electorate to turn out on polling day to make a “positive” vote, as opposed to a “negative” vote. And I seriously do not believe that having such a box on the Ballot Paper will encourage voters to turn out in any substainally greater numbers.

3. As you will have probably ascertained by now, should such a proposition be brought to the States Assembly, I would vote against it.

Regards"

Candidate Steve Pallett

"Hi Neil 

My apologies for the delay in coming back to you, as you'll appreciate we are all very busy at the moment! 

In answer to your questions:

1. I would not support a ‘NOTA’ on the ballot paper until the public are fully consulted on their views and further research is undertaken.

2. Casting a vote for NOTA is seen as a way of protesting against the poor quality of candidates in any election. Although a strong vote on NOTA may well be a ‘slap in the face' for those putting their names forward and potentially a moral victory for disaffected voters, I do not believe that NOTA will be a driving force for change in throwing up better candidates.

I believe that a deposit system (small amount) is far more likely to deter people from standing if it is linked to having to obtain a percentage of the vote or you lose your deposit.

To attract better candidates the role of a States Member must be seen as more attractive than it currently is and may require some roles to have a better remuneration package.

NOTA is, I believe, more likely to deter better candidates than attract them (considering that some States Members have already retired due to the personal abuse aimed at both themselves and their families). I think it likely that abuse of all kinds, the lack of support and the current remuneration is either stopping or preventing better candidates from standing.

NOTA will only add to the negativity around elections when we need to be far more positive and encourage more civic participation in our elections.

3. No I would not bring a proposition as I think this is a matter for the Priveleges and Procedure to consider and then if necessary take to the States.

Kind Regards" 

Candidate Gino Risoli

"hi Neal.
I can understand your frustration but as you know I am determined to make our finances accountable online. I believe this would entirely change Jersey politics. Regards" 


Candidate Lyndon Farnham

"Dear Mr McMurray,

In response to your questions.

1. I would support, in principle, a proposal to add a ‘none of the above’ option to the Ballot Paper unless presented with an overwhelming reason not to (I can’t think of one at present).

2. I did bring an amendment to add a ‘none of the above’ option to the referendum questions on Electoral Reform (Option A, B or C) but it was rejected by the Assembly. I am not totally clear on the advantages or disadvantages of adding it to the Ballot Paper other than to suggest that it could provide a clearer picture on voter apathy. For example, it would no longer be an excuse not to vote on the grounds that you did not support any of the declared candidates.

3. I think a proposition of this nature should be presented to the Assembly by the Privileges and Procedures Committee to stand the best chance of being accepted.

Apologies again for the delay in reply.

With kind regards,"

Candidate John Le Fondre

"Dear Neil

Apologies for delay in responding.

In general terms the comment you make is valid, ie that there are electors who do attend to exercise their vote, but do strike a line through the entire ballot slip, so I take the point, and I also note that this is raised in a number of jurisdictions across the globe. 

The problem is how you could implement this in practice, and what would be the consequences. Equally, should you have 'none of the above' and 'none of the rest' [voters sometimes find they can only find 1 or 2 candidates from the number that they are entitled to vote for].

So before I made any commitment to changing the voting slip I would want to know any potential consequences ; and whether this was actually practical.

However I do note that there are apparently a number of countries that permit this option, including some parts of Canada (and 1 State in the USA) , and also France (although I gather that this is not a 'formal' process whereby a 'NOTA' vote would be counted separately). 

In short, not against the suggestion ; would want to understand the practicalities.

I would also like the States to reconsider the position on candidates paying some form of deposit.

Hope that helps"

Candidate Kristina Moore

"Thank you for your question and please excuse any delay, you may appreciate that we have many people sending us questions and we try our best to respond as we can.

Essentially my answer would be yes, but this is not going to be high on my list of things to achieve. At the relevant moment, ie when we come to discuss reform of the assembly and electoral process I would be happy to ensure that it is included."(END)

Candidate Ant Lewis

After two weeks, two e-mails, and a tweet, Candidate Ant Lewis has not yet answered the questions. After I sent all candidates a reminder e-mail Mr. Lewis did respond (11 days ago) by saying:

"Hi,

Later.
Thank you.
Best wishes,

Ant."(END)

Should Mr. Lewis answer the question(s) then they will be considered for publication in the comment section of this Blog Posting.

58 comments:

  1. I know little about him but I think the most interesting reply was from Phil Maguire:
    ".. Instead, I think a candidate should only be allowed into government if they get a minimum percentage (say 10%) of the electorate to vote for them. This is not the number of people who voted but the number of people allowed to vote. So every person who doesn't vote becomes a vote of no confidence and candidates could not get in unopposed.."

    Prevents candidates getting in unelected but does not really prevent candidates getting in "unopposed".

    needs more thought. unelected constables would have their parish position but would loose their seat in the states.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If you can't even bother to reply to a polite and simple question from the island's leading blog then, in my opinion, this doesn't say a lot about how Mr Lewis would represent me if I entrusted him with one of my votes.

    For record I believe that a disability should not be allowed to prevent a person offering him or her self for election. Much respect is due. However, political correctness must also not be allowed to stop such a failure to respond being criticised.

    All candidates must be able to represent us and be able to respond to us. Otherwise what is the point?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just got back to Jersey yesterday after nearly five months away. Trying to catch up and make sense of what is going on. Why so many politicians ducking out? Strange. Got to be a bit worrying. On this subject I would not support a none of the above option. I think voting should be compulsory. On a lighter note. I quickly sped through the photos and just for a split second I was encouraged. I saw a bald head and thought Trevor Pitman must be standing! Then with crushing disappointment and feeling a bit silly I realised the bald head was not Pitman but Steve Pallett. Still at lease the weather is looking up!

    ReplyDelete
  4. At best voting for candidates allows for a change of faces on the ship of State, It cannot and will not change the ship itself. The corporate SOJ with real power held by unelected vested interests is the problem. A none of the above option would encourage people, like me, who see where the problem lies, to come out and vote. At 30% turnout the SOJ has no real legitimacy to govern the people of this Island. Explained properly to Islanders what a NOTA vote really means, I think it would win by a landslide and we could begin to build a society that values people above corporate interests.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Makes you wonder what Andrew Green and Andrew Lewis would of said regarding NOTA, if they had dared to stand this time. Please note: Not tarring them with the same brush.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Neil, I'm still amazed and blown away that considering the ability we have to do our own research that the majority of the people have not yet grasped that (States of Jersey) is a corporation and it is a franchise of The Crown which is of Vatican ownership. Now with that in mind is it no surprise that we had a Committee of Enquiry rather than Trials by Jury for all those accused knowing how deeply involved in child sex crime the Vatican is!
    philip skinner

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Phil,
      I'm with you until the bit about the crown being in "Vatican ownership"

      What evidence do you have of that claim?

      Isn't it far more likely that the crown is in a symbiotic dependence with the city of London and is much further removed from The Vatican?

      It is difficult to know to what extent high level international paedophile rings are operating and to what extent they have compromised national power centres. The child abuse failings of The Vatican, The UK, Jersey etc. are well documented but in all cases vehemently denied initially -followed by hand wringing, minimisation, obfuscation, delay and ultimately failure

      It is like a protocol is being played out again and again but the abuse and protection of the main players continues.

      Is it just chance that it plays out the same?

      Jersey is the Rosetta Stone by which these failings can be understood.

      Delete
    2. I've done my homework on the subject of Caananite Ritual Sacrifice
      , I do not have to justify myself to someone who hides their name. I've shown you the place to research now do the work and educate yourself. The triple tiara of the pope and who crowns the queen is a clue : )

      Delete
    3. Hi again Phil,
      You don't have to justify yourself to me or anyone else -whether we hide our names or not. Why would the identity of the reader be of any relevance in this case?

      The invitation to provide support for your claim still stands.

      Cryptic nonsense and smileys are a waste of everybody's time unless there is an overriding necessity for it. (e.g. Jersey Data Protection Law)

      If you have credible information please provide it.

      Delete
    4. The point is for you to find your own truth on the subject. How it came to me will be different for you due to what interests you. The truth is always the same, a lie changes to suit the environment. Again I say do the home work I've already pointed you in the right direction : )
      P.S. Knowing who I'm in communication with is polite and respectful that is the relevance

      Delete
  7. Ant Lewis has now replied"

    "I do not support ‘None of the Above’. It does not answer why people don’t vote. I believe in compulsory voting, like Australia.
    We are part of the Jersey community, whether we like it or not. We all interact with one another, we access services provided by the state, we ask the state for protection, we are obligated by law to fund it.
    Therefore we have the civic duty to select our representatives. It is democracy. It would strengthen democracy in our small island."

    ReplyDelete
  8. It took him how long to come up with that dross?

    "It does not answer why people don’t vote"
    -damn right but "compulsory voting" he advocates doesn't either -it masks the symptom with expensive and draconian legislation while leaving the causal disenfranchisement untreated.
    Controlling and not very smart!

    "we ask the state for protection"
    -damn right ...but we and generations of children have not got it! -What is Anthony going to do about that -In fact what DID Anthony do about that during his years at the JEPaedo (reporter, news editor, assistant editor), Channel 103 (news editor)????

    This lack of democracy and rule of law due to the fatally conflicted and unelected Crown Officers is one of the major reasons why people don't vote and why we and generations of children have not got protection from the state.

    "Therefore we have the civic duty to select our representatives. It is democracy."
    -Arse about face again. It is primarily our representatives who have a civic duty and duty to us.
    A minority of us vote, so no Anthony, it is NOT a democracy, it is run by the Crown Officers and their protected spivs.


    Claims to be a different candidate but looks like the same-old riding a near irrelevant hobby horse.

    ReplyDelete
  9. New party in St Helier no 1 single poster on Mont Millais for Wickenden, Labey & Martin wonder what their joint manifesto is?
    Candidates being picky but a demand (vote for) for me to vote for you rather than a polite request of " Please vote"
    makes a difference to me anyhow!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just how far as Deputy Judy Martin fallen? A one time top notch, stand up to be counted Progressive. Now here she is sharing a please re-elect me with the neo-Conservative, done nothing nit-wit Scott 'Only 9 nominators but the Royal Court looked the other way' Wickenden.

      Don't think much of any of the Reform candiadtes or Nick Le Cornu but I really hope someone stps Martin and her two fellow numpties getting in. Wake up Sheeple I say! Wickenden has done absolutely NOTHING.

      Delete
    2. Jerry Gosselin7 May 2018 at 18:08

      Yes, I've attended both St Hel No. 1 hustings and can confirm that the 3 current Deputies are most definitely playing up their 'team' credentials at every opportunity although I wouldn't go as far as calling them a 'party' - at least not a proper one that has clearly stated policies which all members have to follow.

      In his first election speech (see link below), Nick Le Cornu highlighted how 2 members of that 'team' (Wickenden and Labey) had voted in October 2015 to phase out the additional single parent component of Income Support (which is about to be reinstated again from next month). Deputy Wickenden also voted with Deputy Pinel in January 2015 to support her doubling of the qualifying period (to 52 weeks) before employees can generally claim unfair dismissal (with Deputy Labey en defaut for the whole of that day's States meeting). These are just 2 examples where their decision to run as a team may backfire on them:

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jxYqx7qL8Lg

      Delete
  10. Regarding the comment above.

    I was of the same view that most people I speak to seem to hold. This being that the soon to depart States Assembly was the worst in modern history. Unfortunately the more hustings I visit or watch via the web I am quickly getting jumpy that what we will elect in little over a week might prove even worse.

    One or two people on here moan about others harking back to politicians who are now either dead, ill, elderly or been forced out of the States and probably illegally barred from standing. When I see the low quality and smug behaviour of some of those putting themselves forward in this election I have to say I fully understand the yearning for the recent past.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Candidate Ant Lewis' final belated reply shows just how much clout this blog still has. Lewis obviously did not want to bother to answer you but has been forced to. Won't get my vote.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Something of a logical fallacy turning up in a couple of the replies. Simultaneously make voting compulsory, but don't support NOTA/RON. So you must vote for an unsuitable candidate. How very covenient...

    S.O.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or write none of the anchors on the ballot slip and so spoil it.

      Delete
  13. Hi VFC.

    Having voted in the 2008 -2011-2014 elections have have decided not to vote in the 2018. Oh, and a couple of by-elections along the way.

    I just can't bring myself to vote. I have had enough. I have had enough of the political set up in Jersey. The pointless and useless hustings - the manifestos that mean nothing to the majority of candidates that have written them or simply have had them written for them.. Why should I just go and vote because thats what I meant to do. If I had a "non of the above" on the ballot paper I would probably cast my vote. 11 Constables returned without - the most powerful party in the states. This can't be allowed to carry on. The intake of 2014 was a shambles and we have to see what happens this time but the Senatorial Election must be one of the poorest on record.

    I don't agree with a protest vote as it's not registered as a protest vote.

    The turn out is going to be the biggest story at this election. 64,000 registered voters and I believe about 26,000 voted in 2014. Gorst topped the poll with 14,000 votes one of the lowest if not the lowest poll topper for 30yrs. He achieved about 9.8% of the vote.

    Also the Media should be making it quite clear that YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE ALL 8 VOTES.

    My vote means something to me and no one should just think they can have it because voting is the right thing to do.

    Some of the Senatorial Candidates might be returned with as little as 7,000 votes.

    Rico

    ReplyDelete
  14. The vast majority in Jersey don't vote. Now is the time to find out why.

    Earn the vote don't just expect it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. More like a vast number of people in Jersey are not interested in politics.
      How many people get involved online? Not that many, a score maybe on the regular groups and the viewing figures on yesterday's Senators hour struggled to go over 70. Politics is boring to the majority and many of the newbies standing in this latest election are as weak as hell.
      People won't vote because they have no interest.

      Delete
    2. I agree with what you say but also people know that they can't remove the government unless they just do one as has happened this time.. They have registered but not voted.. The reasons will be varied but they have the loudest voice that is ignored.

      Delete
  15. www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-44026803

    "Paedophile-hunting policeman wins payout 46 years on"

    How long will Jersey keep up the façade before it gives recognition and compensation to Syvret, Pitman, Harper, Power .....

    The ruined lives and damaged reputations just to protect the incompetent and the wicked.

    ReplyDelete
  16. NOTA LOT TO VOTE FOR8 May 2018 at 10:30

    With all due respect strongly as I know a small number of people feel about having an NOTA option on the ballot paper to me this is still a negative option.

    It is also far from the most important change to campaign for within our election rules.

    The most important change needed in conjunction with a one type of member elected in equally sized districts across the island is this.

    We all moan about the quality of many candidates available. Yet currently three of the very best are illegally denied the right to stand.

    As a resident of St Helier District No 1 I would really like to vote for former Deputy Shona Pitman. But I cannot because this lady is banned all because she was once made bankrupt even though now discharged.

    Mrs Pitman's husband Trevor, along with former Senator Syvret are also barred. In the Pitmans' case this is illegal and in breach of both their and my Human Rights beyond any argument.

    In the Syvret case perhaps the legal argument is more complex but in my opinion it is still completely wrong that this man has not had a line drawn under his travails by our disgraceful Royal Court, or else told exactly when his manipulated limbo will end.

    So I say it again. Three of our bravest, most hard working and honest politicians all denied offering themselves to the public. Even more important still we the Jersey public denied voting for them at a time when the quality of candidate has never been so low.

    Never mind NOTA. This issue is one which the visiting Electoral Monitoring Mission must have drawn to their attention and condemn.

    ReplyDelete
  17. With this visiting monitoring body for the election can anyone one tell me how it works if they come across practices/flaws that are detrimental to democracy? They surely must but will we ever know? And can the States then just ignore it like they usually do with anything that might upset the status quo?

    ReplyDelete
  18. We have a number of sitting States Members going for Senator. By my reckoning one too many for the available seats. Someone must lose out then.

    My battling four would be Pallet, Bree, Ferguson and Le Fondre. What do others think likely? I also obviously predict not a one of the new candidates getting in, not even the Ben Shenton glove puppet Moz Scott.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Antony Lewis may well get in

      Delete
  19. Reference comment at 10.30.

    The JEP are running a story about two members of the public knocked down by a car. Oddly they are not allowing comments even though carrying a call for any witnesses to come forward.

    The relevance to the comment at 10.30 is as follows. Given that a motorist who admitted his responsibility for knocking down the ex-Deputy Pitman on a zebra crossing in late 2014 was never prosecuted by Jersey's police and AG. If this current driver is found to be at fault will he or she be prosecuted.

    I would imagine that he or she could quote the above case and get off without charge?

    Perhaps it is true that as my late grandfather used to tell me, the police and Constables had a 'None of the above' list for those who must not be prosecuted for anything?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anyone have any thoughts on who will go for Chief Minister?

    I have heard these mentioned and briefly add my thoughts.

    1 - Ian Gorst.

    Mostly likely I suppose but I don't think it is good for democracy to have a Chief Minister having three terms. Unless he or she was elected to the job directly by the public. Personally I think Gorst is useless but do think he might win.

    2 - Steve Luce.

    Yes I really did write Steve Luce! Apparently already offering out jobs if he gets it. Talk about deluded. Did not even face a contested election and made a pig's ear of running Planning.

    3 - Tracey Vallois.

    A possible outside bet. Don't get me wrong. I think Vallois a complete political lightweight with all the courage of a fieldmouse. But she looks and sounds plausible till you scrape the surface.

    4 - Kristina Moore.

    Please God - NO ! A horrible and uncaring woman right out of the Susie Pinel mould. Intellectually maybe even weaker than Luce. In terms of courage even weaker than Gorst.

    5 - Lyndan Farnham.

    Could even our States be that stupid? A Bailhache brothers puppet on a string.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And that's the problem with this Senatorial Election. The new CM must have an island wide mandate no matter how small it is and believe me it will be small.

      The turn out is going to be very interesting.

      Delete
  21. Deputy Simon Bree has also declared he might run for Chief Minister.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I quite like Bree. A bit cocky but at least seems to work hard. Problem for him is that I don't even think he will get elected. Problem for us if he does is that Bree appears to support keeping the Bailiff. We need a Chief Minister to lead reform and modernisation.

      Delete
    2. Stevie Ocean has to be the man. Not sure if I would agree with taxpayers funding his two MI6 minders to sit either side of him in the States though.

      Delete
    3. I have Ferguson might have a go assuming she gets back in. Think it will be a woman this time regardless. Shame there aren't any good ones.

      Delete
    4. Perhaps Stevie could come on and tell us if he will be running for CM? I would also like to know his likely ministers. Also, are his M15 bodyguards being paid for from his campaign expenses? Thanks

      Delete
  22. How long before the JEP costs a quid?8 May 2018 at 13:31

    In today's Filthy Rag the ditor wants islanders to tell him if people want to be updated via email about island news. This is in regard to the widely misunderstood and overly feared new EU data law.

    May I accordingly use your blog to tell the massively overpriced and under-selling island newspaper's editor that, no I do not want any emails from him. I want the truth. Hence I stick to blogs like this.

    ReplyDelete

  23. I disagree with 13.35 having never met him but watched him speak on several occasions through the States video playback system I think Simon Bree is worthwhile and researched also, R Renouf, La Fondre, Ferguson, Mezec, Tadier, and of course Higgins plus a couple of others are all forces for good. Not that I agree with everythinh they support but hey which other human being is an exact blue print of yourself when it comes to politics ?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Re Luce as CM , no contest in Parish yet A St Martin resident standing in St Saviour What was the problem standing in own Parish a "deal" of some sort maybe to keep out of the way to allow Luce a clear run?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. /Gone home by ten9 May 2018 at 09:50

      Was that one of the Jimmy Perchard clan or am I getting mixed up? Also bit worrying you have a Shenton representing the parish now. Let us hope she turns up to the States and contributes a bit more than Ben ever did!

      Delete
  25. Would a good next question for the candidates from you be "Who would you like to see as Chief Minister"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CM just has to be Nick Le Cornu.

      Delete
    2. No. It has to be Gino Risoli.

      Delete
    3. No. It has to be me - I mean Nick

      Delete
    4. We always find it so always amusing to watch the plebs bicker amongst themselves, particularly at election time.

      The REAL Chief Minister will be crowned from Jersey's Royal Family as is right and proper.

      It has always been so and will always be so.
      £26,000,000 of child abuse makes no difference because we run the show.

      Run along now. Don't you lot have some voting to do?

      Delete
  26. Does anyone know if the new political party of Judy Martin, Russell Labey and Scott Wickenden will be defined as such on the ballot slips and what is the party actually called?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Desperate Party?

      Delete
    2. The Party Animals?

      Delete
  27. Wonder if the Electoral Monitoring Mission would give Jersey's most famous political blog an interview?

    ReplyDelete
  28. The UK forcing our finance industry to accept a proper, open public register is now inevitable after what has been agreed with the Caymans etc. If we don't comply pretty quickly we will be isolated and portrayed as a rogue state. Why are none of the candidates being asked about this or offering solutions in their election material? Hardly a minor issue.

    ReplyDelete
  29. If Reform Jersey get six candidates elected this will double their States presence. But will it be success or failure? What do others think. I think it would still be a success.

    ReplyDelete
  30. If Reform come out of this election with 6 candidates elected I would class that that as a good result and something to build on heading towards 2022.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they get six candidates it would be disappointing but still a decent step forward. For 2022 they would need to be savy and attract more well known and respected figures to join their ranks, rather than so many unknowns.

      To this regard an obvious move would appear to be to try and attract the Pitmans to their cause. Somehow though, and I may be wrong, I think their might be a degree of jealousy there from the likes of Mezec and Southern who wouldn't want competition for the limelight.

      Mind you the Pitmans seem to have fallen off the face of the earth given their silence so might be a none starter anyway. Other well known figures are essential to moving Reform forward though even if they may be hard to both find and convince.

      Delete
    2. Fair comment. But can't see Syvret ever getting in the same party as Southern and Mezec let alone the same room. Three egos the size of Mount Bingham.

      Delete
  31. Terry Le Main has been urging the voters to use their 8 votes in the Senatorial Election even if they only like a possible 2. Ben Shenton saying that the turn out is going to be the talking point. Pleased he reads my blog lol. Although he believes Bree will get elected as Senator i'm not so sure.

    Bree said he will stand for Chief Minister - he will be lucky if he is standing in the States.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Think you might be right Rico. Would be a shame though aside from his silly support for retaining the Bailiff. He has been different class to Pinel here in God's own parish as a Deputy. As for Terry Le Main the best advice surely is if El Tel advises you to vote a certain way DON'T. As for Ben Shenton back in his days in the States his actually turning up was often the talking point.

      Delete
    2. Avoid Moz Scott and Troy with the same wide birth you would reserve for Kristina Moore. The Establishment barrel scrapings keen to give us more of the same.

      Delete
  32. Our sinister for international relations has been on a number of jollies to sunny Jamaica.

    Now it appears that the tide of flotsam is slopping the other way
    https://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2018/05/cpa-jersey-election-observation-mission.html

    The Head of the Jersey Election Observation Mission 2018 is one
    Hon. Phillip Paulwell CD MP from Jamaica.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillip_Paulwell
    "Leaked United States Government cables sent from the US Embassy in Kingston on 19 March 2008 linked Paulwell to a number of scandals. According to one cable, Paulwell "has been behind the scenes of numerous imbroglios", including the NetServ scandal, the Cement Fiasco, and the Cuban light bulb scandal. The cable goes on to state that "despite all the innuendos, and accusations, Paulwell has never been charged with a crime."

    You will get no joy out of the election observers but
    Jersey may soon be elevated to an official Banana Republic!

    ReplyDelete