Saturday, 30 April 2016

Reform Jersey. Parish Assembly.



Following the recent Press Release (below) issued by Jersey's only (overt) Political Party "Reform Jersey". VFC sat down with the party Chairman, Deputy SAM MEZEC, to discuss the rarely used (Loi (1804) au sujet des Assemblées Paroissiales) Law.

This is a law that the public should be aware of and used, if necessary, on a regular basis if the (mostly unelected) Parish Constables continue to ignore their Parishioners views on major political issues.

The video/interview/discussion (below the Press Release), we hope, will help inform the public of their, so-called "democratic" right(s) and encourage them to engage with the process.

Political Party to invoke two centuries old law to force Parish debate on TTS outsourcing


"Jersey’s only political party, Reform Jersey, has invoked a 212-year-old law written in French to force the Constable of St Helier to hold a Parish Assembly to discuss the plans of the Minister for Infrastructure, Deputy Eddie Noel, to outsource hundreds of workers jobs.

This follows the recent ballot where workers voted in favour of strike action in response to the Minister’s refusal to enter meaningful negotiations with them.

Article 9 of the Loi (1804) au sujet des Assemblées Paroissiales allows Parishioners to force a Parish Assembly if ten signatures are obtained to support a particular motion to be debated, which will conclude with a vote for Parishioners to register their support or opposition.

“We have chosen to use this old law to force this debate to make a point about local democracy in Jersey. Parish Deputies and Constables very rarely bother to put on meetings to discuss political issues and hear the views of their constituents and there is a widespread perception that they are out of touch. Deputy Noel is looking to sack huge numbers of our Infrastructure workers despite promising during his election that he would do the opposite. This is an issue which could see tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money wasted, so it is only right that Deputies and Constables are forced to get to grips with it” – Party chairman Deputy Sam Mézec

“We would urge people in every Parish to start forcing these public meetings to make sure their representatives are properly held to account. We are happy to offer advice to any Islander who wants to do this.”

The requête has been signed by St Helier Deputies and residents Geoff Southern and Sam Mézec, as well as other members of Reform Jersey and Infrastructure workers.

The Constable of St Helier now has a fortnight to convene this Parish Assembly."(END)

Credit to Reform Jersey for attempting to bring democracy to the island. Please attend the Parish Assembly on Friday 17th May 7:pm at St. Helier Town Hall and ask for details on how to call your own Assembly?




65 comments:

  1. Well done to Reform Jersey. As you say in the blog, Constables largely ignore their responsibilities to the public who elect them (well, apart from in most country parishes where they rarely have elections!). This needs to stop. The often mentioned here former Deputy Trevor Pitman once told me that back in the mists of time (in the lead up to the sabotaged reforms after the war I believe?) One of the things the Constables were supposed to do in part exchange for retaining their place in the States was meant to be to hold regular public meetings to gauge how their parishioners wanted them to vote. This deal clearly hasn't been adhered to as far as I can see in any of the parishes. With this meeting it is surely the time to demand an answer as to why? While I am sure the couple of cyber bullies given free rein to spout their bile on the the JEP webpages may be unhappy I think this is a move by Reform Jersey genuine democrats will welcome.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A move only an Oligarch supporting Conservative or a troll could find fault with. Let us hope the meeting is well attended and Constable Crowcroft given clear instruction as to how his electors want him to speak and vote.

      Delete
  2. This type of thing should happen far more often. Every time there is something as serious as an attempt to undermine the public's services for sure.

    Noel is an absolute prat. But when it comes to getting a ministry as we all know by now that is actually a plus more than a minus.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Once the report from the COI is out it would be good if Reform could help get it in the public eye (Ministers will want it quickly buried) by forcing Crowcroft to call such a meeting to learn if the people of our Capital want the findings acted upon. Are you up for it Deputy Mezec?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Constables Out!1 May 2016 at 19:22

      This is a very good idea. Montfort should do the same in St. Brelade

      Delete
    2. I'll second that point.

      Might be a way to stop the inquiry's report going the same way as Clothier, Napier and the Scrutiny report that exposed Gradwell?

      Get ten people from each parish and we could get 12 debates. How the COM and the Bailhache brothers would hate that!

      Delete
    3. Great idea. I'm happy to sponsor any public meetings to do with the CoI's report when it comes out.

      I'm already privately hearing whispers about particular actions the Chief Minister will need to take when it comes out but I don't think anyone believes he'll have the guts to do what is necessary.

      Delete
    4. This is good news Deputy. You may not have been in the States when the major battles to bring the COI about were fought. But this possibly last battle on local turf at least is going to be a hugely important one. Maybe things will then move on in to London? But a good opportunity for Reform to contribute to the battle for justice nonetheless. Thank you.

      Delete
    5. Sam, as you are reading this thread, could you tell us why the PPC (of which you are a member) has not brought a motion of censure against Andrew Lewis?

      Delete
    6. My recollection is that the committee decided that the statements made by Lewis were in the Assembly and therefore covered by parliamentary privilege.

      The decision was not unanimous.

      Delete
    7. Better to wait until the COI report comes out. From the tone of the hearings where Lewis gave his evidence and the way he was questioned he at least will be getting a very bad mark.

      Now this might be to protect those higher up, or it might be part of a full and proper report spelling out what happened, why it happened and all that truly needs to be done.

      Either way I think that the time for action by PPC on Andrew Lewis is after the COI reports.

      Delete
  4. Clothier, Napier and the Scrutiny report and Chapman, added together didn't cost any where near the £26 million the COI will/has done. Therefore that alone will need to be justified and no brushed under the carpet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Biggles of St. Martin1 May 2016 at 20:48

      Totally agree Anonymous. But I don't think any of us doubt the buggers will try. The idea put forward above could be a real help.

      Delete
  5. Eddie Noel - another goffer in the best Andrew Lewis tradition - is just doing the Ozouf/Gorst/MacLean/Bailhache policy drive to privitise our island.

    Their figures about such moves being beneficial to the island never add up and are rooted purely in their own outdated political ideology of greed.

    Everyone who cares about our island should be at this meeting and supporting the public sector.

    When things can be shown to be duplicated or over-staffed - fine, get rid. But the fact is Jersey's public sector is very small.

    I might have more sympathy if we didn't let tax dodging companies contribute nothing due to zero ten, banks pay a mere pittence to what they should, and Muppets like Boleat and Keen be given tens of thousands of our money for doing sweet FA.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Eddie Noel is very much for The Service Level Agreement. Where in-house work is given to JPH. JPH do not have an in-house team. Therefore the work is given to outside consultants and outside contractors. So far its failing and proving to be wasting a lot of our tax payers money.
    Check it out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Miss Tess Tickles2 May 2016 at 12:58

      Noel is unfit to be a Minister. His record in the States is shocking. Head so far up the Big O's behind he has been living in the dark ages since 2005.

      Delete
  7. Jersey - we ought to rename this place Thatcher Island. The only place in the world where the 1980s just go on and on.

    ReplyDelete
  8. A disgusted immigrant2 May 2016 at 19:09

    Judging by the slow commenting 'tis shame to see the great many evidently care little for their fellow working folk. And you all wonder why your island is nearing a certain creek without a certain implement?

    Boy o boy you crapauds had really better hope the Brexit doesn't happen. With an incompetent Mafia at the helm and the I'm alright Jacque attitude of indifference and apathy on display via the roaring silence here it can't be long before most islanders are back to living in caves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wouldn't put it in quite those terms but I understand the frustration. We surely all know the Pastor's famous saying about doing nothing about opposing wrongs simply because we are not union employees, priests, gypsies etc? Perhaps it will be the same when they start closing bloggers down?

      Delete
    2. It is concerning that too few people in Jersey see and understand the significance and importance of the problems other people are contending with. A narrow focus on our issue-specific concerns, and too little appreciation of how the problems faced by others will often have the same causal basis as our problems.

      I would hope the typical and usual readers of the site would support the efforts of Reform Jersey. I do, in this case, even though my family and I have no direct interest in public-sector workers protection. I could be forgiven for not giving such support given my experiences as a victim of Jersey's child-abuse cover-ups.

      But as these issues have been raised, I think this is a suitable opportunity to put to young Sam Mezec the big deficiency in his performance in the hope some of his youthful arrogance might become clear to him?

      It is not lost on those closely involved in the battle against the Jersey child-abuse cover-ups that Sam is a member of the Jersey parliament's 'privileges' body, the Privileges and Procedures Committee.

      It is that body which has the responsibility for the conduct of elected members of the States assembly. That body has, and as far as I'm aware, continues to, refuse to face the profound gravity of the conduct of Andrew Lewis, the former Home Affairs Minister who, very clearly, lied to the Jersey parliament when he illegally suspended Police Chief Graham Power in 2007.

      Deputy Sam Mezec should be demanding of his fellow PPC members that the conduct of Lewis be examined as a matter of great seriousness, given Lewis' conduct undermines the very ability of the legislature to function in a real, accountable manner. And if his fellow PPC members refuse to take such action, Deputy Mezec should resign from PPC.

      I'm not alone in finding it pretty rich that Deputy Mezec seeks and gets the support of this site and the time and attention of its readers whilst so obviously failing to step up to the plate and make a stand against the shielding of the corrupt actions of Andrew Lewis.

      It isn't as though it would cost Deputy Mezec anything. All he needs to do is attempt to persuade his fellow PPC members to initiate a public process of investigation into the conduct of Andrew Lewis by putting a formal written motion to the Committee. And when they inevitably refuse to act on it, he resigns from the body. He could then deliver a personal statement to the house, explaining his concerns and his actions.

      The thing which strikes those I've discussed this posting with, and I'm sure a lot of other regular readers, is that what we seek and expect of Deputy Mezec is not a 'big ask'.

      If he and his allies seek our support, he needs to begin to recognise that co-operation and support is a two-way-street.

      A Survivor.

      Delete
    3. Perhaps the Deputy has already tried with PPC or is due to do so? Over to you Deputy to let us know. No one would expect that you would succeed. They would be happy that you simply tried. For my part I wouldn't even want you to resign if fail you did or do.

      Delete
    4. Absolute respect to you Sam for taking action over this intended proposal by Noel, which will benefit nobody apart from private firms who will take advantage, pay minimum wages, and also create a bigger burden on SS for those who are left unemployed or who need to claim Income Support. Not a lot of forward thinking by the Minister here, but what can we expect from this man.

      It is refreshing to have Reform politicians who do strive to help the working classes, because as one commenter says this Island is rife with the 'I'm all right Jack' attitude, and those who are alright do not give a monkeys about anyone or anything else.

      Good luck with the meeting - I am sure it will be well attended.

      In regard to PPC and Lewis, Deputy Len Norman, chair of PPC was at one of the hearings where Lewis gave 'evidence' complete with pen and paper. He did not stay the course and did not return for the second hearing. I am told that if action is, or needs to be taken in this regard, the outcome of the final report and its findings will be when decisions are made over this. I can only suspect that the panel were not impressed with what they heard from AL inline with everybody at those hearings. We will have to exercise a little patience on that one.

      Delete
    5. As is mentioned above, I believe that the optimum timing for any action will be once the CoI has released it's report.

      If I chose to take action like resigning (which I don't rule out in future as there are several things I am unhappy with) if I didn't time it properly it would not have the impact I'd want it to and it would all be for nothing.

      I know it must be really difficult being in this period of 'limbo' where it feels like nothing is happening, but it will be worth it when the report comes out.

      I'm even hearing whispers from some business people (right wingers with little political sympathy with Reform Jersey) who are beginning to say that a certain senior minister's position will almost certainly be untenable when the report comes out.

      Delete
  9. Well said Jill. Have we got any kind of actual date suggested yet for publication of the COI report, other than it must be done by the end of September?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is actually the end of the year. Final submissions by interested parties will be made w/c 16th May with the final report expected at or around the end of the year.

      There is rather a lot to report on!

      Delete
  10. I think the report should be cancelled.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr J Le Breton3 May 2016 at 18:55

      I fully concur a total waste of money which has revealed nothing of importance. Or not that my friend Philip can recall anyway.

      Delete
    2. What COI? I don't even recall going! Must have been another former AG?

      Delete
  11. Wouldn't it be good if that "certain senior minister's position" is replaced in a bi-election by Ex- Senator Syvret?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Pepper Pig (A friend of tax dodger Cameron)3 May 2016 at 19:43

    With Brexit on the cards the little gnome Noel ought to be worrying where all those involved in our tax evasion industry will be re-employed, not picking on hard working public sector workers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder where Pepper Pig thinks the money to pay all those "hard working public sector workers" (are those the ones usually found sat in TTS vehicles eating bacon sarnies and reading the Sun in coastal car parks on week-days?) will come from if the 'tax evasion' industry disappears? I don't think we sell much in the way of spuds, milk or hotel beds these days.

      Delete
    2. No doubt the bacon sarnie eating skivers that anonymous thinks all from outside the private sector are could afford a somewhat bigger sarnie if the wonderful finance industry would pay the same tax rate as ordinary mortals do? No doubt anonymous also thinks (you are able to think hopefully?) that depriving people in other countries of tax revenues rightly meant to help them is all hunky dory and absolutely spiffing? No doubt anonymous also concludes that hypocritical toff bully boys like 'we're all in this together' Cameron lying to the electorate while making use of whiter-than-white Jersey 'Finance' vehicles is all ethical and OK too. No one wins in a race to the bottom to appease greed. #Banksters #Parasites

      Delete
    3. General Melchett's batman4 May 2016 at 09:00

      Anonymous probably can't accept that out of control bankers and elements of the global finance industry caused the economic melt down of 2007/08.

      The same people are very generously cooking up the beginnings of another 2007/08 meltdown now.

      A melt down which bacon sarnie munching plebs like me the world over had to foot the bill for with our taxes.

      Just as we did with the multi-million pound bonus packages for failing self-awarded by the gangsters who 'run' these great financial institutions.

      Face facts anonymous - Jersey has done very well (in some ways) from building an industry on foundations of sand.

      Sadly it is our generation, or more poigantly that of our children who are going to pay the price of low intellect imbeciles in the States Assembly gambling on us becoming a monoculture.

      There are hard workers and skivers in both public and private sectors.

      Delete
    4. No, what Anonymous thinks about the ethics of the finance industry is completely irrelevant. What Anonymous thinks is that if the finance industry comes to a sticky end, there will be no money left. This is why Anonymous is left wondering why Pepper Pig gloatingly refers re-employing 'tax evasion industry' workers, when most public sector workers will be just as redundant.

      Anonymous also wonders why Pepper Pig feels the need to refer to public sector workers as 'hard working', when many aren't. What about hard working private sector workers? No love for them?

      Anonymous is also left wondering why K2 feels obliged to refer to the 'toff' Prime Minister of another country, and wonders why he would be lying to the Jersey electorate, which would seem to be a particularly pointless exercise.

      Delete
    5. I think even the most challenged anti-public sector reader can see clearly that what was being referred to with Cameron was his lying to the British public.

      Probably why so many tens of thousands of people were involved in demonstrating against this arrogant hypocrite even if you can only find full accounts of this on citisens media. Really Cameron even makes Jimmy Carr look genuine.

      For the record I am also not what I would think a natural Reform party supporter. Though I sm with them on this. Horror of horrors I actually work in the finance sector.

      I confess I wish I didn't have to. But like the sarny munchers anonymous evidently so hates doing my current job is the only way we could get on the property ladder. Like most of my colleagues.

      There probably lies the dilemma Jersey has made for itself. Answers I don't yet have any. But I am sick of people like anonymous at 22.30 and 10.30 spouting ignorant Class War bile against ordinary people he probably views as being at the taxpayers test.

      Delete
    6. Apologies I appear to have typed taxpayers test instead of teat. What a tit.

      Delete
    7. A totally harmless boob

      Delete
    8. Bet you feel better for getting that off your chest(s)?

      Delete
    9. I love this blog. It is the only political/news site that allows me to really keep abreast of what is important.

      Delete
    10. I love both of your points.

      Delete
  13. Jersey HAS to lay off some front line Public Sector as there are two desperately needed senior posts to create.

    Firstly a full time Carer to ensure External Relations Minister Bailhache does not further embarrass us globally with his track record of amnesia and allowing convicted paedophiles into the Honorary Police and so forth.

    Secondly somebody to drop grapes into failed Treasury Minister Philip 'What black hole?' Ozouf's mouth while he is busy doing his job of being paid to stay out of the way until the next election in London.



    ReplyDelete
  14. While resurrecting this 200 year old law might appear to be a clever move, I think it is a deeply flawed idea. In a representative democracy, we elect politicians to represent our interests, based on our judgement of their political convictions and promises. We don’t require them to ask us our opinion every time there is a vote in the States.

    There is a supreme irony that this move should come from the only overt political party in the island. The foundation of party politics is commitment to a published manifesto: party members stand for election on that platform, and are expected to introduce legislation to achieve their manifesto commitments.

    Yet now we see Reform attempting to resurrect a historic law that potentially undermines the concept of the election manifesto commitment and representative democracy, and subverts it with a device that resembles a 1970s trades union style show of hands – complete with all the potential for intimidation and agitation by small numbers of individuals (ironically, the very thing some left-of-centre voters complain about in the rural parishes).

    It may suit Reform’s agenda in this instance. Any meeting held in the Town Hall to debate public sector contracts is bound to be well-attended, vociferous, and sympathetic to their point of view. No doubt they will get strong support from those present, but it would be completely disingenuous to claim that this gives the meeting any democratic legitimacy, or that States members who attend the meeting ought to be pay heed to any vote. It doesn’t. Jersey’s electorate is much larger than the couple of hundred people who can fit into the Town Hall and raise their hands. Parish Hall meetings may be an acceptable mechanism to deal with administrative matters within the parish, but not to determine island-wide issues.

    If Reform truly believes in the power of the plebiscite, then why not be more honest about it and propose a referendum? If a minister has, as they claim, broken a specific pre-election promise, then this would seem to be an ideal issue for such a device – assuming they can persuade a majority of the non-Reform States members to vote for one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Jersey had a proper democratic representative system then there would be no need to do this. We'd prefer to have a governing party which was elected on a comprehensive manifesto which serves as a blueprint for government, with opposition parties holding them to account and building up their own blueprint to let the electorate consider next time round.

      When we have that system, you have my word that this sort of thing won't be necessary any more.

      But on a point of law, you are wrong when you say this isn't an acceptable thing to bring to a Parish Assembly. This is precisely what the States Assembly lodging period was drawn up for.

      I can't think of an example anywhere in the world when a referendum was used to cast a verdict on a ministers broken promise.

      Delete
  15. Sam, thanks for responding. I thought it was evident that I wasn't talking about what the law allows when I used the word "acceptable". I meant acceptable in the sense it is used in common parlance. At no point did I suggest that what you are seeking to do is unlawful, or even improper.

    While I understand and accept your point that Jersey does not have a functioning democratic representative system, I cannot agree that this justifies promoting the procedure in question. Surely the way forward is for Reform to put forward a manifesto that appeals to the majority of voters in this island, find articulate and persuasive candidates to stand for election, and win a majority in the House? Isn't that how a functioning representative democracy works? Nothing is stopping you from achieving this.

    The referendum I proposed is not to cast a verdict on a minister's broken promise, but to cast a verdict on the minister's proposal to 'corporatise' public sector functions (which I personally oppose for what it's worth). We have seen a creeping policy of doing this in recent years - harbours, airport, property services etc - and it seems a valid question to ask the electorate: Do you agree with corporatisation of public services? Yes or No.

    Should you wish to cast a verdict on the actual breaking of an electoral promise, surely you should bring a vote of no confidence against the minister? That is precisely the sort of behaviour that ought to precipitate a vote of no confidence, so why not bring forward a proposition?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Surely the way forward is for Reform to put forward a manifesto that appeals to the majority of voters in this island, find articulate and persuasive candidates to stand for election, and win a majority in the House?"

      That's a work in progress, but sadly the next chance to make any meaningful progress is two years away, which leaves hundreds of workers potentially losing their jobs in the meantime, so we can't sit on our hands and at least not try to do something to serve those people.

      Deputy Southern has a proposition coming up in the States to stop any outsourcing from occurring without a full States debate and vote. Once that is dealt with (and this Parish Assembly is party happening as an effort to support this proposition) anything else like a Vote of No Confidence would follow on afterwards and I'd support that being something we should consider, though in fairness there is an argument to be had about doing the same for virtually every other minister and there aren't enough hours in the day to deal with it all!

      Delete
    2. As you are called Reform Jersey are you going to be celebrating Jersey's official Reform Day to commorate the events of 28th September 1769 this year? Or can't Reform be bothered?

      Delete
  16. It is good to see Sam Mezec on here. This is what our politicians should be willing to do. Since we have lost Stuart Syvret and the Pitmans the only one who seems willing to regularly come on the net has been Montfort Tadier. Hopefully a sign of more to come, Deputy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree. 99% of our elected noddy dogs think they are far too important once in the Asylum. Well done Mezec.

      Delete
    2. Voted for the now Deputy Mezec not without a little trepidation back in 2014 after the disgraceful forcing out of Shona Pitman. The boy, as they say, has done well though. Could be a bit more outspoken to be fair, and some considerable way to go to match Shona's constituent work rate for certain. But all in all credit where it is due. If only a few more would stand up against the dismantling of our front line essential services like young Mister Mezec.

      Delete
  17. No answer on Reform Day then Reform Chairman?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jersey's official Reform Day is not until September, so why the hurry?

      Or are you trying to disrupt this thread?

      Delete
    2. Probably because to succeed events need planning, letting people know etc. The day also presents a perfect opportunity to tie in the struggle underlying this very thread. Would have thought even a death threat troll might have worked that one out.

      Delete
    3. Fair doos :-)

      But I expect the Reform Chairman has quite a full diary between now and the beginning of September.

      Perhaps you would like to volunteer to take on the majority of the planning, organising and promotion?

      No need to be a party member as Jersey's Reform Day 1769 is not a party political occasion

      It is important and your island needs you!

      Delete
    4. I am happy to give out leaflets. I took one off a gentlemen dressed up in period costume when it was being brought to the States. Fascinating story.

      Delete
    5. Great!

      Have you checked out Michael Dun's site? :

      http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/jersey%20reform%20day

      & this post which does not show in the "label" search:
      http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/the-importance-of-friday-28-september.html

      Delete
  18. Has this "Reform Day" been on the official States list of important days in Jersey since the 1700s? If it has why don't I know about it? I went to school here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jersey's official Reform Day only became "official" in 2012.
      The feudalists tried to erase all trace of Jersey's revolution for the next 200+ years

      Mike Dum seems to have taken a big part in making it happen

      http://www.theislandwiki.org/index.php/The_Revolution_of_1769
      Jersey revolution 1769 – by Michael Dun, published as an appendix to a report accompanying a proposition to the States in 2012 calling for official recognition of the events of 28 September 1769


      Mike Dum started his blog in 2010 and chose the pen name Tom Gruchy

      http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-min=2010-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2011-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=6

      These older posts also do not show in the "label" search

      Delete
    2. Wow! This should be celebrated just like Liberation Day even if it is not within living memory. Must say I am surprised it got through the States. However did that happen?

      Delete
  19. Selected highlights from Mike Dun's 2011 blogs

    http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/jersey-bastille-day-28-september-1769.html

    http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/news-of-screwed.html

    http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/philip-bailhache-and-stuart-syvret-on.html

    http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/bob-le-brocqs-question-district-3-st.html

    http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/stuart-syvrets-trinity-speech-just.html

    http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/13-applicants-4-chosen-9-losers-but-who.html

    http://tomgruchy.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/jersey-untouchables.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you. This can't have got through the local Feudalist party easily in the States surely? What was the vote for and against?

      Delete
    2. Is there a link or reference available to when this was debated? Does seem like something very appropriate to build on. Especially given that a part of this involved the storming of Jersey's corrupt Royal Court! About time we did it again.

      Delete
    3. Looks like it was shortly before 21 November 2012

      www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-20426676

      "Deputy Trevor Pitman, who led the move, also lost a motion calling for £3,000 to be made available to enable experts to reveal the texts of records from the time, which were erased on the orders of the Privy Council."

      Delete
    4. A (presumably anti-feudal?) Deputy lost a proposal to have the truth behind obliterated records revealed?

      How very, very Jersey!

      Delete
    5. I have looked at this proposition and the debate.

      The most amazing aspect is that a request for a small amount of money to help construct a permanent memorial for the brave folk who led this revolt was also turned down.

      Why could this be I must ask? As a non local according to my Wikipedia Jersey is in the top ten GDP jurisdictions in the world!

      You also have an organisation called Visit Jersey. Why aren't they interested in developing your historical past?

      Delete
  20. On Reform Day -

    I'd love to see more happening on 28th September every year.

    The problem is working out what is the best way of commemorating it, maximising the number of people who will turn out and getting it established in peoples' minds as an important date in our Island's history. I don't really know what the best way forward on that is and it could prove to be a task that I don't have the time or (most importantly) budget to do it justice.

    I will say a few things though - This year what I can contribute will be incredibly limited because it will be happening at around the same time as the Medium Term Financial Plan debate, which will mean RJ members will be incredibly busy doing what we were elected to do.

    Last year Reform Day also coincided with the MTFP which is why we couldn't dedicate any time to it then.

    The year before it was during the middle of the election campaign.

    The year before that, I attempted to get the Bailiff's permission to do an open air event for Reform Day and never even got a response to my application!

    This year it falls on a Wednesday.

    ReplyDelete

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