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?

(Some) Key Issues Facing Jersey.

The Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry has triggered a massive outpouring of evidence, interpretations and thoughts. There is a danger that the key issues get lost in the mass of evidence and comment. Team Voice has therefore sifted through as much of the evidence as we are able and picked from the contributions to the Blogs what our readers appear to see as the key themes to emerge. We publish them for your comment and, as always, for our worldwide readership who may see benefit in a short summary of what, from our perspective, this is all about.

Jersey needs reforms, which bring its governance to a standard, that most other western democracies would see as normal. Nothing is being asked for which is beyond what most societies would see as basic entitlements. We believe that everything said in this Blog Posting is well supported by evidence, which is readily available or has been given in public to the on-going Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry.

· The Law Officers are a significant part of the Jersey problem. They combine the role of prosecutors with that of legal advisors to the Jersey Government. There is an obvious conflict of interest when matters are alleged which affect the interests of the government. This conflict was seriously exposed during the police investigation into decades of concealed Child Abuse (Operation Rectangle) and has remained a problem ever since. The Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry has apparently been told of changes which have been made since that time which it is claimed bring more independence to the prosecution process. Many observers see these as cosmetic and unlikely to inspire public confidence. Jersey needs a fully independent prosecution service, which is unfettered and uncompromised by any other responsibilities. As recommended to the Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry HERE.

· There is no general understanding of exactly what is the significance or intended effect of senior legal figures being appointed by the Crown. (Bailiff/Deputy Bailiff/Solicitor General/Attorney General etc.)  There might be a general expectation that their role is to represent the interests of the British Crown in Jersey but instead they sometimes appear to position themselves as the defenders of Jersey interests against British intrusion. It is unclear where their loyalties lie or where they should lie.

· There are deep conflicts in the role of the Bailiff as (unelected) speaker in the island’s parliament, as a (unelected) representative of the island and the senior judge.

· So far as is generally understood, HM Lieutenant Governor is the representative of British Crown interests with a responsibility for monitoring good governance and the proper administration of justice. Yet he now appears to be appointed by the very people he is expected to oversee. There is little information on how the Governor’s duties are discharged in practice As reported by VFC HERE. For example, there is no transparent system of reporting on the activity of the Governor in respect of those things, which he is apparently supposed to observe, or what conclusions if any the Governor has reached and what actions he is taking in consequence. No information is available on the qualifications or training which is required for the Governor to discharge this particular role nor is it clear why a retired General should be considered the best person for the position?

· Democratic participation in the island appears to be low. There is a high level of non-registration for voting and a low level of turnout at elections. The electoral system appears to be tilted in favour of “Old Jersey” interests in the rural parishes. Cynicism around the processes of democracy and governance is widespread.

· Taken together much of the above presents a picture of a system of governance, which has a number of semi-feudal elements, few of which are accountable by any visible means.

· When the Jersey establishment believes that its position is being challenged it sometimes reacts ruthlessly, and in a manner which is unfettered by considerations of ethics, fairness or even legality. And nobody appears to be able to stop them from doing it.

· The Jersey political and public sector appears to have an entrenched culture of inertia. Many witnesses to the on-going Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry have provided evidence of the extreme challenges which can face anyone attempting to deliver change. Progressive innovation is rarely encouraged and is sometimes (more often than not) punished. There is a long history of reports and inquiries, which have produced sensible recommendations that have not been implemented or acted upon. It should be remembered that the Jersey Government argued that the current Committee of Inquiry was unnecessary because “lessons had been learned” and the necessary changes made. The Inquiry is only taking place because the Jersey Government’s view was overruled by a rare backbench revolt that now appears to be well justified by the evidence. The past experience of external reviews too often consists of well-evidenced and constructive reports gathering dust on departmental shelves because nobody has the skills, inclination or support to take them forward or because those with responsibility are fearful of the consequences of doing so.

· There is a conspicuous lack of any consistent external and independent inspection regime with transparent reporting and follow-up. Increasingly in the UK public services, including those providing criminal justice, are subject to regular independent scrutiny. This is far less frequent in Jersey, which arguably needs this type of attention more than most regions of the UK. Where such arrangements have been in place in the past they appear in some cases to have quietly “died a death.” (For instance our Police Force hasn't been HMIC inspected for the best part of 8 years)

· For whatever reason the Jersey media appears to be noticeably non-intrusive and, for the most part, uncritical in respect of the Jersey authorities. If any further disturbing issues emerge in the island it is unlikely to be as a result of investigative journalism. There will be little that the Committee of Inquiry can do about this but it adds strength to the question of who will bring intrusive scrutiny to bear upon government/judicial actions/inactions/corruption in the future?

· It should be remembered that while some of the above raises fine points of constitutional theory, this is not an academic exercise. The well-being of vulnerable people is at stake. The Committee of Inquiry exists because there were decades of preventable suffering in institutions operated by the Jersey Government, and nobody did anything about it. When people subsequently attempted to do something about it they have given evidence, to the Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry, that they encountered a range of difficulties and lack of support from the Jersey authorities, and among those creating the difficulties were people who purported to represent the Crown. Unless there is significant change there is a high probability that further preventable suffering will occur.

· Whatever the Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry recommends, if matters are left to the Jersey authorities, most of the required changes will not happen. Change will only be achieved by strong and authoritative external intervention, followed by intrusive monitoring backed by some form of potential sanction. The Committee of Inquiry should not under estimate the extent to which entrenched Jersey interests will seek to resist, obstruct and subvert any reforms that it recommends.

Have we got it right or do you have different priorities? Let us know.

Jersey International Finance Centre and Democracy.

As a result of the PRESS RELEASE issued by Deputy Montfort Tadier concerning the building (or not) of Jersey's International Finance Centre at the waterfront. Team Voice has exclusively interviewed the Deputy, in depth, where he explains, from his perspective, that there is much more at stake here than a building going up (or not).

The very structure of Democracy, according to the Deputy, is under threat where it appears that the Ministers of our island are taking on the role of CEOs of quangos and representing their interests rather than the people of Jersey who elected them. Scrutiny looks to be redundant (or "an irritant") rather than a check, and balance, which adds value to the decision making process. Policy is now being described, by the current Treasury Minister, as "a mistake."

In December 2014 Scrutiny decided to look at the viability, and much more, of the International Finance Centre building and its Terms of Reference can be viewed HERE. Deputy Tadier explains the apparent shenanigans that have been played by the Treasury Minister, and others, in order to basically do away with this scrutiny function and secured a pre-let of 16,500 square feet (not the 200,000 square feet agreed in The States) of a building before the Scrutiny Report can be finalised/published and so that the building can begin.

This Sunday (7th June 2015) there is a planned public protest to be held at the waterfront (2:30pm) by those opposed to the start of building until the Scrutiny Panel has completed its Report and submitted it to The States.

But as explained earlier, and in the interview, (below) this is about much more than a building, it is about Democracy and preventing it being eroded further. You might not have a view on the building but if you cherish the little amount of Democracy we have on this island we encourage readers to support this protest and be a part of it on Sunday.

Celebrating Democracy Day.......Jersey Style.

After the success of the YISS CAMPAIGN, and by popular demand, Lord Reginald Hamilton Tooting Rawley Jones III returns to our screens in what we hope will become a regular series of political, satirical, commentary.

As the UK celebrated ‘Democracy Day’ this week, to mark 750 years of the first parliament of elected representatives at Westminster, The Jersey Conservative Party showed how it is committed to scaling back democracy, by making sure that it will now be even more difficult to call a ‘requête for a parish Assembly.

Writing opposing the move, brought by the Comité des Connétables P.173/2014, Former Constable and Minister, Mike Jackson criticised the Comité saying: ‘The requête is the ‘little person’s’ opportunity to get their proposition considered and in view of the numbers that generally attend Parish Assemblies, the requirement for 4 signatories seems reasonable but 10 unnecessarily onerous.

Given that there is little to be gained by this proposition please review your support for it as I don’t believe it does the office of Connétable any favours!’

At the same time, the Conservative majority fought off proposals from the opposition – Reform Jersey – to increase the minimum wage by a further 10p an hour, P.175/2014 and to protect workers from unfair dismissal. It will now be possible to dismiss employees P.169/2014 in an unfair way for 12 months, not just six.

In this video, our good friend and local political commentator, Lord Reginald Hamilton Tooting Rawley Jones III praises the success of the Jersey’s Conservative Party, of which he is the proud patron, and calls on Jersey residents to do more to support this government of the rich for the rich.

Royal Court Challenge. Re-election St Helier Number 1?

PRESS RELEASE ON BEHALF OF

NICK LE CORNU AND GINO RISOLI

FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION      -       31ST OCTOBER 2014

Challenge in Royal Court to St Helier District No.1 Election

Deputy Nick Le Cornu and Gino Risoli, candidates in the election for Deputy in St Helier No.1 held on 15^th October 2014, are presenting an application to the Royal Court at 10am Friday 31st October to have the election in that District declared void and a new election called, based on high levels of electoral irregularities and manipulations.

A press conference will be held outside the States Building, Royal Square at 11am by both applicants.

Nick Le Cornu said “Jersey’s first General Election has been marred by irregularities in elections across the island and most recently in the Senatorial recount which “found” new votes. New matters are emerging on a daily basis from elections across the island.”

“To the very end I am fulfilling my mandate as Deputy to challenge the way things have been done in the past. That is what I stood for when I was elected in the March by-election. I am morally obliged to take that commitment seriously.”

“I asked the Chief Minister twice during question time and the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee if election observers would be invited to Jersey’s first General Election and received anodyne answers. The present mess is the consequence.”

“PPC and the Parishes have been found wanting.  Complacency and indifference abound. The absence of rigor and professionalism is matched by a refusal to implement best practice and standards applicable elsewhere. There even appears to be ignorance of the detailed handbooks produced by the Electoral Commission in the UK for the forthcoming May 2015 General Election.”

“During the count in St Helier 3/4 some 261 pre poll votes were not added in before the result of the election was announced. This discovery necessitated a restatement of the numbers.”

“I have evidence of Portuguese people registered to vote being turned away from pre-polling on spurious grounds that their names could not be found. No effort was made to check persons by their address in the street roll of electors”.

“Large numbers of Poles discovered that they were not registered to vote following an extensive voter registration campaign by the supporters of a Polish Senatorial candidate. Forms known to have been delivered to the Town Hall simply had not been processed, denying the right to vote on election day.”

“In the Deputies ballot box of District No.1 there appeared a blank ballot for Deputy in District No.2 St Helier. I suspect this irregularity occurred from a error at pre-polling resulting in the ballot being directed to the wrong polling station. This should be investigated”

“We have to look beyond one little error in one District. There were a preponderance of irregularities and the devil is in the detail. These raise doubts about the integrity of the election as a whole. These things cannot be dismissed as “an accident” when looked at together.”

“Of particular concern to us is that Scott Wickenden was allowed to stand as a candidate and end up being elected a Deputy in District No.1, when his nomination form was defective by virtue of not having 9 seconders, all capable of voting for him in that election. It is inconceivable that the checking process by the Parish of St Helier failed to spot this most fundamental of errors, that one of his seconders was registered in District No.2. Checking is supposed to occur before the nomination meeting, on the night and double checked subsequently. This is gross negligence by Scott Wickenden and on the part of the Constable and Parish of St Helier.”

“The onus is entirely on the candidate to present a valid nomination form at the Nomination Meeting. The absence of 9 seconders on the nomination form invalided the candidate and his election. The candidate only has himself to blame if he cannot understand the fundamental requirements of the election law. These are spelled out in the instructions attached to every nomination paper obtained from a Parish hall.”

“Election disputes are inherent to elections. Challenging an election, its conduct or its results, should however not be perceived as a reflection of weakness, but proof of the strength, vitality and openness of the political system. The right to vote would be merely abstract if the right to sue to enforce it was not guaranteed in law.”

“This is a political issue that must be challenged for the sake of the integrity of the electoral process in Jersey.”

“On the 9^th November will be the 25^th anniversary of the collapse of states who had other electoral standards than ours. Twenty five years after the non-elected Socialist governments disappeared we cannot get our elections honest.”

“Were this Russia or Ukraine these anomalies would be presented as a “crisis of democracy.”

Ask No Questions........

Following the controversial decision of Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, to write a cheque to the tune of £10,000 to enable "Equality of Arms" to the three policemen involved in disciplinary proceedings concerning the bugging of convicted drug dealer Curtis Warren's gang member's car. Deputy Mike Higgins submitted an "urgent question" to be asked in the island's parliament.

For our overseas readers who might not understand how Jersey does "Democracy" it is worth explaining that any questions submitted to the island's parliament by a democratically elected politician has to be vetted and agreed by the Bailiff before they (questions) are "allowed" to be asked.

The Bailiff is unelected Head of the Judiciary and Chief Judge. So before a "democratically" elected member of the legislator can ask a question, in the parliament, it has to be "allowed" by the "unelected" Head of the Judiciary............Democracy a la Jersey.

The three Police Officers, who were severely criticised for their actions by the Supreme Court, faced a "secret" disciplinary Hearing and were cleared of any wrong doing. The Law Officers (judiciary), as a result of the police's disciplinary hearing have now been severely criticised themselves and in particular the Attorney General Tim Le Cocq.

Politicians wishing to ask questions have to submit their questions, no later than, midday on Thursday's before the State Sitting on the following Tuesday. However it was too late to lodge a question surrounding the £10,000 "Equality of Arms" cheque written by the Home Affairs Minister as it wasn't made public until after midday Thursday. So Deputy Higgins lodged what is known as an "urgent question."

The Deputy's question was aimed at Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, who, prior to being elected, was himself a member of the Judiciary for some thirty years.......(coincidentally!)

The question submitted reads;

"Will the Minister justify to the States his decision to grant £10,000 to the defence of three police officers who were severely criticised for unlawful activity by the Privy Council on the grounds of Equality of Arms whilst denying similar support to the [former] Chief of Police Graham Power in his dispute and the States which fails to provide similar support to Public Servants facing disciplinary hearings"(END)

Regular readers and readers of our PREVIOUS POSTING will be aware that the Former Chief Police Officer, Graham Power QPM, was denied "Equality of Arms" by the same Home Affairs Minister.

The "urgent question" was submitted but the Bailiff (Head of Judiciary and unelected Chief Judge) disallowed it and here is his reasoning.

We apply a three-fold test to urgent questions. This question meets the first test in that is a matter of significant public interest and I assume for the moment – although I would need confirmation – that the second test is met, in that the matter has arisen since the deadline for oral questions. However I do not consider that the third aspect is met, namely that the matter is so urgent that it would be inappropriate to expect the member to wait till the next sitting to ask the question. The question can perfectly reasonably be asked at the next meeting. Leave is therefore refused.(END)

This set of events throws up a number of questions, none of which will be asked by the State Media, so is left to Bloggers (Jersey's only independent media).

Firstly we must question the ruling of the unelected Bailiff. "The question can perfectly reasonably be asked at the next meeting." We could argue that the ruling could be levelled at just about "any" urgent question and particularly if the judiciary didn't want it asked and is pretty flimsy considering it is preventing a "democratically" elected member of parliament attempting to hold the executive to account and thus serving the public.

We must then ask, seeing as though the judiciary has been so heavily criticised, as a result of the Police's disciplinary hearing, isn't the Bailiff heavily conflicted as his loyalties could lay with the Judiciary and might want to protect it/them or at least it could be viewed that way?

The over-arching questions are; how can it be in a supposed 21st century "democracy" that the unelected Judiciary have so much power over our "democratically" elected politicians? How many other urgent questions have been blocked by the unelected judiciary? How many written and oral questions have been blocked by the judiciary.......on flimsy grounds? How many propositions/amendments have been blocked by the unelected Judiciary? What impact has this had on our so-called "Democracy?" How can it be said that the politicians (Legislator) are running the island when it is decided by the unelected Judiciary as to what our Elected Members can, and can't ask?

#FreeJersey: Please Help Us Restore Democracy To Our Beautiful Island.

Today is not a day to focus on right-wing versus left-wing politics, but the difference between right and wrong. 

When a democratic government abuses its substantial legal, legislative and financial powers to crack down on journalists’ freedom of speech, force policemen and elected officials from their jobs and systemically dismantle its own checks and balances so as to deny each of its targets due process, clearly it is a government that has lost its way.

Jersey, the jewel in the crown of the Channel Islands, may be one of the world's leading offshore financial centres, but it has begun to use its clout against its own people – and it is keeping the rest of its population in the dark about it. This is now a place where court and legislative records – those that are public anyway – can now be redacted. This is an island where secret trials are now allegedly taking place and elected officials are forced to debate key issues in secret. Web content is banned and journalists booted out. This is not the way a democratic government is supposed to be run.

Again, this is not about politics. It is about standing up for truth, honesty and integrity. It is about restoring the good name of our beautiful island whose reputation has been dragged through the mud by those attempting to cover-up the facts surrounding some of the most heinous crimes known to man – crimes of violence against children. Crimes the vast majority of islanders would never defend, yet most of those who stand accused of committing them have not been brought to justice and continue to walk among us and our children. Worse, these alleged perpetrators remain entrenched in some of the very highest echelons of Jersey’s government – working in departments that focus on children! It is beyond comprehensible.

On an island where children in need of care have been let down by the government for decades – and continue to be let down – we cannot afford to ignore or repeat our mistakes. More broadly, challenging the government’s current decisions, particularly when not made in the best interest of the public, should not require bottomless financial resources and friends in high places. We are supposed to be a democracy, right?

With our checks and balances hamstrung, the international and independent media may be our last chance at reclaiming our democracy and re-establishing rule of law.

Today, Jersey politician Deputy Trevor Pitman launched an e-petition on Change.org in support of the return of U.S. investigative journalist and author, Leah McGrath Goodman, to the island to continue her research into decades of child abuse at Jersey’s state-run “care” homes and allegations of cover-ups in the wake of the government’s removal of the chief of police and shut-down of the entire investigation.

One year ago today, Ms. Goodman was banned from the UK and Jersey for two years after revealing to the Jersey Customs and Immigration Service during a voluntary meeting that she was writing a book on atrocities against children at Haut de la Garenne. According to the UK Border Force, she was flagged by Jersey Immigration authorities for removal upon her next border crossing – and that is exactly what happened. After the intervention of UK Member of Parliament John Hemming, the ban was reduced to one year and it expires today, 11 September 2012. That said, the UK and Jersey have so far declined to restore Ms. Goodman’s visa or allow her cross the border to continue her research. In order to do so safely, she will need to have her Tier -1 visa status fully restored – hence, the reason for Deputy Pitman’s e-petition today.

Leah McGrath Goodman should be permitted to complete her work in order that there is an accurate record based on the available facts and evidence. Jersey needs to confront the failings of its past so it can redress them and, most of all, ensure the safety of our children’s future.

We ask readers who care about the island’s children, who care about the island’s reputation, who believe in a free press and who want the truth to be told to sign Deputy Pitman’s e-petition. We also ask fellow bloggers to copy and paste this blog onto their own Web sites so that we may show the world that Jersey wants the best for its future and its children. It is time to leave our island’s culture of secrecy behind and demand the kind of free and open society our island deserves. Those who would do otherwise are not representative of the majority of islanders.

Please spread the word and sign this petition (ten seconds). The Internet is the one thing Jersey authorities have not been able to lock down.....yet! The petition can be signed HERE

For those who tweet this campaign, please use the #FreeJersey hashtag. While Jersey may try to keep journalists out, it cannot keep us for letting the truth in.