Chief Minister To Seek Re-Election

Chief Minister Ian Gorst.

Jersey's Chief Minister, Senator Ian Gorst, has declared his intention to put himself, once more, before the electorate and seek a third, and final term, as Chief Minister.

Last week VFC was granted an interview (video below) with Senator Gorst to discuss his decision/reasons for seeking an unprecedented third term as the head of the island's government. As an anti Child abuse campaigner I wanted to know how much his support for the Jersey Independent Care Inquiry, and its recommendations, might have hurt him politically, how can he appeal to reformers and traditionalists at the same time? How can he make the public, and States Members, aware of the atrocities which took place (for decades) in State-run "Care" Institutions when some people (and media) only want to discredit the Care Inquiry, and its panel, for ordering a Prawn Cocktail rather than the soup of the day (a-la Operation Rectangle)?

Senator Philip Bailhache

We discuss (among much more) the possibility of (long time critic of the Care Inquiry) Senator Philip Bailhache challenging the leadership role, either openly, or by proxy and what this could mean to the implementation (or not) of the Care Inquiry's recommendations should Senator Bailhache, or a proxy, be successful?

The way I see the up-coming contest for Chief Minister is a two-horse-race. It's either Senator Gorst or Senator Bailhache in the running. Who we elect, at the General Election in May this year, will decide who leads Jersey for the next four years. Who is committed to implementing the Care Inquiry's recommendations? Who is committed to reforming the States and bringing it somewhere close to the 21st Century? Who favours "The Jersey Way" and would take the Island back to the 15th Century? 

Senator Lyndon Farnham

Gorst has come in for a lot of criticism over his leadership across Social Media. One doesn't have to look far on the internet to see remarks like "get Gorst out" "Gorst is useless" "wait until the next election Gorst will be history." This is all well and good but I don't see anybody saying who he will be replaced by? So far the only other declared candidate is Senator Lyndon (Philip Bailhache by proxy) Farnham. With his track record of the Jersey Innovation fund, the Aircraft (non) registry, Condor, and so forth is he really the man to replace Gorst?

Would Senator Gorst be my first choice for Chief Minister? No. But one has to be realistic and look at the "realistic" alternative(s).

Of course this all does depend on either/both Senators Gorst and Bailhache being re-elected in May and unless there's a huge (monumental) shift in the demographic of the voter (traditional Jersey) I think it is a forgone conclusion that both will get back in comfortably. 

Hopefully readers/voters/perspective voters will find the video interview below informative and might encourage them to the polls at the General Election. Vote.je is a very useful site which explains how to get registered to vote and much more which can be found, on the left hand side of this Blogsite under the "My Blog List" banner or  it can be accessed from HERE.  

Boris Bailhache - Guest Posting.

Boris Bailhache

Political observers cannot help but have noticed that the national mainstream media have recently been (almost wall to wall) covering stories regarding the calls for the sacking/resignation of Boris Johnson. The calls are being made, seemingly, because he has gone "off message," is "ignoring collective responsibility" and "undermining the authority" of his Prime Minster Theresa May regarding Brexit.

Boris Johnson, it is firmly believed, is setting his stall for a leadership challenge against Theresa May by undermining her authority with his publicly made Brexit views and is making the PM into some kind of a laughing stock because she is unwilling, or unable, to reign her foreign Minister in.

But what about the Jersey situation with our Foreign Minister, Senator Philip (Boris) Bailhache, and leader Senator, Ian Abraham ,  (Theresa) Gorst? Senator Bailhache and his constant undermining of Ian Gorst, and the latter's attempts, not only to have a Committee of Inquiry (COI) into decades of Child Abuse, but to implement its recommendations. Not only has Boris Bailhache consistently attempted to derail the COI but is now attempting to derail senator Gorst and his attempts to implement the recommendation of splitting the dual role of the Bailiff. Senator Bailhache playing (as mentioned below) the old "tradition" card. Although he didn't play that card when he wiped out 500 years of tradition with the church. That obviously wasn't "traditional" enough to worry the public with.

While drafting this Blog Posting I was contacted by a reader and asked if I could/would publish a Guest Posting which, coincidentally, mirrored some of the points I was going to make so have incorporated it. Thankfully the reader HAS seen the similarities/comparisons between the Theresa May/Boris Johnson, Ian Gorst/Philip Bailhache sketch but can it be that not ONE of our esteemed professional local journalists have seen these similarities/comparisons? Do they not watch the national news?

Below the Guest Posting is senator Bailhache having yet another dig at Senator Gorst and yet another dig at the Care Inquiry. It came by way of an interview with ITV/CTV (who we credit for the recording).

Readers might recall that Sir Philip, with the help of ITV/CTV, managed to EXONERATE the then Jersey Dean Bob Key.

The Guest Poster has asked to remain anonymous.

Guest Post.

"They say that States Members start behaving strangely a few months before an election - some, who have otherwise been inconspicuous for the past 3 years have even been heard to speak, ask questions and even be critical of Government policy. When you are on a sinking ship, even the most loyal crew member will start eyeing up the life-rafts, knowing there may not be space for everyone.

This is standard practice, but what is going to be different about the May elections is that, for the first time in recent time, the fracture lines are starting to show - and in unusual places. Namely, there is infighting on the right. We saw the early signs of this in the fall-out over the innovation fund. Clearly, it was mismanaged. And whilst in times of success, various Ministers would line up to claim the positives as their own, or to take part in the traditional patting of each other's backs, this time, the knives came out.
The public wanted a scalp. The highly paid civil servants were shrewd enough to leave the scene (and the island) before the 'vraic hit the fields', and they would have been laughing all the way to the bank.

Senator Alan Maclean

Rightly or wrongly, Senator Ozouf was the one in the firing line for the failings of the fund and he had to go. The Chief Minister, on the other hand, strongly suggested that it was not his friend Philip who was to blame, so much as Senators Maclean and Farnham - the traditional right-wing of his council of Minister.

Skip forward a few months, and we see another prominent, canny politician who is fully aware that this Council of Minister's ship is heading firmly for the electoral rocks. The English-man Gorst and Phil'll Fix it have never been so unpopular. With the rise of Reform Jersey, and the decline of the neo-liberals, it is important that Senator Bailhache not only has a life raft (chauffeur-driven no doubt), but a ship of his own to captain when SS Vanity finally goes under. For that he needs a flag and a crew.

The 'flag' is tradition and the cause is the Bailiff. An uninspiring one, you might say and this is where the spin is needed. Remember the 2014 elections, which instead of being dominated by the real political issues and the Council of Ministers being held to account for their failings in Health, Housing, Social Security, electoral reform and Population control, the election was engineered to be little more than a side show about the Constables. Whilst younger people, unimpressed, showed their contempt for the political class by staying at home, the older voters took the bait - swallowing the hook, line and sinker too - believing that parish rates would go up if the constables were not in the States. The right (traditional and business class) were united in their efforts then, and saw off the unaligned independents, whilst the Social Democrats of Reform Jersey made no net gains, but maintained their seats.

This time it is very different. The rift between Gorst/Ozouf on the one hand, the 'progressive'-conservatives on one hand and the feudal-reactionaries on the other is palpable. Philip Bailhache, who never was one to toe the line (on the Child Abuse Inquiry, notably) has sensed the public mood and is making the separation of powers debate about something it is not. He knows it is a very simple matter - that Courts and Legislatures should be separate, and that Judges should stick to judging and politicians to politicking. So he needs a distraction and a bogey-man.

(1) POPULISM: This is a matter for the people. This is a constitutional matter, and - of course - constitutional matters should be put to the public (when it suits politicians). How dare arrogant politicians think they can make such a monumental decision without consulting you!

(2) BLAME THE IMMIGRANT. Gorst is an Englishman. He is just trying to make us like an overseas county of England. Look at the House of Commons, they are a complete shambles. We don't need an elected speaker like in England. Look at the mess they are in.

And the Jersey media go along with it.

In the recent Channel TV interview, (below) which was cloying in its deference to 'Sir' Philip, the story ran - Jersey could elect its own speaker like in the UK. But of course, it could have said 'like Barbados', 'like the Cayman Islands' or - how's about - 'like France.'

If there is an obvious parallel to be made with the UK it is the sharpening of knives from the likes of Boris Johnson and the would be pretenders for the lame-duck Theresa May's job.

Surely I am not the only one to see the comparison between Sir Philip Johnson and Boris Bailhache (with a little bit of Rees-Mogg thrown in for good measure)?"(END)

One Rule for One?

Following the debacle, and scandal, of the failed Jersey Innovation Fund (JIF) which could have cost the Jersey taxpayer millions of £'s. It has been reported that two out of the three independent reports into the failings of JIF will not be published. This is apparently because the remaining reports are of a disciplinary nature. (So what)?

The one report that has been published is reported to have exonerated Senator Philip Ozouf but leaves questions to be answered of Senators Alan Maclean and Lyndon Farnham. Questions the Chief Minister Senator Ian Gorst doesn't seem able to understand or ANSWER.

Back in 2010 the then Home Affairs Minister, Ian Le Marquand, set a very dangerous precedent by (possibly illegally) publishing the disgraced and discredited Wiltshire report, as explained in the below e-mail sent to BBC Radio Jersey from VFC.

This is after his (ILM's) predecessor, and now St. Helier Deputy, Andrew Lewis (possibly illegally) suspended the former Police Chief DURING a major Child Abuse Investigation amid contradictory statements of which he remains UNACCOUNTABLE.

The Wiltshire Report (Operation Haven 1) was the prosecution case against the former Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM for a supposed disciplinary hearing..........That never happened!

Despite there never being an "outcome" (because he robbed the former Police Chief of a disciplinary hearing) Ian Le Marquand still went ahead and appeared to have breached the Wilts confidentiality clauses, by publishing a heavily redacted form of its report.

Former CO Wilts Constabulary Brian Moore.

Operation Haven (1) Confidentiality Clauses.

"Highly Confidential – Personal Information

An independent disciplinary investigation by Wiltshire Police

Following the suspension of Chief Officer Graham Power of the
States of Jersey Police on 12 November 2008.

Obligation to confidentiality

1. Paragraph 1.2 of the discipline code (for Chief Officers of the States of Jersey Police) requires that all parties involved in the operation of this code will maintain confidentiality while proceedings are being progressed. The outcome of any particular case arising under the code will not, as a general rule, be publicised, but it is accepted that following the outcome of a particular case, the Home Affairs Minister and/or the States Employment Board and /or the Chief Officer, might decide that public disclosure is appropriate.

2. This Report contains personal data within the meaning of the Data Protection Act 1998, and Wiltshire Police would breach the first data protection principle if it were to disclose that information. Hence, the information is exempt under s.40(2) Freedom of Information Act 2000

3. This Report contains information that has been, and continues to be, held by Wiltshire Police for the purposes of an investigation which it has a duty to conduct and which ought not to be disclosed (under s.30 Freedom of Information Act 2000).

4. An obligation of confidence upon Wiltshire Police arises from the duty outlined at 1. Above, and disclosure of information would be likely to prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and Jersey. Information, therefore, ought not to be disclosed (under s.27 Freedom of Information Act 2000)."(END).

With all this in mind VFC sent the below e-mail to BBC Radio Jersey.

E-mail to BBC Radio Jersey.

"I heard on your radio programme this morning that the remaining reports into the Jersey Innovation Fund will NOT be published because they are of a disciplinary nature.

I'd like to cast your/the BBC's mind back to 2010 when the then Home Affairs Minister, Ian Le Marquand, (possibly illegally) published the prosecution side of a disciplinary report from the Wiltshire Constabulary (Operation Haven 1) against the former Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM.

I reported here https://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2010/08/outcome-precedent-has-been-set.html that a precedent had been set and asked the question"Does this now mean that any states employee, even if un-convicted of any wrongdoing can face the prospect of the publication of a disciplinary report all over the “accredited” media? Or will it, once more turn out to be one rule for one????????????????????????????????"

You/BBC might want to challenge the Chief Minister's decision to bury the JIF reports on the basis of the precedent set by Ian Le Marquand back in 2010?"(END)

Of course the BBC could find itself in a bit of a sticky situation considering that it, alongside all other local mainstream media, published the prosecution case against the former Chief Police Officer. But despite being leaked the Chief Officer's interim defence case refused to publish a single WORD OF IT. Indeed, to this day, NONE of the local mainstream media have published a single word of it despite it now being a publicly available document (somewhere) on the Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry's WEBSITE. And despite ALL local Mainstream Media reporting on the prosecution case.

We await to see if the BBC (or any of the Mainstream Media) will challenge the Chief Minister on his decision to bury these Jersey Innovation Fund disciplinary reports in light of the precedent set by Ian Le Marquand. Or will it be a case of "One Rule for One?"

A Precedent has been SET. (For some?)

Ian Gorst's Guide to the Galaxy.

Chief Minister Ian Gorst.

The meaning of everything, according to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, was/is 42 but Chief Minister Ian Gorst has his own version.

After the scandal of the Jersey Innovation Fund (JIF) was exposed serious questions needed to be asked, or more importantly answered, of those politically responsible i.e Senator Philip Ozouf who signed off two of the loans, and Senator Lyndon Farnham, along with Senator Alan Maclean who between them signed off five of the loans and last but not least Chief Minister Ian Gorst who surely has ultimate responsibility for the actions/in-actions of his Ministers and Assistant Ministers?

We reported HERE. how it looked like Senator Ozouf was being slung under the bus for his part in this fiasco, and in fairness to him, he resigned as Assistant Minister So we know he did "The Honourable Thing." What we DON'T know is if Senator's Maclean and Farnham have also offered to do "The Honourable Thing" or if Chief Minster Gorst asked them to?

Deputy Montfort Tadier.

Reform Jersey's Deputy Montfort Tadier attempted to find this out on 14 February 2017 by tabling the following Oral Question to the Chief Minister:

“Given that Senator Ozouf was not the only Minister to have signed off loans from the Jersey Innovation Fund, will the Chief Minister also be asking Senators Farnham and Maclean to 'step aside' from their Ministerial duties until the relevant investigation has fully reported back?”

This is where we discovered that senator's Farnham and Maclean signed off the majority of the loans but we DIDN'T get an answer to Deputy Tadier's question. So on 14 March 2017 the Deputy attempted once more to get his question addressed if not answered where he tabled the following Oral Question to the Chief Minister.

“Will the Chief Minister state whether, following the publication of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s report entitled ‘Jersey Innovation Fund’ (R.3/2017), Senator Farnham and/or Senator Maclean offered to resign as Ministers or whether he, as Chief Minister, asked them to resign?”

Again a pretty straight forward, clear and concise, question? But this is where we discovered that Chief Minister Gorst has his own version of "42" which appears to be "the former Assistant Minister did the honourable thing."

If this (edited video below) didn't make such a mockery of our so called "Democratic Process" it could almost be funny. The fact that the (unelected/unaccountable) Chair(s) of the States Assembly rule it perfectly acceptable for the Chef Minister (and by implication ANY Minister) to "come out with their own version of 42" in "answer" to any question makes the whole so-called "Democratic Process" that much more (almost) laughable and tragic............ 

Is Senator Ozouf Being Thrown Under a Bus?

Following the scandal of the Jersey Innovation Fund (JIF) and Senator Philip Ozouf's RESIGNATION. The question has to be asked "Is he (Philip Ozouf) being thrown under a bus here?"

On the 17th January 2017, in an answer to a question from Reform Jersey's Deputy Geoff Southern (video below) The Economic Development Minister, Senator Lyndon Farnham acknowledged, admitted, or even "confessed" that five out of  seven grants issued by JIF were NOT signed off by Senator Ozouf. Two of them were apparently signed off by Treasury Minister Senator Alan Maclean, three of them were signed of by Senator Farnham, and two by Senator Ozouf. The latter having fallen on his sword and resigned from his Assistant Ministerial duties.......At least for as long as there is an investigation happening into the alleged waste of millions of £'s of taxpayers money that was JIF.

So is Senator Ozouf the only person who should be shouldering all the blame here? We're not saying he does not have serious questions to answer and he must take responsibility for his actions and/or inactions but is he really the ONLY one who should?

Didn't JIF have some kind of an "Advisory Board?" What kind of advice was it giving? Was its advice acted upon or was it ignored? What about the Chief Minister himself? Doesn't ultimate responsibility lay at his door? Shouldn't he (and others) be offering his resignation or "stepping aside?"

It could be that the supposed Inquiry will answer these questions, or it could be that it won't. Who is conducting the Inquiry? Will it be another "Our Chap" Report? Is it, or why isn't it, a "public" Inquiry?

Reform Jersey's Deputy Montfort Tadier has submitted an Oral Question, (below) to the Chief Minister, tabled for this Tuesday 14th February:

Deputy Montfort Tadier.

Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade will ask the following question of the Chief Minister –

“Given that Senator Ozouf was not the only Minister to have signed off loans from the Jersey Innovation Fund, will the Chief Minister also be asking Senators Farnham and Maclean to 'step aside' from their Ministerial duties until the relevant investigation has fully reported back?”

It's a fair question when one considers Senator Farnham's "confession" in the video below. But it doesn't sound/look like an absolute confession. One can't help thinking he was trying to absolve himself of any real blame and appeared to be laying it more at the door of Senator Ozouf. That's the impression I got but readers/viewers might get another impression.

Could it be that if every Minister was to resign through incompetence, or malpractice, that we would no longer have a Council of Ministers?