The Jersey Trews

Welcome to the first Episode in what I hope may become a more regular feature on Jersey Social Media - "The Jersey Trews".

The Jersey Trews aims to  bring you a more in-depth picture of the local stories of public interest that the local mainstream media are unable or unwilling to cover.

This week's episode focuses on the highly unusual event of the Jersey Assembly agreeing to release an otherwise 'confidential' transcript of a States debate of 2008, where the then-HomeAffairs Minister, Andrew Lewis, informed the Assembly of his decision to suspend the Chief of Police, Graham Power.

At the time, Deputy Lewis claimed to have read a "damning report" of the Metropolitain Police which gave his grounds to suspend the Police Chief. However, since that time, it has been asserted by many, including Napier, former Senators Le Marquand and Senators Syvret, that this could not have been the case.

I will add more to this in due course, but for the time being, do watch the attached video, which I think explains in layperson's terms some of the key points which seem to have by-passed much of the Mainstream Media (MSM) reporting.

Cognitive Dissonance and Jersey Reform.

Sen. Philip Bailhache, Chairman of the Electoral Commission

A referendum is coming up in less than 3 weeks. Two campaign groups, the States Assembly and the electoral commission acknowledge the need for States reform, members of one group - Option C - are questioning the need for reform at all. 

So what is the case for reform?

Well, first of all, here is a little teaser. Can you tell me who is the originator of the following quote?

'There is widespread disillusionment with the political process. Some might say perhaps that this reflects the absence of party politics, but it is also a reflection of the relatively complicated and unfair system whereby we elect our representatives.'

When I saw this quote, I wondered who had said this. I thought it might have been me, but it was not particularly my idiom. So I thought it might have been Geoff Southern or more likely, Roy Le Hérissier. But no. Who was it that dare suggest that there could be anything even slightly wrong with our current system of government, and the way in which we ran our elections in Jersey?

Avid JEP reader, Jimmy Perchard

It is certainly a far cry from the idyllic picture painted by former Senator Perchard (who I hear is now campaigning for the abolition of the Senators) who said, on 30th March 2011 that 'Jersey is a great example of democracy; a beacon of democracy that we should hold up high for the world to look at.'

Hide it under a bushel? No! Not Jim, in any case. He was loud and proud of the Jersey system, which he is now, 2 years later, campaigning to change.

So let's put you out of your misery. The person who disagrees with Senator Perchard, that thinks Jersey is a not shining beacon of democracy, but a 'relatively complicated and unfair system' is none other than Seigneur Bailache lui-même. 

So the question is, now that it has been established beyond doubt, that Jersey's system needs change: what do we do about it?

Well, we have two options on the table. A or B. So which should we go for?

Senator Bailhache told us on 20th February 2013 that:

 'Reform option B creates greater voter inequity than we have at the moment.'

So, that naturally means that the Senator is supporting option A, (right?) which is fairer, more democratic and less complicated (his original reason for bringing reform). WRONG. Senator Bailhache is supporting Option B because he wants to make the system even more inequitable that it is at the moment. 

This is the man who topped the poll islandwide, but he has campaigned to change our entire electoral system which he thinks is unfair and he wants to replace it with something that is even more unfair.

This is an example of cognitive dissonance of the highest order. 

Of course, the Jersey mainstream media do not pick up on this contradiction in the system, in the same way they do not ask why Pierre Horsfall has done a U-Turn on the Constables, and is now supporting Option B. 

Electoral Reform Jersey: Which Parish?

Dear Reader,

You will hopefully be aware that the Jersey Electoral Commission has recently published its findings. I will give a detailed analysis of these in the next few days, but in the meantime, I am publishing a list (below) of the forthcoming public meetings, which start next week in each of the Parishes.

For Parishioners of St Brelade, the first meeting will be held this coming Tuesday at the Parish Hall. I had emailed the Commission asking them to hold it at Communicare, as this is more accessible for parking, would hold more people, and is in walking distance for most residents. However, they could not accommodate this wish.

For constituents of mine who live in St Brelade, and who may not have transport, please do not hesitate to contact me and I will arrange a lift. I have organised a minibus leaving from Communicare at 6:15, 6:30 and 6:45pm for residents of the area who may wish to attend.

For those of you who wish to be involved in  the campaign for positive, democratic reform, you may wish to join Reform Jersey. It's three simple principles for democratic reform have already been taken on board by the Commission, which goes to show what a good, positive campaign and lobbying can do.

For your information, the three basic principles are that:

Each States Member should represent the same number of people.

Each voter should have the same number of votes.

The system must be simple and user friendly.

Now, without further ado, here is the schedule for the meetings -

Date	Location	Time
Tuesday 6th November	St Brelade’s Parish Hall	7 pm
	St John’s Parish Hall	7 pm
Wednesday 7th November	St Helier Town Hall	7 pm
	Trinity Parish Hall	7 pm
Thursday 8th November	St Martin’s Public Hall	7 pm
	St Clement’s Parish Hall	7 pm
Tuesday 13th November	St Ouen’s Parish Hall	7 pm
	St Peter’s Parish Hall	7 pm
Wednesday 14th November	Grouville Parish Hall	7 pm
	St Mary’s Parish Hall	7 pm
Thursday 15th November	St Saviour’s Parish Hall	7 pm
	St Lawrence Parish Hall	7 pm

Jersey Evening Pravda - Deconstructing Jersey Propaganda

Today's Pravda featured propaganda so blatant, flawed and out of touch, that it would not be out of place in Putin's Russia. Under its official propaganda section of page 10, appeared an editorial, ostensibly from Chris Bright, the pamphlet's nominal editor. 

The tone and content were 'brazen.' (as one reader put it) in its open and bias support of the Constables retaining their automatic seat in the States Assembly, even though an increasing ground swell of opinion is increasingly opposed to this position. Moreover, early indications are that the majority of submissions to the Electoral Commission are calling for the ex officio role of the Constables to cease. They could of course stand for election as politicians if they wished and, more importantly, if they passed the democratic test of the electorate.

For those readers not from Jersey, we are a small island jurisdiction, very close to France and in the English Channel. We have a population of nearly 100, 000. We have no party politics (not officially) and we have 51 elected members all sitting in one chamber. But there are 3 categories of States Member: Senators (10) elected island wide; 29 Deputies (elected in district constituencies); and 12 Constables (sometimes called 'Connétables') elected in parishes of varying sizes. 

We are currently undergoing a reform process. Initially, it was agreed that the electoral commission be independent (that is free from politicians), however this was highjacked by a prominent and newly elected politician, who already wanted to keep the role of Constables.

The problem with the Constables position is:

 (1) that they are primarily elected on an honorary basis to lead the municipal administration of their parish and oversee its honorary police force (oh, yes, I forgot to mention - as well as the island having a paid British Police Force, there are also 12 honorary forces, one for each parish); They automatically get a seat in what is effectively our national Parliament as well. However, they are not primarily elected to that role. They are essentially somewhere between a Mayor and a Sheriff.

(2) They represent vastly differing constituencies. St Mary has 1,600 residents, St Helier, the capital, some 34, 000.  Yet they each have one Constable.

It is interesting to note that the Mori poll of 2006 showed support for the Constables [in the States] at 54% (from a sample of 1000). It was certainly not 'general'. Personally, I think it is less, but ultimately we do not know. That is why in 2009, I proposed a referendum to ask the public to decide. However the majority of States Members voted against 29 -17. No surprise that 10 Constables voted en bloc against (what were they so scared of?). Only the Constable of St Clement voted in favour. He also agrees that Constables should lose their ex officio role and has told the commission that. 

It is in this context that the following editorial is set. In this video, I deconstruct some of this propaganda and show it up for the insidious nonsense that it is.

The editorial itself can be seen below.

FOLLOWING up his election promise to resolve the long-running issue of States reform, Senator Sir Philip Bailhache and the Electoral Commission he chairs have now completed the first round of their public consultation on the future make-up of the Assembly.

Even before publishing his findings to initiate a second round of open discussion, the Assistant Chief Minister and former Bailiff has given some clear indications of what they are likely to include, notably four-year terms for all, the retention of the Constables and a reduction in the overall number of Members.

The first of those proposals is uncontentious and the second will be widely welcomed. Despite the insistence of a vociferous minority, there is no evidence of any public demand for the removal of the Constables and no compelling reason why there should be. Each of the 12 parish heads is uniquely well placed to understand and act upon the views and needs of the local communities he or she serves. The claim that they are somehow ‘unelected’ if, as often happens, they face no opposition at the ballot box is self-interested nonsense. Moreover, the life experience and general common sense of the Constables provide an important balancing factor in a single-chamber assembly, while their removal would probably deal an ultimately fatal blow to the parish structure on which so much of Jersey’s special identity and community spirit depends.

If the key question, then, is how well the Constables serve and reflect their electorates, the answer must be: very. That serves also as a reminder that the guiding central issue for the commission should be how to improve the democratic responsiveness and accountability of the States Assembly, as distinct from the speed and efficiency of its decision-making, an important point when it comes in turn to the third of their predictable proposals. The claimed need for a reduction in the overall size of the Assembly is much more questionable.

It has been repeated so often that it has become an article of faith that there are too many States Members, but there is little hard evidence to support the view. Public concern stems not from the number of seats but mainly from the divisive way in which ministerial government has been introduced and the advent of career politician in a jurisdiction without clear party politics.

There may be scope for a tweak here and there in the number of Deputies, and there is certainly a strong case for reinstating the four Senatorial seats arbitrarily removed by the last Assembly, but there must still be enough in total to carry out constituency work, share the ministerial workload more widely, represent the Island overseas, outvote the executive and keep the increasingly powerful civil service in check. Simple mathematics suggest that the current total of 51 is not that excessive.

In reality, there was not much wrong with the old system of 12 Constables, 12 Senators with a hard-won Islandwide mandate and enough Deputies to go round. It gave every voter at last 14 representatives, each of whom had the opportunity to play a direct part in the decision-making process. We cannot turn back the clock, but it is difficult to imagine the Electoral Commission coming up with anything more democratic than that.

'It's Crisis time for Jersey' - Senator Syvret to join former Jersey 'Monarch' in Hollywood Election

You just could not make it up. Several months ago, there was a rumour going around that former Bailiff, Sir Philip Bailhache was going to stand for election in 2011. I and several others dismissed this as 'fanciful', the kind of thing you hear in the pub, which turns out to be nonsense. It was not that those who were saying it were not trustworthy, quite the opposite, rather that it seems the stuff of fairy tales. Certainly, it is possible - and it did happen - that one can start off being a deputy (or senator or constable), become a crown officer and then onto become Bailiff (we know that Philip Bailhache started his states career as a deputy for Grouville in 1972). However, any sensible mind might tend to think that there is an unwritten rule that it does not work the other way round (like a one way membrane) - not for any constitutional reason (though there are questions that should be asked about whether former Chief Justices should be eligible for election), but simply become it is unbecoming for a feudal lord, someone who has held the most senior post in the island, as Head of the Royal Court, Head of the States Assembly and Civic Head of the Island, to 'lower himself' to the role of a humble senator(ial candidate) - I add the parenthesis, because contrary to the inference of recent JEP reports, there is nothing inevitable about the election of the former Bailiff. 

However, we do not live in ordinary times. The decision of Mr P. Bailhache to seek election, is indicative of the desperation that the Establishment find themselves in (yes, there is an establishment in the island - for a good starting point look at page 6 of the phone book - and page 7 lists many of their strongest supporters). For you see, this is where the propaganda kicks in. For these, and many other reactionaries in the island, the fact that the last three years have seen 'divisions' in the States Assembly, long debates, more questions being asked (though not necessarily answered), policies being challenged, the validity of information being contested - these are all portrayed as 'bad things' by many establishment supporters, and their prime media tool, the Jersey Evening Post. Even the BBC have fallen into the trap of dismissing long debates and the concerted efforts for States Reform as politicians being 'self-indulgent', 'talking about themselves', rather than giving in depth political analysis, about what the underlying reasons are for the democratic deficit both in and out of the States. 

So why is the Former Bailiff lowering himself to seek election as Senator? Clearly, there must be something at stake. 'Jersey' - in his terms and the terms of the neo-liberals, of Sen. Ozouf, Maclean, Cohen and their predecessors, Walker, Horsfall, Jeune etc - is first and foremost a business. It is a portal through which Billions of pounds worth of transactions flow every year, and some people do very well from it. For these people, it is important that the Jersey model is protected at all costs. Even if that means independence. That Jersey model is not our 'way of life' - our Jersey cow, the preservation of our coastal beauty and countryside (no, those are dispensable - look at the desecration of Portelet, in the name of Capital) - it is the ability for foreign capital and business interests to use Jersey for its own ends, whilst making a few local residents (Partners of law firms, Directors of Trust Companies, Senior Advocates, Real Estate Agents, Accountants and Property Developpers) very, very wealthy. 

However, there is an inconvenience. When these 'colonialists' came to the island, they noticed there was an indigenous population that needed to be subjugated. So, a facade was created which loosely resembled democracy. You would be able to 'choose' your oppressors - the ones who make you pay more tax - direct and indirect - whilst reducing taxes to (foreign) corporations and the super-wealthy. Political parties would be discouraged, to stop any meaningful policies and their effective delivery by an organised grouping. The system itself would be difficult to understand - three types of member, elected at different times, for different periods, in different areas of differing sizes. Because you cannot vote for policy direction and you cannot vote for all seats, there would be effectively little link between your vote and what you got in government. Moreover, because the Ministers and Chief Minister are then appointed from 'in house' - you, the elector, are removed even further from the decision making process. A Minister can get elected on 'false promises', but because one is a Senator, he does not need to face election with the rest. He then goes on to stand for Chief Minister, even though many feel he has lied and cheated them. The consequence to all this? > Disillusionment > Voter apathy > Abstentionism. But it is not because the public does not care; it is because they realise that the system is against them.

Now back to the former Bailiff: when he declared, he must have thought he was a dead cert. He would not risk this, if there was a significant chance of failure. He would have been aware of the political analysis described above - where the 40% or so who vote for Senators, represent a large majority of the 'conservative, country' vote.  This is surely in his favour. 

But now there is another twist: what was looking like being a fairly bland Senatorial election for 4 seats in October, has just got a whole lot more interesting, with former Senator Syvret declaring just this afternoon, that he will also be standing for election. No doubt the thought of going head to head with his arch-nemisis, Sir Philip, who the former Senator no-doubt thinks is the embodiment of all that is wrong, politically, with the island, was too good an opportunity to miss. 

This, combined with a 'general election' (except for 6 senators seats) could make the outcome unpleasantly uncertain. It will certainly make the 14 or so hustings a lot more interesting. There will, perhaps for the first time, be a level playing field between Mr Syvret and Mr Bailhache. In the past, the power base was always skewed - either as Bailiff of States vs naughty elected Senator (who dared answer back) or Judge/defendant (not that former necessarily ever presided over any of Mr Syvret's cases). 

But the hustings are a great leveller. We know that Mr Syvret is an equal match for the former Bailiff, in terms of intellect and oratory. The 'Sir' title, will mean little when it comes to hustings in St Helier, St Saviour and St Brelade. 

But before we get fixated on two candidates for 4 seats, let's put these whole elections into perspective:

1)There will of course be other candidates - all of whom may be equally or better suited to be in the States than these two. That will be for the electorate to decide. 

2) And most importantly - the next Government will be made up in the vast majority by those (re)elected as deputy and constable. Whilst the media hype will no doubt focus on these 4 seats, the real battles and political gains/losses stand to made in the districts and parishes. In coming weeks, I will be working with other bloggers to highlight some of the choices that need to be made in key constituencies, and giving my take on the candidates. It is important that voters make informed choices, based on policy rather than personality or superficial factors. Moreover, it is simply important that we vote.