Scrutiny: Children's Services in Jersey - But where are the Media?

The Scrutiny Panel that deals with Health and Social Services in Jersey met this Friday for their first public hearing with the Minister and her team to discuss the recent finding of the independent review carried out by the Care Inspectorate into the island's children's services. The panel did a pretty proficient job, considering it was their first ever public hearing, even if the Minister and her entourage were less impressive. 



One member who did impress was the former Education Minister, Deputy James Reed, who demanded to know why, more than 3 years after the Williamson recommendations, the new Inspectorate found that 'children were still not being listened to.'


What was perhaps most surprising (well, not for Jersey) was that none of the media bothered to turn up to hear what the Minister had to say, particularly as they had been covering the very issues that were on the agenda for that meeting. For example, just two days earlier the Jersey Evening Post led with the headline:  'Foster System "Failing Thousands"' , while the BBC lead with 'Jersey Children's Care Service "Needs Improvement"'. Yet the JEP and the BBC decided  not to send any their reporters down to hear what was going on. 
Thankfully, Citizen's media was there to take notes and do interviews. These videos are brought to you courtesy of Tom Gruchy.

Good Conflict. Bad Conflict

A man with many hats:
Attorney General, Tim Le Cocq

Minister for TTS, Deputy Kevin Lewis

You may have read in Friday's Jersey Evening Post that the 'Transport and Technical Services could (here is the operative word) face prosecution over beach polution.' Could, would, might, may... Indeed. 

Now when I read this headline, two questions immediately flashed up in my mind. One inquisitive and one rhetorical: (1) 'Who exactly is going to do the prosecuting?' and (2) What is the actual likelihood of them getting [sucessfully] prosecuted?

As I read on, I found the answer to my first question (I'll leave you make up your own minds re: the second one) 'Environmental protection officers have now submitted a file of evidence about breaches of the plant’s discharge permit to the Attorney General, who is considering whether to bring the matter to court.'

From what I know of the current Attorney General, he seems like a genuinely nice guy, polite, genial, but more important intelligent and a great asset to have in the Assembly when legal questions arise that most non-legally trained members easily struggle with. 

But in this post, I am not concerned with the person of the Attorney General, rather the rôle itself. Or rather, I should say 'rôles', for his jobs are multiple. 

JOB DESCRIPTION FOR HM ATTORNEY GENERAL

1) The Attorney General gives legal advice to Ministers and Scrutiny Panels. 

2)He is also the head of Jersey's prosecution service and, 

3) as 'Titular head' of the Honorary Police, carries out the duties that arise from that position. 

4)His department also assists overseas law enforcement agencies and carries out conveyancing work for the States. The Solicitor General deputises for the Attorney General.

It is the first two, primary rôles of the Attorney General which are of interest to us in this case.

(1) The Attorney General gives legal advice to Ministers (and their departments).
(2) The Attorney General Decides whether to prosecute (Ministers)

So, he gives legal advice to the Environment Department (who have submitted evidence to him regarding the alleged negligence of TTS). He gives legal advice to TTS, who may be facing charges from ... from the Attorney General. (Presumably, he gives legal advice to himself too).

A veritable one stop shop, is our Attorney General.

Now, for the conspiracy theorists amongst you, the alarm bells will be going off in your head. 'Surely this is a conflict of interest!' How can the AG possibly be considered impartial, when he has to balance so many potentially conflicts of interest!'. Shame on you. How dare you cast aspersions or Her Majesty's esteemed Attorney General to be able to balance the near impossible demands of each aspect of his job. The AG is a Crown Officer and therefore well experienced in dealing with conflicts of interests.

BAD CONFLICT

St Helier Deputy, Mike Higgins

When it comes to Elected States Members, however, or at least those outside the cosy inner circle, the rules are somewhat different. Last Year, Deputy Mike Higgins was prevented from carrying out a Scrutiny Review looking at the management of the Airport and Harbours and, in particular, its shadow board (one of the non-executive directors is former Chief Minister, Frank Walker). Deputy Higgins was probably the only States Member of carry out this review, but he was stopped because certain members saw his rôle as 'organiser of the Battle of Britain Air display as a conflict of interest.' Deputy Higgins gave assurances he would not be looking at areas that affected the Air Display, but this did not satisfy other members. The review never did happen and Deputy Higgins resigned from Scrutiny all together as a result

Deputy Trevor Pitman

A similar thing happened to another St Helier Deputy, Trevor Pitman, when he decided to chair a scrutiny into the handling of a review of Operation Rectangle, very much linked to Haut de la Garenne Abuse inquiry. The review was set to find out some damning revelations about how the review was handled and, in the end, succeeded in being carried out, but this was not without Deputy Pitman being dragged over the coals. Apparently, because he had 'asked questions' in the States on the issue and written a blog, he was 'conflicted' and therefore an inappropriate person to now lead a review. That is, considered inappropriate by The Home Affairs Minister, Senator Le Marquand (who was conflicted) and by Senator Ferguson (head of scrutiny at the time).

So you see, in Jersey, it is OK for Crown Officers to be able to be expected to balance their rôles, to over-ride their human nature and to always act in a clinical and impartial way, whether they are advising States Members, telling them when they can speak (some of which with whom they may get on very well, others not so well) or deciding whether to prosecute them. But for those outside the political establishment, even the most contrived suggestion of conflict can be sufficient to scupper valid democratic checks and balances from taking place.

Conclusion

Now, the matter of nitrates going into the sea is one thing. It is no doubt serious, but much more serious is the matter of Historic* Child Abuse (*for those still hoping for justice  in our island, there is nothing 'historic' about it). The potential conflict of interest, from the Attorney General (not necessarily Tim Le Cocq), who is one the one hand advising the Council of Ministers legally, and even politically, whilst also being the one deciding which child abuse cases to prosecute is immense. 

This is why I was so keen to make sure that long awaited Committee of Inquiry in Child Abuse also had the following as one of its terms of reference:

'Was a consistent and impartial approach taken when deciding on which cases to prosecute; and was the process free from political influence or interference on any level?'

This amendment was adopted as part of the Terms of Reference by the States Assembly, but it is already under threat, which figures like the former Chief Minister suggesting to me that it would be 'too costly' to include, and Senator Bailhache, who has said he thinks the CoI is a 'waste of money' altogether.

The minor battle this year will be fighting to secure an Independent Electoral Commission - which Senator Bailhache wants to derail. 

The major battle is fighting for the rights of abuse survivors and making sure that the same Senator and his authoritarian sympathisers are not allowed to derail Child Abuse Inquiry.

Making Sense of the Economic Crisis ... with the help of Rap

I was shown this rather clever video yesterday which combines the musical and poetic talent of Rap with heavyweight political and socio-economic discourse - thrown in with a bit of comedy - to make for a very thought provoking and accessible commentary on topical issues.

This Video is called: 'Termination of Economy'




'TheJuiceMedia Rap News – the news source for the discerning viewer, delivering a bulletin to restore your faith in the fourth estate, make you nod your head to the beat even as you shake it in disbelief. An off-beat musical, current-affairs programme, ‘Rap News’ is responsible for turning bollocks-news into socio-poetic/comedic analyses which everyone can relate to and understand. Join your host, Robert Foster, for the latest broadcast of Rap News.







~TheJuiceMedia: Rap News is written and created by Hugo Farrant and Giordano Nanni in a home-studio/suburban backyard in Melbourne, Australia.



Hugo Farrant fills the role of the amiable Rap News anchorman, Robert Foster – as well as all the guests who appear on the show. Hailing from Branksome in the UK, Hugo is a prolific rhymer and orator, MC and spoken-word poet who regularly graces the stages and festivals of Melbourne. Having spent seven years rhyming and rapping, he now co-rhymes/writes ~TheJuiceMedia: Rap News.



Giordano Nanni is Rap News’s writer, director and editor, whose rants and ruminations on history, politics and current affairs are channeled into rhyme by Robert Foster. Hailing from Italy and South Africa, Giordano’s background is in history, music, and media; he is the instigator of a number of original projects spanning theatre, print and the internets – including ~TheJuiceMedia, which he established in 2008.

 Robert Foster - Rap New’s affable anchorman, whose retro outfits and biting critiques of current affairs have earned him respect in the whisical world of news satire. Specialising in the ancient art of independent-broadcasting with rhyme-and-reason, Robert is the personified embodiment of the collaborative duo, Hugo and Giordano. (Although he would never admit it if questioned directly).


With thanks to Juice Media

Liberal Democrats in Jersey? Interview with Dr Mark Forskitt

When you first think of Jersey Politics, the words liberal  and democratic do not immediately spring to mind, however, last Wednesday, a meeting was held at Hautlieu School to discuss the idea of forming a branch of the UK Liberal Democrat party in Jersey.



I attended the meeting, which was a modest affair. Notable in her absence was Advocate Rose Colley, who I am sure had a good reason for not attending; however, the meeting was essentially called by students whose idea it was in the first place. It was refreshing to hear 4 young people who were intelligently and articulately commenting on politics in the island. Maureen Lakeman was one of those students. Here she talks with Tom Gruchy about politics in Jersey.

Footage Courtesy of Tom Gruchy

Nun The Wiser - Some Christmas Cheer Courtesy of Jersey Tourism

As we enter the yuletide period, I am taking this opportunity to provide a bit of festive cheer courtesy of the ingenious and hard working folk at Jersey Tourism. What we see here is a bit of Jersey street theatre of the finest quality. It is a credit to the team at Tourism who provide events and street theatre to liven up our streets all year round to the benefit of visitors and locals alike.

Enjoy

Should there be a Media Watchdog for Jersey?

Deputy Trevor Pitman will be asking a question
about  media in the States this week

Following on from the Theme of Media in Jersey, I am pleased to publish here part 2 of my interview with Team Voice. Part one can be seen here

Tomorrow Deputy Pitman will ask the following Question of Deputy Tracey Vallois, who is the President of the Chairman's (Scrutiny) Panel: 'Will the President clarify whether she intends to pursue the recommendation of the [previous] Education and Home Affair's Scrutiny Panel to include scrutiny of the media under the remit of the Scrutiny panels?"

More on this after tomorrow's response.

But for now, here is part two. Enjoy

JEP - Not Fit for Purpose: Part 2

The second part of this blog on the Jersey Evening Post co-incides quite appropriately with the latest post of Team Voice,  which features an interview I did with them earlier this week. Later on in this blog, I want to focus on the astonishing media bias that all three of the main Jersey media outlets displayed during last month's Senatorial (General) Elections. However, first of all, I want to follow on from and contextualise the recent 'spat' I have had with Lucy Mason and particularly Chris Bright from the Jersey Evening Post.

One of my respected friends, and political supporters, had suggested I was a little harsh. Following Lucy's misreporting that I had spoilt my paper, when I had not, I responded with a twitter message saying: 'Lucy Mason is either incompetent or telling deliberate malicious lies.' True, the lying part was probably a little harsh, which is why I qualified the statement with the option that she was simply being incompetent.

My esteemed friend wrote,'I'm not sure one mistake deserved the phrase "incompetent". I've made a mistake today at work, which was picked up, and I corrected, but it doesn't happen often, and I'd had to be called incompetent because of that.'

I quite agree. We all make mistakes including (especially) politicians. I responded to my friend saying: 

'I agree that we all make mistakes, but a) this was not a one off and (b) it was the 'process' that was at fault. Lucy said that she did not hear what I said as my microphone was switched off. Rather than come to me ans ask what I said, she then went to colleagues who also misinterpreted my words as an admission. I told her on the phone that (i) she should not be reporting stuff if she did not hear it and (ii) if she wanted clarification, she should have come to me in the first instance.'

Jersey Evening Post Reporter
Lucy Mason

My main concern here is to do with process and 'good/best practice'. Lucy quite openly admits to not hearing what I said (which was a response to Constable John Refault's comments about how awful it was that any States member should see fit to spoil their paper - I responded that any member was quite within their rights to spoil their paper if they could not bring themselves to vote for an individual on ideological or personal grounds. This was taken as an addmission by some, although it most certainly was not). In such a circumstance one should (a) either not report anything which is not clear or (b) ascertain the facts before reporting something. Lucy did attempt to establish what had happened - by talking to other members, at least one of who had misunderstood. What Lucy should have done was to come directly to me, ask if I had spoiled my paper and proceeded from there. This is usually what happens when good practice is operating - and other journalists normally  do that. (Harry McRandle made the same error of practice when he misreported my comments at a Jersey Finance meeting earlier in the year. When confronted with the mistake he apologised and said, 'He was momentarily distracted' and so did not catch what I actually said... If in doubt, make it up)

But it is not simply me who has been affected. Deputy Shona Pitman has also fallen foul to the paper's sub-standard reporting when they reported on the closure of the Market Post Office, against which Shona was fighting. One 'mischevious' shop-owner did not agree with Shona and told the JEP reporter that the market stall holders did not support Deputy Pitman. This single view, which was not representative, then became a story.

Historically, the J.E.P. has a record of getting it wrong: and I can think of 5 occasions off the top of my head where apparently innocent mistakes were made in reporting either my manifesto or my words which all had the effect of portraying me in a bad light. This is without mentioning the 'fake' letters that they have attempted and do still publish from time to time.

Editor, Chris Bright

And now, we turn our attention to the Editor, Chris Bright. The following is the email that Chris sent me following the letter I sent to him (which can be seen on my previous blog). Note its tone and how rather than simply apologising or giving an undertaking to brief his staff to take more care in future, he prefers to go on the defensive - even threatening me. I have published my response to him below:

From: Chris Bright [mailto:CBright@jerseyeveningpost.com] 

Sent: 24 November 2011 12:34

To: Montfort TadierSubject: Spoilt papers

Dear Montfort,

In response to your email of yesterday, we have published a correction to the report mistakenly stating that you had admitted spoiling your ballot paper in the States.

Please note that the operative word here is ‘mistakenly’. The error was not intentional and it is you who owes Lucy Mason an apology for publicly calling her a liar on your Twitter feed, a nasty piece of juvenile name-calling which is simultaneously untrue, offensive and defamatory. Kindly remove the tweet and note that, should you continue personally insulting or maligning  Lucy or, indeed, any other member of this newspaper’s staff in similar fashion, I will have no hesitation in complaining about your conduct to the Privileges and Procedures Committee.

Chris Bright.

---------------

From: Montfort Tadier
Sent: 24 November 2011 15:11
To: 'Chris Bright'
Subject: RE: Spoilt papers

Dear Chris,

I regret the antagonistic tone of your email and that you did not see fit to call me in person. If you had taken time to read my twitter post you would be aware that I said 'Lucy Mason at the JEP is either incompetent or telling deliberate malicious lies.' The operative words here are 'either' and 'or'. 

With this in mind, I will not be apologising to Lucy nor removing my post. If you see fit to refer this to PPC, that is your decision. But I will not be lectured on moral standards by the editor of a newpaper which constantly falls below reasonable standards of balanced, fair and competent journalism - something which was demonstrated very clearly in the recent general elections.

I will be sending a full complaint in to you and the press complaints body, and I will be encouraging my colleagues and members of the public to do the same where they have grievances.

Warmest regards,

Montfort Tadier