TWO items in the national media gave me cause for thought this week.

The first was that the police who attacked a man during the anti-bank protests in the City of London, and possibly caused internal injuries, claimed that he died of natural causes.

No one would have been any the wiser,had it not been for photographic evidence filmed by a passer-by showing that the newspaper seller had been accosted by uniformed officers, we are now told, while attempting to make his way home from work.

The second item was that a senior adviser to UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown has been spending his days inventing ways to smear the names of Tory politicians. Passing on gossip about rival politicians with the intention of destroying reputations is nothing new, but usually there has to be more than a grain of truth in the gossip.

In this case, it seems that the smear campaign ideas were forwarded by e-mail to several other people the senior adviser thought would appreciate the sentiment. Clearly someone with access to his e-mail did not share those sentiments and the public employee in question has now joined the unemployment statistics.

Both these instances question how far those in authority over us can be trusted.
In our own community the idea that politicians could be plotting the downfall of another, or that the police would make announcements without fully exploring the facts, would have seemed ludicrous until recent months.

But in the current climate it is increasingly difficult for ordinary members of the public to figure out what is supposed to be going on. This time last year, for example, we were told that a piece of a child’s skull and teeth had been found at Haut de la Garenne.

Evidence – or lack of it – has since shown that the skull exhibit was a piece of coconut shell and that the teeth had been there since about the time of Shakespeare. You couldn’t make it up if you tried.

Then last week we were told that our Minister for Health had resigned because he was ashamed of the verbal abuse he had given to another politician.

You then have to ask two questions: What prompted his outburst? And why did the politician on the receiving end of the abuse choose to make it public in the way he did?
The only thing we can at least be sure about is that the public have elected both these politicians to serve them and the Island now needs a new Health Minister – the fourth in 18 months.

At least it will give our 53 elected representatives something to talk about over the next few weeks, so that they don’t have to bother debating any matters of greater importance to the rest of the population.

It may be time to invest in a power other than electricity
A NEW idea coming from the UK this week is that people who want to buy an electric car will be able to apply for a grant of £5,000 towards the cost.

Jersey Electricity, too, have been trialling electric cars. I was one of the people offered the chance to sit behind the wheel, but there was a practical hitch: you need an outdoor plug in order to charge it up. Since I live in a flat and don’t have a garage, it wasn’t practical for me.

Nevertheless, in theory there will be plenty of people with access to a suitable electrical source – and the only thing they have to do then is find enough money to pay for the energy.

Naturally enough, the JEC are keen to promote these cars because if we all start using them, they stand to make a small fortune from repeat business. In case you haven’t noticed, electricity already has something of a monopoly in the Island, with most of the new housing developments furnished with electric heating.

There has been talk recently of putting the JEC 100% into States hands; currently, the government owns around 62% of the publicly-quoted business.

The argument in favour of the States acquiring the rest of the shares is that the general public might get a bit more out of it than they do at present. The last windfall of £6 million, which resulted from the sale of the Broad Street showroom, was paid out to shareholders as a special perk while we users were clobbered with a heavily increased tariff charge.

There is also the problem that almost all our electricity is imported from France. As has been so clearly illustrated by the rising cost of the new incinerator, buying stuff abroad has its complications, especially when the euro increases in value against the pound.
Europe is host to a whole range of economic factors which might, at some point in the future, work heavily against us.

So in theory it might not be a bad idea to invest in some solar, wind or tidal wave infrastructure, just in case we find ourselves totally cut off from the nuclear power station which is visible from the north coast on a clear day.

This could also be the golden opportunity for all that talk about mutual co-operation with Guernsey and our other near neighbours to be put into effect.

So where do we grow our spuds, then – the Waterfront?
I WAS disgusted to see the arrogance with which Planning turned down the RJAHS bid for allotments at Mont Cochon. I am, I confess, one of those on the list.

I also happen to know that the public meeting called this week was not in fact made public until the day before it was held. This made it difficult for those on the waiting list to attend or contribute.

The reason given for the refusal was: ‘The department is of the view that allotments can be more appropriately sited on the edge of settlements, where their visual context is different.’

You can guess the possibilities: La Collette, maybe, especially the bit full of contaminated ash? Or how about Gas Place, should there be no way or removing the pollution? Aha, maybe they have the Waterfront in mind – the bit next to the underground road? Almost certainly somewhere where no one in their right mind wants to live, or work, or even build one-bedroom bedsits.

I hope those planners with deck chairs in their gardens enjoy their weekend.
Bah. Humbug.