There is no place for Constables in the States
Tuesday 2nd June 2009, 2:59PM BST.
From R Clarke.
WHAT a classic case of protectionism and self-interest the current proposal for States reform represents.
We have a Privileges and Procedures Committee, chaired by a Constable, who are bringing the matter before the States, but to ensure that their own positions (and appreciable remuneration) are not put at risk, Constables are to be excluded from the considerations for change.
One must ask, why? The immediate and trite response is, as always, ‘to maintain the parish contact with the States’. What nonsense – the elected Deputies maintain that contact. That is what they are there for and at least they were elected into their positions, unlike many of the Constables, who are there by default.
There are no doubt many who, as I do, remember a former Constable, when making his case for the Constables to be in the States, made the idiotic statement that ‘the Constable knows who is sleeping with whom in the parish’.
I for one am not the least bit interested in such snippets of information. Let the Constables remain at home and run their respective parishes and let the parishes pay them so that they are not a half a million pound drain on central funds.
If the proposal goes ahead and the number of members is reduced to 47, that will increase the voting power of the Constables from the present 22.6% of total to 25.53%. A fact they have already no doubt recognised.
When the position of the Constables was last debated not one among them had the courage to declare an interest and abstain from voting.
If we must have change, why can we not have all politicians, of whatever title, elected on an Island-wide basis. Our present insular-minded system is no longer suited to the pressures of modern day government.
7 Midvale Apartments,
Mont Fallu,
St Peter.
The Queen's Diamond Jubilee
JEP Jubilee Editions
Saturday 2 June: Guide to Celebrations
Wednesday 6 June: Souvenir of Events
View The Queen in Jersey supplement
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
As far as I am concerned the Constables need to be removed from the States to help break the establishment stranglehold on the States. It would also reduce the States members by 12 in one go. The Constables tend to vote enblock by 12-0 or 11-1 for the status quo, this is disenfranchising the electorate as far as I am concerned.
The sooner they are removed the better as far as I am concerned, they should be worrying about their own parishes and not island issues, this is their job. It is for this reason that the parishes should pay each Constable from the rates, as it is a parochial issue and not an island issue in my opinion.
I would also remove all 5 unelected members in the States chamber thus getting rid of another 5 from the chamber and replace with one speaker of the house. I make this a net saving of 16, making the States smaller in total and more balanced towards the electorates wishes. I believe this would help to re-engage a totally disillusioned electorate, which is what we have at present.
However I believe the establishment would not like this as it would weaken their grip on the levers of power over here. It is for this reason I believe this won’t happen even if it is in the best interests of the island as a whole.
Report abuse
Get rid of the deputies their only failed senators who get in on a restricted vote (district)anyway. Look at red Geoff and his cronies could not get an island mandate so he promised the earth to bedsit land and got in. What has he done for the district since. they are only interested in island wide politics that’s why they stood for senator in the first place.
The constables are the titular head of the parishes, They stand for that position and and that position only, yes they do have intimate knowledge of their parish, they have, unlike deputies, regular meetings with the people who run the parish, the Honorary police, the roads committees, the Parish works departments, the parish rubbish collectors etc.The Constables do represent the Parishes. My only concern is the growing number who are heading departments ( shows the calibre of the constables I suppose), If they have enough time to do that their parishes must be suffering, they were not elected to run the island they were elected to run the Parish. A Constable does need to be a States Member to the job, The reason most Constable elections are rarely contested is its such an onerous job, why do that when you can get the same for being a deputy.
To say the elected Deputies maintain parish contact with the States is “nonsense”
Lets have 12 Senators island wide and 12 Constables, pay them a decent rate to attract capable people (circa £150,000 )The island would get a much better government and at a cheaper price
Report abuse
Agree with you Adrian – no problem with the Constables coming in to the States Chamber when necessary to provide information to the States Members but they should not have a vote.
PJG – you are misinformed – many deputies hold regular informal meetings with their districts. They are usually foiled in their attempts to make the changes requested by their district residents by the Constables or Establishment States Members – this cannot be labelled as a failure on their part. If the Constables were not allowed a vote in the States Chambers we would see a marked difference in the propositions passed therein.
Report abuse
I would make everyone remaining (37 instead of 53), after the cut backs, the equivalent of a Senator then PJG wouldn’t have an argument as more than likely Geoff Southern would get in as a senator!
I myself think it is good that some are more interested in looking after the working persons’ interests as without them we would have more like Ozouf and co wouldn’t we? What would happen to the working class then?
I myself believe big business and the rich are “big enough” to look after themselves and that they don’t need government support. However the little person does need help. This is how I view things from my perspective.
Report abuse
Nellie, failure is failure no matter how you dress it up.
There are a lot more deputies (failed Senators) than constables why are they being “foiled in their attempts to make the changes requested by their district residents by the Constables”?
Report abuse
Adrian
Red Geof elected islandwide as a Senator ?
Duck!! here come the low flying pigs.
And of these 37 who would represent the parishs ?
Report abuse
PJG why should anyone need to represent the parishes? The island is only 9×5 and it shouldn’t come down to parishes should it?
As I have said before the Constables are responsible for their parishes, let then run them. They can do this from their office in the parish/public halls, and be paid by their parishioners for this work. Why do they need to be sat in the States?
If the Constables have any issues for the States they could be passed on to a designated member of the States couldn’t they? The designated member would have an island wide mandate which you see as important, as do I.
Geoff Southern was 7th, not far from being elected, so this isn’t quite as way out as you seem to think. At least people like Geoff Southern show an interest in the average person in Jersey. You might have confidence in the likes of Ozouf and co I don’t.
Report abuse
Adrian
Its a question of balance, both need representation in the states. What we have at the moment is a bias towards the districts/parishes, The Likes of Big O and Terry are looking after the big picture (I don’t think they are doing a bad job, room for improvement, maybe). We need someone to temper that island wide stance with the requirements of smaller communities/parish. The parish system with the Constable sitting in the States is well proven through hundreds of years to be a way of doing this efficiently and caringly, our parochial system is respected worldwide.
Why expensively duplicate this with deputies ?
The biggest problem I see is Constables heading departments, They were not elected for that they were elected to run and represent the Parish in the States by their parishioners.
Simon Crowcroft was asked to be CM and declined to stand even though he stood a very good chance, he said being a Constable he was too “busy running his Parish” , some of the others could learn from that statement.
The island wide vote (even if “you” don’t like it )has historically been centre to right wing, remember the shock Rene Liron got when he put his high profile left wing politics to the senator test.
I don’t think Red Geoff could even stand in Renes shadow as a politician, especially now he has blatantly broke the law that he makes for all of us to obey, he should fall on his sword, but I don’t think he is honourable enough to do that.Are you “OK” with a man who says there is one law everyone, except me (big Brother).
Report abuse
PJG – aren’t you barking up the wrong tree here?
The letter was about the removal of Constables yet you have your proverbials in a twist about failed Senator’s and Reds under the Bed…
We have Deputies to represent the Parishes. Isn’t that enough?
The majority of the Parish Deputies do a far better job representing us parishioners.
It is also wrong to have the 12 heads of the parish police forces involved in making the laws of the island. Is it not a conflict of interests to have politically motivated policemen?
Report abuse
Civil Serpent
Not so,
I was comparing the calibre and function of our constables to that of our deputies and which group the island would benefit most by doing away with.
You may have an opinion that the Deputies represent the parish, that is your right, is mine to believe you are mistaken.(I would not be so presumptuous as to comment on the state of your underwear though .)
Your last point is extremely valid and does need to the approached. Parishes have a Chef de police who runs the parish police, the Constable usually not interfering in this, but yes you are right it needs to be regulated.
Also is it not wrong for a Deputy who is involved in making the laws of the island to blatantly break them ?
Report abuse
PJG the Constables are pro-establishment as far as I am concerned and need removing to be removed for a more balanced States assembly.
I know some who won’t vote because of this perceived establishment bias.
This is fine and dandy if you are right wing, Conservative, or Tory Boy types but not if you are left of centre and want a more balanced and fairer society. As per the right wing establishment people they have the most money and influence so is it any wonder people aren’t swayed by what they say, especially if they use the Reds under the beds scare tactics of frightening people away from voting for the “wrong type” of candidate?
As far as I am concerned it is much harder for a left wing candidate to get in because of all this, especially when the local media tends to back the establishment candidates, thus giving extra weight to their cause, even if the left wing candidate is better than the right wing candidate and better for the majority in Jersey.
The sad thing is that left wing ideals are much more for an all inclusive society as opposed to the right wing service to self mantra. Why is it that so many are happy to throw their lot in with these ideals? I can’t really believe people are so greedy and self centred as to ignore what is morally and ethical correct.
One thing is for sure, as far as I am concerned, carry on as we are and most will loose out long term.
The island vote is centre right because it has been encouraged to be by causing the majority not to bother to vote as far as I am concerned. The prosecution of the JDA2 has underlined this point in my opinion. I was led to believe at least one other was also reported but those in charge decided not to prosecute them. Is this not a case of one law for one?
Anyway this law is completely stupid and should be repealed as soon as possible in my honest opinion. You can’t assist someone who is disabled to register because allegedly your are influencing their vote a few weeks or months into the future. However give an elderly person a lift to the Polls on polling day, five minutes before they vote and that is perfectly fine as you aren’t putting pressure on them to vote for you!?
As I have said before Constables are Parish orientated and not island orientated so let them get on with their job of running the Parish and leave island affairs to the States.
As far as I am concerned cutting the States assembly by 16 people of the same flavour and allowing the remaining 37 to have an island wide mandate would be a big step forward. We would then have a standardised States assembly where everyone would be on a potentially level footing and get rid of the perceived second class citizens.
We would then see how many left of centre candidates would be acceptible to the “right wing” electorate. You never know there might be some surprises!
Report abuse
Adrian
That is “your” opinion.
Luckily for the prosperity and good of the island “most” voters believe your thinking is flawed, which is why “we ” have elected the government “we” have.
If as you say the Constables are pro establishment surely that was the wish of the electorate ? Or are you saying the electorate is stupid and did not know what they were voting for.
Even GS could stand as Constable if he wanted to do some good for the parish rather than use a deputy position as a back door to being a Senator.
I agree the law GS broke is a stupid law, but he was involved in the formation of it and is in a position to change it democratically, to blatantly break it is an act of arrogance not befitting what is expected from our leaders.
Report abuse
PJG your opinion is different to mine thats your perrogative. However to say that what we have now over here is good is incorrect. Things are getting worse for the majority, just look around you. Not everything is measured in monetary terms.
A greed driven culture is no good for anyone, you just can’t see this. It encourages all that is bad in human nature.
This is no good for Jersey is it?
If you can’t see that the Constables are pro-establishment there is not much I can do about that.
As per the electorate voting for these type of people, they may do a good job at the Parochial level but in the States chamber it is a different kettle of fish. This is why I would like to see them removed, their two roles are incompatible in my opinion. Laying on top of this the local media that always talks these type of people up, and what do you expect?
Are you saying that you would blindly follow the law, because it is the law? This was what they tried at Nuremberg, it however failed as a defence unsurprisingly.
You still haven’t explained how assisting someone who is disabled to register is worthy of prosecution and yet giving an elderly person a lift to the Polls isn’t a problem? In my opinion the later is much more serious maybe you don’t see a problem with this?
I would say on the above that your thinking is flawed, as how can a majority of a minority be seen as true public opinion? A majority of 30% voted for these type of candidates not a majority by any means. I would be very interested to see what the majority 70% thinks and it might well be the opposite of what you think.
Report abuse
Adrian.
Its my opinion that the average person in Jersey doesn’t have it too bad, Its my opinion that if we followed your left wing manifesto Jersey would be the poorer, financially , environmentally, and morally, I do not believe you have factored in all relevant human fallibility, how it will be financed, and basic unchangeable human greed problems into your equation. Its my opinion you are talking pie in the sky, looking through rose tinted glasses, “but you just cant see this can you”. Because my opinion disagrees with your opinion does not mean I am incorrect, it is arrogant of you to suggest so.
To be pro establishment does not mean they are wrong, again you are stating your opinion as a fact, arrogance again.
I am not advocating blindly following the law, I am saying as our politicians can change the law democratically that is the way I prefer it to be done, what I will not tolerate is the destruction our democracy by anarchy (unless its by majority vote)Would you like to live in an island where people broke the law whenever they disagreed with it. If the law is wrong, and can be changed it needs to be changed, not broken. Again. “but you just cant see this can you”.
Ref explaining, as per your penultimate paragraph, Read my previous post again. “I agree the law GS broke is a stupid law, but he was involved in the formation of it and is in a position to change it democratically, to blatantly break it is an act of arrogance not befitting what is expected from our leaders”. We are talking principals here, are we not ?
And your final paragraph, If someone does not want to vote, they end up with what they wanted, what the majority of those that bothered to vote, voted for.
That is a fact not an opinion.
Report abuse
Greed leads down the slippery slope to domination and oppression. This is indeed what is happening in respect of civil liberties you may have just not noticed this. To say that greed is good for the environment, when it is being destroyed at a faster and faster rate, and for the moral of the majority forced to live in a twilight world of survival around the world is plain wrong as far as I am concerned.
Even to be better off financially you have to have more money in your pockets and how can this now be the case with GST being extracted from everyone now? I make it that nearly everyone is now more than 3% worse off, maybe you think GST makes people better off?
To use your argument, PJG,those not of a right wing mentality are not necessarily wrong are they and it is arrogant to assume those in power are right.
You are unfortuantely advocating following the law blindly as whatever it says you will do. You believe in the rule of law and adhering to it even when it is wrong both morally and ethically. Hence my reference to the Nuremberg War trials. GS was right in what he did as far as I am concerned what is the price of being allowed to vote when you are disabled? Why should someone be denied the right to vote?
I ask you why bring in such a stupid law and did GS even vote for this law? I also asked you whether giving an elderly person a lift to the polling station was even worse than helping someone apply for a postal vote. You have so far been unable to reply. As you say we are talking principles here are we not?
Your finally comment is also flawed how do you know how this 70%, who did not vote, would have voted?
Report abuse
Civil Serpent – why are you so against having a say in who takes charge of our local police – I would suggest that we get to vote for the head of the State Police as well or at least some form of elected overseer.
As for the other comments, if it were proposed that the deputies be removed would they all be expected to withdraw from the debate? If so I suggest somebody bring just such a proposition a get rid of some of the dead wood that seems to be collecting. As for red Geoff of any of his cronies standing for Constable they stand no chance. For a start I am sure they would find it to much like hard work, they would have to account directly for their actions and can’t hide behind the “Establishment” when they have to put up rates to pay for their failures.
I think the real reason that Constables get elected and that few are prepared to stand against a successful Constable is that they normally have to prove their worth in some honorary position for many years before being trusted to represent the parish. It is a shame we don’t have a similar apprenticeship scheme for states members.
Report abuse
Adrian – If the people Red Geoff was helping could not fill in a postal application form it necessarily follows that they would not be able to complete an actual postal vote which is more complex. Who then completed their voting form?
I think that for this reason that this law is both sensible and necessary in our present climate. I am sure that if the “establishment” had done this and got off so lightly then the likes of yourself would being crying corruption and cover-up.
Report abuse
You cannot vote en bloc as often as the constables have done and really expect that they have read and understood what it is they’re voting on let alone assume that is being judged on it’s merits or otherwise having been carefully considered.the pretence that they bring some sort of folkwisdom is long out of date . and Juliette Gallichan presiding over something so important and not allowing the constables to be in the frame makes her position wholly untenable….clear thinking,impartial no, blinkered self interest looks more accurate, don’t stand for it ring her and ask for an explanation…it would make an interesting post I feel.
Report abuse
Adrian and PJG. I support Adrian and his first post. If the States Assembly is to have any relevance it must reflect the electorate. I do not support the politics of ‘Red Geof’ but there are clearly many voters who do; he has his place in the States of right.
Nellie I am sure many Deputes do work hard and attend many meeting out of the public gaze. Nevertheless, it is a sad fact that a meeting is is just that, a meeting; sadly many meeting as badly managed and achieve little. Most of the politics that really matters to the electorate, such as; taxation, health, education, law and order, are all island wide issues.
So; 1) remove the Constables for the Assembly so that they can concentrate on their Parish affaires; 2) give the Deputies a five year island wide mandate, with proportional representation; 3) remove the Senators and all non elected members. The Assembly speaker should be elected by the Assembly. The Bailiff has enough to with the legal system. The Governor as the representative of the Crown, as a VIP observer, can attend if he so wishes.
Scary? No, just the representative democracy that all claim to support, be you Adrian or PJG.
Report abuse
Sanity it has been said that one other was implicated but no further action was taken. I leave you to guess why.
Still no answer from anyone ref dropping the old lady off at the Polls to vote then giving her a lift back. Obviously there is nothing amiss with this, is there, in peoples’ minds?
As per true democracy we don’t have it and neither does anyone else. Maybe people should be made aware of what a true democracy really is and ehat it entails?
Well done Mark someone with some sense to see that certain factions need to be removed to make it more democratic than at present.
Truthseeker quite right too. A clash of interests or what?
Report abuse
Leave things as they are but don’t pay the deputies. They don’t seem to add much original thought or bring any thing positive to the debates and if anything seem currently to be getting in the way of good governance. Let the deputies prove their worth by serving the Island in an honorary capacity and then stand for Senator or Connétable once they have completed their apprenticeship. That way the public will have a bit of inside knowledge as to their policies and ability before we have to start forking out a small fortune to pay the rabble we appear to have elected at present. Listening to a few recent states debates on the radio I was disgusted with the arrogance, rudeness, innuendo and sheer ignorance of some of the deputies who frankly are not fit for purpose and an embarrassment to the Island. They seem to have no idea of the damage they are presently doing to the Islands reputation as a politically stable and well governed jurisdiction and if this is allowed to carry on unchecked then I fear for the Islands future.
Report abuse
“If the States Assembly is to have any relevance it must reflect the electorate.”
I agree, and the wishes of the Island were clear: they did not want the likes of Macon, Pitman, Higgins, Southern, Le Claire etc to have any say in the running of this Islands.
It just goes to show that the Jersey Democratic Alliance have the same dictionary as the one used by the Communists in the German Democratic Republic. If they had any conscience, they would resign, as their views have been rejected by the Island.
Report abuse
Adrian, you asked
“Still no answer from anyone ref dropping the old lady off at the Polls to vote then giving her a lift back. Obviously there is nothing amiss with this, is there, in peoples’ minds?”
I guess that’s because nobody disagrees with you on this. I certainly don’t. Surprised you didn’t get a “spot on” from Nellie, though. Perhaps she’s keeping her head down on this one!
I imagine that most people would feel under an obligation to vote for a person or party who had organised their lift.
Nevertheless, one could always deliberately ask a disliked candidate for a lift and then vote for someone else. Similarly get him to help one fill in the postal ballot and land him with a big fine!
Anyway, my “quatre sous” on the topic.
Leave the the connetables to their parish work.
Do away completely with deputies and the idea of constituencies – the whole island is what the States are there for.
Pay all members considerably less. That way anyone from a poor background will not be penalised and anyone rich will think twice before doing it as a pastime or to make even more dosh.
Report abuse
So it appears people are happy with a quasi-democratic system then, that alienates 70% of the voters?
These people on the whole think it is wrong to help someone get their papers in order, to be able to vote, but are happy for a candidate to give an old lady a lift to the parish hall! They are happy to fine someone £10,000 because they broke the law and they happen to be non-establishment. However another who allegedly broke the same law is apparently let off?
I would have to say if this is peoples’ general attitude then they deserve all they are going to get from their precious government. Don’t come moaning when your GST goes up because of more CoM blunders.
You have made your bed you can now lie in it.
I am sorry for all the hardworking, poorly paid people over here who are not being best served by this government.
Report abuse
Come on Adrian.
Any politician who knowingly breaks a law relating to keeping the electoral process as fair as possible can’t complain.
I personally would have run the election again, but that’s just me: I believe in democracy and the rule of law.
As for GST, it is the only game in town. That’s why Guernsey are scrambling to bring it in. I would have started it at 5% in order to cover the shortfall in States revenue, but that’s just me: I like to live within my means.
You say the system alienates the voters? It seems to me that the Senatorial elections are open to all Islanders to vote in and consistently return people who you don’t like. Well, perhaps you are in the minority, and the 70% feel represented.
But no, in JDA land the majority support the people who weren’t elected in the Senatorial elections but who got in through the back door. You could not make it up.
Report abuse
Sanity, I am not against people having a say in who takes charge of our local police. I simply thing that it is not good for the head of the police to also be the legislator.
By all means vote Constables in to head up the parish and its police – but let it stop there. The police should be a political body.
Report abuse
Sorry that should have read “The police should NOT be a political body.”
Report abuse
OK adrian, if you really cant see the difference I will explain it to you as simply as I can.
The law is so because postal votes are applied for and completed in the privacy of your own home, behind closed doors, so no one knows, except you, and the authorities sworn to secrecy, that you are vulnerable to undue pressure to vote a particular way. One could have the complete membership of the JDA looking over ones shoulder when filling in a postal vote, influencing/ bribing/ blackmailing one to vote for them, They would also be able to check who one had voted for, and no one who could stop this malpractice would be any the wiser.
Giving the little old lady a lift to the polls is just that, when she enters the polling station her rights to secrecy are protected by the officers present, there are strict rules on candidates access to polling stations. As R B Bougourd says, one could always deliberately ask a disliked candidate for a lift and then vote for someone else “they would never know.
The only thing protecting this secrecy when postal voting is the law Red Geoff and Shona Pitman apparently despise so much they decided to become criminals. They did this in the complete knowledge they were breaking the law, apparently it has been accepted the other candidate guilty of this offence did so not realising they were breaking the law and were dealt with much more leniently. By even knowing who had postal votes put them in a position to know who (if they so wished)to exert pressure on.
Now please answer my question that you have been avoiding. “Would you like to live in an island where people broke the law whenever they disagreed with it”.should these people be alowed to govern us.
Finaly the system does not alienate 70% of voters they do that all by themselves by not bothering, surely if they are not bothered they must be happy with what they got ? or why did they not vote ?
Report abuse
PJG – as far as Deputies not achieving anything is concerned – look at the propositions they have lodged over recent months – mostly defeated by the banding together of Ministers, Assistant Ministers and Constables (apart from one or two freer thinkers amongst them). When the scales are weighted against them in this manner it’s hardly surprising that their propositions are defeated or that they are unable to defeat proposals by the COM – yet they battle on regardless, thus proving to the electorate that they remain true to their election promises.
It’s also untrue that the meetings that deputies hold with the electorate in their district are useless, even if they are unable to assist immediately(generally because they hit establishment brick walls), these meetings provide a valuable means of keeping in touch with their districts and hearing what people feel about current events etc. so even if people don’t necessarily have a problem they need help with, please do attend the meetings and let them know what you think – this is very important.
Report abuse
Mad Foetus yes I agree, if the law is sensible and if it is evenly applied!
Even you must agree that £10,000 appears excessive for this breach.
Yes by all means run the elections again for all candidates who have done this.
As I have said before we aren’t properly democratic over here so I presume you aren’t happy as you believe in democracy? I do hope you don’t just blindly follow the law without any thought of consequences? If you do then I can see how the Nazi’s for example got so many people to do as they were told!
GST is not the only option, taking the cap off of social security is so easy, it costs nothing to implement and run unlike GST. It would also standardise S.S. payments as everyone would pay 6% of income to them. Why should some get a better deal than others? Oh yes I forgot you earn more than £38,000 p.a. so obviously don’t want to pay more money out prefering to keep it for your self!
It is easy for you to live within your means as you are in a high paid job. Try telling that to someone on minimum wage over here, I think they would tell you different.
So you think that 30% represents the majority?
Maybe the rest don’t count?
It wouldn’t bother me if I am in the minority, as at some stage others are going to have to get real before it is too late. However neither you nor I know this is the case do we?
Report abuse
Nellie we agree, that’s twice now. !!!
The propositions brought by the deputies were voted against by democratically elected politicians, yes they have failed.
Report abuse
PJG “apparently it has been accepted the other candidate guilty of this offence did so not realising they were breaking the law and were dealt with much more leniently.”
Ignorance of the law is not a mitigating factor. Since you know about this, who was this person? Not one who might be the opposite of the JDA by any chance,or who narrowly got in?
Would you ask someone to help you fill your form out you didn’t trust, or felt was blackmailing you. Get real!
If I asked someone to help me I couldn’t give a **** if they saw who I had voted for. I am much more concerned with the authorities whom I don’t know, being able to find out who I am voting for. This is an infringement of my human rights to a secret vote. So why is it allowed? How can it be secret if it isn’t secret, you answer me that? I am looking forward to it because I know you can’t.
Anyway on the off chance that someone wasn’t happy, have they complained to the police about this? If no one has complained I suppose you are going to say they are too scared to say anything? It is much more likely someone in authority was snooping and reported them in my opinion.
As per the little old lady are you saying that she isn’t influenced to do the “right” thing by a kind guesture, even subconciously? You don’t necessarily have to look over one’s shoulder to influence them to vote a certain way in case you didn’t know.
As per your question. I’ll answer it with a question to you. Do you abide by the law if it is morally or ethically wrong or might lead to the harming or death of someone else? Yes or No?
I put the 70% in a clear words as I can. However many of this 70% a happy? How many are disillusioned, distrusting, and sick of those in government?
I would say more than not. The reason? Everyone I have spoken to, without exception, who doesn’t vote is sick of what we have, and they don’t believe it will make a difference if they voted.
Nellie I wouldn’t worry about what certain individuals say about deputies they are obviously pro-establishment from their stance and don’t agree/like anything left of centre. Hence they like Ozouf and co and not the JDA. They are just using the Senator versus deputy thing as a smoke screen to hide their true feelings on this as far as I am concerned.
Just for the record people like Bob Hill (a deputy) rate a lot higher on my scale than Ozouf, Cohen or Perchard who are Senators. However some others think these three do no wrong, are always right and are brilliant for some reason.
Report abuse
Adrian,
I think the majority got the senators they voted for, then the rejects got in through the back door. The anti-establishment represent the minority. The Establishment represent what the good burghers of Jersey want.
Report abuse
PJG, I hear righteousness seeping out of every pore,a bit of defiance against a silly bit of lawmaking nonsense does not really make Geoff/shona criminals,surely they were “Smacked” for not tugging the forelock to the establishment, they may be a bit rough and ready here and there but the fine and manner of setting it up was manifestly excessive, even if they had not “Helped” people to cast a vote they would on the numbers still have got in,laws are not made to hide behind and not always right either,and need questioning regularly in a healthy society lest it become totalitarian, civil disobedience has it’s place,and I would remind you it was the Master of the Rolls Lord Denning himself who once said “The law is an ass”
Report abuse
Let them eat cake then.
Report abuse
1. Adrian, reference the 3rd postal vote offender I do not know who it is and please note I said “apparently”, I do not have full facts so I am reserving judgment, I am not keen on the knee jerk, uninformed reactions such as you appear to prefer. Your uninformed innuendo is lamentable. For your information “Ignorance of the law is not a mitigating factor” Once again you are wrong, it may not be an excuse but it is a mitigating factor. That is the difference between man slaughter and murder (intention to do wrong).
2. You may not “give a **** if someone saw who you had voted for”. Adrian!!! The secret vote is the keystone of our democracy. The purpose of the secret vote is to stop the bully boy tactics of the mob, you know, the left wing unions are worst offenders, hands up all who agree all those who don’t lay down for a kicking, I have been a victim of this so speak from experience. Yes, the serial numbers on the voting slips are traceable; these can only be used if an investigation into wrong doing is authorized, as far as I know this has never happened. Anyone who has “legal” access to these slips is sworn to secrecy on pain of punishment, and would only be able to do so openly and under scrutiny anyway. You surprise me that you have faith in a stranger knocking on your door but none in an accountable, regulated authority. Have “you” had bad experiences to bring on this phobia or is it just “your” imagination?
3. Surely we are all influenced to a greater or lesser degree who we will vote for (ref “the little old lady”) by hustings, manifestos, kind or even unkind gestures, I see nothing wrong with that its only illegal unregulated coercion or a system that allows it that worries me.
4. If I thought a lawful action of mine ended up in the harm or death of someone I would not break the law I would suspend my action and get advice, if I could not myself, I would speak to someone who could change the law,, I would not be so arrogant as to believe that because that is what I thought, it was unquestionably correct. Or are you talking about killing a butterfly in my back garden causing a drought in South America or other such twaddle?
5. Adrian, no matter how disillusioned, distrusting, and sick of those in government one is, not voting is a cop out; you make a decision not to vote you get the government that’s voted in. Is there another way to get the government of your choice, answer that one? (please don’t answer that with a question it only makes me think you have no answer) If everyone you have spoken to, “without exception” who doesn’t vote, is sick of what we have, and they don’t believe it will make a difference if they voted. I can only assume you move in very limited circles. Adrian get real, this 70% don’t matter, they have what they want, they are not concerned who is voted in, whatever, they are comfortable with it. If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.
Report abuse
Adrian,
Ignorance of the law is a mitigating factor. It doesn’t affect whether you are guilty or not but does affect the scale of the punishment you can expect to receive.
If somebody stands up and says I am going to break the law and then does, numerous times, with a view to assisting their own election, then I would say, in the scale of things, it is a very serious offence. Even more so if they opposed the passage of the law in the States.
Let’s be clear: the price of democracy is that you accept the rule of law. If you are a politician you are in a priviledged position of being able to influence what laws are adopted. If politicians will not abide by the laws they have collectively supported, why should anyone else?
Report abuse
Truthseaker.
Righteousness, maybe, that’s your opinion.
Manifestly excessive, that’s your opinion.
Civil disobedience has its place, that’s your opinion.
“Helped” people, that’s your opinion.
Next you will be saying it’s your opinion to compare the acts of Red Geoff and little red riding hood with the likes of Nelson Mandela.
It’s my opinion they broke the election law because it suited their agenda, why else? and its also my opinion your post oozes naivety. They had the means and opportunity to change the law democratically. What was to be gained by their chosen methods ?
Report abuse
PJG I ask this yet again
“Do you abide by the law if it is morally or ethically wrong or might lead to the harming or death of someone else? Yes or No?”
In other words would you do as the law said because it was in the law to do so?
If I knew someone who was standing and I had confidence in them and would vote for them anyway I wouldn’t give a **** if they saw my ballot paper. This is not the same as some faceless stranger as you make out above. If this person then got pulled up by the authorities I would see this as totally wrong, as I had given this person permission to help me.
It is interesting that influencing someone is fine by you except influencing them by helping them fill their papers out which is wrong. I am afraid this is double standards as far as I am concerned.
PJG says “The secret vote is the keystone of our democracy.”
If you maintain this stance then how come ballot papers are marked and are able to be traced? Either it is secret or it isn’t? It can’t be variable depending on factors can it?
As I have already mentioned before and which you appear unable to understand is that our system is not truely democratic, so what are you actually supporting then? Do you even know?
It is your opinion that unions are no good. I would say to you why were they ever needed then? It is pretty damn obvious. They were brought in to protect the workers from bad bosses just in case you were unaware.
It is your opinion that left wing is bad. However many who weren’t born with a silver spoon in their mouth don’t agree with you. It is often dependent on where you are in the soicio-economic divide as to your political outlook. Hence the better off, not affected by issues, see no problems and think everything is great and wish it to stay the same.
You have been influenced too much by the reds under the beds and revolution propaganda put out over the years.
Mad foetus I will also ask you
Do you abide by the law under all circumstances? Yes or No?
Report abuse
Adrian,I fear pjg is beyond help,but just in case I am wrong, I’ll try again,the 6 Nazi officers at the Nuremberg trials proffered as a mitigating ploy that they were “Just obeying the rules” they were informed that this would not get them off as they had broken the higher rules of humanity…and whilst this may not be comparing like with like exactly, perhaps it may serve to show that we have a God given brain and should think for ourselves as well as being a part of our own tribe..this jersey establishment clone thinking is very dangerous stuff..and there is no place to hide once you have abandoned responsibility for yourself. A bunch of yobs kick a passer by to a pulp,they get a tap on the wrist and community service..ha ha…ten grand fine hardly seems congruent, and I don’t particularly care for Geoff’s style very much nor am I a huge fan ,however there is a huge rift appearing in the govt and they should separate the conflicted roles of the bailiff,judge and lawmaker, for if one is to be Just one must also be seen to be Just or folks will think the old boy club have rigged the game against anyone who opposes them.
Report abuse
Adrian.
I have tried to answer your questions,If you canot see that I can only asume you are so far under the influence of your left wing brainwashing you can not see the light.Open your mind and read my posts again, you may be enlightened.
Truthseaker
Funny name for someone who will not litsen.I will try again. We are not talking “6 Nazi officers at the Nuremberg trials”. we are talking about elected representatives of the people who “had the means and opportunity to change the law democratically. What was to be gained by their chosen methods”.
Report abuse
At least you truthseeker know that should a law be immoral or unethical it is correct not to follow it. A law is not necessarily correct just because it is the law. It is correct depending on the morals and ethics behind it and those writting the law. Hence those at Nuremberg were convicted even though they thought the law would exempt them as their laws weren’t moral or ethical.
It appears some will blindly follow, without ever questioning things, to see if they are indeed correct and fit for purpose.
Report abuse