Having our 45 square miles policed by 13 separate forces is neither efficient nor desirable
Monday 15th February 2010, 3:00PM GMT.
IF there’s anything less likely to cause a full-blown debate in the old lads’ corner of the pub than a discussion about the relative merits of the States police and their honorary counterparts, I’ve yet to learn of it.
As The Reader can imagine, what with all the publicity it’s been receiving lately, the way this small rock – or more particularly the streets of St Helier – is policed has featured prominently in the discussions. And to be honest it’s been fascinating to listen to – far better in entertainment value, and probably quality, than some of the petty squabbling that passes for deliberations in the Big House, I have to say.
My own interventions have been rare – I prefer to listen on such occasions –
although I did lose it just a little with the unnecessary references a couple of blokes kept making to the ‘paid police’ and ‘hobby bobbies’ – expressions which are equally disparaging and have no place in civilised discussions, in my view.
Keeping one’s counsel is advisable on such occasions, given that two or three of the group haven’t been on speaking terms for the better part of a week, although in their defence they have all contributed to the drinks kitty and have duly fetched the wets when their turns came up, so it can’t be all bad.
Having listened to what must be many hours of these discussions, I have come to the conclusion that my hitherto support – qualified on occasions, admittedly – for what this newspaper many years ago described as the Island’s ‘unique dual system of policing’ could be on the wane.
I should stress that I have nothing but admiration for those worthy citizens who give up their own time for more brickbats than rewards in order to serve the community. I have similar admiration for their professional colleagues in the States police – not the easiest job in the world, particularly so with the unnecessary distractions of recent times.
All that said, I have always been a little uneasy about the role of Centeniers – caught as they are between the three functions of policing, prosecuting and (where they levy fines after inquiries at the parish halls) acting as a judge.
Public perceptions are important these days, and sadly it often matters less what actually happens in the Centenier’s office than what a percentage of the public believes has happened.
I would actually be in favour of increasing the power of Centeniers and making them the first rung of the judiciary – similar in function, I would think, to the Justices of the Peace who act as lay magistrates in Britain. It could be seen perhaps as the stepping stone, for those who fancy it, to standing for Jurat but, to do the JP bit they must first have their policing powers removed.
As to policing itself, I see nothing wrong with parishioners continuing to elect their Constable’s Officers and Vingteniers, and for those officers to police their parishes. But – and here I am likely to incur the wrath of the diehards, some of whom still take the view that the only offence that can be committed on their particular patch is that of not knowing a Centenier – I think they should be under the general direction of the States police.
I’m old enough to remember the debates – and there were many of them, some more productive than others – which started 60 years ago about having a proper, professional police force. If my memory hasn’t gone completely to pot (Herself says I have my moments in this respect), I doubt that any of them brought the conclusion those proposing changes sought, as each ended in some sort of compromise which meant, and means, that these 45 square miles are policed by no fewer than 13 separate and largely autonomous police forces.
In this day and age, that is neither efficient nor desirable, and perhaps this newspaper’s ‘How safe is St Helier?’ series may well stimulate discussion along the lines I have outlined.
I’d like to think it might.
IT was interesting to read what UK government minister Stephen Timms had to say about Jersey’s ‘excellent’ progress in the area of tax evasion and the like. Mr Timms, who is financial secretary to the Treasury and, as such, one of the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s right-hand men, was speaking at an international conference on fighting financial crime.
I just hope that the plethora of spin doctors and nurses who are employed – or should be – to pick up on comments like those of Mr Timms ensure that on this occasion at least his observations are given the widest possible publicity.
They could start by circulating them to members of the MP’s own party, some of whom seem to be fed bucket loads of absolute drivel – by people with agendas which bear little relation to reality – about the Island’s finance industry and repeat it verbatim, probably because it services as a distraction from the matters they should be addressing.
That said, quite where Bangladesh, Gambia, Ghana and Mongolia stand in the great scheme of matters relating to international financial crime seems to have escaped this bolshie little crapaud’s attention. I mention those countries simply because it was from them that the delegates attending the conference came. High-powered, or what?
AND finally … While the matter of ministerial holidays is still fresh, why didn’t Sean Power tell the States that he, too, was going to cash in on a few air-miles when he rose to explain the absence from the Big House of Terry Le Main? I have a feeling this one’s going to run right up to the next elections.
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
“All that said, I have always been a little uneasy about the role of Centeniers – caught as they are between the three functions of policing, prosecuting and (where they levy fines after inquiries at the parish halls) acting as a judge”
Dear Helier,
Let me put your mind at rest.
(a)If a Centenier is the arresting officer, he/she cannot hold the PHE into the case.
(b)A Centenier can only fine or indeed impose any sanctions where an offender has admitted guilt, even then the offender can refuse the sanction and elect to put their case before a magistrate.
(c)Given procedures at (b)for the Centenier to prosecute is surely natural progression
To amalgamate the 12 parishes IMO has its merits. But not “I think they should be under the general direction of the States police”.
At the moment the SoJP have to call in a Centenier to charge an offender. The SoJP have conducted the enquiry, the Centenier reviews (with the assistance of a paid legal advisor in seriose complicated cases)the evidence and decides whether to charge or return to the officers for more investigation. In effect this is a second agency checking on the first to prevent miscarriages, and their associated costs of compensation.
All this free of charge to the tax/ratepayer
Dont kill the golden goose !
Report abuse
A few points in PJG’s apologia for the Honorary Police bother me:
• “At the moment the SoJP have to call in a Centenier to charge an offender”.
Why? In every other police force in the British Isles an officer of the rank of Sergeant or above can charge an ALLEGED offender. The fact that PJG (consciously or not) omitted that key word is concerning.
PJG continues:
• “The SoJP have conducted the enquiry, the Centenier reviews (with the assistance of a paid legal advisor in seriose [sic] complicated cases) the evidence and decides whether to charge or return to the officers for more investigation”.
Why can a “paid legal advisor” consider the case without the intervention of a centenier? In England and Wales the Crown Prosecution Service performs this perfectly adequately. Here we have the Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General and all their retinues who could easily serve as a Crown Prosecution Service. In fact, they already do.
PJG then tells us:
• “In effect this is a second agency checking on the first to prevent miscarriages, and their associated costs of compensation. All this free of charge to the tax/ratepayer”
I am sorry to disagree again with the writer, but there is no such thing as “free of charge”, either in Jersey or in the rest of the world.
The centenier may well give his/her time voluntarily, but there are the fees due to PJG’s “paid legal advisor” to take into consideration.
The doubtless well-meaning PJG may care to reconsider before erupting into print again on this matter.
Report abuse
Helier, your comments are arguable (I’m quite happy to be persuaded that you are right), but the timing of them seems very odd.
Reducing the honoraries at a time when the SoJP is underfunded, facing a kind of bankruptcy of experience (all the experienced coppers about to go, too few to take their places) and apparently deeply divided over the behaviour of its senior officers in the recent past – well, it seems to me that now is the last possible time you would want to choose to make a radical change to the status quo.
Report abuse
Ben Azai#2
FREE OF CHARGE !
FREE,
given without consideration of a return or reward.
OF,
in respect to.
CHARGE,
to impose or ask as a price or fee.
A Centenier does not ask for nor expect payment for his/her services.
Its sad that your experience of life has led you to say.
but there is no such thing as free of charge, either in Jersey or in the rest of the world
It leads me to think you have never experienced the love of a mother, smelled a flower, experienced or even considered a selfless act.
You are correct I omitted to write alledged, my apologies if has led you to misunderstand my point. but still my omission was free of charge was it not?
As you appear to wish to be pedantic.
apologia
an apology, as in defence or justification of a belief, idea.
read my post again, it was an argument,
a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point
Perhaps its you who should,
reconsider before erupting into print again
Report abuse
What a shame that some contributions make their authors appear so volatile and ‘ipso facto’ leave those contributions with little or no credibility.
Why do those same correspondents feel they can make such wild and rash assumptions about others? On what, precisely, do they base their accusations, one wonders?
Uttering such silly statements about others appears to be PJG’s standard ploy. I thought Ben Azai’s comments and questions to be thoughtful and well-considered. It really is a pity that this can, in no way, be said about another contributor to this thread.
Moreover, I am quite sure that Ben Azai needs no clarification or dictionary definitions of any word he had used.
Report abuse
Udupi
Once again a diatribe from you directed at me, full of insults and unsubstantiated innuendo.
Please next post,some facts please.
Pretty please,
Report abuse
Albert Salmon #5
Ben Azai has taken the time to comment on my post. that post was a comment on Heliers article, the original thread.
He insultingly calls my comments an apology.
He then somewhat pettily takes my omission of a word as a reason to question my fair thinking.
He then presents a reasonable argument for the abolition of the post of Centenier in the magistrates court, albeit without thought to the extra cost involved to the people of jersey.
He then tries to justify his assertions by IMO mistakenly saying there “is no such thing as free of charge, either in Jersey or in the rest of the world”.
I have replied to each of his points, in the same tone as his post, perhaps not as eloquently as Ben Azai may write but then perhaps that’s a question of luck or finances available by parents for schooling.
You say “Why do those same correspondents feel they can make such wild and rash assumptions about others? On what, precisely, do they base their accusations, one wonders?”
I hope the explanation above answers your question.
You also say “I am quite sure that Ben Azai needs no clarification or dictionary definitions of any word he had used.”
Unless you are acquainted with Ben Azai I wonder on what YOU base “such wild and rash assumptions about others”
Report abuse
“a diatribe from you directed at me, full of insults and unsubstantiated innuendo”.
I have read – and carefully re-read – Udupi’s last posting.
Try as I may, I cannot see a single “insult” and no evidence of any “innuendo” – substantiated or not.
Methinks that PJG doth protest too much. Surely (s)he has better things to do?
Report abuse
PJG has stated:
“Ben Azai has taken the time to comment on my post. that post was a comment on Heliers article, the original thread.”
PJG, I may live in Jersey, but I am not stupid.
You commenced your response (#4):
“Ben Azai#2
FREE OF CHARGE ! etc etc”
Do not insult my intelligence, or that of other readers, by trying to wriggle. It’s all there, for anyone to read. Your response was addressed to me.
Also, you are wrong when you state:
“He insultingly calls my comments an apology”
No, I did not; I described your posting as an apologia. You had even gone so far earlier as to offer a dictionary definition of the word ‘apologia’ to prove you knew what it meant. It’s all there, you know: just scroll up and see.
If you want to debate with the big boys, PJG, at least learn the rules. The first of these is to stick to the truth, even if this disproves or negates your argument, and not to attempt to distort it.
Now go back to playing policemen. Oh no, I forgot: you have no connection with any police force.
Report abuse
PJG now moans (#7):
“I have replied to each of his points, in the same tone as his post, perhaps not as eloquently as Ben Azai may write but then perhaps that’s a question of luck or finances available by parents for schooling”.
Maybe, maybe not.
But simple politeness is not taught, but is innate. Most people have that simple skill, a very small minority does not.
PJG has amply demonstrated in his various postings that he falls in the second category.
Report abuse
Ben Azai#9
“PJG, I may live in Jersey, but I am not stupid”
Who is calling you stupid ? and why would living in Jersey infer that you were so ?
“apologia”
yes, stop wriggling we all know exactly what you meant.
“big boys” HMM.I smell an over inflated ego.
“Now go back to playing policemen. Oh no, I forgot: you have no connection with any police force.”
And where have I ever said this, big boy ?(remember your rules)
I note that since your original attack on my post #1(polite, was it not ChuChinChow ?) you have conveniently moved on from “there is no such thing as “free of charge”, either in Jersey or in the rest of the world”
Did you wake up and see the sunrise ? then remember someone somewhere loves you ?
Helier, you are absolutely correct, !
IF there’s anything less likely to cause a full-blown debate in the old lads’ corner of the pub than a discussion about the relative merits of the States police and their honorary counterparts, I’ve yet to learn of it.
Report abuse
Carry on wriggling, PJG.
It will soon be time to reel you in.
Report abuse
Please do not drag me into your petty quarrels, PJG.
Learn to fight your own battles.
Report abuse
Ben Azai #12
Dream on, oh exalted one.
Chuchinchow #13
If you make pointed comments as “you did” in #10 expect replies.
Report abuse
The formerly feisty PJG (whoever she is) has clearly run out of steam.
Her earlier vigorous defence of honorary police has now degenerated into throwing insults.
Time to give up? Or is that loss of face in her country?
Report abuse
100021 #15
nice try ?
Report abuse