Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
A Better Jersey / Re: The coming election
« Last post by Jerry Gosselin on December 08, 2017, 09:32:38 PM »
That FOI response reported by Bailiwick Express has now been published by the States. The link to the PDF document is here:

https://www.gov.je/Freedom%20of%20Information%20library/ID%20FOI%20States%20members%20overseas%20travel%2020171208.pdf

It shows overseas travel taken by States Members since January 2016 (but not the costs). Some interesting things I noticed:

* Murray Norton and Russell Labey did not visit Canada together, as I believed I may have previously stated. Labey's visit was in May 2016 (described as 'Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Canadian Parliamentary Seminar') and Norton went there in April of this year (described as 'Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Fundamentals Course').

* Scott Wickenden cadged 3 CPA junkets to the UK in a period of just 3 months, in addition to 5 other trips as an Assistant Minister (including Estonia and that trip with Crowcroft to the very swanky-looking Mallorca holiday resort that I mentioned back in the Spring)

*Serial junketeer Montfort Tadier once again used his knowledge of the French language to cadge yet another foreign holiday to the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie Annual Conference, this time held in Bosnia-Herzegovina (October 2017). Within weeks he was in Bangladesh (November 2017) with Pinel and Kevin Lewis for the English-language (CPA) version. It would be interesting to know exactly how many French conferences he has attended since first entering the States (and also how many CPA conferences). In total it must surely stretch well into double figures by now.

*Talking of Labeys taking junkets, Stuart Syvret's ex, Deputy Carolyn Labey has bagged an astonishing 10 trips since January 2016. 3 of them were under the heading of 'Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians', which is basically a separate junket club for female politicians and 6 other trips were thanks to her Overseas Aid role (which she'll certainly want to hold onto after the next election!).

To put this into greater context, backbencher Deputy Carolyn Labey clocked up more trips (10) than any of the following members of the government: Assistant Minister Wickenden (8 trips), Minister Luce (7), Assistant Minister Pallett (5), Minister Maclean (5), Minister Pinel (4), Minister Green (3), Minister Pryke (3), Minister Noel (2), Minister Moore (2), Assistant Minister Mezbourian (2) and Assistant Minister Refaut (1). :o This is not a comprehensive analysis so I may well have missed any other members of the executive who didn't take any foreign travel at all (if there are any). Minister Farnham and Assistant Minister Norton each took the same amount of trips (10) as Deputy Labey.

I am therefore awarding Deputy Carolyn Labey the prestigious Philip Ozouf Award 2017 for the greatest effort in junketeering. Well done old dear! 
2
A Better Jersey / Re: The coming election
« Last post by Jerry Gosselin on December 07, 2017, 08:10:14 PM »
At last week's conference the call was for quotas. That is controversial enough in the UK but at least in a proper party political system it is up to each party to decide whether or not to have internal rules that require a certain number of parliamentary candidates to be women. In theory, the elector could still decide to vote for another party which had a male candidate rather than for a female one who only got selected because of her gender. Anyone outside the traditional party system is also free to stand as an independent in the UK if they wish.

However, it is hard to see how any attempt to replicate quotas into the Jersey electoral system could possibly work, given that by tradition, candidates who go on to form the executive are always elected as 'independents' (although everyone knows that they largely cease to be independent as soon as they join the government). How would the public feel if there was a law stipulating that a certain proportion of candidates standing for election as Senator, Deputy or Constable had to be female? If that legal quota could not be reached, would the election have to be postponed? What about elections for Constable, which are traditionally uncontested and where the majority of office holders are always male? What if every candidate in an election for the States was free to put their names forward and the electorate just voted for who they wanted (as now) but a proportion of female candidates would be elected even if they failed to get enough votes to win a seat on merit? How would you feel if a male candidate that you had voted for polled enough votes to win a seat but a statutory quota meant that a lower-placed female candidate took the seat that would otherwise have been his? What happens if no female candidates put their names forward despite all this cajoling by the political high and mighty?

I cannot possibly see any of these scenarios being acceptable to the public, which means that unless government candidates like Gorst decided to form their own political party (e.g. 'The Jersey Business & Establishment Party') and then imposed a certain number of women as party election candidates, women will just have to continue to compete on an equal basis as men. In fact, in elections where a token woman is standing against a group of male candidates, the woman usually gets a boost in the number of her votes compared to the male candidates as many voters will deliberately reserve one of their choices for a female even if they know she isn't really good enough to make an impact in the States. You only have to look back to the 2014 election and the questionable decision to elect political unknown Zoe Cameron as a Senator - and the ultimate consequences of that decision - to see that the electorate can often be swayed to vote irrationally for certain female candidates when commonsense would suggest doing otherwise.
4
A Better Jersey / Re: The coming election
« Last post by Fritz on December 07, 2017, 01:39:22 AM »
Isn,t Gorst,s call for, "More Women in Politics", against latest PC rules?
Should he not have been demanding more, "Gender Neutral Beings", too?
"Undecided Species", should also been given equal support. >:( >:(
5
A Better Jersey / Re: The coming election
« Last post by Jerry Gosselin on December 06, 2017, 08:43:40 PM »
Only a week after Gorst attended and spoke at a conference calling for more women in politics, I duly note that 2 longstanding female TV journalists at BBC Jersey have suddenly left their jobs.  :o I don't know where Clare Burton is going but Emma Chambers is moving to the Bailiwick Express after almost 12 years at the Gorst-friendly Beeb:

https://twitter.com/JerseyEmma/status/936719775320985601


Now this is just a theory at the moment but I presume BBC employees looking to stand for election to public office would not be able to just take a few weeks holiday leave to contest a public election and then return to work if they lose, as most States of Jersey employees (including Christian May) are able to do. Therefore moving to the Express would presumably allow Ms Chambers the freedom to stand for election but still maintain her employment if she fails to win a seat (and maybe even continue working in some capacity for the Express if she is elected).

We know the Jersey government favours media personalities as candidates because their high public profiles mean that they are more trusted by the public and therefore more likely to be elected. Once in office, they can also use their PR talents to improve the public image of an unpopular government. In 2014 it was Norton and Mac who were pre-selected and then parachuted straight into executive roles despite having no previous political experience (which has become all too obvious). We also know the government is likely to favour women for its secret shortlist of replacement ministers and ass. ministers.

So come next May will it be a case of vote, vote, vote for 'independent' ::) Emma Chambers (or maybe 'independent' Clare Burton)??

You heard it here first!
6
A Better Jersey / Re: The coming election
« Last post by Jerry Gosselin on December 04, 2017, 11:22:21 PM »
Anne Southern 'reviewed the papers' on the Ghidoni Show yesterday. Didn't hear it and not interested in it but I've previously pointed out how being invited on to the Ghidoni Show is one of the ways BBC Jersey gives free airtime to the election candidates it favours, enabling the (future) candidates to market themselves to a large island audience. So this appearance more or less guarantees that Mrs Southern's name will appear again on a ballot paper next May, not that any rival candidates will be quaking with fear after her dire 2014 senatorial showing. Will they move her to a town Deputy's seat this time? If so, I reckon it would be St Helier No. 3 so that she can vote for herself!

The really interesting thing is whether undeclared Reform candidates Ollie Taylor and Kit Ashton also happen to turn up on Ghidoni before the deadline for nominations next Spring .... ???

https://mobile.twitter.com/ReformJersey/status/937325122448510976

On a different subject, further to my comments last month about Russel Labey's Australian junket, the Bailiwick Express has reported the findings of its FOI request on States Members' overseas travel. It confirms that Deputy Steve Luce went on the Australian trip with Labey. It also reveals that Labey went on another junket to Canada with Routier and Murray Norton. Both these junkets were listed as Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) trips.

So Norton was not only going on overseas jaunts in his role as Assistant Minister at Economic Devolopment but also cadged this Canadian trip through the CPA, which is traditionally used by backbenchers for junkets. I'm disappointed that the Express article doesn't mention any of Norton's other foreign trips. Maybe more will be revealed when the FOI response itself is published.

https://www.bailiwickexpress.com/jsy/news/states-members-travel-world/?t=i#.WiWA6uvfWK1
7
A Better Jersey / Re: Accountabilty and transparancy, the hallmarks of good Government
« Last post by boatyboy on December 03, 2017, 04:21:44 PM »
THE UK Governments Pledge to end secrecy, will Jersey be made to follow.

Telegraph:

Additional guidance was published in June 2017, but the government has to make good on its promise to create comprehensive register of shell companies’ real owners.

“The government committed to crack down on dirty money in the property market over two years ago, but has so far failed to introduce any legislation, despite widespread support".

The disclosure comes as peers separately call on ministers to honour a pledge to “ publish “ a public register listing individuals who own UK properties through companies registered overseas - a move the Government had said would “assist investigators [to] track down and recover proceeds of crime”.

Lord Faulks, a QC, has put down an amendment to the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Bill, which would introduce a register of beneficial ownership of UK properties.

Additional guidance was published in June 2017, but the government has to make good on its promise to create comprehensive register of shell companies’ real owners.
“The government committed to crack down on dirty money in the property market over two years ago, but has so far failed to introduce any legislation, despite widespread support.

The disclosure comes as peers separately call on ministers to honour a pledge to “ publish “ a public register listing individuals who own UK properties through companies registered overseas - a move the Government had said would “assist investigators [to] track down and recover proceeds of crime”.
Lord Faulks, a QC, has put down an amendment to the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Bill, which would introduce a register of beneficial ownership of UK properties.

Will Jersey follow suit, or continue to hide names - if the UK steps up, Jersey obviously should follow with a full public register of ownership  ?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/02/fears-dirty-money-paid-uzbek-singers-london-homes/

BB
8
A Better Jersey / Re: The coming election
« Last post by Jerry Gosselin on November 30, 2017, 02:33:28 AM »
Well said BB.

I think the benefit to less well off families far outweighs any argument against this scheme.

That is not what a parent told ITV News Channel TV on Tuesday's 6pm bulletin. Quote:

Quote
The main issue would be with lower income families because the adjustment of maintenance probably isn't quite enough in terms of the living expenses, the rents, travel and the other expenses that face Jersey students"

I presume he had some knowledge of the subject for ITV to interview him on camera. It wasn't just a vox pop.

BB - don't expect me to answer technical questions for you. You know where the FOI page is!


9
A Better Jersey / Re: The coming election
« Last post by Fritz on November 30, 2017, 12:41:05 AM »
Well said BB.

I think the benefit to less well off families far outweighs any argument against this scheme.
The immigration issue is different debate altogether.
10
A Better Jersey / Re: The coming election
« Last post by boatyboy on November 29, 2017, 05:50:21 PM »
Hold on - this scheme will cost they say about £3.5 million a year. They have spent £17 million on getting plans drawn up and at the public meeting in front of the independent Planning officer. You will not be surprised to know that there were 19 private well paid consultants and one lawyer under contract to the hospital and arguing for the new hospital.

They spend £4 million on travel for civil servants and politicians in the last three years. They are spending a ridiculous £1 million on a hardly used cycle path in a valley.

I have always maintained the importance of a good education for every child, the least a decent society can give it's children. Therefore Jerry please provide some figures over say just the last five years.

1)  How many students resident on Jersey then went on to university each year over the last five years ?

2) Of the students who went on to university what percentage came from families who's parent's joint earned income was below £50,000 a year ?

3) Of the students who went on to University what percentage came from families who's parent's joint earned income was between £50k to £100k per year

4) Of the students who went on to University what percentage came from families who's parent's joint earned income was between £100k to £150k per year.

5) Of the students who went on to University what percentage came from families who's parent's joint earned income was over £150k per year.

6) What tax would the above ( taking into account the different joint incomes ) be paying in tax, both income and the 5% GST per annum ?

My personal opinion, is that the greater earners will be paying far more tax, which will go some way to offset the Student grant given to their own children, whereby low earning families paying less tax or little tax will benefit far more. Take a step back and even primary and secondary school education is paid for out of general taxation. I do not actually agree with child benefits ( another debate ) if you want them etc. However I do believe a decent education encourages the person to be able to communicate and add more to their life and society in the long term. University for those that are capable should not be barred through financial constraints. Families will still being paying extra to support their off spring for clothes, rent, visits home etc etc.

Correct me after you have provided the figures.

Boatyboy.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10