Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
I don't think this island has ever been so corrupt as it is currently.
The SOJDC is a self serving Quango. Its that simple!!
The folk in charge demand, (And get), salaries and bonuses normally paid to real risk takers in the private sector.
Only difference is if things go ,"Belly up", they havent actually risked any of their own money and will still be paid inflated salaries.
These folk dont give a damn how things pan out over the next few years. They will still all, "Personally", benefit financially.
They will all be able to retire comfortably despite the mess they leave in their wake.
PUT UP HERE FOR SAFE KEEPING the facts as published by Jersey Action Group all credit to them.


Jersey Action Group added 4 new photos.
Yesterday at 6:00am ·



SoJDC have been assigned two leases that UBS previously held before moving to JIFC. They comprise of the 3rd floor and the 1st and 2nd floors, of 28 New Street, at rents of £122,000 pa and £258,000 pa respectively. Both leases run until 11th June 2019 and with two years left on the terms this is a rental take back of £244,000 and £258,000 – a total liability of £760,000, or three quarters of a million pounds. SoJDC did this as part of the deal to entice UBS to take space in Building 4.
These contract leases are on full repairing terms for 21 year from July 1998, and are passed entirely to SoJDC and the assignment makes it clear that SoJDC are taking on all liabilities including liability for dilapidations. It is virtually impossible to work out how much the dilapidation claim would be without seeing the offices but working on the fact they have 15,000 sq. ft., it could be up to £ 500,000 (max)


Taking on these leases means all in all another £1,000,000 needs to come off the bottom line “profit” for Building 4 (IFC1) which is clearly now running at a loss. We have heard no details of the later deal done with BNP Paribas Bank but it is likely that SoJDC have picked up a similar liability there.


(all info is in Royal Court documents in the Public domain):

The lease is based on a rent of £34.50psf and is a total (including stores, car spaces etc.) of £612,952 pa but this is reduced by £25,000 pa for the first three years to £ 587,856 pa but on top of this is a 15 month rent free period. It is a 25 year lease with break clauses at the 15th and 20th years.


JDC are liable for any inherent contamination costs on site during the lease term.


The office space taken (5th floor and approx. half of 4th) is 16,891 sq. ft. so there will be a cost to subdivide (walls/ split services etc.) this to allow letting and this needs to come off the profit.

In addition to the Cat A fit out UBS get "enhanced Cat A works", these are

£15psf for carpets which equates to £253,365
An amount for extra floor boxes (for power)
£ 25,000 for a UBS battery backup
Emergency 630kva generator - Circe £50,000+
Metal ceiling upgrade, window blinds
All this could easily be a total of half a million plus and which is over the market norm of for any rent free perid or rent reduction.


We have been given information that Building 4 has over run on cost by some £3,500,000. A lot of that must do with the extra contamination found when excavating but also the extremely high fit out costs promised to the new tenants including expensive these UPS systems and backup generators.


SoJDC have now moved offices to these 28 New Street having previously rented offices from BNP Pari-bas at Anley Street (their 2nd tenant)
They could have stayed, rent free at their offices at Harbour Reach, Castle Quay but rented these out to Blue Crest (Hedge Fund) to entice them away from Guernsey hoping they would then move to the Fi-nance Centre. They are clearly quite happy at Castle Quay with its stunning views of the Marina and St Aubin’s Bay and likely a lot cheaper rental than the JIFC.

Every time SoJDC move offices they incur further costs of fit out when they move in and then repairs when they move out. The cost of these office moves must be high horror and it is not surprising they could not pay any dividend back to the States last year.
We cannot see anywhere in P73/2010 that SoJDC, given they are mandated by the States to undertake development in the most risk averse manner, have the ability to take back leases (including dilapidations liabilities which are un-costed ) and certainly it’s a sign of how desperate they are to get the JIFC devel-opment going at any cost (to the taxpayer).

Commercial developers would not take back leases, for a pre-let of 15,000 sq ft. in addition to the 15 months’ rent free and £ 300,000 + of add-ons they already have given to UBS. We don’t think States Members envisaged this in P73/2010.

COMPETITION (along the Esplanade):

Dandara are building a new office block at 5 – 6 Esplanade of @ 50,000 sq. ft. and SoJDC will be stuck seeking to let their vacant floors in 4 and 5 and this could be the death knell for building 6.


Lee Henry £167,500 +£37,800 bonus, total £207,185 and pension of £ 25,125.
Simon Neal £117,500+ £19,800 bonus, total £ 137,300 and pension of £ 17,625.
Directors received £ 472,508 in 2016 comprising salary, emoluments, pension, bonus and benefits. The total SoJDC salaries and bonuses have shown a significant increase of some 11% from the previous year. The Company has not made any profit on the Finance Centre, yet is still paying performance related bo-nuses? WHY?


Over 70% of their 2016 profit has been created by massaging the value of their assets. How do they do this?
They call this "Net gain from Fair Value adjustment on investment property":
The Company has an RICS qualified employee who performs valuations on the investment properties based on the latest independent valuations and taking into account recent market evidence, rental agree-ments, quality of covenant, yield comparisons and location of the asset. No independent external valua-tions, which the accounts say should be every 5 years and which have not been done.


The Company receives £759,000 from the States of Jersey in respect of a licence to operate the Esplanade Car Park and Les Jardins de La Mer Car Park. This was supposed to be stopped under P73/2010. They also receive over £1million by way of receipts (cash and rental payments) from the Waterfront under-ground car park. These monies are basically their main source of income to pay their salaries bonuses and pensions so they cannot afford to give this back to the Public.


SoJDC effectively just about broke even on their events in 2016 Income was £65,688. Expenditure: £64,083. The disastrous Roller Disco at the weighbridge in March and the much-maligned December Ar-tic Village were no doubt responsible for wiping out any potential profit for the year.


As JDC, on behalf of the public, have borrowed £ 74 million against assets of £42M surely the Treasury Minister should be making a statement to confirm what profit is being produced by Building 4 for the public benefit and how and where will the Minister be using that money to regenerate St Helier? Given that’s one of 4 Strategic Objectives of the Council of Ministers?


Only 50% or Building 5 which is now raising above the hoarding has been let.
40% of Building 4 (IFC1) is still UNLET
Building 5’s tenant is Sanne trust and guess who is a non-exec director of Sanne? Non other than the Chairman of SoJDC, Nicola Palios.
Other SoJDC board directors connected with the two Building 4 tenants are Richard Barnes ex Managing Director of BNP Paribas Estates but still an advisor for them and Tom Quigley who is an advisor for UBS Bank.


SoJDC’s financial position is in a word: PRECARIOUS.


It is time that our Treasury Minister, Senator Alan MacLean had the Treasury look in to the state of the finances of this Government QUANGO before the banks realise what a mess they are in and call their loans in.

Link to SoJDC 2016 accounts is here:…/2016-financial-statements…

Blue Crest moves:…/Hedge-fund-BlueCrest-moving-to…


General Discussion / SJDC
« Last post by Chevalier Blanc on June 27, 2017, 06:55:15 PM »
So £750,000 given to the banks to move into the new finance centre!
gorst and the rest of the CoM's with the SJDC should get out now!!!!!!!!!!!
Costing us a shed load of money, given to the rich finance people.
Can anyone give any information as to which old offices Dandara have moved into paying £380,000 a year plus moving and refurbishment expenses in taking on ( expensive ) full repairing leases to encourage the old tenants to move out and lease floors in Dandara's  new development  ………….. Any one ?

How Amatuers work using taxpayers money and assets !

Good reporting from The Bailiwick Express to which all credit is due.


More than three quarters of a million has been spent on moving the Jersey Development Company (JDC) into UBS’ former offices – believed to be part of a package of incentives to get the Swiss bank into the International Finance Centre, which was a key part of the development going ahead.

UBS agreed to lease 16,500 square feet in Building Four in 2015. Construction of the IFC’s buildings, which are looked after by the States-owned JDC, were only able to begin after tenancies were announced.

States members pressed the Treasury Minister, Senator Alan Maclean, over what “incentives or inducements” were offered to UBS, but he declined to reveal what he dubbed “commercially sensitive information.”

 But now, more than two years later, it’s emerged that JDC have agreed to rent UBS’ former premises – effectively covering the money they would have spent on rent had they not moved to the IFC.

Then known as the BankAmerica Trust Company, UBS signed two 21-year leases in 1998 for floors one and two of 28 New Street and floor three of the same.

In Royal Court transactions obtained by Express, JDC agreed in May to take over the premises until June 2019 at a cost of £380,000 annually - £258,000 for the first and second floors, and £122,000 for the third – meaning that the States-owned company will have shelled out £760,000 in total for the move

Also thanks to Jersey Action Group:

Is this why Eddie Noel and ministers are inventing new waste and other charges to pay for these ridiculous States forays into business they have no right to undertake.

General Discussion / Re: Murray Norton mingles with celebs (again)
« Last post by Jerry Gosselin on June 25, 2017, 07:42:18 PM »
There was another exclusive awards bash in Jersey yesterday and - wait for it - a real celebrity from Tiger Bay was in attendance.

Needless to say, Jersey's 'Minister for Entertainment', Murray Norton was most prominent of all amidst a gaggle of business, government and Quango fat cats, as this tweet by Jersey Style Awards attests:

It is only 9 months since that JEP article highlighted an apparent conflict of interest between Norton's private compering roles and his position as a government Ass ;) Minister so it is interesting to know whether he was being paid for this latest celeb bash or not, although I reckon the organisers were probably just dishing out free invites to anyone connected to the Jersey government. One of them was Philip Ozouf, judging by this tweet, before jetting back to London:

Norton was most recently seen on TV News earlier this week closely accompanying Senator Ian Gorst as the latter left the States Building after the vote of no confidence last Tuesday. Norton's protective body language towards Gorst on that occasion hints that the celeb-loving DJ wants to be more than just an Ass ;D Minister in the future and is perhaps starting to get fed up of being mocked as the Nina Nannar of Jersey politics. After all, one good turn of loyalty surely deserves another...
The population at the end of 2016 was 104,200 - a rise of 1,500 on the previous year. Net inward migration accounted for 1,300 of this rise and natural growth just 200:

This confirms that the island's population is still on target to reach 166,000 by 2065, which would mean that the population would have more or less doubled between the census of 1991 and 2065.

However, of far greater interest to me is the level of the rise in population in the last decade between 2006 and 2016, which the Jersey Statistics Unit declares to be 11,900 people. That is based on the estimated population at the end of 2006, which was declared as 92,300. There has to be some caution as these are just estimates and I seem to recall that the population estimates that were being quoted a decade ago turned out to be too low compared to the 2011 census figure. However, the latest estimates are likely to be more accurate. This distortion in the accuracy between the 2016 and the 2006 estimates might possibly overstate the level of population rise during the last decade.

The Statistics Unit has (rather wisely from a political standpoint) not quoted the rise between 2006-2016 as a percentage. However, my own calculation suggests the population rise was about 12.9% during that decade.

To put this into historical context, the highest rises in Jersey's population during the past century occurred during the post-war boom period of 1951 to 1971. These rises in the resident population can be broken down as follows:

1951 to 1961 = 12.6% increase
1961 to 1971 = 16.5% increase.

These percentage figures are the "corrected" ones (rather than the official ones) quoted from Table A.1 of Mark Boleat's 2010 report 'Jersey's Population - A history' (link below):

So we can see that the percentage rise in Jersey's population during 2006 to 2016 (12.9%) has exceeded the equivalent rise experienced during 1951-61 (12.6%) and is not that far off the record rise of 16.5% experienced during 1961-71. It is worth recalling that the growth in population during the 1960's resulted in radical political action to deal with the shortage of homes for locals, e.g. the mass rezoning of agricultural land to build new housing estates such as Le Squez and the introduction of tough new Housing residency requirements in 1970. It also led to the building of multi-storey tower blocks during the 1970's, such as De Quetteville (1970), Caesarea Court (1972), Le Marais (1972), The Cedars (1975), Convent Court (1976) and Hue Court (1978).

By 1976, the island only avoided running out of water altogether thanks to the desalination plant and despite angry political opposition from environmentalists, Queen's Valley was flooded and came onto line as a reservoir in 1992. I would say that it is inevitable that another valley will have to be flooded within the next 2 decades unless the population can somehow manage to radically reduce its water consumption. I can't see how that can happen without drastic increases in water rates and usage charges, which I am totally against as it will disproportionately affect large families and those on the lowest incomes. It would also result in many households no longer watering their gardens as regularly as they used to - a process that seems to be happening already as a result of the forced introduction of water meters for new properties. This lack of maintenance of domestic gardens will obviously have an impact on the number of birds and bees and make the island less attractive as a tourist destination.

So it is now almost inevitable that the current increases in population will have negative lifestyle consequences for all of us during the coming two decades and although all politicians claim to be against these high levels of immigration, none of them are capable of actually doing anything about it because taking the necessary action would have a negative impact on the economy and result in yet more tax rises and spending cuts.

The future is grim.
General Discussion / Re: Chief Minister
« Last post by shortport on June 23, 2017, 02:44:27 AM »
It says a lot for the rest of our government if over 30 of them supported him.I would say 70% of our politicians are out of their depth and very few of them do anything to improve our quality of life.The next elections won't make any difference either unless there are some credible candidates,unfortunetly you can't vote someone out,unless there are some impressive candidates the same bunch of muppets will get back in again.
General Discussion / Re: Chief Minister
« Last post by Chevalier Blanc on June 22, 2017, 04:04:31 PM »
To the outside world the States of Jersey government must look like a load of idiots!
There will be no change in the way gorst operators. he is way out of his depth. He should go back to his job of being an accountant.
He only looks at figures and not the people.
The members through away the chance to have a better government by saving him. 
He still wants to bring ozouf back in!  That tells you everything you need to know. He had to sack ozouf to keep his job knowing that the members do not want ozouf, so once he was saved he then goes and tells us he will bring ozouf back in the future.
So that is what he thinks of us and the states members!
I do not wish to forward my life but May 2018 just cannot come fast enough!   
General Discussion / Chief Minister
« Last post by Chevalier Blanc on June 21, 2017, 05:41:23 AM »
It was said in the chamber today that when gorst came to Jersey as an adult he was in some kind of society that was royal.
His one aim is to turn Jersey in to a council like in England.
Take want he wants to do. Get rid of the bailiff has speaker and have 6 districts for voting which would do away with the parish system.
Leaving just a council of ministers running the island because the Constables would go as well in the end.
So much holding on to power that he sacked ozouf to get the CoM's vote for him and other members who want ozouf out, that is the deal he made.
The next CM i think should be Le Fondre.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10