Pages

Tuesday, 21 August 2012

A guest posting from former Deputy, Daniel Wimberley


The man who thought he had given the people of Jersey a fully 'independent' Electoral Commission. Please read it - the posting throws a great deal of light on how this excellent and much-needed initiative has been hijacked by those who want to hold on to power at all costs.

Keep the Faith.

Trevor

10 OUT OF 10 FOR THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION? 
 
NOT QUITE

How are the electoral commission doing their job?  How are they engaging with the public?  How are they avoiding bias or the perception of bias?  Why have they not set out the principles of reform in their consultation document?

Questions like these are about process.  The process followed determines the outcome.  Bad process – bad outcome. Often politicians deride such questions, saying things like: “ah, these are not important questions. What matters is employment, income support, housing etc.” And what they see as the killer retort: “this is just navel-gazing.”

These are remarks made by politicians of the “we do not want any change” variety, I hasten to add. Change often depends completely on having the right process. Example: if there had been proper open consultation on how to replace the old Bellozanne incinerator, we would not have ended up with the bonfire in a box at la Collette.

The whole question of electoral reform is a question of process – How do we elect our States members? Is it fair? Does voting the way we do make a difference?

To say that it does not matter as much as the bread and butter issues like population, housing, jobs, is to miss the point spectacularly. Who sits in the States determines all the other issues.

So process is vitally important. Which is why I wrote to the Commission and asked them a series of questions about how they are doing their job.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Before the hearing on August 17th I asked the Commission these questions:

1    I asked whether the issue of “how do we promote a debate on electoral reform throughout society?”, had ever been on the commission's agenda.  If so, what strategy has been agreed?

2    I asked what steps had been taken to ensure that their processes and methodology were free from bias, as far as this is possible.

3    I asked  why their consultation document contained no explicit mention or discussion of the fundamental principles of electoral reform or of the purposes of having elections, and hence no context to help people understand the issues and come to a view.

4    I asked whether the issue of “what are the fundamental principles of electoral reform?” ever been on the agenda of the Commission and if so, where could the public see the outcome of those discussions.

5    And I asked why the public consultation was begun before the expert critique of the present system and other work had been completed and available to the public.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

So how did it go?

They did acknowledge from the outset that I had the right to talk to them about whatever I wanted to, and to put the questions.

However they first tried at length to get me to drop it. ‘We would much rather hear what you have to say about the classes of member, the term of office etc. etc. Why talk about this stuff?’
But the questions are important, see above, so I did not drop them.

So, question 1 – public engagement

They insisted that they spoke a lot about how to engage the public, they are really trying to get people to put in submissions.  It was in their minds. So, no strategy then. Which kind of shows.

As Mike Dun pointed out at the same hearing – no agenda for the audience, no sound system in a hall with very bad acoustics, no notice outside the building inviting people in. The email to those on the website’s email list – this is people who WANT to be kept informed – telling them of the hearing went out at 14.00 the day before. Same story for the Chief Minister’s appearance.  There is still no mention of upcoming hearings on the Commission’s home page. 

The media covered Ian Gorst’s appearance, even though it was not on any published schedule, and had been arranged at one day’s notice, whereas there were NO mainstream media to hear what leading commentators Mike Dun and Nick Le Cornu; four States members Sean Power, Trevor Pitman, Geoff Southern and Alan Breckon; two former States members, one of them a leading light in his day Reg Jeune, the other the originator of the Electoral Commission, Daniel Wimberley. Clearly they have failed to get the media committed to the cause of informing the public.

When asked if the media would be informed about the hearing we were told that what was sauid would go up on the website. “But that is one month away” we cried. I wonder how many of our esteemed media will print something one month old?

And they should be going well beyond “informing the public”. They should be trying to create a buzz around their work. Yet there is no on-going blog or blogs on the website informing the public of the evolving story of submissions and evidence. There are no focus groups reaching out to the “hard-to-reach”. There has been no research to find out, for example, why people do not vote.

And yet public engagement is vital. Electoral reform in Jersey is controversial.  It is also complex.  Mandates, constituencies, numbers of votes, classes of member, all interrelate and it is not surprising that people seem to want things that are contradictory.  And so it is essential to have the widest possible public debate so that the island can arrive at the best way forward. There should be as wide as possible agreement on this way forward, and even amongst those who do not agree, a recognition that the process was indeed fair, open and thorough.

And yet, no strategy at all.

Question 2 - bias

One of them, Mr. Storm I think, said that bias is in the eye of the beholder. He completely ignores the fact that people have every reason to think the Commission is biased. Three States members are on the Commission, and all of them of one political stripe. Having outsiders overseeing the process, as I have suggested, “would not change anything” according to him.

‘Trust us’ was the message. In the age of banks fiddling the LIBOR rate, newspapers engaging in wholesale illegal hacking of phones whilst completely denying that they were doing so, Tony Blair’s “reasons” for going to war in Iraq, Terry le Sueur and Philip Ozouf misleading the States again and again – trust us rings a little hollow. In fact it will not do any more (if it ever did). The question of how to ensure freedom of bias was a serious one. I put it to them and they just did not get it.

Questions 3 and 4 and 5

How can people come to a sensible view, and even understand the issues at stake if the principles of electoral reform are not stated in the Consultation document? Then they can say “yes, I agree with those fundamental principles” or “no, I do not agree” But at least the whole debate is starting out in the right place. Otherwise we are all at sea without a paddle and it shows.

They said that they had a tight timetable and the experts were going to report soon. So the Commission was not able to put their views into the Consultation document. I pointed out that they could have asked the experts to summarise what for them were the key elements of any electoral reform (and I would add now, a brief critique of the current system in Jersey) and that could have gone in to the consultation, and the other stuff they are going to report on, such as how things work elsewhere could have followed on later.

The fact is, they could have put this stuff into the consultation document and failed to do so. My interpretation is that they (or the chairman in particular, and the others did not spot it) did not  want a discussion of basic principles, but preferred a mish-mash of views which allows them to say – “everyone disagrees, here is what we propose.” That is what it looks like.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

So on tackling the reality and perception of bias, on excluding any discussion of principles in the consultation document, and on engaging the public, the Commission have not done very well.

Trevor optimistically said in his appearance at the same hearing that he hoped that in spite of everything something worth-while would emerge.

Let’s hope so.

120 comments:

  1. I wrote:
    "My interpretation is that they (or the chairman in particular, and the others did not spot it) did not want a discussion of basic principles, but preferred a mish-mash of views which allows them to say – “everyone disagrees, here is what we propose.” That is what it looks like"
    I should have added - it is this complete inability to focus on the basic principles of reform which has led to the States making no progress on this issue for so long.

    P72/2009, which was PPC's proposition for wholesale reform in 2009, did not state any coherent set of principles with a reasoned justification of them.

    Result? A debate which went this way and that in a sort of fog, and every single alternative was rejected by the Assembly. So back to the status quo. Which of course suits those who think that actually the status quo is fine - even though it allows people no say in who governs them, no ability to reject the government, no possibility of preferring one candidate over another, and ensures that the country is vastly over-represented as against the urban areas, in other words the voting sytem is utterly unfair and votes do not have equal weight.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you! Informative, objective and fair!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for putting this up Trevor. Daniel Wimberley is a big miss to the States when you consider how down hill it has gone since last autumn. Who is it that replaced him? I can't think of ever even hearing his successor's name mentioned let alone him (or her?) speaking.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Today I have been waxing my bicycle saddle. Tomorrow I am going round to Rod's house to watch him trim his beard.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Daniel's use of his 'hearing' to put the Electoral Commission on the spot was completely valid in my opinion. The disappointing aspect was that they had so few explanations let alone answers.

    It was particularly interesting how almost all of the 'defence' such as it was from the Commission was left up to Dr. Renouf. The Chairm and his Vice-Chair barely spoke at all.

    Does anyone know if this gentleman is in anyway related to the author of the remarkable piece of 'interpretation' (nearly wrote 'fiction') in the JEP letters page tonight? Trying to justify the over-representation of the country parishes. As they say I suppose, there are lies, goddamn lies and statistics?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Come on Daniel. It will not have been due to any oversight that the JEP and co did not turn up to cover this hearing. They just do not want to publish anything that strays from the script of keeping the Constables in the States.The media and especially the JEP have done more to undermine democracy in this island than anyone else. If they were the only newspaper is Sryia we would not know a thing about the rebellion.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I couldn't agree more anonymous. Which makes getting the other side of the story out via Citizens' Media all the more important.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nothing to do with this post or the Electoral Commission (or maybe it is?) I would just like to suggest reading an excellent old book from the 1950s, recently reissued I believe.

    This is called The breakdown of nations' and was written by the late Leopold Kohr. Old it may be but highly relevant to the world of today brought to its knees by the demented 'free-market' greed merchants.

    Check it out.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The Commission sound like a crowd of incompetent idiots. And that is the charitable interpretation.

    Keep up the good work. A lumberjack never felled a tree with a single stroke. But every solid blow brings the fall nearer.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Here is a link to a PDF of The Breakdown Of Nations by Leopold Kohr.

    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CEUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthehealingproject.net.au%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F04%2FLEOPOLD-KOHR.-The-Breakdown-of-Nations.pdf&ei=eZE0UOevFOWK0AWV6IGICQ&usg=AFQjCNF2cKdLDM_pUIVoDYPvnm_TPv_ReQ&sig2=zTfBM8F_7n-OF9S1Qrjnqg

    ReplyDelete
  11. Polo - an excellent saying and very apt.

    Zoompad - Thanks for the link. If any reader checks it out tell us if it works ok.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If Kohr was basically saying that staying a small State = small is beautiful I would generally agree with his synopsis. On the other hand he obviously never got to visit Jersey under the dictatorship of the rich?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous

    I know where you are coming from. But old as this book is it is still very much worth reading and reflecting upon as I am sure you will agree. Relevant it certainly remains. Don't know if the library has a copy but I would have thought so for anyone interested.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Whatever the flaws of this commission I can't help thinking that it would be a good if the public could make submissions on other areas of life.

    Stuff like 15 years in prison and forced pyschiatric counselling for people who do stuff like stealing other's identities, get convictions for making phone calls threatening violence to vulnerable people, that kind of thing.

    Maybe the public could even get to vote on the sentences such sicko thugs should get?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Good points from Mr Wimberley. Thank God we have a few decent people fighting for us politically. Keep swinging chaps.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It is a shame that Daniel didn't stand again in 2011. His wisdom and genuine concern about peoples' quality of life over greed is much missed.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Any chance of somebody sending another link to that 'Look who's talking' vid on youtube? Funniest comedy of the year!

    ReplyDelete
  18. JTM (Jason the Moonpig)22 August 2012 at 18:09:00 BST

    Today I have mostly been listening to the cockroaches complaining about the state of my carpet. Tomorrow I am off to town to try and buy a personality. Its very, very serious!Ha! ha! Ha! ha! Ha!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's very, very funny !

      and really quite sad that some spineless bullies from the playground never grew up.

      Katie Blackshirt

      Delete
  19. Worried from the flat below22 August 2012 at 18:40:00 BST

    Another drink? What a weirdo the bloke making that abusive phonecall sounds. The voice is trying to be scary but instead it sounds so camp. Makes Mister Humphries sound like Clint Eastwood. The Village People sound like the Expendables. You have to wonder if the caller was probably sitting in a bedsit somewhere dressed as a tellytubby and reading Attitude while smearing himself with tunafish salad? But lets leave him to his own devices. Daniel's points raise very serious issues that need answering. Thanks for letting him do the guest post too.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Off subject but interesting anyway. A new report from the United Nations highlights the ever-widening gap between rich and poor in Latin America.

    Hardly surprising given that the US has been working overtime all these years to keep such countries in debt and thus dependent of course.

    But particularly interesting to see that Chavez's efforts in what is actually a short period of time, and engulfed in huge inherited problems, have now made Venezuela the most equitable in the region.

    Let's hope he gets enough years to finish the job.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I can't be quite sure but I think I may live near the person being abusive on that old You-Tube video. Could be completely different but having seen the bloke steaming in the pub down Broad Street the effeminate, slightly loopy voice sounds very similar.

    But if I am right then it certainly answers a lot. A couple rowing all the time from the sound of it, the poor woman storming out with the bloke howling like some kind of pathetic abandoned poodle. Seems to do nothing all day while the poor woman appears to go out to work. Then he turns up down the pub!

    ReplyDelete
  22. The most disappointing thing about the hearing last week was that the 'Commission' was so defensive in the face of what were very fair questions from Daniel.

    As I pointed out earlier it was left almost entirely to Dr. Renouf to try and justify what had been done. Quite honestly the other two non-political members of the 'Commission' just looked wholly embarrassed by it all.

    Perhaps they agreed with Daniel but weren't big or brave enough to admit it with the Chairman there?

    ReplyDelete
  23. These questions certainly are very reasonable Trevor. That ex-Deputy Wimberly didn't get answers speaks volumes. You are also spot on about him being a great loss to the States.

    I know his eccentric professor image didn't appeal to everyone but I thought he was quite exceptional. Perhaps the fact that I often wear an old Captain Beefheart t shirt full of waccy burns to Fort Regent gym, and probably tend to look a bit of a scruff myself helps look beyond such trivialities?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Daniel was indeed excellent and hopefully, if his family commitments permit, he might be persuaded to stand again in 2014.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Daniel is indeed a great loss to the States Chamber, well researched and a really genuine guy.

      I can only say that politicians like yourself and a handful of others (including those no longer sitting in the States) are what I and a lot of others consider to be REAL politicians worthy of their seat. Long may that remain.

      Delete
  25. One thing that I have noticed is that while it is fine to have an electoral commission they really do need to get a tighter grip on the submissions side of things. These really need to be checked out with phone numbers and addresses that can be verified.

    A fairly well known progressive from within the citizens media community, and a person known to me personally as it happens,had his identity stolen by our most infamous internet troll for a fake post. It was eventually removed, though a couple of others still remain for some reason.

    Now I see there is another obvious one bearing the drunk's sad hallmarks. Such behaviour really should be referred to the police. It also undermines the whole commission process. Which is no doubt also one of the motivations for such creatures?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I picked up on that also, I thought it was strange that what they sent in was not what i would have expected. The mindset of this troll idiot is remarkable, the commission should have had the balls to not only remove it but also state the reason it was removed.

      Never the less, if we are talking about the same person who had their name used I notice they have sent in a submission which is far more likely to be from the real person.

      It was always on the cards from the moment the public were allowed to send in submissions. I am glad to hear it was picked up on because I was beginning not to trust my own judgement.

      Delete
    2. You are both correct. It was after being informed by Deputy Pitman and others that a short submission credited to me, appeared on the EC website that I had definitely not written.

      Thanks to Deputy Pitman for making sure it was removed after I wrote to the EC and copied him in. Ann at the commission was very helpful and sent me further information. How sad and low must a person be to attempt stunts like that ? and then believe they can get away with it. It is not the first time for me or others.

      I submitted an entry using my own pen in August.

      They will never stop the information highway or the truth being published.

      PL

      Delete
  26. Daniel/Trevor

    With regard to Daniel's question 2 about bias. Did you ever really think you might get any kind of admittance on this? It would just seem to me that once the EC had been stolen away by the likes of Bailhache and co there could never, ever be any public acknowledgement that what they were now doing was flawed and tainted. Do you not agree?

    ReplyDelete
  27. A quick fire answe before I depart to make her indoors' dinner.

    Yes, you are probably right in what you say. However, I still think Daniel was quite justified in taking the approach that he did. After all, it was him who got the whole concept of the Electoral Commission up and running.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Just enjoying my meal for one. Not even a meal really, an out-of-date pot noodle. Not much to do on your own. No electricity. Gary Glitter albums all scratched. Hoover won't suck anymore because of all the fluids. Might be why I now even steal children's identities?

    ReplyDelete
  29. No. Best left in the hands of powers that be now...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Can we stop talking about trolls and go back to reform?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous

    I agree - why don't you start us off again?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Complying with both of the above sentiments; does anyone know if the electoral commission have bothered to verify submissions that have just come in with no back-up details? Seems like they haven't but obviously should.

    ReplyDelete
  33. The comment from PL says it all. You need to see this making of false submissions that have little to do with 'reform' but simply thinly concealed attacks on democrats as part of the bigger picture going on here. By this I mean attempts by those who like things as they are - undemocratic and corrupt - to create a false picture that can then be used to justify whatever fix they concoct.

    Anyone reading certain submissions can see if they look closely enough that the author is not only the same person but a very sad and embittered individual who is also probably not very bright. It is a sad statement of Jersey society really and we need to fight against it with all of our strength.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Jilted John, found your ID yet?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Some of these comments are getting so cryptic. I begin to think that some of those who really don't want political change of any kind do just come on to the net to try and draw people off subject? I would like to know what Daniel feels could be the next step though? It is clear we won't be getting any answers from Sir Philip and co.

    ReplyDelete
  36. So serious its funny25 August 2012 at 19:08:00 BST

    Here's a riddle for you. 'The four horsemen of (their own) apocalypse'- Jonnie, Danny, Davey and......the other one. Galloping as fast as they can to their own 'revelation'. The clock may tick slowly. But some fates really are worth waiting for!

    ReplyDelete
  37. In answer to the question from an 'anonymous' as to how long have people got to make submissions. The answer is the end of the month.

    In answer to JJ. I think you will find that Stuart is very much in Jersey. Such childish bad language too, JJ. Whatever does get into you?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Well done Trevor,

    It seems that Jurat Le Breton has resigned.

    Before it hits the fan.

    But Trevor does resigning let him get away with his past?

    ReplyDelete
  39. I think it is a joke that submissions sent in to the electoral commission should be censored just because they have been written under false names. Some of us can only pretend our warped opinions are widely held by resorting to such tactics as stealing others' identities or by pretending to be somebody else.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anonymous

    Jurat Le Breton did not resign as a Jurat - although he certainly should have - he simply 'retired' because he had reached the age of 72.

    A Minister and former Victoria College pupil was also telling me the other day, whilst discussing this appalling situation,that Mr Le Breton also did not 'resign' from Victoria College when the Jervis-Dykes scandal was about to break - he apparently opted for 'early retirement'.

    Of course, if he wants to come on here and tell us all of the details in his own words he will be most...welcome.

    Still, as you rightly indicate - there will be a lot more to come on this issue one way or another during September! I am hoping to finally get a couple of weeks off from tomorrow and once that is out of the way I will be lodging a most 'interesting' proposition...

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  41. Jon or should I say 'Jamie' what time are you going down to the Electoral Commission to prove you're not a robot?

    ReplyDelete
  42. Today I will mostly be Peter Drummond on the radio.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Say no to threatening, drunken phone calls!29 August 2012 at 17:29:00 BST

    Oi Jon! When are you back from your 'holiday'? The Electoral Commission can't wait forever, you know.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Ted Vibert and Monty Tadier giving evidence to the Keep the Constables Commission tomorrow; 2.30 pm and 3.30pm I believe. Town Hall.

    If you recall the media didn't bother to turn up last time with the hearings dominated by sensible, progressive proposals about equality and fairness. Will they be there this time?

    Having of course appeared to report Chief Minister Gorst's unscheduled ramblings, my bet would be - probably.

    But just to report the Constable of St. Peter's thoughts and his novel idea that daffodils in St. Peter should have the same amount of votes as 34,000 people in St. Helier.

    Will he also be explaining why MOST Constables contribute so little to the States? I doubt it.

    ReplyDelete
  45. When I'm not being Peter Drummond on the radio I will be Jamie Wilson on my submission to the electoral commission.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Today I have mostly been pretending to the Electoral Commission that I am am on holiday, so unable to appear to prove I am a real person.

    Tomorrow I will be emailing them to pretend that I am now dead and so further indisposed.

    Friday I am going to completely re-organize my empty lager can collection. A feat on a par with building the Great pyramid.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Dear Trevor,
    I have already stated quite clearly that I am absolutely against the Constables being in the States in full and paid positions (I do not have a problem if they are there on an attendance only basis i.e NO VOTE and NO PAY) this would fulfill Philip Baillache's desire for them to be "able to let their parishoners know" of what is happening in the Chamber. As far as I am concerned that is precisely what our elected respective Deputies are for. So let us get to the real core of this, Trevor could you please tell us all just approximately how many actual days our elected members spend in 'the big house' I ask this not in any way as a derogatory statement as I have no problem at all with truly elected members, but I really do have a problem with the 'default' members i.e The Constables who are initially voted into their respective parishes on an 'unpaid' basis and then 'Voila' they are instantly on £45,000 + per year as a defacto States member...so just how many days do they sit in the chamber to 'earn' this vast amount???? and more to the point how many actually contribute anything of worth (other than their block vote) to the proceedings.?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Anonymous

    Former Deputy, Daniel Wimberley has just sent in some details to the Electoral Commission on exactly how much (or little) the majority of the Constables contribute. This being with regard to bringing propositions in support of their 'election promises!) policies. Whoops, sorry, hardly any of then face elections do they?

    If it is not up on the Electoral Commission website already it should be soon. I'm sure they will put it up (after all, they still have one which is another fake submission ussing the stolen identity of a 14 year old boy!) If not I will ask Daniel if he would send through a copy for me to post on here.

    With further regard to your question, it is not so much people not being in the Assembly at all - most Members will be there to sign in for the school register - the problem is those who then push off to their day jobs or move into the coffee room to talk about all and anything but politics. generally only running in to vote in support of whatever the Council of Ministers is putting forward.

    I did try to increase the quorum to make more people stay and listen/contribute to debates as they are paid to, as you probably recall, but this was defeated. It was also ridiculed in the Jersey Establishment Post who a few months later was then moaning about how many times the States go inquorate!

    What should annoy people are those Members who we taxpayers are funding to the tune of £45,000 to actually sit and run their own businesses. Now I don't call that 'grafting'!

    AS for yet another post from Jono - tonight calling himself 'Max Clifford' - beats Jamie or Paul I suppose - I'm afraid that the reason so many people have sussed you out and laugh at you is down, pure and simple, to your idiotic, thuggish behaviour. My advice to you is get a shrink. Get help. Get a life.

    XXX

    ReplyDelete
  49. With reference to the 'Peter Drummond' posts if the sender, or anyone for that matter, has more information on this please advise. Are we talking BBC or 103 and what was the issue 'Peter' was talking about?

    As for tomorrow's Electoral Commission hearing I believe that John Henwood is also giving his views and Rob Duhumel as well. Like Ted and Monty these should be worth listening to if you can.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Interesting post from Mark. I think he should submit this blog to the electoral commission so these defects are on record. http://jerseytoday.blogspot.com/2012/08/why-i-have-not-made-submission-to.html

    H.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Hi

    First a message to 'anonymous' who sent the link regarding Mark and Jersey Today. Unfortunately, the link does not work so if you can send it again I will try to put it up.

    Second a message to Jon. Jon wanted me to know for some reason that his alter ego a couple of you had posted about, Peter Drummond, who was apparently emailing one of our radio stations is 'a real person'.

    Jon also wanted me to know that he must be real because 'he is on Facebook'! Obviously Jon must have missed the recent news story about the huge amount of non-existant people on this social media acknowledged by Facebook themselves?

    Anyway, my message to Jon is: why tell me? I know you are obsessed with me and a few other political progressives but the fact is I do not know a thing about your good friend 'Peter Drummond'. Maybe the senders of the comments can tell us more?

    Personally, Jon, I am quite sure he is every bit as real as 'Alan Marriot' and the 'Jamie Wilson' who has refused to present some ID to the Electoral Commission because 'he is on holiday'...

    Meanwhile, good to see a Jersey Evening Post 'journalist' actually turn up at today's hearing. Once we read Ben Q's report I will do a post about how accurate it is.

    With almost everyone - apart from that Champion of voting rights for daffodils over people, the Constable of St. Peter - wanting the Constables removed his report should be 'interesting'.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Interesting posting on JE Propaganda blogsite. Serious stuff. Not as funny as that hilarious phone recording he had up of that horrible coward ranting about Stuart Syvret though. That was class.

    Any chance of putting a link up to that again here? I think its important that our community are kept aware of some of the sick people passing themselves off as normal people isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Managed to get the Jersey Today post up. Don't ask me why it wouldn't work the first time around.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Tonight I have been mainly sending (more) abusive posts that can be traced because being so drunk again I didn't stop to think. Tomorrow I will be sandpapering my underpants once it dawns on me that the day the police finally call is getting closer...

    ReplyDelete
  55. trevor it is now saturday what happend to new post on thursday?

    ReplyDelete
  56. The official record of the Jersey Revolution on 28 September 1769 was acribbled out of the official Royal Court record at the time.
    The relevant 4 pages of scribble can now be studied on the Jersey Electoral Commission web-site.
    Nobody has ever bothered to try to discover what is written underneath the scribbling over two centuries...
    If you are interested in learning more go to: www.electoralcommission.je
    look for submissions and scroll down.
    Dun Michael (4) (24 August) shows the 1769 Court Record pages
    Dun Michael (3) (15 August) includes a short account of the importance of 28 September 1769, together with a longer article on the relevant history and a copy from John Shebbeare's book of 1771 showing the original 27 articles of the Islanders petition of grievances to King Geo III from 1769 together with one of Michael Dun's submissions to the "Lord Carswell" examination of the role of the Crown Officers.
    Dun Michael (2) (10 July) Is his written submission to the Electoral Commission
    Dun Mike (9 July) (9 July) is a copy from the Tom Gruchy blog.
    The Transcription of Michael Dun's oral presentation before the Commission is not yet posted on the site.

    28 September this year - of all years - should be celebrated as JERSEY REFORM DAY .
    It occurs on a Friday this year and there is simply no excuse for our collective failure over nearly 250 years to recognise the bravery of those Jersey people in 1769 and their attempt to start the search for a democratic form of government that continues today.
    What are YOU ALL going to do about it this year?

    ReplyDelete
  57. Amonymous

    You question about what happened to my proposed Thursday post is a fair one. Unfortunately another very serious illness befalling one of the family who has had to be flown to the UK.

    I am meant to finally be taking this next week off before the States goes back to sitting but I will try and get something up in the next couple of days. I was going to put Daniel's excellent document about the Constables up for him, but with these other demands on time Tony's Musings have put it up.

    People should check this out as it is a nice reality check for anyone even half believeing the usual rabid anti-democratic nonsense pased off as an editorial comment in the JEP!

    So it is only a 'vociferous minority' who want the Constables out, JEP? There is no real 'reason'to remove them?

    How about these two little facts?

    The 'fors' and 'against' the Constables being in the States has been split almost 50-50 for years. The ratio is now more in favour of removing them than it has ever been.

    Secondly,trying to accomodate the Constables totally skews a fair and democratic system of representation. How can St. May have 2% of the population but due to them having a Constable 2 x representatives in the States? St. Helier on the other hand has 34% of the population yet only has 11 representatives.

    Little more really needs to be said. But of course the JEP has always sought to protect elitism and a two-tier society, haven't they...

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  58. The rag editorial is an insult to democracy. Nuff said.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Trevor.

    Montfort will have a Blog up soon concerning the brazen propaganda of tonight's editorial. It will make for good viewing.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I have been asked if I know why it is that the Electoral Commission website has not been updated since the 28th August with any submissions. I'm afraid I haven't got any idea.

    For anyone conerned having made a submission since this date and yet not finding it on the site I suggest you call the Commission's clerk on 441033. I'm sure that there have been other submissions made because I made one myself.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Jamie, Jonno, Peter and Alan M3 September 2012 at 18:52:00 BST

    We don't want democracy. We want things to stay the way they are. We just want free Stella and you taxpayers allowing us to rip you off by us sitting at home getting legless.

    ReplyDelete
  62. To be fair the Rag is not always completely useless apart from on political matters.

    I remember they did run with the story about that nutter who got done for making a sick threatening phone call to a family.

    Just because they were Syvret's landlords and the bampot didn't like him for some reason.

    Should have had a photo of the nutter though.

    What was his name I can't remember now.

    There's so many insignificant bampots out there, aren't there?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Sorry for delay in new post - been tied up with two constituent cases and then putting together a further file of abusive rants from you know who for lawyer.

    Seems everyone's least favourite internet stalker is now likely to face charges over unfounded allegations against another Senator he must have taken a dislike to. When will he ever seek the help he needs?

    ReplyDelete
  64. To Team Voice

    Good interview with Monty

    To Chris

    Hope this does for confirmation. Thanks a million for sending them through. Better examples of this individual at work one really couldn't get!

    ReplyDelete
  65. From Angela Jeune's Electoral Commission submission; "Finally, as women form a large proportion of society and the voting population I find it “interesting”
    that there is not even one woman on the Electoral Commission Panel."

    Juliette Gallichan might not be the finest figure of a woman but she is a woman. People of Angela Jeune's calibre should be barred from taking part in any political debate.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Thanks anon. I must admit that I hadn't noticed that one on the Commission's website.

    I am told there are some very good late submissions still to go up that were sent in over the last few days before the deadline. They should be up in the next couple of days.

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trevor, you may be interested to know that for some reason the commission has redacted certain names you used in your second submission, despite the fact the names are on the public record.

      Delete
  67. Howdy 'Big Trev' did you know that He Who Is Totally Irrelevant is working himself into a lather on the JEPs website? The amount of times he mentions the progressives but especially rants about you under I think he may have some kind of crush on you! If I were you I should make sure you don't leave any pants out on your washing line overnight. This one is seriously barking.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Anonymous

    No, I don't ever go on the JEP site and you highlight one of the reasons why. Basically any political story involving any 'Progressives' will have this oddball talking to and agreeing with himself using two dozen different names.

    The funny thing is that he is so plain daft he doesn't even realise that some of us have documented evidence as to a whole raft of his fake I.D.s he used to use back in the day when he wrecked the old Planet Jersey.

    You just have to laugh really. I have a file with more than 150 of his abusive rants sent to this site alone. I also know of others involved in blogging who have twice that.

    At least it keeps him off the streets.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Thanks Sam.

    A nice little test which went exactly as I hoped.

    I can now ask questions as to how, Paul, a person I know had a fake post using his name allowed without any question by the great Chairman. It took a complaint from me and another from Paul after I tipped him off to eventually get this removed.

    Even better the question now needs to be asked why they continue to allow another 'submission' in the name of a lad who hasn't made a submission AT ALL and has no real interest in politics per se to remain up on the site.

    The reason can only be that they are so desperate to try and sway the stats in the direction they want the Commission will try and pass off anything as genuine.

    Priceless!

    ReplyDelete
  70. 'jamie'

    With due respect I firstly think you need to investigate the law on sending threatening/abusive messages, such as emails and even posts.

    I did recently with the AG when it became apparent that I would have to eventually do something about a certain deranged individual's bullying behaviour.

    Secondly, while I am obviously not going to post your rant, I honestly believe that the fact that you write that in your opinion 'it is normal' for any person running a blog/webssite to recieve upward of 150 abusive posts really sums your problems up.

    How can such behaviour ever be 'normal'? It can't.

    ReplyDelete

  71. One "police" blanket for sale. Soiled. Possibly hair gel, dribble or even something more unpleasant.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Good letter by Lyndon Farnham in today's paper. Is he a troll as well?

    ReplyDelete
  73. I let this one of the dozen posts from my stalker through simply because it really says it all. I will answer it all myself in a full-length post soon but in the meantime...come on 'anonymous' try and explain 'why' Lyndan Farnham's letter is 'good'?

    One thing is for sure you can't consider it 'good' because it puts forward intelligent or logical proposals that would make Jersey more democratic?

    I mean, answer us this. How can the Senator seriously argue that his proposals would make things more 'democratic' when it would leave in place the core part of the democratic deficit - the Constables.

    I'll spell it out for you again.

    St.Mary 2 x representatives for just a tiny 2% of the population.

    St. Helier a whopping 34% of the population yet just 11 x representaives.

    Or perhaps even clearer still...

    St. Mary 1 x Constable with a vote for 2% of the population.

    St. Helier 1 x Constable for 34% of the population!

    Little more needs to be said, does it!

    Why not just be upfront about what you really want and what you really believe in? Most could at least respect that kind of approach.

    You are scared to death of democracy - just like the Establishment.

    Like the vast majority of the Constables - you are quite happy to put self-interest before the fundamental principle of everyone having a vote of equal weight.

    Like the Establishment you are interested only in being able to stifle change that would benefit the majority rather than the minority.

    Like the Establishment you are basically a coward.

    Am I right or am I right?

    No? Then come back and tell us (I'll translate it into English for you) why everyone in the island having an equal say and vote in what happens in Jersey terrifies you so much?

    Oh, yes. I will be posting my second submission to the Electoral Commission here in full as well...

    ReplyDelete
  74. Meant to add - at least Lyndan made his submission/letter in his own name. That alone should give 'anonymous' something to strive for.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Hang on a minute. Is this the same Lyndan Farnham who I think Rico highlighted had - in his last year as a Deputy - not bothered to turn up for more than 100 of 300 votes? Not ill or on business as I recall just not there?

    Anonymous.

    But not the one who sent in the silly post about the daft letter in the Beano.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Senator Farnham's proposals do not deal with any of the issues. I think this critique is more useful. http://jerseytoday.blogspot.com/2012/08/why-i-have-not-made-submission-to.html. It shows you cannot assume people who did not comment are perfectly happy with the status quo.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Zoompad

    Thanks for your comment. I did not put it up because I just can't agree with the message, though I wholly understand how angry and let down you must feel.

    But just because the police continually fail to do what they should must not lead to innocent people not bothering to report these cyber and phone bullies. If the victims stop then the thugs would have won.

    The police need to be shamed into acting as they are paid to - and that must be the case wherever they may be.

    Look at it this way.

    I was told full details only today of a certain individual who used to go out with a lovely young woman.

    Not only did he unforgivably beat her up - being so inadequate, whilst she was in hospital on one occasion he promised he would collect her wages from where they both worked...

    Only to then steal them and fritter them away on drink and gambling. She never saw them, not a penny.

    Should a low life, bullying scumbag like this be able to pretend nothing happened through threats?

    Of course not. His story must be told - and it eventually will.

    Take care

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  78. I hope to put up the submission from former Deputy, Daniel Wimberley highlighting the facts and figures relating to the contribution of the constables.All being well I will get this up tomorrow.

    Will get my oral questions for next week up at the same time. Might even put up the draft of a complaint that I will be making to PPC about a certain petty criminal who specialises in internet and phone threats.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Could this be the same petty yobbo that a member of the public has now given further hard evidence of his Email and phone bullying to the police?

    ReplyDelete
  80. I haave been sent a tweet relating to the election of a Jurat to replace the newly retired John Le Breton.

    All I can say at this point is let us hope that whoever gets elected won't be the sort who is happy to put the 'good name' of a school before protecting pupils who are being horribly abused!

    Well, we can hope...

    ReplyDelete
  81. If anyone is a victim here it's Jurat Le Breton who made one little mistake and now has to pay for it years later. Children heal and move on which is something I suggest you do.

    ReplyDelete
  82. 'Pete'

    Could you just run that 'one little mistake' angle by me again? And while you're at it how about explaining what such 'little mistakes' say about a person's judgment?

    ReplyDelete
  83. Mr Drummond is typical of the Jersey culture - turn a blind eye - and reap the awards. Trying to protect a pedophile's reputation gets you a job as a jurat and that's the jersey way.

    ReplyDelete
  84. When are you putting up your full second submission?

    ReplyDelete
  85. "28 September this year - of all years - should be celebrated as JERSEY REFORM DAY .

    It occurs on a Friday this year and there is simply no excuse for our collective failure over nearly 250 years to recognise the bravery of those Jersey people in 1769 and their attempt to start the search for a democratic form of government that continues today."

    The excuse lies in the second sentence. Islanders have remained unaware of the event for 250 years.

    You're going to have to work harder than a blog comment if you seriously wish to redress that.

    ReplyDelete
  86. I think I will actually enlarge upon my second submission. Explain a bit about the 're-dacted' parts.

    Not just this but why the Commission are still doing nothing about identity theft - so long as the fake submission supports their already favoured outcome.

    Still, as I have a question in about this issue people like 'Jamie' had better get hurrying down to the Commission's office with ID!

    LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  87. 'Jamie' can't go down to the Electoral Commission. He is dead.

    Not just that but his entire life and identity has somehow been wiped out by aliens.

    It is as if he had never existed.

    ReplyDelete
  88. 'I think I will actually enlarge upon my second submission. Explain a bit about the 're-dacted' parts'

    Good lets see it.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Stealing a poor woman's wages while she lay in hospital and boozing it away down the pub! What a disgrace some people are. That makes even doing pathetic false submissions to our joke of an electoral commission seem funny. Glad to see the laatter is being brought up in the States Trevor. How much more of the farce can this commission become?

    ReplyDelete
  90. To answer that question we had better wait until they come up with their initial proposals. My guess is that we haven't seen anything yet.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Pleased to see that CTV are already interested in the background to my two oral questions for next week. I will obviously be pleased to expand.

    People should also not that although Home Affairs was listed for questions without answers it is actually Economic Development and the Chief Minister.

    Ian Gorst is away so Ian Le Marquand filling in for him.

    ReplyDelete
  92. A whole load of those submissions look dodgy to me. They are probably writing ones in support of the Constables themselves?

    ReplyDelete
  93. Just to let people know that after much faffing about on my part whilst being busy with other things, I should at last have a new post up late Monday. This is to do with some interesting developments beyond our shores.

    ReplyDelete
  94. "Ian Gorst is away so Ian Le Marquand filling in for him."

    So you won't get any straight answer! ILM will of course say things like "I haven't read the notes", "my recollection is jaded", and/or will waffle on about anything not directly related to the question, make it sound as if he has addressed the question (whilst taking up precious time).

    I hope you have some knock out supplementaries.

    ReplyDelete
  95. My email to the electoral commission has not been published. Probably a bit late to moan about it now but I checked my junk mail jut in case a reply was there, but nothing appeared. An hour of my life wasted, I wonder if it was the end of my submission where I said no to an upper chamber a la Baillache and his carribean jaunt made them decide not to publish it. Well, I will email them again tomorrow and ask why it was obviously dismissed.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Anonymous

    'Some knockout supplementaries'?

    As Churchill the dog says in the adverts...

    'Oh YES!'

    And yet the very best bit of the whole Sitting may just be something that our Establishment party 'masters' really won't have even seen coming...

    ReplyDelete
  97. Trevor.

    Lets hope the knockout supplementaries, are for the two "cracking" oral question you are asking tomorrow.


    ReplyDelete
  98. Today proved just how low Philip Bailhahce will go to cover up his shambles of an electoral commission. Basically the man will clearly make up anyting if challenged.Please resign Senator you are a waste of space.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Hi

    To those who are not happy that I still haven't put up a new blog...

    While I am quite happy to say 'sorry' the fact is that apart from my political work here I have been working on something far more important.

    To this regard while I will definitely put a related blog up for tomorrow I have been tied up in putting together the international petition for the best-selling U.S. author and journalist, Leah McGrath Goodman to have her visa entry rights restored.

    This being in order that she can continue her research into the democratic and justice system deficit exposed by the 'Historic' Abuse scandal.

    In the meantime, while it has only been up a matter of several hours please go to the change.org website to learn more.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Trevor could you provide a brief explanation as to how your questions were answered today. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Trevor.

    You and Montford were superb today.

    The Bailhache Brothers could not believe they were loosing control.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Peggy Mitchell-Bailhache11 September 2012 at 21:19:00 BST

    The Bailhache bros wee shown today to be like Grant and Phil Mitchell - only with less class and less brains. A couple of bully boys suddenly finding out there are new kids in the school who just aren't scared of them. Their race is nearly run. Their time nearly over. We just have to hang on in there. Well done!

    ReplyDelete