Pages

Wednesday, 8 August 2012

PRINCE CHARLES IN JERSEY – HOW MUCH DO ROYAL VISITORS REALLY KNOW ABOUT THE ISLAND’S HUGE DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT?

If this post seems an odd one to put up a couple of weeks after the event then the only excuse that I can offer is this one. It was motivated by a discussion over sharing a quick beer on the way home with a couple of constituents; after the excellent Havre des Pas Seaside Festival on Sunday evening.  Ultimately in fact by a comment from a young woman contrasting the smiles of ‘ordinary’ people at this event; with the smiles of the self-proclaimed local ‘Great & the Good’ that were largely given pride of place two weeks ago to pretend that THEY were the true face of Jersey - and what has made it so special. Or used to. 

The question raised was certainly a good one.

Just how much will Prince Charles or his Lady wife really know about the actions of so many of those who smile and preen - but are actually so desperate to hold on to the power they have hijacked in our Crown Dependency of Jersey for so many decades? Not only this, but as my constituent’s partner added ‘how much will the Royals really care to try and find out’?

To this the obvious further addition I suggest might well be: and how much effort would they then make to try and see matters were put right if they did come to know of the cancer eating Jersey from the top down? After all, ‘Old Gods almost dead’ these local Establishment Party ‘Big Wigs’ may be but the damage that they have caused – and continue to cause - is staggering.

One would like to think that there would be a Royal response.

Of course, the Royal visitors are meant to be strictly apolitical. Yet you do have to ask yourself this further question. If Senator Philip Bailhache could simply duck in and out of this constraint every time he wanted to meddle in democracy and maintain the status quo whilst Bailiff - then shouldn’t our Royal Family also be able to do just that when their subjects are quite clearly being sold down the river by people who are as arrogant, elitist and vested interest-driven as they are generally inept at their jobs?

For given that all too many local people would now suggest that Westminster’s constitutional commitment to ensure ‘good governance’ here appears to be largely no more substantial than all but forgotten words on a faded piece of paper; shouldn’t the Crown to which Jersey has for so long pledged loyalty actually be doing a little more ‘top down’ to make things right?

Let’s consider just a handful of examples from recent times…

Do the Royals know that in Jersey our independent Electoral Commission has been stolen away from us by people who have already decided that fair representation and political transparency comes a very poor runner-up to ‘tradition’ and secrecy?

Do they know that victims of appalling abuse whilst in the ‘care’ of the States have their evidence ‘go missing’; or that even when an individual is named by more than a dozen people the Attorney General of the day won’t take the matter forward as in ‘the public interest?

Do they know that in Jersey individuals who are savaged in Official reports for diabolical failings in preventing child abuse at Victoria College are allowed to sit in judgement of others as Jurats for 14 long years without anyone ‘at the top’ saying or doing anything?

Do the Royals know that if you say the wrong thing; look under the wrong stone you can have your career threatened; ended – even have illegal police raids on your home?

Do they know that ‘anti-establishment’ politicians in Jersey actually get prosecuted -  make that ‘persecuted’ - for helping a few elderly/disabled people register a request to later receive a postal vote (a breach of both Human Rights and the law in every other democracy under the sun)? Whilst other Establishment candidates who did exactly the SAME and even in the SAME district are not prosecuted?

Do they know that in Jersey when it suits the Establishment Party only a ‘prosecution’ case will be heard and the defense just doesn’t count in case it undermines the desired result?

Do they know that whilst we have the incredible generosity of someone like David Kirsch in the island we also have dozens of multi-millionaire tax dodgers (costing other jurisdictions millions) who are allowed to pay less tax here than their gardeners and domestics - and yet do nothing to warrant such preferential treatment? All of this, of course, whilst the Establishment Party of 2012 spin their hollow propaganda about ‘all of us’ needing to ‘tighten our belts’ as much-needed frontline public services are slashed?

Do the Royals know that Ministers can be proven to have lied in the States to justify suspending a Chief of Police – yet too many Members are still so spineless they vote to keep such news secret from the public?

Do they know that if you want to find out the truth (and see some decent journalism as well for that matter!) you are better off coming on here or on the Citizens’ Media sites of Voiceforchildren, Rico Sorda and a growing group of others – rather than reading the likes of the Jersey Establishment Post; or tuning in to local TV or radio?

No. The Royals probably don’t. But it’s long past time that they did know of such things. These and a whole lot more. It’s up to us to make sure that they finally do. If only because we can then judge them on the consequent response to helping to set matters right.

Like I said – call me naïve if you wish – but I would like to think that respond appropriately they might…


Keep the Faith.

63 comments:

  1. An interesting angle for a post, Trevor. If the Royals do know what goes on here and don't lift a finger to put matters right then maybe we do need independence. Obviously not independence with the likes of Bailhache in charge. Crikey that goes without saying doesn't it?

    Maybe the true answer is a revolution, Trevor? I mean to say, from what was reported a couple of months back after your questions there are certainly enough guns in the island to have a bloody good one!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Royals know. Why else do you think Bailhache is seeking independence. His loyalty to the Crown is in no doubt at all. He is seeking independence on behalf of the Crown in my humble opinion. It would suit them immensely.

      They are not above seeking suitable financial instruments in order to pay less tax I guess.

      Delete
  2. A revolution? Sounds good to me. Trouble is you would likely not get most of the people who 'say' they want one out of the pub, or away from the telly.

    As for the amount of guns - you only have to recall the Lenny Harper post that was on both Stuart's and Voiceforchildren's blog sites to know that there are people with enough guns to start 'revolutions' from their own basements residing in Jersey.

    And this isn't a dig at licenced gun owners who I have no problem with - contrary to lazy and third rate reporting.

    Maybe someone can post a link to the Lenny Harper post here?

    Not that the authorities would likely care too much about huge gun arsenals that are unregistered. Look at my constituent, Tony's case. Attacked in his own home by an individual who had...petrol bombs 'ready to go' at home. case dismissed!

    And guess what... Tony has just managed to prove that this person also had a real and working handgun! But take it to our courts - waste of time.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Re - Pub - LiKan8 August 2012 at 23:05:00 BST

    Hello Trevor.

    Good points. You have more faith in the royals than me though, mate. With stories like this you should adopt using labels to help people pick up on the post. Key words basically. Prince Charles for example. Just a tip.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Trevor, the Royals (whom as a Socialist, I want to see abolished) would never be bold enough to come out in support of democracy and ordinary people in Jersey, but the UK government has a legal and moral obligation to do so.

    When we have such ridiculous things as you so eloquently listed, like the whole Andrew Lewis lying and the States choosing to cover it up etc, how long do you think it is before the UK has to intervene? As a Parliamentarian, do you ever get much a chance to speak to your counterparts in the House of Commons to talk about Jersey?

    Personally I think that they should be intervening simply because of our pathetic electoral system, let alone all the other abuses that occur in the island.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Deputy Pitman,

    The Royals, well at least the Queen has her man watching the disjointed Government on a personal and weekly basis. Why no comment from him of high office with the Royals approval to be here. A man of integrity or a lap dog for the Jersey Government.

    Maybe the taxpayers pay of around £115,000 plus a cost ( again to the taxpayer ) of close to £800,000 for the running of his very cosy Government house, cars, utility bills, chefs, cleaners, gardners etc is enough of a sweetner for him to smile, open the Fetes and keep his mouth firmly closed.

    The Lieutenant-Governor is appointed by Her Majesty The Queen for a period of 5 years to be her personal representative and impartial adviser.

    Some of the Lieutenant-Governor's specific responsibilities include:

    to represent Her Majesty The Queen on ceremonial occasions

    to host Royal, Ambassadorial and VIP visits and occasions in conjunction with the Island's authorities and the UK government

    to act as a point of contact between the Island's authorities and the UK government.


    http://www.jersey.com/governmenthouse/About/Pages/default.aspx

    Anonymous

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sam and Anonymous.

    Thanks for the comments. I do speak to certain Members of the UK Parliament. I am in the process of doing so again this very week.

    Why? Can't say too much at this point but as you suggest, when you clearly cannot count on Crown Officers or local Ministers to ensure everything is above board what else can you do?

    Perhaps what says it all is that only this past week or so some backbenchers were blocked from meeting with the Justice Minister by no less an office than that of the Chief Minister!

    Just couldn't 'fit us in' to the busy schedule they had organised...

    But fear not - much as some of the Establishment party might pray for it I'm not going to go away! As for the Lieutenant-Governor, I may be giving him a chance to prove his mettle very soon...

    Regards

    Trevor

    PS

    Sam - I will be updating the main website over the next month or so and will get the link to your own very good blog added. Well done for last week again too.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why can't people like you and Sam just accept that most people are happy with things the way they are? The rich are rich because they are obviously better than most people. Whats the problem? There has to be a natural order of things or there would be chaos. Though perhaps that is what all of you equality types really want? If the rich manipulate themselves into power than it is all of you who are daft for letting it happen.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, anonymous, we are obviously very daft and very sad for wanting outlandish things like equality! But tell me - do you ever feel the urge to visit planet earth now and again?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Rude words won't get you anywhere and certainly not posted. You can critise and/or disagree with out surely?

    Meanwhile, unfortunately, fun as it is to sit up late at the lap top watching comments pop through I have to walk the dog. So will carry on tomorrow with the Royals debate.

    Now, where the heck did I put my rocket launcher???

    ReplyDelete
  10. Birt was Knighted just before the Prince Charles visit

    They were umming and arring about it for a while....

    But finally they had to let it go ahead!?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Trevor.

    Regarding the guns on the island, your readers might find this posting of interest as it not only lists some of the firearms held on island but also demonstrates the "Presstitution" of BBC STATE RADIO.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Trevor.

    A short snippet.

    "One man whom we had found had built up an arsenal of weapons was first granted a certificate in 1985. In 1992 he was convicted of Possessing a Prohibited weapon, supplying controlled drugs and other crimes. In 1993 he tried to purchase a shotgun whilst prohibited by the law. In 1995 intelligence was received that he was supplying controlled drugs. In 1996 he applied for and was granted a new firearms certificate by the Connetable. In 2006 he held the following weapons:

    1 x .30 semi automatic carbine*
    2 x 7.62 semi automatic rifles*
    1 x 7.62 bolt action rifle
    1 x .303 bolt action rifle
    1 x 5.56 semi automatic rifle* – as used the British Army
    5 x .357 Magnum handguns
    2 x 9x21 self loading pistol
    1 x 9x19 semi automatic carbine* - similar to that used by the Police
    1 x Pump action shotgun
    2 x Semi automatic shotguns*
    1 x .50 revolver **; and
    1 x .50 rifle **

    183,000 rounds of ammunition for the above weapons."

    PRICELESS

    ReplyDelete
  13. All I can say Trevor is that is one damned good post that sums up all that is wrong with this cesspit Island.

    I have a gut feeling that more unpleasant 'truths' will emerge soon, meaning the liars will have to start practising their art again.

    We must not forget the Committee of (non)Inquiry either which should have been well under way by now, but no - no doubt because of some hidden agenda we do not even have any ToR's yet.

    Like Sam, I say forget the Royals, but whilst we have a representative in the Island, let him prove that he really has a valid worth here. The leaving speech of the last LG was quite disgraceful, so I am not to hopeful!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said Gee Gee

      Ahimsa

      Delete
  14. Hi Trevor,

    Please tell us which Members of Parliament you speak with on a regular basis, and confirm whether these conversations are conducted in your capacity as a member of the States of Jersey, or on a more informal, personal basis ?

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  15. Which Constable was responsible for allowing such a responsible person to plan World War Three?

    And to think - our 'Electoral Commission' thinks they must stay in the States at all costs due to their 'wisdom'!

    If the one in this case is still in name him and I will put it up so long as there is proof of his ID.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Dear 'anonymous'

    Please get real. The people that I speak to need to stay between them and me for obvious reasons. You don't give the identities away of people who are effectively 'on the inside' and genuinely concerned about our version of 'democracy'.

    I came to meet these - with one exception - through being elected. One, who is actually in the House of Lords, not an MP, I first met prior to my election through his meeting up with Shona when he was visiting the island.

    Enough said I think. Jersey is being watched even if it is by a much smaller number of MPs than it should be.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Zoompad. I will try and watch the youtube video you describe.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Thanks Trevor. I don't suppose the Queen was even shown that letter I wrote, but if she wasn't that letter I recieved in reply was an act of treason. I can't even bear to think of if she actually did see my letter, and allow that reply to be sent.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Apropos of absolutely nothing. I sent in a comment to CTV after viewing the Royal visit to Jersey. I said I was appalled that the gaudy "granite feature" was permanent and that the rest of the pictures online seemed to show caricatures of Jersey rather than real life. I suggested that Jersey go the whole hog and declare itself an Island theme park. I pointed out that this was perfectly plausible as larger theme parks already existed in the USA. I'll admit, at the time I was angry at the blatant "frue frueing", to quote Mrs Dickinson, that seemed to have been undertaken prior to the visit by HRH's but I insulted no-one personally nor did I use abusive language. Yet still my comment did not see the light of day.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous says, Birt was Knighted just before Charles visit,they were umming and arring about it for a while,but finally they had to let it go ahead, QUESTIONS, who were these people? likewise with walker who put his name forward?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anyone savvy with online tools can easily verify one or two notable local progressives with extensive parliament links.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous Savvy.

    No - they can't actually. Because not everyone is daft enough to communicate on important issues via cyberspace. I thought that you would know that given your (former) job?

    ReplyDelete
  23. To the poster moaning generally about how little James Baker does in St. Helier No. 1 and in the States too. Sorry, I haven't put it up. I don't think anyone is interested. Its old news. Isn't it? But if you have a specific complaint...

    ReplyDelete
  24. Didn't everyone do well in the Battle and a great sunny day for once too. Which number one deputies were representing their constituents at the police station re-location meeting?

    ReplyDelete
  25. In answer to the question above. Deputy Judy Martin and me were the St. Helier District No.1 Deputies at the meeting. Come on - you didn't really think Deputy Baker would be there, did you?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Whoever posted the "look who's talking" link all I can say, in the words of Rio Ferdinand, absolutely classic! Everyone should re-post to everyone they know. Even to their grandparents. Even to people you don't know. This is so funny and pathetic it deserves to go viral. It is that hilarious! Haw! Haw! Haw! Haw! Haw!Burp!

    ReplyDelete
  27. In answer to the query on what time I am giving evidence to the Electoral Commission next week I don't yet know for sure. I do know that I was the first one down for this date so possibly that means I will be first up.

    As for the other info in your post, thanks. I will be in touch once you are back from your break. Hope the weather is as good for you as it is meant to be here.

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  28. I never realised you had Monarchist sympathies. Expecting the Royals to do anything seems naive. It’s a bit like the poor people that wrote letters to Comrade Stalin about the excesses of the NKVD. The letters all ended up in the archive of - the NKVD and the authors in their goals.

    I am sure there is little in common with those attending the Seaside Festival and English Aristocrats.

    If you want to find an external force that might assist, then start looking at the European Convention on Human Rights and the various judgments of the Strasbourg Court. This is what helped to bring down the Feudal regime in Sark. The UK government ultimately has responsibility for good government in all the Channel Islands. As British citizens why are we not enjoying the same rights as those that live in the UK and in the EU?

    Remember Jersey is not an island. It has a mass of external relationships and there are modern standards of democracy by which all are judged – demagogues and Monarchs alike.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hello Nick

    Your misunderstanding of my alleged 'monarchist sympathies' seems as way off the mark as your understanding of the situation in Sark.

    Indeed, I know I was not the only one at last week's meeting stunned to hear a couple of capitalist/elitist bully boys like the Barclays described by you as if they were some kind of champions of democratic reform.

    As you probably recall, we have friends in Sark, we even got married there and actually know what your great friends the Barclays are doing to the community.Basically dividing it and even destroying it.

    Not out of any remote interest in 'democracy' as you would make out but simply out of the own lust for power. Their aim to make the majority reliant on them and their money. I think it is termed 'buying power'?

    I really never thought you would want to be associated with such people! Perhaps you might also recall when your new heroes suddenly made everyone they had given jobs to redundant shortly before Christmas not so long ago? Why - because an election had not brought about the 'democracy' that suited their objective of domination.

    What was it the Who sang? 'Meet the new boss, same as the old boss'. No, as you should also know I have no monarchist sysmpathies, nor do I mourn the old regime in Sark. But you won't find me cosying up to would be neo-feudalist bullies like the Barclays either.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The Barclays are revolting. There castle is obscene. I doubt such people could even spell democracy.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I think you are likely quite right.

    Interestingly enough when I went over to Sark about a year ago on the way I got speaking to someone who told me that their partner had got a job at the 'castle'.

    Now I have no way of confirming this story but I was told that the person had even had to sign a contract forbidding thm to speak about the place or anything they saw there.

    Almost sounds a bit 'feudalistic' doesn't it, Nick?

    ReplyDelete
  32. I always thought Nick Le Cornu modelled his politics on Stalin? I'm not suggesting he wants to shoot people of course, But the Iron Man controlling everything motif?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anonymous.

    I let this last comment through because I wasn't quite sure if it was genuine or not.

    Anyway, comparing Nick's politics to Stalin is frankly ridiculous. Nick has a keen interest in that period of Russian history but a fan of Stalin he is not.

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  34. With regard to next week's Electoral Commission public hearing, apparently I am up first to give evidence at 10am.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I hope you won't be coming out with the same guff as Gorst about the Constables providing an essential parish link? As for a second House full of Senators - my God what kind of money wasting clap-trap is that?

    ReplyDelete
  36. I think you can be fairly confident about that.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Whilst reading the Road Traffic (St.Helier)(Jersey) order 1996 last year, I came accross a little gem about where the fees for parking go, from memory;

    1/3rd to SoJ
    1/3rd to POSH
    1/3rd to Queen

    this year there have been 2 ammendments to this enactment,
    surprise surprise this section has been deleted.

    the Royals know exactly what's going on over here.

    cyril

    ReplyDelete
  38. Modernity comes in strange guises. As you rightly note, the agents of change in Sark are themselves at the pinnacle of the elite. Whatever their agenda, the Barclays have pushed Sark’s constitution from Feudal to democratic. It’s ironic indeed that their candidates at the elections are unsuccessful. Such ingratitude! (more irony, for the Beans that don’t do irony).

    Channel Island institutions are not comparing well with Human Rights judgments. The signposts for change are there. Facing the obvious, the political class is reluctant to modernise or democratise. Conservatives should realise that for things to remain the same things must change. That is why it is so sad that Clothier was scuppered. The Electoral Commission will simply come up with Byzantine and unworkable plans that just maintain the status quo.

    I look forward to reading you submission to the Electoral Commission (when they choose to publish) and look forward to the hearing on Friday 17th August in St Paul's Centre - 10am.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Nick

    I am thinking about advocating Senator Bailhache to be put forward by the Electoral Commission as Jersey's very own King. Or at least Lord Protector. What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Don't give 'em ideas Trevor. They might think you are being serious.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Heard today Condor ferries to loose money, as FerrySpeed have bought two ships of their own True or False? has anyone any info?

    ReplyDelete
  42. You write in praise of "the incredible generosity of someone like David Kirsch (sic)".
    Are you sure?
    In our capitalist society to be worth around £200 millions by 2008 (as reported) Mr Kirch's wealth was not founded upon acts of generosity.
    His early investment (in the 1960s) in London residential property was closely followed by Private Eye and other critical organs as were some of his many publicized commercial "take over" deals. The tarnished transition of CHAPS (which owned the Jersey Grand Hotel etc)from a public to private company was a substantial financial scandal at the time too.

    That he now confronts the ultimate mortality challlenge has no doubt tempered his wealth seeking urges and it is very gratifying to observe him re-distributing some of his fortune - but let's not get carried away.

    Neither should we get carried away with any expectations that the "Royals" will perform any miracles or acts of generosity for their subjects. The historic record for them is even more flawed than that for Mr Kirch.
    Perhaps you have greater faith in the value of the "sinner who repenteth" than I imagined. If so you had better pray that some of the arch demons that you identify here do not start behaving better because you might yet have to forgive them and sing their praises.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I too have heard that Ferryspeed are leasing or buying two of Condor's old boats to bring freight in themselves, perhaps as a threat to get Condor to reduce their charges. I think that there is truth in the rumour.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Anonymous

    I actually agree with the baisics of what you say - as you likely know, nobody has been more critical, nor done more tham me to bring out the truth of the 1 (1) K system.

    But the point I was trying to make and maybe did not make it well enough is that, whatever the reasons, the fact remains that this very wealthy individual still did not HAVE to take the step that he now has. That is all.

    My problem is with the principle that because someone has acquired MORE they should be allowed by our government to pay LESS.

    After all, great things for communities that some very wealth people do, I have spent a large part of my life working with very poor people who still 'give' to the commumity by the bucket load with their voluntary time and efforts.

    Cheers

    ReplyDelete
  45. With regard to the Ferryspeed issue hopefully something to report next week.

    ReplyDelete
  46. The late and great Norman Le Brocq had the Jersey fishing protection vessel named after him. By way of a convoluted link back to the recent meeting about the new police station, if this is ever built do you think it should be named 'Philip Ozouf What a Cock-up House'? Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Well, the police will also be moving from Summerland so maybe Neverland would be an alternative?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Any idea who the mystery guest was this morning on BBC Radio Jersey? Incognito

    ReplyDelete
  49. Lord Thompson the late and not very lamented Canadian tycoon who owned newspapers such as The Times even before Lord Black of blesssed and sacred but thoroughly discredited media memory - and was also very wealthy.
    He once explained his view that as a wealthy man he could do more good things than a poor man...
    ..it's a point of view of course but so absurd that it is difficult to understand how he was ever able to accumulatre so much power and dosh - not to mention a creeply Peerage.
    Just imagine what bad things the family of a Royal must have done to accumulate so much power, dosh and titles?
    I wonder if Prince Charles and Norman le Brocq are in any way related?

    ReplyDelete
  50. Hi Tom

    Norman and Charles related? If anyone knows then it is probably a local historian like yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I was asked by a gentleman today whilst walking the dog if my submission to the Electoral Commission had been sent in yet as it isn't on their site.

    As I told him, there is no fault on the Commission's part here because I simply haven't sent it in yet. In fact I am finishing it off in the morning. Once this is done I will aim to get it up on the Bald Truth by late Tuesday or early Wednesday.

    The hearing is, of course, at 10am on Friday. I would imagine it will be put up on the Commission's site after that.

    ReplyDelete
  52. If it indeeds transpires that the freight side of Condor is sold to another carrier, then there is going to be a big problem for the Channel Islands.

    I spoke with the first officer of Condor a while ago and it was stated, the real money was being made from freight and the passenger side was not at all important.

    Let us hope that the States have a cast iron clause within the licence agreement or a plan B. for ferries regarding islanders, their cars and freight being a connected and comprehensive
    service.

    Oooops.

    ReplyDelete
  53. From CTV online

    Jersey's Education Committee have been told to think again about their decision not to allow a student to go to his chosen secondary school.

    It's claimed the boy who was simply referred to as J, had difficulty making friends and wanted to go to Les Quennevais because that's where most of his current classmates at La Moye were going. Instead he got sent to Haute Vallee.

    He appealed, but was turned down.

    A daming independent investigation is highly critical of the way the whole issue's been dealt with.

    It says the politician who handled the appeal case was conflicted, and that he demonstrated a lack of impartiality. Deputy Rod Bryans used to be on Haut Valle's board of governors.

    It's also claimed the appeals panel failed to give due and proper consideration to J's best interests, including the supporting views of his headteacher and class teacher.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Just to inform resders that I have been informed that with regard to the Electoral Commission public hearing on Friday I am on at 11am - not 10am.

    I have heard through the grapevine that the first hour will be spent discussing privately debating the crucially important issue of whether you can get a better value for money suntan in Jersey or Barbados!

    Only joking, of course!

    ReplyDelete
  55. Rod does something.

    This case sounds fascinating. Feel free to give me a call if you or they need assistance. I have had similar during my first term and it is important than a young person is at the centre of all considerations.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Re Condor - Brittany Ferries has sub contracted to Condor to provide a high speed service between Cherbourg and Poole for the last few years. The Condor vessel then went onto the Channel Islands and France. Brittany Ferries (according to internet reports) have ended this arrangement.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Hopefully have my submission to the Electoral Commission loaded up on the blog by tomorrow morning latest.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Trevor, did you look at that letter I wrote to the Queen, that I put onto a Youtube video?

    I just find it incredible that such a letter can be sent, and have such a disinterested response.

    As I said, I expect the Queen didnt even recieve the letter, yet the writer of the response has claimed that she would not be interested in what I wrote. I dont think that is true, because surely she would care a lot about institutional child abuse?

    ReplyDelete