Having not made use of my allocation of written questions over the past two States Sittings; at readers' requests I now list below each of the up-coming questions - both written and oral - that I have lodged for the States Sitting of June 18th. Whilst also obviously not wishing to preempt the fun in any shape or form I nevertheless also give a brief bit of background to a few of the most 'interesting' ones for those who may be unaware...
Written question to Minister for Home Affairs
Now this really is a most fascinating question given the Jersey Establishment's increasingly rapid slide toward States indifference to regular abuses of citizen's Human Rights. Human Rights, let us not forget, that would be held as sacrosanct even in many a so-called 'Developing country'.
But in brief do you think it is right that a law-abiding member of the public can be 'arrested' by order of a member of the Planning Department and bundled into a police car - all in full view of a horrified business client? A client who not surprisingly withdrew his offer of a lucrative contract as a consequence! Me neither but perhaps we are just out of step with 'The Jersey Way'? Do you think sanctions for such a person should be more strict than would apply to an alleeged mugger? Hopefully not.
Now the man behind the despicable strategy to ensure the people of St. Helier can never have a fair and equal say in the running of the States, Senator Bailhache, (not to mention his minions Senators Gorst, Ozouf and the Constables) reckon all in relation to this Master Plan to sabotage democracy by 2014 is beyond challenge from we annoying 'little people'. Are the Far-Right 'right'? Well, I know they are not. But let's see if the Attorney General plays along...
Written question to the Attorney General
'Since police investigations began in 2007 in relation to 'historic' abuse can the Minister advise if there have been any cases investigated by the States of Jersey Police where abuse was alleged by both another perpetrator of abuse and corroborated by a victim yet no prosecution was then brought and, if so, what was the reason for this?'
Now this really IS a fascinating question! A former Deputy once observed that one should always ensure you ask questions to which you already knew the answer. Rightly or wrongly to this regard it certainly is funny how certain very telling documentation often gets delivered into the hands of a politician not afraid of the Establishment bully boys. But let's not say too much for now other than this.
The law should apply equally to all, shouldn't it?. But of course the fact is that in Establishment Jersey it does not: it depends upon who you are. Any doubters to this need only ook back to the politically motivated prosecution in 2009 of Deputies Shona Pitman and Geoff Southern for the unknown offence (in every other democracy in the WORLD!) of helping the old and disabled amongst their constituents to register a request for a postal vote.
All, of course, whilst the then Attorney General simultaneously did NOT charge those non-JDA candidates who did the same. And in the same St. Helier No. 2 district! Jusstice - its wonderful isn't it!Yet the matters underlying this question are obviously even more serious. Can it really be acceptable that whilst one abuser gets many years in prison another one - fully evidenced - does not even get taken to court? Of course it isn't - and next week sees the beginning of this sickening abuse of those who control Jersey 'justice' finally being exposed.
No wonder they want to try and shaft me with a non-ECHR compliant trial!
Written question to the Minister for Housing
'Would the Minister advise whether, in the case of the owner of a self-catering property who has re-registered the premises as a lodging house yet retained one unit out of ten as a (third party) manager's flat, all of the tenants are still classed as private tenants in law?'
Nothing that really needs to be said about this question: indeed, its actually not even in the same league as the others. But having been contacted by an elderly member of the public having problems with a dispute with a Fagin-like businessman it is still a question well worth getting an official answer to.
And by my thus doing so, of course, saving the said constituent from being forced to cross the palms of some slimy lawyer with enough silver to secure twenty minutes 'work' that could instead fund the OAP having a nice and well deserved little holiday in the sun somewhere!
Oral question to the Chief Minister
'Following his meeting with the businessmen who raised concern at seeing the Assistant Minister with responsibility for External Affairs reading confidential documents in full view of the public on a flight, does the Chief Minister support the Assistant Minister's views expressed on 14th May 2013 that the allegations were 'inaccurate' and gave a 'fictitious' and 'malicious' account and, if not, will he now be asking his Assistant Minister to resign?'
Now if you don't know the background to this question and you live in Jersey you really must have been residing in a cave without access to the wonderful Gigabyte Jersey! But should that be you...
Basically Senator Philip Bailhache was caught bang-to-rights by a local busiessman foolishly and with his trademark arrogance reading confidential documents in full view of the public on a flight from Gatwick. These documents being to do with the appallingly typical Jersey Way treatment of abuse victim 'HG' in the Dean suspension case.
Most of us would have simply held our hands up and apologised. But not the never-wrong Senator Bailhache. I was instead accused of presenting a document that only 'purported' to be an e-mail from a member of the public. The contents were called 'malicious' and 'fictitious'. Yes, businessman and yours truly were in effect basically liars. Cheers, Senator.
But then one small problem arose: far from being put off by the bluster and the bullying the businessman demanded to meet the Chief Minister. And he even brought along... another businessman who could verify his version of events! Wow! Whoever will Chief Minister Gorst now chose to believe...
Oral question to the Attorney General
'What powers, if any, does a Court have to ensure that full indemnities awarded to members of the public at the conclusion of a court case are enforced and the injured party is not left thousands of pounds out of pocket?'
Now here, last but not least, is another gem. Wouldn't you think that if you won a court case and the judge (no les than the current Bailiff!) awarded you full indemnities you would actually get that money back? Wouldn't you think the Court could actually order a lawyer who was refusing to comply to hand it over? Me too. But then this is I repeat, Establishment Jersey.
After all you might also think that our Police are obliged to accept a member of the community filing a complaint for investigation about alleged criminal activity? They are meant to. But once again in reality it all comes down to who you are and who you are complaining about. Ayway, the fact of the matter is that this particular question I am asking is just the tip of the ice-berg in a case that, though dating back some years, is likely to be making headline news very soon.
Keep the Faith & Happy States listening.
With even my old friend and serial fence-sitter Deputy Roy Le Herissier demanding an inquiry into Bailhache-Gate could be a Question Time to even keep young Pravda Lucy away from her cookery books...