Tuesday, July 7, 2015

HOW 26 JERSEY (MUPPETS) POLITICIANS KILLED OFF SCRUTINY WITH ONE PUSH OF A BUTTON













THE STATES OF JERSEY



THE DEATH OF DEMOCRACY PART 2



WE ARE GOVERNED BY COMPLETE MUPPETS PART 2



AS THE OLD SAYING GOES  "YOU CAN'T POLISH A TURD"


HOW 26 LOBOTOMISED POLITICIANS AND 2 ABSTENTIONS KILLED OF THE SCRUTINY PROCESS IN JERSEY.


DEPUTY NORTON: 

P.44/2015 

"What about Scrutiny?  Scrutiny is crucially important.  I think this entire Assembly recognises how important Scrutiny is and how important a role it should and must play and will play.  The overall principle of Scrutiny looking at the Jersey International Finance Centre will happen, is happening and will continue to happen.  The first building, we have signed a lease.  Sorry, about that.  We have actually done some business.  This is not the time to stop it.  Nor should we attempt to.  Of course should we be involved in building; what do we know about building anyway?  What do we know about telecoms?  What do we know about harbours?  Flying aircraft?  We do it in other forms.  This is just another form of that.  I cannot support this proposition.  We must allow the first phase of that development to happen."



THE 26 WHO KILLED OFF SCRUTINY


Deputy of St John and Deputy Andrew Lewis abstained from the vote. 



In part 1 we looked at the death of scrutiny in Jersey. We have seen how collective responsibly works.  We can see how the executive and their collective "do as you are told lackeys" work in the states chamber. The States of Jersey is so bad at the moment it wouldn't even make for a credible B movie. It's a joke. Laughable. Complete Muppets. Its painful to listen to states sittings but one must  keep abreast of the shambles unfolding before us. The only blessing is that the majority of these muppets don't lodge any questions or propositions so its all over in a couple of hours. £45,000  wham bam thank you mam.  Where shall we go for our summer holidays. 

You would think that there would be some loyalty in Scrutiny. A brothers in arms mentality. All scrutiny members knowing what a difficult and pointless job they do with their reviews. If it's worth something then the executive will kick it into the long grass and then come out telling us what an important role scrutiny has to play. Its Carry on up the States. 


In part 1 we asked this question: 


"Scrutiny is a function that is there to scrutinise  government policy and procedure - it is evidence based and it serves to help states members come to an informed decision based on the facts before taking a vote on our behalf. 

26 of our states members unbelievably ignored scrutiny and intern the democratic purpose. They should be made to resign their seats as states members and representatives of the public.

On the 16/06/2015 Deputy Tadier brought P.44/2015 asking the states to halt  work on the finance quarter for 6 weeks until the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel had concluded their report. 26 of our Muppet states members decided that they would vote blind and kill off scrutiny in one push of a button. This is shocking. This isn't about a building on the Esplanade Car Park  this is about democracy or the death of it. What is the purpose of scrutiny when it continues to be ignored? The executive will back scrutiny when it suits their agenda. How many of those 26 sit on scrutiny panels themselves? Why didn't they support the process they are apart of? "


These are the members below. Part of the 26. Sitting on scrutiny panels. These Muppets voted against the very same function that they are a part of.  No, they thought, lets not support the process of democracy. Lets vote against it. We sit on scrutiny and there is no better feeling than killing it off.  


 I'M NOT JOKING. WE ARE GOVERNED BY MUPPETS.  


Simon Crowcroft. Environment Housng and Technical Services Scrutiny Panel. http://www.scrutiny.gov.je/Panels/Pages/Panels.aspx?PanelId=3

Len Norman PPC Scrutinise States Members conduct?

Constable Michael John Paddock Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel. http://www.scrutiny.gov.je/Panels/Pages/Panels.aspx?PanelId=1

Constable John Edward Le Maistre Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel. http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/Pages/Members.aspx?MemberId=197

Deputy Richard John Renouf Health and Social Security Scrutiny Panel. http://www.scrutiny.gov.je/Panels/Pages/Panels.aspx?PanelId=6

Scott Michael Wickenden Public Accounts Committee http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/Pages/Members.aspx?MemberId=212

Deputy Robert David Johnson. Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel. http://www.scrutiny.gov.je/Panels/Pages/Panels.aspx?PanelId=1 and Environment, Housing and TTS Scrutiny Panel. http://www.scrutiny.gov.je/Panels/Pages/Panels.aspx?PanelId=3


IT GETS BETTER


TAKE A LOOK AT THIS WRITTEN QUESTION.

Deputy McLinton is worried about the cost of asking questions in the States. Yes, asking bloody questions. Yet, he is one of the 26 who has taken a 50million pound punt on a building without even waiting for the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel Review to report back to the states to inform as to whether its a good deal or not. He didn't make a speech.

Deputy McLinton not only informed Save our Shoreline (SOS)  while campaigning for deputy in the 2014 elections that he was against any new office space on the Esplanade car park as shown below and that its to be built upon toxic deposits he also wants to bypass the democratic process of not only ignoring scrutiny but attempting to curtail questioning of the executive. That is quite remarkable and un democratic.




2015 - it's a time to shine alright. 


Question
WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE

BY DEPUTY P.D. McLINTON OF ST. SAVIOUR ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 2nd JUNE 2015

Given that all States departments are being expected to make considerable ongoing savings does PPC consider that such financial savings should also be made in relation to the functioning of the States Assembly and, if so, would PPC consider bringing forward for approval amendments to Standing Orders to limit members to two written questions and two oral questions per sitting of the Assembly?

Answer
A majority of members of PPC agree that the States Assembly should participate fully in the current initiatives to reduce States expenditure and, although the budget of the States Assembly is set by PPC without interference from the Council of Ministers, PPC has already notified the Minister for Treasury and Resources that it is content to make savings in the Assembly budget that match the percentage reductions being made in ministerial departments. PPC has not yet finalised the precise details of how these savings will be made but is satisfied that it can achieve a total on-going annual saving of £392,000 by 2019. If the States agree to the filming and web-streaming of the Assembly there will be an additional need for savings to offset that cost as PPC has agreed to absorb the cost of filming within its current cash limits.

PPC does not, however, believe that it would lead to any noticeable financial savings in the Assembly’s budget if the number of written questions were restricted to two per member per sitting as suggested by the questioner. In addition PPC considers that questions are an important way for members to hold Ministers and other officeholders to account and the committee has no current plans to amend Standing Orders to change the provisions on the number of questions permitted


Then we have Deputy Norton

 Lets remind ourselves again at what Deputy Norton told SOS before being elected.



Now let us look at what an assistant ministerial position does.


10.1.15 Deputy M.J. Norton:
Firstly, I would just like to touch on the members of the public who were outside this building earlier on at a very well-organised get together.  I would rather say “get together” rather than “protest”.  Perhaps it was a protest, for some people it was.  For some they had reasoned arguments.  For some the answer was going to be: “No; now what is the question?”  There was many a time when I did engage outside for a good 20 minutes and I enjoyed the chat that I had with most of those outside.  Some were very vociferous, some were very polite.  I asked them what they wanted.  “What do you want?  What do you want?  Not what we as States Members want but what do you want?”  Some of the answers I got back: “We want jobs.”  Well, the finance industry is great for jobs.  “Oh no, it is not.  No, we want jobs for local people.”  90 per cent of the jobs in the finance industry are filled by local people.  Going forward more and more of those graduates, as soon as they become graduates, before they become graduates, are being snapped-up by those within the financial services industry.  “What do you want?  What do you see for the future?”  “St. Helier.  We would like to see a St. Helier with a soul in it.  We would like to see a St. Helier where we could enjoy our life, where we could live.”  If you do not have the Finance Centre the chances are you will not get the regeneration of St. Helier that is so important.  This is not just about a Jersey International Financial Centre.  This is about St. Helier.  This is about its regeneration.  This is about spending that money forward and making plans and freeing-up some of the wonderful real estate that we could have if some of that finance centre was put together and some of that free space in other parts of St. Helier were freed-up for regeneration.
[15:15]
To make them better places to be.  Many years before I joined the States I did not really know a great deal about the finance industry.  I have never worked in it.  I was never particularly a big fan of it.  I did not really know what it did.  But when asked my opinions on many occasions it was not really where my interest was.  Tourism, that is where we should go.  Agriculture, that is where we should be.  Those are the sole reasons that Jersey is what Jersey is.  That is all fine.  That is great except when you get down to looking at the figures of it.  Suddenly you get down to the real importance of the finance industry and like it or not, a fan or not, the reality is that if you want an industry that supports all other industries in the Island, that spends £1 million per day in other services outside of its own finance industry then you look at the finance industry because that is what it does.  It spends £1 million in everything from carpet fitters and decorates to builders, to people that supply photocopiers, to everything else.  £1 million a day.  There is not another industry doing that.  It brings in 40 per cent of our G.V.A.  Its footprint is very good, 25 per cent.  That is it, but 40 per cent of our G.V.A.  It is very important.  Yesterday I was lucky enough to attend a series of meetings throughout a very, very long day where in London we met a lot of potential inward investors.  The message there was: “Jersey is open for business.”  The message there is: “We are very confident of our future.”  That Jersey is the place to do your business.  There were some very, very powerful people within the rooms that we were in, that were listening, were taking note and are very interested in being part of Jersey.  Now what we are going to do is say: “Oh, actually we are not really sure now.  Can we hold it off for a little minute?  I know we have signed an agreement with someone but, you know, just wait a little bit longer.  Let us mess around UBS, shall we?  We have signed a lease with you but, you know, it might cost us a few quid to get out of it.”  That is not where we should be.  We need to woman-up, man-up, stick our chest out, be a little bit more confident about what we do because that is what the rest of the world is watching.  To support this proposition would be a catastrophe, reputation for us throughout the financial world.  Think very carefully about that.  Our masterplan is a masterplan that is flexible.  That has always been said.  The masterplan of the Esplanade Quarter is flexible.  It is flexible enough to be able to incorporate other suggestions should they come along at the right time.  It is phase by phase.  Who knows, we might even get a hospital down there as well.  But at least it is flexible enough to incorporate it but then we will have to find some money to pay for it.  What about Scrutiny?  Scrutiny is crucially important.  I think this entire Assembly recognises how important Scrutiny is and how important a role it should and must play and will play.  The overall principle of Scrutiny looking at the Jersey International Finance Centre will happen, is happening and will continue to happen.  The first building, we have signed a lease.  Sorry, about that.  We have actually done some business.  This is not the time to stop it.  Nor should we attempt to.  Of course should we be involved in building; what do we know about building anyway?  What do we know about telecoms?  What do we know about harbours?  Flying aircraft?  We do it in other forms.  This is just another form of that.  I cannot support this proposition.  We must allow the first phase of that development to happen.  It should happen on a schedule.  It should give confidence to other people that wish to take out leases that I feel confident are coming our way.  Jersey is open for business and the message we must send out is that we are open for business.  Of course we are listening to the public outside.  I listened to the 50 people outside.  I take note that whether you believe on 900 to 1,000 or 2,000 people, that massive demonstration, I take note of that as well.  There are another 98,000 people living there.  There are 12,000 people in the finance industry.  I take note of what they say as well.  I take note of all those other people that benefit from the finance industry as well.  I take note of all those people that want a job in the future.  My child, your child, your grandchildren, whoever it may be.  They all want jobs that are well paid.  They want jobs that focus on what we do best.  What we do best in the world is finance and financial industries.  It is our golden goose.  It is laying golden eggs for us and we must support it.  You may support it by rejecting this proposition.  [Approbation]



They are not alone. The executive rule the chamber. They rule through collective responsibility. The States of Jersey are seriously letting the good people of Jersey down. They are not interested in due process. The chamber is a shambles. 

Part 3 this weekend. 




Rico Sorda

Part time investigative journalist 



Sunday, June 28, 2015

HOW 26 JERSEY (MUPPETS) POLITICIANS KILLED OFF SCRUTINY WITH ONE PUSH OF A BUTTON



CHIEF MINISTER GORST & TREASURY MINISTER Maclean


THESE STATES MEMBERS SHOULD RESIGN. 







THE STATES OF JERSEY



THE DEATH OF DEMOCRACY 



WE ARE GOVERNED BY COMPLETE AND UTTER MUPPETS (APART FROM THE ODD DECENT ONES)



WE HAVE NEVER HAD IT SO BAD



 SCRUTINY IS NOW OFFICIALLY OBSOLETE AND DEAD


Play the official anthem of the States of Jersey whilst reading this post.



LYRICS
t's time to play the music
It's time to light the lights
t's time to meet the Muppets on the Muppet Show tonight.

It's time to put on makeup
It's time to dress up right
It's time to raise the curtain on the Muppet Show tonight.

Why do we always come here
I guess we'll never know
It's like a kind of torture
To have to watch the show

And now let's get things started
Why don't you get things started
It's time to get things started
On the most sensational inspirational celebrational Muppetational
This is what we call the Muppet Show!


Scrutiny is a function that is there to scrutinise  government policy and procedure - it is evidence based and it serves to help states members come to an informed decision based on the facts before taking a vote on our behalf. 

26 of our states members unbelievably ignored scrutiny and intern the democratic purpose. They should be made to resign their seats as states members and representatives of the public.

On the 16/06/2015 Deputy Tadier brought P.44/2015 asking the states to halt  work on the finance quarter for 6 weeks until the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel had concluded their report. 26 of our Muppet states members decided that they would vote blind and kill off scrutiny in one push of a button. This is shocking. This isn't about a building on the Esplanade Car Park  this is about democracy or the death of it. What is the purpose of scrutiny when it continues to be ignored? The executive will back scrutiny when it suits their agenda. How many of those 26 sit on scrutiny panels themselves? Why didn't they support the process they are apart of? 

We are now seeing party politics under the guise of collective responsibility. It's the party of the quangos. 

Deputy Tadier attempted to follow the democratic process by calling a parish meeting in St Brelade where the parishioners voted unanimously to support his proposition and what did the democratically elected representatives of that parish do? (apart from Deputy Tadier) 

Constable Steve Pallett - Deputy Norton and Deputy Truscott ignored the wishes of their parishioners and voted with the quango. This is the caliber of the politicians we are now dealing with. They are only self interested as they vote with the executive so they can gain future favour. This is blindingly obvious 

We must remember that this is the most illegitimate parliament this island has seen for decades. 2/3rds of them were elected unopposed and that includes 11 out of the 12 constables. They will always back the executive. They are ignoring scrutiny and in doing so ignoring the democratic process.

THE MEDIA

The Jersey Mainstream Media should be taking these 26 Muppets to the cleaners. They should be asked to resign their posts or at the very least asked to justify their actions in a very robust manner. The seriousness of what these 26 did cannot be understated. The media should not let them off the hook. It is bad enough that these 26 anti democrats didn't wait for scrutiny but what if scrutiny comes back with a damning report plus confirming that they have been withheld crucial documents to help them come to an informed opinion. Documents only get withheld when they don't show you in a good light. The 26 need to be challenged on a public platform. It will be interesting to see the actions of the Jersey State Media when the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel report is released. Although the damage has already been done and Scrutiny is buried. It matters little if the report is glowing or damning the 26 have killed scrutiny and democracy. 


What we have are states members (mostly unelected)  trying to cement their future ministerial and assistant ministerial positions. 


Everybody who sits on scrutiny should resign 


Will The Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel be considering their position after the publication of their report? 


In my opinion the States of Jersey as it currently stands should be disbanded. They are failing the people of Jersey. To go forward blindly is unforgivable. We are governed by Muppet's who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the chamber let alone allow them to push buttons when voting. 


Rico Sorda

Part Time Investigative Journalist

Friday, April 24, 2015

THE SPEECHES OF THE SEVEN POLITICIANS WHO WANTED THE JERSEY CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRY TO STOP









JERSEY CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRY OPPONENTS 


FOR THE RECORD - 2015 POST SAVILE - POLITICIANS STILL BURY THEIR HEADS IN THE SAND. 


HERE ARE THE SPEECHES OF THE 7  ( Senator Bailhache abstained) WHO VOTED AGAINST THE JERSEY CARE ENQUIRY FROM REACHING IT'S CONCLUSION.

THE PROPOSITION WAS PASSED FOR EXTRA FUNDING AND THE TRUTH LIVES TO FIGHT ANOTHER DAY. 


THE BELOW POLITICIANS SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME.


Deputy Pinel


Constable Refault


Deputy Luce


Deputy Noel


Deputy Bryans


Deputy Truscott


Senator Bailhache

Thursday, April 9, 2015

LENNY HARPER RESPONDS BRIEFLY - SENATOR BAILHACHE AND HIS INFAMOUS SPEECH - JERSEY CHILD ABUSE- BBC JERSEY








SENATOR PHILIP BAILHACHE

As a direct result of Team Voice’s exclusive http://ricosorda.blogspot.com/2015/04/senator-philip-bailhache-jersey-child.html concerning the alleged leak (to Senator Philip Bailhache) of former Senior Investigating Officer Lenny Harper’s statement to the Jersey Child Abuse Inquiry. BBC Radio Jersey has run with the story that was broadcast this morning, recorded by Team Voice, and reproduced below. The JEP have apparently also run with the story today. 


From the interview (below) it transpires that Senator Bailhache denies being leaked this document. What we didn’t find out was how he apparently knew its content and specifically how many pages it contained.

This looks to be a very serious breach of confidentiality and the abuse enquiry needs to be making a public statement. Not only concerning the alleged breach of a confidential witness statement, but the apparent threat or intimidation of a leading witness where Senator Bailhache proclaimed:

 “I think that we can be fairly sure that that (Mr. Harper’s statement) would provide much lurid material for the media which neither he nor they would be likely to publish without the protection of a committee of inquiry.”

To any independent observer this can be seen as little other than a direct threat against Mr. Harper, and by implication, anybody who submits a statement to the enquiry. It is “The Jersey Way” at it very best or some would say worst. This alleged threat against a witness could, and might have intended to, strike fear in the hearts of vulnerable victims -survivors and witnesses who have already given a statement to the enquiry and very well might convince others NOT to submit any evidence in fear of repercussions.

The enquiry DOES seem to be taking the alleged leak seriously but we urge them to take the threats and intimidation (The Jersey Way) of witnesses equally as serious. It was this kind of intimidation and fear that prevented some victims and survivors from speaking out in the first place and if the COI will not acknowledge this is still going on then there is no hope left for this island.

Here is the BBC Piece that went out today. 





Rico Sorda 

Part Time Investigative Journalist 

Team Voice 

Monday, April 6, 2015

SENATOR PHILIP BAILHACHE - JERSEY CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRY.




SENATOR PHILIP BAILHACHE

May 2008. Senator Bailhache had the audacity, on such a special day, to utter these now infamous words. Not just to the people of Jersey but to the world:


 "All child abuse, wherever it happens, is scandalous, but it is the unjustified and remorseless denigration of Jersey and her people that is the real scandal".



We also have Senator Bailhache neck deep in the Sharp Report, the Roger Holland Affair and let's not forget his horrendous involvement with the  Church Abuse Case.  

When the Committee of Enquiry was finally passed in the States of Jersey guess who was missing for the vote after being present in the States Chamber up until this debate? You guessed it. Senator Philip Bailhache.






On the 24th March 2015 former Bailiff, Senator Philip Bailhache, made a speech in the Jersey parliament as an attempt to close down the ongoing Jersey Child Abuse Enquiry. 


During that speech, not only did Senator Bailhache defend an alleged paedophile, he took the opportunity to further smear the name of the former lead investigator Lenny Harper. Former DCO Lenny Harper, as readers will be aware, is a witness to this care enquiry and has issued a substantive statement. As if attempting to close down the child abuse enquiry,  defending an alleged paedophile and attempting to smear the name of the lead investigator wasn't bad enough, it further transpires that Senator Bailhache might have attempted to threaten and intimidate the witness (Lenny Harper) by proclaiming:



"I understand that the former Deputy Police Chief has recently filed an 80-page memorandum with the inquiry, and I think that we can be fairly sure that that would provide much lurid material for the media which neither he nor they would be likely to publish without the protection of a committee of inquiry."


Those words could be seen as a direct threat or intimidation of a witness and something (the conflicted) Senator Bailhache should be taken to task for.  We are aware that Mr Harper has issued a complaint along those lines. That said, Lenny Harper is quoted as saying that Senator Bailhache is as intimidating as "Winnie The Pooh".  


However, the question is not whether or not Mr Harper was intimidated, but more that the intention was present. 


Now this is a sentence I want readers to pay attention to, where Mr Bailhache said:

"I understand that the former Deputy Police Chief has recently filed an 80-page memorandum with the inquiry."


This statement is very specific in that it appears that Senator Bailhache is aware of how many pages are contained in Mr Harpers statement and the question is "how does he know?" and "who told him?" 


Team Voice can reveal that the Child Abuse enquiry received a number of complaints concerning Senator Bailhache's latest outburst and are taking this, from what we can see, extremely seriously. A number  of stakeholders have received an email from the child abuse enquiry which seems to signify that this latest alleged breach and Senator Bailhache are now under investigation. Team Voice can exclusively report that is is a requirement of the Committee of Enquiry: 

"all Interested Parties confirm by return, and in any event by 4:00pm on Tuesday 7 April 2015, that you have not:

1.       Shared or discussed the content of any statements released to the Interested Parties, that are not yet in the public domain, with anybody outside of your organisations; or
2.       Shared Mr Harper’s statement or any information about its content with "



The Care Enquiry has written to interested parties to inform them that: 

"It has been drawn to the Inquiry’s attention that the witness statement of Mr Harper was referred to by Senator Bailhache during the course of the debate at the States Assembly in respect of the ongoing funding of the Inquiry. We have reviewed the Hansard of the debate and note with concern that the detail provided by Senator Bailhache implies that he has seen a copy of the statement released to the Interested Parties on 17 March 2015.

Further, the enquiry states that it has.

"The Inquiry has carried out some checks and cannot locate any detail in respect of the statement being in the public domain before the debate in the States Assembly."


This looks to be a serious breach of confidentiality and trust. How can witnesses have the trust of submitting evidence if it is being leaked to those who were/are in power while the abuse was/is happening.


Team Voice are pleased that the enquiry is taking the alleged breach seriously. 

Rico Sorda

Part Time Investigative Journalist

Team Voice

Sunday, March 29, 2015

P20/15 THE SPEECHES OF EDUCATION MINISTER - DEPUTY BRYANS AND DEPUTY TRUSCOTT -JERSEY CARE ENQUIRY

DEPUTY TRUSCOTT - VOTED AGAINST P20/15 

DEPUTY BRYANS -EDUCATION MINISTER VOTED AGAINST P20/15





P20/15


SECURING EXTRA FUNDING FOR THE JERSEY CARE ENQUIRY



TWO  MORE SPEECHES TO LOOK AT



BOTH DEPUTY TRUSCOTT AND DEPUTY BRYANS VOTED AGAINST P20/15




Deputy Truscott is Deputy of St Brelade No.2 district. 



His speech on p20/15 can be listened to below.









Deputy Bryans is the Education Minister. When I was listening to his speech I had him down for a vote in favour of extra funding only to go the opposite way right at the end. He seemed to have a lot of empathy for the victims of abuse yet voted in favour of the Committee of Enquiry to be stopped in its tracks. Being the Minister for education I thought that he would have been all in favour. Could it be that his allegiance is really allied with Senator Bailhache? I will let you listen to his  speech and come to your own conclusions. 



Rico Sorda Part Time Investigative Journalist 

Team Voice would also like to welcome TheJerseyWay to the team.

Thursday, March 26, 2015

P20/2015 THE SPEECH OF SENATOR PHILIP BAILHACHE - JERSEY CARE ENQUIRY

SENATOR PHILIP BAILHACHE






SENATOR PHILIP BAILHACHE


HIS SPEECH ON P20/15 



SECURING EXTRA FUNDING FOR THE JERSEY CARE ENQUIRY



SENATOR PHILIP BAILHACHE WANTED THE ENQUIRY STOPPED AND HE WANTED IT STOPPED NOW.





On Wednesday 25th March the States of Jersey passed P.20/2015.  This proposition was to secure extra funding for the Jersey Care Enquiry.  The proposition was passed 34 in favour 4 against and one abstention. The abstention being Senator Bailhache. 


Had the extra funding not been granted the enquiry would have ended. 


More on these related issues can be read on the links below.






This is what I said on my previous posting. 


This was before he made his speech during the debate. There is so much contained in his speech that I will just let the you listen to it. 





SENATOR PHILIP BAILHACHE


WHY DOES THIS MAN HAVE SUCH A PROBLEM WHEN IT COMES TO CHILD ABUSE????


NEVER ANYTHING POSITIVE


THIS OUT OF CONTROL SENATOR NOW TRIES TO POLITICALLY INTERFERE WITH THE COMMITTEE OF ENQUIRY THAT IS MEANT TO BE FREE FROM POLITICAL INTERFERENCE


ARE SOME AFRAID OF THE TRUTH?


 Senator Bailhache started showing his true colours in December 2007 when  shutting down former  Senator Stuart Syvret's Christmas speech.  

Here is what former Senator Stuart Syvret said:

"Indeed, later that year, in December 2007, I attempted to give a Christmas speech as ‘Father of the House’ in which I was expressing recognition of the victims of abuse and expressing empathy with them. Astonishingly I was heckled, barracked, shouted-down, abused – and the Dean’s friend, the conflicted Philip Bailhache, cut my microphone and adjourned the meeting. Robert Key let this happen – and said not one syllable in support of the victims, or even my right to speak of them. I’ve written previously about Key’s conduct in this blog-posting, Of Millstones and Secret Reports:"


Then we have the horrendous  Liberation Day speech of 9th May 2008. Senator Bailhache had the audacity, on such a special day, to utter these now infamous words. Not just to the people of Jersey but to the world:

 "All child abuse, wherever it happens, is scandalous, but it is the unjustified and remorseless denigration of Jersey and her people that is the real scandal".


We also have Senator Bailhache neck deep in the Sharp Report, the Roger Holland Affair and let's not forget his horrendous involvement with the HG Alleged Church Abuse Case.  

When the Committee of Enquiry was finally passed in the States of Jersey guess who was missing for the vote after being present in the States Chamber up until this debate? You guessed it. Senator Philip Bailhache.


We are now counting the cost of failure. Failure, over decades, to protect  CHILDREN. 

INNOCENT VULNERABLE CHILDREN.  

Failure by all the services including the Police . Failure that allowed paedophiles and abusers to inflict mental and physical torture and to ply their trade in the Jersey Care System with such ease. We are now counting the cost. The real cost is not the £20 million or even £50 million that Bailhache is touting around to any sympathetic ear he can find, but the innocence that was snatched by these predatory individuals. Yes, lives and families destroyed. That is the real cost Senator Bailhache. The cost is the failure to protect children for decades. 

Should Senator Bailhache and Deputy Andrew Lewis be even allowed to vote on the proposition for extra funding seeing as they are conflicted? And one would hope that the judiciary won't be chairing this debate. 

The Jersey Evening Post have run some articles concerning the level of expenditure of the Committee of Enquiry and it can be read here:


This is quote from Senator Bailhache from said article. Lets

"Today, Senator Sir Philip Bailhache is reported as saying that the cost of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry could be at least £50 million, many times more than the estimate of £6 million put before the States when Members voted in favour of a public inquiry.

The States must now decide whether to cap the cost of this inquiry. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

Handing over a blank cheque could wipe out savings in the Strategic Reserve which have been built up over decades. The alternative – to borrow the money – is equally unappealing for a community with an innate dislike of public debt.
Senator Bailhache wants to hear Islanders’ views on what the States should do – and whether the cost should be capped."

Let's not forget that Senator Bailhache held the role of Attorney General then Bailiff when the abuse was taking place. He, along with his brother, and now Bailiff William Bailhache are highly conflicted as the Jersey Judiciary fall under the terms of reference for the Committee of Enquiry. Senator Bailhache should be remaining quiet as there is a high chance that he will be having to give evidence to the committee of enquiry along with Deputy Lewis who as Home Affairs Minister suspended the then Chief of Police, Graham Power, on 12th November 2008 based on nothing but a pack of lies. 

Chief Minister Gorst must now rein in his out-of-control External Relations Minister. This debate regarding the extra funding is a chance for us to see exactly where these new politicians, and the established ones, come down on the issue of finding the truth. We all agree that it shouldn't be an open cheque book and checks and balances should be in place, as I believe they are but to not issue the extra funding will bring further shame and ridicule to the island of jersey.

Senator Bailhache obviously doesn't think about the victims when he says he wants the view of the Islander's regarding extra funding. All this shows is that the old guard still won't let it go. What are they so afraid of?  Does he not understand that it is him that is tarnishing this island.  I for one won't be sorry to see the back of him and his brother. The Island needs to breathe once more and be free from this stranglehold.


Rico Sorda

Part Time Investigative Reporter