So, following on from my last couple of Blog Postings where I have been looking at the missing part D of the Napier TOR I will be paying close attention to the Oral question being asked by the Deputy of St Martin. The reason being, I have informed most members as to what has been going on concerning the Chief Ministers answers and the Graham Power letter dated 31st March 2010. What must be avoided is the Bailiffs attempt to have this moved over to the Chief Ministers Questions without Answers period. Get the oral question in, listen carefully at the answers, if not satisfactory then go again during CM question Time.
The States will be sitting on February 1st 2011
You can listen on 1026 MW
Senator Ferguson has not yet replied with her enquiries. I will be keeping a special ear out for her and the good Deputy of St John concerning these issues. More reading on these points can be found here.
I will not be put off from the work i'm doing. I will meet, deal and take care of any issue that arrises from my quest to expose the truth concerning The Jersey Child Abuse Scandal.
Truth Honesty and Integrity
We as an Island are very fast approaching a Crossroad, you can feel it.
The Money God is weak
Leadership is poor
17. The Deputy of St. Martin will ask the following question of the Chief Minister –
“Following the Chief Minister’s written answers on 18th January 2011, will he advise the actual date Mr Napier was instructed to withdraw part (d) of the Terms of Reference and, given the Affidavit’s significance to the suspension of the former Chief Police Officer explain why neither he nor the Deputy of St Martin who were supposed to have oversight of the review were consulted before the decision was taken?”
I will leave you with this.
4.6 Deputy M. Tadier:
Earlier in question time the Chief Minister said he agreed with the principle of being innocent until proven guilty in Jersey and in common law, I guess, as a principle. Will the Minister, therefore, confirm that as Mr. Power has not been found guilty of anything that he is, in fact, innocent?
Senator T.A. Le Sueur:
It depends on how one describes the term “innocent”, in that it is certainly the case that he has not been proved guilty. He has not had the chance, or no one had the chance, to determine that situation. On the basis that until one is proven guilty one remains innocent in law, then clearly Mr. Power, the former Chief Constable of Police, was, on that basis, innocent and is.
4.6.1 Deputy M. Tadier:
Given the fact that we have heard from the Chief Minister that he was and is innocent, will he be asking the Minister for Home Affairs to make an apology, or will he be making an apology, to an innocent man?
Senator T.A. Le Sueur: