Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Trevor's Written Questions

Trevor tells us that his written questions for the States sitting of February 2nd arise from a mixture of his current constituent work; unresolved issues arising from the last States sitting; and some developing work on a review of taxation. The question to the Home Affairs Minister relates to many months work supporting residents of Albert Quay to get the authorities to finally tackle long-standing problems with anti-social behaviour. The question to the Attorney General follows on from a question on the use of independent lawyers during the Historic Abuse Inquiry that went unanswered at the last sitting due to States 'Question Time' over-running. The question to the Treasury Minister arises from work Trevor is analyzing with regard to progressive taxation possibilities. Finally, the question for the Chairman of the Privileges & Procedures Committee relates to the dissatisfaction a number of Members felt with the manner in which the complaint to PPC from Jersey's suspended Police Chief was dealt with.



WRITTEN QUESTION TO H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY DEPUTY T.M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER
ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 2nd FEBRUARY 2010



"Will H.M. Attorney General please clarify whether any of the three former members of 7 Bedford Row Chambers subsequently employed within or by the Attorney General’s office, as mentioned in an answer to a written question on 19th January 2009, were involved in any way in work relating to the Historic Abuse Inquiry; and if so, would he advise what form this involvement took?"






WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS
BY DEPUTY T.M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER
ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 2nd FEBRUARY 2010


"Will the Minister advise how many complaints, if any, have been received by the States of Jersey Police over the past twelve months relating to anti-social behaviour emanating from the area around the Albert Quay Apartments and surrounding land, particularly problems involving cars and motor bikes; further still, how many arrests have been made and how many charges have been brought against those involved in such anti-social behaviour?

Given the number of complaints from residents concerning anti-social behaviour involving cars and motorbikes outside the Albert Quay Apartments, will the Minister advise whether it is the responsibility of the States of Jersey Police or the Harbours Department to deal with this; and whether speed limits and Island-wide restrictions on the sounding of horns within certain hours can be enforced by the States of Jersey Police?"




WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES
BY DEPUTY T.M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER
ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 2nd FEBRUARY 2010


"Given that taxation rates are in line for review, based on current figures, would the Minister advise what increase in revenue would be achieved by the introduction of a progressive tax rate of either 25% or 30% being implemented for those earning more than £100,000 per annum?"



WRITTEN QUESTION TO CHAIRMAN OF PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE
BY DEPUTY T.M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER
ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 2nd FEBRUARY 2010



Following her response to a question on 19th January 2009, concerning the letter of complaint to the Privileges and Procedures Committee made by the suspended Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police, when the Chairman stated that she had intended to mention the letter to the rest of the Committee but that it had not been done , whilst also stating that she often did not inform the Committee of such contacts, would the Chairman advise whether she feels that such comments are consistent; and whether she feels that such practice does not undermine confidence in the Committee to do its job?"

29 comments:

  1. Hi Team JDA

    I would like to thank big trev for all his work in trying to getting some answers. Asking questions in the states is very important and must always be used.

    I hope the JDA can push on with other members from the left in trying to create an open and transparent government, OUR ISLAND NEEDS ALL OF YOU.

    Cheers trevor

    rs

    ReplyDelete
  2. Is rico appearing everywhere now? I just wish he would stop being so obsessed with what he thinks is flaming justice when more qualified people are dealing with it.

    Trevor I cannot support your attempts to once again make an excuse for the voting debacle last year. The JDA to date have never apologised to the voters or even the other candidates in Number 2 which was pretty low I am afraid.

    This will come back and haunt the candidates and there are no doubts about that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous: Your dig at Rico just about scraped on here, as it was yoked to a serious comment on a JDA matter. But, I am not going to allow a flame war on here while I am doing most of the moderating, so no more from where that came, if you please.
    If you want that kind of repartee, there is a part-time website called planetjersey.co.uk, that, if you catch it on a day when it is online, is full of that kind of stuff. You would feel at home there.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Trevor, I take it you do not like Adrian Walsh's website Planet Jersey? But you must read it if you know its on and offline?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I made the comment about PJ. I check it out from time to time, as about 20% of the posts are interesting. Most of it I glance at and scroll past as not worth my time to read thoroughly, but sometimes I learn something, especially from Rico Sorda's contributions.
    David Rotherham

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rico just brings up old news. You should not just use Planet Jersey to catch up with copy and pastes from the past.

    The plight of Graham Power does not create jobs, lower house prices, create discussion about green issues or make living easier for anybody in Jersey. In fact I am yet to see any of the new States members do anything for the people they said they would stand for in their election pledges.

    Perhaps the only thing they can do is re-gurgitate this nonsense all the time at question time because they cannot think of anything else?

    Jersey people are being let down by the whole Government at the moment and then people like the JDA want to push for salary increases for personnel working for the states when there is over 1200 out of work. David, you must realsie that 'the man on the street' is dismayed with whats going on at the moment.

    The Island will go like Bermuda as predicted and even quicker at this rate, where house prices are double what they are now and local people have to leave just to find work elsewhere.

    The only question of real relevance above is a rise in income tax rates, but this has been pushed by a lot of people since GST. It will come in eventually, it has to.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Planet Jersey is the best forum going. AT least you get States members answering questions on there from time to time. Can't agree with rico's contributions but I guess the JDA would use such material for their own ends.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Rico's copy-and-pastes may be old news, but they are also selected juicy bits in more depth than the JEP reported them.
    In the new system, only the Council of Ministers have enough power to achieve big things.
    The Graham Power affair makes me wonder what the hell is going on? If you are completely happy that all is well at the heart of our government you must know something I don't. Please set my mind at rest by sharing it.
    "Dismayed man in the street" sums me up, too. That is why I stand up to be counted.
    The JDA don't use material from PJ at all, for any ends. I am probably the only one in the entire party who even bothers seeing what is on there these days. It is the best forum by default only, the others having almost fizzled out.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Unlike yourself and rico I believe Graham Power should of been fired after the Gradwell Press conferences.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Deputy Trevor PitmanJanuary 28, 2010 at 10:50 AM

    Anonymous 2# & 4#

    Firstly, please be clear that I do not answer any posts using anything other than my own name. You will never see me posting as 'Anonymous'. I have made no reference to Planet Jersey thus far.

    What I will now say, however, (and I am assuming from the comments that 2# & 4# are probably the same individual - apologies if they are not) is that given that PJ appeared quite happy over many months to allow individuals to post complete lies, such as falsely claiming that members of the JDA had carried out voting fraud it is hardly any wonder that so few take the site seriously.

    Indeed, any site allowing clearly very sad and twisted individuals to post such demonstrably false allegations is really worthy of nothing but contempt.

    Of course, given the reality that all some JDA canididates did - along with a number of so-called 'independents' who very oddly were not prosectued - was assist a number of elderly/disabled/needy people to APPLY to be REGISTERED to eventually be given a postal vote it is not surprising that none of these sad individuals would ever post such allegations in their own name.

    For anyone who does not know the reality of the situation, this process of assisting people to APPLY to get REGISTERED to have a postal vote is, of course, something that is wholly legal in every modern democracy in the world according to the research carried out by lawyers last year. It was also legal in Jersey over very many years right up to and including the 2008 Senatorials.

    So...apologise for helping people to APPLY to get REGISTERED for a postal vote? NO. I don't think so. Even more so when you consider that the prosecutions were only selective i.e. if it was worthy of prosecuting one pair of individuals then why not the others who did the same?

    Given that we also have the statements from the complainant in St. Helier No. 3 District where the police and judiciary refused to deal with a far more serious instance all of this really puts matters into context.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I have had to reject a couple of anonymous comments as libellous.
    Trevor's comment above clarifies the actual issues in the prosecutions of two individuals arising from the 2008 Deputies Election. Nobody at all was charged with "votal fraud" and no offences were committed by the JDA as a party.
    I have also rejected a personally offensive comment aimed at myself, as the offered justification was invalid. DR

    ReplyDelete
  12. If it was not votal fruad then what was it then? It sure as hell was not democratic to the other candidates.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous #6:

    Read Trevor's statement above. It explains what it was with total clarity.
    Not democratic? We know of other candidates who were also doing it, but not prosecuted. Were it not for the law change, they all should have been doing it, as good canvassing practice.DR

    ReplyDelete
  14. The explanation and excuse is feeble. Why the JDA needed to do this anyway raises newer questions. Obviously the party cannot be as popular as made out. and to then say 'other candidates were also doing it' is actually a slur.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous #7:
    The explanation is crystal-clear. Which makes me think the feebleness is in your own mind.

    Obviously not as popular as made out by who? The Returning Officers were satisfied that most of our candidates were popular enough in the last election.

    We know at least two non-JDA candidates were doing it in St Helier No 2. It did not occur to me that my words could be as misinterpreted as meaning that all the others were, so that much I apologise for.DR

    ReplyDelete
  16. It is rubbish, it was only the JDA doing the cheating and as one other candidate said afterwards, 'if the JDA were so sure of victory then why cheat?'

    Just accept that a few deputy seats in Numbers 1 & 2 is as far as the JDA will ever go in Jersey Politics.

    People not living in the Parish should not be allowed to stand for election either.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  20. We had a serious complaint about the direction this thread had taken. We may need to take a stricter definition of irrelevant in future. Remember that there is no edit facility for blogspot.com comments; we have to take them or leave them whole. It does not matter how much good stuff is in a comment - if there is any we can't use, then we can't use any.

    ReplyDelete
  21. It is a great shame that your site has now become the target of an infamous troll who seems unable to grasp any of the valid explanations you have taken the time to give to his questions.

    As far as I am concerned the JDA did not cheat, as has all been explained above. True democracy means that others should have also been subjected to the same 'rule of law' as Geoff Southern and Shona Pitman were. Beggars the question - why??

    ReplyDelete
  22. The anonymous troll who keeps on about glove puppets is wrong in so many ways that it is not worth answering him. So, we shall not be using his comments.
    We accept critical comments, but serious ones in good faith, not inane and inaccurate insults.DR

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well done on the new direction of online interactive discussion. There's a niche here that you can capitalise on, being responsive to web comments on political issues will make you a very positive force for the internet generation.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Funny how some people can type but not read. I just rejected a comment that failed to take on board both Trevor's comment of Jan 28 and mine of Jan 31, being inaccurately insulting about a non-existent situation. As the author observed, he could post his nonsense elsewhere. That would be much more appropriate than expecting us to publish his malicious lies about ourselves for him.DR

    ReplyDelete
  25. This blog is a bit touchy in it?

    Mellow out David.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Deputy Trevor PitmanFebruary 1, 2010 at 2:32 PM

    Just for the record as someone asked me. I am not one of the moderators for this blog. I simply don't have the time - or for that matter, the probable technical knowledge. However, will do my beast to have another story posting sometime tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Left to myself, I would take a more liberal approach, as on my own blog, not that I get much reaction on that.
    However, I have come to realise that I need to take into account the sensitivities of my colleagues and, beyond them, friends of theirs whom I have no direct relationship with, when moderating on here, which moves the goalposts quite a way.

    ReplyDelete
  28. The word 'Troll' is becoming a by-word for people that do not agree with others. Need to get away from that!

    ReplyDelete
  29. "Troll", in its internet sense was coined for people who disagree for the sake of disagreeing. Even in the tiny pool of Jersey political websites there are a handful like that, possibly only one or two with multiple identities, and one or more of them has been putting his two-pennyworth in on here.

    ReplyDelete

We shall not accept comments that are offensive in language or content, libellous, irrelevant or deranged.
We have no means of editing comments -it is all or nothing. So, if there is any of your comment we can't use, we can't use any of it.