PARTY – OR PERISH.

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

Go down

PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Stuart Syvret on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 7:42 pm

PARTY – OR PERISH.

The Time Has Come to Embrace Party-Politics

If We Want Our Communities to Survive.

Second post on this site. Sorry for the delay. Overthrow of the state proving to be a time-consuming exercise. For explanation, please see my blog:

http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.com/

But in the meantime, let’s assume you live in a normal, functioning, long-established Western democracy – as opposed to the Channel Islands, say.

You’re a voter in America, the UK, France, Australia, or New Zealand. You’re sceptical when you look at what the various political parties represent. Careerist self-interest, obsolete philosophies, dishonesty in election manifestos, broken promises and a general impression that the main parties simply aren’t speaking to, or for, the great majority of ordinary people – but instead are beholden to powerful forces who they rely upon for money, support and favourable media coverage.

You look at the parties engaging in a game of political Twister, each trying to clamber over the other in an effort to occupy “the centre ground”. Led by a few of the powerful directing a membership of elected representatives who are largely a passive herd of lobby-fodder – with their brains and their consciences in neutral.

There is certainly no shortage of famous observations on the defects of political parties. For example, no less a figure than Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the USA, described political parties as, “the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to Heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.”

There’s just no getting away from it, there are an awful lot or people out there - past & present – with not a good word to say of political parties.

So - let’s imagine a different world.

A place were your MP, Congressman, Deputy or Senator is your old friend Bob, or Jane, who lives just down the street and has known you for 30 years. They’re a good, principled person with common sense, approachable, and they don’t belong to a political party.

They’re a normal human being – one of us; not some distant and faintly unreal apparatchik. They share your worries about the neighbourhood and they’re struggling – just like you - with the cost of putting their kids through university.

They know what the real world is like, and, as “independent” politicians - are able to legislate – in that theoretical Jeffersonian manner - according to their conscience and on the merits of each policy, law and parliamentary motion – rather than having to follow a party line.

Doesn’t it sound just great?

I can imagine lot’s of idealistic anarchists getting all misty-eyed at the thought of such grass-roots proledom.

So, should the world reach out – and seize this vision of democratic paradise?

Actually, we in the Channel Islands have run that experiment for you. We’ve done the double-blind placebo study; had the results peer-reviewed and we’ve taken the experiment’s results and used them in applied “independent” democracy.

The result?

Well – there is the Jersey Child Abuse Disaster. And more parochially - in Jersey those who wish to own property are now seriously being told to sink their money into buying a bed-sit – basic family homes costing over half-a-million pounds. The island’s government is so financially knackered it’s seriously contemplating puling out of the Reciprocal Health Agreement with the UK. And if that wasn’t bad enough – we see reported that the States of Jersey have to turn to charities to bail-out the poor – because Social-Security just can’t afford it.

Yet – apparently – the myth still holds that these islands have been “well-governed” in the absence of political parties - when, in truth, they’ve simply been used as pieces of money-making apparatus by our respective ruling elites.

For even without parties – we’re still lumbered with politicians.

Nature, it is said, abhors a vacuum. And in the affairs of men the same is true of power. If a void exists where there should be leadership, strategic thought, intellectual analysis and policies – forces will rush to fill that emptiness with the strength of a Mistral. And in the absence of cogent sensible policies – the power vacuum will be filled by an avid onrush of snake-oil salesmen, spivs, chancers, self-interested shysters, out-right crooks, conmen, ignoramuses, egotists, morons and the terminally deluded.

Let's meet the average Channel Island politician.

The inchoate rambling mob who have our collective destinies in their hands - with about as much competence as a blind alcoholic on crack at the controls of an A330 Airbus.

It is clear that 95% of Channel Island politicians would struggle to rise much above parish councillor level in England.

People who were decent chaps, and once had a couple of sensible ideas about residents’ car-parking schemes and sorting out some bicycle-racks by the market, suddenly imagine themselves to be a Channel Island version of JFK or Churchill.

But the problem is worse than this. Even if they were any good - our politicians would still be milling around in a kind of directionless entropy – a closed system lacking the energy in-put of philosophies, cohesive policies and the tension and challenge of competing ideas.

So what, then, is the real-world result of the Channel Island experiment of communal demos? Are the results superior to those of the party-political systems we see in virtually the entire democratic world?

No. And no – in a big, fat disastrous way.

Not just a bit deficient – as one party might be compared to another – but absolutely bloody catastrophically defective.

This is heresy to the average Channel Island punter – but let me explain.

There are certain ‘givens’, which we just can’t escape.

Unless you’re an anarchist, we can take it as accepted that, for good or ill, societies are going to have politicians. And no matter what their political colour nor whether they’re a party member or an “independent” – 90% of them just won’t be much good.

Politicians will often be dishonest, lazy and incompetent – but this applies whether they be members of a party or not.

The question we must ask, then, is this: when people say they don’t like party politics – how much of that dislike is based upon a rejection of the concept of organised politics – and how much of the distrust people feel for political organisations is simply down to the inescapable deficiencies and inadequacies of politicians as a specie?

It is, plainly, the latter. For every quote one may find damning political parties – one can find 20 damning politicians generally. The Channel Island mythology is that “independent” candidates are far superior – and that political parties would, somehow, represent the end of civilisation.

But, in truth, the political culture of the Channel Islands represents the very worst of both worlds.

For in the Channel Islands, we have been conned, brainwashed and lied to; propagandised into believing that party politics - or let us more honestly and accurately call it organised and open politics - is somehow "A Bad Thing".

I say conned and lied to because, no matter how defective and inadequate democratic party politics undoubtedly are, the brutal truth is that the reality of our political culture of soi disant “independent” politicians embodies the very worst of both worlds.

When considering organised or disorganised approaches to politics, we are invariably choosing between the lesser of two evils. And the lesser of those two evils is party politics.

This is because when we allow ourselves, as we have done for generations, to be conned into believing the utopian fantasy of ordinary, free-thinking, independent people as politicians – we are buying into a myth – an utterly unrealisable day-dream – a mirage.

Knowing what we all know of human nature, could it ever be considered realistic to imagine that an assembly full of random people – thrown together to work at politics on a regular basis – will not form pacts, scheme, engage in machinations, cast aside independence for short-term pragmatic deal-making, barter, threaten, ostracise, promote or slander each-other?

It isn’t realistic for one instant; indeed – it never has been.

When we elect so-called “independent” politicians, what we get is not - in fact - the wisely co-operating, independently-minded, free-thinking and fearless representatives of myth and propaganda.

In fact, what we get is a de facto political-party; one which comes with all of the distasteful baggage and defects of political-parties generally - but – crucially – a de facto party with none of the advantages which an openly declared political party brings to the table.

What we in the Channel Islands are lumbered with is the worst of both worlds.

Don’t believe me? Let’s take a look.


Consider - Organised Politics:

Voters actually have a choice as to which political philosophy and manifesto of policies we will be governed by.

We go into the voting booth knowing that if party A or party B win a majority, that organisation will form the government – and we can, in theory, have a reasonable expectation of what they will do once in power. With a political party - you know what you’re getting for your vote.

Knowing the enemy: at least with a political party you know which candidates are on which side.

A political party wining a majority has struck an open social contract with the voting public. Should the party not honour that contract – voters can see that fact – and vote them out next election.

Political parties have a stake in their own credibility as organisations – so will exercise a degree of quality-control as to who they put forward as candidates.

But most clearly and importantly – organised politics would give the people of the Channel Island’s power – the power to determine their own destiny - which is not something we have under the present ‘system’.

Consider - “Independent” politics:

The random mish-mash of candidates and ideas does not give voters any kind of meaningful choice in the direction their government will take.

You have no effective control over what philosophy and policies you will be governed by.

The disjointed hotchpotch of contradictory and compromised ‘policies’ which – may – eventually emerge from an administration formed of “independent” members, will almost certainly, be directionless and ineffectual.

With “independent” candidates – even if those you most prefer get elected – you’ve simply no idea what positions they will attain, nor what will emerge as policy.

In the main, with “independent” candidates – you just don’t really know what you’re getting for your vote.

With “independent” candidates, you can’t know the enemy. Individuals who may, on the face of it, seem the proverbial “nice person” – who went to the ‘right’ school, and knew your aunty Marge – may actually represent everything you despise.

When the policies of our legislatures – as is usually the case – don’t represent what we wanted – and frequently just don’t work, even on their own terms – who is accountable? If party A has been in power – and they’ve blown-it – then it’s party A for the chop.

But when all you have is some vague, nebulous collective of, supposedly, “independent” candidates – 95% of whom can easily distance themselves from the various cock-ups – you have a political system with a lethal and inimical flaw in it – the near-complete absence of accountability.

In “independent”-world, candidate “quality control” is simply non-existent; hell, look – even I got in.

But even if every single, solitary one of the “independent” candidates were brilliant – still there would be the final, inescapable – and damning – flaw.

Those candidates, when elected, will come together, negotiate and form a set of policies – but it won’t be a set of polices which you, or any other voter, was actually able to choose with your vote.

Actually – the more you think about it – the more absurd it seems that here – in the 21st century – most people in these islands wonder around seriously believing that there is something wrong with organised politics.

Nobody likes politicians, but we in the Channel Islands appear to have a highly-developed ability to moan about our politicians and our governments. Essentially – we’re never happy with them.

Yet comparatively few of us ever stop to seriously ask ourselves the question – just maybe, our failure to embrace organised politics – and instead placing our destiny in the hands of a raggle-taggle assortment of random do-gooders, shysters and spivs, might – just might – have something to do with our problems and our dissatisfactions?

There is – of course – that wise old saying: “people get the government they deserve”.

Why should we continue to be addicted to the charade of “independent” candidates, when party-politics is so plainly the lesser of two evils?

What are the motivations of those who oppose organised politics in the Channel Islands?

Our respective oligarchies have opposed party-politics rabidly – decade after decade – centuries, even. Their media has remorselessly attacked, marginalised and denigrated any significant attempts at organised politics.

It is, actually, a truly remarkable achievement in the annals of modern propaganda. In the 21st century we have amongst the populations of these islands 85% of people who despise their government – people who see their communities being wasted and destroyed by our oligarchies, yet – amongst the self-same populations – a significant majority failing to see that the cause of our woes is that we have left the field of political battle and surrendered total power to a collection of self-interested shysters.

Can we really be surprised at the fact that we generally hate our governments – and most of us can see them destroying the islands in a welter of greed, incompetence and short-term self-interest – when we just carry on swallowing so passively their lies and propaganda against organised politics?

It may well be too late to save these islands from utter ruination already. But one thing we can be certain of – is that if we fail to organise – if we carry on letting ourselves be “governed” by de facto, yet covert, political parties, disguised as “independents” – we are, indeed, doomed.

Were I ever to stand for election again – it would never again be as an “independent” candidate.

No one who genuinely cares about the future of these islands – as opposed to a nice, safe seat in the legilsature – can still seriously go along with the mythologies and lies of “independent” politics. To do so would be to heap yet further betrayal on these communities.

Our oligarchies – quite obviously – have had a monopoly of power for centuries and will spin us any old rubbish in a desperate effort to maintain that very lucrative and advantageous status quo.

We, in these islands must shake off the communal hallucination that there is something bad and undesirable with the concept of organised politics. Unless we do – we will remain powerless.

Stuart Syvret.

Stuart Syvret

Male
Number of posts : 40
Location : Jersey
Registration date : 2008-04-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by GD on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 7:45 pm

Party Politics in the Islands, not sure I like that Idea....


......THE BOSS......

"Always be yourself because the people who mind don't matter, and the people who matter don't mind"

avatar
GD

Male
Number of posts : 10122
Location : Channel Islands
Job/hobbies : Website Forums...lol
Humor : Anything that makes me laugh
Registration date : 2008-03-06

http://www.vuedesisles.com

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by MarkyD on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 8:57 pm

I'm not sure I see the strength of your argument here Stuart.

Would a political party be just as likely to make a hash of things as an 'independant'? - Yes

Could a political party make promises to the people just in order to get in to power then renege on them after? - Yes

Do we have the power to not re-elect an 'independant' just as we would a 'Party'? - Yes.

I am not convinced that a political party in either island would 'save' us from anything. We could end up with the same individuals just affiliating themselves with the 'Monster Raving Looney Party'.

At the end of the day, what's in a name?
avatar
MarkyD

Male
Number of posts : 1148
Location : In a world of my own
Job/hobbies : Professional Layabout
Humor : Manic - varying from dirty to clinically insane
Registration date : 2008-05-11

http://www.cwgsy.net/community/minimotoraceclub

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Pete Burtenshaw on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 9:18 pm

MarkyD, are you saying that our current political structure is just dandy and do you favour a cabinet style gov with the CM hiring and firing ministers?

Pete Burtenshaw

Male
Number of posts : 652
Location : Guernsey
Registration date : 2008-03-16

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Barney Gumble on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 9:25 pm

i want my say in hiring and firing ministers.... not 2 thumbs... whats gunna happen if he dont get his way? fisticufs???

Not for me!


blah blah
avatar
Barney Gumble

Male
Number of posts : 442
Location : Moes Tavern
Job/hobbies : Drunkard
Humor : Buuuuuurp!
Registration date : 2008-03-10

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by MarkyD on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 10:21 pm

Pete Burtenshaw wrote:MarkyD, are you saying that our current political structure is just dandy and do you favour a cabinet style gov with the CM hiring and firing ministers?

Not at all Pete. However, what I am saying is that if all the political 'muppets' were to affiliate themselves as one party and that party was to be elected in, then how is that any different to the issues we face currently?

Are you saying that a Political Party situation locally will magically solve all the islands problems?
avatar
MarkyD

Male
Number of posts : 1148
Location : In a world of my own
Job/hobbies : Professional Layabout
Humor : Manic - varying from dirty to clinically insane
Registration date : 2008-05-11

http://www.cwgsy.net/community/minimotoraceclub

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Stuart Syvret on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 11:08 pm

In Reply to MarkyD

Disorganised politics versus Organised Politics

MarkyD – I did think I dealt with the points you raise in the original post.

Politicians are flawed and unreliable – whether they are party members - or so-called “independents”.

The point I make is that there is no ‘miracle cure’ for our democratic deficit in these islands – but party politics is the lesser of two evils.

All of the criticisms you make of parties – that they can be unreliable, dishonest, incompetent etc – are true. But what you don’t seem to understand is that the very same criticisms apply equally to soi disant “independent” candidates.

And, in fact, parties offer a range of tremendous advantages.

The ability of the public to choose which policies and philosophies they will be governed by. This democratic power is simply not available to us under the present Channel Island political ‘culture’.

A readily identifiable electoral contract. “Independents” – come election time – can just shrug their shoulders and say ‘sorry, not my fault, I wanted to do X, but most of them didn’t’; a claim that may be true – even if they have been acting in good faith.

But no such excuse can attach to a governing party.

But in the final analysis – we are governed by political parties anyway. It just so happens that they are covert, undeclared, de facto parties – which, as I said in the original post – delivers to us the very worst of both worlds.

At least with open political parties the voters know roughly what the score is.

But with our covert parties – masquerading under the cloak of “independent” candidates – we are simply powerless.

We are in the grip of an approach to politics which, essentially, removes all accountability from those in power.

Stuart.

Stuart Syvret

Male
Number of posts : 40
Location : Jersey
Registration date : 2008-04-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Mumbai on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 11:17 pm

Stuart Syvret is about to introduce us to his own political party. The name escapes me.

Stuart what are you calling your party?

Mumbai

Male
Number of posts : 2
Location : st clement
Registration date : 2008-08-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Nick Palmer on Tue 19 Aug 2008, 11:53 pm

Jersey Charter or something like that
avatar
Nick Palmer

Male
Number of posts : 37
Location : St Lawrence, Jersey
Job/hobbies : Environmentalist, thinker, hang glider pilot
Registration date : 2008-06-30

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Mumbai on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 12:02 am

Cheers, Nick.

By the way I am in almost total agreement with your views on solid waste management strategy. Keep it up, mate!

Mumbai

Male
Number of posts : 2
Location : st clement
Registration date : 2008-08-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by David Rotherham on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 4:40 am

As Stuart points out, distrust of parties is as widespread as dissatisfaction with the status quo. Unlike him, too many do not see the causal linkage, and it will be a long weary task to explain it to them all.

David Rotherham

Male
Number of posts : 21
Location : Trinity, Jersey
Registration date : 2008-04-12

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Pete Burtenshaw on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 5:31 am

MarkyD, one of the key factors in having a democratic political system is the system should be fair and balanced. Whist all political systems have their faults I strongly feel that the system we have here in Gsy is not a democratic system. We do not have island wide voting and one should ask why with voter apathy being present for decades why the delay in introducing a simple change to our political system which would see an increase in voting and install some much needed confidence. OK, we may get the same ‘Muppets’ in power they just have more votes, but at least the systems been changed. I don’t know if party politics would work in the islands I have not given it much thought, but I do know that far from us having a load of ‘Muppets’ (yes I know I have used this term myself) in power we have some very good Deputies who are doing a fine job. I prey however that we do not go down the same path of Jersey and the IOM and have a cabinet style gov. All have seen the total abuse of the CM in jersey and his cronies in removing a fellow Minister who had the guts in exposing alleged murder and abuse at HdelG. I fear if we had the same political system in our States then it would increase public voting apathy and set back our political system for decades. I say this because our CM is probably the most unpopular CM we have had he makes his predecessors look like cherubs. I am convinced he thinks he’s actually the ‘third’ candidate in the forthcoming US elections with his globe trotting putting the world to rights and telling the big players how they should run their countries and this is without the prestige & status of a third world leader.

Pete Burtenshaw

Male
Number of posts : 652
Location : Guernsey
Registration date : 2008-03-16

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by MarkyD on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 7:46 am

Perhaps you already have stumbled on the solution then Pete. Everyone knows the system is not fully democratic, but does that mean it needs to be changed from independant to party?

As much as I can see some benefits of party politics, as Stuart says it has its disadvantages too.

Perhaps the lesser of 'three' evils for Guernsey would be to maintain an 'independant' system, but to extend the voting island wide.

If this was the case at the last election, then perhaps certain ministers would not have been re-elected.

Maybe deputies for specific areas should be decided after they are elected and not only stand for their area. After all, a party is unlikely to contain people associated or affiliated with every parish.

The downside to democracy is that parties or politicians can also be voted in by the public when they are the worst possible outcome in someones opinion. Using your example, Lyndon Trott wouldn't have got re-elected unless a large number of the people in his 'constituency' voted for him. Perhaps people in all the other areas would have quashed that result with a new candidate given an island wide vote.
avatar
MarkyD

Male
Number of posts : 1148
Location : In a world of my own
Job/hobbies : Professional Layabout
Humor : Manic - varying from dirty to clinically insane
Registration date : 2008-05-11

http://www.cwgsy.net/community/minimotoraceclub

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by st_ouennais on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 11:43 am

Having had experience of a political party in the UK from the inside, I can testify to their weakness and shortcomings. Certainly once a party has a formal structure and elected officials, and external funding there are lots of issues to do with accountability and candidate selection etc.

Even in the UK the theoretical position is that political parties endorse declared candidates once the election is underway. Ideally the candidates put themselves forward, and the parties can then support whoever they feel they want to. In practice of course the parties decide on their candidates and control most of the election money. Noone else has much of any chance, unless very well known. (eg Mr Bell of the white suit)

In an ideal electoral system you could have several candidates claiming allegiance to the same 'party'/political philosophy/manifesto group, contesting a seat. That would be fine in single seat constituencies if you had a sensible electoral counting system like single transferable votes. You might think that Jerseys senatorial election system gives something similar -you have six votes to cast. Unless you can muster six reasonable candidates for an alternative campaign group, the result is a bias towards the largest gang. Even with a full slate of six candidates it is an excellent mechanism for heavily weighting the outcome in favour of the most popular group, and giving nothing to the rest. Again changing to a single transferable voting system would promote a bit of diversity, and perhaps reflect the electorate's diverse interests more than the current biggest gang gets the lot.

None of which denies the fact that as a basic voter in Jersey you have currently no way to cast a vote for a manifesto that could actually be implemented. Even with party political systems, indecisive results produce a load of horsetrading, deal-doing, and dodgy promises to stitch together a working majority. But at least you had the possibility of a decisive result for a clear policy platform.

Individuals or parties? Its a case of two unpalatable options and trying to choose the least bad. The question that has to be asked is whether it is necessary to have a structured political party and all that goes with that in order to have political organisation? If we could have campaigning organisation, a common core manifesto, and clear communications with the electorate, and ditch all the extraneous control that parties exert over elected members then that would be a more attractive proposition.

Anyone for a spot of syndicalism?


Last edited by st_ouennais on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 3:27 pm; edited 1 time in total

st_ouennais

Male
Number of posts : 114
Location : St Ouen
Job/hobbies : Global environmental concern
Humor : Not today
Registration date : 2008-06-23

http://st-ouennais.livejournal.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by GD on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 1:31 pm

Listen out for the Live interview on BBC Radio Guernsey tommorow morning 8.10 with Stuart Syvret, about this subject...


......THE BOSS......

"Always be yourself because the people who mind don't matter, and the people who matter don't mind"

avatar
GD

Male
Number of posts : 10122
Location : Channel Islands
Job/hobbies : Website Forums...lol
Humor : Anything that makes me laugh
Registration date : 2008-03-06

http://www.vuedesisles.com

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by GD on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 2:41 pm

A HIGH Court action challenging the impartiality of Channel Islands’ judiciaries should be thrown out, according to a senior advocate.
John Langlois, who is also a former conseiller, said the English High Court had no jurisdiction over the Channel Islands and should therefore dismiss the action.
The action is seeking to force Lord Chancellor Jack Straw and the Minister of Justice, Michael Wills, to intervene in the Jersey child- abuse investigation and appoint independent prosecutors and judges to handle the case.
It was lodged at the High Court last week by Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming and Jersey senator Stuart Syvret.
They have argued that Jersey’s judiciary is not capable of being adequately impartial because of the island’s close-knit environment.
Senator Syvret claimed the question of objectivity also applied to Guernsey’s legal system.
But Mr Langlois said it had been established for centuries that English courts had no jurisdiction over those in the Channel Islands.
‘I expect that the Lord Chancellor will tell the High Court that it has no jurisdiction,’ he said. (from this is Guernsey)


......THE BOSS......

"Always be yourself because the people who mind don't matter, and the people who matter don't mind"

avatar
GD

Male
Number of posts : 10122
Location : Channel Islands
Job/hobbies : Website Forums...lol
Humor : Anything that makes me laugh
Registration date : 2008-03-06

http://www.vuedesisles.com

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Stuart Syvret on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 4:08 pm

This is quite a surprising statement from an Advocate – no, actually, perhaps not. We know what the general public’s opinion of lawyers is – it’s somewhere down there with politicians and estate-agents.

I had many run-ins with Mr. Langlois over the years in my campaigns against the French nuclear industry. He never really grasped those issues, but one would have expected a clearer understanding of jurisprudence, case-law and precedent from Mr. Langlois, given his profession as a lawyer.

Back in those days he, perhaps, placed too much reliance on what his clients - British Nuclear Fools Ltd told him? He’s obviously taken advice from a source of similar reliability in his assertions concerning the UK and the good administration of justice in these islands.

Mr. Langlois’ comments are so fundamentally wrong it’s hard to know where to begin.

Firstly – we are not seeking the UK courts to exercise jurisdiction over the Jersey courts (nor by extension, Guernsey’s courts).

The Jersey authorities are not a party to the action.

The action is promulgated in London, by Families for Justice Ltd, led by John Hemming, MP – and it seeks a judicial review of the acts or omissions of Jack Straw, Justice Secretary and holder of the old title Lord Chancellor.

The action is against a UK Minister – it is, therefore, justiciable in the London courts.

I, too, am a party – as a Director – of Families for Justice – to the action.

Jack Straw is currently the politician who carries ultimate power over what has traditionally been described as “good governance and the proper administration of justice in the Crown Dependencies”.

The Monarch defers all political responsibility to Her Majesty’s Government. The islands are Crown Dependencies – thus it is entirely within the power of the Monarch’s government to intervene.

Mr Langlois’s observations lose all contact with reality when he fails to mention certain, rock-solid precedents of intervention by the UK.

He and others claim the UK government, acting in the name of the Crown, does not have the locus to intervene in the affairs of the islands.

Really? Is that so?

Strange then that Mr Straw himself should have intervened and imposed external investigation on the islands when he initiated the Edwards review of financial regulation?

Or that, in 1992, a Jersey Deputy Bailiff was sacked – stripped of Office – by London?

Or that Jersey was compelled by London, in the late 1980’s, to decriminalise homosexual acts as the discrimination against gay people placed Jersey in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights?

And it just so happens that this matters because the Channel Islands are signatories to the ECHR – but only via the United Kingdom. Thus any breach of the ECHR by the islands, has the effect of placing the UK in breach.

And as the UK carries such responsibility – namely that for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the ECHR – it must also be concomitant that the UK carries the requisite powers to enable them to meet that responsibility.

That was, in case anyone has forgotten, the view of the Killbrandon report in 1972.

Just as another example, amongst the many precedents for intervention I have come across, is from 1861. The States of Jersey made a decision to build a mental hospital – or, in the decidedly non-PC language of the day “an asylum for the island’s lunatics and idiots.” But the States of Jersey later resiled from this decision (perhaps thinking the States chamber was already perfectly adequate to the task). In truth, they didn’t want to spend the money, hence their rescindment of the decision.

This caused outrage amongst ordinary people – and in the name of the Crown, the then Lieutenant Governor vetoed the States rescindment decision, so that the construction of the asylum would still go ahead. Whilst the LG’s power of veto has been dispensed with, unquestionably, the power in which he and others in his post have acted, that of the power of the Crown, remains.

The States of Jersey at that time sought to have the veto declared invalid, and took their case to the Privy Council.

They lost.

As they did in many other cases.

UK responsibility and power to intervene – QED.

I don’t know how much Guernsey lawyers earn these days, but they can’t be much cop if a carpenter is able to accurately explain the facts.

Stuart Syvret.

Stuart Syvret

Male
Number of posts : 40
Location : Jersey
Registration date : 2008-04-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Stuart Syvret on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 5:17 pm

GD wrote:Listen out for the Live interview on BBC Radio Guernsey tommorow morning 8.10 with Stuart Syvret, about this subject...

Please note - Radio Guernsey just phoned me to say the interview will now take place at 7.10 - NOT 8.10.

Stuart

Stuart Syvret

Male
Number of posts : 40
Location : Jersey
Registration date : 2008-04-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Stuart Syvret on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 5:18 pm

And reference the Kilbrandon Report.

That should, of course, have been 1974 - not 1972.

Stuart

Stuart Syvret

Male
Number of posts : 40
Location : Jersey
Registration date : 2008-04-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Pegasus on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 8:02 pm

Party politics are probally the worst thing that could happen to an Island, Just think you could have "The Mason's" party, etc

No sorry, it will only cause more hassle than its worth
avatar
Pegasus

Male
Number of posts : 178
Location : Jersey
Registration date : 2008-03-12

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Pete Burtenshaw on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 8:05 pm

Stuart, you know your stuff.....good on you...and Pegasus, I like your post.........

Pete Burtenshaw

Male
Number of posts : 652
Location : Guernsey
Registration date : 2008-03-16

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Pete Burtenshaw on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 8:25 pm

Subject: 5 SURGEONS.......!

Five surgeons from big cities are discussing who makes the best patients to operate on.

The first surgeon, from New York , says, 'I like to see accountants on my operating table because when you open them up, everything inside is numbered.'

The second, from Chicago , responds, 'Yeah, but you should try electricians! Everything inside them is color coded.'

The third surgeon, from Dallas , says, 'No, I really think librarians are the best, everything inside them is in alphabetical order'

The fourth surgeon, from Los Angeles , chimes in: 'You know, I like construction workers...Those guys always understand when you have a few parts left over.'

But the fifth surgeon, from Washington , DC , shut them all up when he observed: 'You're all wrong. Politicians are the easiest to operate on. There's no guts, no heart, no balls, no brains and no spine, and the head and the ass are interchangeable.

Pete Burtenshaw

Male
Number of posts : 652
Location : Guernsey
Registration date : 2008-03-16

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Stuart Syvret on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 8:48 pm

Pegasus

I think you’ll find we have Mason political parties already.

Whilst I think some are a little too paranoid about groups like the Masons, the simple fact is that a variety of covert allegiances – de facto parties – exist already; fractious, to be sure – but they condense and act as one when the status quo requires it.

This is why I say we have the worst of both worlds – party politics via connivance, stealth, secrecy and dishonesty.

We’d be far better off just forcing it all out into the open.

Stuart.

Stuart Syvret

Male
Number of posts : 40
Location : Jersey
Registration date : 2008-04-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by GD on Thu 21 Aug 2008, 7:42 am

Good Radio Interview this morning on BBC Radio, Stuart.

I am sure that you will have "Stirred" a few things up...


......THE BOSS......

"Always be yourself because the people who mind don't matter, and the people who matter don't mind"

avatar
GD

Male
Number of posts : 10122
Location : Channel Islands
Job/hobbies : Website Forums...lol
Humor : Anything that makes me laugh
Registration date : 2008-03-06

http://www.vuedesisles.com

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Stuart Syvret on Thu 21 Aug 2008, 8:14 am

Thanks

Got the plug in for Vue des Isles.

I hope the interview made sense; it’s always difficult to present new and challenging views in the space of a few sound-bites.

Let’s hope there’s plenty more debate on this site.

I’d appreciate if anyone in Guernsey could post any responses, follow-ups etc from other sites or the GEP.

Stuart

Stuart Syvret

Male
Number of posts : 40
Location : Jersey
Registration date : 2008-04-19

Back to top Go down

Re: PARTY – OR PERISH.

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum