I have permission to put this email extract by Senator Ian Le Marquand on my blog. As can be seen, the JEP has not been entirely accurate in its reporting. This is on the release of the Wiltshire report to the public domain. My thanks to Ian for allowing me to quote him.
My preference is to release the full report with redaction being limited to the removal of names of witnesses etc. However, I need first to take advice from the A-G. There are issues such as possible libel which have to be looked at. At the end of the day I will take a political view of the matter which will take into account the legal advice.
Incidentally, the JEP headline writer has again changed the meaning of what I said to the Scrutiny Panel. I was asked whether I accepted full responsibility for the position which I was taking in relation to David Warcup.
My preference is to release the full report with redaction being limited to the removal of names of witnesses etc. However, I need first to take advice from the A-G. There are issues such as possible libel which have to be looked at. At the end of the day I will take a political view of the matter which will take into account the legal advice.
Incidentally, the JEP headline writer has again changed the meaning of what I said to the Scrutiny Panel. I was asked whether I accepted full responsibility for the position which I was taking in relation to David Warcup.
I indicated that I did and that if the vote went against me in the States on the appointment then, as this appointment is key to my future strategy for the police, I would feel that my position as minister was untenable and that in all integrity I should resign.
I am most certainly not saying, back me or else.
I will be agreeing to the date for the debate being delayed so that I can put the maximum amount of information before my colleagues including the parts of the Metropolitan Police Report and the Wiltshire Police reports which can be disclosed.
Posts
4 comments:
Quote:
...if the vote went against me in the States on the appointment then, as this appointment is key to my future strategy for the police (my emphasis), I would feel that my position as minister was untenable and that in all integrity I should resign.
Why should the appointment of a particular individual be key to a policing strategy? Is there something I am missing here?
On the suspension of Graham Power, it is clear that if the offences were sufficiently severe to warrant immediate suspension, which has now lasted for nearly 18 months, that disciplinary action should indeed be taken, in order to achieve closure on this affair, and to ensure that any questions on the suitability of Mr. Warcup could be closed once and for all.
Otherwise, publishing a report whilst not giving Graham Power to answer the allegations contained within it might be seen as amounting to abuse of power.
Sorry am I missing something, does he think this redeems him?
Senator Le Marquand has been conflicted throughout this debacle and he had a personal axe to grind with Graham Power.
He is out of his depth, is not used to being questioned, and from reading the transcripts from the suspension review comes across as bumbling, inept and arrogant.
He has an amazing self belief in his judgement, a frightening and deluded man.
Why has he chosen to release this limited cherry picked information at this time other than for cynical reasons of trying to save his own skin.
He should do the honourable thing and resign.
To my mind, the most significant thing is: "I will be agreeing to the date for the debate being delayed...", which is what Roy le Herissier is asking for.
I agree with the first comment: it shows poor judgement and too much personal involvement by Senator Le Marquand that he insists that a particular individual is Chief of Police.
He should be objective and detached. If, as you say in one of your earlier posts, one potential outcome is that Graham Power is eventually exonerated and David Warcup consequently condemned, confirming him as Chief now would then be seen as a very bad decision, for which Senator Le Marquand could well have to resign.
Given the legitimate doubts around Warcup's behaviour and motives, it seems to me highly risky to confirm him until the Graham Power case has been settled, but that may take months or years, if it is pursued in a higher court or tribunal in the UK, which looks likely.
In which case it would be prudent to not confirm Warcup as Chief simply because there is so much uncertainty around his own judgment and motives. No doubt he will find another job and Jersey will find another Chief not tainted by involvement with the HdlG investigation.
Post a Comment