Below is a letter published by the JEP last night by Senator Kristina Moore. I’m putting it here because it puts the record straight, and that may be lost in the pages of the JEP, which not everyone may read anyway.
The following points I think are important to note:
States Employment Board and the Police Chief
Kristina Moore had no say in the employment and retirement arrangements of the former Chief Officer of Police – these were the result of decisions taken by the States Employment Board chaired by former Senator Andrew Green.
It was the same SEB which also commissioned an independent consultants report at the cost of £3,321 on Rod Bryans when there was already a paid Commissioner of Standards tasked with carrying out that kind of investigation. The other members of the board at that time were Treasury Minister Alan Maclean, St Mary Constable Juliette Gallichan and St Martin Constable Michel Le Troquer and Housing Minister Anne Pryke.
The States Complaints Board said in a recent report that the termination of eye surgeon’s Dr Alwitry's contract by the SEB was 'one of the worst examples' of a public authority 'disregarding' contract law.
Clearly the SEB had acted in a fashion which on occasions seems to have been cavalier and almost like a petty fiefdom. But as the letter notes quite correctly – these were not Kristina Moore’s decisions to make, and unfortunately none of the members of the SEB remains in the States to be called to account for their actions.
Personal Attacks
“I think it is unfortunate that I am also having to respond to personal comments or observations that involve my family”
A lot of what goes on with Social Media is related to discussion and argument, and perhaps also opinions on Ministers. There is a certain degree of flack which public office will always attract. I myself have seen a change from arguments on political matters to trading insults in political forums online.
But I regard it as beyond the pale for this to extend to a politicians family, and I hope that highlighting this part of the letter that moderators may keep a tighter grip on groups they administer, and those who make these kind of attacks may be shamed into reconsidering their actions. They may not – there are thick-skinned people out there who removed from face to face encounters can lose any moral compass in the way they behave. But where families of politicians are concerned, there is the crossing of a line, and that kind of harassment should be called out.
There is one other mention of a conflict of interest in the public domain. Ben Shenton wrote:
"She is married to a practising lawyer, as openly disclosed during her election campaign, and the interaction between a lawyer and elements of the Homes Affairs portfolio can be immense. To be clear, I’m not making any accusations, as there are none to make. These are just observations based on my experience of public perception. I am also acutely aware that not everyone shares this view regarding her perceived conflict of interest"
This is tackled at the end of her letter. While he is just pointing out perceived conflicts of interest - did he ever make such a mention of Frank Walker and the Guiton Group when he was Health Minister? - the manner in which he does so suggests some kind of collusion. It's not as blatant as the kind of remarks made by Sir Joseph Donaldson Cantley, but there are elements of that.
Role of Home Affairs Minister in police and fire chiefs' retirements
A letter from Senator Kristina Moore.
I wish to provide some clarification on recent comments regarding the retirement of the former chief officer of police and other matters relating to the Home Affairs portfolio.
The terms and conditions of employment for the chief of police do not fall within the remit of the Minister for Home Affairs - these are a responsibility of the States Employment Board. Accordingly, the former chief of police communicated his decision to retire through the States Employment Board.
When I was informed of the former chief's intention to retire, and the arrangements that had been made for his notice period, I had a duty as the minister to ensure the force could continue to operate effectively. This included the maintenance of a robust command structure. I therefore made the necessary interim appointments in July 2017, the details of which were published via ministerial decisions at the time.
All financial implications were resultant from the arrangements agreed between the former chief and the States Employment Board, with which I did not have any involvement. The former chief’s full retirement took effect from the end of October 2017 and he has not received a salary since that date.
In announcing his retirement, the former chief stated that, having reached normal retirement age and the 20th anniversary of his appointment as a chief officer, he was the longest-serving chief in the British Isles and felt that e had met all the goals and challenges he had set on his appointment in 2011.
Comment has also been made regarding the retirement of the chief officer of the Fire and Rescue Service. The current chief has retired and has publicly set out his reasons for this decision. It is a very straightforward matter. The chief has led the Jersey Fire and Rescue Service superbly since 2007, also undertaking the role of Emergency Planning Officer since 2015.
There is an excellent succession plan in place at the Fire and Rescue Service indeed it was stipulated in the contract of the current chief that he must train a successor. The current deputy chief has been in the role for ten years and is perfectly capable of ensuring a seamless transition can take place until a permanent recruitment process is undertaken.
While I am more than content to correct misguided and somewhat ill-informed speculation regarding developments within my current ministerial remit, and am happy to be challenged on policy, I think it is unfortunate that I am also having to respond to personal comments or observations that involve my family. The public can be assured that, throughout my time as Minister for Home Affairs, I have been conscious of occasions where I potentially face a conflict of interest and have undertaken my ministerial duties accordingly.
On the rare occasions where there may have been a conflict of interests or a perceived conflict of interests, the Assistant Minister has taken any necessary decisions.
May I take this opportunity to again warmly thank the 15,292 people who voted for me on 16 May. I am most grateful for their support and looking forward to representing them to the best of my ability.
The following points I think are important to note:
States Employment Board and the Police Chief
Kristina Moore had no say in the employment and retirement arrangements of the former Chief Officer of Police – these were the result of decisions taken by the States Employment Board chaired by former Senator Andrew Green.
It was the same SEB which also commissioned an independent consultants report at the cost of £3,321 on Rod Bryans when there was already a paid Commissioner of Standards tasked with carrying out that kind of investigation. The other members of the board at that time were Treasury Minister Alan Maclean, St Mary Constable Juliette Gallichan and St Martin Constable Michel Le Troquer and Housing Minister Anne Pryke.
The States Complaints Board said in a recent report that the termination of eye surgeon’s Dr Alwitry's contract by the SEB was 'one of the worst examples' of a public authority 'disregarding' contract law.
Clearly the SEB had acted in a fashion which on occasions seems to have been cavalier and almost like a petty fiefdom. But as the letter notes quite correctly – these were not Kristina Moore’s decisions to make, and unfortunately none of the members of the SEB remains in the States to be called to account for their actions.
Personal Attacks
“I think it is unfortunate that I am also having to respond to personal comments or observations that involve my family”
A lot of what goes on with Social Media is related to discussion and argument, and perhaps also opinions on Ministers. There is a certain degree of flack which public office will always attract. I myself have seen a change from arguments on political matters to trading insults in political forums online.
But I regard it as beyond the pale for this to extend to a politicians family, and I hope that highlighting this part of the letter that moderators may keep a tighter grip on groups they administer, and those who make these kind of attacks may be shamed into reconsidering their actions. They may not – there are thick-skinned people out there who removed from face to face encounters can lose any moral compass in the way they behave. But where families of politicians are concerned, there is the crossing of a line, and that kind of harassment should be called out.
There is one other mention of a conflict of interest in the public domain. Ben Shenton wrote:
"She is married to a practising lawyer, as openly disclosed during her election campaign, and the interaction between a lawyer and elements of the Homes Affairs portfolio can be immense. To be clear, I’m not making any accusations, as there are none to make. These are just observations based on my experience of public perception. I am also acutely aware that not everyone shares this view regarding her perceived conflict of interest"
This is tackled at the end of her letter. While he is just pointing out perceived conflicts of interest - did he ever make such a mention of Frank Walker and the Guiton Group when he was Health Minister? - the manner in which he does so suggests some kind of collusion. It's not as blatant as the kind of remarks made by Sir Joseph Donaldson Cantley, but there are elements of that.
Role of Home Affairs Minister in police and fire chiefs' retirements
A letter from Senator Kristina Moore.
I wish to provide some clarification on recent comments regarding the retirement of the former chief officer of police and other matters relating to the Home Affairs portfolio.
The terms and conditions of employment for the chief of police do not fall within the remit of the Minister for Home Affairs - these are a responsibility of the States Employment Board. Accordingly, the former chief of police communicated his decision to retire through the States Employment Board.
When I was informed of the former chief's intention to retire, and the arrangements that had been made for his notice period, I had a duty as the minister to ensure the force could continue to operate effectively. This included the maintenance of a robust command structure. I therefore made the necessary interim appointments in July 2017, the details of which were published via ministerial decisions at the time.
All financial implications were resultant from the arrangements agreed between the former chief and the States Employment Board, with which I did not have any involvement. The former chief’s full retirement took effect from the end of October 2017 and he has not received a salary since that date.
In announcing his retirement, the former chief stated that, having reached normal retirement age and the 20th anniversary of his appointment as a chief officer, he was the longest-serving chief in the British Isles and felt that e had met all the goals and challenges he had set on his appointment in 2011.
Comment has also been made regarding the retirement of the chief officer of the Fire and Rescue Service. The current chief has retired and has publicly set out his reasons for this decision. It is a very straightforward matter. The chief has led the Jersey Fire and Rescue Service superbly since 2007, also undertaking the role of Emergency Planning Officer since 2015.
There is an excellent succession plan in place at the Fire and Rescue Service indeed it was stipulated in the contract of the current chief that he must train a successor. The current deputy chief has been in the role for ten years and is perfectly capable of ensuring a seamless transition can take place until a permanent recruitment process is undertaken.
While I am more than content to correct misguided and somewhat ill-informed speculation regarding developments within my current ministerial remit, and am happy to be challenged on policy, I think it is unfortunate that I am also having to respond to personal comments or observations that involve my family. The public can be assured that, throughout my time as Minister for Home Affairs, I have been conscious of occasions where I potentially face a conflict of interest and have undertaken my ministerial duties accordingly.
On the rare occasions where there may have been a conflict of interests or a perceived conflict of interests, the Assistant Minister has taken any necessary decisions.
May I take this opportunity to again warmly thank the 15,292 people who voted for me on 16 May. I am most grateful for their support and looking forward to representing them to the best of my ability.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment