Said and Unsaid

"'Well, I say things,' said Father Brown in a weak voice, which could alone convey the weakness of the words. 'I say things, but everybody seems to know they mean more than they say. Once I saw a broken mirror and said "Something has happened" and they all answered, "Yes, yes, as you truly say, two men wrestled and one ran into the garden," and so on. I don't understand it, "Something happened," and "Two men wrestled," don't seem to me at all the same; but I dare say I read old books of logic. (GK Chesterton)

One of the interesting things about modern historical research is seeing how historians look at narratives, and step back and see how past historians have been selective with evidence, and made assumptions which frame their narrative.

Filling in the gaps, and making assumptions on what was not said is also something which came up in the States recently.

1.4 Statement from the Right Reverend Bishop of Winchester

"The Deputy Bailiff: The next item of business under A is that I am asked by the Bailiff to draw formally to Members' attention the statement issued by the Right Reverend Bishop of Winchester on 22nd November that, based on Dame Heather Steel's findings to date, the Bishop will not be taking disciplinary action against the Dean or any other member of the clergy in Jersey.  The Dean is a Member of this Assembly and while, of course, there may be other issues to be canvassed in connection with the matter generally, I am sure that Members will want to join me in expressing the greatest pleasure that the Dean has been exonerated from criticism.  [Approbation]"

The Bishop's statement said:

"What I can state at this point, based on Dame Heather's findings to date, is that I will not be taking disciplinary action against any member of the clergy in relation to the handling of the safeguarding complaint in question or the subsequent review process."

But it also went on to state:

"I am all too conscious that questions remain about safeguarding best practice."

That is something that has rather been forgotten in the use of the term "exonerated from criticism", which is the narrative that the Deputy Bailiff is suggesting. But he is going beyond what has been stated, and there is no indication anywhere in the Bishop's statement that "not taking disciplinary action" equates with "exonerated". He is bringing into his narrative something that is not there. It was unsaid.

And moreover, the questions remaining about safeguarding are an indication that there still remains criticism, even if it is not deemed of such seriousness as to warrant disciplinary action. Now that ties more in with the real course of events.

If we look at an earlier statement by the Diocese, we can see that there was a failing of safeguarding, else why would the Dean have had to apologise? Is the Dean to retract the apology? And if he did, would he explain why he felt it necessary to make it? Whatever we present as historical narrative must include that apology.

As the statement said:

"The Very Reverend Robert Key, the Dean of Jersey, has, today, apologised for mistakes in the handling of a safeguarding complaint and added his own apology to that of the Bishop of Winchester and Archbishop of Canterbury to the vulnerable person at the heart of this matter."

"The Bishop acknowledges that, although mistakes were made, the Dean believed he was acting in good faith."

"The Dean said: 'I regret mistakes that I made in the safeguarding processes and I understand that, upon reflection, it would have been more helpful if I had co-operated more fully with the Korris Review. I now add my own apology to that of the Bishop of Winchester and Archbishop of Canterbury to the vulnerable person at the heart of this matter.'"

To paraphrase Father Brown, I dare say I read old books of logic, but "exonerated from criticism" hardly seems to match up with the Dean's own confession of "mistakes that I made in the safeguarding processes".

It is as if the Deputy Bailiff wants to draw a veil over the earlier apology. I'd sooner have history that is unvarnished, warts and all, than a version which has been tidied up, sanitised, and air-brushed for public consumption.

And how are improvements to be made to safeguarding? It is now forgotten, in an act of collective amnesia, the practices that were in place which almost certainly increased the risk of a failure to safeguard. Chaperoning an individual in a position of authority to keep an eye on him when he was in close proximity to women is not, as far as I am aware, a practice that would be tolerated in any other organisation (and I've taken soundings), and yet in Jersey, it was an acceptable informal policy at one church.

Putting it in perspective, there are no indications of this occurring in any other Anglican churches within the Island. It is also clear, on reading Korris, that some churches had much better awareness of safeguarding than the one at the centre of the complaint.

But it was the weakness in the system of general policy of safeguarding that meant this church did not have good safeguarding; moreover, the matter was known to the Dean. There were clearly deficiencies, and it has not yet been stated what action is being taken to ensure better safeguarding procedures for the future.

That is something which has also remained unsaid.

Growing up with the Doctor - Part 5

Growing up with the Doctor - Peter Davison (1981-1984)

"A man is the sum of his memories you know, a Time Lord even more so." (The Five Doctors)

At the start of Peter Davison's tenure as the Doctor, I was back in Jersey, doing accountancy preparation, which then mostly involved analysis of cheque stubs, manual trial balances, and the use of a calculator on which you entered numbers, cranked a handle, and watched a paper roll emerge.

I was also involved in typing of minutes (when the regular typists were off ill), and setting up our magnificent computer, the DEC PDP 11/03 to deal with the Annual Company Returns. This was a machine the size of a filing cabinet, with two large circular disks about a foot in diameter, one with the program, one with the data. And they held a whopping 3 MB of data. It was the computer age!

But the hard science of Chris Bidmead's time as script editor was fading, one last gasp of glory in the first Davison story "Castrovalva", which explored recursion, M.C. Escher, and the idea of space folding in on itself. After that, the stories become more straightforward adventure narratives, with the exception of Kinda, a wonderful exploration of the unconscious dark side of human nature. Although the next season would have the excellent Snakedance, and Enlightenment, two stories which explored inner space as much as outer space.

Snakedance explores the lust for power, and how when we externalise evil, we forget it originates within our own psyche. Enlightenment has a space race with sailing ships, and a race to obtain "enlightenment" which it turns out is a choice, and not a thing. Alongside that sat Maudryn Undead, with split time zones, and the return of the Brigadier, an excellent story, with a short flashback sequence that was a wonderful surprise; alas, the production team did not realise the value in a glimpse of the past was successful because it was unexpected, and instead began to generate flashbacks and continuity references to the detriment of the stories.

Peter Davison was the youngest ever Doctor, almost my own age, and I was also re-inventing myself. I had a longish gold coloured coat, not unlike his, and for about a year I died my hair blonde like his. What those about me must have thought, goodness only knows! Fortunately, no men in white coats came to take me away to the home for mostly harmless Geeks. There's even a photo of me at my god-daughter's christening with blonde hair. Clean shaven, of course, like the Doctor. And fortunately, the only photo of me in my Geek phase.

The Tardis now had a computer screen whose pixels rather resembled something out of the BBC micro. There was a massive surge in home computers of all kinds, but those of the BBC Micro, Acorn and Clive Sinclair's ZX81 dominated the market. And then, in 1981, IMB launched its first personal computer, and things would never be the same again.

I remember going round to the States fledgling IT department, and hearing that the latest strategy was to put the DEC PC onto every civil servant's desk. They thought the DEC Rainbow would be around for ages, and could have done with a Tardis to avoid making what must have been an expensive mistake.

Around the end of Peter Davison's second season, I decided to place an advertisement in the personal column of the local newspaper. In pre-internet and mobile phone days, this was in fact one of the ways that people got to meet and date other people.

I seem to remember the advert was suitably quirky; I believe it had "Dislike of discos and Dalmatians" which I rather liked because not only was it alliterative, it also was a good conversational opening. I have around five replies, mostly from women who didn't like discos, and the opening question was usually to ask what I had against Dalmatians. I had nothing against Dalmatians; I just wanted to see if it would spark curiosity, and it did.

At least my girlfriend Marilyn, whom I met as a result of that advertisement, did not have to put up with blond hair. By this time it was long but brown, but I had taken up learning the recorder (a trait of the second doctor), so she had to suffer some of my playing.

For my part, I had to enjoy watching Boy George and Culture Club singing Karma Kamelion on Top of the Pops, while they glided down a river on a barge. It was I suppose marginally better than the robot Kamelion in the Doctor Who story "The King's Demons" which was a rather dire two part quasi-historical story. Having lost K9, John Nathan Turner was keen on the latest gimmick, a robot programmed to speak, but not, unfortunately, act.

Marilyn also had to endure "The Five Doctors", which was not bad as an anniversary story, but had some remarkably bad lines, delivered without the slightest attempt at mitigation. The Castellan shouting out "No, not the mind probe" sticks in the memory. On the other hand, when I went round to her parents' house, I had to watch Jim Bowen and lots of rather obese men throwing darts in the game show "Bull's-eye" and Ted Rogers and Dusty Bin in the game show "3-2-1". I've never liked games shows much, and those didn't cause me to change my mind.

Doctor Who itself under Eric Savard as script editor was something of a mixed bag. The final season had risible stories like "Warriors of the Deep" in which Ingrid Pitt gives a karate kick to a monster that looks to all the world like a Doctor Who monster version of a pantomime horse. Even the Dalek story was incoherent, and had a long very self-indulgent fan flashback sequence of all the companions. The continuity of the programme was beginning to overbalance it.

There were good stories lurking there - Christopher Bidmead's Frontios, and Peter Davison's swan song - the Caves of Androzani by Robert Holmes. But the series was becoming more of a cult status, more appealing to its fan base than trying to reach the general public.

The Caves of Androzani was partly about power politics, and the economics of greed. It was a very suitable mirror to the deregulated society of laissez faire capitalism of Ronald Reagan in America and Margaret Thatcher in Britain, and the rise of the yuppie (young upwardly mobile person), and the emergence of the rich bankers and stock market managers with their bonus culture.

And so Peter Davison's era came to an end at a time when the miners were striking in the coal industry. The miners were no longer to be seen in Doctor Who, which had lost touch with stories with an edge, a moral comment on society. Instead, the strife in the Tardis was mostly from disputes amongst the crew and the Doctor, first with Tegan and then Peri. Long time script writer Terrance Dicks had revealed in a documentary that he often used short quarrel scenes when he had to fill a bit of extra time. Unfortunately, Eric Saward took this very much to heart, and instead of the odd argument, the Tardis would become the scene of endless bickering, which had about all the subtlety of painting a picture with a large broom.

Despite the glimpses of greatness, Doctor Who seemed to have withdrawn from real world issues, and become more self-indulgent, losing its way. It was, unfortunately, to lose its way even more with the next Doctor.

Every Vote Counts

The debate is coming up soon on Alternative Voting (for Constables) and Single Transferable Voting (for Deputies / Senators). In this posting, I want to look at the issues raised by the Constable's Committee response to the proposition by Deputy Montfort Tadier.
 
Single Transferable Voting
 
The Constables think that STV would take too long, and they point out that polling stations are staffed by volunteers:
 
"STV will require multiple counts, with the results from separate electoral districts having to be totalled to establish whether or not a candidate has been elected and which preferences should thus be redistributed. It is thus unlikely that staff and volunteers will be able to complete the STV count on polling day."
 
That doesn't seem a good reason for not adopting STV - it is notable that the Constable's Committee do not say that it would not be a fairer system, they simply say that it would be unduly long, and place too much of a burden on staff and volunteers. That is a very pragmatic argument, but it is not a very good one. If one voting system is much fairer than another - and the mathematics shows that it is - to say that it would not be practical is an argument for making it practical.
 
In this respect, it does seem like a good reason for reviewing and streamlining election procedures. The Privileges and Procedures Committee suggested electronic voting recently, and this has moved on a long way in terms of security and robustness since it was mooted in 2010.
There would be an inevitable capital cost, but that could be recouped over time. It is not like building a set for a play that has only one performance, it is like building a set that would be used time and again. The cost should therefore be balanced against long term use.
 
It should be noted that the present system is not entirely robust. During 2011, there were 13 individuals in both districts of St Brelade's Number 1 and St Brelade's Number 2 voting registers, and 3 of those had an identical address. The argument "if it isn't broke, don't fix it", does not really apply when even a study of one Parish throws up discrepancies which shows the current system has flaws.
 
The States Chamber itself has moved ahead with technology. Voting is now recorded electronically, and not via the appel. As a result, the voting results can be seen and placed online very quickly indeed. If it is not beyond the wit of the States to introduce change and technology for themselves, why should they not introduce it for the rest of us? Of course electronic technology can lead to pitfalls, such as Alan MacLean's ringbinder nudging the "Pour" vote on the Town Park, but that was down to human error, not a fault with the technology.
 
And Jersey is supposed to be looking to become a showcase for excellence in IT and ecommerce, with Gigabit Jersey rolling out. If it cannot sort out improvements to facilitate a better voting system by using electronic technology, how can it expect the world to listen? If it doesn't trust the technology for its own population, why should the rest of the world look towards Jersey with admiration?
 
When Wales was looking at STV, Peter Black, Liberal Democrat local government spokesman at the Assembly, said, "The important thing about STV is that you get councils that reflect the votes cast by the people."
 
And he went on to say:

"My view is that changing the system could well result in a renewed interest in council elections. In some places, there have been low turnouts because some people take the view that it is a waste of time voting because the result is a foregone conclusion. With STV, every vote counts." (1)
 
It is interesting that when the issue was raised in Wales on 2002, and the Sunderland Commission proposed that proportional representation should be adopted to elect all members of the 22 local authorities in Wales from 2008, the same kind of argument that the Constables Committee has given came out:
 
"If the Assembly Government adopts the proposals from the Sunderland Commission on Local Government Electoral Arrangements, we will adopt a system which complicates matters immensely." (2)
 
But another sign that matters are broken is the decline in people coming out to vote. First past the post is seen very much as wasting votes, and nothing changing. People don't bother, because they don't believe the voting system itself will deliver change.
 
Lucy Stephenson, writing in the JEP, suggested that voter apathy was a result of people being happy with election results. That is certainly wishful thinking not born out either by my own small scale surveys or past Mori polls. The mantra is often "it won't make any difference if I vote", usually coupled with a rather cynical comment on the States. The one I liked the best was "I don't vote; it only encourages them". But that encapsulates the reason for apathy.
 
Without a hope of change, the act of voting is seen to legitimise the government that we get. Hence opting out is in fact not just a sign of apathy, but also a sign of protest - a refusal to allow voting to provide a legitimisation for the States. It might be asked how low does the turnout have to be before the very idea that the States are democratically elected is seen as special pleading. Gandhi would have understood well the power of non-violent protest, of refusing to take part.
 
Alternative Voting System
 
The alternative vote system for Constables should certainly go through. All the Constables say against this is that it could be longer than expected to process votes:
 
"The Alternative Voting system is, in effect, that used for the recent referendum on the Reform of the States Assembly. It might be possible for such a count to be concluded on the polling day, but this would depend upon the turnout, the number of candidates and whether a recount or recounts were required."
 
The substantial weakness in any argument, and probably why they do not really make one, is that the Referendum showed that the public coped very well with the AV system, as did those counting the votes cast. Far from ending far in the night, or with many spoilt papers, the Referendum showed how well the existing system could cope, and it coped magnificently.
 
The Constable's elections rarely see any contest, and I doubt seriously whether we would see more than three candidates trying for the role. Most elections have historically been just two individuals, in which case AV would not apply. It seems clear that the Constable's Committee is raising the spectre of multiple candidates in order to frighten the Assembly into turning the proposition down. But there are only twelve constables, one in each Parish, and the odds of multiple contested elections with more than three candidates must be weighted heavily against that happening. Even if STV is not passed, this would be a step in the right direction.
 
Conclusions
 
Ever dropping voter turnout rates are a sign of what appears to be overall political disengagement by the electorate. High cynicism and low confidence prevail among voters attitudes toward politicians and political institutions.
 
Jennifer Dalton comments that:
 
"Psychological factors are significant determinants of voter turnout, particularly level of interest in politics, knowledge or information about politics, alongside feelings of political efficacy. Those who have less interest in politics, have less knowledge about political issues, or feel that their votes will have little impact, are less likely to vote."
 
"Aside from compulsory voting, which tends to result in higher turnout, many contend that electoral reform can increase overall voter turnout. Specifically, it is suggested that where electoral systems have higher levels of proportionality between the parties' shares of the popular vote and the number of corresponding party seats in the legislative body-as occurs in Proportional Representation (PR) or mixed systems-higher levels of voter turnout are more likely."(3)
 
One has only to compare the declining voter turnout with other countries and islands to see that the existing system is in need of reform
 
Sarah Birch conducted a study which looked at testing the hypothesis that perceptions of electoral integrity are positively related to turnout. The empirical analysis looked at data from 31 countries, considering such matters as "Perceptions of electoral fairness", "Interest in politics" as well as age, gender and any party affiliations.  Statistical multivariate analysis showed results confirming the hypothesis. Her reported noted that:
 
"Confidence-related abstention can have a variety of nefarious consequences for democracy. If democrats choose to exit from electoral politics in reaction to perceived flaws in electoral processes, the result may be a downward spiral in democratic performance and legitimacy" (4)
 
"Elections are the building blocks of democracy; it follows that electoral integrity is a precondition for meaningful democratic competition at all levels. In as much as poor evaluations of the fairness of elections keeps citizens away from the polls, democratic legitimacy and performance will be compromised."
 
The system of First Past the Post creates an unrepresentative States, which "wastes" votes. This hugely discourages citizens' participation and breeds cynicism about politics. People are less likely to participate in elections when their vote is less likely to make a difference.
 
It is time that it was changed. It is time to ensure that every vote counts.
 
References
1)      "STV Gives You Councils That Reflect the Votes Cast by the People" , Western Mail, Cardiff, Wales, 2006
2)      Voting Fears `Are Unfounded' COUNCIL ELECTIONS: TV Programme Shows How Easily Public Can Adopt a New System. Western Mail (Cardiff, Wales), 2002
3)      Alienation and Nationalism: Is It Possible to Increase First Nations Voter Turnout in Ontario?, Jennifer Dalton 2007
4)      Perceptions of Electoral Fairness and Voter Turnout, Sarah Birch

The Remise de Biens: How it works

"St Helier deputies Trevor and Shona Pitman have asked the legal system to allow their home to be sold to pay off their debts. Under Jersey law, no States members are allowed to be considered bankrupt while sitting in the assembly. The couple were unavailable for comment. In Jersey law a "remise de biens" allows people struggling with debt to ask the court to step in. It is a form of bankruptcy that lets a court sell property to pay off debt."(1)

The BBC report is not strictly speaking accurate. The "remise de biens" is not bankruptcy as such. That is a "désastre (bankruptcy)". The purpose of a désastre is to gather in and sell an insolvent debtor's assets, to find out why insolvency occurred and whether any bankruptcy offences were committed, and to distribute the net proceeds of the assets to those who are entitled to them. After 1990, the Bankruptcy Law on désastres applied to both movable and immovable property.

There is also a "dégrèvement" which is a procedure mostly used by banks where property is concerned. As Natasha Clark of Appleby explains:

"The advantage of the dégrèvement procedure for a creditor bank, as opposed to the désastre (bankruptcy) option, is clear: whilst désastre ensures the equitable treatment of all the creditors, a dégrèvement is concerned with clearing charges off the property and disposing of it. Unlike a désastre it allows any value in the property, over and above that which is owed, to vest in the creditor who takes the property, and not in the debtor. " (2)

And there is another option, which is at the discretion of the court, a "Remise de Biens". One of the critical case laws cited in this respect is termed "Re Barker [1985]", where  Charles Frossard, Commissioner, said this:

"We have come to the conclusion that a remise de biens is always preferable to a dégrèvement when conditions warrant it."

Deputies Trevor and Shona Pitman have applied for a "remise de biens" which is not totally bankruptcy, as can be seen from this explanation from Voisin Law:

"It is in fact a means by which a debtor, who might not be insolvent, but is experiencing difficulty satisfying his creditors can realise those of his assets as are necessary to satisfy his creditors in an orderly fashion. The procedure is governed by the Loi (1839) sur les Remise de Biens, albeit it is derived from ancient customary law. The process is commenced by the debtor applying to the Royal Court. The debtor must own immovable property i.e. land/house. The debtor is required to present a schedule of all his moveable and immoveable property to the Court. The debtor must swear to the fact that the schedule is true and accurate. If accepted, the Royal Court will appoint 2 Jurats to examine the schedule, investigate the property and report back to the Court within 15 days." (3)

What is important to note is this:

"If satisfied, the Royal Court may grant the relief sought. If it does, then the debtor's property will be placed entre les mains de la justice. The Jurats will then supervise the orderly disposal of the debtor's property. A successful Remise will release the debtor from liability for his debts by selling all or part of his assets. If sufficient funds are raised to pay off the creditors and there is a balance on the debtor's estate, the balance and any unsold assets will be returned to the debtor." (3)

In other words, if the assets can cover the debts, then the debtor will no longer have liability for debts, and therefore would not be considered bankrupt. So the BBC report is misleading.

The important factor is whether it is judged that there is sufficient equity in a debtor's property. If that is not the case, if there is only marginal equity, or the sale or realisation of other assets would be considered complicated, then - as happened recently - a Remise may be turned down. Key principles, as noted by Voisin Law are:

a)      The Court will have no jurisdiction unless it reasonably considers that there may be a surplus available for distribution amongst ordinary creditors following the sale of assets;
b)      If the Court is satisfied that there may be a credit balance available for distribution amongst ordinary creditors then it is right to investigate the matter and give consideration to the application for a Remise;
c)      The Court will have regard to the impact of any extended delay in the recovery of the debt upon the creditors;
d)      There must be clear and significant equity in the debtor's property;
e)      The Court will consider any factors which would go to show hardship on the part of the creditor or the debtor;

It should also be noted that demonstration of bad faith or uncertainty as to the outcome of the Remise will make it less likely that the Court will grant the application.

On the background of the law, there's an interesting article by Frederick Benest and Michael Wilkins in the Jersey Law review which notes that:

"This is an ancient procedure which developed out of the customary law of Normandy and was last substantively modified by a statute passed as long ago, in its original form, as 1839: the Loi (1839) sur les remises de biens." (4)

The article also deals with the fact that while there is no appeal against the decision of the court, there could be brought a writ of complaint against the decision, and an appeal could be made on the grounds of the Human Rights Law (which at the time of their writing, was still being implemented):

"Article 2 of the 1839 Law provides that there is no appeal from the decision of the Court as to whether to grant or refuse a remise.  However, a petition of doléance (i.e. a writ of complaint or grievance somewhat similar to the ancient English remedy of mandamus) could nonetheless be brought to remedy any breach of natural justice (or manifest error of law).. Furthermore  a failure (e.g.) to provide a fair hearing would engage the Human Rights (Jersey) Law, 2000 (once fully implemented) for a breach of the article 6 Convention right." (4)

As Benest and Wilkins note, the autorisés responsible for realising the debtor's property and the payment of his debts will, in the normal course of events, engage experts and agents to assist them in this process. The Viscount (who administers every désastre) may also provide back-up and certain administrative support.The Jurats have nonetheless to take any decisions presented to them before action can be taken:

"According to the evidence of JW Dupré, Attorney General, given to the Royal Commissioners in 1859, 'nothing is done of any importance without its having been laid before the Jurats and their assent obtained" (4)

It is notable that while the time is not set within stone, there are certain customary time scales:

"A remise must be concluded within a fixed period prescribed by the Court, traditionally of six months, during which time the autorisés attempt to regularise the debtor's affairs.  The proceedings may be - and generally are - extended to twelve months by the Court  but thereafter a further extension can only be granted with the agreement of the creditors because, in the words of Tomes DB in Re Barker- '........a remise which has not been successfully concluded within a year operates, as a matter of law, as the personal cession and renunciation by the debtor of all his property to his creditors and a dégrèvement ensues'. (4)

A Remise that is successful is not a bankruptcy, so it does not need a discharge:

"If a remise is successful to the extent that all the debtor's debts are paid in full, the question of discharge does not arise - there simply are no debts remaining.  But where a remise is successful so  that the secured charges are paid off and a dividend, however small, is paid to the unsecured creditors, the debtor obtains a discharge from his outstanding debts in the sense that the debtor cannot be sued subsequently by a creditor who received a dividend."

The case of Dr Mickhael in 2010 set forth some important case law considerations:

"Where there is a clear and significant equity in the debtor's property, which would accrue to one or more of the creditors on a dégrèvement and be lost to the debtor if the dégrèvement were to proceed, the Court had a solid basis upon which to exercise a discretion to grant a remise. "

" Conversely, where there is only a marginal equity, and a potentially complex process for the sale or other realisation of the assets, it is highly doubtful as to whether a remise would be appropriate."

"Between the two extremes set out in the preceding two paragraphs, other factors will inevitably have some relevance - the weighting of them will depend upon the Court's assessment of the margin of equity in the property which appears to exist, the length of time the realisation of the assets is likely to take place if a remise were to be granted and any other factors which would particularly go to show hardship on the part of the creditors or the debtor." (5)

And Paul Omar, in an article on the Remise, has some interesting historical notes:

"The procedure, which developed in Jersey customary law, is said to be based on the lettres de répit issued by Royal fiat first introduced in a French ordinance promulgated in 1673 during the reign of Louis XIV. The Loi (1839) sur les remises de biens, which codified and amended the customary law procedure, does not define a duration for the procedure. "

"An element of good faith and probity has always been evident in the law relating to remise de biens. Le Geyt stated that the procedure was not available to persons who had wantonly dissipated their assets by spending their money "in taverns, on games of chance or with shameless women". The 1839 law itself was passed in order to control the availability of the procedure by subjecting the application to a hearing  before the court and to require debtors to follow the advice and counsel of the Jurats."

"Le Gros also states that despite the requirement to swear an oath, some debtors have in the past misstated or omitted debts from the statement, often acting in concert with creditors to do so: C. Le Gros, Traité du Droit Coutumier de l'Ile de Jersey (1943) (reprinted 2007, Jersey and Guernsey Law Review Ltd, St Helier), at 371-372." (7)

And he notes that:

"In fact, the law now states that the detailed statement of property presented by the debtor must, unless rejected on the spot, be verified on oath before the court that it is true and faithful. In Re Mickhael, the court states that good faith on the part of the debtor is required, particularly where the debtor is asking the court to exercise its discretion in granting a remise, applying the maxim: "he who comes to equity must do so with clean hands"." (7)

References:

(1)   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-25218963
(2)   http://www.applebyglobal.com/publication-pdf-versions/articles/articles-2010/the-degrevement-dilemma-by-natasha-clark.pdf
(3)   http://www.voisinlaw.com/voisin-law-review-for-business-brief-july-2011/
(4)   http://www.jerseylaw.je/Publications/JerseyLawReview/Feb04/JLR0402_Benest.aspx
(5)   http://www.jerseylaw.je/Judgments/UnreportedJudgments/Documents/Display.aspx?url=2010/10-09-14_Representation_of_Mickhael_166A.htm
(6)   http://www.jerseylaw.je/Judgments/UnreportedJudgments/Documents/Display.aspx?url=2011/11-02-08_Representation_of_Mr_and_Mrs_Gibbins_033.htm
(7)   https://www.jerseylaw.je/Publications/jerseylawreview/feb11/JLR1102_Omar.aspx

Father Christmas will be visiting Reg’s Garden today

Father Christmas will be visiting Reg’s Garden today, (Sunday).

He will be in his Grotto, waiting to talk to children between 3.30 and 5.30pm, when he will be handing out dozens of presents to well behaved ones between the ages of 3 and 10 years.

Adults accompanying the children will not be left out, they will be offered something warm to drink (Pimms) tea and coffee, and a mince pie.

Reg’s Garden is in St Brelade, next to the Silver Springs Nursing Home, reach it by going down the track that is between Silver Springs and Tabor Park.

Santa’s Grotto is just inside the gate leading off the illuminated car park into the garden.

Santa has requested than money raised this month should go to Les Amis Children’s Home.

If children would like to talk to him, he suggests that a small donation of £2 for children between the ages 3 to 8 and £3 for children from 8 to 10 years old, will help Les Amais. You could give more if you wish.

You will find loads of car parking just a few feet from the Grotto and toilets including less-able ones are available.

We need your help like never before.

The Parable of the Builders Revisited

The Parable of the Builders Revisited

The Teacher said..

There was a foolish man who built his house upon a very high rock, so that he could be lord of all the lands he surveyed. But the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, and it fell, because the rock crumbled away, and great was his fall. For truly, I tell you, pride comes before disaster, and arrogance before a fall.

Now there was a man who built a house on the sand. He was wise indeed, for he had built mighty walls to guard against the fierce tides, and no winds could blow and beat against it. And great was the rejoicing of those within the house, for neither the floods could rise up against it, nor the wind blow against it.

And I tell you: the wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes, but it cannot blow where those mighty walls still keep it out.

Mandela

The poem today is about the world of South Africa, before and after Mandela. Heaven and hell in the poem, is of course, irony. It was indeed a heaven for the white rulers. But a heaven built on injustice.

Mandela

Born in world chained, a different life
A country split apart, heaven and hell
And torn apart with fears and strife
And so many locked in a prison cell

He was locked away for speaking out:
Truth to power; twenty-seven years
To know thyself, confront the doubt
Songs and laments, peace and tears

And when let free, not bitter hate
But peace and justice on his mind
A leader now, if the hour was late
Reconciliation his vision signed

A long walk to freedom, he did say
One we must all walk, on every day

RIP: Nelson Mandela

"There is no easy walk to freedom anywhere, and many of us will have to pass through the valley of the shadow of death again and again before we reach the mountaintop of our desires." (Nelson Mandela)
 
The news has broken that Nelson Mandela (born 18 July 1918, died 5 December 2013) has died. He was a South African political activist, co-winner of Nobel Peace Prize with F.W. de Klerk in 1993. And most significantly, where dictators have risen to power, or good men have later become dictatorial rulers of countries, he became in 1994 he became the first President of South Africa to be elected in fully-representative democratic elections, and was not corrupted by power.
 
Perhaps that was because he had learnt the lessons of power, and how dangerous it can be. He had indeed considered the way of violence in an interview in 1961, when he said:
 
"There are thousands of people who feel that it is useless and futile for us to continue talking peace and non-violence - against a government whose only reply is savage attacks on an unarmed and defenceless people. And I think the time has come for us to consider, in the light of our experiences at this day at home, whether the methods which we have applied so far are adequate."
 
This was a time of racial segregation in South Africa- apartheid - when black peoples were treated very brutally indeed. Because along with segregation, as in South Africa, came class segregation, where black people were treated as second class citizens.
 
What was even worse that a particular brand of Dutch Calvinism lent itself to support apartheid. This was a legacy of the time of the Boers, when the Dutch were intent on carving out their own Empire in Africa, along with the other European powers.
 
In the Afrikaner Calvinist ordering of the world, the elect were predestined before the creation to be elect, and the elect, of course, were the white settlers. The doctrine of predestination imposed fixity on the structure of South African society.
 
"The Calvinist penchant for strict Biblical interpretation had led to a world-view which splits the human race into different God-created entities, different ethnicities. God's destruction of the Tower of Babel and the separation of language from the time of Genesis proved the crucial existence of different ethnicities as part of God's will in the mind of the Afrikaner." (1)
 
"The entire apartheid system was based on Calvin's interpretation of predestination and election. In fact, Calvinism per se pretty much had a lot to do with the institutionalization of Apartheid in South Africa. John Calvin wrote in his Institutes of the Christian Religion: 'All are NOT created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestined to life or to death.' (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, Section 21, 5)" (2)
 
Against this there was a rising tide of opposition from the black community, but not just from them. Trevor Huddleston, in his book "Naught for your Comfort" describes the situation he faced as a priest sent out to Africa. He may have been white, but he was on the side of social justice, and against oppression. Huddleston
 
"fought to alleviate poverty and railed against laws that made blacks non-citizens in their own land. ''There is no time to be lost in breaking the present government I am convinced,'' he wrote in ''Naught For Your Comfort,'' his 1955 book about his experiences. In 1956, he was recalled by his superiors, who feared the views expressed in his book might get him expelled. ''I did not want to leave because I loved being in Africa, but I had taken a vow of obedience so I had to." (3)
 
Huddleston later worked together with Desmond Tutu in opposing apartheid. There was a rising movement within Christianity to critique the Calvinist chains that had bound the country under apartheid.
 
It is in the fight against oppression that Mandela came to the forefront as one of the leaders. But unlike so many of those who fought for freedom in African states, he was fighting not for black peoples against white peoples, but against injustice domination and oppression in whatever form it manifested itself. He was not blind to the corrupting nature of power, and he was not looking to replace white oppression with black oppression.
 
A notable example of precisely that happening was Rhodesia, where Robert Mugabe gained power, and sought to keep power by means of force, becoming as brutal as the white government he had criticised.
 
But Mandela, in a speech in the Rivona Trial in 1964, said:
 
"During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons will live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for. But, my lord, if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."
 
I still remember when Mandela was released in 1990, watching the television, and feeling hope that at last something better would be coming to Africa. Even his speech showed a very different outlook.
 
"It was during those long and lonely years that my hunger for the freedom of my own people became a hunger for the freedom of all people, white and black. I knew as well as I knew anything that the oppressor must be liberated just as surely as the oppressed. A man who takes away another man's freedom is a prisoner of hatred; he is locked behind the bars of prejudice and narrow-mindedness. I am not truly free if I am taking away someone else's freedom, just as surely as I am not free when my freedom is taken from me. The oppressed and the oppressor alike are robbed of their humanity."
 
And the rest is history, as they say. He became ANC President, and led negotiations with President F.W. de Klerk to abolish apartheid and establish multiracial elections in 1994. He led his ANC party to victory and was elected President. He formed a Government of National Unity, and worked to defuse ethnic tensions, promulgating a new constitution and began the Truth and Reconciliation Commission which was a way of confronting the human rights abuses of Africa's past and sought a reconciliatory approach which was quite different from anything done before.
 
 Rather like Martin Luther King, so much that he said is inspiring, and memorable. Here are a few quotations:
 
"I have walked that long road to freedom. I have tried not to falter; I have made missteps along the way. But I have discovered the secret that after climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb. I have taken a moment here to rest, to steal a view of the glorious vista that surrounds me, to look back on the distance I have come. But I can rest only for a moment, for with freedom comes responsibilities, and I dare not linger, for my long walk is not yet ended"
 
"When I walked out of prison, that was my mission, to liberate the oppressed and the oppressor both. Some say that has now been achieved. But I know that that is not the case. The truth is that we are not yet free; we have merely achieved the freedom to be free, the right not to be oppressed. We have not taken the final step of our journey, but the first step on a longer and even more difficult road. For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others. The true test of our devotion to freedom is just beginning."
 
References
(1)    http://pseudointellectualchat.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/calvinism-and-apartheid-the-development-of-afrikaner-nationalism/
(2)    http://hil001.blogspot.com/2013/01/calvinism-and-apartheid-south-africa.html
(3)    http://anglicansonline.org/archive/news/articles/1998/980421a.html

Charities reclaiming on lump sum donations: A Budget Amendment Passed.

In 2010, I spoke out in my blog in support of a gift aid scheme for Jersey. Chris Stone very kindly interviewed me on radio, and I was also asked to do a short piece to camera for the BBC local news bulletin, who were very helpful in making my arguments more widely known.
 
My blog posting can be seen here:
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2010/01/why-jersey-needs-gift-aid.html  
 
Philip Ozouf, the Treasury Minister, was opposed, and former States member, Jean Le Maistre rang me up to wish me luck, but mentioned that he had tried to get something similar through, without success.
 
Senator Ozouf said:
 
"The UK system is slightly different as Tax rates are much higher.  We have a low administrative tax system, an easy collect tax system. I don't want to change that but am happy to look at the whole gift aid arrangements.
 
And that was that!
 
But as the recession deepened, I wondered if it was possible to improve matters instead by a simple alteration to the existing tax law. So I began in July 2013 to lobby various States members. This was my argument:
 
Charities reclaiming on lump sum donations: Proposed Amendment to Income Tax Law
 
The background details on giving to charity and reclaiming tax can be found at
http://www.gov.je/TaxesMoney/IncomeTax/Charities/Pages/MakingDonation.aspx
 
This is to do with charities reclaiming tax paid on donations from tax payers, where the donation is either covenanted over several years, or is paid as a lump sum over £100.
 
The relevant part of the Income Tax law is given below. I would have thought it a simple proposition to amend 87B F
(f)     the sum paid is not less than £100;
to replace with the words
(f)     the sum paid is not less than £50;
 
The argument is a simple one. With these times of economic constraint, charities need all the help they can muster from taxpayers. As there are many calls on the public from differing charities, a reduction to £50 would both enable them to benefit more from lump sum donations, and ensure that those wanting to donate £50 to two different charities would also enable the two charities to gain from the donations. Sanctuary House, for example, could benefit by this simple change in the law.
 
This is not a move to gift aid, and it still retains the lump sum, and existing methods of claiming by completing forms, and I would suggest that the slight increase in administration would certainly be outweighed by the benefits which would accrue to charities.
 
While there is a general consultation on charities, this is part of the income tax law, and can be addressed simply and separately without any need for delay, especially as the consultation does not in fact address this, as it is part of the income tax law. The need of charities for extra income would, I have thought, meant that the sooner it could be implemented, the better.
 
Deputy John Young takes action
 
I'm not going to name the people who didn't respond, as there are many calls on a States Member's time, and it is quite understandable that matters can be pushed onto the "back burner" and forgotten. I should mention that I don't usually send out blanket emails to all States members; I like to send it to individuals whom I feel may be receptive to a suggestion. Otherwise, it becomes "overkill".
 
But I bumped into Deputy John Young at a meeting at the Parish Hall, and mentioned it to him, and forwarded my email to him. He seemed very keen to progress it, and had emailed Philip Ozouf on my behalf. Philip was broadly in favour, and in his reply (which I have permission to quote) he said:
 
"Thank you for your email. Treasury has looked at this in some detail during this year as we are considering introducing a form of gift aid relief with lower qualifying donations than the current £100 limit, precisely for the reason you set out in your email."
 
However, he wanted more figures on the matter:
 
"The outcome of that work was that there is currently insufficient information to enable us to determine the cost of reducing the qualifying limit."
 
And he suggested that should be part of the raft of changes under the new Charities Law, after the review, rather than just a matter under the Tax Law.
 
So it seemed that delays were again happening. I resigned myself to the inevitable, although I was encouraged by an exchange of emails with Deputy Young again, who wanted to ask about whether reducing the amount might reduce charitable giving.
 
I thought that was most unlikely. People who gave £100 or more would have that kind of commitment, but a reduction to £50 would hopefully generate a bonus commitment from people who had not been able to benefit charities in that way. Deputy Young was definitely on the case. And actually much to my surprise, I saw it voted on in the States as part of this year's budget debate!
 
Here is the proposition, and the notes on it, which show how well Deputy Young presented the case, and did his homework to reply to the question of costs raised by Senator Ozouf.
 
The Proposition
 
As part (b) of the fourth amendment to the Budget, Deputy Young brought this small but significant change:
 
"The estimate of income from taxation during 2014 shall be decreased by £20,000 by reducing the de minimus limit on charitable donations on which the charity may reclaim the tax applicable from £100 to £50"
 
Deputy Young's Notes to the Proposition
 
For many years Jersey has had a successful scheme which allows local charities to benefit from repayment of tax suffered by local taxpayers making lump sum donations subject to certain conditions. The cost of administering this tax repayment scheme is an important consideration. Charities are required to submit an annual schedule of donations received, together with the documentation, and can do so more frequently, but not more than monthly. In 2012, £786,725 tax was repaid to 151 charities.

On 17th April last year, the Minister for Treasury and Resources, in answering a question from Deputy S. Pinel of St. Clement said: "I want to support the philanthropic sector in Jersey. The arrangements we have are slightly different to that of the United Kingdom; it is that charitable donations are not given but then the charity benefits from the 20 per cent tax concession, so it is a slightly different arrangement up to a cap of £500,000, as I think it is. I am certainly going to be looking further at boosting with the Chief Minister the philanthropic and third sector. The third sector is vital; we need to give it resource, we need to give it encouragement and certainly we need to encourage local Islanders to give and certainly I am not proposing any changes to our arrangements, in fact I want to improve them."

In this year's Budget, the Minister is proposing to amend Article 87B of the Income Tax (Jersey) Law 1961 to relax the requirement for the taxpayer making the donation to 3 years' prior residence; however, the minimum donation to qualify for this scheme is still set at £100. The Law was altered to reduce the minimum sum to £100 from £250 in 2001, but has remained unaltered since that time.

I believe in these stringent times the old saying "watch the pennies and the pound will look after themselves" applies. Thirteen years later, in the middle of the post-credit crunch recession, there is a strong case for assisting charities by reducing this de minimus limit on individual donations to £50, which my amendment proposes.

It is anticipated by the Income Tax Department that the total cost of the reduction in the de minimus limit of individual donations to £50 is unlikely to exceed £20,000.

The Outcome: The Vote
 
Unlike many of the budget amendments, this one was passed by all the 41 States Members present in the Chamber, with no dissent!
 
I would like in this blog to express my deep felt thanks to Deputy John Young, for not just listening to me, but taking action to prepare and present a proposition on the matter, so that at last, sooner rather than later, charities can benefit more as a result of this budget.
 
As far as I am concerned, it is a great Christmas present come early!

Jersey and Winchester: The View from Guernsey

On 30 November, 2013, under a headline of "Sex complaint row threatens church split", the story broke that "Guernsey may leave the Diocese of Winchester in a protest move, it has emerged."
 
This was a statement made by the Vice Dean, who said that Guernsey would follow Jersey if a current dispute with the diocese resulted in "divorce". As the Guernsey Press reported it:
 
"Vice-Dean the Rev. Kevin Northover acknowledged tensions were high between the Jersey church and the diocese following an investigation into how a sexual misconduct complaint was handled by the Jersey Deanery. If the relationship cannot be patched up, it has been suggested that Jersey might look to withdraw from the diocese, potentially moving to one in Europe. While neither Mr Northover nor the Dean, the Very Rev. Canon Paul Mellor, wanted to speculate on the potential pullout, the former said the Channel Islands would in all likelihood stick together. 'If, for example, Jersey chose to go in a certain direction it would be silly for us not to as well,' Mr Northover said."
 
This provoked some interesting comments.
 
"Dani" said that: "My gut reaction is irrespective of the practicalities of staying with Jersey it is better reputation wise we distance ourselves from the Jersey on this one completely. There is nothing positive about sticking together with them or being associated with them on this matter. It concerns me actually our local reverend is taking this stance."
 
And she came to the core of the complaint, citing almost verbatim the Korris report:
 
"A vulnerable adult called HG (26) disabled through autism began attending a church in Jersey then began living with the church warden and his wife. The dean of that church had said he had previously spoken to the church warden about the fact he is too tactile, stands too close to women, touches too much/inappropriately. His manner was deemed to be inappropriate to such an extent that he was chaperoned within the church when in close proximity to women."
 
It is interesting to note the focus on this, because the safeguarding issue about the churchwarden and his inappropriate behaviour - not just with HG, but other women - has been pretty much overlooked in Jersey. The focus of attention there is whether there is any blame associated with the clergy, and the churchwarden does not even seem to have featured in the Steel report, as far as press releases go.
 
Dani goes on to summarise the case:
 
"H.G. wrote an email attaching a lengthy, detailed, account of unwelcome and potentially abusive behaviour she had experienced at the hand of church warden. This included emotional manipulation by being described as his "adopted daughter" but then later rejected, and an unwanted and inappropriate physical intimacy. This was sent to the church dean."
 
"Now how her complaint was dealt with in my opinion completely failed her. She was questioned in an aggressive manner by several church personnel about her account. Now in my opinion as soon as anyone says they have been abused you say I BELIEVE YOU. Not attack them or query them. You then make a police complaint immediately for it to be investigated. This stuff is serious. It took the dean 25 days to tell this heavily autistic person who solely looked to the church to go to the police - and that was only after they had gotten legal advice. Truly disgusting and shocking."
 
"Anyhow I haven't been keeping up to date with this case but HGs mental state diminished (used later to undermine her accounts) and she ended up being deported to UK and is reported to have been homeless and penniless."
 
"There are safeguarding procedures issued for a reason to make sure things are dealt with properly. I don't want us to be associated or seen to endorse what happened in Jersey."
 
Deputy Ellis Bebb made a comment after this:
 
"I think that the question we should ask ourselves is whether Winchester is the right diocese for Guernsey. I think that what happened in Jersey poses a lot of questions, but I'm convinced that as with any breakdown in relations, there's plenty of blame to go around for everyone. One small correction, the woman wasn't deported but bound over by the Jersey courts; the decision to do so was at the courts discretion & nothing to do with the church. "Regardless of how we got to this situation, I think that it affords Guernsey the opportunity to ask whether the diocese of Winchester is the best fit for the Deanery. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but given that Jersey are looking at the issue, it's logical for us to do the same."
 
Deputy Bebb seems unaware that while it was the civil courts who made the decision of binding over, it was the clergy who were the complainants, and who supplied statements to the police. So to say it was purely a civil matter is overlooking the wider chain of events.
 
Dani came back - very politely (a lesson to Jersey, I feel) - with this remark:
 
"Elis, I respectfully disagree but thank you for engaging. First I will say it is always good to continually ask what is the right set up for any organisation and to look at the benefits for the users. Those are the people that matter. In respect of the churches I believe many users can be vulnerable and that they go their to find acceptance, help, support and love from the church community/god/christ. They should be safe. Clearly the Jersey procedures did not work and they resulted in a very poor outcome for a vulnerable person. There seems to be no valid reason to reject these safeguarding principles and this is what it is all about."
 
"I have heard no other local person ever before speak of wanting a split from Winchester and the reality is the split would in these circumstances be driven from wanting to carrying on in an outdated way in Jersey where concern for the vulnerable is not prioritized. No records were even kept by these people. You would think that was a minimum requirement. It definitely does pose a lot of questions why such a fuss on their part!"
 
"HGs deterioration in mental health unfortunately led to criminal offences that resulted in her being sent to the UK with no money and no-one to meet her. What kind of experiences bring on mental health deterioration?"
 
And Dani has evidently been reading Korris, because she cites these paragraphs:
 
From the independent report: "The Church let H.G. down. Despite the difficulties of her background and disablement, and struggle with some everyday practicalities, H.G. was none-the-less in employment, pursuing hobbies, socializing and wanting to be accepted in the church community. Over the next three years H.G.'s life changed from having no history of being in trouble with the law, to having a police record and being a displaced person, homeless on the streets of the mainland."
 
Following on how she felt: "H.G. felt disbelieved and publicly humiliated. In reaction to her sense of getting no adequate response to any of the issues she raised she appealed to the higher authority of the Bishop, to Lambeth Palace, and to the media in the form of BBC Jersey, all to no effect."
 
Her conclusion:
 
"I believe it is disingenuous to thus pretend that the church had nothing to do with the outcome of her resulting mental state and actions especially when they have such issue with implementing procedures to stop it ever happening to anyone else. It is incredibly easy to see how this all happened. It is all very much related unfortunately and nasty business."
 
"As much as it may seem logical to look at the issue in isolation it is not the reality, and will not be perceived as such. It definitely makes me wonder why such eager support is put forward straight away to Jersey with no critique. Very pally - no critical analysis in regards to a move on the face of it."
 
"Surely as good as it is to stay with Jersey there are other complications from change and aligning with EU institutions. It is not straight forward. None of that was mentioned in this press release. I think it is perfectly valid to stress Jerseys association with child abuse, what has happened and how our churches react should take all of this into account."
 
"Clearly I agree with you in essence - always best to think about how to move forward but to me. it doesn't look like Jersey is doing that at all. So following them in their path does not look like a good move."
 
Deputy Bebb replies as follows:
 
"Dani, I don't wish to engage particularly on this case as I know that there are a number of contentious points & I don't have the full details to make a public statement about the specifics of the case. One thing that I would note, I've heard it suggested even during Bishop Michael's time that Winchester was not the best fit. It would seem that it is even less so under Bishop Tim. This doesn't mean that we have to or should move diocese, but the question is being posed & it would be foolish not to take the opportunity to consider the options. The devil is in the Detail"
 
A contributor called "Heaven's Eye View?" then makes these points:
 
Mostly fair comment Elis. but just "One small correction". Ex Metropolitan policeman and Jersey States Member Bob Hill MBE has done a series of very informative blogs on this. Let's not be hiding behind the detail of contrived situations or language, at the expense of the bigger picture.
 
EVERYTHING that happened to the vulnerable woman IS church related.
-The safeguarding issues,
-the botched complaint,
-the autistic lady's backlash,
-the dubious reporting to police to prevent her potentially making a scene at a church service,
-the alleged mistreatment and further safeguarding issues after attest/snatching from her home,
-the even more dubious refusal of bail for someone of good character on a minor charge potentially engineered to soften up the vulnerable woman & make here loose her job and her home.
..right to the choice she was then given in court go back in to prison or be leave the island ("constructively DEPORTED" should we say) with no money and no home and no provision for her immediate or long term care.
 
"The first winter was the worst but she has learnt survival and where there is a meal to be had and she is now brightly facing her forth winter on the streets. She is autistic but she is far from stupid as her abusers are finding out to their cost. She sometimes sleeps at friends houses. Because of her Autism compounding the trauma of her mistreatment she is now quite difficult to help beyond this. She says she prefers to sleep outside because being inside gives her claustrophobia and panic attacks because it is like being in a prison cell again. Unsurprisingly she now finds it very difficult to trust anyone. Hopefully she will get better over time because this is not a good situation and could end very badly indeed."
 
"She has been writing 3 blogs over several years now. 2 of these have recently been open to the public. She remains a committed Christian and her main religious blog is showing over 4,000 visitors. Mostly CI & UK and also worldwide CoE/christian countries, to even places like Japan! All from a peripatetic existence utilising ad-hoc Internet cafes and libraries. Awesome. Many people who call themselves "Christian" could learn a lot from her. she has covered many subjects including forgiveness."
 
"Due to her Autistic nature her blogs are highly variable; They can be odd or insightful, light or heavy going. Guernsey must NOT tether itself to Jersey on this one - bad mistake!"
 
Deputy Bebb comes back with some interesting points about the peculiar relation between the Channel Island Churches and Winchester:
 
"I think that we're all agreeing on this one, just with different views. One thing that I'd like to highlight. Guernsey wouldn't tether itself to Jersey any more than it is at the moment. Both deaneries are part of the diocese of Winchester & were one deanery to consider moving, it makes sense for the other to pose the same question. But even if both deaneries were to move to the same new diocese, we would still have our separate ecclesiastical law. We're not tethered, we just may be thinking of moving from the current same field to the same new field. Of course, the grass isn't always greener, but it may be. Worth thinking about."
 
"It's not exactly following Jersey for the sake of it. Relations between Jersey & Winchester are poor (to put it mildly) and part of this is frustration that ecclesiastical law in Jersey is different to that in the UK. Given that Jersey are looking at their relationship with Winchester it affords us an opportunity to do the same. We're also anomalous to the diocese of Winchester."
 
"The reason that the diocese of Europe seems to have some logic is that each & every part of that diocese is different; therefore anomalies are the order of the day. This isn't to say that the diocese of Europe is the only answer available or that we should necessarily move from the diocese of Winchester, just that it affords an opportunity to pose the question & consider the options."
 
A writer called PLP agrees but asks why this case should be the cause of a review:
 
"A process of constant review is healthy but using a case of alleged abuse in Jersey as a catalyst for that process seems rather a bizarre (and potentially dangerous, not to mention insensitive) way to go about it. Surely the focus should be for the Diocese of Winchester / Jersey Deanery to resolve this case and ensure appropriate support is given to the person involved. Until that happens, the Guernsey Deanery would do well to keep their fingers well clear lest they get burned."
 
Here Elis Bebb makes a point about the Bishop and his comment is interesting, in that it shows how it is the Bishop's actions in looking at both Jersey and Guernsey that have caused the problems. If he had focused purely on Guernsey, then the issue of a break with Winchester probably would not have surfaced
 
"This wasn't a choice of the Guernsey Deanery; it was a choice of the Bishop of Winchester to include Guernsey in the process from what I understand. Conclude from that what you may."
 
Tim South has some rather cutting remarks about Jersey:
 
"To be frank some of the channel island church leaders and powerful political supporters are displaying small island egotistical mentality, hardly a mention of" HG" the victim. The focus should be about the appalling care of an intelligent, but vulnerable lady whom the church and police thought they had got rid of, by giving her a choice in court after being locked up for two weeks, more jail or a plane ticket and banned for three years from Jersey. She took the ticket."
 
"Back to the spin. The Dame Heather Steel report has not been released because it is not finished, but Senator Bailhache in Jersey says the Dean has been completely absolved. Which is interesting because not only has the report not been release, it is being kept secret. So how would he have this information?"
 
"Even more interesting is, why the Dean apologised? if he has done nothing wrong apart part from refusing to take part in the Korris report which found him badly lacking in several areas."
 
"BBC: Dean Key said: "I regret mistakes that I made in the safeguarding processes and I understand that, upon reflection, it would have been more helpful if I had co-operated more fully with the Korris [safeguarding} Review."
 
That is a very sharp point. How can the Steel report "exonerate" the Dean to use one headline, or again, looking at the JEP say "Dean cleared" and forget that Bob key himself said that he made mistakes during the safeguarding process, and had not co-operated fully with the Korris review.  The actual statement from Winchester notes that:
 
"What I can state at this point, based on Dame Heather's findings to date, is that I will not be taking disciplinary action against any member of the clergy in relation to the handling of the safeguarding complaint in question or the subsequent review process."
 
That's not the same as saying that there were no mistakes made, and the note of triumph in the local press seems to overlook the Dean's own declarations on that matter.
 
In reply to Tim, Elis Bebb also notes that:
 
"Just a few corrections. Guernsey's arrangements regarding vulnerable adults are different to Jersey's. The pay of the Rev. Northover is from the Diocese of Winchester along with any healthcare or travel expenditure, that's part of the reason the congregation pays a parish share to the diocese. The Vale rectory is the property of the Church of England & therefore isn't supported by the ratepayers. Apart from the above points, as I've said previously, I don't know the details of the case to make a public comment, but your points make interesting reading, thank you."
 
And he also summarises why Guernsey has been drawn into the net with Jersey - the Bishop's review:
 
"You're right that a change of diocese is not usual. But I don't think that there's a hidden agenda. As you'll see from the posts and without going into detail, there's been a breakdown in relations between the Deanery of Jersey & the diocese of Winchester. Both the Deanery of Jersey & the Deanery of Guernsey are anomalous to the rest of the diocese as they have different & independent ecclesiastical law."
 
"There's a review being undertaken to consider the options for Jersey & Guernsey are being included in the review. There are a number of options available, one of which is to stay in the diocese of Winchester, another is to move to another diocese with the diocese in Europe being one of those options. If you know something else or believe thee to be another agenda, I'm interested to hear it."
 
"Just to let you know that the ecclesiastical court in Jersey is very different in its formation & functions to the ecclesiastical court in Guernsey."
 
"Personally I believe the decision to include Guernsey in the general review at this early a stage has led to a lot of confusion over the issues. Maybe we should only have been included at a later point when arrangements in Jersey are more advanced."
 
"Given that the specific case that has led to this point happened in Jersey and that their arrangements on safeguarding vulnerable adults are very different to those in Guernsey, I don't believe my time is best spent going into the full details of what happened in another jurisdiction and then making public statements on that situation. I look forward to the publication of the Steel report and will continue to work for appropriate arrangements concerning vulnerable adults here in Guernsey."
 
Which is as good a way as any of a politician saying that Jersey's arrangements were clearly deficient, and Guernsey's are better, although he is also saying that there is always room for improvement.
 
In conclusion, the general tenor of comments coming from Guernsey are that Jersey and Winchester have a very bad relationship at present, and this is in part because of the case of HG, which highlighted failures in safeguarding - in particular concerning the churchwarden - in Jersey. They don't seem to have a very high opinion of either Winchester or Jersey, and they don't think Jersey authorities - either ecclesiastical or civil - acted particularly well.
 
The editor himself has just also decided to write about this in the leader comment in the Guernsey Press:
 
"No one reading the Korris report into allegations by a vulnerable adult parishioner who complained about abusive behaviour by a churchwarden in Jersey can fail to be disturbed by a catalogue of failures by the Church of England there in dealing with the situation. Yet it is being questioned on its role in what is little short of a scandal - the alleged victim ended up being hounded off the island and dumped in the UK with no accommodation or money and is now living rough - that appears to have triggered Jersey's desire to leave the Diocese of Winchester. That the established church in Guernsey is considering siding with Jersey and similarly splitting from Winchester is therefore worrying."
 
And they ask:
 
"Can there be any credible reason why Jersey does not demonstrate complete adherence to the safeguarding procedures put in place by the Diocese of Winchester?"
 
The leader writer of the Guernsey Press even goes so far as to suggest that the only reason for a split from Winchester for the Church of England in Jersey and Guernsey would be to consolidate and hold onto power, and not be answerable to any higher authority. That's something which has not been raised by the Jersey Evening Post.
 
For all the glowing headlines in Jersey, most of the Guernsey people glancing across the water, see a very different picture from that portrayed in our media, with lots of unanswered questions, failings by church and civil authorities with regard to HG, and a dispute which may well cause a review of their own position with Winchester. And there is a much stronger focus on safeguarding issues as well, and the churchwarden at the heart of the complaint is not forgotten.
 
References
http://www.thisisguernsey.com/news/2013/11/30/sex-complaint-row-threatens-church-split/
http://www.thisisguernsey.com/comment/gp-opinion/2013/12/03/row-is-over-holding-on-to-power/

Philippines and Grenada's debts

This came via Ed Le Quesne, and I think it is very important, hence a posting tonight.

Subject: Philippines and Grenada's debts

Dear All,

I had the latest newsletter from the Jubilee Debt Campaign today.

It says that the amazing sun of £50 million has been pledged to the DEC in the first fortnight  of their appeal for relief after Typhoon Haiyan  BUT the same amount of money leaves the Philippines every 3 and a half days, a total of $8 billion flowing overseas yearly, more than 20% of the Government income.  These debts originated with the odious rule of Ferdinand Marcos in the 1980s, debts run up at the time  when he was an ally in the Cold War.

Please sign the petition at www.jubileedebt.org.uk/philippinesaction.  You will also get more information about the debt.

A second article asks for support for the island of Grenada.  It has been hit by 2 hurricanes, Ivan and Emily, and the loss of EU trade preferences for banana and spice exports.  Rather than introduce austerity in a vain hope to pay their debts, the Government is asking for a negotiation of debt reduction.  They wrote a letter to the Guardian explaining their situation and the intolerable situation for their young people.   There is a petition to sign on the website asking George Osborne to enter negotiations. See www.jubileedebt.org.uk/grenadaaction

To help the Jubilee Debt campaign to keep these facts in the public mind, any donations given online from 10 am on Thurs, Fri, Sat Dec 5th,6th, 7th  at www.jubileedebt.org.uk/biggive  will be doubled!!

Best wishes

Ed Le Quesne,

P.S.   They congratulate Jersey for its action on Vulture Funds but warn that vulture funds are in danger of inflicting a massive debt burden on Argentina.   The present  world finance system protects wealthy speculators and imposes the costs on the poorest people

Growing up with the Doctor – Part 4

Growing up with the Doctor – Tom Baker (1974 to 1981)
 
When Tom Baker became the Doctor in 1974, I had turned 17, and was just about to embark on 13 driving lessons, after which I was finally deemed to be safe enough to drive on the roads of Jersey. I was stopped, incidentally, shortly after passing my test, for what a police motorcycle rider told me was "careful driving". I was going so slowly and timidly that he thought I was drunk!
 
Tom Baker saw me through the 6th form at school (what is now termed, confusingly to me, year 11 and year 12) and onward through my student days at University. And he was definitely the student's Doctor, with his witty repartee, and his bohemian clothing. It was only in his final year, that John Nathan Turner decided to change the image, and replaced what had been just clothes – albeit with a technicolour scarf – with a uniform – question marks on the shirt, a long burgundy coat, and a scarf that was now just burgundy, plum, and red scarf.
 
Tom Baker also managed to get engaged and married. Myself, I only got engaged during my time as a student to a girl called Ruth, and unhappily the engagement was broken with much heartache on both sides. Baker's marriage ended soon after he left the show.
 
The very early Baker stories were a gradual move from the old style Pertwee stories, and a very mixed bag. For every atmospheric Genesis of the Dalek and Terror of the Zygons, you had the more plodding and traditional Robot and Revenge of the Cybermen.
 
But after that, the show moved on to become a Gothic delight, with the historical settings given the full strength of the BBC production values, giving the show a rich sumptuous look, which can be seen at its best in stories like Pyramids of Mars, Masque of Mandragora, Talons of Weng-Chiang, gradually fading but still present in Horror of Fang Rock, Image of the Fendahl. Even the non-historical stories drew upon roots in literature, Planet of Evil (Jekyll and Hyde), The Brain of Morbius (Frankenstein), The Robots of Death (Agatha Christie), The Seeds of Doom (The Thing from Another World).
 
These were the years after the end of the Heath government, when Harold Wilson came to power, and clashes over pay negotiations with the Unions led to Jim Callaghan's Government "Winter of Discontent". Inflation rocketed, and by the end of 1979, when Margaret Thatcher came to power, prices of everything from food to cars and houses had soared.
 
There was little reflection of this in Doctor Who. Unlike the Pertwee era, comment on the topical issues of the day had largely vanished. That's not to say that Doctor Who had lost its moral compass – far from it. Genesis of the Daleks confronts issues of warfare and takes the Daleks back to their post-war roots in reflections on Nazi Germany. Planet of Evil looks at scientific responsibility. And The Deadly Assassin presents government power struggles, and the corruption that power brings. The Doctor is still fighting evil, and he takes pains to tell Leela not to use weapons to kill. But the moral imperative was more universal rather than specific.
 
Orwell looked at Charles Dickens, and concluded that Dickens is a moralist. In his novels, he fights particular evils in society where he encounters them, but he has no clear cut remedy of his own, and no political agenda like socialism. That's very much like the Tom Baker Doctor. He enters the situation, and defeats the evil, and leaves. There's no word of advice or comment like Jon Pertwee's Doctor sometimes used to give at the end of a story. Baker's Doctor has done what was needed, and that is all the improvement he needs to do. And of course, he is far less an establishment figure than his predecessor, much more of a maverick. It's like playing the joker in the pack.
 
Coming from Jersey, I found at University everyone wanted political labels. Were you Conservative, Liberal or Labour? Fellow students found it hard to understand that there could be a form of politics, as in Jersey, where party systems did not exist. I rather relished the fact that like Tom Baker's Doctor, my politics could not be pinned down, pigeonholed, and neatly categorised. People love labels; it makes them secure.
 
Gothic stories, by their very nature, are dark, and the violent nature of the stories, albeit enfolded in a fantasy setting, drew criticism from Mary Whitehouse, and her self-proclaimed "National Viewers and Listeners Association"; now it goes under the name of "Mediawatch" which at least does not try to suggest a spuriously large membership. The NVLA eventually gained about 150,000 members, which is about the size of York.
 
As a result of prolonged criticism, and one drowning sequence in particular which it was agreed did overstep boundaries, Philip Hinchcliffe was rapidly moved on, and Doctor Who under new producer Graham Williams was under strict instructions to tone the level of violence down.
 
The Williams period was a mixed bag. There were some extremely good stories, such as many of those in the "Key to Time", and a high note with "City of Death". But there were some very silly stories, and the sets began to look too over lit, too lacking in detail. Watching "The Invisible Enemy" and "The Sun Makers", despite being good stories, the sets are a failure, with far too many bright and cheap looking corridor scenes. Inflation was also beginning to bite very hard at Doctor Who, and without the benefits of modern digital technology, some of the monsters – the giant prawn in "The Invisible Enemy", the weather balloon with phallus in "The Creature from the Pit", and the Mandrels in "Nightmare of Eden" opened the show to justifiable ridicule.
 
Even in the student common room, attention was waning during Doctor Who, and sometimes I remember a tussle over continuing to watch "Happy Days" on ITV or turning over to "Doctor Who". The latter always won, but that there could be a conflict was an indication that even the core audience was becoming alienated. I rather liked seeing a bit of "Happy Days"; the alternative was to watch "Basil Brush" on BBC1, an exercise in endurance as we groaned at the ""Ha Ha Ha! Boom! Boom!"" jokes. Basil Brush is wonderfully described in Wikipedia as a "fictional anthropomorphic fox", primarily portrayed as a "Glove Puppet".
 
I eventually moved out to student digs, a flat in St David's Hill Exeter, where we had the flat on the first floor, and the ground floor was taken up with fellow students, most of whom were doing theology degrees and looking for ordination in the Church of England. Their standards for house-cleaning, however, were so bad that the one girl down there rapidly moved out. The Young Ones may have been a wild exaggeration, because we all did study as students, but in terms of cleaning, the downstairs flat could well have passed muster as a set. I had to go down with my friend Charles to look it over before Christmas, as he was nominally in charge of both flats. The mantelpiece had a glass with something green and purple growing in it. The kitchen sink was full of dirty grey water and dishes, and the bath was home to a family of slugs.
 
After Exeter, and a year at St Lukes, I had spent a short spell teaching mathematics at Bideford, and then Gloucester. Both schools, and others that I applied for and visited, were redolent of the decay of the early 1980s, with plasterboard cracked, paint peeling. Bideford had a good maths team, however, and I enjoyed my brief stay there. Gloucester was a larger comprehensive, where caning was still enforced by the headmaster. It was a troubled time for me, and I had to witness the beating with a cane on the hand of a boy who had apparently threatened another with a knife.
 
Change was also happening in Doctor Who. John Nathan Turner was bringing a more serious tone to the series, going back to concepts based around hard science supplied by his script editor Christopher Bidmead. Gone were the informal clothes, and in came an outfit. The production values gained a glossier look to them. The swirling patterns were replaced by an exploding star field. Some of the stories from this time were memorable, but despite the emphasis on hard science, there were still moments of silly scripting – the Master presenting an ultimatum to "peoples of the universe" with a cassette tape recorder. But there were some fine stories. It was as if the Baker years had sought a last gasp of the early greatness before the end. The thread that binds the universe together.
 
It was the end, but the moment had been prepared for. The final Baker story saw Tom change into Peter Davison. It was a moody gloom laden story about entropy and decay, about things falling apart, and it more or less mirrored the period of intense depression that I was undergoing at that time. But as Peter Davison took over, so the fragments of my life would gradually reassemble themselves.

Bloggers and Spent Convictions

The "Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (Jersey) 2001" in broad terms allows a person to rehabilitate themselves following a criminal conviction. The way it works is described as follows:
 
"After a given period of time following conviction, a conviction can be regarded as spent. The formula for calculating that period is complex, and can be made more complicated if another offence is committed before any prior convictions are spent. But the general principle involved is simple. People make bad choices, but they should not be forced to live with them forever."
 
But while that applies to employers, what is the position with regard to bloggers, for example, if the information in question is in the public domain?
 
The case of G.D. v. Bernard Kenny and The Hudson County Democratic Organization, Inc. in New Jersey raised this issue where the Supreme Court looked into the difficulties in the "expungement" or "rehabilitation" of convicted criminals on libel and privacy claims.
 
This was not, in point of fact, a situation which could have originated in Jersey. Even with ROA (Jersey), any criminal conviction has to be declared before an election. In the case of GD, he was a candidate for election to the State Senate, and a flyer (by other campaigners) stated that he was "a DRUG DEALER who went to JAIL for FIVE YEARS for selling coke near a public school."
 
He brought a libel claim against this statement. Although he had a conviction for drug dealing he argued that because the record of his conviction was "expunged" and his conviction was - as a matter of law - deemed not to have occurred..
 
However, the New Jersey Supreme Court rejected this argument, holding that the expungement statute does not transmute a once-true fact into a falsehood. While answering a question on an employment form may not legally require you to declare an "expunged" or "spent" conviction, the fact of the matter was that the conviction existed, and libel dealt with actual facts.
 
The argument was that the case was public, and hence he had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the expunged conviction:
 
"G.D. pled guilty and was sentenced in a courtroom that was open to the public. The judgment of conviction in G.D.'s case was a court record available to the public for thirteen years before the entry of the expungement order. During all those years, the information concerning G.D.'s conviction was available to commercial data companies as well as to newspapers and other public organizations. The reality is that criminal-conviction information is disseminated well before the entry of an expungement order."
 
The Court concluded that:
 
"This is not a case in which a defendant peered through closed curtains into a bedroom or wrongly acquired a personal diary and made highly private information available to the public. A person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the sanctity of his or her bedroom and personal diary from peeping toms intent on making private facts titillating fodder for the public. This case, however, deals with public acts, a guilty plea and sentence in a public courtroom, and public facts, court records available to the public over many years".
 
In the UK this kind of scenario is dealt with by Section 8 of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, which means that if a publisher - or blogger - says, of a rehabilitated person, that he or she is a convicted criminal, then any resulting libel action can be defended by proving the spent conviction. The exception is where it can be proven that publication was made with malice which must mean a dominant motive to injure the claimant. The establishment of motive is fraught with difficulties, and it seems very unlikely that this would be easily established in practice.
 
A case came up dealing with this - Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd in 2008, where Justice Eady ruled that:
 
"The extent to which material is truly "in the public domain" will ultimately depend upon the particular facts before the Court. In Attorney-General v. Greater Manchester Newspapers Ltd [2001] EWHC 530 (QB) the test was applied as to whether certain information was "realistically" accessible to members of the public or only "in theory"."
 
The question here is not whether the convictions are pronounced in public courtrooms but how many members of the public are present, and whether or not the story is reported widely or at all in the press. Clearly if it has been reported in the press, it is "realistically" accessible.
 
I tracked down at the library, the JEP reporting of the case heard by Richard Falle as Acting Magistrate in the case of HG, although only the bare bones are present. That is "realistically accessible". If it is on the Legal Information Website, as the Royal Court cases are under "unreported judgements", and easily searchable, that must also be deemed to be "realistically accessible", and will have been trawled by search engines.
 
Hugh Tomlinson QC comments that:
 
"In practice, many convictions are pronounced in public courtrooms where few, if any, members of the public are present and are not reported widely (or often, at all) in the press.  In contrast to the New Jersey position, they are not available on public websites.   It could, therefore, be argued that an old "spent" conviction does, in fact, attract a "reasonable expectation of privacy" as it is not "realistically accessible to members of the public".
 
"Secondly, it might be argued that as a matter of public policy (or perhaps the positive obligations of the State under Article 8), a "spent" conviction should be treated as attracting a "reasonable expectation of privacy" - the expectation would be "reasonable" precisely because the conviction is spent."
 
"Neither of these arguments are straightforward.  In any event, if "misuse of private information" was being invoked, the publication of spent convictions could, potentially, be justified as a matter of public interest."
 
The National Association of Reformed Offenders notes that:
 
"The situation is also complicated by online records of convictions. Once a conviction is online, and so in the public domain, the media can quote it in their outlets since they are not 'revealing' anything new, just stating a known fact. Nobody's data is being invaded if past news sources are quoted and privacy rights are not being compromised. This seems to be true even in the case of 'spent' convictions. If the conviction is on record, it is likely that in certain situations the media are able to justify the ability to publish these details even though it is spent. "
 
References
http://www.jerseyhumanrights.com/recent/e_martin.htm
http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/libel-privacy-and-forgetting-claims-by-rehabilitated-offenders-hugh-tomlinson-qc/
http://www.vote.je/assets/Nomination-documents-2011-Senator-Connetable-Deputy.pdf
http://www.unlock.org.uk/userfiles/file/IAG/Media%20reporting%20of%20criminal%20records.pdf

The Parable of the Friend

The Parable of the Friend
 
The Teacher said "Simon, I have something to tell you"
 
Simon said, "Teacher, say on."
 
"A certain lender had two debtors. The one owed five hundred denarii, and the other , who was a friend, fifty. When they couldn't pay, he forgave the friend, and had the other thrown into a debtors prison. Which of them therefore will love him most?"
 
Simon answered
 
"He, I suppose, who was his friend, because for the sake of their friendship, he cancelled their debt as if it had never happened."
 
The teacher turned to him:
 
"You have judged correctly. To whom little is forgiven, the same is usually a friend. Therefore I tell you, their sins, which were many, are forgiven, for it would not do to have a scandal among friends."
 
And he said to them:
 
"Greater love hath no man, that he put a friend before a stranger".