History of St Clement's Church by G.R. Bailleine (Part 1)

Here is part one of the forgotten piece by  G.R. Balleine  on the history of the Church, transcribed below. Balleine had a wonderful grasp of how to make historical narrative interesting, and peppers his history with interesting anecdotes.

History of St Clement's Church by G.R. Bailleine  (Part 1)

Origin and Foundation

In ancient documents the Church is referred to as follows: "Ecclesia Sancti Clementis de Petravilla in Gersuis", which is the Latin for "the Church of St. Clement on the estate of Peter in Jersey".

In case anyone should make the objection that we have made a somewhat free translation of the word Petravilla, we would explain it as follows. There are several place-names in Jersey ending in the word ville, for example, Grouville, Longueville. These date back to pre-Norman days when Gallic gentlemen (even after the fall of the Roman Empire) continued to reside in .so-called Roman Villas. The Villa did not necessarily mean simply the residence, or house occupied, but the entire estate, or farm, cultivated by these landed gentry. Such an estate was one known as Pierreville, the estate of Peter.

In time, the owner became a Christian, and built a wooden chapel for himself and his employees, and no doubt one of the men from his estate was ordained Priest to minister in the said chapel. This wooden Chapel would no doubt have been burnt during the Norman raids, but, on the cessation of these raids in the year 911, work would have been begun on the erection of a stone chapel dedicated in the name of St. Clement. He was a "popular saint of the moment," his bones having been allegedly recently brought back from the Black Sea.

No later than the year 1067, there is evidence that William the Conqueror granted to the Abbey of Montvilliers half the tithes of the Church of St. Clement in Jersey. Since only Parish Churches received tithes, the Church of St. Clement was then no longer a private chapel, but a Parish Church. Another charter in 1090 shows that by that time the church had passed into the ownership of the Abbey of St. Sauveur le Vicomte in Normandy, for the Abbot was confirmed in his possession; and it remained the property of this Abbey until the Reformation.

The Early Building

The oldest part of the Church, that which formed the original chapel, is what we now know as the Nave. At first, no doubt, it was a tiny Norman building, with a low thatched roof and narrow windows, two of which remain in the north wall. A further chapel was added a few yards away, on the site which the organ chamber now occupies. This, for perhaps five hundred years, had no connection with St. Clement's but stood as a neighbouring Chapel, as the Fishermen's Chapel stands close to St. Brelade's.

In the 15th century, the Church was considerably enlarged by the addition of a chancel and transepts, giving it the usual cruciform shape of most Christian churches. It has been possible to ascertain the approximate date for these enlargements and alterations on account of the Payn arms, the three trefoils, in the chancel, for the Payns were the Seigneurs of Samares during that century. Also of this period are the gargoyle on the East outside wall, and the murals, or frescoes.

When the church was enlarged, the roof was raised and constructed in stone, the line of which may still be observed on the tower arch, and buttresses were constructed to support the weight.

Reformation Vandalism

The Reformation reached the island of Jersey in severely Calvinistic form, in approximately 1550. As was the case with all the Jersey Churches, and with the majority of the churches in England, all traces of the ancient worship were swept aside.

Altars, images, stained glass, all were smashed to pieces. Endowments for masses and lamps were confiscated to the Crown. Only one bell was left. Soler, the first Protestant Rector, a- fiery Spaniard, who had been a Dominican Friar, did his work so thoroughly that nothing remains but one empty bracket, on which once stood the statue of a Saint, the piscina in the chancel, at which the Priest used to cleanse his hands before Mass, and in the North Chapel, a much more primitive piscina, and an ambry or almery, the cupboard which contained the altar vessels, the consecrated oil for anointing the sick, and the reserved sacrament.

The Reformation and After

During the hundred years following the Reformation the Church became a "Huguenot Temple", that is to say the form of worship was that practised by the Protestants of France, except for five years  under Mary, when the Catholic ritual was restored, and for a short period during which Dean Bandinel secured a reluctant use of the Prayer Book. During this time at St. Clement's, the men entered by the West door, and the women by a -door, now walled up, at the end of the North transept.

The South door did-not then exist. In Commonwealth days a large gallery was erected at the West end of the Church. There was then no altar, but an oak table (now in the new vestry), was set in front of the pulpit, and from the North side of this no doubt the Celebrant would conduct the Communion Service on only the four Major Festivals of the Church's Year.

The 19th Century

The Act Book of the Assemblee Ecclesiastique gives certain information as to what took place in the 19th century. In 1823, the Assembly forbade the Schoolmaster to continue holding his school in the vestry, as the children had been breaking seats and windows in the Church.

The Militia cannon were kept in the Church as late as 1824, for in that year a special meeting was held to take steps to make it easier to get them in and out.

In 1826, the Reverend Phillippe Aubin, B.D. was appointed Rector, a young and vigorous man, who made many improvements. In 1828, the old cracked bell was disposed of to a French bell founder, named Pierre Le Lievre, and was replaced by the present one, cast by Marquet of Villedieu. It was hung on September 1st of that year, and bears the inscription :

`Saint Clement, Ile de Jersey, 1828
Messrs Jean Touzel, et Gedeon Ahier,.
Surveillants..'

An organ, lent by the Seigneur of Samares, was placed in the gallery. An annexe, as high as the Church itself, was added to the West end to house the cannon and to act as a vestry and Sunday School. Since this now blocked the West door, a new entrance was made, which in later years formed a small vestry, and which, later still, was discontinued as a vestry and which, at the time of writing, is used as a store for cleaning equipment. In 1833, the North door was walled up to exclude the draught. In 1837, the stone from which the parish notices had once been given out was ordered to be removed from the churchyard to make room for a grave.

The Restoration of 1880

The important Restoration of 1880 was in fact initiated by the Reverend Charles Marett, M.A., Rector from 1842-1876. In 1874, the Rector caused a Committee to be appointed to draw up plans for a complete restoration, and he himself collected £295.

The annexe, built at the instigation of Rector Aubin, was entirely removed, thus allowing for the re-opening of the West door, and the unblocking of the West window. The nearby door was turned into a tiny vestry. A new entrance to the Church was made in the South transept.

The gallery was pulled down, and the walls stripped of their plaster, thus revealing the Frescoes. The high box-pews and the great square manor-pew in front of the pulpit were removed and replaced by the present seating.

The Chancel was restored to its ancient use with altar and altar-rails. A new pulpit and prayer-desk were installed, the pulpit being handsomely constructed out of Caen stone. The reredos was presented by Edward Mourant, Seigneur; the sanctuary chair by Jean Monamy, the Constable; and the lectern by Charles Marett, the former Rector. Three stained-glass windows were also presented.

The work took three years to complete, and the total cost was £1,535. The Church was re-opened for public worship on March 29th, 1882, when the Service was conducted in English.

 

Some Enforcement Difficulties: The Proposed Helmet law

I see that the scrutiny panel are recommending the bicycle helmets are used by young children, as a compulsory law, with a structure of fines against miscreants.
 
I covered this in my blog last month:
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/06/head-case-impact-of-faulty-law.html
 
"One offence is committed by the child himself or herself (if aged 10 or over, and below the prescribed upper age limit), one by either or both of the child's parents if they cause or permit the breach without reasonable excuse, and one by any other person who is driving the cycle without reasonable excuse at the time of the breach (for example where the child is in a child seat, in a trailer or on a tandem)."
 
As I pointed out, apart from parents ensuring their children had helmets, and left home wearing them (if for school), there was very little they could do to be held responsible, and that would almost certainly come under the heading reasonable excuse. It is almost impossible for parents to enforce the law in the same way as wearing seat belts, despite an analogy often being made, because the analogy just breaks down: parents are present in cars with kids, but are not (usually) following kids on bikes all the way to school (or elsewhere).
 
Determining age limit, and for that matter identity, of children will be almost impossible because there is no requirement in the law for them to carry identification; indeed, apart from passports, which you are not required to have unless you travel, there are no forms of ID for under 16 year olds readily available. And if some were, who would supply them, and at what cost?
 
I suggested confiscation of some kind might be more effective, and I did not realise when suggesting this that in fact it has been implemented (so obviously legal technicalities are not insurmountable) and has proven to be highly effective in a small town. Substitute Parish for Town, and this might be a good model for Jersey to adopt.
 
The study, which appeared in a Paediatrics journal, was reported as follows under the headline "Georgia Town Seizes Bicycles":
 
"The medical journal 'Pediatrics' reports that the town of Wadley, Georgia, has set up a police program to seize the bicycles of riders under 16 who are not wearing helmets. Parents and kids then come to the station house to retrieve the bicycle, and are treated to a lecture on helmet safety. For a second offence the bicycle would be permanently confiscated, but there have been no second offences to date."
 
"Wadley's ordinance has been enforced since 1997, and was combined with distribution of free helmets and a short bike safety education talk in grades K through 7. Following that, Police impounded 167 bicycles in the first five months in this town of 2,400 residents. The campaign has reportedly raised helmet usage from essentially zero to over 54 per cent. The article concludes that simply passing a law is less effective than a campaign featuring active enforcement, free helmets and an education program."
 
Another version of the story adds more details:
 
"Wadley police officers then began confiscating bicycles anytime a child was caught without a helmet. The child and a parent had to go to the police station, where they were lectured on helmet use before getting the bike back."
 
"Without enforcement, state and local laws are not as effective in encouraging helmet use, said Stephen Davidson, one of the study's co-authors: '''We do recommend that small towns interested in increasing bike helmet usage consider developing some sort of enforceable bike helmet regulation,'' said Davidson, who is director of the injury control section of the Division of Public Health."
 
It is I think something which would be much more effective and enforceable than a system of fines, which may well turn generally law abiding citizens into criminals, and will in any event be extremely difficult to enforce. Removal of bike, with the element of shame involved in having to go and reclaim it, is a more immediate mechanism for enforcement.
 
Boston, in 2008, decided through frustration of unenforceable laws, to do something very similar to this:
 
"If you're young and ride a bicycle through town without a helmet, you may end up walking back home. Police here are looking for scofflaws and will snatch the pedals from your feet if you've been warned numerous times but still forgo headgear. Holliston police, frustrated in trying to drive home the point that riding without a helmet is dangerous and illegal, are hoping the tactic will finally get the attention of young riders."
 
"We're not looking to take bikes away from the kids who forget their helmets," School Resource Officer David Gatchell said yesterday. "This isn't something where we're looking to collect a hundred bikes. We don't want to seize bikes, but for the kids who repeatedly ignore the warnings, it will happen."
 
"Riding a bike - or scooter or in-line skates - without a helmet is illegal for anyone younger than 17 in Massachusetts. But Gatchell said he's noticed crowds of youngsters riding in his town without head protection. Bradford Jackson, Holliston school superintendent, said that outside the schools, he's seen an increase in bike riders, given the warm weather"
 
"The law allows police to hold the bicycles for as long as 15 days, but Gatchell said parents can reclaim them early if they show that their child has a helmet. Nancy King-Bolger, president of the Holliston Parent Teacher Student Association for the past two years, said she also has noticed that most Holliston kids, especially older teens, ride through the town centre without headgear."
 
"Parents of younger kids have more control because their children aren't riding that far from home. The earlier you get your child to put it on, the more likely the child will continue to wear the helmet when he or she gets older."
 
"King-Bolger said it wasn't easy getting her two boys to wear helmets. "I was the helmet witch. When my kids were younger and riding bikes and skateboarding downtown, I felt strongly that they wore helmets. This is a small village and I had my spies out there, asking other parents if they had seen my boys without helmets."
 
San Diego has also introduced a policy with regard to city schools and campus which includes confiscation:
 
"All students riding bicycles, skateboards, and/or scooters must wear helmets. Vehicle Code 21212 states that all minors under 18 must wear a helmet when operating a bicycle, skateboard, or scooter. Students caught in violation of the code are subject to fine. Correia is in support of student transit other than motorized vehicle, but must enforce a strict helmet policy. Students found on campus with bicycles, skateboards, or scooters without helmets will have their vehicle confiscated"
 
The States are due to debate the matter next week. The States of Jersey Police submission said that:
 
"The absence of registration markings and registered keeper requirements, aligned to motor vehicles, will present some enforcement difficulties."
 
As I said in my original blog, which also formed part of a submission to Scrutiny, I am not suggesting that a compulsory law on cycle helmets for children is a bad thing; far from it - I think the use of helmets is needed to prevent head injuries.
 
My concern is that by passing a law without adequate means of enforcement, the States are being foolish. This law, as it stands, is almost an encouragement for any young people to lie about their identity and their age, and their home if stopped by the police and given more than a caution. Do we want to encourage that kind of culture, in which law evasion albeit minor, might become habitual?
 
The police themselves realise that it is very difficult to enforce, and the police comment on policing priorities in this matter is a masterpiece of obscuration:
 
Do we envisage any problems policing this Law?

"Policing priorities are set on a monthly, weekly and daily basis, dependent on the nature of any given incident, through an intelligence led process that aligns threat  and risk with operational deployment. This legislation and any methods of enforcement would be considered amongst other policing priorities, which include responding to concerns raised by the public. Operational priorities feed off of that process."
 
"The SOJP also recognise the value of public support and cooperation and so would look to use the law as an educational tool and make sure that any enforcement methods remain proportionate to the incident or offence. The absence of registration markings and registered keeper requirements, aligned to motor vehicles, will present some enforcement difficulties"
 
What kind of priority can we give to Policing this proposed Law?
 
"I think we follow the answer given for question on problems policing this law. Priorities are set accordingly."

That tells us very little, but I suspect that reading between the lines, the degree of enforcement might just exceed that given to enforcement of litter laws.
 
There are alternatives to fines, and it is a shame that the focus primarily on Australia overlooked the situation in America, where greater imagination (in the face of the deficiency of a fine-based regime) has led to better ways of enforcement by means of confiscation.
 
References
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/108/4/1030.full
http://www.sydneycyclist.com/forum/topics/sue-abbott-s-bicycles-confiscated-by-sheriff?xg_source=activity
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/09/11/no_bike_helmet_lose_your_wheels/
http://onlineathens.com/stories/070400/new_0704000012.shtml
http://www.sandi.net/site/default.aspx?PageType=3&DomainID=7079&ModuleInstanceID=19685&ViewID=047E6BE3-6D87-4130-8424-D8E4E9ED6C2A&RenderLoc=0&FlexDataID=76352&PageID=20027

The Clarion Call of Unbelief

I don't know if I am simply more sensitive to matters, but it seems that there are lot more atheists about today who seem to have a passion for stridently announcing their unbelief.
 
I suppose the rot originally set in with Richard Dawkins, whose apogee was undoubtedly "The God Delusion". Having TV shows in which he lambasted faith, he then went on to turn an equally critical eye upon New Age believers, which is often a rather eclectic rag tag of beliefs. Vibrations, energy, Chakras, healing power, and many more matters come under that umbrella, which is dominant in bookshops, squeezing popular science down to single book cases.
 
Of course, there is nothing especially different from New Age and the varying kinds of folk-belief which have been part of our culture over the centuries. My great-grandmother, for example, was supposed to possess the power to charm warts away. I am generally neither a believer not a sceptic on those matters; I am, I suppose more of an observer of popular culture. If there is one trend I do not like, it is the increasing commodification of folk-beliefs. The New Age has become big business, and where that is the case, there is always room for exploitation.
 
It is interesting to look at Derren Brown. Like Richard Dawkins, Brown wears his atheist quite visibly, and sometimes quite stridently. But his motivation for exposing shysters, whether they be religious healers, or psychic mediums, is very different from Dawkins. When Brown exposed the bug bucks in religious healers in the USA, he was careful to approach Christian groups who also shared his concerns. He wanted to emphasis that he was not attacking religion, but those con-artistes who use religious beliefs as a means of duping people and exploiting them, often when at their most vulnerable.
 
But what is interesting about some arguments today is that the presenters mention that they are atheists, as if that is a guarantee that the argument must be correct. It is like saying: I am an atheist, I don't hold your religious beliefs, and therefore what I have to say is unbiased and objective, while what you have to say is not.
 
For example, to say in a political context, "As a European atheist, I will wholeheartedly support this piece of legislation" is to add something which not actually germane to debate, any more than anyone opposes something on the grounds that it is "contrary to God's teaching" is really telling us anything other than their own beliefs. Should a statement of personal beliefs be necessary, and can we even trust exactly what that might mean in such circumstances? Should Pagans begin their speeches by outlining the fact that they are followers of Pan? Do we really need to know this?
 
In a way it is like a vestigial form of the Marxist ideal of Utopia, whether according to Marxist theory, the revolution, not only brings about an altered state of society, but also an altered state of consciousness - false consciousness, which is propped up by religion, is banished, and the true state of affairs is seen by all.
 
What must surely matter is not that a journalist tells us that he is an atheist, for example, as if signalling that what he has to say will of necessity be iconoclastic, but whether his arguments have merit. If I am opposing the kind of Sharia law which we see enacted in some parts of the world, my argument should be to show how in removes freedom, and enslaves people.
 
Whether or not there are verses in the Koran or Hadith which justify, for example, death as a penalty for apostasy, is a matter for the Muslims to argue among themselves, just as Christians may argue about whether or not homosexuality is against their God's will by citing Biblical verses. But at the end of the day, citing religious authorities pulls the debate into the area of authority, and not argument, and that road is a dead end.
 
In fact it is rarely possible to argue against entrenched religious beliefs, and it is often equally possible to argue against entrenched atheist beliefs. The focus of the argument must be elsewhere, on the kind of groundwork laid down by Michael Sandel in political philosophy, in teasing apart the consequences and contradictions inherent in a position, and deconstructing why we think that a particular piece of legislation is good or bad. Sandel believes it is important that debate brings philosophy into the public arena so that "people find themselves wrestling with the dissonances within their own judgements. This is the moment of critical self-reflection that is the ultimate aim of philosophy."
 
And argument alone may not sway people, which is where the literary imagination can also be important. Part of the art of persuasion is to show people another point of view, and to enable them to visualise another point of view, in ways which they may not have perceived. Victor Hugo's' "Les Miserables" enables us to see a world which is manifestly unjust, although a degree of its force is lost because we no longer live in a world where a man could be sent to the galleys for stealing a loaf of bread, but it still contains powerful lessons about injustice. But what is surely needed is today's Hugo, someone to present strong imaginative pictures of injustices in society.

Earthshock

On 12 July 2014, an earthquake suddenly struck Jersey, about 4.2 magnitude, and it was like a small explosion in our office, as everything shook, and there was a bang. This is a reflection on that event. This poem uses the form of Rubaiyat to explore a mythology of quakes.
 
Earthshock
 
Came a loud bang and much shaking
Ground convulses with the quaking
The earth was not such solid rock
As if great giants were now waking
 
Perhaps this was a sign to shock
Earthquake tells us to take stock
Long we have despoiled the earth
And now we hear the warning knock
 
Perhaps a lesson from the earth
As if Earth Mother giving birth
And rips asunder in the making
Just a thought for what it's worth

 

Rolf Harris: Some Notes

Interviewer: What's the secret to your enduring popularity?
 
Rolf Harris: "I think it's because I'm honest and real onscreen. I talk the same way onscreen as off. It's the same person you meet on the street as on the screen, so people feel that they can trust me. They know where they stand with me."
 
Saturday nights was Grandstand, with the boring and interminable football scores read out, before the camera swung round, Doctor Who (which in those days was William Hartnell and Patrick Troughton), and some kind of variety show based around a presenter, such as Val Doonican, or Rolf Harris.
 
We grew up with Rolf, his wobble board, the didgeridoo and the stylophone, and the songs like "Two Little Boys", "Tie Me Kangaroo Down, Sport", "Sun Arise" and "Jake the Peg". There were massive paintings on the stage when he would tell a story and his catchphrase was always "Can you tell what it is yet?"
 
He was part of our childhood, far more than Jimmy Savile, who always seemed a very strange individual. Rolf, on the other hand, seemed almost like a friend of the family, invited into living rooms on television up and down the land.
 
Writing in the Telegraph in 2011, Rebecca Tyrrel wrote that
 
"He is a man so guileless and innocent and unsullied that he couldn't see the smutty innuendo lurking within the title of his most famous, all time, blockbuster-hit single - 'Tie Me Kangaroo Down Sport'. Jake the Peg was a man with an extra leg to Rolf - nothing more or less, nothing to giggle at. Smut and Rolf just don't go together - smut and Rolf is an oxymoron."
 
But now, he has been has been found guilty of 12 counts of indecently assaulting four girls in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. It turns out that he was not "guileless and innocent and unsullied" after all.
 
As Alison Phillip, writing in the Daily Mirror, comments:
 
"Jimmy Savile. Yes, everyone thought he was a total weirdo from the distance of their TV screen. Stuart Hall? Yep, all the signs of a serial sleaze ball. Max Clifford? About as surprising as rain in June. But Rolf Harris? Now this truly was shocking."
 
"When Operation Yewtree cops made their arrest of this national treasure there was a real sense that this time they had got it wrong. Tragically, we now know the police had it absolutely right and the lovable entertainer was one of the nastiest, most duplicitous types of pervert."
 
Why did he do it? The article by Rebecca Tyrell, written before his fall from grace, before he was even being investigated, is helpful here because it allows us insights into his strange upbringing:
 
"That 1974 TV Times interview is quite so shocking and revealing. In an article headlined "Sooner or later Rolf Harris must tie his kangaroo down", Rolf reveals, 'I grew up in the belief that sex was dirty. It was spoken of only behind the boy's lavatory at school or written with chalk on a wall. All the external freedom I had as a child couldn't overcome it: inside me it was like a prison. When I was ten or 11 my mother decided I should see her naked to let me know it was all natural and everything - and we had baths together.'"
 
Going from a culture of repression when sex was regarded as dirty and shameful, to taking baths with his mother naked must have surely contributed to the part of himself that he kept hidden. In particular, one of the strongest taboos in almost any culture is that of incest, of having sexual feelings for your mother, and yet his strange upbringing had his mother reveal herself as a sexual object.
 
As Peter Conrad noted:
 
"Since she had seemingly encouraged such intimacy, Rolf reacted in the same way when he saw her in a swimsuit she had knitted, with a fringe of tassels below the waist. In the water, the dangling strands swelled up, which prompted him to say, 'They look like pubic hairs.' Affronted, his mum belted him hard across the face."
 
The messages that sex was dirty, and something to be kept secret, but was a secret pleasure was something that he probably learnt from these contradictory experiences. It is known that some people who have been abused, mistreated or neglected develop negative feelings and beliefs about themselves and others. Sexually molesting others can be a form of control, and regaining self-image over a hostile world.
 
But it is not the whole story. Children who are abused quite often become child abusers themselves, but Clare Rayner survived her childhood to be strongly against child abuse. Norman Wisdom was physically and brutally abused by his father, and yet he survived, taking the experience, and channelling it into his pathos when on screen. He never was violent with his children.
 
What turns one person into a monster? As the judge stated, there was no expression of remorse, and not was there any outburst protesting his innocence. It was more like acceptance that the game was up, and he had failed in his attempt to have his witnesses discredited.
 
Most of us have some degree of moral code, what Freud termed the superego, but it appears that there is no indication that people like Rolf Harris feel that what they are doing is wrong. They know it is illegal, so they become adept at hiding it. However it begins, one thing seems certain. Like the concentration camp guard who gradually and unconsciously becomes desensitised to his own wrong doing, sex offenders are less and less likely to feel any remorse or guilt.
 
The Harborview Center for Sexual Assault & Traumatic Stress looks at this, and describes different ways in which sex offenders deal with their offences:
 
"Denial is used by offenders to avoid facing the consequences of their actions. Denial means that offenders refuse to admit to others or sometimes even to themselves that they have committed sexual assaults. They may say, "It's a lie. I never did it," or "That wasn't really rape, she agreed to it."

"Rationalizing involves blaming the victim, other people or circumstances. Typical thoughts are, "It wasn't my fault, she led me on", "he didn't fight back" or "I didn't know what I was doing, I had too much alcohol." These are ways of placing responsibility on someone or something else.

"Minimizing is used by offenders to deny the seriousness of the acts or the harm done to the victims. "It wasn't that bad - he liked it," or "I didn't really hurt her." By minimizing their actions, offenders try to make it seem as though what they did was not such a big deal.

These all involve self-justification, means of stilling any conscience; they are coping mechanisms for dealing with the fact that the offender has done something wrong. But of course they know it is wrong, which is why they conceal it, and ensure that they cannot be easily caught.
 
Why did he do it? As one article on sex offenders notes:
 
"Typically, it's not just one thing that leads up to sex offences, it's a series of decisions and positions that the offender was in that led to this point."
 
His background certainly can't have helped, but repression of emotions - "boys don't cry" - was part of the culture back then, even more than it is today. And alongside the messages from school that sex was something dirty, was the heyday of free love and the swinging sixties, a culture where hedonism was given reign, and sexuality was something much looser, more easily available. It was against this kind of background that more perverse sexual activity could be camouflaged, as with Jimmy Saville, because there was a perception that sex was more readily available, and birth control meant it could also be liberated from procreation. Against a time when pop stars, DJs, soap opera actors, and other celebrities could take advantage of the young women eager to participate in a liberated lifestyle, the sexual offender like Harris could operate almost invisibly. Who would notice him?
 
The impression he gave, of everyone's favourite uncle, of cuddly Uncle Rolf, kind with animals, was in part true; this was as the judge said, a Jekyll and Hyde character. As Jekyll, he entertained, made people laugh, drew paintings, sang songs, but this also provided opportunities for Hyde to be there, concealed, waiting for the opportunity that he knew would arise.
 
That is why it was always more of a shock when he was convicted. Jimmy Saville, by contrast, always came across as strange, and somehow creepy, even when presenting "Jim'll Fix It".
 
Jekyll and Hyde is a good way of grasping the essentials of the case. Jekyll lets Hyde out, and enjoys the thrill that comes from his experience as Hyde, but eventually, Hyde comes to dominate, and can control when he wants to be released. The alter ego becomes dominant.
 
Today's society, where even children sitting on Father Christmas is considered to be something of a risk, has a much greater awareness of predatory sexual offenders, and the background culture is one where one-night stands, while they may still occur, are not openly part of the culture, and highly visible as back in the sixties.
 
That's not to say that monsters might not arise, but we are more watchful and mindful of them when they do. In a way, the process of safeguarding has also removed the innocence that society once had for children. Sitting on Father Christmas, or taking photos of children at a nativity play, are all bound up with risk assessment, and that is the price we pay for our concerns about what has slipped by in the past.
 
The problem comes when the monster in our midst is also a conjuror, and all the safeguards we have in place mean that we only look one way; the clever conjurer can see where we look, and know where the gaps in our vision are, and by all accounts, sometimes operating in full view of an audience, this seems to have been what Rolf Harris did, making use of misdirection. Even some people who had worked with him did not see any sign of that, and could not believe they might have been hoodwinked.
 
Fundamentally, behaviour can become addictive, and sexual offenders display a marked inability to give up that particular addiction. It is not surprising, because as Freud pointed out, libido is one of the great driving forces within our psyche. The literature shows the risk of recidivism is high, but what we can perhaps be thankful for is that even when Rolf Harris is released, his high profile will mean he will not have the relative anonymity of the average offender.
 
References
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/4726276/A-portrait-of-Rolf-Harris.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/shock-truth-rolf-harris-predator-3791217
http://metro.co.uk/2008/10/15/five-questions-for-rolf-harris-33955/
http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2014/july/1404178677/peter-conrad/inside-strange-world-rolf-harris
http://www.portagepath.org/shlibbu/community/CommunityPwaysSummer05SexOffender.pdf
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/the-royal-show-that-unmasked-rolf-harris-as-a-child-abuser/story-e6frg6n6-1226974449463?nk=968a678819ef1e87a6cf9afc60f73181
https://depts.washington.edu/hcsats/PDF/infobrochures/sexual_offenders.pdf

May Retrospective

A look back at my top blog posts for the month in May, according to Google Statistics on my blog: It is a little later than usual! Links and a few extracts to whet the appetite, or not, as the case may be. I always find it interesting to see what rises to the top of the lists, and sometimes something from further back, or even a year ago, can resurface.
 
Saturday Limericks
 
Up to the top again, my post on Limericks. Here's the Postman Pat one:
 
There once was a small cat called Jess
Whose fur was a black and white mess
And she went in a van
With a funny old man
It was Postman Pat, as you'd guess!
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/03/saturday-limericks.html
 
States of Jersey Development Company: Review of Accounts
 
An analysis of their latest released accounts.
 
"Certainly the statement by Lee Henry - 'It remains the position today based on independent professional advice that the JIFC scheme will generate a net return in the order of £50 million for the public.' - begs the question - when?"
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/05/states-of-jersey-development-company.html
 
Coming up in the States
 
Various, including the proposition to elect the Chief Minister by Island wide vote.
 
"It may seem plodding at times, and frustrating, but consensus politics is not mediocre, except in the sense of the "aurea mediocritas", the golden mean of Horace. Ministerial government has created an executive and a class of political outsiders, I believe that anything which widens that gap, and makes it a yawning chasm is bad for Jersey."
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/05/coming-up-in-states_13.html
 
Deconstructing A Comment
 
A tongue in cheek look at PPCs reply to Eddie Noel's proposal to keep States free parking at Pier Road, and not return it to Snow Hill.
 
The Committee accepts that the public need for accessible and convenient spaces in St. Helier overrides that of States members' needs; however, it also acknowledges that States Members have a civic duty to perform and should not be hindered in doing so.
 
Translation: States members need perks. They are important people, you know.
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/05/deconstructing-comment.html
 
Could it be time the JDC curtailed its lofty ambitions?
 
A guest posting by Dave Cabeldu.
 
"To date £4m has been spent on the Esplanade proposals without a penny of income yet being evident anywhere on the horizon. The JDC directors have received emoluments of £400,000 in salaries plus 142,000 in bonuses!"
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/05/could-it-be-time-jdc-curtailed-its.html
 
Stinking Bishop and a Wake Up Call
 
At the end of the Wallace and Gromit film, Wallace lies almost fatally dying after a fall until Gromit revives him with a sniff of "Stinking Bishop" cheese.
 
There was a degree of upset not unlike sniffing that cheese caused by the Anglican Bishop of Willesden, Greater London, England, putting a comment on Peter Ould's blog. In it, among other matters, Bishop Pete Broadbent commented on the case of HG, and "the dull and witless way that the Dean handled things"
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/05/stinking-bishop-and-wake-up-call.html
 
Jersey Historic Abuse Inquiry: Guest Posting
 
Guest posting by Carrie Modral:
 
"This is a plea for all abuse victims in Jersey to please come forward and tell your story to the COI. Each of you have a story to tell, let your story be heard and recorded in Jersey's history for all time! Please don't be nervous about coming forward, the team are compassionate and caring, they want to hear what you have to say and you can ask to remain anonymous. Each and every one of you are part of a big jigsaw, please help me to them to piece that jigsaw together and get the true picture."
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/05/jersey-historic-abuse-inquiry-guest.html
 
The Bald Truth: A Global Brand
 
Still popular, my March posting on "Bald Truth" people across the world.
 
"Nobody believes the official spokesman... but everybody trusts an unidentified source."
 
Byzantine Interim Episcopal Oversight?
 
Byzantine: excessively complicated, typically involving a great deal of administrative detail.
 
A look at the convoluted oversight arrangements with the Bishop of Dover and the Anglican Churches in Jersey and Guernsey
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/05/byzantine-interim-episcopal-oversight.html

 

And so to Bed…

Every evening I put up a quote on Facebook to end the day on, with the time old form found in the diary of Samuel Pepys. Here is another selection.
 
And so to bed...quote for tonight is from the Dalai Lama:
 
Many of our problems are created by ourselves based on divisions due to ideology, religion, race, resources, economic status or other factors. The time has come to think on a deeper, more human level and appreciate and respect our sameness as human beings.
 
And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Herman Hesse:
 
A longing to wander tears my heart when I hear trees rustling in the wind at evening. If one listens to them silently for a long time, this longing reveals its kernel, its meaning. It is not so much a matter of escaping from one's suffering, though it may seem to be so. It is a longing for home, for a memory of the mother, for new metaphors for life. It leads home. Every path leads homeward, every step is birth, every step is death, every grave is mother.
 
And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Dietrich Bonhoeffer:
 
Time is the most precious gift in our possession, for it is the most irrevocable. This is what makes it so disturbing to look back upon the time which we have lost. Time lost is time when we have not lived a full human life, time unenriched by experience, creative endeavor, enjoyment, and suffering. Time lost is time not filled, time left empty.
 
And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Mark Haddon:
 
On the fifth day, which was a Sunday, it rained very hard. I like it when it rains hard. It sounds like white noise everywhere, which is like silence but not empty.
 
And so to bed... quote for tonight is from T.H. White:
 
There is a thing called knowledge of the world, which people do not have until they are middle-aged. It is something which cannot be taught to younger people, because it is not logical and does not obey laws that are constant. It has no rules.
 
And so to bed.. quote for tonight is from Brian Andreas:
 
That was the day the ancient songs of blood and war spilled from a hole in the sky
And there was a long moment as we listened and fell silent in our grief
and then one by one,
we stood tall
and came together
and began to sing of life and love and all that is good and true.
 
And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Paulo Coelho:
 
He was able to understand one thing: making a decision was only the beginning of things. When someone makes a decision, he is really diving into a strong current that will carry him to places he had never dreamed of when he first made the decision.
 
And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Leo Buscaglia:
 
Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a
listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all
of which have the potential to turn a life around.
 
 

The Intangible Aspects of Marriage

Today is the day when the issue of Civil (Same Sex) Marriages is debated in Jersey, or delayed by an amendment by Senator Ian Le Marquand.
 
I have now written three blog postings on same-sex marriage and this will be the last for the time being. The three others can be seen at:
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/ian-le-marquands-red-herrings.html
The Church of England and Same Sex Marriage - A Briefing Note
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/same-sex-civil-marriage-in-jersey.html  
The Quaker View on Marriage
 
http://tonymusings.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/marriage-lines.html  
A history of marriage and how its definition has changed over the centuries
 
In this final blog on the subject, I'd like to look at two issues - one which might be deemed sociological, and one linguistic.
 
Sociological Aspects of the Term Marriage
 
One of the questions I have heard posed is this: can you tell me what legal disadvantages there are for civil partners rather than married civil partners?
 
I would say that the main change is what might be termed an social disadvantage.
 
A civil partnership is primarily a legal matter, it is like other legal arrangements that may be associated but do not form part of marriage, such as pre-nuptial agreements - it is concerned with legal rights of partners.
 
A civil marriage, by contrast, is concerned with the relationship of two people, and a declaration of love between each other, in addition to the legal arrangements that are binding on the participants. It involves words as a necessary pledge - not the case with a civil partnership.
 
Marriages are solemnized by saying a prescribed form of words. Civil partnerships are registered by signing the civil partnership document, with no words required to be spoken.
 
The sociological aspect is dealt with in depth by Professor Ralph Wedgwood. He a professor of philosophy at the University of Southern California.  He notes that the meaning of marriage must come from generally shared understandings about what married life is normally (although not always like), and he is worth quoting at length:
 
"These assumptions seem to include the following: normally, marriage involves sexual intimacy (which in heterosexual couples often leads to childbirth); it involves the couple's cooperation in dealing with the domestic and economic necessities of life (including raising children if they have any); and it is entered into with a mutual long-term commitment to sustaining the relationship."
 
"Which elements of this social meaning are most important? To answer this question, we need to see what benefits are created by institutions that possess a social meaning of this kind. I propose that the crucial benefit is roughly this: by marrying, a couple can give a signal to their community that they wish their relationship to be viewed in the light of these generally shared assumptions about what married life is like. The rest of the community is not obligated to interpret the couple's relationship in the light of these assumptions; but because marriage is such a familiar and generally understood institution, virtually the whole community will be able to understand the signal that the couple is sending."
 
"In this way, marriage's social meaning makes it possible for couples to communicate information about their relationships in a particularly effective way. This is important because people do not only care about tangible benefits (such as money or health care or the like); they care about intangible benefits as well. In particular, people care deeply about how they are regarded by others - which inevitably depends on the information about them that is shared in their community."
 
"It seems clear that, while the theoretical arguments for same-sex marriage often focus on legal claims, the actual conception of many same-sex couples is broader and includes this social meaning. This broader conception lies behind the emotional appeals that same-sex marriage proponents have so often made, but there is also a more theoretical case to be made as well. Many same-sex couples have the very same interest in having access to an institution that has this social meaning as opposite-sex couples have, affording them the intangible benefit of being able to signal to their community that they wish their relationship to be interpreted in the light of these generally shared assumptions. "
 
"Given that, it must be unjust for the state to deny same-sex couples the right to marry when this right is made available to other couples who have precisely the same interest in having it."
 
Linguistic
 
The situation we find ourselves in is a very strange one indeed. Unfortunately no one has come up with any appropriate name - apart from "civil marriage" - which carries the same weight in terms of meaning. As quite a chunk of Europe - Belgium, Denmark,France, Iceland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal,Spain, Sweden and of course recently the UK, have now adopted same-sex marriage laws, this is something which we will have to come to terms with - for instance, a UK same sex couple, legally married in the UK, would be entitled to describe themselves as "married" on holiday in Jersey.  It will not be long, I think, before TV soap operas and popular literature will start to make this mainstream.
 
Words do change meanings over time, and sometimes by means of legislation. I think we will see globally a period of unsettledness, where terms are sought to distinguish between different forms of marriage. I agree that no matter what we call it, same-sex marriages will not be the same as opposite-sex marriages to people who do not see them as the same.
 
The consequence of this is that as "marriage" becomes a term applicable to gay couples, those who oppose such unions will either add an adjective or use a different word altogether to distinguish them from what they consider proper unions, and even those who accept such unions may also seek to discriminate in some way between different types of marriage.
 
Emerging linguistic evidence in the USA suggests that a variety of forms are entering the language, some of which have prejudices embedded, and some of which are fairly neutral in terms of words used. Some people are using terms such as "gay marriage" and "real marriage" or "gay marriage" and "straight marriage" while others are using more value neutral terms such as homosexual marriage" and "heterosexual marriage" or "same sex marriage" and "opposite sex marriage".
 
This is unsettling, and linguistic change, enforced by legislation, can cause a good deal of anxiety. But language is remarkably adaptive, and I am sure that words will be found to describe the new situation which certainly prevails in the UK, parts of the USA, and some other countries in Europe. We should not allow anxieties over terms to stand in the way of this legislation.
 
A significant change which has also taken place in our culture is the realisation that gender matters in language, and language should be reframed to be inclusive. Notably, the notion that "man" as a term encompassed woman is no longer the case, and it is seen that, in fact, the use of the tem "man" as a synomym for both men and women in language embedded a cultural prejudice which provided sufficitient linguistic ambiguity to demean women.
 
When Rousseau wrote "men are born free", he actually meant just men, not women, and this is hidden in the inclusive nature of the term "man". The American declaration of Independence that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" allowed room for women to be second class citizens, while at the same time sounding as if it was inclusive.
 
I think that most of us would be careful with language today, and however clumsy it may make sentences, would prefer a form of inclusive language to that which can be found in older literature, even in the early post-war period. We are more sensitive to the fact that "man" cannot be assumed to be "man and woman". The linguistic landscape has changed.
 
I suspect that something very similar will happen with the word "marriage" in the context of our neighbours, and especially, given the dominance of the UK media on our culture, with regard to the English language. That change in meaning is not something which we can easily isolate ourselves from, regardless of whether or not changes are made to legislation
 
The Oxford English Dictionary, which reflects current linguistic usage, notes that "marriage" is defined as:
 
The condition of being a husband or wife; the relation between persons married to each other; matrimony. The term is now sometimes used with reference to long-term relationships between partners of the same sex.
 
As can be seen here, linguistic change is already happening, whether we like it or not. Delaying legislation will not alter the linguistic landscape, as language is too amorphous to be restricted by prescription, despite the best attempts of the 18th and 19th century grammarians.
 
References
Ralph Wedgewood's full piece can be found online in various places, and one is:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/24/marriage-meaning-and-equality/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
Also see:
http://myweb.facstaff.wwu.edu/wasserr/360/wedgwood.pdf

 

Ian Le Marquand's Red Herrings

Ian Le Marquand has recently raised a number of important questions about same-sex marriages, and in particular, what effect that would have on the Church of England in Jersey. While I think the Senator is right to raise these issues, his presentation of them seems to ignore the fact that they were both raised and dealt with by the framing of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013.

In fact, most of what he appears to be asking for consultation and answers about seems to have been dealt with during the process of implementing the English marriage laws and I can see no reason why the same restrictions and safeguards should not apply in Jersey.

For a licensed reader in the Church of England, he seems to have read very little on this matter, as he does not seem to show any awareness of the copious information available to him, and which I have put further down this posting.  He seems to have ignored the fact that the Church of England in the UK is just as bound up with the State as an established church regarding marriage, and that these issues were dealt with in the relevant laws. It is absurd to present matters as if these had not already been the subject of discussion and legislative safeguards which any Jersey legislation can adopt as a model.

In short, he presents a series of red herrings, which would make sense if we were dealing with a “tabular rasa”, a blank slate, on these matters. But because England has dealt with these matters, it is clear that Jersey can do so just as easily. We have no need to re-invent the wheel.

I cite below links, and extracts from those links, which are particularly pertinent to the matter of the Church of England as an established church.

Other matters regarding education, for example, have also been raised and discussed – I add a very short link here to show the matters that were raised for consideration. I leave the reader to search out those discussions.

http://www.churchofengland.org/our-views/marriage,-family-and-sexuality-issues/same-sex-marriage/same-sex-marriage-and-the-church-of-england-an-explanatory-note.aspx

Because the Canon Law of the Church of England is also part of the public law of the land and cannot be in conflict with statute law, it is important that any legislation for same-sex marriage makes it clear that it does not apply to marriage according to the rites of the Church of England. The legislative drafting of what is needed for the Church of England is necessarily unique because of that; and because Church of England clergy normally have a legal duty to marry people by virtue of their office.

The Government, in accepting that the legal effect of the Canons of the Church of England need to be preserved (in line with its assertions about protection of religious liberty), have committed to drafting legislation on same sex marriage accordingly.

Any change to the Church of England's doctrine and practice of marriage would require legislation by the Church's General Synod.  In addition to an Amending Canon that redefined the nature of marriage such a legislative package would also involve the General Synod passing a Measure (the General Synod's equivalent of an Act of Parliament) that altered both the statute law concerning marriage according to the rites Church of England and the marriage service in the Book of Common Prayer.

http://www.churchofengland.org/media-centre/news/2014/02/house-of-bishops-pastoral-guidance-on-same-sex-marriage.aspx

The effect of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013

The effect of the legislation is that in most respects there will no longer be any distinction between marriage involving same sex couples and couples of opposite genders. The legislation makes religious as well as civil same sex weddings possible, though only where the relevant denomination or faith has opted in to conducting such weddings. In addition, the legislation provides that no person may be compelled to conduct or be present at such a wedding.

The Act provides no opt in mechanism for the Church of England because of the constitutional convention that the power of initiative on legislation affecting the Church of England rests with the General Synod, which has the power to pass Measures and Canons. The Act preserves, as part of the law of England, the effect of any Canon which makes provision about marriage being the union of one man with one woman, notwithstanding the general, gender free definition of marriage. As a result Canon B30 remains part of the law of the land.

When the Act comes into force in March it will continue not to be legally possible for two persons of the same sex to marry according to the rites of the Church of England. In addition the Act makes clear that any rights and duties which currently exist in relation to being married in Church of England churches do not extend to same sex couples.

http://www.churchofengland.org/our-views/marriage,-family-and-sexuality-issues/same-sex-marriage/same-sex-marriage-and-the-church-of-england-an-explanatory-note.aspx

In her statement to the House of Commons on 11th December on the Government's proposals for Equal Marriage, the Secretary of State said:

"Because the Church of England and Wales have explicitly stated that they do not wish to conduct same-sex marriages the legislation will explicitly state that it would be illegal for the Churches of England and Wales to marry same-sex couples. Mr Speaker, this provision recognises and protects the unique and Established nature of these churches. The church's canon law will also continue to ban the marriage of same-sex couples. Therefore, even if these institutions wanted to conduct same sex marriage, it would require a change to primary legislation at a later date and a change to canon law. Additional protection that cannot be breached."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27083764

The law prohibits the Church of England from performing same-sex weddings.

http://www.churchofengland.org/our-views/marriage,-family-and-sexuality-issues/same-sex-marriage.aspx

The Archbishop of York raised questions about whether the definition of all marriages must change in order to accommodate the desire of same-sex couples to marry

The Bishops of Ripon and Leeds and Leicester sought assurances that schools of a religious character, including Church of England schools, would have legal clarity about the teaching of marriage according to the tenets of the faith.

The Bishop of Leicester also argued for measures to support freedom of speech for those who continue to hold and express a belief about traditional marriage.

The Bishop of Guildford raised questions and concerns about the place of fidelity and the position of children in relation to parents in same-sex marriages

Same-Sex Civil Marriage in Jersey: The Quaker View

'You will say,' George Fox is reported as declaring in 1652, 'Christ saith this, and the apostles say this; but what canst thou say? Art thou a child of Light and hast walked in the Light, and what thou speakest, is it inwardly from God?'
 
Ahead of next week's debate, I'm reprinting the letter sent to the JEP by the Quakers in favour of the proposition; it shows that not every religious group in Jersey is against the idea that same-sex couples should be able to have a civil wedding (that is, a wedding outside of a church, with no religious elements).
 
The Quaker's in the UK were also supportive of legislation there, and have some useful documents relating to this, which can be found here:
 
http://www.quaker.org.uk/we-are-but-witnesses  
http://www.quaker.org.uk/sites/default/files/We-are-but-witnesses.pdf  
http://www.quaker.org.uk/files/The-Christian-theology-and-history-of-marriage.pdf  
 
Of these, here are a few selections. From the 1963 publication, "Towards a Quaker View of Sex":
 
"Surely it is the nature and quality of a relationship that matters: one must not judge by its outward appearance but by its inner worth. We see no reason why the physical nature of a sexual act should be the criterion by which the question whether or not it is moral should be decided. An act which expresses true affection between two individuals and gives pleasure to them both, does not seem to us to be sinful by reason alone of the fact that it is homosexual."
 
Quoting this at the time of the Marriages (Same Sex Couples) Bill, Baroness Brinton said:
 
"Quakers see God in everyone, and all commitments to relationships as of equal worth. So I am pleased that the Quakers have said publicly that they will opt into the registration arrangements and carry out equal marriage with enthusiasm."
 
And their discussions hark back to their founder George Fox, who said:
 
"For the right joining in marriage is the work of the Lord only, and not the priests or magistrates; for it is God's ordinance and not man's and therefore Friends cannot consent that they should join them together: for we marry none; it is the Lord's work, and we are but witnesses."
 
They have also examined the biblical basis for marriage, and come to very different conclusions from those of the Jersey Evangelical Alliance:
 
"Scripture has been cited in opposition to same sex marriage: first, as condemning same sex relationships; second, as ruling out the possibility that 'marriage' can be understood as applying to same sex couples. As regards the condemnation of same sex relationships, the key texts are Genesis 19, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.14 It seems clear to us that none of these prohibit same sex relationships per se. Rather, they either assume heterosexual marriage, condemn the abuse of power exhibited in particular same sex relationships or incorporate homosexuality within a purity code that is not generally regarded as binding."
 
http://www.quaker.org.uk/sites/default/files/We-are-but-witnesses.pdf
 
From Cathy Eglington, clerk, Jersey Quaker Meeting..
 
In considering changing the law to allow same sex marriages, we would like you to know that Quakers in Jersey would welcome this change to the law.
 
Quakers see the light of God in everyone and that leads us to say that all committed, loving relationships are of equal worth and so Quakers in Jersey wish to celebrate same-sex marriage in the same way.
 
The civil partnerships law is a legal contract, not a spiritual one. That is why we hope the change in the law, so that same-sex marriages can be celebrated within a couple's worshipping community, will be passed in Jersey.
 
We do not seek to impose this on anyone else. For Quakers, this is an issue of religious freedom.
 
Quaker marriage is not open to all, but is for members and those who, while not in formal membership, are in unity with its religious nature and witness.
 
Some of us were at Quaker Yearly Meeting in York in 2009 when over 2,000 Quakers agreed to seek a change in the law so that same-sex marriages can be prepared, celebrated, witnessed, reported to the state and recognised as legally valid, without further process, in the same way as opposite-sex marriages are celebrated in Quaker meetings.
 
Quakers consider that they should be able to follow the insights of their membership in celebrating life-long committed relationships between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, in exactly the same way as they currently recognise the marriage of opposite-sex couples.
 
Quakers in Britain welcomed the Marriage (same sex couples) Act which received Royal Assent on 17 July 2013 and we hope that the law will be passed allowing same-sex marriages in Jersey.

Stolen Childhoods

Today's poem is not an easy one, it is about Rolf Harris, who many of us grew up with; he was part of our childhood, but all the time there was a darker side behind the man. Why does one man (or woman) become a saint, and another a monster? I don't think we can always tell.

I think chance plays a large part, and how we make choices, even choices when we were younger, against our background. Clare Rayner suffered an abusive childhood, but she reacted against abuse. Norman Wisdom was beaten, but he took that and channeled it into pathos. The notion that our childhood shapes us is true, but so do our choices given that childhood.

But one think I am sure of: saints tend to shine out, and be visible. Monsters remain in the shadows, and when they do appear, they disguise themselves well.

Stolen Childhoods
 
Everybody's favourite, hidden past
Can you tell what it is yet? Or who?
Some closure for his victims at last
As past misdeeds are in open view
 
Innocence stolen, scars left behind
No sun arise early in that morning
And yet he seemed so nice and kind
And few saw any signs for warning
 
Jekyll and Hyde, the darkness inside
While beaming bonhomie shining out
A crueler face, he managed to hide
Of that there can now be no doubt
 
We welcomed this man into our home
Stolen childhoods where he did roam

Guest Reply by Senator Paul Routier on Seasonal Workers and Registration Cards

Senator Paul Routier has responded to my post on "A Seasonal Registration Card" and has very kindly permitted me to post the contents of his email.

The original post can be read here:
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/07/a-seasonal-registration-card.html

Guest Reply by Senator Paul Routier

Dear Tony,

Thank you for your email.

Before I outline in detail my thoughts, I would mention that what has been missed by the reporting is that the card costs £35 for a person who has worked in Jersey before. As is often the case with seasonal workers, they return over a number of years. Furthermore, it is not something that has to be paid more than once, i.e. a worker can work in Jersey this season and pay for their card, and then use the card again next season without further charge. This may not detract from the points you raise, but does seem worth mentioning and means that the impact in future years will be lesser.

Having said that, my first thought on reading your email is that it is difficult to treat some industries different to others - both for practical reasons and on principle.

Notably, seasonal staff work in a wide range of businesses service tourists, for hotels, bars, restaurants, cafes, beach concessions, shops in town and elsewhere. It would involve some administration to decide precisely which business would attract the lower rate and allocate cards accordingly.  Furthermore, workers often arrive in Jersey for a season not being clear as to which business they will work for. That would present difficulties in administering differing fee levels. Of course, administrative difficulties can be resolved, but on principle, I question whether it is right that some short term workers should pay more than others.

Perhaps more fundamentally, however, the emphasis of our policies at the moment is very much one of supporting locally qualified people into work. While this is often challenging, the back to work programme offer considerable support, including financial incentives, for employers to take on local people. In this context, the registration fee is not inconsistent.

I hope this is a good insight into our thinking.

I would add that the policy was based on consultation, public engagement, and proper consideration. I would also emphasis, nevertheless, that comments and recommendations are always welcome and are seriously considered.

Thank you again for your time.

Kind Regards

Paul

Senator Paul Routier MBE

A Seasonal Registration Card?

The JEP reported recently on problems arising from the registration cards and the tourism industry:

"Everyone who now comes to the Island to work has to pay the £75 fee for the card issued under the Control of Housing and Work Laws that came into force last year. But industry leaders say that the charge is more than what it costs for a passport and many of those who have to pay are only in Jersey for a matter of weeks."

Now this seems to be to be an almost perfect example of what Karl Popper called the law of unintended consequences, that when you lay out a blueprint, and plan for some eventualities, there will often be unexpected consequences that had not been foreseen.

No one has yet come up with any solutions, and yet I can see an obvious one. Why not have a "seasonal registration card", say at £20 per employee, for anyone who is over here just for seasonal work? The card can be limited to just so many months from the start date on it, and if the employee returns, to ensure they are seasonal, a new card can be issued.

If, however, the employee decided to take a more permanent job, and stay in the Island, they would have to get a standard registration card at £75 on the expiry of their seasonal card. This would ensure the means of controlling immigration remained, while at the same time, allowing for seasonal workers.

Now I would suggest that this option be limited to tourism and farming, the two industries which employ seasonal staff. The reason for that is that property developers have also been known to bring in cheap outside labour to work on projects, but that is not seasonal, and would potentially damage the labour market - and property developers, if they want to do that, can certainly afford the full £75.

So the seasonal registration card would be a special concession with regard to specifically seasonal work, rather than just available to any business.

There is a model for this kind of situation, which while not exactly a perfect analogue, does provide a parallel. I can work in Jersey and bring my own car, and have UK number plates, which can be retained for a one year. But if I am resident here for more than one year, then I must register my vehicle immediately and change the foreign number plates for Jersey ones.

I think if not an exact parallel, it certainly allows a differentiation between the transient resident and the permanent one, and the same kind of idea could be incorporated into registration cards, suitably amending the law.

Having a "seasonal registration card" that allowed a worker to come for just the summer months, at a reduced cost of £20, would solve the problems faced by tourism and agriculture, while at the same time, the requirement to replace it with the existing registration card system (of £75) if resident for more tha those months would retain the controls needed for immigration.

References

http://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2014/06/29/work-fee-is-too-high-for-summer-staff/

Plemont Debate in Tweets

My last post on the Plemont debate is more or less that debate compressed into tweets. There is something exciting though, if you follow the debate by Twitter, because instead of the long winded speeches (apparently they were told to keep them short, but it did take most of the day), you have brevity and pace.

One somewhat belligerent Facebook poster will have to dine on humble pie tonight. He grumbled angrily online at the start of the debate:

"Think that they are going to listen.... It has to be bought by NT only, even if they have to borrow from the the states (us)..... by the time dust has settled on this saga, it will have cost over £10m.... anyone voting to buy this package unconditionally, will NOT BE GETTING MY VOTE AT THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION. .... and I would encourage others to do the same."

As there was one abstention, and 11 against, some of whom are not even in his district, he will be rather hard put to vote for anyone in the next election. He will be able to vote for Deputy Sean Power, who voted against it, and probably for none of the existing Senators!

As I predicted, the core of the debate was not to buy Plemont, which was pretty much a foregone conclusion, but how to fund it, and whether Senator Ozouf's mechanism was legitimate. Apparently, according to the Solicitor General, it was, which opens a whole can of worms by way of setting precedent for this kind of "money-go-round", and also suggest that money could have been funnelled in this way for the historical abuse inquiry if that indirect route had been suggested.

I still stand by my words in my last blog:

"It is not exactly money laundering, but it seems very close to that, moving money from one place to another to conceal its point of origin. It is certainly setting a dangerous precedent to allow 'earmarked funds' to be moved around by the Treasury Minister in such convoluted ways as to 'grab' the cash into other projects or intentions."

Notice, please, that perhaps unlike some others, certainly on Twitter, I never said it was money laundering but shared a family resemblance to that. I do choose my words carefully.

In the end, it was a tussle between the poetry and the prose, and the poetic won over the more prosaic. I think members realised that Philip Ozouf's mechanism for funding was not exactly satisfactory, but in the end, they took the pragmatic decision that it was better to look at the bigger picture, rather than worry too much about the murky mechanisms for getting there.

I do hope that schools organise trips to walk round the headland once it has been restored. There are certainly kids in town schools who never get out into the countryside much, and who have probably never ever visited Plemont. If Plemont is to be a legacy to our children, it must be a legacy that all Island children have the opportunity to visit, not just those who have the means to do so. Heritage must be for everyone, and only then will it be worth while.

Plemont Debate in Tweets

christianrmay @NatTrustJersey Members declare themselves in the States as the debate gets underway...

Channel103News 12 States Members declare an interest as members of the @NatTrustJersey at start of #plemont debate

DeputyTadier Plémont deb8 is 1 of the most important ever. Unfortunately, it will be dominated by legitimate concerns over the convoluted funding method

Athena_Kallias @DeputyTadier If any of them have an ounce of morality, they will vote for Plemont, I understand the implications of the funding method

nelsonpk75 @DeputyTadier I understand the point. The principal is whether to approve the grant, not where exactly the funds come from.

DeputyTadier @nelsonpk75 fundamentally disagree. The proposition is badly worded and PO has made it controversial with an inflammatory funding mechanism

CarolynLabey Wearing green. It's Plemont.

christianrmay Public in Public Gallery reminded by DB that Standing Orders prohibit clapping and other audible support of speakers during debate.

DeputyMacon Quite a full public gallery in the States today for the buying of Plémont proposition. The debate behind.

christianrmay Senator Bailhache succinctly lays out his Proposition for grant to NTfJ to purchase Plemont. Dept. Duhamel on his feet to give counter.

RussellLabey Senator Bailhache "it's the duty of the States to protect agricultural land"not alas in St Ouen with the contemptuous proposal for field 622

christianrmay Over @ChangeJersey there is a opinion article written by Christopher Harris of @NatTrustJersey on their position re Plemont. Take a look!

JEPnews 1/2 Environment Minister Rob Duhamel is the first to speak during today's #Plémont debate. He is opposing the move to help buy the land.

JEPnews 2/2 Deputy Duhamel says that according to the 'Jersey grapevine', another potential #Plémont buyer also wants to buy the site.

SamMezec Environment Minister says he has heard of a potential buyer for Plémont who wants to build just one house and give 95% back to nature.

christianrmay I think precedent being set using COCF (vicariously) as source of funds for Plemont will raise the most concern in the coming debate.

JEPnews Deputy Duahmel says he does not support using tax payers' money to help buy #Plémont because its not good 'value for money'.

christianrmay Members supportive f the purchase of Plemont but not in favour of the funding method - I can see this being repeated several times today.

seanpowerjersey Plemont debate started. The funding will be the main issue.

seanpowerjersey First time in 9 years in the States that I have seen so many lobbyists in the gallery

JEPnews Deputy Gerard Baudains supports the buying of #Plémont, but not the proposed indirect funding from the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund.

RicoSorda Housing Minister forgets to mention the funding #plemont cooking the books is not worth a mention. lol Carry on up the states.

Channel103News Environment Minister claims another buyer for #plemont is waiting in the wings and wants to build 1 house and return 95% to nature.

Channel103News Dep Baudains says he can't support #plemont purchase because cash confiscated from criminals will be used. 'Improper use of fund'

Channel103News Dep Andrew Green berates Environ Min for expressing a view against #plemont purchase and urges States to support it.

JEPnews St Helier Deputy Judy Martin says that most Islanders she's spoken to don't want the States
to spend £3.575 million to help buy #Plémont.

RicoSorda Deputy of St Martin supports cooking the books. What a government #plemont Carry on up the States @SamMezec

SamMezec Looks like funding mechanism for Plémont purchase is proving controversial. Unsurprising. Very strange method proposed.

christianrmay Dept. Martin highlights serious plight of St Clements residents who packed in so tightly they cant turn around without hitting each other.

christianrmay But, on a serious note, the issue arises again that the process of funding is 'fraud' or 'money laundering'.

JEPnews 1/2 St Helier Deputy Mike Higgins has questioned the lawfulness of using the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund to help buy #Plémont.

JEPnews 2/2 But the Solicitor General has ruled that the method outlined is lawful. #Plémont.

Channel103News SG has been quizzed about the lawfulness of using confiscated proceeds of crime for #Plemont purchase. Howard Sharp says it's ok.

JEPnews 1/2 Here's how the Treasury Minister has proposed to fund the States portion of the #Plémont purchase...

JEPnews £3.5m from Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund > new police station. £3.5m from that project > Chief Mins Dept > National Trust for Jersey.

JennBridge @JennBridge Look at the history of successful applications for moneys from the funds - very narrow & specific

christianrmay @JennBridge @JEPnews Relying upon de Smiths Judicial review of Administrative Action "If the actor has in truth used his power for the ½

christianrmay @JennBridge @JEPnews purposes for which it was conferred, it is thus immaterial that he was enabled to achieve a subsidiary object 2/2

JennBridge @christianrmay @JEPnews Indeed. So let's call it a "mechanism" then.

seanpowerjersey Yet again the debate on Plemont splits the public and the Assembly. Suspect this debate will win or lose on use of COCF funds.

seanpowerjersey Treasury and Treasurer are in an impossible position with Plemont funding. Can only imagine the discussion behind the scenes at CLMH

JennBridge @christianrmay @JEPnews As PO would say "If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck....."

JennBridge "Clapped out" is not parliamentary language but "on its last legs" is OK. Is there is list somewhere?

christianrmay @JennBridge less Wikipedia there is! UK gets as extreme as "Git" or "Tart". Canada much more fun with "trained seal" & "Canadian Mussolini"

Channel103News Dep Southern: Crime confiscation fund use for #plemont 'a fix and a fiddle' for Treasury Minister's 'pet project'

seanpowerjersey Southern: on Plemont; this is like bend it with Beckham except in this case (COCF funds ) bend it like Ozouf

JennBridge ...and yet when they were looking for funding for the CoI - no one suggested this type of "mechanism".

LeahFergusonITV Major sticking point in buying Plemont debate is where money is coming from. Treasury plan to use criminal confiscation fund to free up cash

LeahFergusonITV Treasury's idea of moving money from criminal fund to pay for Plemont in round about way dubbed 'money laundering' by some politicians.

JEPnews St Clement Constable Len Norman says he's had 20 or 30 emails, calls and letters that were evenly split on the move to help buy #Plémont.

JEPnews St Ouen Deputy James Reed was asked by the Deputy Bailiff earlier to remove a 'Love #Plémont' campaign card displayed on his desk.

JennBridge Deputy of St Ouen speaking. I have to disagree. Key difference is that Town Park is in the densest part of town with least open space.

DeputyTadier Deputy James read tells Health Minister to 'Get her act together.' @bbcjersey @itvchanneltv

SoJRingbinder I wish States Members would stop referring to Sen Maclean's ringbinder voting for the Town Park. I voted for the Town Park in my own right!

JEPnews It wasn't going to be long before someone suggested that offenders help clean up #Plemont. Constable Sadie Rennard says that could be done.

JEPnews St John Constable Phil Rondel managing to link his favourite topic - mains drains - to the #Plémont debate.
Tue, Jul 01 12:02:44 from Twitter Web Client

seanpowerjersey Flail rattling speech by Deputy of St. Ouen on supporting Plemont. Saliva deposits highly likely on bald dome of Deputy Green in front

Channel103News Const Rondel: Can't support #plemont purchase while 'middle Jersey is still hurting'

Channel103News States Members praised for a good debate so far, but now asked only to speak if they have something new to add.

bbcjersey Public gallery very busy, fifty plus people, who have been asked not to applaud or make other noise during debate on Plemont ^cs

bbcjersey Most of the members objecting are unhappy with how it would be funded. Fudge, fiddle and fix says Deputy Southern ^cs

bbcjersey But constable Len Norman is the first to say he believes it will go through

JennBridge @SimonCrowcroft makes a good point about the environmental problems of (re) introducing buildings/humans & pets e.g cats into the area.

christianrmay Proposal under Standing Order 84 to close the debate and move to vote likely in next 30mins now notice given

JEPnews Chief Minister Ian Gorst is speaking about legacy and asking Members to support #Plémont so it can become part of the Chamber's record.

seanpowerjersey Fairly certain that this Plemont proposition will go through now with a clear majority.

bbcjersey Senator Ozouf's funding proposal for Plemont is a good one, says Chief Minister

seanpowerjersey Treasury use and recommendation on use of COCF funds for Plemont is a very creative use of funds. Treasury and SG reluctant warriors here

JEPnews Environment Minister Rob Duhamel has 'left his heart behind' in opposing a plan to help buy #Plémont, Deputy John Young has said.

edwardjnoel Happy to support Plemont prop as 2 core issues now addressed, comp purchase and certainty of purchase price, hope those members ....1/2

edwardjnoel 2/2 hope those members who support Plemont 2day will support capital funding for fort regent in the next assembly when 2016/19 MTFP debated

JennBridge @johnyhil Deputy Young reminds the Chamber that we only spend 1% of Jersey's budget on the environment. He says "it's not an or it's an &".

TheVoiceJersey Aquiring #plemont thru a Robert Mugabe style land-grab was not palatable 2 most States Members. Will acquisition thru money laundering work?

Channel103News #plemont debate has broken for lunch. Back at 2.15pm.

lyndonfarnham I predict strong support for Proposition to assist @NatTrustJersey with funding to acquire the Plemont headland:

christianrmay Hoping to to hear @philipozouf speak on funding Plemont. Treasury found a viable & legal solution to an urgent demand for funds from COCF.

bbcjersey Make sure islanders with less ability to express their needs are heard, amid well educated Plemont debate - the Dean

bbcjersey If necessary I will look again at where to get the money for Plemont, but it must come from somewhere; Sen. Ozouf

christianrmay Treasury Minister @philipozouf makes it clear that it is not a binary choice between Plemont grant OR Healthcare.

hannahwalkerCI Treasury Min @philipozouf says he backs the plans to buy Plemont and says members should think of what the 'right thing is for Jersey'

JEPnews A brief pause in the #Plémont debate just now to find the off switch of a flickering light above Deputy Bailiff Willam Bailhache.

Channel103News Senator Le Gresley says tourists come to the island to see our coast & Plemont should be bought for the people of Jersey, and the tourists

christianrmay Proposition to close debate on Plemont and move to vote defeated 25 - 17. Debate continues.

JerseyJustice23 You've been warned States members ..Don't upset the Deputy Bailiff by making your own submissions to the assembly if he deems them irrelevant

bbcjersey Deputy le Herissier is tempted to change his mind and support Plemont plan, if he gets public access guarantees

hannahwalkerCI @NickLeCornu 'if we can find £3.5 million for Plemont, why can't we deal with poverty in the island?

Channel103News Senator Sir Philip Bailhache is now summing up. Vote on Plemont is imminent

seanpowerjersey Did not speak as everything has been said and everyone has made their minds up. Legacies like Plemont will come again with demands for funds

seanpowerjersey The next Plemont type legacy problem site may well be in St. Brelades Bay. Another clamour for public funds will no doubt happen again soon

JEPnews #Plémont vote coming in the next few minutes.

bbcjersey It was approved! Only eleven members voted against, 35 in favour - Plemont will be returned to nature! Cheers from the public gallery.

seanpowerjersey Assembly supported the Plemont site by a sizeable majority. Future approach to using public funds to acquire problem legacy sites unclear

seanpowerjersey 11 of us voted against Plemont and method of using COCF funds to assist NT Jersey in acquiring this legacy site of historic poor planning

LeahFergusonITV BREAKING: Jersey States votes FOR buying Plemont. 35 in favour, 11 against.

Channel103News States Members have voted to buy Plemont by 35 votes to 11, with one abstention

Plemont: The Day of Judgement Arrives

"I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak" (Matthew 12:36)

Well, today is the day that Plemont gets debated and possibly voted on, depending on how long the speeches are. There will be people meeting in the Royal Square to show support for the proposition, and certainly a degree of lobbying behind the scenes is likely to have taken place.

I'm still not happy with the rather devious re-routing of funds from the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund to pay for Plemont. I know that this is not happening directly, but as the sums involved in the transfer of funds to the Police HQ budget, and then the use of unused funds there to be returned to the Chief Minister's department exactly match, effectively it is a straight transfer from one place to another.

It is not exactly money laundering, but it seems very close to that, moving money from one place to another to conceal its point of origin. It is certainly setting a dangerous precedent to allow 'earmarked funds' to be moved around by the Treasury Minister in such convoluted ways as to 'grab' the cash into other projects or intentions - made worse still when those projects are sponsored or supported by the Minister himself.

And yet the solution probably lies within Philip Ozouf's hands, as he has just presented to the States, on 30th June 2014, a "Budget Management Report for the Period Ended 31st December 2013"

In the section entitled "Infrastructure Investments ", the report states that:

"During the 6 month period to 31st December 2013, the Minister approved the issuance of a £13,000,000 infrastructure investment from the Currency Fund to provide the States of Jersey Development Company with financing for part of the underground car park, subject to conditions (MD-TR-2013-0095). Note that at present it is not planned that this investment will proceed."

As Save Our Shoreline have noted, the car park has been put into mothballs for the time being, and the money allocated is not going to be used. Why not retract it, and use part of it for Plemont?

Why does the owner/developer want to sell at this point? I can't really see him motivated by some kind of benign altruism, for surely he would then gift the land. I think it is much more the case that the developer would prefer a return now, if he can get it, rather than incur capital cost of site clearance, and building new homes in a time of property slump.

The National Trust were able to secure a deal where the developer probably makes around 2- 3 million on his original investment, perhaps not as much as the sale of property - but he would have associated costs and perhaps loans to take out first to fund the project, with interested incurred on those.

Meanwhile, battle lines are drawn, and Deputy Rob Duhamel is surprisingly valuing the land in more economic terms than the Treasury Minister. He says:

 "At a cost of between £5,000 to £10,000 per vergee and by taking a mid-point figure of £7,500 per vergee, £3.575 million would in theory buy approximately 476 vergees of non-agricultural land. This is nearly 60 times the proposed built on area of the Plémont development (8 vergees) which is not already being returned to public accessible natural landscape. In contributing £3.575 million, it could be argued that the States are supporting the purchase of 8 vergees of non-agricultural land at an approximate cost of at least £446,000 per vergee. This sum excludes the contribution being made by the NTJ. This does not represent good value for money."

"There is some environmental benefit in the States supporting the National Trust for Jersey in purchasing the Plémont Holiday Village and adjoining land at a cost of £7.15 million. I am sure that in a perfect world, returning built land to its natural state would be welcomed by many islanders and by the Minister for Planning and Environment."

"However, I do not believe providing a grant of £3.575 million to return eight vergees of land on the North coast of the island to a natural state offers the island good value for money. Only a small number of islanders will benefit from the acquisition of this small and very expensive piece of land."

I think that the key factor in the debate will not be the purchase of Plemont, but how it is to be funded, and in particular - as it is the only proposal on the table - whether Philip Ozouf's suggestion will sway the House enough to establish what could be a very dangerous precedent, and moreover one which was rejected when similarly sourced funding for the Historical Abuse Enquiry was suggested.

By setting out only one option for funding the purchase of Plemont, and not keeping his options open, Philip Ozouf may have wrecked the very proposal he set out to support.

For other posts on Plemont, please see:

http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/06/plemont-some-thoughts.html
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/06/guest-post-on-plemont-by-michael-de-pre.html
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/06/guest-post-on-plemont-by-adam-gardiner.html

And Bob Hill's blog posting - with a debate in the comments at:

http://bobhilljersey.blogspot.com/2014/06/plemont-headland-contrived-debate.html
http://bobhilljersey.blogspot.com/2014/06/plemont-2-more-dirty-deeds-afoot.html

See also Mark Forskitt at:
http://st-ouennais.livejournal.com/169270.html

On the use of the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund not being available for the Historical Abuse Enquiry, see Voice for Children's blog at:
http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2011/02/cocf-could-be-used.html

And for my narrative poem on what Plemont could be, see
http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2014/06/plemont.html