Jersey Political Parties - and the New Law controlling them

http://www.jerseylaw.je/Law/display.aspx?url=LawsAdopted/Political_Parties_(Registration)_(Jersey)_Law_200-.htm

Are you aware that there is legislation in the pipeline regarding political parties in Jersey?

How it applies to loose coalitions of like minded people, I do not know. In fact, it is hard to see how loose coalitions on single issues (such as removal of GST from food) would constitute a political party.

But it seems to me that it is designed both to regulate against mismanagement, and to control the political process.

I think who ever drew it up should be referred to a therapist for counselling, as judging from its contents, they have serious psychological hang-ups on control issues.

Note, in particular, the following:

The party must have a name that does not exceed 6 words.

So no "Monster Raving Loony Jersey Party" then! Amazing that Britain allows such names, but Jersey is bent on controlling the names so much that they cannot allow it. The name must be vetted for approval too, just in case the powers that be do not like it. I cannot think of any restrictions quite as controlling as this in the UK.

The party must have a written constitution, one of the expressed objectives of which must be the endorsement of candidates for election as Senator, Deputy or Connétable.

Incredible that Jersey does not have a written constitution, but political parties must have. Incidentally, it suffers a charge of £1 per page in photocopying charges as part of the registration process; I suggest anyone submitting one uses Arial, 8 point or smaller.

The party must keep accounts.

A sensible measure against mismanagement, but why should parties have more restrictions than individuals? If parties can mismanage political expenses, so can individuals, especially with election spending? And is there enough of a "Chinese wall" to ensure that those opposed to the party cannot see all the details of the accounts?

Note, too that the registration of the party requires a fee to be paid.

A registered political party must not use or otherwise hold itself out as known by any name, or abbreviation of its name, other than the name or abbreviation (if any) that is registered for it.

Quite how the Conservative Party - otherwise known popularly as the Tory Party - or the Liberal Democrats - LibDems - would deal with this if it was in place in the UK is unknown. It seems a draconian measure invoked to restrict what parties are called, and ignores the way in which the public may well invent their own abbreviations which will become part of the common discourse. It reminds me more than anything else of how some French purists tried to stop the importation of loan words into French. It is, I think, completely unworkable. If the public discourse uses a nickname, there is a prohibition on the party using the self-same nickname? Sheer, unworkable madness, that could only come from a legal mind totally divorced from the realities of living in the real world.

The application must be signed by not less than 20 persons.

So much for the "Gang of Four" who broke away from the Labour party (David Own, Shirley Williams, Bill Rogers, Roy Jenkins)! Obviously this is a measure to stop Darius Pearce with his almost one-man "Jersey Conservative Party", but it seems unduly restrictive.

---

Selected parts of the Law for your perusal:

A LAW to provide for the registration of political parties who wish to endorse candidates for election as a Senator, Deputy or Connétable, and for connected purposes

2 Requirements for political party to be registered

(1) A political party may only be registered if it complies with this Article.

(2) The party must have a name that does not exceed 6 words.

(3) The name of the party, and any abbreviation of the name and any emblem of the party, must not be –

(a) offensive, obscene or otherwise inappropriate; or

(b) either identical to, or of sufficient similarity that it may be confused with, the name, abbreviation or emblem of any other organization.

(4) The party must have 3 officeholders, being the leader, treasurer and secretary.

(5) A person may hold 2 of the offices described in paragraph (4), but not all 3.

(6) A person cannot hold any office described in paragraph (4) unless he or she is registered as an elector under the 2002 Law.

(7) The party must have an address in Jersey to which communications intended for the party may be sent.

(8) The party must have a written constitution, one of the expressed objectives of which must be the endorsement of candidates for election as Senator, Deputy or Connétable.

(9) The party must keep accounts.

(10) The party must have an accounting period that does not exceed 12 months.

(11) The States may by Regulations amend, or make provision in addition to, paragraphs (2) and (3) regarding the restrictions on the name of a political party.

3 Restriction on name and emblem used by registered political party

(1) A registered political party must not use or otherwise hold itself out as known by any name, or abbreviation of its name, other than the name or abbreviation (if any) that is registered for it.

(2) A registered political party must not use or otherwise hold itself out as associated with any emblem other than the emblem (if any) that is registered for it.

4 Application for registration of political party

(1) An application for registration of a political party may be made to the Court, in accordance with this Article.

(2) An application must contain –

(a) the full name of the party and the abbreviation (if any) of that name;

(b) the emblem, if any, of the party;

(c) an address, in Jersey, for the purposes of Article 2(7);

(d) the full names of the leader, treasurer and secretary of the party.

(3) An application must be accompanied by –

(a) a copy of the party's constitution;

(b) a copy of the party's most recent statement of accounts;

(c) the fee payable for the application.

(4) The application must be signed by not less than 20 persons.

(5) A person can only sign an application if he or she is registered as an elector under the 2002 Law.

(6) The States may by Regulations amend, in paragraph (4), the number of persons who must sign the application.

5 Consideration of application for registration of political party

(1) The Greffier shall deliver to the Attorney General a copy of an application for registration of a political party.

(2) The Attorney General shall inform the Court whether, in his or her opinion, the party complies with Article 2 and the application complies with Article 4.

(3) The Court shall refuse to order the registration of a political party if the Court is of the opinion that the party does not comply with Article 2 or that the application does not comply with Article 4.

9 Accounts to be filed

(1) A statement of accounts in respect of an accounting period of a registered political party must be delivered to the Greffier within the period of 3 months following the end of the accounting period.

(2) The States may, by Regulations, amend the period within which the statement must be delivered, mentioned in paragraph (1).

13 Stamp Duties and Fees (Jersey) Law 1998 amended

In Part 1 of the Schedule to the Stamp Duties and Fees (Jersey) Law 1998, after item 32 there shall be inserted the following item –

"32A.	POLITICAL PARTIES (REGISTRATION) (JERSEY) LAW 200-
(a)	Application for registration of political party	£50	Application	Greffier
(b)	Application to change name or abbreviation of name of a registered political party or to register or change the emblem of a registered political party	£50	Application	Greffier
(c)	Copy of constitution or statement of accounts, per page	£1	Application	Greffier".

How to follow up a story

I came across this forum posting recently, entitled "Never on a Sunday: Paycard confusion!"

The writer comments that: "Some people who've been trying to park in St Helier on a Sunday have been left scratching their heads rather than their cards. A new residents' parking scheme in the Cheapside area of town is causing confusion. Unless you've got a permit you have to show a scratch card from 9 in the morning till ten at night. And that's everyday of the week including Sundays. There's a problem though. There's no Sundays on the scratch cards. Parking control say they don't patrol on a Sunday. The scheme's being run by the parish. They haven't commented."

http://www.vuedesisles.com/law-enforcement-f20/never-on-a-sunday-paycard-confusion-t725.htm#5956

Indeed, when I checked the TTS site, it notes that

To use a Paycard you have to scratch the silver coating off in each of the five sections to indicate the day, date, month and arrival time in hours and minutes.

 

http://www.gov.je/TransportTechnicalServices/Transport/Parking/paycards.htm

But checking up further with the Parish  (who are very helpful about providing information, and gave it promptly), it is revealed that all one needs on a Sunday are four sections (not five) to be scratched off in these residents parking zones (currently  St. Mark's and Cheapside) - i.e. day, time (hours, minutes, month).

 

There is a change in the law, covered by Amendment 22 of the St Helier Road Traffic Law which came into effect on the 1st. May 2008, which deals with all of this for these residential zones. Because it is so recent, you will not find it in the consolidated online laws yet.

 

The reason for the use of paycards on a Sunday is to dissuade non-residents from using the areas reserved for the residents parking zones (and for which residents pay for a permit), which seems perfectly sensible to me. 

 

TTS haven't updated their website (now there's a surprise!), but Wikipedia have:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_in_Jersey#Parking

 

It leads me to wonder if the original writer or the people scratching their heads had in fact bothered to check with the Parish authorities before rushing into print!

 

 

 

Past records: the Case of St Mary

Juliette Gallichan, Deputy for St Mary

"I am opposed to the 5% sales tax as I think it is disproportionately unfair to the lower paid. I am concerned that F&E say they will mitigate its effect on the poorer families by increased income support. This is not socially sound policy. Furthermore it will increase inflation, especially in the short term. It is expensive to administer and will require a new collection mechanism. Once in place it will be an easy matter to obtain more revenue by simply increasing the percentage, and this will not encourage Government to keep the emphasis on cost-cutting." (Senatorial Bi-Election 2004 interview to BBC)

Of course, she was one of those voting FOR the introduction of GST!!!

It is obvious that people do change their minds, but try as I might, I can't find any detailed apology from her and justification for why she did so. Perhaps she could comment on this site appropriately. "I admit that I was wrong when I said that. I have changed my mind since.", or words to that effect (and not the mealy mouthed kind of justifications that might have come from "Yes, Minister") - even if it was related to the introduction of GST - would be a good thing to hear from a sitting politician, especially with reasons given, a history of how she changed her mind. Better late than never.

Actions, they say, speak louder than words. But watch out, because your words may one day come back and haunt you!

On words, here is a useful word for today: "hypocrite". This comes from the 13th century Middle English ypocrite, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokrites actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai . It refers to "a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings."

Good night and good luck

Good night and good luck (2005): A Review

(Now available on DVD)

---

"We will not walk in fear of one another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason if we dig deep in our history and doctrine and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes which were for the moment unpopular. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. "

This is a film set in the McCarthy era, telling the story of how Ed Murrow and his team of journalists took on McCarthy, and help to finished his communist witch hunt.

It is important today because it shows how someone like McCarthy can become important, and can feed on the fears in society, and fan the flames of prejudice, frequently with no evidence, only hearsay, and the use of a vicious polemic.

The lessons it teaches are wider than the era itself, and certainly in a world post 9/11, where there is fear in Muslim minorities in Western countries that they may be attacked for no other reason than their faith, or fear of those same minorities (who might be a secret terrorist sleeper?), it is necessary to say: do not react out of fear, do not look at others through a filter of prejudice. These are the preliminaries to peace, but they are only the first steps on the road to peace between all peoples of goodwill. Where there is a climate of fear, of people ranting against other people, it is still necessary to speak out, even if it means saying things which are uncomfortable; complacency too often is a cover for a false comfort that hides from speaking truth.

Murrow succeeded in stopping one witch hunt; but he paid a price. There were sudden staff cut-backs, his show was moved from prime-time to a Sunday afternoon slot, and reduced in number of programs. Victory against the forces of fear is never won easily.

This film, with its wonderful black and white photography, its marvelous use of light, and blues music punctuating the story, brings the time vividly to life; an age when cigarette smoke rose pervasively all around (wisps caught in beams of light). The documentary feel to it is precise; it does not make a chocolate coated confectionary, and for this the use of black and white is required; colour would make it seem too artificial.

David Strathairn is perfect as Murrow, George Cluny self-effacing as co-producer, Fred Friendly. The intercut real film of McCarthy blends seamlessly. This is also accurate to history. In his 1954 "See it Now" special, "A Report on Senator Joseph McCarthy" , Murrow did use excerpts from McCarthy's own speeches and proclamations to criticize the senator and point out episodes where he had contradicted himself.

It is a film that deserves to be seen wherever there is a climate of fear.

Previously, I had regarded the excellent, but underrated, TV biopic of Murrow ("Murrow", 1985) starring Dan Travanti as pretty definitive; it went from the war years (where he reported from London under the Blitz, with the catch-phrase "This is London." ) through the McCarthy era until his the cigarette-induced death. This new film is more precisely focused, but the sharper for it.

Incidentally, the catch phrase of Murrow used as the title of the film, and his sign off for his shows probably dates from his war years. Londoners in the Blitz used the phrases "so long, and good luck", and Princess Elizabeth, in a radio broadcast of 1940, ended with the words "good night, and good luck to you all." At the end of one of his 1940 broadcasts, Murrow ended with "good night, and good luck" and Ida Lou Anderson his voice coach, insisted he keep it.

When most cinema sets out just to entertain, this is a film with a difference, of which Murrow's own words are most apposite:

"This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire, but it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box."

---

The Moral Dimension

In "The Moral Dimension", a superb episode of Yes, Minister, a journalist has reports from France that a recent British contract in Kumran was won by bribery.

Press Officer: I must ask you to meet this journalist.

Hacker: Oh, yes, all right. What am I going to say?

Humphrey: I suggest attack is the best form of defense.

Hacker: Attack, attack, yes. Good thinking, Humphrey. Yes, got it.

Press Officer: Miss Jenny Goodwin from The Guardian.

Hacker: Do come in. Sit down, Jenny.I may call you Jenny, may I not? Now, what seems to be the trouble?

Jenny: The first is a story that was in the French press. It's about corruption in BES -
getting the Kumrani contract.

Hacker: Complete nonsense!

Jenny: They quoted reports of payments to officials.

Hacker: Really, this is absolutely typical. A British company slogs its guts out to win orders, create jobs! What does it get from the media? A smear campaign!

Jenny: If they won by bribery...

Hacker: There was no bribery. I had a full inquiry. All these payments have been identified. Commission fees, administrative overheads. Operative costs, managerial surcharges. Expenses, miscellaneous outgoings. We have looked into every brown envelope... ...every......every account book and everything is completely in order.

Jenny: I see.

Hacker: May I say one thing? Allegations of this nature are symptomatic of a very sick society for which the media shares the blame! I'll call on the Press Council to censure the press for its lack of professionalism in running this story. The Council and the House of Commons must be concerned about the standards which have applied in this disgraceful matter. Pressure will be brought to bear to make sure that this gutter press reporting is not repeated.

Isn't it interesting how both Frank Walker and Philip Bailhache have attacked the media in a very similar style to Hacker. It is clear that the media - the UK media - have born the brunt of the Liberation day speeches - "Liberate us from lies" indeed!

Of course, as we know from their statements, it is crystal clear the media have got it all wrong.

For this is real life, not Yes Minister, where, in fact, the minister, James Hacker, was using attacking the media as a means of diverting attention from the fact that something really had gone wrong behind the scenes.

Although I can't help having doubts....

Jersey Grovel awards 2008

Nominations are now needed for the annual Jersey Grovel Awards 2008.

These are awarded for the best example of groveling, fawning, sycophancy in a Jersey politician.

I'm starting the ball rolling by suggesting Deputy Andrew David Lewis, Deputy of St John. And due for election this November...

To set the scene, this takes place after the disasters of the Newsnight with Jeremy Paxman, and the fiasco of a press conference at St Martin's Public Hall. Not exactly Frank Walker's shining moments of glory, unless that is, you listen to what Mr Lewis had to say on the matter:

From the Jersey Hansard:

The Deputy of St. John:

Could I first begin by congratulating the Chief Minister on the superb way he has dealt with the media frenzy in the last couple of days. Will he be taking exception with the B.B.C. (British Broadcasting Corporation) over the technique that Jeremy Paxman used last night - the very biased technique he used - in interviewing the Chief Minister last night? Will he be taking this up with the B.B.C.?

Senator F.H. Walker:

Prior to the Newsnight interview, I have already taken up concerns with the B.B.C. that cameras were running when I was not told that that would be the case, and that breaches one of the basic ethics of the B.B.C. as I understand it. I have not yet decided whether I will be taking another complaint forward on the facts that Mr. Paxman totally misquoted me with his opening question and then refused to accept my answers to those questions. Whether or not I do that is a matter for some consideration. I fear that if I do I will make little progress in any event, but that is not necessarily a reason for not doing so.

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/documents/hansard/44514-31776-1232008.htm

Conflicts of Interest: An Interesting Retrospective

An older story. The case of the defrauded investors, and Sinel's battle to get them compensation. What is interesting is the same themes arising, with regard to (1) the bias of the internal press (2) conflicts of interest with regard to the Bailiff's position (3) the dismissive kind of remarks that the Bailiff made then to the defrauded protestors.

I would note in fairness that the site in question tends to take a very polemic view against the Channel Islands as "tax havens" which I personally do not subscribe to. However, Sinel's letter is specifically related to a specific case, and improving the judicial system.

It also highlights in detail (I only give snippets, check the link for Sinel's letter the conflicts of interest which occur without a separation of powers. We hear a lot about it being important. This letter is important because it details what can happen - and did happen - if there is no separation of powers.

The JEP

Sinel addressed the matter of "free speech" and the media. He complimented the professionalism of the "external" media, but accused Jersey's only daily paper, the Jersey Evening Post, of not being objective and "points out that it is controlled by Senator Frank Walker, Chairman of the bank regulatory committee (the FEC/FSC) which, not surprisingly in Jersey, is also responsible for the promotion of the island's finance industry. "

The Bailiff

Among the many judgments and remarks he has given against the interests of the defrauded investors in the Cantrade Fraud, The Bailiff once dismissively referred to them as "a small band of protestors".

http://visar.csustan.edu/aaba/sinel1.htm

Sinel's letter on the subject notes:

It has long been the hallmark of civilised societies that the legislature and executive are kept completely isolated from the judiciary. It is not necessary for me to explain to you or any of the recipients of this letter why we need and indeed should have had a long time ago a separation of powers. It is perhaps easy for people in our position to assume that the public neither know nor care why this should be so. I am not a politician, however, 1 have had the opportunity over the last few years to discuss with many ordinary members of the public the defect in the Island's constitution to which 1 have just referred. Vernon Tomes had a landslide victory at the penultimate Senatorial hustings; one of the main planks of his election campaign was the separation of the judiciary from the legislature. One of the most important functions of the English judicial system is to prevent the oppression of the people by the government, clearly it cannot do so or be seen to do so where the very same individuals sit astride both horses, this is a very real matter of concern to ordinary litigants.

Then he gave a clear example of how this conflict of interest played out:

When the Finance and Economics Committee decided not to investigate Cantrade, a decision (which it has since maintained notwithstanding the fact that Cantrade has been convicted of criminal offences in relation to its forex dealings), it sought and obtained advice from the Attorney General. The Attorney General not only apparently advised the FEC not to investigate citing in part the fact that it would be a major undertaking to investigate a subsidiary of the Union Bank of Switzerland" but he continued to give advice to the Finance and Economics Committee whilst at the same time overseeing the purported investigation and prosecution of Cantrade in respect of the Plaintiffs' allegations of criminal offences arising from precisely the same facts which gave rise to the Plaintiff s request to the Finance and Economics Committee to investigate the activities of Cantrade.

The Attorney General's conflict of interest was at that stage at least to the Plaintiff's minds manifest and apparent. The continued attempted exculpation of the Finance and Economics Committee by the Attorney General is believed by the Plaintiffs', many of their investors and certain other third parties to have formed at least part of the motivation behind his alleged failure to prosecute inter alia Cantrade and its officers adequately or at all.

When the Plaintiffs' pointed out what they perceived to be the Attorney General's conflict of interest they were informed that in future the representation of the Finance and Economics Committee would be undertaken by the Solicitor General. Whatever comfort the Plaintiffs' might have derived from this development was rapidly negated by the actions of the Solicitor General which proved beyond per adventure, that not only was there no attempt at a Chinese wall internally, but that the files maintained by the Attorney General in relation to the prosecution of inter alia Cantrade were available to the Solicitor General who made free use of the information there available for the general purpose of defending the Finance and Economics Committee's failure to investigate Cantrade and for the specific purpose of attempting to demonstrate that the Plaintiffs' allegations of criminal malfeasance by Cantrade and Young were questionable.


Mr Hamon, whose name also crops up in connection with informal advice given to Jack Hydes in the Jervis-Dykes case, also makes an appearance, he read the minutes of a confidential meeting between Sinel's clients and the police:

I turn now to the actions of the presiding Judge Mr Hamon on that same date. Not only did Mr Hamon allow the Solicitor General to read aloud the minute of the meeting of 12th September 1995, but having had the origins of that minute explained to him, he went on to publicise same by including that minute in his written judgment. The Plaintiffs' and their advisers still fail to comprehend how this publication facilitated in any way the administration of justice. At that same hearing, Mr Hamon told the Plaintiffs' counsel [i.e. me], that 1 could not make submission which involved criticisms of the Attorney General and the discharge by him of the functions of his office.


Finally, Sinel comments on the Bailiff making a speech which also showed how the conflict of interest played out:

The culmination of the Plaintiffs' disquiet was a series of recusal applications founded initially upon the absence of a separation of powers and subsequently upon the content of a more than unfortunate speech given by the Bailiff to the Society of Chartered and Certified Accountants, on the 16th day of November 1996.

In a country where there was a de facto separation of powers it would have been inconceivable that such a speech would have been given by a sitting judge. One can argue as to what exactly the speech meant but the facts are undeniable. Namely that a sitting judge opined publicly in relation to criticism made of the Island, by Plaintiffs' in proceedings before its Courts, which proceedings were founded upon the same substantive facts which gave rise to the criticisms made of the Island. One can see why the head of Jersey's legislature might make such a speech but no judge should have done so.

The Casualty: A Parable

Once there was a care home, and from this home, a boy escaped. He had been beaten and abused in the home, and did not know how he was to go on. In his desperation, he tried to hang himself, but the rope broke, and there, by the side of the road, he lay huddled and wretched, curled up and sobbing, with a broken wrist.

Now it so happened that a senior civil servant came to pass that way, and as he drove by, he saw the boy, and recognised him, for over the years, he had dealt with the home in his capacity as administrator. And he had appointed the supervisor of the home, and had only recently written a fulsome letter praising him for all the good work that he had done, and he knew that the boy came from a troubled background. He was in a hurry to an important meeting of a local charity, and thought to himself that the supervisor would surely come in search of the boy anyway, and he was a good man, and would know the best way to deal with the runaway.

A little later in the day, along came a politician, in his expensive car, and he wound down the automatic window as he saw the boy. Then he thought of how the press might get hold of the situation, and politicise it, and how it would look bad that such matters could happen in care, and he might be a material witness in court. Only yesterday, afternoon, he had been having lunch in his club with the senior civil servant responsible for such matters, and he was sure that such abuses could not happen now. It was a matter for the police anyway, and was it not he, himself, who provided them with all the resources they needed to deal with such matters, and had declared that publically. So he wound his window back up, and drove on.

Then came a senior judge, and he was on his way to church, already late, and he saw the boy. He reasoned that he did not know if anything had happened, and if an investigation took place, then it would be his place to be involved, and deliver a balanced judgement, so that the truth would come out. And anyway, he would pray for the boy when he got to church, and the prayers of such a righteous man as himself would surely be heard. So he, too, drove on.

Finally, as the day was getting dark, a journalist, one of those derided as the gutter press, and not an Islander at all, came along in his scruffy car. He saw the boy, and gave him water to drink, made a makeshift sling, and took him along to the casualty department for his bruises to be tended, and his broken wrist to be mended, and left word and his number so that the boy and the department would know how to contact him; and he told the boy he would return to make sure he was cared for properly, and tell his tale publically if needs be, so that the injustices of the past would be brought to light.

Now answer this: who was the "good Samaritan" to the boy?

Paganism and sexuality

Are Pagans More Sexually Open?

My pagan friends suggest that they can be, and in debates I've seen usually Christianity comes in for a bashing. Actually matters are more complex than that. A few historical notes....

The ancient pagan world had many kinds of different beliefs and practices regarding sexuality.

According to Julian the Pagan Emperor, Attis was an orphan left by his mother on the bank of the river. He became a handsome youth, who was in love with Cybele who forbade him to love any other woman. Nevertheless, Attis fell in love with the river nymph Sangaria and had a sexual intercourse with her in a cave. Cybele made him mad, and during this time of madness he castrated himself. Then he was pardoned by Cybele, who caused him to ascend to the celestial worlds.

For the followers of Attis, the highlight of ritual worship for the elect, was to get into an ecstatic frenzy, and then practice self-mutilation of the genitals! One of the few accurate sources in Frazer.

Early Stoicism thought was that sex, like all things, should be in common, and this includes a rejection of marriage and the incest taboo. This changes in Antipater, Hierocles, and Musonius, who argue for heterosexual marriage as the norm. And by Seneca and Epictetus, the pagan Stoic ideal is the celibate male. In fact, where sex does occur, for Musonius and Seneca, it is only all right within marriage, and even then only for the purpose of reproduction.

Moving to early Gnosticism, sex is equated with death. It is part of the material world, and must be avoided at all costs. The later Cathars (of the Middle Ages), who also espoused a form of Gnosticism, saw the "pure" as those renouncing sex, and were vegetarians because they would not eat animals that procreated (except fish, whose method of propagation they thought was spontaneous!)

Returning to ancient paganism, for Plato, sexuality was characterized by mental frenzy as opposed to rationality (Republic 403). The only justification for sexuality to exist at all was for procreation. Therefore, all sexuality outside of marriage should be forbidden by law (Laws 838-9).

The Manichees - an eclectic pagan religion which drew on Gnosticism, Zoroastrianism/Mithraism and Greek paganism, named after its founder Mani, were like the Gnostics, believers that all sex, even in marriage including the birth of children was evil and sinful. Thus celibacy is best. It thrived between the 3rd to 7th centuries.

So I don't think one can blame Christianity for all the woes about sexuality; in fact, one could argue the case that a lot of Christian thinking on the subject was coloured by pagan philosophy, as can be seen by the way in which the "Song of Songs" was sanitised as an allegory, rather than taken as a literal description of erotic love.

The Closed Society

Walker defends 'secret' agenda By Harry McRandle, JEP

JERSEY'S government is less secret than many others elsewhere, says Chief Minister Frank Walker. The Senator spoke out to defend the approach adopted by the Council of Ministers in discussing matters in private session - of the 12 items on tomorrow's order paper, ten are on the part 'B', or secret agenda. Senator Walker argued that the Council's approach actually protects the public interest in many instances. 'We never keep things secret any longer than we have to,' said the Senator. 'I know there is a perception that we work behind closed doors too much. 'However, the press and public have much more open access to government information in Jersey than in many other places, including the UK.'

I came across this "secret agenda" or "closed" agenda to give it its proper name some time ago. At least we know what we are being excluded from, although some of it makes worrying reading. Some "closed items" which are debated (just so you know what is on the cards to come up sometime in the future, with my comments):

Thursday 8th May 2008
Haut de la Garenne - that's coming up regularly!

Thursday 24th April 2008
Importation of Cattle Semen - nice to know that's debated in secret! A matter of public importance, which we know has the Chief Minister's backing!
Housing Needs Survey - perhaps there is rather more poverty than they would like to let out
Environmental Taxes - watch for these sneaking in as stealth taxes

Thursday 27th March 2008
Esplanade Quarter Masterplan - Freddie's Folly, under ground and under wraps
Environmental Taxes - watch for these sneaking in as stealth taxes
Update on Skills Executive - that's so that when UK appointments are made, we don't know why! Or maybe they are brainstorming excuses for top uk appointments?
Haut de la Garenne - another secret review, what's so secret that the public can't know?

Thursday 6th March 2008
Constitutional Review Report - without public debate, maybe on the dual roles of Bailhache and Bailhache? And the results of the meeting with Jack Straw?
Imagine Jersey Report on Consultation Process - I can imagine why they'd try to hide this one!
Seat Belt Legislation - secret to spare De Faye's blushes?
Haut de la Garenne - another secret debate
Review of Licensing Laws - another sneaky change in the pipeline?

Thursday 7th February 2008
Machinery of Government Review - that's to do with Senators, Deputies, Clothier etc etc
Scrutiny Code of Practice - I see scrutiny can't get a look in on any measures involving their powers

Thursday 24th January 2008
Channel Islander Status in the EU - why this is a secret subject is beyond me
La Collette Hazard Review Group - don't think Simon Crowcroft would be happy about the secrecy here

Jersey Blogs

Another interesting blog at:

http://www.stateofjersey.co.uk/2008/05/predictable-start-to-demonstration.html

Came across these recent posts. Desmond Tutu has been speaking out on Zimbabwe, contrary to some bloggers I have seen who have questioned his silence. He has not been silent; he just hasn't been widely reported in the Western Press.

---

Desmond Tutu statement on Zimbabwe

Posted: Thursday, April 24, 2008, 15:20 (BST)

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/desmond.tutu.statement.on.zimbabwe/18310.htm

Zimbabwe is staring into the abyss. Violence is growing and the people are suffering greatly as a result. It is now vital that we all do what we can to calm the situation.

In particular I join the worldwide calls to stop the supply of weapons to the country - by land, sea or air - until the political crisis is resolved. It is obvious that supplying large quantities of arms at this stage would risk escalating the violence, perhaps resulting in the large-scale loss of life.

We should be proud of the African Trade Unions and governments who refused to let the most recent Chinese shipment off-load in their ports but China must now agree not to try and send these arms by air instead.

I join the South African church leaders in urging all governments to immediately start work at the UN level to agree a binding UN arms embargo as quickly as possible. In the meantime I hope that every country will agree to a moratorium on the supply of any arms to the country.

If violence flares further in Zimbabwe, those supplying the weapons will be left with blood on their hands. It is up to every country in the region and beyond to take a stand."

---

http://old.thejakartapost.com/detaileditorial.asp?fileid=20080507.E03&irec=2

Coalition to protect Zimbabwe

Desmond Tutu and Aryeh Neier, Johannesburg

Although the Chinese ship that was carrying arms to Zimbabwe, the An Yue Jiang, has reportedly turned back, we don't know where else President Robert Mugabe's military and paramilitary forces may be acquiring weapons.

In light of the escalating violent repression of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and of those whose support apparently helped the MDC to prevail in the presidential election, the results of which have still not been announced after four weeks an international arms embargo on Zimbabwe is urgently needed.

In addition, we call on the African Union, with the support of the United Nations, to send an investigative mission to Zimbabwe to determine what additional measures may be required to carry out the internationally accepted responsibility to protect.

The concept of the responsibility to protect was adopted unanimously by the UN World Summit in 2005. Yet, it remains controversial because it is often assumed that it implies the use of military force for purposes of humanitarian intervention. We believe, as was recognized at the UN World Summit, that military force should only be a last resort when needed to prevent or halt large-scale loss of life. The first step is to gather reliable information so that it is possible to know what international measures are required to prevent a disaster.

In the case of Zimbabwe, it is extremely difficult to obtain such information. Mugabe's regime has systematically shut down independent media, attacked independent civil society organizations, denied visas to foreign journalists, and has arrested and beaten journalists who nevertheless enter the country.

Foreign observers were present when the voting took place in Zimbabwe on March 29, and their presence helped to ensure that the election itself was peaceful. The observers have long since left the country, however, and the reports that have filtered out suggest that in some parts of the country, Mugabes opponents are now experiencing a reign of terror.

The Constitutive Act of the African Union provides in Article 4 the right of the Union to intervene in a Member State pursuant to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances, namely: war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity (as well as a serious threat to legitimate order).

Here too, however, actual military intervention should only be a last resort. In the case of Zimbabwe, for example, it is possible that sending in unarmed observers from other African countries would be sufficient. Their presence and ability to provide objective information might prevent continuation or further escalation of the violence of the last few weeks to the point where it would require military intervention. Unarmed observers could also help to ensure that emergency international food assistance, on which much of Zimbabwe's population now depends for survival, is distributed equitably, without regard to the political leanings of those requiring it.

Earlier this year, the African Union, through the good work of former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, averted a calamity in Kenya after a disputed election led to widespread violence. The danger in Zimbabwe appears to be comparable. Once again, the African Union, with the support of the UN, should provide the leadership that would demonstrate that Africa has the capacity and the will to resolve a great crisis in a manner that mitigates the suffering of African people.

Desmond Tutu is a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Aryeh Neier is President of the Open Society Institute.

"Faith" in the MMR Vaccine

A recent report in the JEP shows that parents in Jersey now have more faith in the MMR vaccine. I'd have more faith if I knew that:

a) adverse reactions were properly notified, the general health visitor response to raised temperature is to give calpol. No record is kept of such adverse reactions; it is just a verbal communication, lost to the system.

b) parents were given details of the batch numbers of the MMR vaccines. The record keeping back in the 1990s was certainly extremely sloppy, and if a parent wanted the details, they might actually be inaccurate, i.e., not tally with the vaccine manufacturers own details. I've never seen a health visitor note down the number, so this is hardly surprising.

Given this lack of data, it beggars belief that reports - based on statistical analysis of adverse reactions, and vaccines - can be trusted. If there is a rogue batch, how could it be tracked, given that there is no tracking, no policy on adverse side effects recording at all. "Faith" in this respect, seems more akin to the kind of religious belief lambasted by Richard Dawkins - such "faith" is powerful enough to immunize people against rationality.

Look at how different the situation is with the CHAT - the childhood autism "early warning" tests devised by Simon Baron-Cohen; if this flags up a warning, the child's development is monitored, and periodically reviewed. Nothing like that happens with vaccines, and adverse reactions, and the logic is that it is safe, and not required.

Incidentally, a recent report on the USA 2006 outbreak of mumps reveals that the vaccine does not necessarily confer much immunity - 63% coming down with mumps having had two MMR jabs. And because it has been bound up - for largely political and economic reasons in the USA, Canada, the UK, and Jersey (but not France, for example) - there is no single mumps only vaccine available to give a third "booster". Which leaves the health authorities in a quandary. Faith the MMR, it seems, may not give immunity after all.

Some of the scientists adopt the question begging approach, saying the situation would have been larger if the vaccine had not been given, or the outbreak more severe, but as there is no control group, that is pure speculation - especially as no reports have been made of more severe outbreaks among those who had not had the two MMR jabs, which surely would provide some degree of control group evidence. But surprisingly, no such detailed reports have surfaced, which is strange, if the hypothesis was more than rhetoric of people who simply didn't know why the vaccine had failed so spectacularly, and wanted to bolster the public's continual "faith" in the MMR vaccine.

"Faith", says Dawkins, "means. blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even. in the teeth of evidence"

Do you have "faith" in the MMR?

---

Jersey shows faith in MMR vaccine

Diane Simon

MORE parents in the Island have greater confidence in the MMR vaccine for their children, according to recently released statistics.

The uptake in Jersey of the vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella now stands at 86 per cent of those who are eligible to take it compared to 73 per cent in 2005.

Immunisation nurse specialist Linda Diggle said that the increase was mostly due to the effort that Health, GPs, school nurses and health visitors had made in answering parents' questions about the vaccine.

'Predominantly, parents in Jersey have shaken off the adverse publicity about the MMR vaccine in the last few years,' she said. 'The evidence is very strong that this vaccine is safe and the best way to protect children from these diseases.'

JEP Published 1/5/2008

---

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jho73tvnoJ4y5V2ZCfimTXdmyvxg

A new U.S. study suggests the timing of the delivery of mumps vaccine or the number of shots given might need to be tweaked to avert or control future outbreaks of the disease.

The study, a report on a large mumps outbreak in the U.S. Midwest in 2006, revealed that 63 per cent of the people who came down with mumps had received the recommended two doses of mumps vaccine in childhood. That suggests waning immunity played a role in the outbreak.

But trying to shore up immunity to mumps into adulthood by delaying delivery of the second dose of mumps vaccine is not something immunization advisory bodies would opt for without more research and more evidence of need, the senior author of the study said in an interview.

That's because mumps vaccine comes mixed in a vaccine cocktail that also protects against measles and rubella, two diseases public health authorities view with more concern.

---

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Germs/story?id=4620377&page=1

But she did not contract and spread the disease due to her failure to receive proper immunizations. Indeed, like many of the other students on her campus who contracted the disease, she received the two-dose measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine when she was a child.

Now, new research suggests that the mumps outbreak that began early in 2006 — the largest outbreak of mumps in the United States in two decades — was probably due more to vaccine failure than the failure of people to get their recommended immunizations.

Researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention looked at mumps cases in the United States in 2006. They studied the 6,584 reported cases of mumps and found that in most cases, the vaccine from childhood no longer provided enough protection in adulthood.

The Law is an Obstructive Ass

Yesterday the Council of Ministers met and confirmed our fullest support for the Home Affairs Minister, the Police and our Criminal Justice authorities. (February 2008, Statement by Chief Minister, Frank Walker)


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/apr/30/ukcrime/print

Just been reading the online Guardian page, where it is noted that:

At the states meeting yesterday it was also revealed that the law officers' department, Jersey's equivalent of the Crown Prosecution Service, had turned down requests by the inquiry team for search warrants. Police sources yesterday said they had been refused three times when applying for permission to search the headquarters of the sea cadets in St Helier, where abuse has been alleged. The search was eventually carried out with help from officers from the mainland.

A source close to Harper yesterday said he had been so "severely and willfully obstructed" in his investigation that he had come within "hours" of resigning. But the source stressed that Harper's retirement in August was unrelated and had been planned for some time.

Now who was it who said back in February 2008?

Whilst the Council of Ministers prime concern is protecting our current vulnerable children, our next priority is to ensure that anyone who has perpetrated crimes against children is identified and prosecuted. We have complete confidence in our Police, The Law Officers and the Judiciary. We know they will do everything in their power to ensure that the criminal investigations and any subsequent prosecutions are thorough, professional and totally impartial. (Frank Walker)

So much for the Law Officers doing everything in their power not to obstruct the investigation! I wonder what Frank Walker would say?

http://www.gov.je/ChiefMinister/StatementontheHistoricChildAbuse.htm

DNA, Behaviour Patterns and Ancestral Memory

I don't think there is a straight translation from DNA to behaviour patterns. Too many of the explanations for observed animal behaviour, particularly human behaviour, speculate how an adaptation could have evolved without considering how that explanation could be tested, and what results is a "Just So Story", albeit one heavily infused with scientific rhetoric - Steven Pinker's "How the Mind Works" is a good example of this.

Regarding "ancestral memory", Jung actually placed his "collective unconscious" very firmly in a Darwinian framework, which is often overlooked; it is instead seen as some kind of occult idea, which is mistaken.

The idea of common or collective archetypes comes from the fact that we share a common ancestry, and we have similar minds, so that (for instance) you can assume that the experience I have of thought, or self-awareness, is the same as yours because we have a common biological history. Jung's ideas about the mind are an extension of this.

Jung places the archytpes here as "conceptual matrixes" or "patterns" behind all our religious and mythological concepts, and indeed, our thinking processes in general, as they have evolved. So for Jung, there is a kind of "ancestral memory" in the way our mental processes have evolved, not quite an ancestral memory, but a commonality from the ancestral mind:

Quote:

The contents of the collective unconscious are represented in consciousness in the form of pronounced preferences and definite ways of looking at things. These subjective tendencies and views are generally regarded by the individual as being determined by the object -- incorrectly, since they have their source in the unconscious structure of the psyche and are merely released by the effect of the object.

In terms of recent scientific work done to verify these ideas, the book "ARCHETYPE REVISITED: AN UPDATED NATURAL HISTORY OF THE SELF (2002) by Anthony Stevens is a good introduction.

 

A Bold and Imposing Cliché

"A BOLD and imposing development will be 'wonderful' for Portelet's headland, according to the Environment Minister Freddie Cohen. One of Jersey's most beautiful bays is soon to be dominated by a large-scale scheme of 50 residential properties on the former Portelet Holiday Village site. Dandara, who got permission to build on the site more than two years ago, employed UK architect Sir Richard MacCormac to design the 45 flats and five houses." (JEP, 30.04.2008)

In fact, despite the blurb about "bold" and "imposing", the photo shows a very large set of buildings, which in no way blend any way with the scenery of Portelet, but stand out like a sore thumb. In fact, I can't find any pictures of anything designed by MacCormac in a rural coastal setting; all his stuff seems centered on cities and suburbs, which is hardly promising. Fine designs if you are building there, but not really suitable for a scenic Island coast.

It will certainly be "wonderful" for someone - Sir Richard, who will have another example of his buildings to lecture upon, Dandara, who appear to have managed to get this plan past Freddie by the captivating glamour of a big name in architecture, and Freddie, who will have made a name for himself in the record books with his planning decisions alongside the late John Le Sueur of St John, and his impressive attempts to enter the ranks of Private Eye's Pseud's Corner for jargon.

When words like "bold" and "imposing" are mentioned, I know I am entering clichéland, where the words are used for propaganda to bolster a counter-intuitive (and large-scale) style of architecture that clashes horribly with the granite surrounds of Portelet Bay. Whereas a nice granite facing might cost more, but would respect the Jersey coastline, and be in keeping with Jersey styles of architecture. Smaller scale buildings in Ouasne, for example, have had a requirement of granite facing to blend in with their surroundings, while up on a cliff-top, beneath a bay, in full sight from Noirmont, all these requirements have been waived.

Who said: "Planning - respecting Jersey's architecture. In recent years we have failed to respect Jersey's traditional architecture. We must ensure that our Island heritage is reflected in new buildings constructed. It costs no more to design and build well. "?

Methinks it was the last Cohen election manifesto.

Deputy Powerless

From the JEP:

http://www.thisisjersey.com/news/showarchive.pl?ArticleID=102008&year=2008&category=news

THE decision to tell the media that 'partial child's remains' had been found at Haut de la Garenne was inappropriate, according to Deputy Sean Power. He says that the police went too far when briefing journalists on 23 February after finding a skull fragment buried at the former children's home.

Am I unduly cynical, but is it because it is an election year that Mr. Power is suddenly becoming extremely vocal (having already come out with saying that we have to watch "internal enemies" as much as the UK press)? Now he is having a go at Lenny Harper, again with little or no understanding of police procedure.

It is standard police practice not to reveal everything, not to be misleading, but simply so that if witnesses come forward what they bring to the investigation is corroborating evidence, and cannot be dismissed on the grounds of "collusion" of witnesses with revealed data. If Mr. Power doesn't understand that yet, I suggest he tries asking a lawyer about it.

He also raises the subject of how they know the bone fragments come from a child, and cast skepticism upon this claim. Here speaks someone with clearly not the slightest inkling of modern forensic science and forensic archeology, who has not even bothered to ask how they know before speaking out. I suggest he tries looking under articles regarding measurement of bone protein and the like.

For instance, the article "Histomorphometric determination of formation rates of archaeological bone" notes that "Age-associated changes in bone histomorphology in extinct populations have remained essentially unchanged for at least 1,600 years. Bone formation rates determined for these populations agree with age-matched values determined for extantHomo sapiens."

In fact, as the article "Examining histology to identify burned bone" explains, it is possible to also use "examination of the microscopic internal structure" to distinguish burned from unburned bone.

In the case of the Taber child, measurement of bone protein was used to determine that that 4,000 old (radiocarbon dated) came from "fragments of a human infant skull"

Some bedtime reading on forensics would do Mr. Power no end of good, and may prevent him from engaging his mouth without having first applied his brain, instead of trying to scapegoat the police, "internal enemies" and the UK media, for historic (and fairly recent) failings in the child care system. Of course that won't get him on the front page of the JEP, but it might lead to more informed questions being asked when necessary.

For instance, he might also asking about whistle blowing mechanisms, and consider reading my notes on the huge Wale child abuse scandal, and considering how important the appropriate mechanisms for whistle blowing were considered by the eminent knight producing the government report recommendations (http://tonymusings.blogspot.com/2008/04/tu-quoque.html). I am watching to see if Andrew Williamson produces anything half as good for the States.

The Neglect of Youth

 The Neglect of Youth

A Paper on the Need for Leisure Provisions for Young People on the Island of Jersey

---

Overview

There are glaring deficiencies in addressing the youth of the Island of Jersey. Little provision is made for young people aged between 12 and 17, as they are barred from many adult premises until 18 years old. But this is overlooked; all that is seen is youth violence, disturbances, crime, drink and drug abuse and social unrest, and how to deal with that.

In one sense this is correct. As an article in New Statesman (1) points out, "crime is very significantly a youth activity. We know that a half of all young men and a third of young women between 14 and 25 admit to having committed a crime. The Audit Commission last November estimated that under-18s committed 28 million offences a year against individuals, retailers and manufacturers". The figures for Jersey will be less, but the proportion of youthful offenders is likely to be the same.

The general public notice this, as they notice the large numbers of youth of the Island hanging around public places, involved in disturbances, and they are usually dismissive of any absence of alternatives. "When we were young, we used to amuse ourselves" is the most common and clichéd reaction, failing to address the realities of the much larger youth population, and the loss of more traditional centres of activity (2). The general public need re-education into the needs of the youth.

So part of the problem is surely the neglect of the youth, and the inadequacy of any decent provision for them. It is instructive, in this respect, to consider the French approaches. This paper sets out to examine in more detail what we can learn from those cultures, and how this could be applicable to Jersey.

---

Discussion 1: French Approaches

The French crime prevention programme is centered on two principles:

"Firstly, in simple economic terms, it is cheaper to invest in prevention than to pay for police and court time, secure accommodation for young offenders and expensive medical treatment for addicts and alcoholics. Secondly, the state has a vested interest in the young and a duty to protect them."(3)

A radical rethink was forced upon the French authorities after serious violence erupted in parts of Lyon and Marseille in the summer of 1981. This was addressed by the publication of the Bonnemaison Report which gave rise to two responses:

• "The immediate response was the introduction of a major programme of summer camps and activities (the été-jeunes programmes) for young people in urban areas
• The longer-term response of the government was to set up an inter-departmental commission to find solutions to the underlying problems of unemployment and the social isolation of young people"(4)

The important principle that guides the été-jeunes activities is that they should, as far as possible, respond to the interests and wishes of young people themselves rather than being imposed upon them.

That is not to say that sport and recreational facilities are not provided for summer activities, but there are a wide variety, and the use of a 'summer activities passport' enables young people to choose for themselves, and this is logged and used for the future redirection of resources.

Lastly, and of equal significance for Jersey, the été-jeunes programmes "have played an important part in 'penetrating' immigrant populations without threatening their cultural and religious identity and integrity".(7)

For the longer term measures, feedback from the young people is also sought and they are encouraged to develop initiatives themselves. To give an example, among the projects proposed by young people themselves were a multi-racial theatre workshop, a series of monthly boums (teen-age dance parties), the creation of a sports club, a camping holiday and a study holiday. Not all of these would be appropriate economically or logistically for a small Island like Jersey, but the same emphasis should be on facilitating and rewarding initiative rather than stifling it, of getting the young people themselves to develop ways of overcoming obstacles to their ideas.

Two examples are worth noting:

In Les Moulins, where there is alcoholism and a general lack of facilities, young people have been helped by grants with their own proposal of a non-alcoholic cafe. This not only provides employment and skills training, but is also a meeting place for young people, and "a venue for musical events, video screening and photographic exhibitions"(5). It might also contribute to the prevention of alcohol-related disturbances.

The Metro station 'Place Rihour' in the city centre, and the surrounding square was a meeting place for young 'drifters', many of whom spent the entire day hanging around the Metro entrance. Whilst there was little evidence that they engaged in serious criminal activities (other than a few involved in drug dealing), their presence was generally perceived as threatening, particularly by the elderly." A project to deal with this took the form of a video drama, which was written and performed by those who hung around the Place Rihour almost permanently it was directed by a professional theatre director. "It was an imaginative and original response which attempted to incorporate the apparent needs of these young people to exhibit themselves before an audience and find a legitimate avenue for the expression of their 'outlandish' and often disturbing behaviour. By reconstructing the self-image of these young people and the image they present to others, the project facilitated the re-direction of their behaviour and their energies into constructive and legitimate channels that appealed to their own sense of what is meaningful and real."(6)

These are just a few of the examples of the imaginative responses and facilitation of the youth, but they demonstrate that things can be done, and the mindset that shoots ideas down in flames (on grounds of cost, logistics etc) needs to be more open to trying to make things happen rather than just look for obstacles (7).

A possible opening in Jersey might be to open the Parish Halls as a meeting place for young people, and this is considered briefly in an appendix.

---

Discussion 2: Guiding Principles

In Germany, Peter Hubner has become well known as an architect behind several very successful youth club initiatives. It is worth considering his work, even if Jersey might not be able to fund a dedicated building, because of the principles which his approach reveals. He "organised brainstorming sessions with the local youth to gather their suggestions for the club"(8), and the facilities available and organisation therefore involved young people from the start.

We can take this is the key note for the guiding principles of youth facilities in Jersey - to listen to what young people want, and help them (by "brainstorming", for example) to think hard about what they want.

The other way of finding what is needed is to design a questionnaire, both multiple choice and open ended. This has the advantage of finding out initial expectations - Are young people prepared to take the initiative? How do they rate existing types of facilities (list)? Do they have access to them? How could they be improved? Would they be prepared to take responsibility on for an initiative? Both these kinds of questions, and more open-ended ones, in a fairly short questionnaire, can provide a useful demonstration of the need for better youth facilities, how they are best organised (co-responsibility). Most importantly, they provide a quantitative determination of the need which cannot be easily overlooked or dismissed.

---

Conclusions

In his conclusion to his report on crime prevention in France, Michael King notes that "the English approach to the is dependent upon it being able to demonstrate an immediate and identifiable impact upon levels of crime"(9). This is the reactive approach, which is like trying to put fires out when they have been lit. It is very much a short term approach, while in contrast, the French approach is to take the longer view. This takes longer to have an impact on society, but is none the less more effective. It is an approach in which "the best projects are those which emerge from the bottom up, involve local people and arise out of the identification of local needs. Ultimately, projects need to be developed in response to local conditions and by local people taking responsibility for their own actions. For young people, this is in itself the key to becoming fully responsible citizens."(10)

I think the time has come to take a fresh initiative for the youth of the island. There has been too widespread a neglect of youth, and if this manifests itself in crime, we have only ourselves to blame. Particular responsibility must, however, go to those in authority, who have the best opportunity both to see this and take action to remedy the situation.

If this was to be looked at as a parable, it would be like a story about roots and branches in a tree. Insufficient watering and neglect of the roots leads to problems with the branches, but to tackle the problems with the branches alone will not make a healthy tree; the only way to do that is to return to the roots.

If we are to build a just and responsible society, it is time we looked again at the youth of the island, and make sure we do not neglect or starve these roots.

---

Notes:

(1) "Club 14-25 Seeks Minister" in the New Statesman. Volume: 126. Issue: 4330. (1997)

(2) For example, the Churches were more involved in youth culture, scouting and guides were more larger per head of population, Parish and farming events also played a part.

(3) "Crime Prevention in France", Journal article by Michael King; Canadian Journal of Criminology, Vol. 31, 1989

(4) Op. Cit.

(5) Op. Cit.

(6) Op. Cit.

(7) The problems of a closed mindset in finding opportunities to change are discussed very cogently in "20 Steps to Better Management" (1996)

(8) "Youthful Exuberance" by Peter Blundell Jones, "The Architectural Review", Volume: 196. Issue: 1170, 1994.

(9) "Crime Prevention in France"

(10) "Crime Prevention in France"

---

Appendix 1: Notes on Questionnaires

Questionnaires are fine as far as the Data Protection Law is concerned, as long as they don't have any personal identifiers (names, etc) on them.

The design of the questionnaire is important, and can be either open ended (i.e. people put what they want), or multiple choice (yes, no, undecided or choices and don't know, always important to allow a non-committal answer); these should be as unambiguous as possible. Usually you would have both, with a group (5-10) of multiple choice questions followed by a single "comment" question. The multiple choice questions are good because they lend themselves to easy statistical analysis (80% said…) which is more difficult to infer from open ended comment type questions, but those can reveal more important personal opinions which would otherwise be forgotten. The open ended questions are termed "non probabilistic sampling", and while they can be useful as a commentary on the multiple choice questions, alone they are not considered good statistical practice. Small scale interviews are also problematic in this regard, they can easily be dismissed as "anecdotal".

If possible the questionnaire should not be too long, say a page or a double sided page, so it is not too long to complete, especially if relying on goodwill of school staff.

It is important to know total numbers of possible respondents (i.e. pupils attending the school), so that the number of questionnaires can be given as a percentage against them. For various reasons, you will never get 100% response. However, if you can show the sample you have obtained is more or less representative of the whole (in terms of age, gender, school), it does not matter even if you only cover say 25%. What is to be avoided though is the voluntary entry and return of forms, which leads to bias (because of the non-returns).

While names are not included, such information as states/private/parish/age/male, female are useful in breaking down the data in different ways which can be informative. (Technically, this is known as stratification)

Collation of data can nowadays be done by spreadsheet for multiple choice questions. Usually these would be written up in a report with the "comments" providing a more detailed analysis of the data. The better this is done, the more credence it will have.

Ideally, a small sample questionnaire would be used in a pilot scheme, and any defects of this remedied in the full scale survey. The standard report takes the form: Overview, Data, Discussion, Conclusion, Recommendations. The Discussion area could also look at other countries (and also Guernsey would be useful as it is a similar sized Island to ours).

---

Appendix 2: Young People Meeting Place based on Parish Halls

This considers the suggestion that Parish Halls could be open to the youth. Some matters that must be considered are:

• What is the ratio of minimum adult supervision (on the premises) to young people going to be?
• Do health and safety requirements need a specific minimum?
• Who is going to ensure that too many people do not come to a Parish Hall (because of fire regulations, insurance)?
• What other locations are possible (you are very limited in St Helier, a heavily populated Parish, if all you are looking at is a Parish Hall)? Are any Church halls available?
• What facilities are going to be available?
• If there is equipment (disco, pool table, etc), how is it to be stored?
• If refreshments, where are these to be kept? Who will handle the finances? Will proper books be kept?
• How is alcohol and drug abuse to be monitored?

---

 

 

Time for Talk?

The "Time for Change" meeting got underway this weekend. According to Nick Le Couteur on BBC Radio, this is going to be the start of a new political party, the "Reform" group. He was also saying they were committed to doing away with GST, although when pressed, he had no alternatives.

Montford Tadier was also interviewed. He was concentrating on the Clothier kind of reforms needed in his talk, or the bits in the interview, and how it was disappointing that only 50 people came, and a lack of young people.

Robert Duhamel was quoted as saying that Jersey was very good at complaining about the status quo, but not very good at translating that into action for change, in terms of voting.

My comments, for what they are worth:

a) Do we need yet another political party? We have the JDA, and the last election saw the JDA and Centre Party played off against each other, to the detriment of both. A split vote in any electoral district is always bad on a first-past-the-post voting system, as both history and mathematical analysis of voting systems (see a recent New Scientist for a summary) have shown.

b) If we need a party like "Reform", I would suggest a simple affiliation, e.g. reform of the states, as for instance, along the Clothier guidelines. One or two very basic objectives, rather than getting all kinds of other baggage (no GST etc) on the way, which I am afraid will only lose support. In the long term, most people will grudgingly accept GST because there is nothing better proposed, and the GST issue muddies the waters over electoral reform. In the post-War period, the States were reformed (no Rectors or Jurats) because the movement to change it was committed just to that. A loose affiliation means lots of people can sign up to it, but also have their own independent ideas on other matters.

c) Existing parties, like the JDA, need to be working on clear policy guidelines if they are to get anywhere in the next elections on party lines. In particular, how would they improve existing systems to help the least well off. What would do with micro-adjustments, and what needs a complete re-think?

Tu Quoque

A peculiar argument by Senator Walker's "going on the offensive" when questioned on the BBC Radio 4 programme, "The Investigation".

Here he attempted to divert and deflect criticism of Jersey by saying at once that Jersey has been appalled by the child abuse scandals in England. That's like commenting on Paisnel, "The Beast of Jersey", for example, by saying that "well, we've had him, but you had the Yorkshire Ripper", as if that somehow makes it fine!

It is an example of the logical fallacy known as Tue Quoque (or "you too")

A makes criticism P.

A is also guilty of P.

Therefore, P is dismissed.

In this case, P is incidence of child abuse, and failure to deal with it.

My book of logic states: "Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. This is a classic Red Herring since whether the accuser is guilty of the same, or a similar, wrong is irrelevant to the truth of the original charge. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation."

In this case, however, the interviewer refused to be deflected!

In fact, he had mentioned UK cases as an example of what had gone wrong elsewhere, and it is interesting that if you trawl back at these cases - for example, a particularly bad one in Wales, which has some similarities with reports of victims from Haut de La Garrenne, especially with regard to some of those in charge.

Other matters the report on the Wales case relate have particular relevance to the "culture of concealment" in Jersey, and suggest positive steps to remedy this.

I have highlighted the relevant proposals by the report, as it will be interesting to see if Andrew Williamson's report (surely overdue now?) comes in with the same kind of recommendations or avoids them.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/feb/16/audreygillan/print

Refuges that turned into purgatory
Report condemns oversights and inadequacies of a system that allowed children to be abused for 10 years

This article appeared in the Guardian on Wednesday February 16 2000 . It was last updated at 22:12 on February 15 2000.

On the outside it looked like a somewhat forbidding Elizabethan manor house set in ample grounds, but the children who lived in the Bryn Estyn home, near Wrexham, north Wales, were in purgatory, according to the report published today into the biggest child sex scandal Britain has known.

Between 1974 and 1984, Bryn Estyn, became "the worst centre of child abuse in north Wales over a period of 10 years, undetected by outsiders".

After a three-year tribunal of inquiry into abuse in children's homes and foster homes across north Wales, chaired by Sir Ronald Waterhouse, the report, Lost In Care, says: "The evidence before us has disclosed that for many children who were consigned to Bryn Estyn, in the 10 or so years of its existence as a community home, it was a form of purgatory or worse from which they emerged more damaged than when they had entered and for whom the future had become even more bleak."

After registering 259 complaints and listening to the painful testimony of 129 people, the tribunal concluded that widespread sexual abuse of boys occurred in children's residential establishments in the now-defunct region of Clwyd between 1974 and 1990. It also found that there were incidents of sexual abuse of girl residents, though they were comparatively rare. Physical and sexual abuse of young residents in the neighbouring county of Gwynedd also occurred.

Local authority homes in Clwyd most affected were Bryn Estyn, where two senior officers, Peter Howarth and Stephen Norris, sexually assaulted and buggered boys over a 10-year period and Cartrefle, where Norris continued to abuse boys from 1984 until his arrest in June 1990. The tribunal also found evidence of sexual abuse at Little Acton assessment centre, Bersham Hall, Chevet Hey and Upper Downing. And there was widespread sexual abuse of boys in private residential establishments in the Clwyd area and abuse of children in five foster homes.

The report also found physical abuse and the unacceptable use of force in six local authority community homes in Clwyd. Once again, Bryn Estyn was the worst offender. It had "a harsh institutional regime in which, for many, there was a heavy atmosphere of fear".

'Grossly poisoned'

About 140 former residents of Bryn Estyn between 1974 and 1984 made allegations of physical or sexual abuse and the inquiry listened to the evidence of 48 of them. The overwhelming majority of complaints were made against Peter Howarth, assistant then deputy principal at the home.

The report found: "The lives of these already disturbed children were grossly poisoned by a leading authority figure in whom they should have been able to place their trust. They felt soiled, guilty and embarrassed and some of them were led to question their own sexual orientation. Most of them have experienced difficulties in their sexual relationships and their relationships with children ever since and many have continued to rebel against authority. Even more seriously, their self-respect and ability to look forward to the future have been shattered."

Howarth invented a regime at the home where he would post a flat list which named boys who were invited to his flat for recreation. Staff did not remark on its inappropriateness, leading the inquiry to conclude that there was a conspiracy of silence.

"It was Howarth's daily practice to invite resident boys, usually from the main building, to his flat in the late evening for drinks (including some alcohol) and light food for the privilege of watching television and for other recreation such as playing cards, board games etc ... Attendance was part of the agreed programme of activities available to boys in the evening and the names of those attending would be entered into the activities log. The sessions would begin at about 8.30pm and the boys attending, usually five or six or even more at a time, were required to dress in their pyjamas without any underwear. If they were wearing underpants under their pyjamas, they were ordered to remove them."

The inquiry discovered that Howarth had a number of favourites, known as "bum boys" and it was they who were the main victims of his sexual assaults. The report says: "They would be detained on some pretext when others were leaving, at which point, buggery or some indecency would occur. Quite often, however, similar conduct would occur in the kitchen of the flat, for example, whilst others were still present in another room watching television."

Howarth was convicted in July 1994 of one offence of buggery and seven indecent assaults and received a total of 10 years in prison. He died in April 1997. Stephen Norris's offences at Bryn Estyn and other homes were of similar nature to Howarth's but his method of operation was different. The report found he was "a coarse man of poor general education who should never have been placed in charge of a unit providing for the needs of immature and disturbed boys".

Norris pleaded guilty in November 1993 to three offences of buggery, an attempted buggery and three indecent assaults involving three former Bryn Estyn boys and received seven years in prison. He had already served 3 years in prison imposed in October 1990 for sexual offences committed at Cartrefle.

The report concludes that for two senior members of staff to be habitually engaged in major sexual abuse of many of the young residents without detection was "truly appalling".

Applauding the bravery of those who gave testimony to the inquiry, the tribunal lays the blame for the failure to detect the abusers at the doors of a number of agencies. Staff at the homes were criticised for their failure to blow the whistle on their colleagues. It found there were few complaints of abuse from the children in the homes because they were discouraged from doing so. There were no procedures in any of the establishments to enable members of staff to voice concerns.

The inquiry also found that social services failed to provide at the most senior level effective and positive leadership to ensure that the first consideration was the welfare of the child. Senior management was subject to frequent changes and was confused and defective.

There were no coherent arrangements by Clwyd social services for the management, support and monitoring of their care homes which allowed Bryn Estyn, in particular, to be run without any guidance.

The Welsh office comes in for a great deal of blame, with the report saying it "cannot absolve itself of ultimate responsibility for the fate of children in care by referring to legislation that successive governments themselves initiated from time to time, whether or not with expert advice". It discovered that "lack of leadership" in the Welsh office meant "forward planning was allowed to wither and die".

The tribunal also concluded that central government must bear responsibility for what happened. It said that for more than half the period under review children's services were given insufficient priority, including a failure to take action before the children act 1989 to regulate private children's homes and a failure to take steps to ensure that adequate facilities were made available for the training of residential child care workers.

The tribunal found that the police investigation of child abuse in Clwyd from 1991 was carried out "thoroughly" and "sensitively".
The report, however, criticises investigations into complaints about Gwynedd made by care home head Alison Taylor. The police work, it says, was "sluggish and shallow" and "seriously defective". The role played by Det Supt Gwynne Owen was inappropriate and the size of the investigating team inadequate. There was no liaison with social services and relevant documents were not seized.

The inquiry found no evidence of a paedophile ring in north Wales which was said to have involved high-profile public figures but said it had very little documentary evidence to go on. It had no evidence "to establish that there was a wide-ranging conspiracy involving prominent persons and others with the objective of sexual activity with children in care".

There was nothing to suggest there was a paedophile ring operating recruitment at Bryn Estyn. But there was a paedophile ring in the Wrexham and Chester areas "in the sense that there were a number of male persons, many of them known to each other, who were engaged in paedophile activities and were targeting young males in their middle teens".

Recommendations

The report makes 72 recommendations. An independent commissioner for Wales should be appointed to ensure children's rights through the monitoring and oversight of the operation of complaints and whistleblowing procedures and the arrangements for children's advocacy.

Every social services authority should be required to appoint an appropriately qualified or experienced children's complaints officer to act in the best interests of the child.

• An abused child should not be transferred to another placement unless it is in the child's best interests.
  
• Every local authority should promote awareness by children and staff of its complaints procedures for looked-after children and the importance of applying them without any threat or fear of reprisals.
  
• There should be the establishment and implementation of conscientiously clear whistleblowing procedures. And consideration should be given to making failure to report actual or suspected abuse an explicit disciplinary offence.
  
• A field social worker should be assigned to every looked-after child while in care and for an appropriate period of time afterwards and should visit them not less than once every eight weeks.
  

The report says there is a need for coordinated action by the new local authorities responsible for social services in north Wales. It raises as a cause for concern the adequacy of financial resources allocated to children's services and recommends a review of pay structures.


The tribunal found that the provision for appropriate management training is required and says the problem of recruitment of suitable residential care staff for children needs to be addressed urgently.

It says that positive action to encourage whistleblowing is needed. There should be increased vigilance among teachers, members of the medical profession and police officers.

There should be an inter-agency review of the procedures followed and personnel employed in all investigations of this nature with a view to issuing practical procedural guidance for the future. Social service and police files should be preserved and police should be allowed access to social service files. It also recommends the sharing of information generally for criminal investigation and child protection purposes.

Social services departments should be reminded periodically that they must exercise vigilance in the recruitment and management of their staff with similar vigilance being applied to all applications for approval as foster parents.
There should also be appropriate and timely induction training. Senior staff of children's homes must be qualified social workers.

Main points

•An independent children's commissioner for Wales should be appointed to oversee complaints and whistleblowing procedures
•Every social services authority should be required to appoint a complaints officer to interview children alleging abuse
•An independent regulatory body should be set up to inspect all children's homes, foster homes and other child services
•Social workers should be required to visit every child in their charge and in care at least every eight weeks
•Local authorities should have clear procedures to encourage staff whistleblowing