Saturday, October 6, 2012

THE VOTING PATTERN - COUNCIL OF MINISTERS

Senator Routier

Sir Philip Bailhache (THE  JERSEY DON)



DEPUTY JAMES REED 


DEPUTY ANNE PRYKE 

SENATOR IAN LE MARQUAND


SENATOR GORST
SENATOR OZOUF

FORMER CHIEF MINISTER LE SUER


SENATOR MACLEAN





LET US BEGIN 


"THE VOTING PATTERNS" 


WHY IS CHIEF MINISTER GORST HAVING TROUBLE WITH CERTAIN MEMBERS IN THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS?



WHY CANT  CHIEF MINISTER GORST  BRING THE VERITA TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR A COMMITTEE OF ENQUIRY (COI)  INTO DECADES LONG CHILD ABUSE?




I BELIEVE THE ANSWERS CAN BE FOUND IN THE VOTING PATTERNS OF THE MAJOR PROPOSITIONS BROUGHT TO THE STATES OF JERSEY FROM 2008 UP TO THE PRESENT DAY


LET US REMIND OURSELVES WHAT SENATOR LE GRESLEY SAID IN HIS EXCELLENT INTERVIEW WITH VOICEFORCHILDREN.




This is the list of the Council of Ministers from 2008 to 2011:


Chief Minister - Senator Terry Le Suer   

Treasury Minister - Senator Philip Ozouf

Economic Development Minister - Senator Alan Maclean

Home Affairs Minister - Senator Ian Le Marquand

Health and Social Services Minister - Deputy Ann Pryke 

Education, Sport and Culture Minister - Deputy James Reed 

Planning and Environment Minister - Freddie Cohen 

Transport and Technical Services- Constable Mike Jackson


Housing Minister:

 Deputy Andrew Green - (from February 2011).[7] He replaced Deputy Sean Power, in post since June 2010, was resigned after he was "found to have broken the Data Protection Law by sending a confidential and personal email to a States colleague on to a third party".[8] Power's predecessor had also resigned: Senator Terry Le Main, elected in 2008 with 27 votes (Senator Alan Breckon receiving 25 votes), stood down as minister in June 2010 following revelations about his relationship with a property developer.[9]




THIS IS THE PRESENT MINISTERS 2011:


Chief Minister - Senator Ian Gorst 

Treasury Minister - Senator Philip Ozouf

Economic Development Minister - Senator Alan Maclean

Home Affairs Minister - Senator Ian Le Marquand

Health and Social Services Minister - Deputy Ann Pryke 

Education, Sport and Culture Minister - Deputy Patrick Ryan

Planning and Environment Minister - Deputy Rob Duhamel

Transport and Technical Services- Deputy Kevin Lewis

Housing Minister -  Deputy Andrew Green. 

Social Security Minister - Senator Le Gresley 






WHY ARE CERTAIN MEMBERS CONSTANTLY VOTING A CERTAIN WAY WHEN WE COME TO ISSUES SUCH AS  - THE SUSPENSION OF THE FORMER CHIEF OF POLICE GRAHAM POWER - COMMITTEE OF ENQUIRY INTO CHILD ABUSE - THE RIGHTS OF A CHILD TO BE REPRESENTED IN COURT - AND ANYTHING TO DO WITH TRUTH, HONESTY AND INTEGRITY.




THE PATTERN IS ALARMING




ON THIS FIRST POSTING I WILL CONCENTRATE  ON THE MINISTERS - THE CORPORATE PARENT 


FIRST UP: 



Call for review of Power suspension
Wednesday 17th December 2008, 2:56PM GMT.

AN independent review could be held into the suspended Police Chief’s claims that he is the victim of a ‘blatant abuse of political power’.
St Helier Constable Simon Crowcroft has submitted a proposition to the Bailiff calling for a ‘compliance check’ into the way former Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis carried out the suspension of Graham Power. Mr Power has claimed that his suspension was neither proportionate nor carried out properly.
Mr Crowcroft wants the proposition, which calls for new Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand to commission the review, to be lodged for debate early in the New Year. But any debate would have to be carried out in camera, like the brief States debate into the suspension that was held earlier this month.
Mr Power, pictured, was suspended from duty on full pay on 12 November after the States of Jersey Police announced that there was no evidence to back up claims of child murder at Haut de la Garenne.

HOW DID THEY VOTE? 



Vote for Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police: review of procedure regarding suspension (P.182-2008)
Vote date:
21/01/2009

Reference:
P.182/2008

Proposition:



HERE ARE THE MINISTERS  WHO VOTED AGAINST THIS 


Chief Minister - Senator Terry Le Suer   

Treasury Minister - Senator Philip Ozouf

Economic Development Minister - Senator Alan Maclean

Home Affairs Minister - Senator Ian Le Marquand

Health and Social Services Minister - Deputy Ann Pryke 

Planning and Environment Minister - Freddie Cohen 

Transport and Technical Services- Constable Mike Jackson

 Education, Sport and Culture Minister - Deputy James Reed 

Housing Minister was not present 

* Also note Senator Routier and Deputy Gorst voted against this *




NEXT UP WE HAVE THIS:


States reject call for police suspension inquiry
Wednesday 24th February 2010, 2:58PM GMT.

The States sat in camera this morning
The States have rejected a proposition for a committee of inquiry into the suspension of police chief Graham Power.
They voted by 26 to 21 against Deputy Bob Hill’s proposal after an in-camera debate lasting just over four hours.
Mr Power has been off work on full pay for well over a year since he was suspended by former Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis over his handling of the historical child abuse inquiry. The suspension is thought to have cost the taxpayer up to £1m.
Deputy Bob Hill wanted a committee of inquiry to be held which would have had the power to force witnesses to attend and give evidence, and to demand any documents that it wanted to see. He said that the suspension pointed to a conspiracy, and that it needed to be fully investigated. But ministers resisted the proposition.

HOW DID THEY VOTE? 
Vote for Committee of Inquiry: suspension of the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police
Vote date:
24/02/2010

Reference:
P.9/2010

Proposition:


HERE ARE THE MINISTERS  WHO VOTED AGAINST THIS: 


Chief Minister - Senator Terry Le Suer   

Treasury Minister - Senator Philip Ozouf

Economic Development Minister - Senator Alan Maclean

Home Affairs Minister - Senator Ian Le Marquand

Health and Social Services Minister - Deputy Ann Pryke 

Planning and Environment Minister - Freddie Cohen 

Transport and Technical Services- Constable Mike Jackson

Housing Minister - Terry Le Main 

Education, Sport and Culture Minister - Deputy James Reed 

* Also note Senator Routier and Deputy Gorst voted against this *





NEXT UP THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS ONE.



Vote for Historical Child Abuse: request to Council of Ministers as amended
Vote date:
02/03/2011

Reference:
P.19/2011

Proposition:



HERE ARE THE MINISTERS  WHO VOTED AGAINST THIS: 

Chief Minister - Senator Terry Le Suer   

Treasury Minister - Senator Philip Ozouf

Economic Development Minister - Senator Alan Maclean

Home Affairs Minister - Senator Ian Le Marquand

Health and Social Services Minister - Deputy Ann Pryke 

Education, Sport and Culture Minister - Deputy James Reed "ABSTAINED"

*Senator Le Main was ill * Deputy Gorst voted against*



LOOK AT THE POWER CLUSTER RIGHT THERE. THEY EVEN VOTED AGAINST A COMMITTEE OF ENQUIRY INTO DECADES OF CHILD ABUSE.



Now we have a serious debate about Children being represented in a court of Law.



Vote for Children (Jersey) Law 2002: appointment of children’s guardians and advocates in certain court proceedings.
Vote date:
04/11/2010

Reference:
P.137/2010
Proposition:






HERE ARE THE MINISTERS  WHO VOTED AGAINST THIS: 

Chief Minister - Senator Terry Le Suer   

Treasury Minister - Senator Philip Ozouf

Economic Development Minister - Senator Alan Maclean

Home Affairs Minister - Senator Ian Le Marquand

Health and Social Services Minister - Deputy Ann Pryke 

Planning and Environment Minister - Freddie Cohen 

Transport and Technical Services- Constable Mike Jackson

Housing Minister - Terry Le Main 

Education, Sport and Culture Minister - Deputy James Reed 

* Also note Senator Routier voted against this *




LOOK AT THE POWER CLUSTER 



Look at how they have voted on such serious issues. This is just a snapshot. I haven't looked at the silent assassins yet. These include non Ministers. I  can assure you that it is exactly the same pattern.  Why would these politicians vote against such profound propositions that go into the rule of law and Child Protection? The silent assassins are the ones who just push the buttons and don't say anything. 

I  could have put many more up but these are the ones that will do for now.

Yet it carries on. Even under the new Ministerial Government.



Let us look at how the Class of 2011 Council of Ministers do.



Vote for Committee of Inquiry: resignation of the Comptroller and Auditor General (as amended)
Vote date:
11/09/2012

Reference:
P.68/2012
Proposition:



HERE ARE THE MINISTERS  WHO VOTED AGAINST THIS: 



Chief Minister - Senator Ian Gorst - out of Island

Treasury Minister - Senator Philip Ozouf

Economic Development Minister - Senator Alan Maclean

Home Affairs Minister - Senator Ian Le Marquand

Health and Social Services Minister - Deputy Ann Pryke 

Education, Sport and Culture Minister - Deputy Patrick Ryan

Transport and Technical Services- Deputy Kevin Lewis

Housing Minister -  Deputy Andrew Green. 

*Senator Routier and Senator Bailhache voted against this*


The Council of Ministers led by Senator Ozouf set the tone for how the voting on a proposition will go. When I add in the other members in the next posting you will see the pattern. They always vote against open and transparent government. WHY?

Yes, we have some very lame sheep.

Senator Le Gresley has shown that he is prepared to step away from the Council of Ministers when they show all the social and moral conscience of an evil Junta.

The Voting speaks a thousand words


These politicians are dangerous.


Rico Sorda 




62 comments:

rico sorda said...

Why are the same Ministers voting against such important propositions?

Senator Le Gresley has shown that you don't have to follow the crazy gang into their pit of secrecy

rs

Anonymous said...

I have watched with horror the voting of my Constable since he was elected. I thought he was a decent, nice man but he has voted against everything good. Constable Paddock of St Ouen don't think no-one is watching you.

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

Rico

More important, basic, public-interest research - that any self-respecting traditional journalist or mainstream media should have done - if we had any in Jersey.

Sadly, we don't, so it's down to independent journalists like you.

Remarkable, isn't it - that not even the BBC in Jersey can do so much as take even one, basic, rudimentary look at the question of power in Jersey, covert de facto party allegiances, and how the public interest is failed?

The BBC are going to have to explain why they have failed to scrutinise these politicians.

And as far as those cover-up favouring incumbents are concerned, let us note it, so that those outside Jersey realise that we know it - they're a collection of cretins.

Let there be no misunderstanding. We know who is calling the corrupt shots in Jersey - and it is not that collection of States of Jersey sock-puppets.

Stuart.

Anonymous said...

Are the top two twin brothers?

Anonymous said...

This really needs to get out to the media. I suggest anyone who has a twitter account to tweet it to the media tweet it directly to any of the COM who have a twitter account or facebook and ask your followers for help to RT it.

There is something seriously wrong with how this government control everything.

Anonymous said...

Sentiments echoed reference Constable Paddock.

James said...

@Stuart: this is not quite as new as you think. Tony Bellows took a look at voting patterns two years ago, here.

If Tony is prepared to do the same for the first year of the current States (but with Gorst replacing Le Sueur), it will be interesting to compare. I'd be surprised if Dep Pryke doesn't score very high again, but I think I'd expect to see the general trend being towards a less unified view.

rico sorda said...


Progress to protect the vulnerable has been made but channels of accountability in organisations are still unclear


Sir Jimmy Savile OBE died a year ago, aged 84, with his reputation intact as a major star, DJ, children's entertainer and indefatigable worker for charity, reportedly raising more than £40m during his lifetime. Now, six police forces, co-ordinated by the Metropolitan Police, are investigating the claims of more than 40 women that they were raped and sexually assaulted in their early teens by Savile when he was at the peak of his fame in the 60s and later, charges vehemently denied by some members of Sir Jimmy's family. Janet Street-Porter, Paul Gambaccini and Esther Rantzen, among other colleagues, have said that they had been aware of the rumours. Rantzen, founder of Childline, has said that Savile was "A-list", therefore "untouchable", and no "minor" who complained about a television icon would have been believed. "We all blocked our ears to the gossip," Rantzen said last week.

The revelations began last weekend in advance of an ITV documentary during which six women gave chilling testimonies about the allegedly predatory behaviour of the Jim'll Fix It and Top of the Pops star and, in some accounts, of other celebrity pop figures. A BBC Newsnight investigation into Savile's activities was abandoned last year, leading to speculation that it had been dropped to protect the BBC's reputation. Several women have alleged BBC staff were told of the abuse and ignored it. If true, this opens the BBC to the serious charge of corporate collusion in the crime of paedophilia. George Entwhistle, the new director general of the BBC, has insisted that there was no evidence to suggest "any known wrongdoing was ignored by management", while the decision in December not to broadcast the Newsnight film was taken for proper editorial reasons.

rico sorda said...

In a further defence of the BBC's apparent inertia, Chris Poole, who worked at Decca Records in the 1970s, says that Savile's alleged proclivities should be set in the context of an era in which behaviour now regarded as reprehensible was commonplace. Rock stars, DJs and music executives were all involved in an underage groupie culture. Be that as it may, Savile is also accused of assaulting children in care at an approved school in Surrey and the now notorious Haute de la Garenne School in Jersey, which has seen convictions of former members of staff. If correct, this is exploitation of vulnerable young people in the classic, timeless paedophile pattern. Furthermore, child sexual abuse, the denial of children's testimonies and institutional collusion are all shamefully not misdemeanours of some shoddy past, they are an ever-present danger.

Survivors of child sexual abuse move into adulthood manifesting the scars of their experiences in different ways. Some manage to heal the wounds. Many, however, present damaging behaviour in later years that may include self-harming, low self-esteem, drug abuse and an inability to make lasting relationships. They pay dearly. Since the 1970s, knowledge of how sexual predators "groom" has improved considerably. They often operate within a family circle or they have access to children shielded by a system that wittingly or unwittingly colludes in a predator's activities. Across the globe, for example, some senior members of the Roman Catholic church have protected a large number of paedophile priests. Earlier this year, and only under pressure, the Primate of All Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, personally apologised to Brendan Boland, abused in the early 70s, from the age of 11, by Father Brendan Smyth. Brady was informed but did not take appropriate action. As a result, as many as 100 children were abused by the same priest over the years. In Weston-Super-Mare last year, primary school teacher Nigel Leat was jailed indefinitely for abusing girls as young as six. Staff raised concerns about his behaviour 30 times over 14 years but the head took no action.

rico sorda said...

Again in Rochdale, young vulnerable girls abused by a ring of men repeatedly sought help for years from police and social workers, to no avail. As a review of (the lack of) multi-agency response, published in September, reports, incredibly, the violent, sexually aggressive, contemptuous behaviour of the men went unchallenged. Instead, these children who were physically but certainly not emotionally mature were said to have exercised "lifestyle choices". Culpability for this appalling lack of responsibility in the chain of "support" remains disgracefully unclear.

Progress has undoubtedly been made in tackling child sexual abuse. All schools and organisations involved with young people, for instance, have an individual "dedicated" to child protection. Professionals, such as police and social workers, in theory, work together and every local authority has a safeguarding children board. And yet, the forest of rules and regulations, as the recent Munro review of child protection confirmed, means red tape often blocks prevention and hampers support for young people, while some of the earliest lessons learned in the 70s are still too often ignored.

The rights of children, not least their right to be heard, are often cast aside. Outcomes for whistleblowers continue to be uncertain and channels of accountability in organisations are often unclear. In two recent cases in the US, a bishop and senior managers who knew of abuse and did nothing have been convicted for failure to disclose. That is a welcome development. Of course, malicious allegations occur but far more concerning is that in a highly sexualised culture, the 13-year-old maybe blamed by those in power and not the predatory responsible adult.

rico sorda said...

Every era throws up fresh opportunities for paedophiles but what remains constant is the duty of every adult to protect teenagers as well as the very young. The internet, online child pornography and social media make it that much harder for concerned adults to preserve the metaphorical wall around childhood for as long as is humanly possible. Abuse occurs across the classes but it is encouraged still further where there is inequality and deprivation. Austerity is increasing the numbers of the most vulnerable; cuts are having an impact on the very good work in prevention, support for victims and the detection of increasingly sophisticated paedophiles. That is unacceptable.

Sir Jimmy Savile is innocent until proven guilty. In his 1976 autobiography, he described a night with six young girls at his flat. "To date," he wrote, "we have not been found out." It is time to learn whether that was a harmless boast or the arrogant truth.

Beyond Savile: we're still deaf to the voices of the abused | Observer editorial

rico sorda said...

What I have tried to show on this posting is the voting pattern on the most profound propositions regarding child protection and the rule of law.

For some reason, the same politicians keep voting the same way against open and transparent government.

Why are they doing this?

Time and time again?

Who or what is making them do this?

rs

Zoompad said...

"Sir Jimmy Savile is innocent until proven guilty."

So are the people who have accused him of molesting and raping them. Yet there are certain people loudly demanding that anyone making false accusations of rape should be jailed, which sounds just, until you look into other activities of these same people and discover that they are making their living by defending people accused of rape, even people who are boldly (as Ralph Underwager advised them to be) asserting their human rights as paedophiles.

Anyone accused of having the paedophile invented Parental Alienation Syndrome in the secret family courts can expect to be threatened repeatedly with jail (Threat Therapy), and even end up there. And so you end up with the sad situation of the victims of sex crimes getting the punishment and those who did the crime rubbing their hands in glee and crowing to their mates about so and so getting banged up, or going off their trolly, hahaha.

I am still very very very very very angry about the Staffordshire Pindown cover up, and after reading the Hansard debate on 8th July 2010 and I am wondering about what Meg Munn meant in column 590? Because when I read that bit I just wondered if that is what happened to me? Have politicians been creeping round asking questions about me, at the same time I was denied access to the justice system for the complaints I made to be properly dealt with? Is that why I have been treated in such a peculiar way? I can't help but wonder!

Us Staffordshire Pindown children were not even allowed to have a copy of the report - I had to buy a second hand copy online. I couldn't even read it in the local library as Staffordshire seems to have disposed of every library copy! Why???

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

As has been mentioned this list could/should have been compiled by an independent mainstream media but the only independent media we have on this island are the Blogs.

We now have the voting pattern of those who like to keep "The Jersey Way" and your readers should be keeping a close eye on how our "representatives" vote with the Committee of Inquiry into the decades of Child Abuse that went unchallenged for so long.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

They say you can judge a government by the way it treats its children.

When we consider this proposition.

Vote for Children (Jersey) Law 2002: appointment of children’s guardians and advocates in certain court proceedings.

Then some of those who voted against it.

Chief Minister - Senator Terry Le Suer

Treasury Minister - Senator Philip Ozouf

Economic Development Minister - Senator Alan Maclean

Home Affairs Minister - Senator Ian Le Marquand

Health and Social Services Minister - Deputy Ann Pryke

Planning and Environment Minister - Freddie Cohen

Transport and Technical Services- Constable Mike Jackson

Housing Minister - Terry Le Main

Education, Sport and Culture Minister - Deputy James Reed

* Also note Senator Routier voted against this *

Then learn that a "WALL" or a "TREE" has an automatic right to legal representation in a Jersey court one gets the idea of the Jersey Governments PRIORITIES

Anonymous said...

Rating the States Members - 9 Sept 2009
27 Deputy Anne Enid Pryke
27 Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur
27 Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf
27 Connétable Peter Frederick Maurice Hanning
27 Senator Terence John Le Main
26 Deputy Edward James Noel
26 Deputy James Gordon Reed
26 Deputy Angela Elizabeth Jeune
26 Deputy John Alexander Nicholas Le Fondré
26 Connétable Graeme Frank Butcher
26 Connétable Michael Keith Jackson
25 Connétable Juliette Gallichan
25 Deputy Sean Power
25 Connétable Silvanus Arthur Yates
25 Senator Alan John Henry Maclean
25 Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand
25 Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan
25 Connétable John Martin Refault
25 Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy
25 Connétable Kenneth Priaulx Vibert
25 Deputy Collin Hedley Egré
24 Connétable Leonard Norman
24 Deputy Anne Teresa Dupre
24 Deputy John Benjamin Fox
23 Senator Paul Francis Routier
22 Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson
21 Deputy Jacqueline Ann Hilton
21 Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis
21 Senator Frederick Ellyer Cohen
16 Connétable Deidre Wendy Mezbourian
16 Deputy Ian Joseph Gorst
14 Deputy Robert Charles Duhamel
14 Senator James Leslie Perchard
13 Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E.

11 Deputy Philip John Rondel
10 Deputy Frederick John Hill, B.E.M.
10 Deputy Jeremy Martin Maçon
10 Deputy Roy George Le Hérissier
10 Deputy Tracey Anne Vallois
10 Senator Ben Edward Shenton
7 Connétable Alan Simon Crowcroft
7 Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey
7 Deputy Daniel John Arabin Wimberley
7 Deputy Judith Ann Martin
4 Senator Alan Breckon
3 Deputy Montfort Tadier
2 Deputy Paul Vincent Francis Le Claire
2 Deputy Shona Pitman
2 Deputy Trevor Mark Pitman
1 Deputy Geoffrey Peter Southern
1 Deputy Michael Roderick Higgins
1 Senator Stuart Syvret
0 Deputy Deborah Jane De So

Anonymous said...

The above is a revised list of voting patterns over 27 votes where there was a significant conflict on votes, rather than those votes which have been carried by everyone present. It counts how many States members vote the same way as Senator Terry Le Sueur, the Chief Minister.

The data has been adjusted as follows: if the member was not present for any reason on any votes (en defaut, illness etc), but voted for Terry le Sueur on 19 or more occasions, they have been given a "virtually tally" for each of their absences, assuming they would have voted that way on those occasions. This is to avoid the data being skewed by illnesses and absences,
and attempts to make it more representative.

It will be seen that around the 13 mark, the House divides into more or less two groups. Contrary to the repeatedly stated mantra that the Constables do not exercise a "block vote", it is pretty clear that apart from Simon Crowcroft, they vote more often in the same way as the Chief Minister than the contrary, so that overall, there is a statistical "block vote" effect, even if
they may dissent on the odd individual vote.

The one occasion on which Stuart Syvret voted the same way as Terry Le Sueur was the Gallichan PPC proposals for removing the Senators and having "Superconstituences", while retailing the Constables. Deputy de Sousa voted for these proposals, thus beating Stuart Syvret's record of non-conformity. He voted against.

Anonymous said...

It would be interesting to see who voted against the release of the public transcript of the in-camera debate

Ian Evans said...

A fine monopoly we have, thanks for setting this out Rico.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

A crucial proposition that you left out was P.48/2012 lodged by Deputy Mike Higgins.

The Deputy wanted the Hansard of the secret debate in the States published when the former Police Chief Graham Power QPM was (possibly illegally) suspended.

The proposition was lost meaning the majority of our States Members wanted secrecy to rule the day.

Fortunately there was at least one "source" who clearly believed the public would be better served by having this Hansard/transcript published and duly leaked you a copy which you posted, in the public interest HERE

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

Further to my last comment, on the eve of the P.48/2012 debate we published an exclusive interview with DEPUTY HIGGINS

Anonymous said...

I have read various child abuse reports over the years and quite frequently either those who are abusers or those who defend abusers want to in-still the idea that as they were so long ago why bother investigating.

They miss the point, the way to stop child abuse is to ensure that anyone who is informed or has good reason for suspecting, makes sure it is thoroughly investigated.

Anyone guilty of a cover up should be bought to justice and judged by those who are not sympathetic with child abusers. So an investigation should find all those who are/where guilty of a cover up, make an example, to help stop others thinking it better to say nothing.

Anonymous said...

Has some Jersey politicians done a runner i see there was three swiss air force jets at the airport the other night two vip transports one fighter jet for protection

rico sorda said...

Vote for Statement made ‘in camera’ on 2nd December 2008: release of transcript - Paragraph (a).

Vote date: 26/06/2012 Reference: P.48/2012

Proposition: Statement made ‘in camera’ on 2nd December 2008: release of transcript.

The Ministers voting against and their followers:

Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Alan Breckon Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Senator Ian Joseph Gorst Contre
Senator Lyndon John Farnham Contre
Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache Contre
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan Contre
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Connétable Deidre Wendy Mezbourian Contre
Connétable Juliette Gallichan Contre
Connétable Philip John Rondel Contre
Connétable Michael John Paddock Contre
Connétable Michel Philip Sydney Le Troquer Contre
Deputy James Gordon Reed Contre
Deputy Jacqueline Ann Hilton Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Sean Power Contre
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E. Contre
Deputy James Patrick Gorton Baker Contre
Deputy Susan Jane Pinel Contre
Deputy John Michael Le Bailly Contre
Deputy Stephen George Luce Contre
Deputy Roderick Gordon Bryans Contre
Deputy Kristina Louise Moore Contre
Deputy Richard John Rondel

rico sorda said...

Vote for Statement made ‘in camera’ on 2nd December 2008: release of transcript - Paragraph (b).

Vote date: 26/06/2012 Reference: P.48/2012

Proposition: Statement made ‘in camera’ on 2nd December 2008: release of transcript.(17 kb)

The Ministers voting against and their followers:


Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Alan Breckon Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Senator Ian Joseph Gorst Contre
Senator Lyndon John Farnham Contre
Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache Contre
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan Contre
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Connétable Deidre Wendy Mezbourian Contre
Connétable Juliette Gallichan Contre
Connétable Philip John Rondel Contre
Connétable Michael John Paddock Contre
Connétable Michel Philip Sydney Le Troquer Contre
Deputy James Gordon Reed Contre
Deputy Jacqueline Ann Hilton Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Sean Power Contre
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E. Contre
Deputy James Patrick Gorton Baker Contre
Deputy Susan Jane Pinel Contre
Deputy John Michael Le Bailly Contre
Deputy Stephen George Luce Contre
Deputy Roderick Gordon Bryans Contre
Deputy Kristina Louise Moore Contre
Deputy Richard John Rondel Contre
Deputy Judith Ann Martin Abstained
Deputy John Hilary Young Abstained


They are your Establishment party. One or two were missing from the vote as they were not present at the time.


rs

rico sorda said...

Vote for Committee of Inquiry: resignation of the Comptroller and Auditor General (as amended)

Vote date: 11/09/2012 Reference: P.68/2012

Proposition: Committee of Inquiry: resignation of the Comptroller and Auditor General.(22 kb)

ALL THAT VOTED AGAINST:


Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Senator Lyndon John Farnham Contre
Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache Contre
Connétable Alan Simon Crowcroft Contre
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Connétable Juliette Gallichan Contre
Connétable Michael John Paddock Contre
Connétable Stephen William Pallett Contre
Connétable Michel Philip Sydney Le Troquer Contre
Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey Contre
Deputy Jacqueline Ann Hilton Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Sean Power Contre
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E. Contre
Deputy Patrick John Dennis Ryan Contre
Deputy James Patrick Gorton Baker Contre
Deputy Susan Jane Pinel Contre
Deputy John Michael Le Bailly Contre
Deputy Stephen George Luce Contre
Deputy Roderick Gordon Bryans Contre
Deputy Kristina Louise Moore Contre
Connétable Sadie Anthea Rennard Abstained
Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson Out of the island
Senator Ian Joseph Gorst Out of the island

rico sorda said...

Vote for Committee of Inquiry: resignation of the Comptroller and Auditor General (P.68/2012) – amendment.

Vote date: 11/09/2012 Reference: P.68/2012(Amd) Proposition: Committee of Inquiry: resignation of the Comptroller and Auditor General (P.68/2012) – amendment.(12 kb)

THE SAME OLD GANG:

Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Senator Lyndon John Farnham Contre
Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache Contre
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Connétable Michael John Paddock Contre
Connétable Stephen William Pallett Contre
Connétable Michel Philip Sydney Le Troquer Contre
Connétable Sadie Anthea Rennard Contre
Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Sean Power Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E. Contre
Deputy Patrick John Dennis Ryan Contre
Deputy James Patrick Gorton Baker Contre
Deputy John Michael Le Bailly Contre
Deputy Tracey Anne Vallois Abstained
Connétable Alan Simon Crowcroft Not present for vote
Connétable Leonard Norman Not present for vote
Connétable Juliette Gallichan Not present for vote
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Not present for vote
Deputy Michael Roderick Higgins Not present for vote
Deputy Richard John Rondel Not present for vote
Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson Out of the island
Senator Ian Joseph Gorst Out of the island
Deputy James Gordon Reed Out of the island

Anonymous said...

And to think I wasted my vote on Alan Breacon, how very disappointing. He must have been 'captured' by the establishment even before his alleged assault.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

Has your challenge been accepted YET?



Anonymous said...

Breckon is a botherer

Will State media mention the Swiss fighter jet?

Ian Evans said...

No one wants to investigate COMPLAINTS OF CORRUPTION here in sleepy sunny shady Jersey?

rico sorda said...

Vote for Children (Jersey) Law 2002: appointment of children’s guardians and advocates in certain court proceedings.

Vote date: 04/11/2010 Reference: P.137/2010

Proposition: Children (Jersey) Law 2002: appointment of children’s guardians and advocates in certain court proceedings.(32 kb)

HERE WE AGAIN:

Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur Contre
Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Terence John Le Main Contre
Senator Ben Edward Shenton Contre
Senator Frederick Ellyer Cohen Contre
Senator James Leslie Perchard Contre
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Connétable Kenneth Priaulx Vibert Contre
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan Contre
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy Contre
Connétable Michael Keith Jackson Contre
Connétable Peter Frederick Maurice Hanning Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Connétable Juliette Gallichan Contre
Deputy John Benjamin Fox Contre
Deputy James Gordon Reed Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Sean Power Contre
Deputy Angela Elizabeth Jeune Contre
Deputy Anne Teresa Dupre Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Tracey Anne Vallois Contre
Deputy Collin Hedley Egré Not present for vote
Connétable Philip John Rondel Not present for vote
Connétable Graeme Frank Butcher Ill
Deputy Deborah Jane De Sousa Ill
Senator Ian Joseph Gorst Declared an interest
Connétable Alan Simon Crowcroft En défaut
Deputy John Alexander Nicholas Le Fondré En défaut

rico sorda said...

How about this one. Who could forget.

Vote for Draft Annual Business Plan 2011 (P.99-2010)- eighth amendment (paragraph 2 - educational psychologist)

Vote date: 15/09/2010 Reference: P.99/2010(Amd)(8) Proposition: Draft Annual Business Plan 2011 (P.99-2010)- eighth amendment(57 kb)

GUESS HOW THEY VOTED

Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur Contre
Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Ben Edward Shenton Contre
Senator Frederick Ellyer Cohen Contre
Senator James Leslie Perchard Contre
Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson Contre
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Connétable Kenneth Priaulx Vibert Contre
Connétable Alan Simon Crowcroft Contre
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy Contre
Connétable Michael Keith Jackson Contre
Connétable Silvanus Arthur Yates Contre
Connétable Graeme Frank Butcher Contre
Connétable Peter Frederick Maurice Hanning Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Deputy Robert Charles Duhamel Contre
Deputy John Benjamin Fox Contre
Deputy Judith Ann Martin Contre
Deputy James Gordon Reed Contre
Deputy Collin Hedley Egré Contre
Deputy Jacqueline Ann Hilton Contre
Deputy John Alexander Nicholas Le Fondré Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Sean Power Contre
Senator Ian Joseph Gorst Contre
Connétable Philip John Rondel Contre
Deputy Angela Elizabeth Jeune Contre
Deputy Anne Teresa Dupre Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E. Contre


Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan Not present for vote
Deputy Tracey Anne Vallois Not present for vote
Senator Terence John Le Main Ill
Deputy Shona Pitman Ill
Deputy Roy George Le Hérissier Out of the island
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Out of the island
Connétable Juliette Gallichan Excused attendance

rico sorda said...

Vote for Draft Annual Business Plan 2011 (P.99-2010)- eighth amendment (paragraph 3-free entry for students to Durrell)

Vote date: 15/09/2010 Reference: P.99/2010(Amd)(8) Proposition: Draft Annual Business Plan 2011 (P.99-2010)- eighth amendment(57 kb)

NOTHING HAS CHANGED

Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur Contre
Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Ben Edward Shenton Contre
Senator James Leslie Perchard Contre
Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson Contre
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Senator Francis du Heaume Le Gresley, M.B.E. Contre
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan Contre
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy Contre
Connétable Michael Keith Jackson Contre
Connétable Silvanus Arthur Yates Contre
Connétable Graeme Frank Butcher Contre
Connétable Peter Frederick Maurice Hanning Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Connétable Deidre Wendy Mezbourian Contre
Deputy Robert Charles Duhamel Contre
Deputy James Gordon Reed Contre
Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey Contre
Deputy Collin Hedley Egré Contre
Deputy Jacqueline Ann Hilton Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Sean Power Contre
Senator Ian Joseph Gorst Contre
Connétable Philip John Rondel Contre
Deputy Angela Elizabeth Jeune Contre
Deputy Anne Teresa Dupre Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E. Contre


Deputy Tracey Anne Vallois Abstained
Deputy John Alexander Nicholas Le Fondré Not present for vote
Deputy Michael Roderick Higgins Not present for vote
Senator Terence John Le Main Ill
Deputy Shona Pitman Ill
Deputy Roy George Le Hérissier Out of the island
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Out of the island
Connétable Juliette Gallichan Excused attendance

rico sorda said...

Vote for Draft Annual Business Plan 2011 (P.99/2010): fourth amendment paragraph 3 (school milk)

Vote date: 15/09/2010 Reference: P.99/2010(Amd)(4) Proposition: Draft Annual Business Plan 2011 (P.99/2010): fourth amendment.(131


Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur Contre
Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Ben Edward Shenton Contre
Senator Frederick Ellyer Cohen Contre
Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson Contre
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Senator Francis du Heaume Le Gresley, M.B.E. Contre
Connétable Kenneth Priaulx Vibert Contre
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan Contre
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy Contre
Connétable Michael Keith Jackson Contre
Connétable Silvanus Arthur Yates Contre
Connétable Peter Frederick Maurice Hanning Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Connétable Deidre Wendy Mezbourian Contre
Deputy Robert Charles Duhamel Contre
Deputy John Benjamin Fox Contre
Deputy James Gordon Reed Contre
Deputy Collin Hedley Egré Contre
Deputy Jacqueline Ann Hilton Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Sean Power Contre
Senator Ian Joseph Gorst Contre
Deputy Angela Elizabeth Jeune Contre
Deputy Anne Teresa Dupre Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E. Contre

Deputy John Alexander Nicholas Le Fondré Not present for vote
Deputy Tracey Anne Vallois Not present for vote
Senator Terence John Le Main Ill
Deputy Shona Pitman Ill
Deputy Roy George Le Hérissier Out of the island
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Out of the island
Connétable Juliette Gallichan Excused attendance
Senator James Leslie Perchard Declared an interest
Deputy Montfort Tadier En défaut

rico sorda said...

You see, this is why I'm saying no Amendments to a Committee of Enquiry proposition if its not fit for purpose.

Chief Minister Gorst can lodge a weak proposition and then expect the usual politicians to add the amendments. This must be a NO

Its doesn't matter if its the class of 2008 or the class of 2011 the club will pull together and reject what they don't want.

Just look at some of these horrendous voting patterns

. My God.

Simply Horrendous

What are the odds on the Votes being almost identical?

rs

Anonymous said...

Is there a cut out switch on the pour button?

Anonymous said...

Rico this smacks of corruption.

Anonymous said...

Rico,

Your research shows nothing more than a consistency of voting on certain issues.

One can attribute motives to this consistency ad nauseam, and certainly use the occasion to fuel long-held prejudices, but we should not forget that one reason why the individuals concerned voted consistently as they did could simply be that they genuinely believed that they were voting the right way; that when they voted against a proposal it was because they believed that the measure being proposed was not the right one. - such is democracy.

It is as much the right of an elected representative to vote as he/she sees fit, as it is your right to disagree with their decision.

Sadly, over the years there has been far too much personal interpretation of facts and events masquerading as "evidence."

Unfortunately, anyone who tries to point out that such interpretation and, often, supposition, is rife and may, in fact, be not the ONLY interpretation, tends to be shouted down and condemned as a troll.

You claim "truth" but the only real truth, which would still be open to question, should be based on an analysis not only of the way members voted, but also on the stated reasons (from speeches etc.) as to why they voted as they did.

They may well have ulterior, even hidden motives, ranging from a secret cabbala intent on hiding the truth, to simple incompetence and/or stupidity and/or misguided preconceptions, but the role of any journalist - and I see you describe yourself as such - is to present a balance, where ALL possible motives are explored, explained and offered to readers so that they can make up their own minds.

If you do not offer balance, or allow alternative interpretations, all you're doing is conducting a witch-hunt based on your own opinions and prejudices.

Anonymous said...

Rico,

As you are talking about the politics of politicians, which simply means what do they believe in the most popular is with out doubt Senator Routier the first picture at the top of your list.

Popular to two distinct groups that love the man.

Firstly the council of ministers and second civil servants who have a special warm and pet name for him.

This all revolves around your latest heading of voting patterns. As a reward for services to whoever is the Chief Minister almost never failing to vote how he is ordered he was given a title the assistant chief minister by the CM for being a good boy.

The second special warmth and affection is given by civil servants who have a special name for him which is Labrador.

They throw a stick, and he goes and gets it without question.

The perfect politician for the club but not for the hardworking islanders, he is a bloody disaster.

Check his voting record if you think this is rubbish.

rico sorda said...

Anon at 11.35.

Im sorry but you are wrong. I appreciate your comment, but from what you have said I can assume that you have no idea how our States of Jersey and its majority of politicians operate. I listen to nearly every debate and have done so since 2008.

Groupthink is alive and kicking in the SoJ

The majority don't even speak on the propositions. They just push the button. I know, for my sins, I listen to this garbage twice a month.

rs

Anonymous said...

"Unfortunately, anyone who tries to point out that such interpretation and, often, supposition, is rife and may, in fact, be not the ONLY interpretation, tends to be shouted down and condemned as a troll."

I see you have also witnessed how the MSM report on such subjects!.

If only the writer of the above would focus his/her efforts at the JEP/CTV, they offer the other side, this blog is effectively giving a balance.

Rico's post highlights how some states members vote consistently against issues of huge public interest and for those who think it is wrong, it is worth letting them know who not to vote for next time around.

Yes I would also like to know why they vote as they do, we may find their reasons are more closely linked to "Group Think" rather than public interest in justice.

Anonymous said...

"Your research shows nothing more than a consistency of voting on certain issues."

Coincidentally all "certain issues" relate to the public interest in possible abuse of power, strange some do not want to get to the truth!!

Anonymous said...

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/Pages/Votes.aspx?VotingId=66

Vote for censure about the golden handshakes.

I believe this is where a cover up starts.

Anonymous said...


reply to commentor at 11:35

interpretation of facts and events masquerading as "evidence."

The only decision ever made by Andrew Lewis the then Home Affairs Minister was to suspend Graham Power.

Andrew Lewis claimed he never saw the met interim report he also claimed he did see the interim report.

Mr. Lewis made one statement in-camera and one to Mr Napier, under oath I believe.

I am reading the evidence not interpreting it.

Terry Le Sueur believes the Police Chief owes the Island an apology

Look at who votes to keep in-camera meeting secret.

Anonymous said...

Historic Abuse Redress Scheme: approval by States Assembly (P.80/2012)

The Council of Ministers have urged members to vote against this. It should be debated tomorrow in the States.

This is my stab at the ones who will vote against. This is even before a word is spoken.

Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E.
Senator Ian Gorst
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand
Senator Lyndon John Farnham
Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache
Connetable Len Norman
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan
Connétable John Martin Refault
Connétable Michael John Paddock
Connétable Stephen William Pallett
Connetable Dan Murphy
Connetable Crowcroft
Connétable Michel Philip Sydney Le Troquer
Connétable Sadie Anthea Rennard -Abstained
Connetable Mezbourian
Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke
Deputy Sean Power
Deputy Edward James Noel
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E.
Deputy Patrick John Dennis Ryan
Deputy James Patrick Gorton baker
Deputy John Michael Le Bailly
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis
Deputy Richard John Rondel
Deputy James Gordon Reed
Deputy Pinel

Anonymous said...

Brilliant.

Ricos predictions.

It could become a regular feature video clip, pitman style.

Anonymous said...

feel free to add or change.

I think Francis might float on this one. He has gone against the COM twice now.

Im happy with the above list. Make your own.

rico sorda said...

This is interesting. The Vote for Plemont.

Bailhache will win the VOTE. There can be no doubt in this. The majority of the chamber are in awe of him and some are just plain scared.

Let us look at the vote the last time it was up and no Bailhache in the chamber..

Vote for Plémont Holiday Village: acquisition by the Public.

Vote date: 20/01/2010 Reference: P.144/2009 Proposition: Plémont Holiday Village: acquisition by the Public.(94 kb)

These are the ones who voted against the proposition

Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur Contre
Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Ben Edward Shenton Contre
Senator James Leslie Perchard Contre
Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson Contre
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy Contre
Connétable Michael Keith Jackson Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Deputy Robert Charles Duhamel Contre
Deputy Frederick John Hill, B.E.M. Contre
Deputy Judith Ann Martin Contre
Deputy Geoffrey Peter Southern Contre
Deputy John Alexander Nicholas Le Fondré Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Contre
Connétable Philip John Rondel Contre
Deputy Angela Elizabeth Jeune Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre
Deputy Tracey Anne Vallois Contre

Yes, some of them are no longer in the States but what influence does Bailhache have on the above??

8 millions with will be the answer.




Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E. Contre
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf Contre
Senator Sarah Craig Ferguson Contre
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean Contre
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand Contre
Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy Contre
Connétable Leonard Norman Contre
Connétable John Martin Refault Contre
Deputy Robert Charles Duhamel Contre
Deputy John Alexander Nicholas Le Fondré Contre
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke Contre
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis Contre
Connétable Philip John Rondel Contre
Deputy Edward James Noel Contre

How will the above lot now vote?

rs

rico sorda said...

The Vote for Plemont is already won by just adding the numbers you don't even need the debate.

Simples

rs

Anonymous said...



Comment at 1:27 is spot on. You really could make predictions in short video clips. It would illustrate how predictably opposed to transparency and independence of voting the establishment bloc is. It could also be entertaining for those who need to be enlightened.

rico sorda said...

The members who will defiantly vote for Plemont. Lets see how I do.


Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E.
Senator Ian Gorst
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand
Senator Lyndon John Farnham
Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache
Connetable Len Norman
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan
Connétable John Martin Refault
Connétable Michael John Paddock
Connétable Stephen William Pallett
Connetable Dan Murphy
Connetable Crowcroft
Connétable Michel Philip Sydney Le Troquer
Connétable Sadie Anthea Rennard
Connetable Mezbourian
Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke
Deputy Sean Power
Deputy Edward James Noel
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E.
Deputy Patrick John Dennis Ryan
Deputy James Patrick Gorton baker
Deputy John Michael Le Bailly
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis
Deputy Richard John Rondel
Deputy James Gordon Reed
Deputy Pinel
Deputy Rod Bryans

Plémont is a done deal.

Now lets just wait

There are the ones who voted Pour in the last debate that haven't been added yet but a simple count up of the conservative right says we have it passed.

Anonymous said...

You are right Rico we do not need propositions or votes all that is a side show to what the Government want.

Zoompad said...

http://zoompad.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-colin-tucker-scandal-continues-as.html

Colin Tucker has been recycled!!!

rico sorda said...

Historic Abuse Redress Scheme: approval by States Assembly (P.80/2012)

The Council of Ministers have urged members to vote against this. It should be debated tomorrow in the States.

This is my stab at the ones who will vote against. This is even before a word is spoken.

Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E.
Senator Ian Gorst
Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand
Senator Lyndon John Farnham
Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache
Connetable Len Norman
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan
Connétable John Martin Refault
Connétable Michael John Paddock
Connétable Stephen William Pallett
Connetable Dan Murphy
Connetable Crowcroft
Connétable Michel Philip Sydney Le Troquer
Connétable Sadie Anthea Rennard -Abstained
Connetable Mezbourian
Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke
Deputy Sean Power
Deputy Edward James Noel
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E.
Deputy Patrick John Dennis Ryan
Deputy James Patrick Gorton baker
Deputy John Michael Le Bailly
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis
Deputy Richard John Rondel
Deputy James Gordon Reed
Deputy Pinel
Deputy Rod Bryans.

How many do you think I will get right?

rs

Anonymous said...

I think it is simpler to say how many will you get wrong. I think Possibly S Power could vote for this. My reason is that I feel he has been recently raising his profile via the media Jep etc.

rico sorda said...

" think it is simpler to say how many will you get wrong. I think Possibly S Power could vote for this. My reason is that I feel he has been recently raising his profile via the media Jep etc. "

He is the Bailhache court jester.

Not a chance

rs

rico sorda said...

Lenny Harper on BBC Radio 5 Live from 10.30 tonight talking about the Jersey Child-abuse Cover up

RS

rico sorda said...

Historic Abuse Redress Scheme: approval by States Assembly (P.80/2012)

The Council of Ministers have urged members to vote against this. It should be debated tomorrow in the States.

This is my stab at the ones who will vote against. This is even before a word is spoken.

REVISED

Senator Paul Francis Routier M.B.E.
Senator Ian Gorst
Senator Alan John Henry Maclean
Senator Bryan Ian Le Marquand
Senator Lyndon John Farnham
Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache
Connetable Len Norman
Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan
Connétable John Martin Refault
Connétable Michael John Paddock
Connétable Stephen William Pallett
Connetable Dan Murphy
Connetable Crowcroft
Connétable Michel Philip Sydney Le Troquer
Connétable Sadie Anthea Rennard -Abstained
Connetable Mezbourian
Deputy Carolyn Fiona Labey
Deputy Anne Enid Pryke
Deputy Sean Power
Deputy Edward James Noel
Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E.
Deputy Patrick John Dennis Ryan
Deputy James Patrick Gorton baker
Deputy John Michael Le Bailly
Deputy Kevin Charles Lewis
Deputy Richard John Rondel
Deputy James Gordon Reed
Deputy Pinel
Deputy Rod Bryans.

How many do you think I will get right?

The performance of Senator Gorst today in the States was beyond belief. The man who is bringing the proposition into decades long child abuse informed deputy pitman that he hasn't bothered reading the Sharp Report. That was just the beginning of a shameful day.

Senator Le Gresely had better start working on his resignation speech as Gorst isn't going to bring anything robust to the states.

What is it about keeping Child Abuse covered -up over here?

rs

Anonymous said...

CTV online says "Deputy Higgins' failed move was to get the States to review how money is paid to victims. He said, "My information is that they're trying to stop people who were being abused by visitors to the homes, either members of their own family, or friends of staff, rather than staff themselve or former members of staff." "So, if Jimmy Savile abused you, you wouldn't be able to claim compensation. That's what it looks like, so I want the States to examime the scheme and make sure it's fit for purpose."

The scheme was set up to offer victims of abuse compensation on a sliding scale, from below £10,000 for physical or sexual abuse, up to £20,000 for more serious cases, to £60,000 for the worst, prolonged abuse including rape. 128 people have put in claims so far.

The debate was adjourned at the end of the day (Tuesday) and resumes tomorrow".

I may have missed something today as I couldn't listen live, but their online report starts by saying "Deputy Higgins failed move" - It ends saying the debate was adjourned (...) and resumes tomorrow".

Was this an amendment lost? Has the main vote already happened mid-debate? Are they pre-empting the final vote result? Do they have inside information? Are they using Rico's Vote prediction-o-meter App?

Ian Evans said...

The most CRIMINAL PLACE in the British Empire

Anonymous said...

I tried tracking the election promises and statements of intention of mostly senators against their votes. It is fascinating.

I have figures for the few predictions made by candidates at the last senator election. One person on that list stands out as remarkably good at it. Did not got elected of course.