A QUEST TOWARDS THE BALLOT-BOX.

A QUEST TOWARDS THE BALLOT-BOX.

Your Elected Representatives: The Guilty Parties.

I know it’s premature – the Jersey elections only take place at the end of this year. But I thought there’s no harm in enabling you to begin your appraisal of your elected representatives early.

Below I reproduce the vote record of members of the Jersey parliament when agreeing with Frank Walker’s proposal to remove me from Ministerial office.

For those of you not familiar with the arcane procedures of ‘the States’ let me explain that the vote was ‘for’ or ‘against’ Senator Frank Walker’s proposition.

Given our French heritage the words ‘pour’ – for, or ‘contre’ – against, are used.

So let me make a few observations.

The primary “grounds” for dismissing me were that, by saying publicly that I had no confidence in the child protection apparatus of Jersey, I was – allegedly -“undermining staff moral”.

And that by speaking out against obvious failings in the child protection apparatus I was – allegedly – “putting children at greater risk”.

As explained elsewhere, these two assertions were – and remain – ignorant and contemptible nonsense.

A very substantial amount of the information which caused me to be concerned was, in fact, brought to my attention by good, principled, front-line staff.

Good staff whose “moral” was being seriously “undermined” by having divisional bosses who were incompetent, lying, dangerous clowns.

And one doesn’t need to be any kind of expert in child protection to just know, instinctively, that any failings, neglect and dangers to children should be publicly exposed.

Secrecy, “discretion” and concealment – these are the watch-words of child abusers.

You would have to be a complete idiot to believe anyone who tried to say “now, we mustn’t speak of child protection failures” – “it should be our secret” – and “would you like a sweetie, little girl?”

Yet – such catastrophic misjudgements were the preferred choice of my “esteemed colleagues”.

Take my former Assistant Minster, for example, Deputy Celia Scott-Warren – and sister-in-law of Frank Walker.

She resigned – without saying as much as one syllable to me first – instead preferring to side with the very senior civil servants who are responsible for failing to prevent and expose these atrocities against children.

But she is not alone; as you can see from the voting record, 35 members of Jersey’s parliament voted – effectively – to support the culture of cover-up and concealment.

15 members supported me – including some who are not natural political allies of mine. That they came to the debate with a sufficinetly open mind is to their great credit.

One member, the Home Affairs Minister, Senator Wendy Kinnard – Bollinger Bolshevik and supposed trendy-lefty – “declared an interest” and withdrew; a cowardly retreat. I have marked her as an abstention in this list.

Whilst she has tried desperately to have it both ways, in many respects – her position is the most contemptible of all.

Initially endorsing Big Frank’s wish to get rid of me – as soon as she realised things were going to become profoundly controversial, she retreated from the arena.

At least with people like Frank Walker and Philip Ozouf you know where they are coming from – ruthless market fundamentalism and implacable partisan politicking.

In the case of people like Wendy – it really is tragic – as well as contemptible – to see a former friend and supposed ‘right-on’ lefty destroy their own credibility so comprehensively.

She always aspired to becoming a ‘Jurat’ – a lay-judge in Jersey’s Royal Court. She won’t, of course. Firstly, her contemptible actions and deficiencies in this case would – one might like to imagine – militate against her election. But having said that, the Jurats include amongst their number – in John Le Breton – a man who concealed child abuse – so we couldn’t be surprised.

We will have to console ourselves with the thought that there won’t be ‘Jurats’ in a few years time.

Instead we will have the proper administration of justice.

Now – remember – as I have remarked elsewhere – even to this very day not one, single, solitary, one of the 35 who voted to support the concealment of abuse has apologised to the victims.

Not one has recanted in any way.

People are fallible – we all make mistakes. But when the evidence becomes unavoidable – perhaps we should expect individuals to exhibit a little contrition?

Well – none of these 35 States members has yet done so.

Even those who fondly imagine themselves to be Christians.

And it’s not as though they can plead ignorance. For even though, Phil Bailhache illegally and undemocratically prevented my formal response to the dismissal proposal from being officially produced, each member was ultimately provided with a photocopy of my comments – plus 14 extremely important appendices of evidence which demonstrated my case to be correct.

Whilst I doubt that many of them actually read the material – it included such evidence as the Sharp report, the Dylan Southern report into an appaling episode of concealed and unpunished abuse – and it included the evidence which showed the letter to Big Frank demanding my sacking – was written by the principally culpable civil servant – Marnie Baudains.

All this evidence – and more besides – was in the hands of members at the beginning of the debate. 35 of those members chose to ignore the evidence, couldn’t be bothered to read it – or just didn’t understand it.

But evidence they had; so there can be no excuse – there can be no hiding place.

So – here is your ‘cut & paste’ guide to how Jersey politicians voted.

Remember it carefully.

I promise to post any recantations here – should any be forthcoming.

But don’t hold your breath.

Stuart Syvret.

THE STATES, adopting a proposition of the Chief Minister, and, in accordance with Article 21(4) of the States of Jersey Law 2005, dismissed Senator Stuart Syvret as Minister for Health and Social Services.

Members present voted as follows –

POUR: 35

Senator L. Norman
Senator F.H. Walker
Senator T.A. Le Sueur
Senator P.F. Routier
Senator M.E. Vibert
Senator P.F.C. Ozouf
Senator T.J. Le Main
Senator F.E. Cohen
Connétable of St. Ouen
Connétable of St. Mary
Connétable of St. Clement
Connétable of St. Lawrence
Connétable of Grouville
Connétable of St. Brelade
Connétable of St. Martin
Connétable of St. Saviour
Deputy R.C. Duhamel (S)
Deputy J.J. Huet (H)
Deputy P.N. Troy (B)
Deputy C.J. Scott Warren (S)
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier (S)
Deputy J.B. Fox (H)
Deputy S.C. Ferguson (B)
Deputy of St. Ouen
Deputy of St. Peter
Deputy J.A. Hilton (H)
Deputy G.W.J. de Faye (H)
Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré (L)
Deputy D.W. Mezbourian (L)
Deputy of Trinity
Deputy S.S.P.A. Power (B)
Deputy A.J.D. Maclean (H)
Deputy of St. John
Deputy I.J. Gorst (C)
Deputy of St. Mary

CONTRE: 15

Senator S. Syvret
Senator B.E. Shenton
Senator J.L. Perchard
Connétable of St. Peter
Connétable of St. Helier
Connétable of St. John
Deputy A. Breckon (S)
Deputy of St. Martin
Deputy G.C.L. Baudains (C)
Deputy J.A. Martin (H)
Deputy G.P. Southern (H)
Deputy P.J.D. Ryan (H)
Deputy of Grouville
Deputy S. Pitman (H)
Deputy K.C. Lewis (S)

ABSTAIN: 1

Senator W. Kinnard

37 thoughts on “A QUEST TOWARDS THE BALLOT-BOX.

  1. Anonymous

    Can I just take you up on your singling out of Celia Scott-Warren?

    Celia’s husband’s sister, Fiona Spurr, happened to marry Frank Walker. Very recently and very late in life, a second marriage for both of them. Good luck to them.

    What has that got to do with Celia’s politics? That sort of thing happens in a population of 90,000. It is not some cosy arrangement, and that is how I think you seek to describe it. That part of your post comes across to me as disingenous, to say the least.

    You know as well as I do that Frank and Celia are chalk and cheese and that Celia would not know what big business and corruption were even if they bit her on the backside.

    Since you equate the UK with some sort of excellence, what are your views on Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper (husband and wife) working together in the same government?

    Can relatives not work in politics? What about the Miliband brothers? Are they automatically tainted?

    Reply
  2. Anonymous

    You may have expected nothing but blind admiration for your latest rant. I am sorry to diappoint.

    You continually tell us that you represent the people. So too do the 35 States members who approved your dismissal.

    You also stoop to continuous personal insults and atacks on various members of the Jersey “establishment”, particularly Philip Bailhache. This is an example of the kind of unprofessional behaviour for which you lost your job in the first place.

    I am not denying that there are child protection issues in Jersey, I am simply reminding you that there are ways in which politicians and professionals should act and you have done your very best to avoid conforming to them.

    Reply
  3. Anonymous

    Although none of the 35 have apologised to the victims, isn’t it fair to say none of the 15 (besides yourself) have either?

    The 15 that voted “contre” appear to be just as silent as the rest of them. This is the time when they should publicly be supporting you. Are any of them helping you behind the scenes?

    Reply
  4. Anonymous

    Hi Stuart, it would help us if you could to put names to the ‘Deputies’
    Also,given your comments on ‘certain’ member’s ‘activities’, I am surprised a UK paper has not run with them!

    Keep on fighting, you are not alone.

    Reply
  5. Stuart Syvret

    From Stuart Syvret.

    Re: apologies to the victims from States members.

    In fairness, I’m not sure the 15 should be singled-out for not apologising. Virtually all of them came to the debate with no prior knowledge of the subject matter in general terms – nor of the specifics in this appaling episode. Nevertheless, they used common sense – and refused to rush into judgement.

    The Constable of St. Peter, for example, said “What if Senator Syvret is right?”

    And as we now know – I was ‘right’. Or rather – the whistle-blowers, witnesses and victims who came to me were right.

    I believed them – and didn’t believe the senior civil servant bosses in my department who would have had me believe that everything in the garden was rosy.

    A few of the 15 are, indeed, helping ‘behind the scenes’.

    The 35 States members who voted to carry on with, and support, the culture of concealment and cover-up – in best “terribly polite” and “professional” Jersey politics fashion – certainly owe an apology to the victims.

    A previous commenter – anonymous, so quite possibly one of the culpable civil servants – or politicians – themselves – said that the 35 members also represented the people of Jersey – as though, bizarrely, this fact rendered their actions beyond criticism.

    Yes – it’s absolutely correct to say the 35 represent the public.

    I am, therefore, assisting the people of Jersey in deciding whether the actions of the 35 render them still worthy of voting for.

    I can guarantee right now – as could anyone familiar with Jersey politics – that there is precisely zero prospect of any one of them apologising to the victims.

    But their attitude is worth observing during the coming months – if for no other reason than some mild amusement amongst what is otherwise a wretched landscape of failure.

    Stuart Syvret.

    Reply
  6. Stuart Syvret

    From Stuart Syvret.

    Re “admiration” and that “wonderful” Phil Bailhache.

    ‘Dear’ Anonymous (and you could be one of the abusers – or those who concealed abuse – for all we know.)

    Unfortunately, you make the error of judging my motivations by the same standards of most States members.

    Had I been seeking “admiration” – I would never have begun to speak out about the disgusting failures of the States of Jersey.

    I would, instead, have followed the customary approach – the approach you advocate here – of not telling the truth, of concealing facts because to expose them would have been ‘unpleasant’ or ‘distressing’ to people. Possibly even ‘rude’ – oh dear.

    The “behaviour” you so obviously admire involves lying, pretending that things are OK – and not speaking frankly about the gross incompetences of politicians and others.

    The profound reluctance to engage with the truth which we see manifested in your comment is, actually, one of the principle causes of the multi-decade failure to expose and punish child abusers.

    You, like most States members, clearly attach far higher importance to “politeness” than you do to protecting vulnerable children.

    It is, essentially, the cultural cringe of Jersey politics. Never mind the abuse, battery and rape of children – just as long as we’re all terribly polite about it.

    Give me honesty over “politeness” every time.

    Carry out a simple analysis: all my political predecessors? All terribly “polite” and “respectable” – to a man and woman.

    How many of them spoke out about gross failings to protect vulnerable children?

    Zero.

    QED.

    Stuart Syvret.

    Reply
  7. Stuart Syvret

    From Stuart Syvret.

    Re: Deputy Celia Scott-Warren.

    I single her out for criticism – not because of her relatives – but because she behaved in a totally reprehensible manner.

    She resigned as my Assistant Minister – without so much as one single word of warning to me.

    Instead, she wrote to Terry Le Sueur confirming her resignation. I only found out about it second-hand when an e-mail was sent around – of which I was the 5th cc’d recipient.

    It’s not so much that her actions were reprehensible and discourteous to me – it is that they were, effectively, a betrayal of the victims. It was Deputy Scott-Warren making it perfectly clear that she sided with the senior civil servants – rather than with abuse survivors.

    And even when the catastrophic nature of her misjudgement is plain for all to see – she still runs around, telling anyone who will listen – that I was terribly unfair to the poor, poor civil servants.

    You know? – The one’s on around £100,000 of taxpayers’ money per annum – plus big, fat pension – for their supposed expertise in child protection.

    Stuart Syvret.

    Reply
  8. Sigmund Fraud

    Does the the last coward who signed into your blog not realise that they look to the outside world to be every bit as bad as you have said they are?

    Not that signing your blog as anonymous is cowardly as in most cases I f the rest have signed in anonymously because of fear of the “Establishment” to ovoid being threatened by said “Establishment” and their friends and familiars, where as this one does it because they are indeed a coward who does not know what or how to be professional.

    “There are ways in which politicians and professionals should act and you have done your very best to avoid conforming to them.”

    We all know how Politicians & so called professionals have behaved in the past as we have many accounts of their unprofessional behavior.

    I wonder if stealing building equipment that belong to someone else could be seen as being professional? particularly Phil Bailhache.

    They are the scum of the earth who will rot their way through life not caring about who gets hurt along the way.

    Here in the UK we all feel that these horrors are currently being hidden and covered up even more now with the help of the British government, as we have had our own share of paedophiles in power who covered up a number of cases just like in Jersey.

    You are doing a magnificent jod Stuart, Please don’t give up your fight for true justice for the many victims people like the last writer would have hushed up and consigned to history.

    and how professional is it to sign yourself as anonymous when you claim to be professional?

    keep up your good work Stuart.. your work is invaluable and obviously there work is not seen as so.

    Reply
  9. JTM

    I think the people that voted in favour of GST are the ones who will be getting a rough ride in October. Unless of course they pull the plug on it for a year? Which has been suggested….:-/

    Reply
  10. Helen

    I have never bothered to vote before to be honest never saw the point nothing would ever change I am now ashamed of this attitude! I will be there with my vote this time and it certainly will not be for the 35. I am also encouraging my children to take an interest in this and to use their votes hopefully we can help to make some changes!! Stuart I support you and thank you so much for bringing this out in the open!

    Reply
  11. jim browne

    Hi Stuart.

    Has there been a D-Notice put on the Jersey Media, as nothing is coming out onto the Mainland about what is going on, seems quite for the last few weeks.

    I think my friend has already mailed you asking that if you need any help from us over here please by all means ask us, we have plenty of contacts all over the country.

    Keep yer chin up mate and keep fighting, we are all behind you.

    Jim Browne

    Reply
  12. jez

    If you were to stand for election, Stuart, you would not get my vote just in case you got H&SS again. I work at the General, and in 4 years only saw you once on the ward. I have cared for one of the Haute De La Garenne victims on more occaisions than you’ve bothered to visit the teams on the wards!
    It could be worse; if I were a child at Greenfields I would not have seen you at all!
    You have a bloody cheek proclaiming to care all of a sudden.
    And as for suggesting an anonymous poster “could be one of the abusers – or those who concealed abuse”…

    Jeremy Strickland

    Reply
  13. Stuart Syvret

    From Stuart Syvret.

    Re: Not voting for me.

    Mr Strickland.

    I would be immensely pleased – were I ever to contest another election – to not receive your vote.

    The question is hypothetical, as the last 12 months have made me realise – and fully understand – the nostrum “people get the government they deserve.”

    You, apparently, believe that I – a carpenter – should be milling around the wards, operating theatres and specialist care units – spotting the fact that Consultants, nurses, technicians – are getting things wrong – and telling them what they should be doing instead.

    Well – guess what?

    I happen to believe that people who are paid £80,000, £100,000 – a £150,000 – of tax-payers money – for their supposed expertise – to manage these areas – should be performing as required.

    When they fail to do so – when people like you are content for their performance to be crap – as long as the blame can be laid upon some non-expert fall-guy – then the public good is betrayed and failed – again and again.

    As it happens, a very substantial number of staff in H & SS are in communication with me – and have been for some years.

    Indeed – the concerns that made me conclude, back in early ’07, that I had no confidence in child protection – were brought to me by a number of front-line H & SS staff.

    Of course – the culpable small minority – people who have been grossly incompetent, unethical, stupid – or criminal – will share your view.

    The great majority are, instead, wishing for ethical and effective management.

    Sadly – an outcome unlikely to be achieved for as long as management people in the Jersey public sector get promoted according to which club they belong to, who their relatives are, who they are friends with and who they’re sleeping with.

    I’m entirely happy with my actions and performance in H & SS – as I have pointed out elsewhere – their have been 20 political terms since the end of World War II.

    Amongst that number I am the first – and only – one to recognise and attempt to stop systemic, cultural child abuse by the States of Jersey.

    You claim I “have a bloody cheek” proclaiming to care. I have always cared – as a very substantial number of victims will attest. Indeed – I must be doing something right – as 98% of communications I receive are deeply supportive.

    So, I don’t think I can be blamed for regarding with profound suspicion – even as potential abusers and concealers – those disturbingly strident few who, like you, endorse the past culture of concealment, cover-up and cosmetic glad-handing.

    A culture which has – clearly – failed catastrophically.

    Stuart Syvret.

    Reply
  14. Anonymous

    If you were to stand for election, Stuart, you would not get my vote just in case you got H&SS again. I work at the General, and in 4 years only saw you once on the ward. I have cared for one of the Haute De La Garenne victims on more occaisions than you’ve bothered to visit the teams on the wards!
    It could be worse; if I were a child at Greenfields I would not have seen you at all!
    You have a bloody cheek proclaiming to care all of a sudden.
    And as for suggesting an anonymous poster “could be one of the abusers – or those who concealed abuse”…

    Jeremy Strickland

    Dear Jez

    In the scheme of things, one less vote for Stuart shouldn’t make too much of a mark on his growing popularity amongst the islands voters.

    I have worked for Health and Social Services in all three of the main homes for almost five years and in those almost five years (up until recent times surprise surprise) I cannot recall one visit from “any” of our “leaders”, let alone Stuart.

    Have you really cared for one of the HDLG victims? If you did, you are just as guilty as the perpetrators of the child abuse crimes for not voicing up at the time. If you haven’t, please refrain from using HDLG victims in your sarcasm.

    As far as Stuart caring goes, at least one member of our establishment has the courage to stand up and say he does even if it is too little to late.

    And it would not surpise me in the slightest if one of the abusers or one who concealed the abuse was posting on this forum. What was that you said about caring for one of the victims?

    Stephen

    Reply
  15. Sigmund Fraud

    I suppose Jez who has worked with the victims as he says would vote the other mod back in then.

    and as for throwing his dummy out of the pram because you didn’t visit him at the hospital. I think this boy should grow up.

    What matters is the now!! and the future which if pillocks like Jez had his way it would all still be hidden.

    What happened to Jez saying something to someone or blowing the whistle if he was getting the victims going to him?

    How many victims and how long would he hold on the the information he had?

    Oh I forgot he still has his job! so the answer is he told nobody about what he knew of the victims and their plight, Well that makes him every bit as bad as the rest of the complete prawns who infest the Jersey Government don’t it.

    Reply
  16. Sigmund Fraud

    Hi Stuart a message to the world from Frank Walker.

    There has been no interference with the flow of information to the media whatsoever. The Police and only the Police have control over press statements issued on the investigation. There has been no news because thankfully there have been no new developments.

    From the political perspective I have given interviews to the Today programme, broadcast on Good Friday, Panorama which will be broadcast next Monday and I am doing both the Saturday Interview in the JEP on Saturday and Talk Back on the BBC on Sunday.

    My theme is that Jersey has to accept that something terrible has happened and that we won’t be able to look forward until we have brought the guilty to justice and given victims every possible support.

    There is no cover up in Jersey today, and I repeat my statement, that there will be no hiding place for those who have committed these horrendous crimes or who may in the past have let victims down by not reacting to complaints and cries for help as they should have done.

    I will shortly be announcing an independent enquiry to be headed up by a leading QC from the UK

    to investigate all aspects of the way Jersey has dealt with this crisis, both historically and currently. This will commence as soon as the police investigation has been concluded. I am determined that any impartial observer will have to conclude that we have handled every aspect of this horrible situation thoroughly and transparently.

    I hope this gives you peace of mind.

    Regards

    Frank Walker

    Reply
  17. www.fireinice2005.co.uk

    Dear Mr. Browne,

    I write in reply to your e-mail of 24 March criticising the JEP coverage of the Haut de la Garenne investigation.

    If you would care to specify what factual information, as distinct from hearsay and rumour, you believe we have failed to report, I would be in a better position to respond.

    Yours sincerely,

    Chris Bright

    Editor

    Reply
  18. Anonymous

    I hear Frank Walker is going to be making an appearence on the up coming Panorama prgramme this Monday.

    Could you let us know if you are on it, or have you seen the programme that is going to be aired? If so could you give us your thoughts on it?

    Reply
  19. Dan

    The anonymous thing…

    It is worth bearing in mind that no-one’s real identity is easily verifiable here, aside from Stuart Syvret’s – we can be sure this is not a bogus blog.

    Anyone can post here under an apparent real name. But there is no way to know if that person really is who they claim to be.

    There have been calls for a formal system on the internet, which would allow, or even force, people to use a validated real identity. But, such a system would most likely be abused anyhow, same as any other form of ID.

    Reply
  20. Anonymous

    Mr Bright,

    I think most people’s criticisms of the JEP relate to its failure to uncover or report on so many allegations of abuse in the past, and yet it seems so ready to tow the establishment line. As one states deputy said to me recently – they publish exactly the same spin that is given to us, without question.

    You then stand on your pulpit and preach editorials of sickening sicophancy that would probably guarantee you a job for life in the North Korean press , and, while on the subject of sicophancy, you will recall that very recently the JEP published a letter praising your fellow co-editor, Rob Shipley. It was a letter so toe-curlingly sicophantic, it was an embarrasement to journalism. I really do not believe that any newspaper in the free world would even think of publishing such drivel.

    Reply
  21. Anonymous

    Fire In Ice could you publish the e-mail you sent to the JEP on here?

    The JEP are not in the habbit of publishing any facts if they are in any way detremental to our “powers that be”

    Chris Bright and Rob Shipleys hands are (in my opinion) swimming in blood and have had ample opportunity and proof to expose failings in our government system.

    Their relationship with Frank Walker and co is common knowledge, not only in Jersey, but thanks to the internet, worldwide.

    You would do well to keep your eye on this site and others like it if you want to learn the facts about the “stories” published by the calaberators, sorry the JEP.

    Reply
  22. Ms De Bate,from Purley

    To Mr Bright .
    It had not really occured to me that your your newspaper could be implicated in the recent events and accusations of cover-ups ,until I studied the paper over several weeks to see how the outside media was recording events and how your own journalists were reporting things.
    It became very clear after two or three days,that the absence of any serious investigative journalism was missing from any of your articles.
    Your unfailing support of “the Establishment”,was cringe worthy.
    You have a captive market over here.
    The nature of Island life makes for gossip and speculation.That is your bread and butter.I will admit currently people do not buy it for the sensational reporting of current and Global affairs ,but to keep up with Hatches,Matches and Dispatches. Colleagues and myself at work ,like to discuss what planning permits are being discussed .
    We like to see our kids achievements,photos of nativity plays .Dogs that have won a rosette at crufts .
    Who is selling their house,who has broken the speed limit at Bel Royal.This is what your paper is currently good at.
    But unlike a lot of people I can access impartial information from other sources including the net.
    You know as well as I do ,that an awful lot of people read and believe anything that is before them,so you have an obligation to us to provide us with accurate objective information.
    With regard to recent events this was your chance to show us, and the outside World how good you could be ,but you have flunked it.!!
    You must have the choice of graduates applying for positions on your paper,why then can you not have some serious debate,instead of stifling it.?
    There must be some repressed hack lurking within your organisation ,at least give them a chance ?

    Reply
  23. Sigmund Fraud

    We can never expect the truth from a rag that is run bye (JEP) Jersey Establishment Paedophiles, now can we?

    They have printed very little about the atrocities of late however they have an even worse record when it come to the history behind the events now coming to light and in fact they have been every bit as bad at reporting these abuses as most of the oligarchs who are to blame without doubt for the very reason these horrors are referred to as “Historic”

    Fire in ice asked the JEP why this is, as well as whether there will be a D-Notice placed upon the press as was apparent when the Dunblane murders of 16 children by known paedophile Thomas Hamilton On March 13, 1996,

    The victims’ families challenged the 100-year ban because they believed that the public had a right to view the documents.

    Officials insisted that the ban was instated only to protect the identities of the children named in the reports. However, Neil Mackay stated in his March 2003 Sunday Herald article that there were only “a handful of documents” that related to children or named alleged abuse victims. Many believed that the ban was illegal and was actually instated to protect high-level officials, such as local police and authorities, from wrongdoing.

    Because of situations like that of Dunblane and lessons not learned we now have episodes all over the UK, Jersey and Guernsey.

    Where powerful people can put the squeeze on the press to silence them.

    Reply
  24. Anonymous

    Mr Strickland – slacker!

    It is apparent from your recent posts that you are a person of subnormal imbecilic intelligence who demonstrates a profound inability to sufficiently stimulate your mind to determine right and wrong, truth and lies, good and evil, rather, YOUR ‘current diatribe’ is belying the ‘focus on the real matter’; the concealment by the authorities of failure to provide vulnerable children with moral, ethical and lawful protection. Sadly, in the diminutive corners of your genius you also do not hold a universal compassion for the victims of these historic occurrences but rather contempt for all who attempt to speak out against an understandably apprehensible catastrophic failure of a gerentologically advanced system.

    You admit that on more than one ‘occasisions’ – an attempt at Jersey pattoir I think? – you have cared for a victim, and therefore admit to failing to follow the core values of nursing, to improve the health & WELFARE of the patient, by simply not doing anything about it, not voicing up, more than once, and allowing the child to return to an insecure environment. You then post comments containing a disturbingly sarcastic undertone, which utilises the victims’ tragedies to state the point that Stuart did not visit you, bar one occasion, in your four years “work”.

    Jez, ‘Get some help, please.’

    When did the following last make an appearance to you:

    Chief Executive Officer
    Mike Pollard
    Directorate Manager of Surgery
    Angela Body
    Directorate Manager of Medicine
    Mark Littler
    Directorate Manager of Mental Health
    Ian Dyer
    Directorate Manager of Social Services
    Marnie Baudains
    Directorate Manager of Public Health
    Rosemary Geller
    Medical Director
    Richard Lane
    Director of Nursing and Governance
    Rose Naylor
    Director of Corporate Planning and Performance
    Richard Jouault

    “Would you like a sweetie little girl?”

    “God defend me from the Welsh fairy,” – William Shakespeare (1564 – 1616)

    Reply
  25. TonyB

    When Esther Rantzen engages with child-care issues, she does not need to indulge in virtiolic polemic, and yet she gets her point across, probably better, because that kind of rhetoric always suggests some kind of point-scoring. She managed to make Senator Frank Walker squirm on Newsnight because of the callousness of his infamous “shaft Jersey internationally” phrase, and she managed to do that speaking softly and politely, but firmly, and bringing the matter back to the children who had been abused. In fact, her intervention was probably more damaging to Senator Walker than Jeremy Paxman’s more bruising one.
    The idea that politeness and a reluctance to engage with the truth are opposed is a false dichotomy.

    Will you censor this comment like the JEP does when they don’t want to hear something? I will be watching.

    Reply
  26. Anonymous

    Please note that I have been criticising the JEP in this email I sent to them, as you can see from the mail I sent on 24/03/08. I just asked a question.

    Hi.

    Can you please tell me if there has been a D-Notice put on the press regarding the home abuse in Jersey, as there has been no news coming onto the mainland for sometime now.

    Also can I have your word that there will be no ‘Cover up’ of events during this investigation.

    Jim Browne

    They replied.

    Dear Mr. Browne,

    I write in reply to your e-mail of 24 March criticising the JEP coverage of the Haut de la Garenne investigation.

    If you would care to specify what factual information, as distinct from hearsay and rumour, you believe we have failed to report, I would be in a better position to respond.

    Yours sincerely,

    Chris Bright

    Editor

    Reply
  27. Anonymous

    Hi Stuart.

    I seem to have upset JEP for asking if they had had a D-Notice issued to them regarding any information getting out to the press or media, it was only a simple question and they get their knickers in a twist.

    So I send this reply.

    Dear Chris.

    I am not criticising your newspaper in anyway, I am just asking if the press in Jersey have been issued with a D-Notice, and also would like to ask that there be no cover up from ANY party regarding the issues of this case.

    I am sure you do a wonderful job with your paper and proud of it.

    One of the reasons I ask this, is that there seems to be now news whatsoever reaching the mainland at this moment in time since the Army went to the site. I myself am a survivor of child abuse in care on the mainland and have been fighting the courts now for 12 years, I am also a lead case for 60 other claiments. So please don’t think that I am in anyway criticising your newspaper.

    Many thanks

    Jim Browne a Survivor.

    Reply
  28. Stuart Syvret

    From Stuart Syvret.

    Re: Tonyb & Esther Rantzen.

    Sorry, Tony – but I think you’re missing the boat on all this.

    Why should you and the Jersey establishment be so hung-up on “politeness”?

    I’m afraid you’re wrong as well to suggest that “politeness” and a reluctance to engage with the truth are not able to constitute the same approach – they frequently do.

    Don’t you see that the entire, traditional “culture” of political discourse in Jersey – based as it has been and everyone being terribly, terribly polite to each other – has caused the truth to remain unspoken and hidden for all these decades?

    As I said to a previous commentator – give me honesty over “politeness” every time.

    However – having got that out of the way I should point out a few facts.

    Go back to those misty days of the first half of 2007. Consider – I gave an honest answer to a question which was put to me in the States assembly.

    In essence, I said I had no confidence in the child protection apparatus of Jersey and that I was going to commission an external, independent review.

    The answer was, actually, polite, didn’t name anyone specifically, was truthful and frank – and, as the Greffier of the States subsequently confirmed to me – was entirely compatible with all relevant standing orders, members code & Ministerial code.

    So there you have a “polite” answer – one which complied with every relevant rule of the assembly.

    Yet this answer subsequently became the main ground for seeking my dismissal on the alleged grounds that to openly speak of failing systems was to “undermine staff moral” – and – quite extraordinarily – “to put children at increased risk”.

    The answer I gave may certainly have undermined the moral of about 10 over-promoted, lazy, incompetent, dishonest and dangerous senior civil servants – but as the response I received personally from many front-line staff demonstrated – having the truth spoken actually boosted their moral – considerably.

    And my answer – which followed your expectation of “politeness”, elicited from the Jersey establishment a dangerous and really quite shameful lie. A lie which Walker & Co cling to even to this day; namely that to speak out against failure “was to put children at increased risk”.

    The truth is the diametric opposite of this. Transparency and honesty are always required in the sphere of child protection. It is paedophiles and those who wish to conceal the activities of paedophiles who advocate secrecy.
    “Would you like a sweetie, little girl? And it will be our secrete eh?”

    So, Tony – in the early stages, I followed your nostrum of “politeness” – and it elicited nothing but lies and oppression form the Jersey oligarchy.

    And I was – in case you didn’t spot this – very polite during every media interview, including Newsnight and others. I think you will find that the foul, ranting abuse was coming from Frank Walker – so it is he who needs some instruction on “politeness”.

    Stuart Syvret.

    Reply
  29. jim browne

    Hi Stuart.

    Having set eyes on the Sharp Report, I have to agree with you that the Child Protection issues went right out of the window. How can Mr Hyde had no right to question a young man or child in front of his parents, this puts the child under Pressure and he will not talk in from of them due to his shame. Jervis -Dykes should have been suspened as soon as the complaint was made and Mr Hyde should have informed either the police or the relevent services. This was not done and is in breach of the child protection policy.

    You were in you right to complain about about these actions and should not be sacked from your Position, if anything the people from Jersey should back you to the hilt and even promote you.

    Never give in Stuart as you have the support from many people here on the mainland.

    People should not remain Anonymous when they post, they have nothing to hide, stand up and be counted, because if we don’t, we will never be believed and will spend the rst of our lives in hiding.

    God Bless you Stuart you are a fighter like us.

    Reply
  30. Disgruntled

    Syvret wrote:

    “10 over-promoted, lazy, incompetent, dishonest and dangerous senior civil servants”

    Add yourself to the top of the list Syvret.

    “Would you like a sweetie, little girl? And it will be our secrete eh?”

    Now that is sick.

    Reply
  31. Stuart Syvret

    From Stuart Syvret

    Disgruntled

    I think we can assume from this that you are a paedophile or/and one of the culpable senior civil servants.

    Or a member of the same ‘lodge’.

    Or one of the local spivs who place pursuing their finical self-interests over child protection.

    The phrase “would you like a sweetie, little girl?” could well be the descriptive motto of the Jersey establishment – especially the senior civil service – for this whole disgusting episode.

    I mean – what could be a more apposite phrase to sum-up a situation in which the Jersey Directorate Manager of Social Services – THE civil servant with prime reasonability for child protection – authors a letter which claims and asserts that to speak out against failing systems is to “put children at increased risk”?

    A foul lie – driven and motivated by pure self-interest – which sought to close down debate, scrutiny and discussion.

    A desperate attempt to hide decades of gross incompetence.

    Every single respectable child protection organisation knows that secrecy and silence are the cloaks of child abusers. This is why every single good organisation says it’s always better to speak out against child protection failures.

    Yet the relevant senior Jersey civil service figures took the opposite approach – preferring self-protecting secrecy over child safety.

    It actually speaks volumes about the calibre of the Jersey establishment that a significant number of these managers are not yet suspended.

    It’s as plain-as-day that a substantial number of them must be – and will be – dismissed – many of them, in truth, being, essentially, unemployable in the first place.

    Actually “10 over promoted, lazy, incompetent, dishonest and dangerous civil servants” was a rather charitable under-estimate.

    If I were to include into my condemnatory calculation those who, just for example, used to routinely beat-up kids in homes – or assault kids in youth clubs – or allow paedophiles to ‘resign’ – rather than report them immediately to the police – or fail to respond ethically to gross failures in order to avoid questions concerning their own competence – then I think you would find the number somewhat higher.

    So – culpable civil servant, abuser, and concealer of abuse, politically motivated Jersey spiv – whoever you are, and others like you – keep the strident assaults upon transparency and accountability coming.

    I can’t trace your identities – but my friends in the Police Force could if they chose.

    Stuart Syvret.

    Reply
  32. Anonymous

    Stuart I agree “digruntled” could very well be a part of the Walker brigade.

    You have explained how being polite and conformist only leads to cocealment and cover up. It is baltantly clear The Walker Brigade and kiddie ticklers are doing everything in their power to discredit you and your fantastic work in trying to expose them.

    Unfortunately the closer you get to exposing them, the more people like “digruntled” are going to turn up trying to divert your intentions.

    You are a real hope and inspiration keep going, you have a huge amount of people depending on you, worldwide!

    Reply
  33. Sigmund Fraud

    Blogger Disgruntled said…

    “Would you like a sweetie, little girl? And it will be our secrete eh?”

    Now that is sick.

    You said it disgruntled and we all know why your disgruntled!!!

    Wouldn’t take your sweetie eh?

    people like this make me puke bottless pillocks who don’t have the decency to address people in the correct manor then go on to slag them of not understanding what Stuart meant by his carefully chosen words so as not to offend this pissgruntled ignoramus pops up with the comments he can hardly hide behind I guess your one of them then.

    I would suggest you stand upon a foundation bereft of all education.

    Reply
  34. Anonymous

    Stuart

    I note the tone of the comments and while it is opinion it is some what distracting.

    The new chair of the child protection committee made an excellent point – separation of roles. You cannot provide and police yourself. This message is the way forward.

    If the States is committed to change then this needs to be instigated in the next few weeks.

    The traditional description for public provision of services is “international high quality”

    Perhaps with an independent examination of service provision, the public will at last have some facts to judge such claims.

    This principle could then be extended to all service provision. Abuse happens when areas are not monitored.
    The health service have never been independently inspected.

    The following failings are a small illustration of the problem

    1. The continued employment of a nurse convicted of theft of drugs. The nurse was moved to the school of nursing and the line manager who failed to act (the spouse) has gone to the A&E department.

    2. The lack of a drug error policy. Does the hospital report to errors to the national patient safety agency? Are people told they’ve had the wrong drugs?

    3. The lack of independence in the complaints process.
    The standard response “no case to answer” following self investigation.

    4. The lack of patient information – no information -no consent. There is a shocking disregard to the right to information.

    5. The lack of proper checking of locum doctors – Anyone ever read the Elwood case in the UK.

    6 The children’s unit. The chief nurse stated in the press that the staff had training in paediatric resus techniques – The recent cohort all failed – its the talk of the hospital.

    7. The issue of Greenfield was blamed on the building. Buildings don’t bully or abuse people do. You have a new building – have the staff changed?

    8. Investigation into a patient’s death by a member of the team involved in the case (see point 5) – no conflict there obviously .

    Remember our services are second to none!

    Reply
  35. Stuart Syvret

    From Stuart Syvret

    Re Regulation and Standards in the Jersey Hospital.

    Yes – I agree with all of these points.

    I will do a substantive post on these issues when I have time.

    Whilst all these changes are very necessary – the “Cultural” resistance to such oversight and regulation is immense. God knows – I’ve tried for years.

    Achieving it won’t be easy.

    To those who read this blog, and who work in H & SS, if you get the chance, please spread word of its existence.

    I did wish to communicate with staff to respond to the steaming pile of horse dung issued by Mike Pollard last year in which he asserted – amongst another load of lies – that child protection standards in Jersey were fantastic.

    He issued this letter a few days after my dismissal as H & SS Minister.

    But guess what? – Within hours of me getting the boot, the establishment had the States of Jersey e-mail system rigged to prevent me from mailing any of the H & SS group addresses.

    So I have been denied a right-of-reply by a few unelected, self-serving apparatchiks.

    This blog is my only means of communicating with staff – so please spread the word.

    Thanks

    Stuart Syvret.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.