Geoff Cook of Jersey Finance wrote two comments on the blog yesterday, wanting to set the record straight on some things — such as the fact that Jersey is a transparent jurisdiction.
Of course, as any objective observer knows who lives beyond the goldfish bowl that is Jersey, the place is as opaque as a bricked in window.
He tried to conclude by saying we differ in our views. I had to disagree. I wrote:
Don’t for one minute think we just differ: that massively understates the situation. I oppose the abuse that you promote, which I think as shocking and as undermining of humankind as slavery was, and look forward to the day when it is outlawed by all civilised societies, including the one that will one day I hope prevail in Jersey.
That’s not a difference: that’s an entirely different world view.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Jersey
Without appearing to be an obsequious Mr Echo of Richard Murphy …
In this matter may his words be chiselled in stone.
Geoff Cook is right and shows why he is head of Jersey Finance Limited. You should stop knocking Jersey and its people Richard, its not nice.
@Jamie
Yesterday Richard Murphy wrote:
“I’m not obsessed with Jersey – I love the place and its people. I have nothing against them and have entity for no one. But I will condemn wrongdoing where ever I see it, and your organisation promotes it in my opinion.”
So clearly Mr. Murphy loves both Jersey and Jersey people. That IS nice.
Why Geoff Cook is head of Jersey Finance Limited is clear enough for all to see.
In a fair and decent world the governments of Jerseys, Guernsey and the Isle of Man would be required to act legally and decently; and in this regard Mr. Murphy’s views are rapidly gaining support from a growing number of people – whilst the few relics living on these islands are rapidly diminishing in number.
That IS nice.
@ PSG, are you saying that the governments of Jersey, Guernsey and/or the Isle of Man have acted illegally? Please could you point show where there has occured?
@Jamie
I do not knock Jersey or its people stop I knock the financial system that you host
I do not play the people – I am playing the issue. It’s very different
@Greg
I think that there is good argument, for example, that these three places have not complied with the requirements of the EU code of conduct onbusiness taxation. Whether that is a legal requirement or not, compliance with international norms of behaviour is an indication of willingness to cooperate, and I don’t see it.
@Greg
The PSG always appreciates receipt of enquiries which help to promote our campaign To clear-up any misunderstanding; the PSG comment was intended from an EU and UK perspective.
The governments of your little islands appear to allow or condone behaviour which would not be tolerated under EU or UK regulation. Regulation which, as the world knows, do not apply to Jersey, Guernsey and/or the Isle of Man as they are (conveniently) not a part of either the EU or UK. This situation may be (at the moment) beneficial to the island’s economies, but it can bring unwelcome repercussions to innocent people.
The PSG’s knowledge of these matters is confined to regulation relating to financial services — industries which provide a valuable contribution to the islands’ economies. When a dossier of more than fifty separate documents is distributed to interested parties (other than the island’s regulatory authorities) the reliability the PSG campaign is justified.
Hopefully the above remedies any confusion in the matter, but please do not hesitate to ask for more information.
The PSG office is now closed until Tuesday.
PS: “Occurred” has two “Rs”.
But it’s not illegal activity, which is what the PSG was suggesting. As far as I can see, the EU are saying it is against the “spirit” of the code. Which is not the same.
[…] I said, in a comment aimed at Geoff Cook recently: Don’t for one minute think we just differ: that massively understates the situation. I oppose […]