I have often argued that the Channel Islands have been subject to regulatory capture. That is, that these quasi-independent parts of the UK (for that is what they are) with their Westminster tolerated ability to pass local tax law have long been captured by the financial services industry in a way that means any vestige of real democracy disappeared long ago.
The capture of the media - even the BBC, just noted - is part of this process.
And another loyal part of the Guernsey media loyally supports the cause. This is a report from yesterday:
A politician says he will not resign over comments he made about Guernsey’s fulfilment industry and which appeared in the national media.
Deputy Barry Brehaut’s (pictured) remarks, supporting UK campaigners who want to close the low value consignment relief ‘loophole’ that allows goods from Guernsey below £18 in value to be imported into the UK VAT-free, featured on The Daily Telegraph’s website.
Accountant Harry Dick-Cleland said Deputy’s Brehaut’s comments smacked of incompetence by threatening the livelihoods of more than 600 people who work in Guernsey’s fulfilment industry.
In a call to yesterday’s BBC Guernsey phone-in, on which deputies Barry Paint and Graham Guille were guests, he said Deputy Brehaut should resign from government.
Note that 'national' media means the UK media: implicit recognition of being part of that whole and that Guernsey is not independent.
Note too the implicit structure of the article - that the politician is wrong not to resign for saying - as he made clear in the BBC interview I've linked, that he thinks Guernsey has a repetitional risk issue from the UK VAT abuse that takes place through it.
And it's not incompetence to draw attention to the fact that this change is on the cards - it's a recognition of reality - but only the critics get space - with the absurd demand that anyone at all elected to the States must follow the party line laid down by finance. It was of course a finance industry person making the suggestion.
This is the reality of life in tax havens - quasi-jurisdictions that have long lost any vestige of democratic accountability in the interests of finance.
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:
Buy me a coffee!
The Channel Islands and the Isle of Sham are to all realistic purposes single-party, state controlled oligarchies which, behind a facade of democracy, are not reluctant to crush opposition.
All meaningful power — the legislature, the executive, senior civil servants, the prosecution service, the police, most of the local media and all significant employers are controlled by a coalition of interests united in greed, perceived superior intellect, social status and financial resources.
These privileged individuals may not always like each other – but at critical times they invariably unite to ruthlessly corrupt power in defence of their lucrative status quo.
For obvious reasons this is little opposition to the oligarchies’ entrenched antidemocratic monopoly.
But thanks to R.M.(and others) change is indeed on-the-cards.
Barry Brehaut is very brave to stand up for common sense and fair play. This isn’t about anything other than tax avoidance and market distortion and he recognises the growing damage that LVCR abuse is doing to Guernsey and also the clear unfairness of so called competition based on a tax advantage. Its gratifying to see that amongst the usual howling pack some other Islanders are posting supportive comments and recognising what UK retailers have had to face and what is driving their anger. Thanks to the UKs negligence and the Channel Islands promotion of this scheme there is now an unholy mess to deal with.
Intolerance of dissent is a hallmark of the political culture of the Channel Islands. I listened to the Guernsey Talkback programme and noted that Deputy Graham Guille used the expression “careless talk could cost livelihoods”, as a way of saying that Deputy Brehaut should not have dared to discuss a sensitive economic issue. He was really talking about the finance industry, which politicians know not to criticise, not that such thoughts exist in Guernsey.
Jersey is equally intollerant. Politicians there learn quickly, if they want a career, to talk about residents parking and yellow lines rather than anything of economic consequence. The political elite are very hostile to anyone commenting critically about island institutions in the UK media; it is an offence called “going outside the island”. Recently Deputy Montfort Tadier was heavily criticised in the local media for revealing on the BBC’s Mark Thomas comedy programme that there were high levels of poverty and inequality in Jersey.
Premier Shareholder Group, as ever, sums up the problem succinctly.
Incidentally, Guernsey still has a two hour Sunday morning Talkback programme with two elected politicians. In Jersey that slot has been closed and relegated to one hour on a Thursday evening between 6 and 7pm. Very few ring in to comment and increasingly records are played to fill in the time. Dumbing down or what?
Having been on the receiving end of some of the vitriol spouted by Jersey journalists (among others) when anyone suggests that Jersey is part of the UK, I have reconsidered my position on this. To be honest I understand how they feel. I live in Medway. The Mayor of London thinks he can put a London airport here. But Medway is not part of London, it is its own authority. I may not like what my local authority does, but I could get very angry about the London mayor trying to control what is a separate authority, even though part of the UK. Similarly, I have seen proposals to bring the Channel Islands and Isle of Man under the remit of Westminster, and the argument usually used in favour of this is their tax haven status. But they are independent entities which are not subject to the UK government, although they are subject to the Crown. They can set their own tax levels and it is none of Westminster’s business. Westminster may choose to make new laws preventing companies domiciled in the UK from transferring funds to Jersey to avoid tax. But it can’t interfere with the tax arrangements in Jersey itself, except by negotiation. That would be imposing our government on another country.
Regarding the EU’s involvement in clamping down on tax tavens – are the Channel Islands actually part of the EU?
@Frances Coppola
We’re going to have to differ here
a) The Crown is the UK parliament – let’s not beat about the bush. It has been since the 17 century (well it was England and Wales then – but UK now)
2) All Crown Dependencies legislation is Privy Council approved – and heavily vetted
3) These places are not independent of UK – hence for international relations purposes are part of EU so comply with its requirement on tax law – they have no choice – and so their tax is independent by concession only – just like that of a council
4) These are not countries – they issue UK passports – a sure sign they’re British
In other words your argument here is wrong
It’s a convenient pretence for the City of London that they’re independent – but they’re not – and the existence of civil servants in London with responsibility for them is sure evidence of the fact
Richard
Based on your point 4, none of Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland are “countries” because they also use UK passports. Which of course is nonsense – each of them is a separate country. The passport position is a total red herring.
@Steve
They are parts of the UK with devolved powers
That’s it
Sure they have cultural fondations as nations – but so was East Anglia once
In the context discussed here they’re not countries
And nor are the Crown Dependencies
Their name says it – the Crown is the UK parliament and they’re dependent on it
Guernsey’s parliament declared unfit for purpose
In an independent report, commissioned by the parliament itself into the way the Channel island is governed, the States of Guernsey failed six out of six tests of good governance.
Inspectors found that the island’s elected chamber had no clear direction, lacked accountability, was unable to address concerns about the conduct of its staff and lacked clear leadership.
The island’s local newspaper, the Guernsey Press, described the parliament as “a basket case”, saying: “Guernsey’s government does not know where it is going, has no directional leadership, has vague and drawn-out decision-making processes and, when it does make a decision, that’s often based on flaky information.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6176148/Guernseys-parliament-declared-unfit-for-purpose.html
You were saying Richard?
@Premier Shareholder Group
That’s so true on Guernsey
And Jersey may be worse!