Senator Philip Ozouf has been playing nasty, and true to totalitarian form, in an interview on the BBC with Deputy Montfort Tadier this morning.
As readers of the blog over the weekend will know, Tadier has said there is tax evasion on Jersey - which is no news to anyone. As HMRC said in a report published in March:
So, outside Jersey it is widely recognised that there is substantial tax evasion facilitated by the Island. Ozouf denies it and has demanded Tadier retract and apologise to the people of Jersey, with threats attached. This morning the threats got nastier. He said to Tadier live on air (and I think the transcript is about right, although he made it last longer, and the end was spoken over):
"You claim to have knowledge of wrongdoing. If you aren't passing it across to the financial crimes unit, you are wrong"
The threat is obvious. So now Ozouf, who has already shown he clearly does not believe in democracy, is now using the Jersey police state, previously used against Senator Stuart Syvret, to now threaten Deputy Tadier. Ozouf knows, as any reasonable person knows, that systemic proof does not require a police report, and that is what Tadier is referring to - systemic failures. But Ozouf is deliberately manipulating this to create a climate of fear that prevents discussion of the role of the finance industry. This is not just bullying; it is state bullying to oppress free speech. As Ozouf also said in the interview:
Loose tongues cost jobs in Jersey
That means that not only is Jersey now, in its ruling elites eyes, a single party state where opposition is not allowed, it is also a place that threatens free speech that states what is obviously true.
But let's also be clear about this. As the Kilbrandon Report of 1973 - which is still the key source on the issue of relationships between the UK and Jersey - says:
- The Crown has ultimate responsibility for the good government of the Islands
And as parliament noted in 2010:
Kilbrandon explains that the basis on which the Crown has ultimate responsibility for the good government of the Crown Dependencies stems partly from the fact that, with the UK, they are all part of the British Isles. Whilst this did not make uniformity essential, it was "nevertheless highly desirable that the institutions and the practices of the Islands should not differ beyond recognition from those of the United Kingdom". All parties were in favour of the Crown Dependencies expressing their individuality, but it was recognised that "the British Islands were an entity in the eyes of the world, and the United Kingdom Government would be held responsible internationally if practices in the Islands were to overstep the limits of acceptability".
Threatening the use of local police to stop free speech on a matter of significance, when it is raised by an elected member of the local parliament, has to be overstepping the limits of acceptability.
Will the UK act? I think it is time to do so. The destruction of free speech and democracy in Jersey has to be a step too far.
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:
Free speech is allowed, it just depends who is doing the speaking. Does anyone remember this article from last year?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/26/jersey-threatens-independence-tax-backlash
Strange how Philip Bailhache was not rounded on by Ozouf for such damaging comments don’t you think?
If you have the time to read the article you will see that Ozouf actually supported Bailhache’s views.
It’s a strange island we live in.
Richard,
Whilst on the subject of good governance and the UK’s role in Jersey, it is worth your readers learning about the recent electoral reform referendum we had in Jersey.
Jersey’s electoral system is known to be very undemocratic and unrepresentative, so we had an Electoral Commission draft some reform proposals.
The commission was filled with politicians with vested interests in their seats being maintained (as well as getting an advantage for their political perspective), so unsurprisingly the reform option backed by the establishment was the option that actually made our electoral system LESS representative than what it currently is and gives those in the country areas (which are more conservative/ traditionalist) a vote that is worth double the vote that people in the urban areas (which are more progressive and social democratic) get.
The reform option won the referendum by a tiny margin, on a turn out that was incredibly low, after a campaign filled with lies by the establishment.
The system proposed is in contravention of the Venice Commission Code of Good Practice on Electoral Matters, which could arguably make it against the ECHR too.
If there is an issue that requires the UK to intervene, it is this.
The Jersey establishment are unapologetically stealing democracy in Jersey and gerrymandering our electoral boundaries.
The feudal authorities in Sark attempted to do the same thing and the UK Ministry of Justice refused to pass their legislation and told them to go back to the drawing board. They should do the same with Jersey.
As your blog shows, this is just one of many things that those in power in Jersey think they can get away with, and I look forward to the day that the UK stands up and says “no more”.
I was aware
It’s another of their crimes
As Kilbrandon himself noted however:
There is room for difference of opinion on the circumstances in which it would be proper to exercise that power [i.e. intervening in the island’s affairds]. Intervention would certainly be justifiable to preserve law and order in the event of grave internal disruption. Whether there are other circumstances in which it would be justified is a question which is so hypothetical as in our view not to be worth pursuing. We think that the United Kingdom Government and Parliament ought to be very slow to seek to impose their will on the Islands merely on the grounds that they know better than the Islands what is good for them; there is ample evidence in the differences between United Kingdom and Island legislation in social matters to show that this policy has in fact been followed for very many years.
What you are talking about is essentially this – a disagreement as to what you think is better for Jersey. Ozouf is right (I don’t always say this) – tax evasion is a crime in the island. It goes on sadly – I’m sure, but probably not as much as in the UK!
Your proposal for the UK to intervene for the sake of a spat about the extent to which or otherwise it is taking place however pushes even your sensationlist agenda to an extreme!
No, this is about bringing the UKL into disrepute
Ozouf does that rather well
It would not be so worrying except for the fact he has real power
Richard
You have hit the nail on the head!
It is time for the UK to intervene to ensure good government in Jersey.
There are far too many serious scandals going on, viz
The sacking of the Island’s Deputy Baliff (see http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/jersey-judge-crisis)
The sacking of the Police Chief (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10597972)
The imprisonment of the Magistrate for fraud (designate) (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-19826792)
These three are just a few of the many serious wrongdoings going on in Government here
The comment your are wrong not to report a suspected crime doesn’t constitute a threat does it?
There is a general principle, at least under UK laww, that unless you have a special relationship with someone, or for another example are working in the regulated sector and have a suspicion, there is no need to report a crime.
Isn’t the reference just to a civic duty rather than a legal obligation?
I felt the tone was meant to be menacing – and was
Along with the rest of what was said
“Lawson: The Banker’s Poison is Out”
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/05/lawson-the-bankers-poison-is-out/
“Sadly, we are not making this up”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-06/latest-contribution-us-gdp-promises-no-really
As the old song goes, “There maybe troubles ahead”.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-22433249
http://www.jerseyfinance.je/ceo-blog/le-parisien#.UYk-q8xwaUk
I must thank Geoff Cook for providing a translation of the whole article which appeared in the French newspaper. Until today I wasn’t aware of the other stories it covered and the other sources they had spoken to.
So, well done Geoff you have now allowed me to know much more than Montfort ever said. Talk about cutting of your nose to spite your face.
Any sensible organisation would have just printed Montfort’s piece, not the bit from the industry insider who said “In trust matters, here, tax avoidance is not the exception, it’s the rule!”
Epic fail Geoff, your wish to smear Montfort has clouded your judgement badly.
“Thames Valley Police, on the advice of the Fraud Group of the Crown Prosecution Service, has charged eight people following a large-scale investigation into Corruption and other offences originating from the Halifax Bank of Scotland branch in Reading, Berkshire.”
http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/newsevents/newsevents-pressreleases/newsevents-pressreleases-item.htm?id=241720