Tuesday 4 July 2017

Senator Gorst's first challenge.


The Chief Minister did a decently statesman like job in his response to the publication of the care inquiry report.  He apologised to survivors and victims  up front and accepted all the recommendations. Chief minister shocked saddened sorry

In reality he could do little else.  The findings of the inquiry were critical of pretty much every aspect they looked into.  There were no straws to clutch at.  Even the fig leaf of the Williamson report that has been used before to claim progress is being made was  holed.

But that isn't the challenge I had in mind.  His immediate problem is what to do about deputy Andrew Lewis.  He is currently chair of the  Public Accounts committee and a member of the Chairman's committee The purpose and role of the commitee can be seen at Public Accounts  It is not trivial body having reported on such things  as e-gov, the innovation fund, financial management and internal audit. 

From the care inqury: "We find that Andrew Lewis lied to the States Assembly about the Metropolitan Police Service report, stating that he had sight of it when he had not. We can readily see why these acts have given rise to public suspicion that all or some of those involved were acting improperly and that they were motivated by a wish to discredit or close down investigations into child abuse.”

It simply isn't possible for him to continue as chair of the Public Accounts committee.  A vote of no confidence could be brought to remove him, but I don't think that can happen before the in committee debate on the care inquiry report.  And it  surely isn't appropriate for him to participate in that given the statement made by the inquiry.  Actually it goes further .

The phrase "these acts have given rise to public suspicion that all or some of those involved were acting improperly"  is referring to States members and very senior cvil servants .  Prima facie evidence that  his actions have brought the  Assembly and the States into disrepute.   That is a suspension issue.  

If the Chief Minister's words in response to the publication of the care inquiry report are to mean anything I can see no other option.  If he does not act on that finding  then he  undermines the report and the inquiry.  No confidence in Deputy Lewis as chair of the Public Accounts committee does not address the issues relating to the care inquiry and where he lied - to the Assembly and effectively to the public of the Island. If we had a recall mechanism I think this is exactly the sort of scenario it would be applicable. But we dont so it has to be immediate suspension.  


15 comments:

  1. Tony at Andrew Lewis Care Inquiry goes into some detail of the background and what was said at the debate. Worth a read.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mark, isn't Lewis being thrown to the wolves to protect the Bailhache brothers and others? Isn't the real story everything, simply everything the report avoids- the structural deficits, the bent judiciary, the underlying Jersey Way. Interesting that addressing the meaning of TJW is recommended by the COI when really, the recently knighted William Bailhache epitomises all that is bad about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sure he is being thrown to the wolves. And yes there's much more to come about the points you raise. The key thing about dealng with Lewis is that it needs to be done immediately. I've just heard the PPC's answer to deputy Tadier's emergency question - PPC are going to deal with it next week. That means after the in committee debate on the report. Lewis gets the chance to lie again about what happened. No wonder the public think the States disfunctional.

      Delete
  3. Mark.

    You wrote:

    "his actions have brought the Assembly and the States into disrepute. That is a suspension issue."

    You have hit the nail on the head. The longer he stays part of the States it will remain in disrepute. If CM Gorst is serious about a culture change then he needs to get rid of Deputy Lewis and his ilk.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Mark for your reply to my previous comment.
      I agree with you and VFC about the SOJ being in disrepute with Lewis.
      But what about the Bailhache brothers? Surely their presence is also problematic if this culture change is going to be addressed. And what about those who've left the SOJ like Walker, Le Marquand and others. If Gorst is serious, these peoples past actions should be highlighted too and if they sit on government quango boards today, they too should be forced out IMO. It's a shame the report did not go into depth on the structural issues as I fear nothing will really change without this being addressed.

      Delete
    2. Slightly different scenario with the Bailhaches . Lewis case is clear cut the inquiry report says he lied. Thats good enough evidence for action , it demands action. The CoI skirted round the issues of judicial system and law officers citing the Terms of Reference. A bit of a bad show given the chair was specifically empowered to request changes to TOR's if she felt it appropriate, but she didnt. I commented earlier that Lewis is being thrown to the wolves, the question is to protect whom?

      Perhaps I'm not totally independently minded here see. state media

      Delete
  4. I really do think that it is not our best route for Gorst to "suspend" Lewis or to ask for that. Far better to go through PPC, go through all the usual channels. Reasons?

    1) we collectively need to keep this issue alive. It will die, if it does not receive the "oxygen of publicity" The Lewis story will provide some of that oxygen. In order to keep up any pressure at all on the whole response to the Recommendations, we need stories.

    2) The more he protests, the worse it gets for him, the more he perjures himself, the more his allies and minders are in the frame.

    3) THINK

    It is not about the joy of a quick win, it is about winning over the States and the public and what will best serve this end.

    4) By challenging PPC, we force them to consider the moral and political sues, close up, at first hand. They probably will call him in. More publicity, more chances for Lewis to say whatever he will say.

    If all channels fail, then put pressure on Gorst to bring a proposition. I do not believe an antagonistic approach is the right one - yet.

    Remember also, the real aim is that he ends up in court

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Daniel, PPC aren't meeting till next week - and today Lewis spoke in the committee debate talking largely about himself of course.

      I dont think anyone other than Lewis is in the frame on this Some would be very happy for it to continue with him the magicians distraction while business as ususal continues behind the curtain.

      Suspending or ejecting Lewis isn't a quick win, it wont change the policies or mindset in the States. It would be removing an obstacle to good governance and the rule of law, and give credance t the wods feh CM etc that change wil happen. He wont end up in court even if he has perjured himslef in the States and before the CoI -he is covered by parliamentary privilege under standing orders.

      Delete
  5. This new Children's Commissioner. How about it Mark?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is only going to be of use if a lot of the other things in the report come about, especially the culture change. Without that it is just another excuse to say look we've done something without anything actually changing where it matters.

      Delete
    2. I mean will you apply to be the commissioner.

      Delete
    3. We dont need more stories like the fairy tales of milk teeth and the like. Facts please. Hard cold evidenced facts.

      Delete
    4. Me apply. Only if I can wear my underpants on the outside of my trousers.

      Delete
    5. Actually I've just seen the outline job description at http://www.bailiwickexpress.com/jsy/news/childrens-commissioner-be-appointed-soon-possible/?t=i#.WV_U11GQzcs It is definitly an outside position there's plenty of scope for challenging the status quo.

      Delete