Pages

Tuesday, 21 February 2017

Bob Hill Big Step(s) Forward.



Former Deputy Bob Hill.


Regular readers/viewers will be aware that in November 2015 former Jersey politician, Human Rights and anti Child Abuse Campaigner, Bob Hill, suffered a near fatal stroke/brain haemorrhage which we reported HERE. The stroke left Bob paralysed on his right hand side and he lost his ability to speak.

Bob spent seven months in hospital/Overdale hospital recuperating and was discharged in June last year (2016). He moved back into his house where his wife Ann had had the house modified/adapted to cater for Bob's new needs. We reported on Bob's release from hospital and return home HERE.

Since his return home Bob has been making slow but significant progress. He is still paralysed down his right hand side and struggles with his speech although there has been significant improvement with his speech.

Last week I watched Bob stand up out of his wheelchair (with his walking aid), do a 360 turn, and sit back down again. This was a huge step forward and very encouraging. Well I suppose, strictly speaking, it was a few steps in a circle but you get what I mean!

Less than a week later I watched Bob (video below) get out of his wheelchair, walk to the front door, get the mail from the letter box, and walk back to sit down. This is very significant progress and lots of steps forward!

A number of our readers/viewers have contacted us both publicly (comments on Blogs) and privately asking how Bob and family are getting on, is Bob getting better? We've even been asked if he is still alive!

After witnessing these massive steps forward today we wanted to share this significant event with our readers and well wishers.

It should be mentioned that Bob is under instruction NOT to attempt walking without a physiotherapist being present. Bob's wife Ann has had to sign a waiver taking responsibility should Bob fall while trying to walk. This explains why Ann is a lot more worried when Bob is on his feet than he is!

Those who know Bob will know that he's never been one for doing what he is told and, as the saying goes; "you can't keep a good man down!"




122 comments:

  1. Fantastic.

    Keep passing on our good wishes to Bob and tell him we're thrilled.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Excellent news, this man has never been afraid to tell it how it is, and with great style. Just so pleased he is with us still.One of the good guy's and that is an understatement.

    Hope you are with us for many more years Bob.

    Paul Letherbarrow.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Fabulous I am so pleased for Bob and Ann onwards and upwards Bob.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A great example of how persistence, perseverance and a positive attitude can take you a long way!
    Best wishes to Bob, Ann and all the family.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good Luck Bob. Just heard A Jersey Jurat is to be tried by Guernsey Jurats. Who would that be?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can't be Jurat John Le Breton of Victoria College child abuse cover up shame. A former police officer told the independant Care Inquiry they were not allowed to even question this man who the police described as a pathetic individual of zero integrity and one they could not believe was ever allowed to become a Jurat.

      Delete
    2. Anyone got any more info on this Jurat being tried? Interesting to learn what for? In the Le Breton case the police stated that they were prevented from even questioning him about his part in the Jervis-Dykes cover up where at least one abused pupil accussed him of bullying him into silence. The police went on to add that it was stressed to them that no Jurat had ever been charged with anything. Say no more. Jersey Way. Jog on.

      Delete
  6. Great news that bob is getting better long my it continue best wishes to bob and family.martin

    ReplyDelete
  7. Absolutely marvellous news and truly thrilled for Bob and his family. Your resolve will get you there Bob, as long as you don't get on that bike yet!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Fantastic news. Bob is just a legend. Love to all the family x

    ReplyDelete
  9. How refreshing to wake up and see something so positive. Bob you have made me smile. Keep going and never give up.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Great work x Keep going x Love to you all x馃挋

    ReplyDelete
  11. A real man of the people. All the very best bob.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Brillian news about Bob. Whon knows, Bob. We may yet see you on that old bone-shaker of a vote! Keep smiling and well done. A real fighter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh dear too much vino. I thought I had written on that old bone-shaking vote winner of a bike! Good luck Bob. You really are a legend.

      Delete
  13. Bob is a true fighter for the underdog who was never afraid to stick his head above the parapet and has helped me and my family in the past when my own Deputies wouldn't. Abig thank you to a man among men.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Child enquiry report could be soon now, Anton Skinners car not at his abode last few days maybe gone on extended holiday on our gold plated pension we pay him until the "dust" has settled!!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Brilliant to see Bob on his feet again. He's such a determined gentleman.

    ReplyDelete
  16. All the very best Mr Hill. A true fighter. Thank you for the update VFC.

    ReplyDelete
  17. A great man and a much missed politician. Good luck Mr Hill.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bob Hill is a very good man. Good to hear he making progress.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am thrilled he is making progress

      Delete
  19. If Bob Hill is well enough it would be great to see him invited to write a columm in the JEP. A good honest chap like Bob would help even out all the appalling establishment numpties they now let vent their spleen.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Here in St Martin we really curse the day we were daft enough to vote for Steve Luce over Bob Hill. How silly the parish was. What a waste of space his successor has turned out to be. Yet while Bob, like just about every other honest, peoples' politician was kept on the backbenchers Luce is awarded a ministry. This States really is absolutely dire. Hope the recovery keeps on coming Bob. You deserve it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There was a particularly nasty campaign in St. Martins to oust Bob from his seat and it was unfortunately successful. I believe it was organised by 2 prominent parish families. I could name them.

      Delete
    2. You SHOULD name them.
      If you are mistaken, they are welcome to come on here and put the record straight.

      Delete
    3. I'm not comfortable about naming people. They know who they are and so does Bob.

      Delete
    4. We all know who they are. Let's not pretend, eh?

      At least one of those Jersey 'Families' have prominent aging sons who had an awful lot riding on the 'right' outcome of the HDLG investigation. And also an awful lot riding on the protection of Jersey's most infamous, abusive internet troll. Just as does 'St. Martin Son's' friend, the equally corrupt son of a noted Nazi Occupation collaborator.

      Sometimes people get so stupefied with drink they can't help but incriminate themselves. In between screaming abuse at others with imprecations of suicide.

      I believe the said individual is also infamous for an event known as The Moonlight Parade Tirade.

      Crystal Set.

      Delete
    5. Me, Sir? I never said that Sir. I'm just sick of the Member saying these awful things. Or words to that effect?

      Delete
  21. Great news about Bob Hill. Thanks for the update Voice.

    ReplyDelete
  22. As many have said above, great news about a great person. Best wishes for a complete recovery.

    ReplyDelete
  23. What a nice man Bob Hill is. A fighter too obviously. Best of luck Mr Hill.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I know Bob will appreciate this as a vocal opponent of discrimination.
    There are a few Jerseymen who would match HNWI and they are legally discriminated against by the Chief Minister, where will this stop?

    This gas just been published as a FOI

    Request
    Is the High Value Residency income tax regime of 20% on the first £625,000 of worldwide earned income (equivalent to £125,000), plus an additional 1% on all other worldwide income accessible to all resident tax payers with equivalent income, and if not then why not?

    If the answer is that despite having equivalent income that tax regime is not available to existing residents does that comply with local and international antidiscrimination legislation?

    Response
    It is assumed the question refers to individuals who come to Jersey by obtaining entitled status under Regulation 2(1) (e) of the Control of Housing and Work (Residential and Employment Status) (Jersey) Regulations 2013. This is the High Value Resident Scheme which is designed to attract High net worth individuals to live and work in Jersey.

    When an individual is granted 2(1) (e) status, they are entitled to be taxed in accordance with the preferential tax rate of (currently) 1% on all income they generate annually – except for the first £625,000 of income which is always taxed at 20%. In Jersey access to the preferential tax rate is granted through residential status, determined under the above Law. By definition this preferential rate is not available to other Jersey taxpayers (including those who may have similar levels of personal income) who are not granted this residential status. Many other jurisdictions have similar regimes designed to attract high net worth individuals.(NOTE this last bit is not true places like Guernsey, IoM etc have a maximum tax applicable to all citizens )
    The Comptroller of Taxes is satisfied that the scheme is compliant both with domestic law and Jersey’s international treaty obligations.

    What makes this REALLY interesting is how this fits with the Discrimination Law 2013

    Firstly Race is protected and (6) For the purposes of the Law "national origins" includes being of Jersey origin.

    Then a Key concept is (6)1 A person discriminates against another person (the subject) if because of a protected characteristic the person treats the subject less favourably than the person treats or would treat others.

    What this means is Chief Minister Gorst in giving preferential tax rates to people who are by definition , not of Jersey origin , is without doubt discriminating against people (his electors ) from Jersey.

    But the Law then says that ,,, and this is the only interpretation ,, they are NOT prohibited from making this act of discrimination..

    PART 2

    EXCEPTIONS TO PROHIBITED ACTS: RACE

    3 Race: act done pursuant to States’ policy or Ministerial decision
    An act of discrimination is not prohibited by this Law so far as it relates to the protected characteristic of race, if it is done pursuant to a policy adopted by the States or by Ministerial decision where the implementation of that policy or decision applies criteria based upon a person’s place of birth or length of residency in Jersey, for the purposes of –
    (a) promoting employment or other opportunities; or
    (b) providing access to facilities and services.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I always thought it was positive discrimination as in five year rules etc.Never thought they would discriminate in favour of incomers and against well off Jersey people who employ locals etc etc.
    What about potentially successful Innovation Fund projects , locals would pay more tax than outsiders! I have no problem with level playing fields but Gorst has skewed this against locals!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Was it Deputy Luce that was going to push a vote of no confidence against another Politician, but was asked to hold back, and then was given a ministerial job? I have spoken to various members of the parish of St Martin and they are all of the opinion that they will not vote for Mr Luce as deputy again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well here's another one for you. His lining up with Connetable Refault on this against Deputy Duhamel was unforgivable.Sure Rob Duhamel had his faults but thinking independently was always his strong point. They hated that and wheeled out Refault and Luce to kill him off with the bribe of office. You only need to listen to the pompous apologist Refault to see the mistake.

      Delete
  27. Nice to hear some good news among all the understandable gloom. Bob Hill is a very nice chap. Everyone with a good heart should wish him well.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Good luck Mr Hill. You were an excellent States Member.

    ReplyDelete
  29. We now find out that the states departments spend over £100,000 a year ( of tax payers money ) on coffee and tea for THEMSELVES. As well as building office blocks, and apartments, in competition with the hard working private sector, but pay no tax, nor suffer market forces because they are underwritten by the States - who - would never let them fail selling off public assets like car parks.

    He was right then and Roger Bale is now:

    http://planetjersey.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=980.msg59925#msg59925

    ReplyDelete
  30. Yes. But also sick of hearing about the 'hard working' private sector. Not true in so many cases. Just look at the 'legal industry'. Lazy, greedy charlatans (almost) to a man and woman. The whole gravy train should have been investigated years ago and English lawyers allowed in. This would have halved prices in a month.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Could a Jersey lawyer act for someone in UK court?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps not. But even if they could they would not get away with charging superstar fees for work done to the standard of an O level student. Is it not hilarious how the excuse for the closed shop is Jersey's different (archiac) laws. Yet the overpaid numptie judges who sit on our bogus Appeal Court or are brought over as needed do not have to have the local 'qualification?

      Delete
    2. No. They just have to have had dinner with Michael Birt or the Bailhache brothers probably? That and know all about the true purpose of the Jersey court and Jersey Way.

      Delete
    3. I lived in London - lawyers are actually a similar cost there as they are in Jersey. I grant you that rates in the English regions are considerably cheaper. The presence of the finance industry in Jersey pushes up the cost of most services here.

      Delete
  32. A light-hearted look asking whose Island Is It ANYWAY?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lord Reg's butler28 February 2017 at 18:23

      LOL! It ain't your island, Tadier its MY island! Great stuff. Particularly liked the orange-faced failed election candidate doing the comedy to Lord Reg's straight bits. In the same humour vein what happened to the proposed best of the old BTR videos? They were class.

      Delete
    2. By BTR I suppose you mean the videos Trevor Pitman used to make with someone on his Bald Truth Jersey blog? They really were something fresh in Jersey politics at the time I would have to agree. Loads of information you didn't get except on blogs like this, and some pretty irreverant humour in his calling a spade a spade.

      Nobody does that in Jersey politics now. Tell it how it is, gloves off and hang the consequences. Jersey politics is plain old sterile and boring. I would even be pleased to see Donald Trump in the States just to have things livened up.

      Fat chance I know.I've started watching Eastenders again just to shut it all out. Our island is screwed with this shower in control.

      Delete
    3. Deputy Trevor Pitman as he was could have been an excellent TV presenter as well as a very good politician. Few people can talk coherently off the cuff and do it while looking natural. He did it all with aplomb. Certainly missed in the States.

      Delete
    4. It was a crying shame to see Trevor, and Shona Pitman, treated the way they were. The sad thing is though Trevor is doing just as the establishment wanted/want him to do, when they worked out a way to take him out. He was a huge danger to them and they had to remove him.... Lets hope he comes back with vengeance!!

      Delete
    5. The Establishment will do anything to keep Trevor and Shona out of politics as long as they can. It is the good old Jersey Way. Just look at how the real threats to business as usual over the last ten to fifteen years get fixed. Ted Vibert, Stuart Syvret who survived longer than most because at the beginning he was a lone voice, then Trevor and Shona.

      Mark my words Mike Higgins will be next and then Sam Mezec if he grows in to a true Trevor type figure. If you notice they leave the token harmless leftists alone so they can pretend to be a healthy democracy. What problem does a Southern really cause them, or a Duhamel? Very little really. Just wish Montfort Tadier would be take the gloves off and be as good as he can be when on song.

      Delete
    6. Anon at 20:51 I agree to a large extent, but the real reason Stuart lasted so long is that generally he was right and knew how to defend himself well. Sooner or later though he was always going to force the powers that be to use a nobbled system unfairly and possibly illegally against him. Trevor and Shona on the other hand made a deep mistake by trying to get one over on the JEP under a system that will do everything possible to protect their apparatus. They should have made a public fuss and then taken it on the chin as part and parcel of political life, whilst focusing on more important battles. To a certain extent Trevor's ego got in the way and I hope that he has learned from that. Loosing Trevor was indeed a huge blow.

      No what is need are politicians with balls who know when to push and when to back off. More canny and cunning politicians who can play hard ball but also play the game when they have to. Young Mezec is not yet one of those despite showing some promise. This whole debacle over two faced Lewis's electoral reform demonstrates that sadly all too well. That said he needs to learn from this and grow stronger and wiser and play the system better rather than always fighting it.

      Tadier and Southern could rise up but are prone to making gaffs IMHO. Tadier appears quite often to absent without leave. That might only be my perception, and not reflect the real position but I am just saying it how I see it. Higgins is the only one who consistently gets it right but is not really dynamic enough and there is a limit to what he can do.

      Collectively though Higgins, Tadier, Mezec (on a tighter leash) and Southern (focused on specific issues and on an even tighter leash), could be very productive if galvanized together. So here's a suggestion. I have no idea if Trevor would be up for this but these four would be good to form a political alliance outside of a political party to focus on a coordinated strategy on the key issues lead by Trevor. Trevor is not able to stand for a while longer I believe but you don't have to be a politician to be politically active. Such alliance would be far stronger and more likely to attract and retain new progressive thinking talent. This is probably the quickest and most likely method to succeed with much needed reform.

      For the record I am a member of Reform Jersey but seriously thinking about cancelling my membership. I don't see the coordination, and a thought process in the party that will really succeed. Sam needs to set aside his ego about "his party" and think of the bigger picture IMHO.

      Comments offered with the idea of stimulating the debate and trying to think outside of the box. Perhaps a new and dedicated thread on these thoughts Voice? You could even ask Trevor for an interview to discuss them?

      JRCbean

      Delete
    7. Just to add, if you don't believe me about the Sam Mezec, "his party" comment Just take a look at the parties web site -

      http://www.reformjersey.je/

      JRCbean

      Delete
    8. Agree with a lot but two things I can't agree with. Stuart wasn't generally always right. He was often wrong too but seemed quite unable to ever face up to it. This alienated a lot of people even those who supported him. This brings me to the other aspect I can't agree with.

      You accuse Trevor of letting his ego cause his and Shona's shafting in the court. I just can't run with that one. I knew Trevor right from school and he was always one of the least egotistical people you could ever meet. To my eyes he carried that on in politics. What did for him and his wife is that he, and she, just would not back down in the face of obvious wrongs. That is what I want in politicians.

      It is what I hope to see grow with Sam Mezec and be a bit more consistently applied by the very good Monty Tadier. As for Southern he will never change. He just does what he does and to be fair he works very hard for the down trodden. Just don't expect him to tear up any trees.

      Higgins is a very clever and principled man. I sometimes just wish he would be a bit more nose to nose when they try to shut him up in the States. I would like to see Higgins front or join a party. He could bring that elder Statesman aura.

      Like you I aalso would like Trevor and Shona back. Stuart I also wish would return to politics. He could help change so much and it would surely be better to use his cconsiderable talenets from inside the devil's cauldren than being stuck on the outside when he does not need to be?

      What most of don't know I accept is whether the Stuarts, Trevors or Shonas even want to be in politics again. Quite possibly they do not and who could blame any of them.

      Delete
    9. Re Reform Website:
      I reset my zoom setting but it stayed the same.

      Re Trevor
      He tended to shoot from the hip and was set up by Broadlands and JEP, and who knows who was pulling the strings there.

      Delete
    10. We will have to agree to disagree on Trevor's Ego but forgive me for specifically not stating that I would also welcome Shona back on the political stage. Absolutely agree and accept that Trevor, Shona and definitely Stuart may have no appetite to get back into politics by standing again. Indeed Stuart has stated that on a number of occasions, and I doubt that anything will make him change his mind on that point. That does not mean however that none of them might want to have some input and debate with a tight knit coordinated political alliance pushing on the key areas including electoral reform and corruption in the system. Indeed guidance and strategy planning from any or all these three with hard earned experience would be invaluable.

      Agree re Higgins but cant see him fronting a party for the reasons you state. The leader would still need to be really strong and in control on occasion.

      JRCbean

      Delete
    11. Stuart Syvret had a huge ego and that is ultimately what led him like a lamb to the slaughter. Laying the charge at Trevor Pitman's feet while not flagging up this major flaw in the latter's personality seems a bit skewed. Pitman's fault for a corrupt court system but not Syvret's? How does that one work?

      Delete
    12. Syvret bluffed all the time because when he did have chances to take Jersey down he did nothing.

      Delete
    13. I don't think Trevor Pitman was egotistical nor do I think Stuart Syvret was. To focus on such things allows the important issues to be missed. Even if someone was as ego-driven as a Philip Ozouf or to the degree young Sam Mezec sometimes seems, you should still be able to rely on the fairness and legality of a court. Neither Syvret nor the Pitmans were afforded such basics.

      Delete
    14. @12:20 "I don't think Trevor Pitman was egotistical nor do I think Stuart Syvret was. To focus on such things allows the important issues to be missed....
      .....you should still be able to rely on the fairness and legality of a court. Neither Syvret nor the Pitmans were afforded such basics"

      Absolutely right!
      It is unlikely that anyone involved in politics does not have an ego - the shrinking violets don't tend to put themselves up for it.

      I suggest that the other commenter comes to terms with that rather than using someone's ego (or actually *their* opinion of it) for a tired ad hominem attack on the Health Minister who blew the whistle on Jersey's not fit for purpose children's services.

      Delete
    15. "Stuart Syvret had a huge ego and that is ultimately what led him like a lamb to the slaughter"

      No, that is not true.
      What did for Syvret was standing up for Jersey's abused children and highlighting the likelihood that perhaps dozens of vulnerable patients at Jersey's General Hospital could have been murdered by an unstable ex-military nurse.

      https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2013/11/07/a-mass-murderer-by-stuart-syvret/

      There were rape and misconduct allegations
      Mr. M was arrested on returning to the Island on the 17th April, 1999, and, armed with a Warrant, his home address was searched. During the search, the following property was recovered.
      1. One lump of brown cannabis resin, tablets and scales.
      2. Knuckle-duster.
      3. A Police Philips radio (in working order).
      4. Bag containing various medications.
      5. Eleven syringes with a clear liquid within, and other medication, insulin and
      two bottles of potassium chloride.
      6. Six firearms, with large quantity of ammunition.
      The medications had been stolen from the hospital and included enough to kill a roomful of people with compounds which were near impossible to detect after a murder.

      The investigation was inexplicably stopped by the Attorney General and Detective Inspector Barry Faudemer was given a highly paid job at Jersey Financial Services Commission.

      Delete

    16. If only Mr. Syvret had persisted in raising these issues through the proper channels.

      Then everything would have worked out fine!

      #imhavingagiraffe

      Delete
    17. When it came to giving evidence to the Jersey Care Inquiry Stuart Syvret never stood up for abused children then even though people on here begged him to.
      This Inquiry is the only one of its kind in Jersey and for the record apart from the odd critical reference to Stuart Syvret from others, he will not be regarded by historians as anything of major significance.

      Delete
    18. Nurse M is a strange one because it has been said that due to Stuart Syvret's persistent campaign against him the likelihood of him ever getting a fair trial was quickly diminished. So has Stuart Syvret done something to protect the people or make matters worse? Another view point is that if people seriously regarded Nurse M as a real threat to others then the last thing anybody would do is antagonise such a person online. To some this sort of exonerates him.
      Whatever peoples views are of Nurse M, apart from a load of publicity at the time it did not re-open the case and after 9 years he remains free.

      Delete
    19. @17:16 Syvret's revelations "did not re-open the case and after 9 years he remains free"

      indeed not.

      Has it not occurred to you that it is a little odd that "Nurse M" was not charged and imprisoned for the "lump of brown cannabis resin"?

      or the other items?

      Perhaps it has also escaped your notice that the case was long closed before the police report was leaked to Senator Syvret.

      Senator Syvret claimed (with considerable justification) that there was ZERO chance of the Jersey authorities prosecuting Nurse M (or even investigating the unexplained spate of deaths), and that his priority was to inform and protect the public.

      "It is with trepidation I publish the material below – for reasons which will become plain within the first few paragraphs."

      https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2013/11/07/a-mass-murderer-by-stuart-syvret/

      Delete
    20. Anon 19.08 its better to have these debates on facebook because the Moderator on here keeps on refusing to publish half the comments.

      Delete
    21. @09:30 "the Moderator on here keeps on refusing to publish half the comments"

      The Moderator on here is VFC. I have always found him very fair minded and more than willing to air alternative viewpoints.

      Could it be that your comments about the Ex Health Minister were factually incorrect or gratuitous personal attacks?

      VFC has even let some of the usual trite garbage through
      e.g.
      Anonymous 2 March 2017 at 12:00  "Syvret bluffed all the time because when he did have chances to take Jersey down he did nothing."

      Is that guff even worth answering?

      It is a false premise that the Ex Health Minister even wanted to "take Jersey down". His emphasis was always to unseat the shysters, lock up paedophiles and protect children.

      Delete
  33. Good to see former Deputy Bob Hill up and about. Like Tadier and Pitman another of the true good guys.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Talking of interviews I hope the day comes when Bob Hill can give this blog an interview. Top man and there aren't many of them about.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The sad thing about how Reform Jersey has gone under Deputy Mezec is the apparent lack of co-ordination and a wider public front as JRCBean says. Sad and strange because back in the highly successful 2008 election and for a couple of years later the JDA under Chairman Pitman seemed to be everywhere. They were in the news all the time.

    They were speaking to the media about issues all the time, all of them not just the Chairman.They were in town with a stall either campaigning on issues or just there for people to speak to. The JDA also used to run workshops on different subjects that anyone could attend. I went to a couple myself at St Paul's Centre.

    Most intriguingly as I seem to recall they even used to get around the JEP's misrepresentation or simple non-reporting of stories damaging to the powers that be by placing quite sizable adverts setting out some of these issues. None of this happens with Reform even though they would probably say that they are the natural successor to the JDA.

    Why?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sam is a big lover of social media and likes to use Twitter, Facebook, and you tube video's, probably because he can get out an unedited (by others) view on anything and everything relevant, much of which doesn't fit with MSM agenda. I actually follow RJ on twitter, and look at the occasional You Tube video, but don't use Facebook as I hate it with a passion. RJ also have their not so regular "pint and politics" sessions, but for a variety of reasons I have not been able to attend any of those. I personally have emailed Sam at the RJ official email address and never received a response of any kind. Followed up on that email via twitter and referenced in active blog posts involving Sam and still not had any kind of response. I've also tweeted in a private conversation directly to Sam at RJ twitter feed, eventually got a curt response back, but absolutely zero response to a very polite follow up question.

      So you can see why I am less than impressed with RJ/Sam, and more importantly the lack of respect they, or maybe Sam in particular shows to RJ members.

      To answer your point. Adverts in the Rag with falling circulation, are just too expensive, and probably have zero effect. Social media only really effective if your target audience are largely using it, which they are not. Also with Social media it has to be an active, RESPONSIVE, and regular campaign.

      To answer earlier points, yes Stuart has an ego issue, but I never actually said that he didn't. Re Trevor court case, it always hinged on a subjective view of the advert in question and therefore the decision to pursue it in court was always on dodgy ground. That's why I take the view that it was to a certain extent ego driven. Nothing said so far has made me revise my view.


      JRCbean

      Delete
    2. If I can butt in to this thread I too would not have gone to court. But I still have to say, if it does not sound daft, is that I don't blame them for doing so. The clear lies made within the advert from Broadlands could not be said to hinge on a subjective view in any way. The 4 x the salary claim was demonstrated to be wholly false as Trevor wrote on his blog many times. As for wrapping the pair in an election rosette made out of banknotes no one could ever seriously believe that had anything to do with mortgages. You also seem to infer that Trevor Pitman must have made the decision to go to court. That is rather disrespectful to his wife who evidently felt equally strongly about the lies circulated by the JEP on behalf of their client. Regardless of all of this what is of real import is that the couple's court process was, in Stuart's words, ultra vires, thanks to an obviously unfit jurat.

      Delete
    3. Would that be the jurat named by a former police officer who investigated the Jervis-Dykes abuse cover up at Vic College?

      Delete
    4. The one who Vic pupils told bullied kids who complained into silence?

      Delete
  36. What do people think about this Jeremy Macon nonsense with the referendum and a 40% level being needed? I think it just makes him look like he is worried he might lose his seat if we get super constituencies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anything to stall change. Even rubbish change as per the Lewis/Farnham farce. The proposed new system is a shambles beyond question. Though if it got rid of mummy's little helper maybe it would be worth it?

      Delete
    2. mummy's little helper is vastly preferable to paedo's little helper, which is what 2/3 of the rest amount to

      Delete
  37. Any referendum is doomed in future because of Sir Philip Bailhache having been allowed to hijack the independent electoral commission and construct one that would ensure he and his Constable mates had to get the result they wanted.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Jersey is in such a mess. Once finance pulls out or collapses I genuinely think our island will become like some wild west ghost town after the gold rush.

    ReplyDelete
  39. The only honest way forward is to have a Royal Commission in to the unfit for purpose Jersey political system. But how many would vote for that? Three, maybe four or five? It was born out of self-interest and it remains out of self-interest.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Its a shame we didn't have live video streaming of the States a few years ago when the likes of Stuart Syvret, Trevor Pitman, Ted Vibert and Dick Shenton were in the States. Now there were some orators whose speeches regularly would have gone seriously viral.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Good point, but the present States members would not have voted to go viral if the likes of Syvret and Pitman were still members. They recently voted live video streaming in, because the present members are safe ineffectuals.... They have shamefully removed the dangerous ones!?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Coming from a different angle you could say most of the truly 'dangerous' ones are just given jobs in the Council of Ministers!

      But you are right for sure. Those two would have had me keeping one eye on my office computer for work and the other on my tablet for the States.

      Delete
  42. Stuart Syvret, Trevor Pitman, Ted Vibert and Dick Shenton...

    What about Jerry Dorey?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dorey was a lousy orator who was more interested in if a report had the correct amount of commas as opposed to full stops. Should not be mentioned in the same breath as the others. In the case of Dick Shenton, a brilliant orator, possibly the best of all four. But he didn't fight for ordinary people like the other three did. Live streaming with Syvret, Pitman and Vibert would have been better than pay per view TV.

      Delete
  43. Please tell us. "What about Jerry Dorey?"

    ReplyDelete
  44. Wish Stuart Syvret would make his mind up.
    One minute the Care Inq is ultra vires, next its not fit for purpose, then he reckons he should have been subpoenaed to attend, then he says he was constructively excluded from it after flatly refusing to partake when asked, and now he reckon the Care Inq shield abusers.
    Can't he just walk away?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He did walk away and there is no turning back.
      Whatever the report concludes he was never a constructive part of it and he will have to live with it.

      Delete
    2. You really make me laugh Anonymous  at 09:19 / 10:45 with this endless repetition of utter guff straight out of the establishment songbook.

      Just face the fact that a REAL and FIT FOR PURPOSE "Care Inquiry" [*abuse inquiry*, actually]  WOULD HAVE SUBPOENAED the whistleblowing Health Minister AND various other vital witnesses.

      A real and fit for purpose CoI was actually called for by Mr Syvret himself (back in 2008, I think) and if this CoI was real and fit for purpose then I'm sure the ex Health Minister would have gladly attended.

      http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/the-publics-inquiry-into-the-public-inquiry-starts-here/

      QED

      This lawyer fest represents very poor value for money, now adding the Jersey Taxpayer to the many  victims of team Bailhache's child abuse scandal.

      There is relatively little which has been revealed by the CoI which had not been revealed Health Minister's blog up to a decade before *for free*.

      We do not know what other information and detail Mr Syvret holds. You are entitled to your opinion but to any thinking person it is difficult to name a more vital witness.

      Delete
    3. This 'guff' is only copied from Twitter and irrespective of your continued attempts to pour scorn on this Inquiry, I took part in it with 100's of others and like then, as of today, why do you bother?

      Delete
    4. Mr Syvret is entitled to his views on the COI right or wrong. What irritates a lot of people is that he seems to have left himself nowhere to go as an alternative with the UK overlords being bent. Yet he keeps going over and over the same points. He may well be right on some, many or even all. But where has he left himself to go? Must be driving him mad. Could it have been better to bite his lip, voice his distrust/conerns and just give his evidence anyway? The victims generally appear to have wanted this.

      Delete
    5. Well said @13:33 ,but at what point a compromise equates to a sell out is a difficult call to make.

      @12:51"This guff is only copied from Twitter" - No it is not. It is a combination of misrepresentation and soiled opinion from a person or people who are determined to peddle this establishment nonsense.

      @10:45 "He did walk away and there is no turning back. Whatever the report concludes he was never a constructive part of it and he will have to live with it."
      Can you point to where that appeared on twitter? (probably not , but see similar request below)
      I fear that we will all have to live with the wasted opportunity of an expensive CoI which may amount to little more than another layer of cover up wrapped in nice words and hand wringing. We will see.


      @09:19 "One minute the Care Inq is ultra vires, next its not fit for purpose, then he reckons he should have been subpoenaed to attend, then he says he was constructively excluded from it after flatly refusing to partake when asked, and now he reckon the Care Inq shield abusers"

      If you have thought this through and are as good as your word you will be able to post a link to each of those *quotes* "copied from Twitter and we will see in context if the ex-Health Minister's tweets are a true or reasonable opinion.
      Why would anyone want to misquote out of context. e.g. "flatly refusing to partake when asked", if the context is that the CoI was NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE and could just provide unprosecuted abusers with a get out of jail free card?

      The Devil is in the detail.

      A certain well known troll is not above claiming to be an abuse survivor.
      You claim to have given evidence. If that is true then well done and good for you. It was YOUR RIGHT to choose to compromise on the fitness of the CoI. It is likewise Mr Syvret's RIGHT not to compromise on it's fitness.
      Were you a more important witness than the Health Minister.

      The fact remains that a real CoI WOULD HAVE SUBPOENAED the whistleblowing Health Minister AND various other witnesses.

      QED

      I hope the CoI report does not leave you disappointed once you have sucked the sugar coating off. At £20+ million it must come with some sparkles!

      Delete
    6. If Mr Syvert is right then literally everybody in the legal system is wrong, which, is ridiculous.
      Then again I cannot understand why he keeps on tweeting about an Inquiry which he had no intention of partaking in 3 years ago and on the subject of subpoenas, surely he had a duty to give evidence without a subpoena? After all he was Minister of HSS for many years and other past HSS Ministers willingly gave evidence without resistance.

      Delete
    7. "If Mr Syvert is right then literally everybody in the legal system is wrong, which, is ridiculous."

      It's not that ridiculous indeed he is strongly supported by a social survey which concluded 50% of islanders surveyed did not trust the judicial system.

      Stay tuned for a new Blog Posting coming this afternoon with more evidence (as if any more is needed) to suggest we have a corrupt judiciary.

      Delete
    8. Ah so I am a troll for asking why you keep on trying to trash the Care Inquiry...I will take that as a compliment.
      Rather than carry on with this playground debate my last word is that I await, with others, for this final Care Inquiry Report with full optimism. There is no point in debating the worth of something with people who never even took part in it.

      Delete
    9. *It's not that ridiculous indeed he is strongly supported by a social survey which concluded 50% of islanders surveyed did not trust the judicial system.*

      How many Islanders were surveyed because I never took part in it and when you say trust, what's so un-trusting?

      Delete
    10. "what's so un-trusting?"

      Hopefully you will be that little more informed with the next Blog Posting.

      Delete
    11. No @14:04 , you are only a troll if you make statements like "One minute the Care Inq is ultra vires, next its not fit for purpose, then he reckons he should have been subpoenaed to attend, then he says he was constructively excluded from it after flatly refusing to partake when asked, and now he reckon the Care Inq shield abusers".

      and FAIL TO PROVIDE LINKS to show where they were "only copied from Twitter" to show that that they are all relevant and fair quotes, and not a hate campaign.

      Suggesting that a £23 million CoI should have subpoenaed relevant witnesses is not a "playground debate" to anyone who takes the future of child protection seriously.


      Look what happened when witnesses for child protection DID willingly compromise and give evidence:

      http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/jersey-child-abuse-inquiry-witness.html

      QED

      Provide the links and you are not a troll !

      Delete
    12. The fact that 50% of islanders surveyed did not trust the judicial system is all the fault of Jersey's Child Protection Bloggers. They really should be BANNED !

      P.19/2016 was a good start. At least bloggers are now at risk of criminal prosecution if they cause 'upset' by indulging in the wrong sort of free speech.

      The Nazis are still in control and there is nothing you can do about it.

      Delete
    13. Like I said, I look forward to the Care Inquiry Report and will no longer be partaking in a playground debate with somebody who only wants to disrupt it. You are completely on your own because hundreds of witnesses partook.

      Delete
    14. To be fair to the Nazis; at least one witness to the CoI has said that it was only during the brief period of the German occupation that the abuse in orphanages was halted.

      The Nazis were not a nice bunch but at least they had some standards.

      These establishment abusers make me sick!

      Fess up, lock up the guilty, mend the systems and the culture. Then we can move on.

      Delete
    15. @15:00
      It is only a "playground debate" for those who make claims and then refuse to provide the evidence

      Mr Syvret has already provided more evidence than probably anyone else. It is still mostly on his blog

      http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog

      though he was forced to remove some of it under threat of FURTHER IMPRISONMENT  by Jersey's corrupt establishment courts.

      The courts which let a proven concealer of abuse and bully of abused children to sit as a Jurat

      Put up or shut up.

      Delete
    16. An online opinionated Blog is no substitute for giving real evidence to a Public Inquiry which will eventually make recommendations for the States to act upon.

      Delete
    17. Does the playground debate continue? We don't mind.5 March 2017 at 15:43



      Indeed @15:30
      and a fake Public Inquiry which outsourced the most vital parts of it's investigation to pet lawyers out of *public* view ...... is no substitute for a real CoI which would provide real closure and genuinely improve child protection

      Have another link
      http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/jersey-lieutenant-governor-and-crown.html

      Delete
    18. A fake public inquiry only to him.
      At least VFC took part in it.

      Delete
    19. *An online opinionated Blog is no substitute for giving real evidence*

      So true.
      There are Billions of people online with views, but it doesn't mean they are all right.

      Delete
    20. Playground Poster5 March 2017 at 16:13

      @15:46"A fake public inquiry only to him. At least VFC......"

      I'm glad you mentioned VFC because he has expressed concerns about it being a fake:
      http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/jersey-child-abuse-committee-of-inquiry.html

      "Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry A Fake, Partial, Incompetent?"

      You really are determined with your hate campaign if it stops you reading (or understanding?) links

      Now are you were going to put up or shut up?


      @15:56 "No" LOL
      So sad

      Delete
    21. That's Daniel Wimberley expressing concerns and not VFC. Even if VFC did have some concerns he still stepped up to the plate and gave evidence. I think Rico did as well but I could have got that wrong.

      Delete
    22. The only person running a hate campaign is you.
      The Stuart Syvret Twitter account is publicly see-able and all comments quoted are on it, and as for putting up or shutting up, well the people who did put up were the ones who gave evidence.

      Delete
    23. @16:20 & 16:30 more hot air contradicting your own earlier statements and failing to put up

      all very "playground" and so predictable.

      So which comments were you quoting?

      Post the links or carry on looking like a certain hateful character

      Won't put up & won't shut up? No Surprise!

      Delete
    24. Some of these posts sadden me, because surely only an Abuser would want this Care Inquiry to fail.
      Not forgetting the annoyance this could cause for the Survivors who found the courage to re-live their experiences. Despite the trolling, we should rise up this and congratulate all those who did give evidence to the Care Inquiry. There will never be an event like this again and we should be proud that we made it what it is because if one child is protected in the future through change then its been worth it.

      Delete
    25. *Some of these posts sadden me, because surely only an Abuser would want this Care Inquiry to fail.*

      Maybe onto something there.
      I wish Stuart would do the honorable thing and walk away.

      Delete
  45. A shame a blog about the much missed former Deputy Bob Hill has gone off in all sorts of directions. But I suppose you can only go so far with everyone's good wishes? But how about this for a fun way to slend a rainy lunchtime while keeping Bob and some of the others mentioned here in mind?

    Try and make up a whole council of ministers with politicians past or present who you think are sure would have always tried to do the right thing. In terms of general policy to benefit the whole island and definitely when it comes to issues like HDLG and the Jersey way.

    If you are like me you will probably struggle to fill the ministerial roles let alone the assistants. Could even make a fascinating post?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As we're back to the subject of Bob Hill, he was another witness who was very badly treated by the Inquiry.

      Delete
    2. In what way was he badly treated?

      Delete
    3. 16:47
      in a way that may well have contributed significantly to stress at the time, and over the next few days when Bob Hill suffered from a devastating stroke.

      Are you new to this at are you just trolling?

      Delete
    4. Is this an opinion from Mr Bob Hill himself?
      Because it is my understanding that he is a former Police officer and would be able to deal with stressful situations.

      Delete
    5. I may actually ask the Hill family about this because if anybody is trolling its the idiot who has been on here all day trying to trash the Inquiry and insult those who defend it.

      Delete
    6. I can verify that Bob felt he was poorly treated by the COI when giving evidence and a number of us felt the same. I can also verify that he was not feeling well, or himself, the days leading up to, during, and after he gave evidence.

      He gave his evidence on the 22nd of October 2015. Some three weeks later he suffered his near fatal stroke.

      I should also add that you don't consider asking "the Hill family" anything. They have enough to be dealing with don't you think?

      Delete
  46. As mentioned (by VFC) above. New BLOG POSTING shining a light on Jersey's apparent corrupt "Judiciary" and much, much, more.

    ReplyDelete
  47. "because if one child is protected in the future through change then its been worth it."

    My wish is to see every child in care protected from future abuse and all recommendations within this Report adhered to.

    We must think ahead and put faith into this forthcoming Report and brush aside the minority who only want to ruin it.

    ReplyDelete