Can I change the topic of conversation and ask you to reflect for a moment on events especially over the last week here in Jersey. We have two so called parties Time for Change and the JDA who seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet but are currently so busy bickering between themselves that they seem to have lost sight of the fact that whilst this is happening the establishment are able to do what they want. The establishment are no doubt sitting laughing and working out which candidate they will place where in the next election.
The chances are that unless somebody locks these two parties, pretty damn quickly, in a room until they have sorted out their differences and can act like statesmen none of them deserve to be in government.
Neither party will succeed in anything until they can prove to the public they are worthy once again.
Time4Change have never constituted themselves as a party, and their one States Member usually co-operates with the JDA. The manner in which Time4Change was launched by JDA members at the JDA's expense raised some resentment at the time, but that was two years ago.
ReplyDeleteThe bickering amongst the progressives was down to Stuart Syvret, not parties.
"The bickering amongst the progressives was down to Stuart Syvret, not parties."
ReplyDeleteI witnessed Ted Vibert doing more than his fair share, not only at the hustings meetings, but on his own Blog and with letters to the Filthy Rag.
It is not fair to say the bickering came from Stuart Syvret Ted Vibert played a very big role in dividing the progressives. Unity is what is needed, not division, pehaps Stuart Syvret and Ted Vibert could be put in a room to sort sh1t out! Because I agree with the main post, the establishment will be laughing all the way to the next elections!
While I agree to some extent and would add only that the so-called 'party' Time 4 Change is just Montford Tadier and Nick Le Cornu and no such 'party' at all I do find it a bit rich for Denise to criticise. She was one of those who quickly bottled out of the JDA back in 2005. Too much hard work trying to work with others politically? Pleased to see her get her MBE though. It is a shame though how all those others who do so much for the community never get recognised like the lucky few.
ReplyDeleteNeither Time4Change nor the JDA are the party of the future. Jersey workers, based in their Unions, need to form a new political grouping that clearly represents their economic interests and then backs candidates for election with funds and support.
ReplyDeleteThe JDA has no ideology or solid base in society. At best it can be a Liberal Part, based on loose ideas of fairness and justice in s society devoid of both. Individuals may be attracted to this on a personal basis, but it is not the representation of concrete economic interest.
Elsewhere JDA members have indicated their hostility to unions and the organised working class. The resurection of Ted Vibert means that the JDA will go futher to the Right and alienate its worker base (if it has one at all).As a Centre Right grouping it will remain for ever scared of its shadow. Perhaps it will survive but with no real membership or hope of attracing activists. The JDA is essentially a group of careerists; the rump of a formerly populist organisation that split because Right and Centre Right could not coexist.
The workers and unions must form a workers party that represents exclusively those interests.
Blog from Geoff Southern in response to Denise
ReplyDeleteHi Denise, good to have you back in circulation. Sincerely hope your recuperation goes well. We have already spoken, but congratulations on your award from the Queen. It makes me feel that there is some justice in the world after all. No-one could be more deserving of recognition. You are a beacon to us all.
In response to your blog, there is as you say a problem with the unity presented by the centre-left in the recent election. It was a difficult decision for the JDA, and me in particular, to stand in the election against Stuart Syvret. I only finally decided after I heard Stuart say that his solution to Jersey's problems was to form a new party. He has been twice offered the ledership of the JDA to take us forward. Both times he has refused. He has no answers.
As to "Time4Change", they are not a party. They are a pressure group. Still the only registered political party in jersey is the JDA. According to Monty, Nick Le Cornu did not stand as a T4C candidate, but an independent. I was surprised that Monty persists in supporting Nick who is determined to pursue his own political agenda and wreck any unity on the left by his inflated rhetoric and calls to man the barricades.
As you know Nick and Monty were both leading members of the JDA in the past. The problem I have with Nick is that he was given £1000 of JDA funds to encourage political action in a new group of (mostly young)people that the JDA was not reaching. He organised a seminar and rally but then stated that he had formed a new party (T4C)that was going to stand candidates in the forthcoming 2008 elections. He still does not seem to recognise that this was a complete abuse of his position and our funds. For a supposedly intelligent man not to recognise that you cannot be an active member of 2 competing political parties at the same time is unbelievable. Unsurprisingly, We asked him to leave the party. Monty was given the choice to stay or leave. He left.
Personally, I would welcome Monty back into the fold should he want to come back. Nick is a different kettle of fish. Nick keeps on standing on a personal and individual platform largely borrowed (or pinched, like the money)from the JDA. He grandstands revolutionary ideals which are completely unelectable, knowing that he will split the center-left vote.
Worse, as a candidate, he seems to take a perverse pleasure in going out of his way to insult the voters as he demonstrates his intellectual superiority. We are starting now to recruit and train up good candidates for the 2011 elections, Nick would never be acceptable, given his contempt for the voters. You know how difficult the hustings circuit is having stood alongside me in 2005. You were so good you beat me. I have no doubt you could do so again. I hope you will consider standing again, especially as JDA, if you would like to.
Yes, the centre-left is split. But there is a clear lead being given by the JDA. We are leading the way in forging links with other groups representing the interests of ordinary working people and families in Jersey. Recent successes demonstrate that we are making progress on behalf of the people of Jersey. Keep the faith. Progress to reform is slow, but inevitable. The JDA remains in the vanguard of the fight for positive change.
Listen on 4th July on BBC when I take on Ozouf on his cuts and tax measures.
The only comment I would respond to is from anonymous who obviously does not know me or they would know why I left the JDA and have subsequently taken a back seat in politics, All ways check your facts before making comments.
ReplyDeleteNo disrespect but Time 4 Change have been embarrassing, particularly Mr Le Cornu. Not a real socialist just a wannabee desperately looking for a stage on which to posture. In all honesty and quite in contrast to what Geoff says, we probably need something new now. Somebody new needs to lead it too with Deputy Trevor Pitman or Deputy Mike Higgins the most likely as both are good speakers and seem respected on a wider basis than many of the progressives, wrong as this might be.
ReplyDeleteI know it has been the basis for abuses, but there has been a practice in UK where parties are close and sympathetic enough to sort out fielding at elections so they don't compete head-on, but take different districts - in Jersey, there are some where no elections took place. Next time, the Deputies and Constables occur on the same day as Senators - plenty of chances to decide who is going to stand and where; and think tactically, it is better to have a candidate that will get in for a district, that bicker over it.
ReplyDeleteDenise,
ReplyDeleteI am writing in reply to Geoff Southern’s comments only for the reason of setting the record straight over certain important historical events. It would appear that the JDA leadership likes to perpetuate certain myths that present their own conduct in a positive light and constitutes a form of self justification.
I have so far refrained in a public forum to correct these calumnies; however it seems they will be perpetuated unless refuted. I have always been advised to avoid bickering and remember who it is we seek to oppose. There is a danger that certain telling of events can become activating myths in that they will be believed by the gullible and those without first hand knowledge. Even those with knowledge of the truth can become amnesic when it comes to group loyalties. Inconvenient truths can be forgotten if it is believed that it serves a higher purpose.
continued in Part II
Part II
ReplyDeleteThe formation of Time4Change and the child abuse rally on 8th March 2008
Time4Change was formed rapidly in response to the child abuse revelations, and within a week had organised a successful rally in the Royal Square. Only Time4Change recognised that this was the greatest political challenge to have been faced by the Jersey Establishment in decades. Time4Change was the only radical voice articulating the issue, in conjunction with Senator Stuart Syvret, to the Jersey public and wider world. I spoke of Radio 5 Live and on the prestigious Radio 4 “Today” programme. The world’s media appreciated that the public of Jersey, in righteous revulsion, had organised a protest against child abuse, as had been the response in other countries when abuse had been revealed. The rally was a success with 600 demonstrators in the Royal Square and several millions watching live on Sky TV, where it was top breaking news all morning.
Time4Change was formed by victims of abuse and those shocked by the revelations. Amongst the organisers were victims, feminists, civil society activists including some who were also JDA members. They called for a public demonstration of protest against years of government neglect.
On 4th March 2008 Southern wrote, having heard rumours about the rally:
“Who is running this demo, and what is its purpose? How is it being organised and how many are to turn up? Sounds like a disaster in the making. I do not want JDA associated with it, in any way, shape or form.”
Southern’s concern was that it would undermine the credibility of the JDA in an election year were it to be unsuccessful. This was a concern for several Council members as well. For Southern, JDA respectability was more important than protesting against serious government failures.
The JDA was silent and absent at a crucial time when the Establishment was in crisis. It may have wished to avoid the child abuse matter, but it did not even issue a simple press release to the assembled media of the world outlining the undemocratic nature of politics and society in Jersey. Two JDA Council members attended the rally and one of them spoke but nothing more. Southern was noticeably absent. At a time when the Establishment was in crisis and reeling, the JDA was silent. How could a progressive group have missed such an opportunity?
That inaction and missed opportunity are no coincidence. Essentially the JDA present no serious threat to the Establishment and has no transformative potential.
PART IV
ReplyDeleteTime4Change – the broad church
Time4Change has consistently held fairly well attended public meeting since formation, attracting States members as speakers. Two notable events were on electoral reform and reform of the Crown Officers. We see politics as a wider enterprise which is outside the JDA’s political vocabulary.
It is significant that the JDA do not hold public meetings. Instead the JDA is fossilized (some might say Stalinist) with poorly attended Council meetings and decisions taken by a handful. The membership is never consulted. When Time4Change was formed several JDA members joined complaining that the leadership never kept in touch. Only every three years does the machine become active, and then only in St Helier, where it expects to receive working class votes. In the meantime there is no campaign work designed to engage its membership or broader sections of society.
Time4Change, by contrast, is not simply electoralist and seeks to be part of the wider community and work with others.
The undemocratic nature of the JDA is revealed by the way Southern says that he offered the leadership of the JDA twice to Senator Stuart Syvret. By what sort of fiat does one get given leadership? Who decides? Is the membership ever consulted?
Stuart Syvret has said privately and publicly, that he never believed that the JDA was the progressive force in Jersey society, partly because of its politics and largely to do with the personality of its leader, Geoff Southern. To even suggest that Syvret would have joined the JDA is delusional.
By contrast, Syvret did speak at the child abuse rally, at the conference and at a subsequent Time4Change public meeting on States reform.
Defamatry allegations of dishonesty in relation to JDA funds.
Southern alleges that I “pinched” £1000 of JDA money to set up a rival political party. This allegation of dishonesty is defamatory and needs to be refuted. The main expenses of the rally were met by me. Many others gave their time and material assistance without charge. With the rally a success, the JDA Council formally agreed to reimburse £500 of expenses I had incurred. The decision went through a democratic process of approval.
The JDA Council agreed democratically to support the idea of the Time4Change conference and agreed to pay £500, being the expenses of the conference hall. Donations towards expenses were also provided by radical lawyers and anti racist campaigners.
All expenses of both the rally and conference were accounted for in a formal set of accounts presented to the JDA Council and agreed.
A Time4Change candidate
I most certainly did not stand in the recent Senatorial by election as an ”independent”. Commentators on BBC radio Jersey during the evening results clearly recognised that I was under the banner of Time4Change.
I stood because I knew that no other candidate would put the workers case credibly. Standing was not done with any real prospect of electoral success; it was part of a wider political process to focus opposition on the government pay freeze and cuts.
Ralph Nader in the US is always accused of splitting the vote with his egotistical "man the barricades" approach. Yet anyone who listens to him can hear that his contempt is reserved for people who compromise where it is not even necessary and thereby exhibit their active contempt for the needs of the electorate.
Nick Le Cornu
Part III
ReplyDeleteTime4Change – a movement for reform
Part of the success of the rally was the way it had brought together formally disparate political forces and sections of society over a single issue of moral and political importance. It was realised by those involved within Time4Change that there was an opportunity to create a campaigning group that would bring together these elements in a new fashion. Time4Change had activated individuals and groups that the JDA had never managed to reach in any of its incarnations.
The idea of “Reform-Time4Change”, as it was originally titled, was to act as a broad church, embracing non-establishment politicians, reform activists and supporters included abuse victims, Liberals, businessmen, students and many people who had never been involved in politics before.
To that end it was agreed to hold a conference on Sunday 27th April 2008 in the Pomme D’Or Hotel to launch the platform “Reform – Time4Change”.
At the Council meeting at which both I and Monty were expelled from the JDA, we pleaded with members to come on board and play an active role in the leadership and direction of Reform-Time4Change. Instead we were accused of have formed a new party to rival the JDA. This was never our intention.
The issue of child abuse has split Jersey Society and that was mirrored in the Left as well. Some chose to keep their distance from a highly contentious issue. Time4Change was born out of revulsion at the revelations and developed a political response accordingly. In doing so it attracted many new activists for whom the JDA as an organisation was and remains irrelevant.
Some strong comments have been aired here.
ReplyDeleteTime to move on from this topic.
POSITIVE THOUGHTS AND IDEAS for the future are what Jersey needs now.
Pat
I guess what really shows how much stock should be put in this drivel from Nick Le Cornu - must be good to be 50% of a party/organisatio - is to consider what the old Commie says about his being a candidate in the recent by-election...
ReplyDeleteHe wasn't an 'independent' Nick blusters. Well, well, well, did he or anyone else tell that to the other 50% of Time 4 A Commie? Because only last week in the States Deputy Montford Tadier stated - to howls of drision - that Nick wasn't an official Time 4 A Commie candidate at all, but rather an independent! Confused? You will be if you ever vote for this joker.
As a foot note one should also remember that Nick Le Cornu, far from what he would like people to believe, went on the radio and announced his new 'party' whilst still in the JDA! OK, so he had to retract it pretty quickly when only Monty and his coat tail followed him but there you have it. No wonder the left struggle with fake socialists like Nick.
Time 4 Change? No, dear boy. Time for all involved to move on. Nick will never be elected until he learns to respect people instead of trying to lecture them. Socialism, yes. Marxism, Stalinism, Le Cornuism, NO!
When he knocks on my door next time I will just turn up the TV.