Tuesday, 16 November 2010

Questions in the States 16/11/10.

1. The Deputy of Grouville will ask the following question of the Chief Minister –



“Given that during Oral Question Time on 3rd February 2009 the Chief Minister said that he would endeavour to find out whether there were written guidelines or policies relating to the taking of notes at suspensions and the shredding of those notes before the typewritten minutes were agreed, will he inform Members whether such guidelines exist and, if they do not, will he state why no guidelines have been implemented?”




3. Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier will ask the following question of the Chief Minister –



“Given that on 12th October 2010 the Chief Minister informed Members that disciplinary action would be dealt with through normal procedures, will he inform Members whether disciplinary action has been taken in relation to the Napier findings, and if so, what has been the outcome?"



4. Deputy of St. Martin will ask the following question of the Chief Minister –



“In his answer to an oral question on 19th October 2010 about the altering of the Napier Terms of Reference, the Chief Minister advised that they were altered when it was established that the previous Chief Officer of Police would fully participate in the investigation, will the Minister inform Members how this willingness was communicated and, if by letter, when this was received?”





10. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade will ask the following question of the Chief Minister –



“Will the Chief Minister confirm that Mr Napier was invited to come to Jersey to present his report to States Members and, if so, will he state when this was and why he has not yet come over?”





16. Deputy of St. Martin will ask the following question of the Chief Minister –



“In view of the fact that during oral question time on 30th June 2009, the Chief Minister agreed that States Members should apologise when they make allegations against individuals that are not substantiated, will the Chief Minister inform Members whether he has asked the Minister for Home Affairs to apologise for allegations made against the former Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police, and, if not why not?”

7 comments:

rico sorda said...

Thanks so much for this it's a great help

rs

Anonymous said...

These same questions at every sitting are getting cumbersome. What these questioners are trying to achieve is a mystery. If Brian Napier does not want a press conference then what can they do about it? If the end justifies the suspension anyway what can they do about it? If there is no law with regard to notes then what can they do about it? Its all going around in circles and getting tedious. Thanks for putting these recording up anyway, its useful for all sides.

Anonymous said...

So TLS effectively agrees that Graham Power was not guilty, so how does that stack up with, events has since proven that the suspension was justified!!!

Ian Evans said...

Stuart Syvret, JAILED for caring.

Anonymous said...

What is, cumbersome, Is the Chief Ministers behaviour.

Brian Napier offered to come to Jersey. What changed? call me a cynic did he receive a bonus for not coming.

The suspension was not justified we still have no facts or evidence to support how the suspension even came about.

Simple question isnt it? Why was Graham Power suspended in the middle of a child abuse investigation?

The question is simple the answer is where we have problems.

Thanks thejerseyway for bring to public attention the difficulties our Chief Minister has with supplying answers.

Anonymous said...

Stuart Syvret was jailed for contempt of Court. Thats what it says on the charge sheet.

Anonymous said...

Anyone who does not feel contempt for the overly politicized Jersey courts is crazy. Contempt of Court, indeed!