Wednesday, 30 March 2011

Questions in the States. 29/03/11


4. The Deputy of St. Martin will ask the following question of the Minister for Home Affairs –


“Will the Minister inform Members of the circumstances that led to the recent abortive search of a property in St Ouen, is he satisfied that appropriate steps were taken to allay a sense of grievance and, given the difficulty in identifying addresses particularly in rural parishes, is the Minister of the view that before States Police execute searches they should liaise with the Chef de Police of the relevant parish?”







9. Senator S.C. Ferguson will ask the following question of H.M. Attorney General –

“If an officer employed by the States, when discussing a problem with a member of the public tells that person not to contact any politicians about the problem, is that officer guilty of contempt of the States Assembly?”





11. Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier will ask the following question of the Minister for Home Affairs –

“Will the Minister confirm whether he was ever advised by the Chief Minister that the former Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police had requested, on 3rd April 2010, that his response to the Wiltshire Report should be published?”




TheJerseyWay would like to Credit & Thank BBC Radio Jersey for making these recording's posible.

8 comments:

Ian Evans said...

DON'T CRAP ON YOUR OWN

Ian Evans said...

Le Marquand skating around the edges again, "I am confident BUT" ??? Laughing stock....

Anonymous said...

Completely unaware, what a load of tripe. i am sure I have heard him use those words on other occasions where without a doubt he would be well aware.

Well, i hope the question is asked again when he will have had time to regurgitate some more tripe!

voiceforchildren said...

TJW.

Ian Le Marquand, instead of stop digging, he is still looking for that bigger spade.

Anonymous said...

Interesting that people asking ILM are asking whether the local sentenier or che de police should be asked before conducting a search.

What seems to have been missed here is that the local sentenier is possibly likely to know the person who's property is to be searched and could unwittingly make that known to the person.

Its my opinion that although the police made a mistake it can be rectified whereas if they were to inform everyone about where they were going to search then the possibilities are rife as to what might happen.

Perhaps this is a product of our police force being too politicised.

Ian Evans said...

RAPE=BAIL=JERSEY=SICK

Anonymous said...

ILM answered the Graham Power defense document question and threw in his own bombshell by informing us that he had emailed GP asking him to make contact re his document. GP never replied to the ILM request.

I conclude from all this that it would have been wise to have contacted GP about this matter before going public.GP may then have mentioned the ILM request. He might also have explained why it was that he chose not to reply. What initially appeared to be an issue, now no longer is.

Anonymous said...

I occasionally read comments on taking civil action against Jersey child abusers.

who will finance it.
How will this be done.
When can it be done.
Who will do it.
Can only those who have been criminally charged be pursued,keeping in mind that particularly well known one has not been charged.