Tuesday, 15 January 2013

Questions without Answers. 15/01/13.


Question 13. Surpasses everything that been aloud to happen in the States to this Date! Chief Minister passes Question to someone who Knows, But He say's he Knows nothing, But he say's its an on going Case so he can't Say any more!!!!!!!!!!!!

  So has he told us that there IS a Supper Inthingy out there that has been paid for out of our Tax's? To do with Private Person's against another Private Person?

This lot make it up as they go along there merry way!




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

“Does the Chief Minister plan to propose the creation of a Minister for External Relations and, if so, has he considered how this would impact on the so-called ‘Troy’ rule in the eventuality of the number of States Members being reduced as proposed by the Electoral Commission?”









4.  Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade will ask the following question of the Minister for Home Affairs –

“Will the Minister provide an estimate of the cost incurred by Department in respect of the surveillance, arrest, security and conviction of Curtis Warren and associates and the cost to date of the investigation and subsequent disciplinary action being pursued against three of the officers involved in the said case?”




10.  Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade will ask the following question of H.M. Attorney General –

“Will H.M. Attorney General provide an estimate of the prosecution costs in respect of the conviction of Curtis Warren and associates, including the appeal case, and advise what steps, if any, have been taken to recover the court and case costs?”




Now For Something Completely Different. 

  Chief Minister passes this to someone that Knows !



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

“Will the Minister clarify how much taxpayers’ money has thus far been spent in support of the four individuals bringing actions under the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005, relating to the internet?”




(c) – Questions to Ministers without notice (30 minutes)


2nd question period – Chief Minister



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







24 comments:

Ian Evans said...

Good one TJW, I am just listening to the current debate from Mike Higgins about the translation of laws from french to english.

It is imperative for the people of the island to understand the French laws by having them written in English. If we cannot read the laws, what chance do we have in our corrupt courts.

It would be fantastic if you could cover the entire debate, and also the individual comments from our cover up ministers and constables who do not want the people to know what their laws actually say!!!

Big task, but I hope you can manage it mate :)

thejerseyway said...

Hi Ian.

I stopped recording so I could get this Post up so I think I've missed most of the speeches, recorded from half way through Bailhache speech. I'll put it up in the next couple of days.

Its such a mess over here,they just do not want us Knowing anything. I see it was lost!!!!!!

TJW.

Ian Evans said...

Is it possible to get a copy of the recording off Hansard?

thejerseyway said...


Not Sure but I bet that is not possible, can't have that can we that would be to helpful.

TJW.

Ian Evans said...

hahaha, wonder if you could check mate, there must be some way of replaying somewhere!

Ian Evans said...

Questions without answers turns into complaint against MIKE BOWRON

rico sorda said...

http://www.dataprotection.gov.je/cms/GeneralInformation/AnnualReports/

Appendix 2 -2011

Where is the funding for court cases coming from?

rs

Anonymous said...

In response to the link to Data Protection Rico provided, I think the Data Protection rules could be more truthful if they were changed to say" We will help trolls and crooks with all desired resource funding and judicial support so they may better fight against anything published on line which hurts their feelings, unless we are politically aligned with what is published.

Anonymous said...

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyPropositions/2004/34398-16029-2042004.pdf

Commissioner to administer. The expected initial net base cost of administering and implementing the Law is
£200,000 p.a., with an associated manpower complement of 4 full-time employees.
Currently the Committee has a net budget for the Data Protection Office of £125,000, and a staff establishment of
4. There are no expected manpower implications to the new Law and the Finance and Economics Committee will
meet the shortfall in net budget currently estimated as required, from within existing resources.
Committees and other administrations of the States which fall under the remit of the Law will be required to meet
the enhanced levels of regulation in the same way that private sector businesses will. It is expected, however, that
any additional resource requirement, over and above that needed under the existing law will only arise during the
transitional period, and the Data Protection Commissioner will lend as much support as possible to ensure that
such costs are minimal.

Anonymous said...

I fail to understand why the data protection commissioner is using taxpayers money to involve herself in individual cases of alleged slander, libel or defamation?

This will now set a precedent and open the flood gates at huge cost to the public.

Ian Evans said...

To be subjected to data protection laws you must first be registered with data protection, no contract, no obligation....

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...
In response to the link to Data Protection Rico provided, I think the Data Protection rules could be more truthful if they were changed to say" We will help trolls and crooks with all desired resource funding and judicial support so they may better fight against anything published on line which hurts their feelings, unless we are politically aligned with what is published.

January 15, 2013 11:37 pm"

Sorry, this is getting me confused!
A person is being taken to court for I assume offensive blog activity and the only way to deal with this is to insult the department bringing this action who are only doing their job under the parameters of the law. A bit hypocritical isn't it?

Anonymous said...

http://jerseylibertarian.blogspot.com/2013/01/this-is-what-it-was-like-in-berlin-in.html

GeeGee said...

Un(b****y)believable! I caught the bulk of Routier's (non) answers whilst driving into town yesterday. It was either an exchange that was so farcical as to be embarrassing or so embarrassing it was farcical!

Either way, he knew nothing, and if he did he certainly wasn't letting on.

What a shambles.

Anonymous said...

Before the Data protection commissioner jumps the gun and funds such activity on behalf of taxpayers one would wonder why the four have not sued?

Ian Evans said...

Jersey breaking INTERNATIONAL LAW

Ian Evans said...

Scum Bag Ian Gorst gags victims after PROMISING that victims would NOT BE GAGGED!!!.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous asked, "Before the Data protection commissioner jumps the gun and funds such activity on behalf of taxpayers one would wonder why the four have not sued?"

Hmmm, I wonder what the public would learn from a law suit. Would they learns about dangerous stalker-trolls who make death threats, criminal cops and officials or terrifying violent nurses? I think that's your answer as to why the Data Protection office is willing to secretly fund this disgusting action against the man who tried to hold criminals to account.

Elle

voiceforchildren said...

TJW.

Totally agree with GEEGEE and Question 13 really deserves a Blog of its own and I might publish one myself.

In the meantime, you and you readers might want to have a look at THIS

Anonymous said...

Elle, what you just said is trolling by definition. You cannot go around pointing the finger at people and then doing exactly the same yourself.

Ian Evans said...

Common Law, Customary Law, & the BAILHACHE Bro's

Anonymous said...

I am a bit lost as to what Question 13 is trying to get at. Cases go on all the time at the expense of the tax payer so what makes this one of such special interest, and surely the ultimate cost should be bore by the people who break the data protection law and not those seeking justice through it?

Ian Evans said...

State Media V's Bloggers....on GRAFFITI

voiceforchildren said...

TJW.

An act of sheer DESPERATION?