Grouville fields saga shows we need reform - and island-wide politicians

Thursday 24 February 2022

Grouville fields saga shows we need reform - and island-wide politicians

Thursday 24 February 2022

A Grouville resident and ex-Senator says he is worried about how the Bridging Island Plan is playing out in his parish, and why it illustrates that breaking up Jersey into districts is the wrong thing to do.

Here's what he had to say...

Due to political incompetence, primarily the lack of a population policy, the island finds itself with a severe affordable housing crisis. It is therefore with some trepidation that I suggest that the Island Plan debate is delayed until after the summer election.

I am a Grouville resident - one of those poor individuals that has had my political influence largely removed under the new political system (more about that later).

As a result, I have been taking a particular interest in the Grouville planning shenanigans.

Firstly, the whole Island Plan consultation has been handled in a completely unethical manner. The addition of new fields based on “if you don’t pass our original proposals, you risk these fields as well” is simply devious low-intelligence political blackmail.

However, it was a Bailiwick Express piece that caught my eye.

Deputy Scott Wickenden, who was elected by just 682 voters in St. Helier No. 1 and zero voters in Grouville, has put forward a cluster of fields in Grouville. If he wants to represent the whole island, he should have an island-wide mandate – currently, he certainly does not represent me.

There are now a dozen fields in Grouville in contention for housing, even though the Environment Minister only put one forward.

Grouville appears under attack: let’s get our Deputy and Constable to serve us as promised when we elected them.

Oh dear.

One group of fields is owned by a family member of Deputy Labey, we are told, and another field is owned by a brother of Constable John Le Maistre, so both will be withdrawing from the debate.

Pictured: Grouville's two elected representatives, Constable Le Maistre and Deputy Labey, will not be taking part in two separate debates about fields in their parish.

Before withdrawing, Deputy Labey will be arguing against the development of Environment Minister’s choice, field G392A, even though the Jersey Farmers Union President Peter Le Maistre has said that the JFU does not oppose the development, as the field is one of the "least important” to the agricultural sector.

If Deputy Labey is successful in blocking the re-zoning of this field, it increases the chances of the fields owned by one of the Labey family being re-zoned?

Surely, she is therefore conflicted on this field as well?

As for Constable John Le Maistre, he has demonstrated an error of judgement. The field owned by his brother is close to the field described as ‘least important’ to agriculture by the JFU President [who is not the owner].

Surely the field owned by one of John Le Maistre’s brothers [not the JFU President] would have little chance of being passed if Peter Le Maistre is not successful in his efforts?

Furthermore, if a field is owned by your brother, you step back completely, not just for the debate. What on earth does he think he was doing when he approached Deputy Steve Luce, using his position as Constable, and asking the Deputy to put his brother’s field forward? And what was Deputy Luce thinking when he did so?

Yet nobody appears to have questioned this, as if it is acceptable behaviour in 2022.

If I were in politics and a family member wanted a field re-zoned, I would not do anything at all – least of all ask another politician to propose it.

So, Grouville is left without any of the two elected politicians being able to fight its corner.

And everyone, except me, appears to believe that the above conflicts are ok in 2022.

If this has happened here, there is a chance that the whole Island Plan is tainted, and needs investigation.

As for Deputy Wickenden, he should really support my petition to bring back the Island-wide mandate.

I am not standing at the next election simply because I don't want to just do what is right for my district - I want to do what is best for the whole island.

I would want everyone to have the opportunity to give me their vote, so that those who do not agree with my views can influence my election outcome.

I don't believe in districts as they are the death-knell for a parish system that has existed since 475 AD.

The problem of the disparity between the Constable’s electorate has not been dealt with and, when they are removed from the States Assembly, as they surely will be, the Parish Halls will be re-centred around ‘District Halls’, at a considerable cost saving.

I further object to a system where I can vote for just three Deputies whereby a St. Saviour voter, for example, can elect five Deputies. On what planet would this be fair?

Something has to change.

This is why I’ve started a petition calling for an island-wide mandate for all politicians, with a significant reduction in the number of politicians.

That way, everyone on the electoral register will get the same influence on the structure of the States Assembly as those in St. Saviour.

Ben Shenton’s petition can be viewed HERE.