This Wednesday lunchtime a meeting was held in Church House by the
Christian group Business Connect for all the candidates standing for Deputy in
District No1 and No2. Before them were a
number of topical issues with a moral dimension. The hope from the point of
view of the organisers of CHOW (Church House on Wednesday) was to pose a
Christian challenge to contemporary politics.
The topics for debate were injustice in Jersey; Gay
marriage; the position of the Dean in the States Assembly; Sunday trading; gender
discrimination and Church subsidy through the Parish rates system.
We all had to indicate which questions we wanted to discuss and our host Paul Milbank ensured everyone got to answer an equal number of questions and speak for two minutes.
We all had to indicate which questions we wanted to discuss and our host Paul Milbank ensured everyone got to answer an equal number of questions and speak for two minutes.
CHOW
I noticed that the Establishment candidate here in No1 District, Gordon Forrest, displayed alacrity only to answer the question on Sunday trading. Being a modern Tory, with an employer and business background, this was not surprising. However, debates in the States Assembly invariably have a moral aspect and call for a fine tuned sensitivity to public sentiment. The world is not all technocratic black letter law and finance. Matters of gender, sexual orientation and constitutional law frequently arise and it was correct that CHOW posed them to candidates.
Naturally Reform Jersey candidates Sam Mezec and I were hands up first to talk on justice and inequality.
Below are Gordon Forrest (District No.1, Establishment) and Sam Mezec (District No.2, Reform Jersey) speaking at CHOW on the issue of Sunday Trading:
I noticed that the Establishment candidate here in No1 District, Gordon Forrest, displayed alacrity only to answer the question on Sunday trading. Being a modern Tory, with an employer and business background, this was not surprising. However, debates in the States Assembly invariably have a moral aspect and call for a fine tuned sensitivity to public sentiment. The world is not all technocratic black letter law and finance. Matters of gender, sexual orientation and constitutional law frequently arise and it was correct that CHOW posed them to candidates.
Naturally Reform Jersey candidates Sam Mezec and I were hands up first to talk on justice and inequality.
Below are Gordon Forrest (District No.1, Establishment) and Sam Mezec (District No.2, Reform Jersey) speaking at CHOW on the issue of Sunday Trading:
District No.2 Hustings
On Wednesday evening District No2 held its Husting in the Town Hall Assembly room. I attended, and my assessment was confirmed by conversations afterwards; there was only one candidate of calibre speaking and that was Sam Mezec. His speech carefully crafted his evident youth, 23, to his advantage, emphasising vigor and agility over a number of sedate elderly gentlemen with conventional ideas and solutions. Some candidates shot themselves in the foot, in a classic manner, by deferring in their speeches to Sam, leaving no doubt in the audience's mind who had the upper hand.
Whereas other candidates answered questions with a stream of consciousness, Sam displayed a rounded analysis of often complex issues. He did more than say he “would look into it”, the classic get out clause for candidates covering up their ignorance and provided a clear position on every issue.
On Wednesday evening District No2 held its Husting in the Town Hall Assembly room. I attended, and my assessment was confirmed by conversations afterwards; there was only one candidate of calibre speaking and that was Sam Mezec. His speech carefully crafted his evident youth, 23, to his advantage, emphasising vigor and agility over a number of sedate elderly gentlemen with conventional ideas and solutions. Some candidates shot themselves in the foot, in a classic manner, by deferring in their speeches to Sam, leaving no doubt in the audience's mind who had the upper hand.
Whereas other candidates answered questions with a stream of consciousness, Sam displayed a rounded analysis of often complex issues. He did more than say he “would look into it”, the classic get out clause for candidates covering up their ignorance and provided a clear position on every issue.
Injustice
My contribution at CHOW was on injustice which turned into a speech on inequality and again on gender inequality, which boiled down to the issue of women. I gave the latter a socialist twists by moving beyond “Trickle down Feminism” and its obsession with the “Glass Ceiling” that prevents upper middle class women entering Parliament and the Boardroom, to consider where was the “floor” for working class women bearing the responsibility of child care, the family and work.
My contribution at CHOW was on injustice which turned into a speech on inequality and again on gender inequality, which boiled down to the issue of women. I gave the latter a socialist twists by moving beyond “Trickle down Feminism” and its obsession with the “Glass Ceiling” that prevents upper middle class women entering Parliament and the Boardroom, to consider where was the “floor” for working class women bearing the responsibility of child care, the family and work.
Cringeworthy
When the only woman running for election in District No.1 spoke on women and rejected any form of positive discrimination, I had to cringe. Her speech then veered off on a semi racist tack, made all the worse because it was genuine and heartfelt. Sitting at the back of the room were three people of colour, a man and two women, one a Real Feminist. I was embarrassed on their behalf when Maureen Morgan mentioned “black one armed lesbians”, the fantasy bête noir of all Daily Mail readers. At least she realised she had over-stepped the mark and sort of apologised.
Judge for yourself if Ms Morgan will be invited to give the key note speech at the next Jersey conference on “Advancing Women in Politics and Public Life”?
THE ELECTION FOR DEPUTY IN DISTRICT NO.1 ST HELIER WILL BE HELD ON WEDNESDAY 5TH MARCH 2014 AT THE TOWN HALL, 8AM TO 8PM.
VOTERS MAY PRE-POLL (VOTE EARLY) BY ATTENDING AT ST PAUL'S CENTRE, DUMARESQ STREET, FROM 9AM TO 5PM FROM MONDAY 24TH FEBRUARY TO SATURDAY 1ST MARCH AND AGAIN ON MONDAY 3RD MARCH 9AM TO 2PM.
Thanks again to Stewart for the photography.
Well done Nick, I particularly like your transcending of the cliché of the glass ceiling, and addressing 'where is the floor' for (would be) working women and mothers. There is a race to the bottom in terms of conditions and wages, but many already feel at rock bottom. Best wishes. I hope you succeed.
ReplyDeleteThis woman, did not apologize!,
ReplyDeleteShe had allowed her very real, embittered personal views to leak out to the public including
the professional black people present in the audience. She desperately tried to back-track on her thoughtless remark in a humliating attempt to save face. This was NO APPOLOGY!, This was a futile appeal for forgiveness from the audience.! THE DAMAGE IS DONE, SURELY NO WAY BACK FOR HER NOW,
Unfortunately for Ms Morgan there was one Black, one-armed and Lesbian person actually actually sitting in the Audience at the time of her embarrassing remark.
ReplyDeleteAmusingly, the Celebrity Drug Dealer Curtis Warren used Ms Morgans phrase in court, he was nevertheless still "Carried away" by the police.
ReplyDeleteShe may have been totally crass but I agree with her about positive discrimination being absurd. How can it be justified?
ReplyDeleteNick.
ReplyDeleteAs I am black-listed by the BBC they won't acknowledge my e-mails so could you let me know. Is "The Politics Hour" going to be the usual 40 minutes tomorrow or is it going to be extended to two hours bearing in mind there will be 5 guests (candidates) and 40 minutes will be nowhere near a sufficient amount of time to engage the electorate/candidates?
Will the public be allowed to ask questions live on air or will the BBC be reading out its own selection of edited comments?
Being black-listed, the BBC don't read out my comments/questions left on Facebook/Twitter/e-mails instead it reads out establishment friendly comments from known (to the BBC and most others) fake profiles.
The questions I would like to submit is "do the candidates believe they can really make a difference politically without being dragged through a politicised and corrupt judicial system?"
Do the candidates believe the true power in Jersey lays in the hands of the Law Offices Department and the State Media while the elections are no more than a veneer to dupe the public into believing they are living in a democracy?
We wil see if the BBC is able to remain impartial and avoid asking questions that are obviously from Trolls.
ReplyDelete