Tuesday 10 September 2013

Senator Sir Philip Bailhache--------------A Man of Influence-----Part 2.

As the law had already been drafted it was only a matter of months before the “Loi 1960 au sujet du College Victoria” became operative after having been forwarded to the Privy Council for confirmation and to the Royal Court for registration.

Sir Philip Bailhache as the Chairman of the new Governing Board was soon joined by the Deputy Bailiff Francis Hamon, Air Marshal Sir Michael Alcock, Rev. John Platt of Pembroke College Oxford, Richard Robins and Peter Norman.

As mentioned in my PREVIOUS BLOG the States was embroiled with proposals for providing for the education of pupils in the secondary sector. Dr Young assisted by Ken Spours had been commissioned by the Education Committee in April 1993 to undertake a review of post-16 education for the non fee paying schools. In September 1993 they presented their report.

In 1993 students attending Victoria and the Girls Colleges ceased paying fees once they reached the sixth form, this anomaly had been created some years previously. In their Report Young/Spours had made a number of recommendations and its favoured option was to establish a sixth form college for all students in the non-fee paying sector. This would have included both Colleges as the sixth form was non-fee paying.

In 1990’s the Committee system prevailed and the Education Committee’s President was Connetable Iris Le Feuvre of St Lawrence.  I had some sympathy with what she was attempting because there was a need for the existing costly and outdated education system to be updated but if she followed the Young/Spours recommendations it would be at the expense of a number of sacred cows.

On 20th June 1995 the Education Committee lodged P84/95 which was for the re-organisation of the Island’s secondary education in the non-fee paying sector. In my opinion it fell short of the Young/Spours favoured option in that it did not include Victoria or the Girls College. The date for debate was set for 25th July. Shortly afterwards I submitted an amendment to the Greffier which was to include both colleges

The normal procedure for lodging propositions, amendments or questions is that they are submitted to the Greffier who not only ensures they are grammatically correct but they also comply with Standing Orders. They are then forwarded to the Bailiff or in his absence the Deputy Bailiff whose decision is final. If approved the proposition is then printed and circulated to be formally lodged at the next States Sitting which in my case was Tuesday 11th July.

The Greffier must have been content with my amendment which was then approved by the Deputy Bailiff Francis Hamon who apart from being an Old Victorian was also on the Board of Governors. Like the Greffier he obviously found no grounds for rejection so my proposition was duly printed and circulated for formal lodging on Tuesday 11th July.

However before the 11th I was informed by Sir Philip that I had to delete reference to Victoria College in my amendment. He said that as a result of the amendments to the “Loi 1960 au sujet du College Victoria,” the College was now independent of the States. I was unhappy, Sir Philip was well and truly conflicted, out of order and overriding his Deputy but there was no appeal.

A short time after I was informed by Sir Philip that my amended amendment could not be lodged because in his opinion it would “negative the Education Committee’s proposition.” His decision was bizarre because if that was the case my original amendment would not have been approved by the Greffier, Deputy Bailiff and even Sir Philip who did not raise the matter when he told me that reference to Victoria College had to be withdrawn.

As my amendment was on the 11th June Order Paper the Bailiff had to inform Members that in his opinion my amendment was contrary to Standing Order No 21 (2) as such I could not present it and had to withdraw it.

When formally withdrawing my amendment I said that Members were only now learning of the true implications of their approval of the amendments to the “Loi 1960 au sujet du College Victoria” the previous year. There were mutterings of disapproval from some Members about Sir Philip’s conflict and being final arbiter. The JEP report is below.


The debate on the re-organisation was acrimonious with the defence of the schools and colleges taking priority over the education of it students. I believe the Education Committee had fudged the issue which left more losers than winners. The proposition was heavily defeated and it was evident that it had spilt the Committee, made the President's position untenable and she resigned soon after.

After the summer break Deputy Evelyn Pullin was elected as President. Her tenure was most troublesome, not only did she have to address the re-organisation but also the status of the Victorian Governing Board as I had made it clear that I would not let the matter rest.

I believed that Sir Philip had abused his position in relation to the law drafting and my amendments. His behaviour was unbecoming of a judge and QC. I, along with many other States Members were of the view that if Victoria College was independent of the States then those receiving the perceived benefits should pay for the privilege and not expect the tax payer continuing to do so.

During the ensuing months I carried out considerable research and asked a number of questions before eventually lodging an amendment to overturn the States decision of April 1994. It was a difficult task because of opposition from Old Victorians and parents who did not appreciate that independence had to be paid for via raising school fees. Independence would also impede on the College’s relationship with the Girls College and its sixth form in particular.

The JEP published the Al Thomas cartoon below illustrating my difficulties which I shall cover in my next Blog.


  1. I remember Jimmy Perchard - only a couple of years ago - telling the states assembly how Jersey is a shining beacon of democracy. He went further and challenged members to name a time when the bailiff has been anything other than independent or impartial. Do you have Jimmy Perchard's email addy? Somebody needs to send this Blog to him.

  2. Jimmy didn't get everything right and his claim was well off the mark.

  3. Welcome to feudal Jersey, population you!

  4. Dear Bob, Sir Philip is a man who has had power on all counts, he won't stop until the system in Jersey changes! He is involved in everything that happens in Jersey and if it is not him it is his brother William. In a way Philip feels he is royalty on Jersey, wanting his own museum, for example a number of years ago, do you remember? for someone to think to that level they must have issues of power in their thinking...... step by step, all we can hope for is that he looks at himself and takes stock of his past and tries to face how he will deal with his future. I hope he resigns soon and allows change in Jersey for the better.

  5. http://bobhilljersey.blogspot.com/2013/08/senator-sir-philip-bailhache-man-of.html?showComment=1377784178689#c2055445198011993126

    Bob, On your previous (link above) blog you kindly published the following comment:


    Yes, you make another good point Bob re. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me"

    Some of the fools are little better themselves and are horizontally integrated into the "house/businesses of Bailhache"

    And some just follow the pied piper in a tank top
    to hell, but probably not back again

    I feel sorry for the followers who gazed open mouthed as the media built Sir Philip up to be some sort of god
    Why did the media do this ?
    How did an otherwise intelligent population largely swallow it?

    It was done with a relative stranglehold on power & information. A stranglehold which they fully intend to reassert.
    Mark my words.


    Call me "Cassandra" but that last bit:

    "It was done with a relative stranglehold on power & information. A stranglehold which they fully intend to reassert."

    has unfortunately .......... come to pass !

    See judgement transcript and analysis at:

    and further development at:
    Topic: JEP- is it worth buying ? (Read 25703 times)

  6. Beware the forthcoming "anti-trolling" legislation, it is ripe for hijack !

    Beware ! ....... Beware ! ....... Beware !

    Beware the shysters for they own this island ........ They shall trap you in a gilded cage !

    Beware! The gilded cage is just a cage we have painted gold and the gold is already peeling off !
    They have sold your soul for well under it's market value and they shall own you ..... and even own the 'democracy' that is not just yours, but is the birthright of your children !

    Beware ! ....... Beware ! ....... Beware !

    [this prediction was brought to you without breaching Data Protection Legislation or it's hijacked Case Law]

  7. Bob, have you seen p4 of the JEP today? Police say that HG's original complaint "remains subject of reinvestigation".

  8. Thanks for the info. One wonders why and has new evidence has come to light?

  9. be nice if they had informed me of this. Probably it means that the powers that be are going to ensure that their church officer friend is cleared. HG

  10. Perhaps Ian Evans could scan and upload the article? P4 on 19th Sept.

    HG - the article quotes SoJP as saying "The Korris report highlighted potential new lines of inquiry and the original indecent assault complaint remains subject of re-investigation, with a view to ask for reconsideration by the Law Officers' Department. Consequently, this remains a matter of sub judice"

    HG - this is very rare, in Jersey. As the original complainant, I urge you not to dismiss it out of hand. The article also clarifies Stuart Gull's role, as a point of contact for Dame Heather Steele. If I were you, as the original complainant, I would contact Mr Gull, perhaps with Bob's help, and say "these are my contact details, please keep me notified about this reinvestigation". I appreciate you have little faith in the powers that be, but I don't think that this reinvestigation should be so easily dismissed. As I say, it is a rare occurrence.

    1. I understand that Mr gull is an officer from the UK and that he has a good track record up to now, so that is probably good advice.

      It is encouraging that the original indecent assault complaint remains subject of re-investigation. However this may be a ploy to keep sub Justice and thus under wraps until the heat has died down.

      Remain positive but watchful.

  11. Many thanks anonymous, that is very helpful. HG

  12. I don't think Ian will touch the JEP.

    1. Probably not. I did today but washed my hands straight after!

    2. Someone has to do the dirty work for the rest of us. Ian's careful to avoid being tainted.

  13. The police have reopened an investigation into an alleged indecent assault carried out by a churchwarden against a young woman in 2008.

    The allegation led to the Dean, the very Rev Bob Key having his authority to preach withdrawn earlier this year by the Bishop of Winchester.

    It has also strained the relationship between the diocese and the Anglican community in Jersey.


    It is understood that the police are looking again at the correspondence that passed between the woman, the warden, police and others responsible for protecting the young and vulnerable in the Chhurch of England.

    The complaint by the woman was re-examined in a Church commissioned report earlier this year. Its publication led to the Bishop effectively suspending the Dean for seven weeks. He returned to duty in in May in May after apologising to the vulnerable woman. It has also prompted the police to reinvestigate the allegation.

    The force first looked into the allegation five years ago but the case was dropped after two months because of a lack of evidence.

    In a statement this week the police said: The publications of the Winchester Diocese Safeguarding Independent Review (The Korris report) highlighed potential new lines of inquiry and the original indecent assault complaint remains subject of reinvestigation, with a view to ask for reconsideration by the Law Officers' department. Consequently, this remains a matter of sub judice.'

    Because the investigation is active, the police will not reveal what those new lines of inquiry are. The Korris report did not specifically recommend the reopening of a criminal investigation but did criticise the way the complaint had been handled and identified holes in procedure.

    Meanwhile a seperate investigation is being carried out by a judge appointed by the Bishop to see if any disciplinary measures should be taken against any member of the clergy.

    Former Court of Appeal judge Dame Heather Steel visited the Island recently to gather evidence. Following a request from the Diocese of Winchester, a senior Jersey police officer is helping her.

    Asked why a policeman was assisting in a non-police inquiry, a spokesman for the force said: 'The diocese asked the police if they could provide a single point of contact in Jersey by way of support and local advisory conduit for Dame Heather Steel.

    'Folloing consideration, in light of the associated ongoing criminal reinvestigation, Detective Superintendent Stewart Gull was identified as support to Dame Heather.

    ''To date, this has culminated in approximately seven hours' work, which has had no impact upon his core role as head of crime services.

    " It is not uncommon for the police to provide input and support to associated inquiries, in particular where there is potential crossover and duplication.

    'At this stage, no further work is planned or anticipated.'

    dame Heather's report is due to be published later this year.

    1. Thank you for your very informed comment above which appear to have come via press releases. If they are from press releases I am sure that readers would welcome the opportunity of reading them. I would be grateful if you could inform if the Press Releases have been published by Winchester's Press officers and/or the Jersey police.

    2. The above is a word for word transcription of the JEP article on page 4, Sept 19th 2013. Somebody has kindly typed it all out, which I did not have time to do.

      There is no press release on the SoJP website or the Diocese website

    3. Thanks for the info. I now have a copy of the JEP report. Like you I have checked the same websites without success. It would appear that the JEP report is based on a police press release/statement and I have emailed them asking or a copy.

      However one wonders what was the purpose of the statement, are the police unto something new or is it a kite flying exercise?

  14. I am baffled that the diocese suddenly need to explain the use of Jersey police. are they trying to say he is nothing to do with it or he is something to do with it? and why is Dame Steel being allowed to proceed when she is conflicted, she is basically being given leeway to damage me. HG

    1. I can understand HG being baffled by Supt.Gull's involvement particularly as in the comment above it says, "It is not uncommon for the police to provide input and support to associated inquiries, in particular where there is potential crossover and duplication.

      'At this stage, no further work is planned or anticipated.'

      Does it mean that the original complaint has been re-investigated and Mr Gull stands by the original decision?

      What about the investigation into the circumstances leading to HG's arrest, two weeks detention and deportation from the Island, has Supt Gull investigated that matter too?

      Concerns had been raised at the outset regarding Dame Heather's perceived conflict. Nothing to date has come to light to allay those concerns.