STATES Members threw out Senator Stuart Syvret’s attempt to remove the Council of Ministers yesterday.
By a majority of 41 to eight, they rejected his calls to support a vote of no confidence in Chief Minister Frank Walker and his nine ministers.
The vote came after around seven hours of debate and with only four ministers speaking.
The strongest and most damning words against Senator Syvret and his proposition came from his successor as Health Minister, Senator Ben Shenton.
He referred to Senator Syvret (pictured) as a ‘Teflon politician’ who had consistently failed to face up to his failings or shoulder responsibility.
The Health Minister suggested that Senator Syvret had gone from optimistic minister to destructive communist in two short years.
The first to speak when the debate resumed yesterday morning was Deputy Gerard Baudains.
He said that one might think everything was rosy from hearing the speeches of Senators Frank Walker and Philip Ozouf.
‘One could have thought it was too good to be true and, of course, it is,’ he said. ‘It was selective, carefully avoiding the unfavourable parts.’
He added that either the ministerial system was not working or several of the ministers were not up to the job, adding that the long list of mistakes went on ‘like some sort of nightmare’.
‘There is not one Member of this House who does not know that the legislature has never been held in lower regard,’ he said.
Senator Ben Shenton said, referring to Senator Syvret’s opening address, that he had never heard such a poor speech since entering the House.
‘It was very much a me, me, me speech telling us how wrong we all are and how the former minister has got it all right,’ he said.
He added: ‘I think it is about time that the public opened their eyes and realised they were being hoodwinked by a failed minister.’
And he added that Senator Syvret’s speech had revealed a man who had ‘much too high an opinion of himself’.
Senator Shenton said that there were faults with the Council of Ministers, adding that he had been a critic of fellow ministers when he thought it necessary.
However, he argued that Members had to ask themselves a question: ‘Are you a mechanic willing to repair the deficiencies or a wrecker wiling to destroy everything?’
He said that Senator Syvret had been an excellent Health Minister, but a disastrous Social Services Minister, who never visited the Greenfields secure youth unit, which he attacked so often.
Senator Shenton questioned what Senator Syvret had achieved in his 17 years as a States Member.
‘It is about time he stopped hiding from the fact that he was responsible for child protection for many, many years,’ he added.
And he suggested that Senator Syvret had used the Haut de la Garenne inquiry to further his own political agenda and opened up a lot of doors that may never be closed.
The Health Minister also criticised Senator Syvret for his attendance record in the States.
‘I would not tolerate such an attendance record among my staff at Health and Social Services,’ he said. ‘I sometimes think the Senator should consider sacking himself.
‘It is not the Council of Ministers which has let the Island down, it is the poll-topping Senator who refused to take responsibility.’
And he said that Senator Syvret had gone from being an ‘optimistic minister’ to a ‘destructive communist’ in just two years.
Deputy Sarah Ferguson said that she would not be supporting the proposition, adding that it was ‘entirely destructive’.
‘If you are going to pull down the castle, you do need something to put in its place,’ she said, adding that the Senator had provided no credible alternative to the system he sought to destroy.
Deputy Ferguson suggested that, if Senator Syvret was writing an end of term report for the council, he would give them an F, whereas she would give them a B- or a B.
Deputy Anne Pryke said that Jersey had a strong economy and excellent health and education services. She added that the council was not perfect, but stressed that it had some notable achievements to its credit.
Education Minister Mike Vibert said that he did not need to list the great successes of the Education department which he had inherited and added to, because Islanders knew how good Jersey schools were.
The Senator added that, as far as he was aware, Senator Syvret had never visited any of the Island’s secondary schools. If he had, the Education Minister said, he would not have made such critical comments.
‘The only reason he wants to sweep away the whole political establishment is because of the States’ consistent refusal to accept his own view of the world,’ added Senator Vibert.
‘However, in the absence of political parties, it is the Strategic Plan, in which the States sets out policy for the three years of the life of this Assembly, that is important. Unless the Council of Ministers have strayed from that blueprint – and I don’t think it has to any great extent – the vote of no confidence should fall.’
He added that Senator Syvret had to learn that he was far more likely to achieve his political aims if he tempered his language and spoke to people with more respect.
He said that it was a paradox of Island politics that Senator Walker was trusted in the House and not by the wider electorate, while Senator Syvret was trusted by the community but not by his political colleagues.
Housing Minister Terry Le Main said that Senator Syvret was far too happy to cry to Jersey’s enemies in the UK rather than trying to sort out his differences reasonably in the Island.
Deputy Peter Troy focused his comments on the way that the Council of Ministers had managed the debate about a new waste strategy. He said that there had been too little regard given to alternatives to the proposals put forward by Transport Minister Guy de Faye and his department for a new incinerator.
And he argued that it was ridiculous that such a measly 36 per cent recycling target had been set.
He said that he was ‘no boot licker’ and, as an assistant minister, had opposed, and would continue to oppose, council proposals which he did not agree with. However, he said the council’s record was not all bad.
Deputy Juliette Gallichan said that she was not entirely satisfied with the council, but insisted that that was no reason to vote for a motion of no confidence.
She added that she loved all that the Island had to offer and was glad that its politicians had helped to create a strong economy that meant her children had a better than average chance of getting good jobs and of having a bright future.
‘I will not be bullied into popular short-termist voting to the detriment of my Island,’ she said.
Deputy Roy Le Hérissier said that he had struggled with the issue of whether the council should be brought to account by means of a no confidence vote.
He said that he admired the Chief Minister’s dedicated work ethic, but suggested that his expectation of loyalty from his troops stifled necessary debate.
One result of that, he said, was that the government was disconnected from the people. The reality at the moment, he suggested, was that traditional Jersey had jumped on the bandwagon normally driven by the usual malcontents.
‘There is a disconnection from the electorate and it’s getting worse and worse,’ Deputy Le Hérissier added. ‘The problem is that the government does believe in spin and it actually believes its own spin.’
He added that the council existed in a vacuum in which they kept telling themselves that they were right and surrounded themselves with people who also said they were right.
He added that the problem with the ministerial system was that it had destroyed consensus politics.
But Deputy Le Hérissier questioned what Senator Syvret’s vision was for the future.
Deputy Jackie Hilton said that she agreed with much of what Senator Shenton had said.
Deputy Kevin Lewis said that many, many mistakes had been made by the Council.
According to States standing orders, Senator Walker had the right to respond to points raised in the debate before Senator Syvret’s closing address.
The Chief Minister said that he accepted all was not perfect with ministerial government, but insisted that the Island was at the start of an evolutionary process and that the governmental system would improve. And he repeated the words of Senator Shenton that Members had to decide whether they were mechanics or wreckers.
He said that some Members had welcomed the proposition because it was an avenue for them to express dissatisfaction with the council and the ministerial system.
However, he said that he wished there was a way that such a debate could take place without the need for a vote of no confidence.
He questioned whether Jersey was really in the mess that Senator Syvret suggested, because he did not recognise the picture painted by the former minister.
Senator Walker said that he agreed with Senator Shenton that Senator Syvret had used the Haut de la Garenne inquiry for his own political ends.
And he repeated his inadvertently broadcast comment to Senator Syvret in what he thought was an off-air conversation with Senator Syvret that the latter was only interested in ‘shafting Jersey’. ‘Of that I have no doubt whatsoever,’ he said.
The Chief Minister said of the council: ‘We are delivering on the policies that this House has laid down for us to deliver on.’
In his closing speech, Senator Syvret said that he had no intention of seeking to become Chief Minister and added: ‘Why would anyone but a complete fool want to take the helm of the Titanic before it slips below the waves.’
He added: ‘The Council of Ministers states in its report that this proposition will not result in a sea change in Island politics. As I suggested at the beginning of this debate, that may well be the likely outcome of a vote in favour of this proposition.
‘A vote against this proposition, on the other hand, may well be the catalyst that at last will free this community from the self-interested, short-term, incompetent tyranny of a secret, unopposed political party.’
He added that, if he lost the vote, he would be looking into setting up a political movement that would campaign for change to produce a fairer, more open, accountable and equitable society. The group, he said, would be called Jersey Charter and would have a series of core aims that would be written into a short charter.
When the vote was taken at around 12.40 pm yesterday, the proposition was lost by eight votes to 41.
