If it's so good living there, why are they living here?

That point of view takes me back to when Cecil Harrison was made Bailiff and sadly died without a knighthood all too soon after taking office, although he was honoured for his work at the International Court at The Hague in keeping greedy French mitts off the Minquiers and the Ecrehous.

On a similar theme, it was also nice a while back to see his daughter, Jurat (and Lieut-Bailiff) Sally Le Brocq receive an accolade for her service to the Island. I wonder how long it will be before we next see a former Bailiff’s daughter appointed Lieut-Bailiff, or indeed, as Herself observed (looking over my shoulder yet again) the first woman Bailiff?

While on one of my name dropping exercises – it’s gratifying on occasions to pretend you know these people when all you’ve got is a reasonable memory – I was pleased to read that our Foreign Minister, former Bailiff Sir Philip Bailhache, made clear yet again to anyone who cares to listen that neither he nor the rest of us are in the mood to continue rolling over and letting the British Government tickle Jersey’s collective tummy.

As someone from this small rock once pointed out in a letter to The Times, following the events near Hastings on 14 October 1066 we allowed England a measure of independence and they’ve not made best use of the privilege.

I’m getting all this off my chest simply because there was a bloke from over there – quite by coincidence he actually came from not far from Hastings – in the pub the other evening banging on about ‘this happens in England’ and ‘they manage to do that in England’ so much that, probably with a Calvados or two north of my usual quota, I asked him why he and the rest of them were living over here if it was so marvellous over there.

To listen to some of them talk you’d think they were parachuted in to rescue us from living in caves, writing on the walls and drinking whatever takes your fancy out of stone jam jars. I get utterly fed up with them at times.

No doubt the usual suspects are already licking their pencils and looking for a sheet of paper on which to accuse me of racism, bigotry and xenophobia, always assuming they know how to string more than five words together.

Come over here by all means, this is one of the most hospitable places on earth, but please don’t tell us how to run – or indeed ruin – the Island. It was all going tickety boo until people started moving here for no better reason than to print money.

Scanning the Gazette notices the other day – as you do when you’ve finished sorting the sock drawer – I noticed the notification for the Public Inquiry into the planned redevelopment of Stan Parkin’s holiday camp at Plemont is now getting into gear.

I have to say that I was amused (well, I managed about a quarter of a smile) to read that anyone wanting to make an additional or new representation must not exceed 1,500 words in their written submission. No matter which side of the fence anyone sits on, this matter is an important one for Jersey and quite frankly I find it a bit insulting to be told that I (or, to be more precise, those who intend making a submission) have to adhere to a word limit which equates as near as makes no difference to the length of this column and half as much again.

The Inquiry is being conducted by what the notice describes as ‘an independent Inspector’ and while I have no problem with that I do think that if we can’t appoint someone with a greater attention span able to read more than 1,500 words from any one person or organisation then we should look again.

I know that in the last war Prime Minister Winston Churchill used to like his ministers and officials to make their submissions on ‘no more than two sheets of paper’ but for heaven’s sake this is a planning application, not a world war on half a dozen fronts.

I have no doubt at all that Philip Ozouf’s suggestion to make changes to the gold-plated, index linked pension scheme for States employees will provoke the inevitable protest from, dare I say it, the inevitable sources.

I read what was published the other day and, if I was one of those employees – and I have to say I’d be considerably better off if I was – the most important thing is that past contributions will still count towards a final salary scheme and only contributions made after changes are approved will count towards any new scheme.

This simple country boy believes this means that what you’ve paid is ring fenced and counts towards the existing scheme. I only hope that someone in Senator Ozouf’s department has the wit to explain all this properly, rather than writing some almost unintelligible civil service speak. Pensions, as those of us who are old will tell anyone who cares to listen, are a vitally important subject and, hopefully, not a political football.

And finally,

I read the other day in 25 Years Ago that Sir Dick from the Docks failed in one of the many propositions he brought to overturn either a planning or housing decision. The report ended with a reference to the possibility of the case being taken to the European Court of Human Rights. Turn the clock forward 25 years and you’ll probably find that the consent his constituent was refused would today be granted – because of fear of that European Court. Times change.