Sark Newspaper 15 March 2019

2 On 10 th December 2018 a hustings event was held at the Island Hall, two days before the election, for the appointment of nine Conseillers to Chief Pleas. The purpose was to enable the public to question candidates about the policies on which they sought election. Mr Doyle was one of the candidates that took part in the event. He has made a complaint about the behaviour of the then Conseiller Reginald Guille towards him at the event. He says that the behaviour and words used by Conseiller Guille were in breach of the code of conduct for members of Chief Pleas. His complaint stated: ‘Mr Guille is a Conseiller. He is not, in respect of this complaint, an ordinary member of the public. At the Island Hall at 5.45pm on 10 th December Mr Guille took it upon himself to sternly criticise the dig- nity, efficacy and lawful legitimacy of my nomination and candidacy toward the election to be held two days later. This revocation, though initially relatively calm, increased in temper with his index finger point- ing at my chest, whilst he persistently sought the support of his table looking towards them. This was, albeit informal, a husting at which I was present, to share views with my voting pub- lic. My complaint is that Mr Guille ought not to have chosen that occasion to vent his personal discordance towards me. In doing so, especially with regards to the nature and contempt of his maligned promises, which were that he personal- ly is writing a law to stop people like me ever standing again and that his first motion if I am elected is to seek approval form the entire body of Chief Pleas for the ratification thereof, he was interfering in the process of my campaign inap- propriately. He was attempting to usurp and rat- tle me and that is unacceptable behaviour for a non-standing Conseiller at the commencement of a free and fair democratic husting event. Mr Guille did express his motives; motives that he may not have been aware of prior to reading my manifesto, namely that I see the continuing stream of Chief Pleas-approved Guernsey ema- nating legislation as unfair and keeping Sark in- dependent as I do not wish to see increased taxes on Sark as a mean of funded government initia- tives. Mr Guille suggested that I am motivated only by resentment and that I should “tell your probation officer he got it [the law] wrong”. Mr Guille made me feel belittled and entirely un- welcomed to Chief Pleas. He made it clear that he would be against me from the very start. He ruined my evening and I feel sure that I lost ground that evening as I felt physically unnerved to go on speaking as the others did. Ironically it was Mr Guille that advised the procedure that I followed prior to applying in nomination. It was the subsequent manifesto that initiated that change.’ The code sets out the procedure for dealing with complaints. Mr Doyle was asked if he wished to put for- ward any further evidence; he said that there was none. It was decided after careful consideration by the panel that, if proven, the complaint would be within the scope of the code and should proceed to a full investiga- tion. A letter was written to Conseiller Guille on 11 th January telling him of that decision reminding him of his rights under the procedures. It stated that it was not a finding on merit and it would only be after a full investigation of all of the evi- dence that a finding could be made. He was asked to put forward a written response and any other evidence that he wished the panel to con- sider. The code requires in 4(j): ‘All Conseillers shall fully co-operate with the panel and any investigation group. Failure to co- operate will be deemed a breach of the code.’ It is clear that Conseiller Guille was either una- ware of, or chose to disregard, this legal require- ment. Unfortunately, for whatever reasoning, he did not co-operate, and he did not put any evi- dence before us, or make any submissions on the evidence of Mr Doyle or the law. Instead Conseiller Guille tendered his resignation to Chief Pleas at its meeting on 18 th (sic) January. He said: IN FULLAND UNEDITED SARK’S CODE OF CONDUCT PANEL JUDGEMENT ‘WE UPHOLD MR DOYLE’S COMPLAINT’ CODE OF CONDUCT PANEL HIS HONOUR DAVID BRUNNING - CHAIRMAN SEIGNEUR MAJOR CHRISTOPHER BEAUMONT MISS LUCY BELFIELD DR RICHARD AXTON MRS HAZEL FRY CODE OF CONDUCT PANEL

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDMzNDc=