the dire situation in the british crown dependency of sark



the dire situation in the british crown dependency of sark
Issue no. 26 - 6th March 2015 - Price 90p
Under a totalitarian one ruling party regime reminiscent of 1930s’
Germany, headed by unelected feudal lord Michael Beaumont and
his chosen leaders, the current situation in Sark can be
summed up as follows:
good governance
law and order
right to self-determination
human rights
end to the on-going depopulation
full secondary education for all children
welfare provisions for all of those who need support
acknowledgement that Sark is in crisis
hope for a future, let alone a prosperous one
And there is nothing - nothing whatsoever - that the Island’s people
can do about it. The power of the feudal lord and his one ruling
party state remains absolute and unchallengeable.
It could all have been so different. If feudal lord Michael Beaumont, his chosen leaders “presidents” Reginald Guille and Edric Baker and the one ruling party which they control and dominate had been willing
to accept Belinda Crowe’s Review and implement her
corresponding 33 recommendations, the Ministry of
Justice would not have had to slam Sark for not being
“well governed”. Sark would long since have had separation of powers between those who make the law
and those who enforce and administer it if it hadn’t
been for the very obvious fact that neither feudal lord
Michael Beaumont, nor his chosen “president” Reginald Guille nor any single member of their one ruling party parliament are willing to give up the absolute power they presently hold, whatever Sark’s
“minority groups” say, whatever the Ministry of Justice says or whatever Ms Belinda Crowe advised.
an enormous financial liability to the entire Island,
insolvent without regular taxpayer-funded cash injections.
If feudal lord Michael Beaumont, his chosen leaders
and the one ruling party which they control and dominate had been willing to accept former Temporary
Chief Secretary Colin Kniveton’s reports, the Crown
Dependency of Sark would long since have had a Customs post and with it not just protection against criminals and criminal activity but direct access to a vast,
untapped tourist market that lies at our doorstep. The
Island would, in other words have had an economy
that can sustain a thriving working population.
As recently as November 2014, barely three months
ago, feudal lord Michael Beaumont declared to the
Guernsey Press that:
If feudal lord Michael Beaumont, his chosen leaders
and the one ruling party which they control and dominate had been willing to acknowledge the fact that
their present “policies” are steering Sark towards further economic destruction, further depopulation, widespread hardship and extensive misery, the people who
remain on this Island would not be deprived of any
hope of a better, more prosperous future for themselves and their families.
Many more will leave and when they do, the British
Crown Dependency of Sark will lose its life-blood. It
will lose the very people that can shape and build a
sustainable future for Sark. What then?
To everyone else than the feudal lord and the one ruling party members who so far have been comfortably
insulated from the effects of their own governance due
to feudal patronage in the form of taxpayer-funded
employment, taxpayer-funded sponsorship, involvement in unregulated “offshore financial services” and /
or imported pensions or fortunes conveniently sheltering here out of reach from far less lenient tax authorities, the situation is dire. As illustrated by there being
no applications being published by the No Development Committee this month, just like the month of
November 2014. And as illustrated by the news that
still more young families are leaving Sark.
If feudal lord Michael Beaumont, his chosen leaders
and the one ruling party which they control and dominate had been willing to acknowledge that everyone on
this Island needs, and is entitled to, the protection afforded by an independent judiciary and independently
and professionally implemented law and order, this
Island would long since have had a judiciary fit for
purpose, professional independent policing and,
again, border control instead of being an open border
policed solely by short - term volunteer constables
who, chosen by Michael Beaumont, his chosen leaders
and the one ruling party which they control and dominate, invariably are hopelessly conflicted, necessarily
unable to and incapable of implementing the rule of
Yet the feudal lord, the man who, thanks to an accident of birth, owns the constitution, jurisdiction and
judiciary of this Island, is obviously unwilling to face
the fact that the governance of Sark under his leadership and dominance has destroyed this Island - for
everyone else than himself and his chosen few. He has,
shown time and time again to have no grip on reality.
Unfortunately for the disenfranchised people of this
Island, where the feudal lord goes, the members and
supporters of his totalitarian one ruling party regime
unprotestingly follow. Further destruction, further
despair and further hardship will inevitably follow .
If feudal lord Michael Beaumont, his chosen leaders
and the one ruling party which they control and dominate had been willing to acknowledge in full rather
than cherry-pick the recommendations of Dr Spencer’s Shipping Review, the Isle of Sark Shipping Company could have been a thriving business rather than
Our 59th weekly appeal
to Michael Beaumont:
Over a 100 jobs have been lost on Sark and there is unemployment on an unprecedented
scale. People are suffering hardship, having difficulties paying the rent and putting food on
the table. Some shops and small businesses have simply closed down, others have gone or
are going bankrupt. The lives of many families have been devastated and many have
already left whilst others are in the process of leaving
simply because they have no other choice.
The Island’s economy is in a state of collapse and its cash reserves depleted whilst the
Island-owned monopoly shipping company, the IoSS, of which your name appears on 99.9%
of the shares, is losing vast amounts of money on a daily basis costing a mind-boggling
£6,000 a day to run with a near non-existent daily income from freight and passengers in
the winter months - as evidenced by the £200,000 taxpayer-funded emergency loans
that Chief Pleas were forced to hand over in January this year and again now in October
in order to save the company from immediate bankruptcy.
Mr Beaumont, the Sark Newsletter, succeeded by the Sark Newspaper, has appealed to you
on many occasions on behalf of your people, appeals which you have so far ignored, to give
them an opportunity to create a future for themselves through an economy based on tourism.
The Island needs you to show your concern for the people, young and old, now, by
giving your permission for a local Customs post based on Sark and your support for direct
shipping routes bringing in visitors from the Continent of Europe.
Only then can the people of this Island get on with creating the economy that they so badly
need and a future for themselves and their families.
It is your Island and it is therefore your responsibility to act.
As part of her Review for the government of Sark of
May 2012, Ms Belinda Crowe made 33 recommendations. Two of these are:
sion between activities which are rightly political and
those which should be outside of political influence.
The Sark-style “streamlining” is complete, with the
Island’s one ruling party parliament now having 29
committees - 13 more than when Ms Crowe undertook her review and 25 more than she recommended.
12. Review and streamline the committee structure,
with three committees aligned to Sark’s strategic priorities – potentially, Commerce and Development; Infrastructure; Education, Health and Welfare; with an
overarching committee with responsibility for Strategy
and Finance to ensure that all government activities
are aligned, properly prioritised and progressed in line
with the strategy.
At the time when this new “committee structure” was
discussed and voted through by our one ruling party
parliament last year, it was jubilantly proclaimed
that its implementation would introduce separation
of powers between those who make the law and those
13. Remove the administrative and transactional activi- who enforce, administer and/or police it. That is not
ties from the committee mandates and transfer them to
true. There is still no separation of powers in any
the public servants to create a more appropriate divishape or form. Here is a vivid illustration why:
Behind the closed doors of the Secret Parliament, the one ruling party regime decides what ‘policies’ to
prioritise. All the members of the one ruling party parliament (and anyone they care to invite) are part
of that secret decision-making process, including Edric Baker and Peter Byrne.
One of the ‘policies’ given priority is a new Development Control Law. To develop the new legislation, the
Secret Parliament has formed a Special Secret Development Control Law Committee, which again counts
Edric Baker and Peter Byrne amongst its members (as well as President Antony Dunks, the former long term
Chairman of the Development Control Committee, and Elizabeth Jane Norwich).
The Special Secret Development Control Law Committee, including Edric Baker and Peter Byrne,
are now busy developing and devising the new Development Control Law.
Once the Special Secret Development Control Law Committee, including Edric Baker and Peter Byrne, have
finished this process, the public one ruling party parliament, of which Edric Baker and Peter Byrne are
members, will vote it through - rubber stamp it without any debate.
Once the new Development Control Law is voted through, it will be vigorously enforced / administered / policed by the Development Control Committee, of which Edric Baker is Chairman and Peter Byrne a member:
[email protected]
 Edric Baker (Chairman)
 Peter Byrne
 Elsie Courtney
 Matthew Joyner (Deputy Chairman)
 Sandra Williams
 Committee Secretary
There are many further examples, for instance:
Three of the members of the Shipping Committee, Diane Baker, Richard Dewe and Sandra Williams, are also
members of the Special Secret Shipping Review Committee - they are tasked with “reviewing” the operation
of Sark’s publicly owned monopoly shipping operator over which they, as members of the Shipping
Committee, already exercise extensive political control - and for which they regularly
request taxpayer-funded working capital in the form of “short - term” loans.
This is not a system that ensures separation of powers. It is a system that ensures the concentration of
enormous power in the hands of carefully chosen members of Sark’s totalitarian one ruling party regime.
So the new one ruling party Policy & Performance Committee
have ‘investigated’ the offensive
comments made by Michael
Beaumont’s chief enforcer and
chosen “president” Reginald
Guille. Do any members of the
committee even know how to
conduct such an investigation?
Does any member of the committee have any appropriate qualification for conducting an investigation? What were the criteria
set for the investigation and who
decided on those criteria?
Then there is the not insignificant
matter of who was interviewed
for the investigation. Were those
who questioned the wisdom of
“president” Guille’s words asked
for their views? Or was it only
supporters of his one ruling party
state who were given the opportunity to comment?
To have any value and any credibility at all the investigation
should have been carried out independently and by someone
with a suitable background;
someone who doesn’t and hasn’t
lived in Sark so their observations would not be influenced by
individuals or events other than
that which was under investigation. It would have been perfectly reasonable to ask either the
Office of the Lt- Governor or a
senior officer in the Ministry of
Justice to appoint someone to
carry out a true and unbiased
investigation – but then would
our one ruling party government
really want an unbiased investigation? Of course not.
Whoever carried out the investigation should have invited anyone who had a view about the
“president’s” comments to be
able to speak confidentially to the
tricacies of government. They
will not be easily fooled. The
Ministry of Justice are, moreover, keeping a watching brief on
Sark, we know that because the
leading civil servant responsible
for the Crown Dependencies,
Chiara MacCall, told us so at a
public meeting.
Reginald Guille, feudal lord Michael
Beaumont’s chosen “president”
and chief enforcer
The Minister responsible for
Crown Dependencies, Lord
Faulks, is a highly experience
barrister and will no doubt scrutinise everything that comes from
the government of Sark. He will
not be easily fooled either.
The public in Sark, the still far
too silent majority, will know
how things work here so they will
clearly not be fooled.
Policy & Performance Committee
Chairman Charles Maitland
independent investigator. But as
the investigation was carried out
assumedly by a member or members of the one ruling party state,
there would be no chance of anyone being able to speak confidentially. We all know that anyone
who dares to question how things
are done in Sark will be setting
themselves up for a lot of harassment; they will be marked as
‘traitors’ and their quality of life
will be ruined. And not only
that, their family – older or
younger generations – are not
exempt from the unpleasant responses that come from questioning a one ruling party regime
akin to Germany of the 1930s.
So why was the ‘investigation’
carried out by a one ruling party
state committee? Who is it going
to fool? The Ministry of Justice
is staffed with astute people who
have much experience in the in5
So who is the one ruling party
state Policy and Resources Committee trying to fool? It can only
be themselves and their fellow
one ruling party members and
supporters – everyone else will
see completely through it.
It’s not too late to have a proper,
independent and unbiased investigation and if we had a truly
democratic, unbiased government, then that’s what we could
expect. Unfortunately, Sark’s
one ruling party government is
neither democratic nor unbiased
- nor proper nor independent.
As far as they are concerned, the
matter of “president” Reginald
Guille, in breach of Sark’s laws
and contrary to all democratic
principles, ordering the members
of our so-called democratic assembly to ignore the Ministry of
Justice’s calls for reform and ignore the wishes and interests of
the Island’s “minority” of nonone ruling party members, is
therefore now closed.
He is back on the lawless Island of
ing to resort to violence against
the Editor of this publication, no
questions asked.
 The man who was dubbed “the
lord of fraud” by the British national press, no questions asked.
 The man whose rented Sark ac-
commodation, his claim to tax
free residence here, adjoins that
of Mr & Mrs Harker, whose particular brand of “offshore financial services” hit the headlines in
the UK press when their Sark
company, International Subcontracting Solutions Ltd, was found
to assist in tax avoidance for UK
based teachers and health workers, no questions asked.
 The man who is a convicted serial
fraudster, serial-bankruptcies, a
fantasist, a homophobe and a
known wife-beater, no questions
 The man who comes and goes in
Sark with enough luggage for a
family of five going on a twoweek holiday although he never
spends more than a few days
here, no questions asked.
 The man who claims to be a Sark
resident although he only spends
a few weeks a year here and obviously resides outside London, no
questions asked.
 The man who lives in the UK
driving Guernsey-registered luxury cars, no questions asked.
 The man whose dubious services
are employed by failed Irish tycoon Patrick McKillen.
 The man who has stated to Pat-
rick McKillen’s employee, the
former policeman and “threat
research and intelligence” expert
Denis O’Sullivan that he is will-
 The man who along with mem-
bers of parliament Rosanne
Guille Byrne, Hazel Fry, Peter
Byrne, Elizabeth Jane Norwich
and Roger Norwich is involved in
a criminal conspiracy to close
down the free press in Sark, no
questions asked.
 The man who, of course, is none
other than Craig Leslie Tuck,
who now calls himself Lord de
Chanson and formerly called
himself Roland Lybird, is back
on this lawless Island where he is
free to come and go, no questions
asked and where he is free to conduct his unsavoury business, no
questions asked.
No questions asked because Sark
has no border control and no independent professional police force
whilst the Island’s hopelessly conflicted, short - term volunteer constables are answerable to the same
one ruling party regime that protects Craig Leslie Tuck, protects
his claim to Sark residency and
protects his un-taxed Sark-based
activities from which he has
claimed to earn £280,000 a year.
Why does feudal lord Michael
Beaumont and the members of his
one ruling party regime protect
someone like Craig Leslie Tuck
alias Lord de Chanson? Well, Mr
Tuck is not the only one who earns
considerable sums of money on
shady Sark-based services. Indeed, it is documented that the feudal lord himself has a particularly
long history of involvement with
unregulated “offshore financial
services” - the Sark Lark - along
with a large number of past and
current members of his one ruling
party regime.
What does Craig Leslie Tuck bring
with him in his three oversized and
extremely heavy suitcases when he
comes to Sark? Is it documents
and paperwork relating to offshore
letterbox companies and other unregulated offshore tax evasion
schemes? Is he acting as a conduit
for those in Sark involved in this
lucrative and unregulated activity
contrary to international laws and
One thing is for sure, no one is asking Craig Leslie Tuck any questions. He does what he likes on the
lawless Island of Sark, not just undisturbed but protected by those
on the Island with the authority to
do so - first and foremost the owner of Sark’s jurisdiction, feudal
lord Michael Beaumont.
Denis O’Sullivan:
“Would you consider using violence?”
Craig Leslie Tuck:
“Y es. I have a goal and will get it.”
The British Crown Dependency of Sark has a total resident population of no
more than 450 men, women and children. To serve that tiny population, many
of whom are not economically active, the Island has no less than two banks;
HSBC, which operates a full branch, and NatWest, which although the branch
is closing will operate Sark accounts through the one ruling party’s Post
Whether we say that Sark has one bank serving 450 people or two banks
serving 225 each, the number of bank branches per capita is astoundingly high.
In comparison, the World Bank (see
FB.CBK.BRCH.P5) informs us that in 2011 the UK had 24.2 bank branches
per 100,000 adults; i.e. there were 4,132 adult customers per branch. Many
British bank branches have closed down since then, and according to the UK
press there were in December 2014 some 9,500 branches to serve the banking
needs of a population of 60 million; i.e. an average of 6,315 customers per
Banks are not charitable institutions, far from it. Neither the HSBC nor
NatWest would operate in Sark unless it was profitable.
According to Deutsche Bank, “branch density can be influenced by a number
of market- or country-specific factors such as the maturity of the financial market, market penetration of banking products, future sales potential, profitability and number of competitors. However, population density, degree of urbanisation, incomes and general buying habits also play a part.”
Sark, with two banks serving a total population of just 450, has an enormously high such “branch density”,
but why - what’s in it for the banks?
Sark also has a collapsed economy, a historically high level of unemployment, a declining number of businesses
and a shrinking population. Mortgages are non-existent as it is not permitted, by law, to borrow money
against Sark property. In the open economy there is no ‘financial market’ to ‘penetrate’ with ‘banking products’ and there is no future ‘sales potential’ in a sparse and shrinking population with low incomes, if any income at all, and no cash to spare. So, on the face of it, it doesn’t make sense yet it is obviously profitable to
operate banks in Sark. Otherwise they wouldn’t be here. So where is the profitability - the money - coming
from? Even Craig Leslie Tuck’s capacious suitcases would not contain enough money to keep two banks operating profitably year round in tiny Sark.
The explanation lies in Sark’s infamous black economy, the “offshore financial services” operated from Sark
well below the radar of international regulation and well away from off-Island tax authorities. Some Sark residents - and some Sark non-residents - are making substantial amounts of un-taxed money by exploiting
Sark’s “special” situation as a lawless offshore jurisdiction where the authorities are either turning a blind eye
or themselves participating in the lucrative activity dubbed the Sark Lark. Whether they are signing on, for a
fee of up to £10,000 a year, as directors of off-shore letterbox companies that serve no commercial purpose and
exist only for tax evasion, money laundering or other financial crimes, whether they are simply supplying offIsland companies with a convenient Sark address or whether they are operating more modern permutations of
the Sark Lark, the participants, who include feudal lord Michael Beaumont and many members and supporters of his one ruling party regime, are not contributing anything - nothing at all - to this Island’s economy. All
whilst destroying Sark’s and the rest of the Channel Islands’ reputation and credibility in the outside world.
They couldn’t do it without Sark-based accounts in Sark-based banks.
He boasts a number of high profile clients such as
Liam Neeson, Britney Spears, Jennifer Lopez, Demi
Moore, Colin Farrell, Uri Geller and Harrison Ford.
Point a camera in his direction and he will perform
with a level of gravitas that would barely do justice to
a member of one of his fellow countrymen Louis
Walsh’s latest teenage boy bands.
As recently as 12th of February 2015 Mr Tweed
could be found pontificating on National television
on matters as important as the recently released
Fifty Shades of Grey movie, “I’m keeping an eye
open in the kitchen for the rope and the duct tape” he
informed viewers of UTV news.
Patrick McKillen’s “celebrity lawyer” Paul Tweed
One can only wonder as to the thoughts of prominent human rights lawyers such as the distinguished
George Bizos when witnessing their high and honourable profession portrayed in such a low and vulgar manner. Friends and colleagues of Patrick Finucane, the Northern Ireland human rights lawyer
murdered for his courageous stand against those
who sought to silence him, must hang their heads in
despair and weep when they see what vacuous
depths a member of the legal profession will stoop to
for the purposes of self promotion.
The Editor of the Sark Newspaper continues to be
the recipient of sabre rattling threats from Patrick McKillen’s Irish lawyer Paul Tweed of Johnsons Solicitors in Belfast. Proceedings have been
issued by Mr Tweed on behalf of his client against
Sark resident Kevin Delaney in the high court in
Dublin and are currently subject to a challenge in
respect of legal jurisdiction. Never one to hide his
light behind a bushel we are informed via the
Chambers & Partners website that:
“The remarkable Paul Tweed is acknowledged as
a legend with an unrivalled client base” and that
he continues to operate at the forefront of the defamation and privacy market, and is lauded for his
unparalleled track record of success.”
The absurdity of the UK Northern Irish citizen Patrick McKillen, a resident of the United States of
America, using the might of the Irish High Court to
pursue a claim against a resident of Sark, a British
Crown Dependency of only 2.1 square miles, is on
the face of it there for all to see. But Patrick
McKillen’s cynical tactics are using the self-satisfied
Paul Tweed to pursue his enemies in the Irish High
Court are anything but absurd. They are as cynical
as they are futile.
This may well be the case but it begs the question as
to why such a high profile “celebrity lawyer “ is pursuing the Editor of the free press on Sark where the
issues of the day are state engineered social deprivation, the collapse of the Island’s economy and depopulation on a scale not witnesses since the late 19th
century. Add to this a complete absence of openness, transparency and accountability from a one
ruling party state that governs solely for the majority
whilst actively persecuting any minority groups, one
wonders what the self-publicist Paul Tweed is doing
involving himself in the plight of the people of Sark.
Mr Tweed is no friend of freedom of speech and a
free press. In May 2013 he was to be found dismissing claims that freedom of comment was jeopardised
by libel laws that date back to the Victorian era, and
are often called the most restrictive in the world. He
singled out for criticism changes to British law which
says that people must show “serious harm” to their
reputation before suing. When considering the rich
pickings to be had by Mr Tweed in his chosen field of
work in his favoured jurisdiction, the High Court of
Dublin, one is minded of the words of the late Mandy Rice-Davies: “well he would say that, wouldn’t
Even Mr Tweed’s closest friends would concede that
he is no 21st century William Garrow. He has made
his reputation by defending the rich and famous and
specialising in elitist causes such as Reputation Management & Privacy for Hollywood celebrities.
Away from the heady world of Patrick McKillen’s celebrity friends
and lawyers, the people of Sark are
still waiting for answers from the
fallen entrepreneur. Twice in recent months, on 6th November
2014 and on 24th February 2015,
the following questions have been
put to Mr McKillen:
 Why have you visited Sark?
 Who have you met with whilst
visiting Sark?
 Have you met with the Seigneur
of Sark and, if so, why and what
was discussed?
 Have you met with Sark politi-
cians and, if so, who, why and
what was discussed?
 What is your interest in Sark?
 Did you engage former police-
man, and employee of Risk Management International, of RMI
House, Castle Drive, Nass Road,
Dublin Mr Denis O'Sullivan to
travel to Sark and conspire with
members of the one ruling party
state and if so, to do what and
 Were you aware of the plan to
procure and the procurement of a
glass bearing Mr Delaney's fingerprints?
 Were you aware of proposals to
use violence against Mr Delaney?
On both occasions these questions
have been met by a wall of silence
from Mr McKillen and his legal
representative Paul Tweed of
Johnsons Solicitors in Belfast.
The people of Sark have a inalienable right to know who meets
and exerts influence over those
who govern them. Patrick
McKillen’s involvement with the
one ruling party state of Sark is
 Mr McKillen has no previous
connection with Sark but has
visited Sark on more than one
occasion in the past couple of
years to meet with members of
the one ruling party parliament.
Patrick McKillen in Sark with Mrs
Elizabeth Jane Norwich. She and
her husband Roger are both members of Sark’s one ruling party
 Mr McKillen posed outside
Kevin Delaney's offices in Sark
for a photograph which later
appeared on a website bitterly
opposed to Mr Delaney and the
interests of Sark Estate Management , the company Mr Delaney
 Mr McKillen engaged the ser-
vices of a Mr Denis O'Sullivan, a
former policeman and employee
of Risk Management International, of RMI House, Castle
Drive, Nass Road, Dublin.
 Denis O'Sullivan and Lord de
Chanson, alias Craig Tuck,
have been witnessed discussing
the use of violence against Mr
 Mr McKillen has, through his
paid agent Denis O'Sullivan,
and with the assistance of member of Sark’s one ruling party
state parliament Rosanne
Guille, procured the theft of a
glass bearing Kevin Delaney, the
Editor of the Sark Newspaper’s
 Mr McKillen has meddled in
Patrick McKillen poses in Sark’s Avenue outside a business managed by the
Editor of the Sark Newspaper Kevin Delaney in November 2013
Sark affairs with a view to attacking Kevin Delaney and his
reputation whilst at the same
time issuing legal proceedings
against the public exposure of
the above facts.
Amongst the opening statements in the minutes of the
one ruling party’s meeting on 2nd October 2013 was
the following:
No information about this was to be found on the one
ruling party’s “official” tourism website until Tuesday this week, four days after Ms Janet Guy’s grand
announcement to the Guernsey Press. However, an
earlier internet search revealed the “news” announced on one ruling party extremist Rosanne
Guille Byrne’s favoured Creative Sark website and
on the websites of individual Sark guesthouse operators who use the events to promote their businesses.
“Royal Charter - on 6th August the 450th Anniversary
of the signing of the Royal Charter and the settlement
of Sark by Seigneur Helier de Carteret will take place.
It is hoped to coordinate a number of events and projects to mark this historic date. Again a Committee or
Working Party will start gathering ideas and report
back as appropriate.”
Small wonder that the one ruling party has kept this
“news” under wraps. At a time of prolonged economic crisis and widespread hardship, on an Island
where there is no welfare for the sick, the elderly and
the vulnerable and on an Island where GCSE-level
education is only available to those children whose
parents can afford to pay for it, Sark’s one ruling
party has decided, behind closed doors and without
consulting the taxpayers who forked out the money,
to spend £10,000 on festivities, including erecting a
“Sarkhenge”, in celebration of their feudal lord and
his feudal lease - a lease which “was critical in establishing the structure of the Island” and a feudal structure which to this day remains and which to this day
is the main obstacle to Sark becoming a fully functioning 21st century democracy.
No one ever reported back on the ideas gathered.
However, one year later, at the meeting held on 1st
October 2014, the Island’s 2015 proposed Budget was
voted through. Under “Miscellaneous” expenditure,
£10, 000 is earmarked for “2015 celebrations”. Although this large sum was over £9,000 more than the
annual contribution to RNLI, £6,500 more than the
total of agricultural grants for the year, £3,000 more
than what is set aside for the maintenance of the Island’s school and Hall (including member of the one
ruling party parliament Sandra Williams’ pub and
café) and a full two thirds of the Island’s entire
“Policing & Customs” budget for the year of £15,000,
no details were given or asked for by the assembly
before the budget was voted through.
Hardly anything to celebrate - unless, of course, you
are the owner of that lease and with it the owner of
Sark’s constitution, jurisdiction and judiciary; unless
you have, as has feudal lord Michael Beaumont, successfully fooled the Crown and the Ministry of Justice
into approving “democratic reforms” that saw him,
an unelected private individual accountable to no
one, retain powers that would be unacceptable in any
democracy in the civilised world; unless you have, as
does Michael Beaumont, some kind of sinister hold
over the Crown and the Ministry of Justice that render them unable to intervene and rid this Island once
and for all of the feudal grip it has endured for 450
Indeed, since the first announcement in October
2013, the matter has not been mentioned in public
again by our one ruling party except the briefest of
references in a “press release” issued by the Tourism Committee on 1st December 2014. Certainly,
there has been no announcement of a committee or
working party and no plans for these celebrations
have been publicly made - until Friday last week, that
is, when, in the ‘news from the Islands’ section,
“Conseiller” Janet Guy is gushing to the Guernsey
Press’ readers that a:
“modern henge-style monument is to be unveiled in
Sark” on 6th August and that “Islanders and visitors
are being invited to gather to celebrate the Jersey pink
granite stones” to mark the “450th anniversary of the
granting of the Royal Charter by Elizabeth I to Helier
de Carteret”.
The only one who has cause for celebration this August is Sark’s autocratic and unaccountable feudal
lord. The taxpayers whose hard-earned and scant
cash has been spent on this without anyone bothering
to consult them definitely don’t. These feudal celebrations were funded by tax payments from many
whose livelihoods, dreams and aspirations have been
willfully destroyed by the regime they are now being
asked to celebrate. Since Michael Beaumont is the
only one who has cause for celebration, why didn’t he
put his hand in his pocket for once?
Other events are also promised, such as a guided
walk, no doubt led by former member of the one ruling party parliament Janet Guy and a £10 evening
cruise on the Sark Belle (for those with strong stomachs, one might add, and weather permitting, of
course). There will also be fun and games on the Millennium Field.
In 2014, the year during which the
of taxpayers’ money was allocated to the feudal anniversary celebrations,
the minimum Personal Capital Tax was
As £10,000 / £288 = 34.7, this means that over
34 Sark Islanders’ tax payments
have been spent on erecting a “Sarkhenge” and related celebratory events.
Sark is the only jurisdiction in the British Isles where GCSE-level education
is available only to those children whose parents can afford to pay for it.
The approximate cost to Sark’s tax-paying parents of a GCSE-level education
for one child (six GCSEs and depending on the courses / subjects chosen)
is a whopping
For the money it cost to celebrate feudalism and erect a monument to it at the
Derrible headland, a Sark child could have been given a full secondary education.
But, as Sark’s schoolchildren and their parents are all too aware, the
education of the young is not a priority for Sark’s feudal lord
and his one ruling party regime.
Guernsey Press 27th February 2015
President of the European Court of Human Rights, Mr Dean Spielmann
President of the European Commission, Mr Jean - Claude Juncker
The Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr Nils Muižnieks
Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr Ban Ki-moon
Lord President of the Privy Council, The Rt. Hon. Nick Clegg
Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs, The Rt. Hon. Philip Hammond
Minister of State for the Ministry of Justice, Lord Faulks QC
Home Secretary, The Rt. Hon. Theresa May
Reviewer of Sark’s Administration, Ms Belinda Crowe
His Excellency the Lt-Governor of Guernsey, Air Marshall Peter Walker, CB CBE
The Queen’s Private Secretary, Sir Christopher Geidt KCVO OBE PC
Ms Camisha Bridgeman, Desk Officer in Strategy & Coordination
at the Overseas Territories Directorate
The Sark Newspaper’s readers are once again reminded that if you are being bullied, intimidated or
harassed in any way and wish to seek support, help or legal advice, please do not hesitate to call,
write or e-mail me at the Sark Newspaper’s address.
What you say will be in the strictest confidence unless you give your consent otherwise.
Kevin Delaney
The Sark Newspaper is edited and published on Sark by its proprietor Sark resident Kevin Delaney
E-mail Editor in Chief Kevin Delaney: [email protected]
Deputy Editor John Donnelly