ONE of the oft-repeated criticisms of the States of Jersey is that its Members act as 53 independent political parties, without an overall direction or purpose.
Indeed, on some days in the States Chamber it can be pretty hard to see where it’s all going, and more significantly what, if anything, is being achieved.Devotees of this point of view will probably not be too impressed by Saturday’s event.
For your 53 States Members, simply substitute 250 members of the public, and for States debates on issues like the policeman’s oath, harbour dues and how many houses fit in a field, simply substitute an open(ish) discussion on the future of the Island.Before you know it, you’re Imagining Jersey.While you could not call the people who attended the event representative of the Island’s population - a fact acknowledged by the organising Policy and Resources Committee - the one thing the audience had in common was that they thought a word in the ear of the Island’s government was worth putting aside a Saturday for.The Gloucester Hall at Fort Regent played host to 250 Islanders, 25 States Members and enough high-ranking civil servants to make you dizzy.
And it was somehow fitting that the Fort - felt for years to have been the greatest white elephant in the history of burning public money in Jersey - was the venue for so random an event.The main headline news had to be the near-global support for controlled economic growth and the call for cutting through both red tape and inefficiency.
That was a feature of the manifestos of the four mock Councils of Ministers that were set up from the discussion groups that spent the morning wrestling with Jersey’s economic future; the manifestos placed on the tables by a candidate in the Senatorial by-election just before the event started had been hastily removed.But dig a little deeper and you realised that the 250 people who came were armed not just with opinions, but with the facts and the will to back them up.
But because the event worked by distilling ideas and opinions, a lot of those ideas did not make the final cut.Wandering from table to table as the debates went on, you heard a remarkable mix of fairly disparate views.
A man on one table argued that what the Island needed was real support for tourism that went beyond encouragement, for an organisation to help to develop new businesses and liaise with the States for them.A woman at another table argued with equal vigour that the finance industry needed not just the support of the States, but more aggressive marketing throughout the world.And yet another Imaginer asked whether we all really believed that if Jersey opened its doors to allcomers, would we be deluged? Or was it more likely that we would be entirely underwhelmed by the trickle of immigrants?Those ideas did not make the final list of policies on which the audience could all agree, but according to P & R, every word will be reviewed and considered when it comes to designing the Strategic Plan that will lay the grounding principles for States policies over the next decade.But that’s the problem with trying to distill 250 unique collections of opinions, beliefs and ideologies: it just cannot be done.
All that could possibly have been gained from Saturday’s meeting was a broad statement from an unrepresentative group of people.
And that, of course, is exactly what happened.There are cynics who say that the decisions have already been made, that the Strategic Plan is written and is just taking up space on a shelf somewhere at Cyril Le Marquand House while the Island is put through an elaborate PR exercise.Not so, say P & R.
And if that really was the general view on the project, they asked, why would 250 people put aside a Saturday to go along and get involved? There were some people who felt they had been pushed into a specific direction through the process, and who felt the distillation had been slanted in favour of a certain viewpoint.Was it a success, then? From P & R’s point of view, undoubtedly it was.
The result was one they would not have predicted, but one which will have led them to think they had an easier task on their hands than they might have thought.And from the public’s point of view, yes it was a success - probably.
Anything that gets voters and politicians in a big room together cannot be all that bad.
And if everyone manages to get out unhurt and unharmed, then that’s a bonus.
Article posted on 8th March, 2004 - 12.00am
Most Commented: