AT last, Jersey’s constitutional position with the UK has been clarified – we are not much more than a colony.

While the Council of Ministers has welcomed the announcement, by the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, of yet another review of the Island’s finance industry, I surely cannot be the only one to believe that he has a brass cheek.

The Chancellor might well protest that he has no intention of looking at constitutional change, but in that case what gives him the right to just walk into what is supposed to be an independent jurisdiction and one which has successfully looked after its finance sector for decades?

We should also be a little suspicious of the language of the Chancellor when he made the announcement about the Foot Review, which it will no doubt now be called. It sounded as though he was doing it for our own good, because he was worried about ‘the long-term opportunities and challenges for the UK’s Crown dependencies and overseas territories as financial centres’.

Well, if there are any worries, we haven’t sought help and I’m sure we can deal with our own problems. Even his colleague, the Financial Services Secretary, had the temerity to say that the review ‘will take a serious and constructive look at the challenges the centres face in the current climate and how they could best respond’.

So from whose point of view are they going to take this constructive look? Surely he doesn’t think he has any responsibilities for our finance sector?

Perhaps we could turn around and say, no thanks. If there are any challenges facing the Island because of the current economic climate – for which the Chancellor’s government can take quite a large part of the responsibility – then we will deal with them ourselves, as we always have done. After all, many of these challenges in the past have emanated from the UK Government, so it’s a bit rich now to claim he is doing it for our own good.

Obviously, from a political point of view, when someone like the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer decides he wants to undertake a review, it would be foolish to go and tell him to get the information from the IMF. He might have to wait a couple of months, because they have only just left here.

In the meantime, if he’s got the time in between sorting out the global financial crisis and an economy in recession, he could ask any number of other international regulatory organisations who have looked at the Island in some detail.

Apparently, we have to put a brave face on it and pretend that we welcome the review, because it’s yet another opportunity for us to show how we’ve got it right. However, we shouldn’t just roll over and let him tickle our tummy, particularly if we do have any aspirations for looking after our own international affairs.

Our subservient attitude is in direct contrast to that of the Premier of Bermuda, for example. Bermuda is also a thriving international financial centre and a colony. While, he didn’t get the same Whitehall softening up treatment as the Jersey and Guernsey Chief Ministers, possibly for logistical reasons, he has accepted the review because he says Bermuda has nothing to fear from it.

But he has also called it an affront to the people of Bermuda who have ‘just reason to be offended and insulted’.
‘Here they are, a supreme power who does not contribute one penny to our livelihood, who just announced that they have determined we, and some of their other territories, need a review,’ the Premier told his parliament.

‘There is an irony in the timing of this UK Treasury review. At a time when nations around the world are basking in the glow of the historic US election, some of the British territories are being brought to the knees of our colonial master by this intrusive intervention.’

However, the Premier noted that Bermuda, because of its colonial relationship, was obliged to accept the Chancellor’s review. Jersey, presumably, has to do the same because being a Crown Dependency is no different to being a colony.

The really interesting question, however, is what happens to this review when it is concluded? The Council of Ministers is confident that the Island will come out of it with flying colours, because we are committed to adopting international standards (not British standards, please note).

The report will, therefore, quietly be filed away along with previous reviews. But what does Jersey do if Michael Foot says that all the Crown dependencies and the overseas territories should have exactly the same bank depositor guarantees as the UK?

It’s a possibility, because it’s undoubtedly the Landsbanki affair, and the fear of the UK Government that they would have to bail out offshore investors, that has prompted this review. But the islands have very different finance centres and Jersey has already expressed caution about adopting a one size fits all approach.

Certainly the Bermuda Government appears less than keen to adopt measures apparently imposed on them by their colonial masters.

The Premier told parliament: ‘This Government is firmly of the view that issues of taxation and fiscal policy are solely the purview of the Government of Bermuda. Any attempt to breach the principle of internal self-government will be stridently resisted. We will be as vigilant as our colonial status allows and ensure that this review is not a cloak by which to intrude on matters appropriately left to the internal government.’

Despite the absence of any similar reluctance in Jersey, the issue could be a test of how serious we are about growing up and looking after our own affairs.

• Peter Body is editor of Business Brief magazine.