From Terry Connor.
ON reviewing some of the recent decisions/ratifications made by the States I wonder if it would be advantageous to expect all newly elected candidates to undergo a simple examination to determine their fitness to govern, before they take their seats in the Chamber.

This need not be onerous and could be in the form of a multiple choice format to preclude any bias toward literary competence.
Some suggested questions could for instance be:
- If traffic bottlenecks occur would it be better to:
(a) Widen the road.
(b) Narrow the road.

- Which is the larger sum:
(a) 50 million.
(b) 105 million.

- In an airport, should baggage trolleys be:
(a) Narrower than the passageways.
(b) Wider than the passageways.

- If in a referendum, the majority of votes are cast ‘against’ should this be:
(a) Ignored.
(b) Taken into account.

- Should a potentially incendiary furnace be placed:
(a) In an area of high density population close to a fuel farm.
(b) Somewhere else.

- If a contract is signed in a depreciating currency should this be:
(a) Hedged against further depreciation.
(b) Just hoped it won’t get worse.

- Is it more economical not to impose a tax or impose it and employ yet more civil servants to administer the exemptions:
(a) Yes.
(b) No.

- And now the real killer to sort the men from the boys – which is taller:
(a) A seven-storey building approved by Planning.
(b) A seven-storey building not approved by Planning.

These are merely suggestions. No doubt a more sophisticated mind could devise more searching criteria if the principle is accepted.

PS. Papers should of course be marked by non-politicians, who are more likely to be in possession of the correct answers, to obviate the all-too-common 99%-plus pass rates we now see in educational exam results.
Kerami,
Pontac,
St Clement.