Judgment time for Clothier
Friday 21st August 2009, 3:00PM BST.
From ex-Deputy Don Filleul
SUFFICIENT time has passed for us to make judgements on the success or otherwise of the Clothier-flavoured updating of the machinery of our government and I look forward keenly to the forthcoming States debate.
Hopefully the self-interest which consumed the original discussion will not bring about another stalemate. Here is my own up- dated suggestion.
The removal of Senators and Constables, as originally proposed by Clothier, remains the best start for effectively updating the administration.
Adding just 12 to the remaining membership provides, in my view, an adequate representation to enable good and balanced administration, the number 41 being easily achieved by adding an additional Deputy to each parish.
I can see no reason why Constables should not be eligible to contest that extra seat, if they and their electorate so desire.
There appears to be a consensus that the Constables should remain in the States and this would be an elegant solution, providing as it does for those not interested in politics to reject nomination and concentrate on parochial affairs.
I have never been entirely happy with Scrutiny, which enables a second look at proposals, but has no teeth. Ex-Senator Walker asked us to see Scrutiny as a ‘critical friend’ and then moaned like Hades when some scrutineers strongly opposed his plans.
While I accept that there have been improvements in this session, it seems to me that there is room for a more effective structure, without promoting party politics, for which there still seems to be no appetite in Jersey.
A mistake of some magnitude was made when Senator Syvret persuaded the States that the Chief Minister should not solely appoint his Council of Ministers and opened selection to the States, in the oft-abused name of ‘democracy’.
Clothier expected the Chief Minister to appoint a government he could lead and we should return to this. A better amendment for Senator Syvret, surely, would have been to propose the election of the Chairman of Scrutineers and give him a similar right to appoint his group of Scrutiny chairmen.
The result would be a debating Chamber with clearly defined responsibilities and duties, having an appointed body to govern, and a similar group to question and amend. They might, with advantage, select specific Members to shadow the more important ministries.
There is time for another amendment to create this structure, which with confidence I submit as a desirable modification effectively to marshal the resources of our elected Assembly. I hope someone takes it up. Please!
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
JOIN US ON...
Facebook and Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Got a story? Get in touch
KIT 4 CLUBS
Win a share of £10,000
2012 is the year of the London Olympics and to celebrate this great event the Jersey Evening Post, in association with sponsors Ogier is giving all sporting clubs a chance to win a share of £10,000.
I think it is doubtful that a proposal of this sort will triumph over the self interest of the States members and the Constables in particular.
Also adding an additional member to each parish would not answer the ‘democratic deficit’ eg the rural parishes are at the moment over represented, in fact the abolition of the Senators would make the house even more biased.
Report abuse
It always surprises me when people suggest abolishing the senators. It is the deputies that should go, then all our politicians have an island-wide mandate.
Keep the constables in to maintain parish representation.
Report abuse
Get rid of the Constables asap. All they do is give between 10 and 12 votes for the establshment party, so much for a balanced States assembly.
Report abuse
UK Student
If you are a student ? Its refreshing to read such understanding of Jerseys political needs in one so young.
I agree entirely with your post, and I am shortly to get my bus pass.
My only addition to your suggestions is that the Constables be barred from heading any departments, they should be too busy running their parishes and the likes of constable Jackson must surely have a conflict of interests when he has to make decisions that are detrimental to his Parish but for the good of the island, or vice versa ?
Constable Crowcroft illuminated this problem when he refused the suggestion he stand for chief minister claiming he was too busy with his parish, and could not do both jobs.
A loss to the island, but a benefit to St Helier.
Adrian
Have you ever thought the reason they “appear” to have a block vote for the establishment (if there is such a thing. Next you will be shouting oligarchy ?)Is they all do a similar job and are all driven by a desire to do the best for their parishoners.Surely one can only expect a similarity in their voting. Only SS, his disciples or similar, would see a conspiracy in this, They are voting as their electors expected them to, that why they voted for them. Surely this is no difference from expecting a left wing vote from an union leader and a right wing one from a company CEO ?
The reason their elections are not usually contested is it takes a hard work and dedication to do the job, not a quality one often sees in our deputies.
Report abuse
Allowing hte CM to elect all the ministers would be one more step towards dictatorship. It’s hard enough already to counteract some of the daft ministerial proposals – heaven forbid that we give them more power.
The sooner the constables are removed from the States the sooner we move towards true democracy.
Report abuse