From Advocate John Kelleher.
AS a member of the Clothier Panel, I have followed with great interest the manner in which the States of Jersey have considered and implemented aspects of the recommendations made in the Clothier Report.

Until now, I have refrained from public comment, not least since I formed the view that the reforms which have been instigated did not affect my personal, democratic rights and were not of such a fundamental nature as required either that I were forewarned of their possibility by election candidates standing on a clear platform for reform, or that the electorate were consulted by way of referendum.

I feel very different about the recent decision to reduce the number of Senators. I consider, as clearly do many other people in this Island, that as a voter I have the legitimate expectation, if not the basic democratic right, to be consulted if the States wish to reduce the number of candidates for whom I am entitled to vote.

I have been disenfranchised. Previously, I could and did vote for 12 Senators, one Constable and one Deputy. When the reduction to the number of Senators has been played out, through the next two elections, I will have lost the ability to vote for four representatives, four people who could properly assert that they had been voted in on an Island wide mandate.

I was not consulted about this – none of us were. I was not forewarned by those standing for election in recent years that it was their intention to reduce my influence on the composition of the States in this manner, nor were any of my fellow electors so forewarned.

Add to these propositions the fact that I have been disenfranchised wholly by candidates for whom I did not vote and for whom predominantly I could not vote, since the proposition to reduce the number of Senators was carried overwhelmingly by Deputies (but not mine, Deputy Labey, who voted against the reduction). Thus those elected by the smallest number of voters have removed four of those members previously voted in by the greatest number of voters on an Island-wide basis. I think I have proper cause to feel aggrieved.

And I am all the more aggrieved because, again like so many of my fellow voters, I actually believe that the number of elected representatives should be reduced. However, the fact remains that we have not been consulted and the States cannot claim to have altered the membership of the States in a manner which reflects our wishes.

I note that the Privileges and Procedures Committee has issued its defence of its role in the reduction of the number of Senators, in its comments on Deputy Labey’s proposition to undo this wrong that has been done to the electorate, due to be debated tomorrow.

I am particularly intrigued by its calling in aid the effect the success of the proposition will, so it is alleged, have on the credibility of the States and of Jersey as a whole, in the eyes of the UK.

These Aunt Sally arguments only have to be stated to reveal their absurdity. The arguments can only be interpreted as propounding that, even if the decision to reduce the number of Senators was a wrongful infringement of voters’ democratic rights and even if it were proper to consult with the electorate before reform of this magnitude is imposed, the decision should not be reversed or delayed for reconsideration because it is embarrassing, not only for those who made the decision, but for all of us.

Is the committee serious? Are the UK authorities (whoever they may be, the committee does not tell us) really going to take more than a passing interest if our legislature changes its mind? Even if they did, would they not conclude that it is a matter for Jersey to determine its own destiny on political representation?

That, after all, would be in accord with the preamble to the States of Jersey Law 2005, a statute which was approved by the ‘UK authorities’, two limbs of which proclaim:

‘Whereas it is recognised that Jersey has autonomous capacity in domestic affairs’; and ‘Whereas Jersey wishes to enhance and promote democratic, accountable and responsive governance in the Island and implement fair, effective and efficient policies, in accordance with the international principles of human rights’.

I fully appreciate that the reduction in the number of States Members has proved a difficult issue for our politicians. Recollection suggests there have been at least five propositions on this subject post-Clothier. I anticipate that it will continue to be a difficult issue.

But, States Members, please consult us first before you embark on a diminution of our democratic rights. I am, as are many voters, ready and willing to engage on these issues. But we need to be given that opportunity.