The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
_______________
Lodged au Greffe on 2nd February 1999 by Senator S. Syvret
______________________________
STATES OF JERSEY
STATES GREFFE
175 1 9 9 9 P . 1 9
Price code: A
____________
In sub-paragraph (a) of the proposition after the word "process" delete the word "and" and following the word " Bailiff ", add the words -
• th e transparency, accountability and democratic responsiveness of the States Assembly and Committees of the States; and
• an d whether the machinery of government is presently subject to checks and balances sufficient to safeguard the public good and the rights of individuals;
SENATOR S. SYVRET
Report
I welcome the proposed review of the machinery of government. I was, however, somewhat disappointed to discover that words such as democracy, transparency and accountability do not appear in the Policy and Resources document. Whilst reference is made to management buzzwords such as determining, co-ordinating, monitoring and delivery, we must at all times be conscious of the fact that we are proposing to review a government and not the mere efficiency of a PLC. Whilst efficiency' and effectiveness' are of course of considerable importance, I believe that public concern with the performance' of the States goes beyond a limited management guru interpretation of that word. Frequent criticisms made by members of the public are that the States never listens to people, and that the wishes of the community are frequently ignored. Indeed, a reason frequently given for not voting is "why bother, it never changes anything". I therefore consider it important that the review address the fundamental issue of whether the machinery of government is democratically responsive; does it actually succeed in delivering the wishes of the electorate? Surely this is a core question in any consideration of a democratic government.
The principle of checks and balances has been a central feature in the debate about good government in western society for over two hundred years. It would therefore be somewhat strange if a root and branch review of the machinery of government were not asked explicitly to address this core issue.