Skip to main content

Ministerial Government: referendum (P.94/2016) – comments.

This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.

Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.

STATES OF JERSEY

MINISTERIAL GOVERNMENT: REFERENDUM (P.94/2016) – COMMENTS

Presented to the States on 28th November 2016 by the Council of Ministers

STATES GREFFE

2016  P.94 Com.

COMMENTS

In recent months, a number of changes to the workings our democracy and system of government have been proposed, including the election of Assistant Ministers, the role of the Bailiff , our voting system and procedures, and this proposition, which asks that a referendum take place asking the public whether Jersey should continue with Ministerial Government.

The Council of Ministers for its part has focused on an agenda on improving public services,  sustainable  public  finances, the  economy  and  our  town,  but agrees  that improvements to our system of government are necessary.

This needs care, ensuring that changes are considered and planned with the fullest thought.

Instead, this proposition proposes a referendum on whether we should abolish what we have, without any clear proposal as to what will replace it.

It also does not provide a mechanism, or the requisite confidence, that we can deliver whatever view the public expresses.

This creates uncertainty and a lack of direction.

It will also bring considerable cost, and require considerable energy and time at all levels of government over a number of years – this was the experience of the move from the Committee system to Ministerial Government.

However,  with  care  and  attention, and  while  difficult,  positive,  constructive,  and considered change is possible. This is what the Council of Ministers would like to see, including promoting engagement and inclusiveness in the development of strategic and financial policies, and in doing so, considering a wide range of opinions.

As to referenda, the Privileges and Procedures Committee are due to bring forward legislation on the establishment of a Referendum Commission in the next few months. This would build on their previous recommendations (R.80/2014, "Referenda: Review of Procedures") including that referendum questions first be subject to full evaluation, including  focus  groups.  This  would  also  enable  any  question  to  be  assessed  for compliance  with  the  "Venice  Commission"  and  the  "Code  of  Good  Practice  on Referendums" in a proper framework. It is not ideal that the States Assembly should be asked  to agree to a  referendum  in  advance  of  this  legislation,  with  the  question essentially established by a proposition which clearly outlines that the question should be a yes/no on whether Ministerial Government should continue.

Finally, measures to improve our system of government need to develop alongside making it easier to vote and a more representative system. This is arguably the largest challenge.

Accordingly, while the Council of Ministers understands the desire for more inclusive policy-making processes, it does not support this, proposition believing it does not provide clear or positive direction, and that it will come at considerable cost.

Page - 2

P.94/2016 Com.

 _____________________________________________________________________

Statement under Standing Order 37A [Presentation of comment relating to a proposition]

These comments were submitted to the States Greffe later than the noon deadline on Friday 25th November 2016 specified in Standing Order 37A, as final internal review processes had not been completed.

Page - 3

P.94/2016 Com.