Senatorial Elections 2005

STATES OF JERSEY

r

SENATORIAL ELECTIONS 2005

Lodged au Greffe on 7th December 2004 by Deputy P.N. Troy of St. Brelade

STATES GREFFE

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

( a ) to agree that draft legislation should be prepared and submitted to the States for approval to

provide that –

(i ) a n y Senator elected for a 6-year term in 2002 should be permitted, on a purely voluntary

basis, to submit himself or herself for re-election during the 2005 election for Senators whilst remaining in office as a member of the States until the successful candidates in that election are sworn in;

(i i ) t h e number of Senators to be elected during the 2005 election for Senators should be the

total of the 6 ordinary vacancies and the number of Senators elected in 2002 submitting themselves for re-election;

( ii i) a n y Senator elected in 2002 submitting himself or herself for re-election who was not

successful in the above election would leave office when the successful candidates were sworn in with no form of compensation notwithstanding the fact that he or she was initially elected in 2002 for a term of office of 6 years;

( iv ) u n le ss the States should otherwise resolve to amend the term of office of Senators, the

6  candidates obtaining the largest number of votes in the 2005 election should be elected for a period of 6 years and the remaining successful candidates for a period of 3 years.

(b ) to charge the Privileges and Procedures Committee to bring forward for approval the necessary

legislation as soon as practicable.

DEPUTY P.N. TROY OF ST. BRELADE

REPORT

Ministerial Government

In introducing a Ministerial System of government, the process would ideally include a provision for General Elections to be in place so as to ensure that the principal candidates for Ministerial Office would at the time of the appointment of Chief Minister and Ministers have received a full and proper mandate from the electorate at the time immediately preceding the appointment of a "Cabinet".

The Privileges and Procedures Committee had hoped to introduce a General Election in 2005, but time constraints in drafting legislation could not be met. In addition proposals for a General Election in 2008 contained in P.151/2004 from the Special Committee on the Composition & Election of the States were rejected by the Assembly in November 2004.

With the States of Jersey having rejected the principle of a General election at this time I feel it important that all with an island wide mandate have the opportunity to put themselves forward for election prior to the introduction of the Ministerial system.

Mandate from the people

The decision to implement the Ministerial system in 2005 has been approved, but we are in the unusual position that 6 Senators all of which hold key Committee Presidencies (Senator Kinnard, Senator Norman, Senator Ozouf , Senator Routier, Senator Michael Vibert , and Senator Walker ) were elected to office 3 years prior to the introduction of the Ministerial system.

Do the 6  Senators have a full and proper mandate in the eyes of the electorate for nomination as either Chief Minister or as Ministers in 2005 given that they were elected in 2002? Were the elections of 2002 fought on a candidate's clear expression of interest in either the position of Chief Minister or Ministerial Office? Attached is a schedule of the issues discussed at hustings in 2002 (Appendix), which demonstrates that candidates were not questioned fully by the electorate based on their aspirations for Ministerial office or the policies that they would pursue if elected to Ministerial Office.

What is the Public perception of those elections in 2002? A report contained in our local newspaper of a Public meeting held at Communicare on Wednesday 1st December 2004 states –

" T h e re were a number of votes taken during the meeting and among them was a unanimous vote in favour of a proposal that the six Senators not due to face the electorate until 2008 should be made to stand down and go to the polls next October before the island moves to a system of ministerial government. That subject prompted much discussion and the overwhelming feeling was that whoever is to become Chief Minister next year should have a clear mandate from the electorate to do the job"

In addition there have been a large number of callers to our local radio station expressing the same views, and I have been contacted by members of the public expressing their support for this projet.

This proposition allows for the six Senators elected in October 2002 to voluntarily stand for re-election in 2005 and  clearly  express  their candidacy  for  either  Chief  Minister  or  Minister  and  the  policies that  they would implement if given the mandate.

Much has changed since the election of the 6 Senators as witnessed by the happenings at the St Clement hustings in 2002 –

" T h i sisjersey.com" reported that "At the end of the meeting Stan Adeler asked two short questions and requested that the candidates should give a show of hands. In unanimous votes, each election hopeful showed that they were against the introduction of VAT and for, in principle, the introduction of a PAYE system of tax."

Have the Senators changed their minds? Is their stated preference to avoid the introduction of a sales tax/VAT/consumption tax explicable without going back to the polls? Preferably key individuals should explain their future policies and strategies for the Island in the months before the introduction of the Ministerial system, not 3 years before such an historic occasion.

In my opinion the electors in 2005 should have the opportunity to quiz key individuals with an Island-wide mandate on their aspirations for Ministerial office and proposed policies in a Ministerial system.

Practical issues

Part  (a)(i) of the proposition asks that the States debate the general concept of legislation being prepared to facilitate the 6  Senators elected in 2002 to voluntarily stand for re-election during the 2005 elections for Senators and that legislation would provide that they could remain in office until successful election candidates were sworn in.

Currently, any Senator resigning from office would immediately stand down from all positions held and a date for a by-election set. My proposition requests that members agree to the principle of an amendment to legislation to facilitate sitting Senators to voluntarily participate in the 2005 elections without standing down from office.

The current situation is that Senators and Deputies can be elected for a shorter term than is currently set down in the States of Jersey Law but to have achieved that in the 2002 elections the Privileges and Procedures Committee of the day would have had to take a proposition to the States in 2001 requesting that the term of office be reduced to have coincided with the introduction of the Ministerial system. Such action was not achieved, and my proposition gives sitting Senators the opportunity to stand for election immediately prior to the introduction of the Ministerial system.

Part  (a)(ii) clarifies that the number of Senators in the 2005 elections would be the total of the 6 ordinary vacancies and the number of those elected in 2002 that voluntarily decide to stand for re-election. Consequently, if 4 of the 6 Senators elected in 2002 stood for re-election there would be a total of 10  seats available in the Senatorial elections of October 2005.

Part  (a)(iii) provides that any Senator voluntarily standing for re-election who was not successful in the said elections would leave office when the successful candidates were sworn in. There would be no compensation paid for loss of office.

I did consider whether some form of compensation should be paid, as the Senator's who draw earnings could reasonably expect to draw the annual sum paid until the term of their office expires in 2008. I considered a payment of 6  months of prior years drawings as a possibility if unsuccessful in the election, and also as to whether a sum should be allowed from Public funds to compensate for two amounts of election expenses (2002 and 2005), but decided that it would be best for the Senator's concerned to amend this projet if they so wished.

Part  (a)(iv) provides for the fact that the States may at some point prior to 2005 provide that all Senators are elected on the same day. Whilst it was discussed in the recent debate on the composition of the States, I have left it as an issue to be fully resolved by the Privileges and Procedures Committee. Certainly if the States had agreed to a General election in 2008 the terms of office of all members would have to have expired at the same time. That did not happen, but it does remain that the fact that Senatorial positions are elected on a 6-year mandate clearly has implications when considered against the arrangements for election of Chief Minister and Ministers on a differing time basis.

Of the seats available in the 2005 elections the 6  candidates with the highest vote count will have terms of office expiring in 2011(6  years) and the remaining successful candidates would have terms expiring in 2008 (3  years) This would preserve the cycle of 50% of Senators elected every 3  years, but as previously stated this is subject to future discussion regarding terms of office and future election procedures.

Part  (b) requests the Privileges and Procedures Committee to implement the proposals by bringing amended legislation to the States.

Exclusion of Connétable s from this projet

I took the decision not to include Connétable s within this proposition, as all Connétable s are elected to their Parish (and obtain an ex-officio right to sit in this assembly) under the Code of Laws confirmed by order of His Majesty in Council of 28th March 1771 read together with a subsequent Order in Council of August 1784. The code of 1771 reads –

" Il s ( Connétable s) ne continueront en la charge, non plus que les Centeniers et Vingteniers, plus de trois ans a moins qu'ils n'y soient élus de nouveau, et qu'ils consentent de l'exercer."

which translates to –

" T h e y ( Connétable s) will not continue in office, not longer than Centeniers and Vingteniers, not longer than 3  years unless they are re-elected, and they consent to exercise it."

Whilst it would be possible to give Connétable s the same opportunity to stand for re-election there remains some doubt as to whether any of the Connétable s would wish to be Chief Minister or Minister and I have chosen to specifically restrict the debate to the Senators. If members expressed an opinion that elections could be managed by some other authority than the Connétable s in 2005, and that it would be desirable for a process akin to a General election (Note: recently defeated Privileges and Procedures Committee proposals) then any member is open to amend this proposition.

Conclusion

In my opinion prior to implementing the Ministerial system which will commence with States Members electing from their number a Chief Minister who will form a cabinet of Ministers in December 2005, the electorate should on the "eve" of a major structural change have the opportunity to vote on an informed basis for those who would wish to formulate future policy direction, based on expressions of office that key individuals wish to occupy and the policies to which they subscribe.

Financial and manpower implications

As an election is scheduled for Senators in October 2005 there are minimal implications beyond printing additional ballot papers. The usual procedures for the election process would apply.

APPENDIX

difficult over the savings tax directive and the code of conduct?

Q2 How fair is Jersey's childcare system?

Q3 Should we cut the civil service?

Q4 What of the damage and nuisance caused to the parish by the waste site

at Crabbé.

Q5 candidates  were  questioned  about  the Regulation  of  Undertakings

Law  with  reference  to public  enemy  No  1' – inflation.  He  asked whether  they  felt  that  the  job  restriction  laws  caused  inflation,  and whether they were actually working in controlling population as had been intended.

St.  Brelade

Q1 Do candidates have any experience of running a business with a turn-

over of £100,000-plus, what they would do about raging inflation, and what he described as the poor state of the General Hospital.

Q2 in the current economic climate, would you support the outsourcing of

non-core States services to the private sector?

Q3 the candidates were asked if they considered themselves delegates or

representatives and also asked for their views on referenda.

Q4 What is the ideal age for a Senator?

Trinity

Q1 For or against green lanes and parish rates equality?

Q2 How about a referendum on States reform plans?

Q3 Would you vote for euthanasia?

Q4 how  would  you  preserve  the  Island's right  to  self-determine',

specifically in respect of the finance industry, in light of the growing threats from the UK and Europe. Also asked whether the candidates supported the wish of Kofi Annan to see overseas aid increased to just over 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product,

Q5 Will you stick to spending limits?

St.  Martin

Q1 Agriculture: Where does its future lie?

Q2 Have you given further thought to legalisation of euthanasia?

Q3 Should new boats be taxed?

Q4 views on the composition of the States Senators, Deputies, MSJs, how

they saw themselves in the new ministerial chamber and whether they would want a ministerial or backbencher's role.

St.  Saviour

Q1 asked the candidates for their views on the current state of the States

Pension scheme and whether they were in favour of moving towards a different scheme.

Q2 With no housing qualifications, should I leave the Island?

Q3 What would you do to raise revenue?

Q4 Will collective  responsibility  prevent  you  from  fulfilling  your

manifesto?

St.  Peter

Q1 States Members: Would you maintain your vote on the population

policy?

Q2 How would you be proactive in boosting Island industries?

Q3 Casinos: For or against?

Q4 asked the candidates whether they favoured raising the ceiling on Social

Security contributions.

St.  Lawrence

Q1 Do you support keeping fiscal independence?

Q2 Would you vote for a rescindment of Clothier?

Q3 views on the fact that there were still a large number of properties

unconnected to main drains. Those who were not connected had, in addition, the expense of tanker services

Q4 Trade union official Mick Kavanagh asked candidates if they would

support  the  abolition  of  rules  preventing civil  servants  from  being allowed to openly support candidates in future elections.

Q5 questioned candidates about the deficit in the States public services

sector pension  fund,  asking  whether  they  thought  this  kind  of information should be made public

Q6 Should we continue to pour money into the Airport?

St.  Ouen

Q1 Would you stop unions holding the Island to ransom through strike

action?

Q2 What would you do to control spending?

Q3 University grants: Was Education's five-year decision discriminatory

against people on 3 year contracts?

Q4 Would you help protect Plémont?

St.  Helier

Q1 asked  how  the  candidates  would  vote  on  a  proposition  to  control

welfare through a central system, whether the States should pay rates for their properties and whether they would support standardisation in banding rates on a square footage basis.

Q2 How would you limit car use? Would you cycle, walk or use the bus to

get around?

Q3 asked whether the candidates would support an Islandwide referendum

on governmental reform, a question she said required a straight yes or no'.

Q4 Finance Industry OECD - What would you do about the international

challenges facing the Island?

Q5 How would you reduce crime?

Q6 How could we encourage more airlines here?