Composition of the States - revised structure and referendum

STATES OF JERSEY

r

COMPOSITION OF THE STATES: REVISED STRUCTURE AND REFERENDUM

Lodged au Greffe on 5th June 2007

by the Privileges and Procedures Committee

STATES GREFFE

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

(a ) to agree that the current composition of the States should be amended and that, from 2011, the

elected membership of the States should be –

(i ) t h e 1 2 Parish Connétable s;

(i i) 3 6 o ther members, to be known as Deputies, elected in 6 new large electoral districts;

(b ) to agree that from 2011 all 48 members of the States should be elected on a single general election

day and for a common term of office of 4  years;

(c ) to agree that the reform proposals set out in paragraphs (a) and (b) above should be submitted to

the electorate in a referendum to be held as soon as practicable and that they should not be pursued unless supported by a majority of those voting in the referendum;

(d ) to charge the Privileges and Procedures Committee to bring forward for approval by the States –

( i) p r o posals regarding the precise boundaries and size of the proposed 6 large electoral

districts; and

( ii ) l e g islation to give effect to the changes with appropriate transitional arrangements

including, in particular, reducing the term of office of the 6 Senators to be elected in 2008 from 6  years to 3  years and ensuring that the terms of office of all Parish Connétable s ar managed to conclude on the single general election day in 2011.

(e ) to charge the Privileges and Procedures Committee to consult as appropriate with Ministers and

report to the States with recommendations on the feasibility of holding elections for the States in the Spring or early Summer;

( f) t o charge the Privileges and Procedures Committee to undertake research on the merits of

alternative methods of voting to replace the current first past the post' system and to report to the States with recommendations.

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. T h e Privileges and Procedures Committee is convincedoftheneed for reform of the composition and election ofthe States andhasnowanalysed the outcomeof the work it has undertaken over thelast year on this issue (1.2 and Appendix).
2. I t is clear that there isnooverallconsensusononeway forward andthe interaction between various aspects ofreform that have been putforwardisnot always well understood (1.3).
3. T h ere are certainkey principles that emerge from theCommittee'swork(2.1),namely –

1. t h e needforreform;
2. a s ingle general election day;
3. t h e Parish Connétable s should remainasmembersof the States;
4. t h e Island-wide mandate for some members is important although there is also considerable support forparishrepresentation;
5. th e re are too many membersinthe States;
6. a s lightly longertermofoffice would be beneficial.

4. N o worthwhile andworkable reform option that incorporates mostoftheabove principles can befoundif the current 3 categories of electedmembers (Senators, Connétable s andDeputies) are retained (3.1 to 3.10).
5. S o mecompromiseor trade off' will beneeded if workable reform isto be agreed(4.1).
6. If t he Connétable s are to remain in the States the Assemblymustbemadeupof Connétable sand only one other category of elected members to be able to introduce other aspects of reform such as a single general election day and a common term of office (4.2).
7. A n Assembly of Connétable s and Senators is not a workable option becauseof the difficulties in electing a largenumberof Senators atone time (5.1to 5.5).
8. A n Assemblyof Connétable sand an increased numberof Deputies elected on the current parish or constituency basis is a also feasibleandworkable reform option (6.1 to6.9).
9. A n Assemblyof Connétable sand36members (to be knownasDeputies)electedin 6 new large electoral districts represents the best reform option available and would embody some of the desirable aspects of the current Island-wide mandate (which only applies to 12outof53membersat the present time anyway) (7.1 to 7.13). Theadvantagesof this option are asfollows –

• Each elector would continue to vote for a larger number of representatives;

• Each elector would vote for the same number of candidates;

• There is more chance that every election would be contested;

• Every successful candidate would have a larger mandate and the elections would have some of the characteristics of the current Senatorial elections;

• Elections should be more clearly focussed on Island-wide issues.

10. B efore beingimplemented the preferred option for reform should be placed before the electorate in a referendum (8.1 to 8.4). Transitional arrangementsshouldbeputinplacetoensure that the new system can be fully implementedby2011 (9.1 and 9.2).
11. R esearchshould be undertaken into the feasibility ofmoving elections to the spring/early summer (10.1 and 10.2) and into the feasibility of alternative methods of voting (11.1 to 11.2).
12. P PCisconvinced that if one of the 2 workableoptions set out is notselectedtobe put to a referendum the

only realistic alternative is for the status quo to continue. PPC believes that it would be extremely unfortunate if

all the work that has been done on this matter came to nothing (13.1 to 13.3).

REPORT

1. I n t roduction

1. T h e Privileges and Procedures Committee has been working on proposals for the reform of the composition of the States ever since it took office inDecember2005. This proposition isthe culmination of that work and setsouttheCommittee's proposed optionforreform.
2. P P C has madeitclear over the lastfewmonths that it believes that itis crucial that the viewsof the public are taken into accountin any reform proposals.Extensivepublic consultation hasthereforetakenplace and a summary and analysisof the outcomeof that workis set out in the Appendix. In addition, as explained below,PPCbelieves that the reform proposalsshouldbe put to the electorate in a referendum before being implemented.
3. A l thoughcertain clear themesemerge from the opinion surveys and the other forms of public consultation it is apparent that there is no overall consensus among membersofthe public or membersof the States about the type of reform that should be introduced. Furthermore, and perhaps moreimportantly, the interaction betweenvarious aspects ofpossible reform isnotalways well understood.WithhindsightPPC accepts that the interaction between different proposals couldperhaps have been madeclearer during the consultation processas it is apparent, as explained in greater detail below, that some of the reform options that scored highly inthe opinion surveys cannotbe introduced together if a workable overall solutionisto be proposed.

2. R  ef orm principles that have emerged from PPC'swork

1. A s mentionedabove there are certain clearthemes that have emerged from theCommittee's work to date and that appeartohave a wide measure of support. In no particular order these can besummarisedas follows –

1. t h er e is a needforreform;
2. th e re should, if possible, be a singlegeneral election day for all members of the States;
3. t h e Parish Connétable s should remainasmembersof the States;
4. m  any Islanders believe that the Island-wide mandateforsomemembers is important although there is also considerablesupportfortheParishsystem and parish representationin the States;
5. m a nyfeel that there are too manymembersin the States;
6. a s lightly longertermofofficeformembers would be beneficial.

2. F u rtherbackground detail on eachoftheabove reform principles is given in the summaryof the work undertaken in the Appendix.
3. P P C believes that worthwhile reform should,ifpossible,incorporate as manyof the above principles as possible although,asexplainedbelow,PPChasconcluded that it is simply notpossiblefor a workable package of reform to be designed that incorporates them all.

3. R  et ainingthe current 3 categoriesof elected members

1. D u ring the Committee's consultation process it has become clear that there isconsiderablesupportfor eachof the 3 current categories of elected members and, intheirownway,thepositionsof Senator, Connétable and Deputy are eachseen as beneficial.
2. M  any Islanders expressed support in the first MORI survey during the summerof2006 for theIsland- wide mandate. It isclearlyfeltbysome electors that,assome of the mostseniorpositionsofExecutive responsibility have been held by Senators in recent years, all islandersshouldbe able to influence the

election of the Chief Minister and other members of the Executive through the Senatorial system.

3. F r om the firstMORI survey and the viewsexpressedduring the in Committee' debate it is clear that there is very significantsupport for the position of the Connétable s as membersof the States. The link that they provide between the Parishesand the States is considered by many to be vital and,inaddition, many members expressed the view during the in Committee' debate that it would possibly deal a very severe blow to the whole Parish system if the Connétable s lost their right to sit in the States.
4. T h e positionof Deputy isseen by manyIslandersto provide a more direct' access to the political environment than the position of Senator. Many respondents duringthe consultation period valued the way in which Parish Deputies canbe easily contacted by constituents and there wasalso a feeling that the election process for Deputies, with more personal contact and a smallnumberofcandidates,wasmore meaningful than the Senatorial election process and allowed electors to get to know candidates much better.
5. F ro m the unusual starting pointof a unicameralAssembly with 3 different categories ofelectedmembers it couldbe argued, becauseof the perceived benefits of the 3 positionsas set out above, that reform should, if possible, be centred on the retention of the 3 categories.HoweverPPC's conclusion from the work undertaken over the last year is that no workable system can bedesignedwhich incorporates other meaningful reforms whilst retaining the current 3 categories of Senators, Connétable sandDeputies.
6. A l though it might theoretically be possible to simply hold a general election on one day for the 3 categories of members (an option that was, of course, rejected during the debateson1stand2ndMay 2007) PPCis in no doubt that this would not represent any improvementon the current position and would almost certainly introduce a system that wasworse than the current one.There are a numberof reasons forthis.
7. W  ithout the attraction of a longer term of office the position of Senator wouldalmost certainly become unattractive and, furthermore, sitting Deputies maybereluctant to stand for a Senatorial positionwithout the current optionofbeing able to stand again as a Deputy if unsuccessfulintheSenatorialcontest. This could lead to a situation, over a periodoftime,wherethe majority of candidates standing for Senator were not already States members.This, in turn, would undermine the concept that Senators are seenas the more senior membersoftheAssembly and it wouldinevitably, as a result, becomeless likely that those with an Island-wide mandate would beappointedtosenior positions. As a result the current perceived benefit ofthe office, and indeedthemain rationale for retaining the Senatorial mandate, would belost.
8. If all 12 Senatorial positions were retained in a structure with a general election and a commontermof office it wouldobviouslybenecessaryfor electors to vote forup to 12 candidates atonetime.Becauseof the difficulty of getting to knowthepolicies of so many candidates,and trying to then select upto12 candidates to vote for, many electors wouldalmost certainly choose to vote for significantly less than that number with the consequence that candidateselectedin10th, 11th and 12th place would obtain a very low percentage of the vote.Itisworth pointing out, for example, that in the 1999 Senatorial election the 6th candidatewas elected with only 33%of the votescastwhich represented 14%of the registered electorate andit is likely that this problem would beaccentuatedif more than 6 candidatesneededtobe elected atonetime.
9. In addition to the issues aboveitis likely that many of the electorate, particularly those who did not normally take a close interest inlocal politics, would find elections with 3 categories ofmember at the same timesomewhat confusing. There would possibly be Senatorial hustings held at the same time as hustings for Deputy and/or Connétable with,nodoubt, posters and leaflets for the 3 categories all being available at the sametime. It isalsonot clear whetherit would be legally possible to restrict candidates standing for more than oneofthe 3 offices at the sametime leading to yet further confusion and possibly even a numberofbye-electionsif a candidate wassuccessful in more than one position on the same day.
10. P PC's overall conclusion is that if the 3 categories ofmembership are to beretained several of the underlying principles that are listed abovewould need to be omitted from any reform proposals.In

particular PPC is convinced that a single general election day and a common 4 year term of office are

incompatible with any decision to retain the current 3 categories of membership in the Assembly. PPC does not believe that tinkering' with a 3 category Assembly, for example by reducing the number of Senators, would overcome these problems. PPC is convinced that the position of Senator is only a viable one in the long-term if the elections are held on a separate day from the Deputies elections and with a longer term of office. In reality this therefore makes any significant reform to address concerns about the present system almost impossible.

4. W  o rkable reform options

1. H a vingconcluded that a desire to retain the current 3 categories ofmembers rules out otherreformsPPC has decided that reform mustbebasedonsome trade off' so that really beneficial reform proposals can be agreed. Put simply it is just notpossibletoaccommodate all the desirable reform options inone package.
2. O n the basis that thereisclearly overwhelming supportin the currentAssembly for the retention ofthe Connétable s as membersoftheStatesPPChas concluded that the only workable reform options that accommodate the viewsexpressedby the publicand that might be acceptable to the States involve a composition consisting of the Connétable s and only oneother category ofmember. With this structure PPC is satisfied that all the otherunderlying reform principles set out abovecould be accommodatedand that it would, in particular, with only 2 categories ofmember,bepossibleto hold the election for both on one single day.
3. I n anAssemblycomprised of the Connétable s andoneother category of members there are only 3 realistic options. TheAssemblywould need to becomprisedof –

1 .  C o n nétables and Senators; or

2 .  C o n nétables and Deputies; or

3 .  C o n nétables and members elected in new large electoral districts. E a c h of these options is now analysed in turn.

5. A  n Assemblycomprising Connétable sand Senators

1. A s mentionedabove there is clear evidence that a large numberofmembersof the public believe that the Island-wide mandate is important.In the first MORI poll 46%of respondents believed that all members should beselectedonan Island-wide basis and a further 32%ofrespondents believed that at least some members should continue tobe elected forthe whole Island. During the publicmeetings held by the then Policy andResourcesCommittee in early 2002 there wasalsosignificantsupport for the retention of the Senatorial mandate. Those whofavourthe retention of the Island-wide mandate often refer tothe need for those in senior positions, particularly theChiefMinister,to have a mandate from the whole Island.
2. T h e obvious difficulty with electing all membersapart from the Connétable s on an Island-wide basis is the logistical problemof electing some35to40 members in this way.Althoughsome jurisdictions do hold elections with large numbersof candidates these arealmostwithout exception in the context of a party political system where electors cansimplychoose the nameoftheir preferred party without needing to be concernedabout the namesof individual candidates.Itisclear that, notwithstanding the emergence of some political parties inrecent years, nonewsystem for reform in Jersey can bebasedonthe need for a party political structure to make it workable. There is much evidence that many members of the electorate are notawareof the names and policiesofmembersof the States and it is almost impossible to imagine a successful outcome if electors were faced with choosing some 35to40 names from a possible list ofupto 100  candidates,or even more.PPCcannotconceive any workablewayinwhich the electorate could be informed ofthe policies ofthecandidates. Personal canvassing with an Island-wide election is, in practice, impossible and, even if candidates undertook it, would only cover a very small proportion of

households. There could clearly be no hustings meetings in the traditional way as there is already criticism about

the number of candidates on the Senatorial hustings platform and it would obviously be impossible to hold hustings with possibly some 70 to 100  candidates. Even if all candidates were obliged to produce a full policy manifesto it is probably unrealistic to expect many electors to take the trouble to read and analyse them all so that they could identify some 35 names to vote for on polling day. In reality it is likely that electors would almost certainly vote for a very small number of candidates out of the possible total of some 35 to 40 meaning that certain candidates would be elected with an extremely small proportion of votes cast.

3. P P C is conscious that Option 1 of its own options put forward for discussion in the leaflet circulated to households involved a States consisting solelyof Senators andParish Connétable sbecause this option appeared tomeet the aspirations of the public as expressed in the MORI poll mostclosely.Others,in particular Deputy P.V.F.Le Claire in his recent proposition (P.64/2007), have also put forward this option.
4. H a vingreceived and considered manycommentson the feasibility of this composition over the last few monthsPPC has concluded that it is, unfortunately, simplyunworkable and might, if introduced, simply cause chaos and bring the entire electoralprocess into disrepute. PPC's overall conclusion is that if the Island-wide mandateisto be retained the inevitable consequence is that there must be a smallnumber of such representatives, which in turn means that a third form of representation (which in practicewould need to be constituency based), wouldbenecessaryaswell.PPChas already concluded,asmentioned above, that noworkable system can bedesigned with 3  categories ofmembers unless manyotherof the worthwhile reform principles, such as a general election, are abandoned.
5. If members wish tomove from the status quo to animprovedsystemPPC believes that an Assembly comprising solely of Connétable s and Senators is not therefore a viable and workableoption for reform and mustberejected.
   6. A  n Assemblycomprising Connétable sand Deputies

1. D e spite the anecdotal evidence from the2002 Parish meetings and the findings of the MORI poll relating to Island-wide mandates,PPCnoted the strength of feeling in a numberof the letters received during the consultation period in favourofParish-based constituency representation.Manyrespondents pointed out that despite the perceived benefitsofthe Island-wide mandatethere was, in practice, little opportunity for the electorate tomakemeaningfuldecisionsduringthe Senatorial electionbecauseofthelargenumberof candidates and the consequential unsatisfactory nature of the hustings process with each candidate answering perhaps only 4 or 5 questions for one minuteat a time.Respondentsfelt that Parish-based elections, with moremeaningful hustings meetings and the real opportunity forcandidates to become known through personalcanvassing, actually gave the public better accessto their elected representatives. In additionmany respondents pointed out that their first port of call onany Parish or political matter was their Parish Deputy and not one ofthe12Senators.
2. It i s clear to PPC that anAssembly comprising solely of Connétable s andDeputieswouldbe a workable option for reform. Elections for both categories could take placeevery 4 years on a single day or,ifthere was severe resistance to one single election, in 2 elections, one shortly aftertheother.PPCdoesnot favour this latter option as it believes that thebenefits of onesinglegeneralelectionday outweigh any disadvantages. In practice the issues inan election for Connétable willbesomewhat different from those in an election for Deputy and,becauseof the relatively smallnumberof candidates likely to be involved in the elections, theconfusion referred to earlier in a general election with 3 categories ofmemberswould not arise in the same way.
3. A further advantageof introducing this form of reform would be that the opportunity could be taken to correct someoftheimbalancein Parish representation. In anAssembly of, say, 48 or49 members a revised allocation of Deputiescouldbe introduced which would give a muchcloser correlation between population and representation. Deputy Southern put forward the following option for an increased number of 37 Deputies in his amendmenttothe proposition of Senator B.E.Shenton (P.145/2006) and this gives

an indication of one possible revised allocation of Deputies' seats.

Population Proposed Ratio Parish

2001 Census representation reps/popn.

4. If this structure wasadoptedtherecouldbesomemeritin abolishing electoral districts in all Parishes except St.  Helierso that Deputies would have a larger constituency and be able to represent the interests of Parishioners as a whole rather than being restricted to a division oftheParishonly.
5. P P C is well awareofthe criticism that some will levelat this option, namely that the abolition of the Island-wide mandatewouldmean that senior office holders such as the Chief Minister would only be elected for a smallconstituencyandby a small proportion of the Island's electorate with remaining electors unable to influence the election. PPC has to accept and respect this criticism butwouldpointout that the manyotherbenefitsof a single election day, such asthefact that all members would beelected before  the  Assembly was reconstituted, would  be lost  if  the   Island-wide  mandate is retained in  a meaningfulway.PPC is conscious that thereissome public concern that, for example, 6  Senators do not currently facean election before the new States are constitutedand a decision to abolish the position of Senator would, of course, resolve this difficulty.
6. P P C mentioned in its first consultationreport in December2006(R.97/2006) that somecompromise would be necessary ifreform is tobeagreed and this isone such situation. Membersmust decide whether the introduction of a general election andthe attraction of a common term of office is a worthwhile "trade off" for the loss of the Island-wide mandate.
7. I f the Island-wide mandatewastobeabolishedandreplacedby further Deputies PPCbelieves it is inevitable that elections for Deputy would concentrate moreonimportant Island-wide issues such as taxation and the futureof social policy rather than purely parochial issues. Theremay currently be a perception  that  important  Island-wide  issues  are  discussed  during Senatorial elections  with  more parochial issues dealt with in the Deputies elections. Therecould therefore be a significant opportunity to enhance thepositionofParish Deputy if all membersofthe States with the exception of the Connétable s were elected in this way.
8. A l thoughunder this system the post of Chief Minister wouldbe held by a person with only a Parish-based constituency PPC believes itisimportant to remember that the Chief Minister, despite his important rôle as Jersey's political "leader", is only onememberof the Executiveteamand,furthermore, that the entire

Executive cannot exist or operate without the support of a majority in the States Assembly. Electors would

therefore still be able to influence Government policy through the elections in their own constituency. In addition it is likely that electors would be able to make much more meaningful choices than may be the case during the Senatorial elections where electors can, realistically, learn very little of a candidates' policies. During the consultation period one respondent wrote to PPC that "It is clear from recent years that the Senatorial hustings are verging on being a waste of time, with the potential voters being given a very small glimpse of each candidate and the end result being choice by the most charismatic".

9. P P C's overall conclusion is that anAssemblyof Connétable s and Deputies would be a realistic option for reform and the benefitsof a single general election dayand a commontermof office must be considered against the loss of the Island-wide mandate.As explained below this optionis not, by a majority,PPC's preferred option for reform but Deputy G.C.L. Baudains willbe bringing this option forward through a minority amendment to PPC's proposition and States members will thereforehavethe opportunity to debate this optionalongsidePPC's preferred option. IfadoptedbytheStatesPPC accepts that itwould certainly represent a feasible and workable way forward for reform.

7. A  n Assemblycomprising Connétable sandmemberselected in newlargeelectoral districts

1. H aving concluded that the only workable reform options are for an Assembly comprised of the Connétable s and oneothercategoryofmember, and having discounted the optionof Connétable s and Senators, PPChas decided that the option that most closely meets the viewsexpressedby the public is an Assembly comprisedof the Parish Connétable s and a numberofothermembers elected in newlarge electoral districts. As with the previous option a single general election dayfor all members would take place every 4 years and, once again, PPC is confident that this would bemanageable, particularly because there are likely tobe different candidates attracted to the 2 different categories ofmembership.
2. P P C is, of course, conscious that the optionof larger constituencieswasrejectedwhenput forward by the former Special Committee in 2004 in P.151/2004 but, at that stage, the important difference in the proposals was that the Connétable s would nolonger have remained in the Assembly.
3. T h e disadvantageof introducing newlarge electoral districts is clearly that it would be a concept that is currently unknown in the Island and manyhaveexpressed concern aboutthe loss of a direct link between Parishes and electoral districts. Althoughit is, of course, true that a systemof large districts would break this direct link PPC believes that,inthe absence ofan Island-wide mandate,largeconstituencies would go some considerable waytowards meeting the aspirations of the electorate tobe involved with the election of a numberofmembers.
4. V o ting trends across the Island inevery recent Senatorial election show that candidates attract similar percentages ofsupportacross the 12 Parishes and,atthe last Senatorial election in 2005, the 6 successful candidates were the top 6 candidates inevery single Parish. Although, therefore, electors would nolonger have the optionofvotingforthesamecandidatesacrossthe Island asatpresentit is likely that an extremely unpopularcandidate,who would notbe successful in one district, would have been equally unsuccessful if heor she had stood in another district.
5. H a vingconcluded that the retention of the Island-wide mandateisnot a feasibleoption for reform if other desirable changes are to be introduced, PPC therefore believes that the establishment of a numberoflarge electoral districts represents the best wayto retain someof the desirable characteristics of the current Senatorial system. Electors wouldchose a numberof candidates, as happens at present with the Senatorial election, and, because of the size of the districts, each candidate would receive a mandate from a reasonably significantnumberof electors, particularly if the new structure improved overall voter turnout. It isworth recalling that, although the 12 Senators currently obtain a mandate from the entire Island, they are significantly outnumberedin voting in the Assembly by the 29 Deputies and12 Connétable s who have much smaller mandates. With the establishmentof larger constituencies eachof the memberselected in the new districts wouldhave a significantly greater mandate than current Deputies and it is likely that all elections would be contested. In addition all residents inthe Island would have the same numberof representatives intheAssembly,overcoming the current anomaly that an elector in a smallcountryParish

only votes for one Deputy whereas an elector in St.  Helier Nos. 3 and 4 votes for four.

6. P P C is, of course, extremely conscious that some will view theestablishment of large electoral districts as a severe blowto the continuation ofthe Parish system in the Island. PPCdoesnotshare this view.The proposals oftheformer Special Committee (P.151/2004)clearly failed becausetherewasnolongerany direct Parish representation in the States. Under these present proposals the 12 Connétable s would remain in the States and wouldprovide a very important and direct link betweeneachParish and the Assembly. PPC believes that the rôle of the Connétable would,in fact, be significantly enhancedunder this systemas the current confusion that can exist between the rôle of the Connétable and the Parish Deputy in representing a Parish wouldberemoved.
7. D uring the consultation period some have expressed concern that some Parishes might have no representation of their own under the large constituency model but PPC believes this is a misunderstandingofhow such a system would work. In practice anymemberselectedacross several Parishes would be responsible for the representation of all electors in that large district. An elector living in, say, St. John currently only hasone Connétable andone Deputy (in addition to the 12 Senators) as hi or her representatives whereasunderthe new system the sameresident would have a numberof States members directly responsiblefor representing the Parish of St. John alongwithotherpartsofthe electoral district even if none actually livedin that Parish.
8. A further benefit of this option is that itis likely that the elections would notbedominatedbyparochial issues but would involve discussion on policies relating toall-Island issues. This would hopefully enable greater political discussion at election time onimportant issues and the candidates would be able to hold a numberof hustings meetings across thelarge constituencies during the election period whichwould hopefully increase interest and turnout in the elections.
9. T h ere are a numberof different divisions of the Island that are possible under this option. If the option is approved in principle detailed work will need tobeundertaken, with the assistance of the Statistics Unit and the Parishes, to find the fairestpossible division of the Island, taking account of the most accurate information currently available aboutpopulationnumbersandthenumberof potential electors across the Parishes. The results of this work will,ifthe proposition is approved,bebroughtback to theStates for approval.
10. T he Committee is recommending that the Island shouldbe divided into 6 large electoral districts with a total 36 members,tobeknownas Deputies, beingelected to theStatesin this way.The creation of the areas can hopefullybedesignedso that 6 members are elected ineacharea thereby retaining theconcept of choosingup to 6 representatives on one ballot paper that is familiar to electors in the current Senatorial election. Thenew electoral districts would bemadeupof adjoining parishes or districts withinthose parishes and PPCseessomemerit in placing some parts ofSt. Helier with other parishes so that all of the 6 districts spanmore than one parish.
11. P PCrecommends that the resulting sizeoftheAssembly,namely 48 elected members,isanappropriate way torespondto the clear view expressed during the consultation period that thereshould be some reduction inthenumberofmembers.PPCnotedtheviews expressed during the inCommitteedebate that no significant reduction wasappropriate at this time astherewas concern that the scrutiny functionwould becomeless effective (someof the Committee'soriginal consultation options referred to an Assembly of only 42 elected members).PPC is convinced that a reduction of 5 membersis a workable option that wil not diminish the overall effectiveness of the Assembly.If this reduction is approved PPC will bring forward proposals during the transition period that the totalnumberof Ministers and Assistant Ministers allowed under the new reduced membership should be limited to 20 (a reduction of3)which would leave 28 members(areduction of 2)toserve in scrutinyand other non-Executive roles. This would widen the gap' between the Executive and non-Executive beyond the strict 10% rule' originally agreed in 2001 and, with a gap of 8 compared to the current gap of7, PPC believes that fearsabout a reduction in the effectiveness of the scrutinyfunction with a reducedmembership can beallayed.
12. P PC is conscious that some membersmay take the view this option is such a significant change from the

present structure that it is too radical a reform. As mentioned in the previous section PPC accepts that the option

of an Assembly of Connétable s and Deputies elected on the current basis is also a workable option and that would, of course, represent a less radical shift. It is nevertheless, in the Committee's view, worth summarising the advantages of the large electoral district option to show why this more radical change is preferable –

• Each elector would continue to vote for a larger number of representatives;

• Each elector would vote for the same number of candidates;

• There is more chance that every election would be contested;

• Turnout should be improved with a single general election day and to mirror the fact that turnout is currently greater in the Senatorial election than in the Deputies elections;

• Every successful candidate would have a larger mandate and the elections would have some of the characteristics of the current Senatorial elections;

• Elections should be more clearly focussed on Island-wide issues.

13. T heCommitteeishappytoadmit that its ownmemberswere not all initially supportive of the proposal but were, by a majority, convinced that it represents the best wayforwardwhen all the advantagesand disadvantages of other options havebeen carefully weighed up.PPCthereforeurges all membersto undertake a similar exerciseandassessthebenefitsof this option very carefully for themselves rather than simply rejecting it outofhand.

8. T h  e needfor a referendum

1. P P C hasalways made it clear that the reform of the States is a matter that affects Islanders in such a fundamental way that any reform proposalsshouldbeputto the electorate in a referendum before being implemented. Although there have, of course, been 2 opinion surveys, public meetings and other discussions on this matter a referendumwouldbe the only"official" way to testpublic opinion onthese important issues. Following the introduction of the Referendum(Jersey)Law 2002 it is difficult tosee what moreimportantissue there couldbe to justify the holdingof a referendum.PPChas therefore included the requirement for a referendum in this proposition.
2. A l though no referendum is legally binding under the termsoftheReferendum (Jersey) Law 2002 PPC has proposed in this proposition that the States should agree in advance that no proposals agreed in principle' by the States willbeimplementedunless they are supported by a majority of those voting in a referendum. The Committee believes that this will send out a clear signal to the electorate that the result of the referendum will bethedecidingfactoronwhetherornot reform takes place. If the agreed reform package is supported by a majority in the referendum PPC will then bring forward the necessary legislation togive effect to the proposals but if the package is rejected in the referendum PPC will take no steps to implementtopackage, even though it had been agreed in principle' by the States. If that happens PPC will need to reassess the wayforwardtosee if alternative optionsshouldbe pursued or if the whole idea ofreform should beabandoned.
3. U n der the termsof the Referendum(Jersey) Law 2002 the States mustapprove an Act to fix the date of the referendum and to set out the questionandif this proposition is approved the Act will bebrought forward for approvalassoonas possible. PPCenvisages that one question with a yes/no answercouldbe asked along the lines of –

" D o you agree that the present composition of the elected membership of the States should be amended and replaced with an Assembly of 48  members, namely 12   Connétable s and 36  member elected in 6 new large electoral districts, with all members elected on a single general election day for a 4 year term of office?".

4. E f forts wouldneed to bemadeto ensure that the issues were clearly explained to the electorate so that voters could take an informed decision on the reasons for and against the proposed option for reform.

9. T r a nsitionalarrangementsand timescale for introduction ofchanges

1. U n fortunately PPC considers that, realistically, the revised system cannotnowbeintroduceduntil2011 particularly because ofthepositionof the 6 Senators elected for 6 years in 2005. Subjectto a satisfactory outcome in the referendum, the Committee proposes introducing legislation to provide appropriate transitional arrangementsfor2008so that, for example, the 6 Senators elected nextyearwould only serve for 3 years.In this way the entire new system couldbe put in placefor 2011.
2. I n order to achieve one single general election dayby 2011 PPC would alsoensure that appropriate transitional arrangements were put in place for the election of Connétable s sothat,by2011, all termsof office wouldend at the same time to enable a full single election day for all membersto take place.

10. A possible move to spring/earlysummerelections

1. D uring thedebateon the proposition of Senator Shenton and associated amendmentson1stand 2nd May 2008 views both for and against a move to Spring/early Summer elections were expressed. Many members referred to the difficulties associated with canvassingon dark, cold evenings in the late autumn and to the uninviting nature of setting outto vote on a November evening. Othermembers, including the Minister forTreasuryand Resources, referred to some of the practical problems associated with a moveto another periodin the year including,in particular, the impacton the timing of the Annual Business Plan.
2. P PCbelieves that further research is needed into this issue before asking members to make a final decision on it. The problems associated with the timing of the Annual Business Plan cannot be insurmountable but may require, for example, different provisions in anelection year. Itis only right that the full implicationsofanychangeare set outin full after further research before asking membersto make a decision on this matter.

11. A l ternativevotingsystems

1. C oncern has been expressed by some in the past that the present first past the post' system leads to distorted results in an election where voters are askedtocast a numberofvoteson one ballot paper. For example, asmentioned earlier, candidates can beelected with significantly less than 50%ofvotes cast.
2. T here would no doubt be a numberof potential problemsto introduce an alternative method of voting in a largely non-party political environmentwheremethods that arecommonly used in other jurisdictions, such asparty lists, cannotapply.Thereare nevertheless formsof preferential voting that mightpossibly be suitable for Jersey and the Committeebelieves that these shouldbe researched in greater detail. A full report could then be presented tomembers setting out the full advantages and disadvantagesofmoving from the current tried and tested, and relatively simple,methodto a morecomplex, but possibly fairer, system.

12. F i nancialandmanpower implications

1. A ny proposition must give details of the financialandmanpowerconsequencesandPPC is therefore obliged to specify that a reduction in membership in the Assembly to 48asrecommendedwould, at 2007 rates, produce an annual savingof£210,460. The Committee nevertheless wishestomakeit very clear that the proposed reduction in membershipisnotbeingputforwardfor financial reasons.
2. A referendum would be similar to a current Senatorial election andisestimated to cost some£15,000.
3. T here are no additional manpower implications.

13. C o nclusion

1. T he reform of the compositionof the States is one ofthemostimportant issues that the States will be asked to discuss in the foreseeable future. The future reputation of the Island as a stable democratic society isdependentonmaking the right decision and the Island'swhole prosperity may well be linked to that reputation.Any reform must therefore be carefully thought through and all possibleconsequencesof change analysed in detail. The States cannot afford to make the wrong decision.
2. P PC is nevertheless convinced that the current low electoral turnouts cannot simply beignoredbythose whoargue that the present system works welland that no reform is needed.Assetout in this reportPPC has spent a considerableamountof time analysing reform options andisnowconvinced that, taking account ofpublic opinion and theviewsexpressedby States members, there are only 2 workable options that might be acceptable. The Committee believes that the States are therefore faced with a simple choice – they must either decide to support one oftheseoptionsordecide that the status quo should continue. PPCseesnomerit in continuing toundertake yet more researchorseek yet further options – the Committee genuinely believes that there arenootherworkable options that would beacceptable at the present time. If these reform proposals are rejectedPPC will have to take that decision as a signal to stop work on this issue for the foreseeable future. TheCommitteehopes very much that will not happen.
3. V ery strong viewsaboutthe need for reform have been expressedby the publicduring the consultation phase and the Committee believes that there wouldbe severe disappointment in the Island if all the work on reform came to nothing. TheCommitteebelieves that membersshouldconsider the following quotes submitted from members of the publicduring the consultation periodvery carefully beforedecidingto reject the calls for reform –

" W e are totally disillusioned with the way the States is being run. We have voted in every election for 40  years but we have vowed we will never vote again unless the system is changed."

" U n t il something drastic is undertaken to change the present method of electing States members, I am afraid that the present apathy at election time will prevail".

APPENDIX

Summary of work undertaken by PPC since 2006

Background

Ever since the publication of the report of the Review Panel on the Machinery of Government (the Clothier' Report) in December 2000 there have been numerous unsuccessful attempts to bring forward reform of the composition of the States.

The former Policy and Resources Committee lodged a proposition on the matter (P.179/2001) in November 2001 recommending the abolition of the office of Senator and the removal of the Connétable s from the States but withdrew the proposition after a series of parish meetings in early 2002.

Following the withdrawal of P.179/2001 the States agreed to set up a Special Committee under the Presidency of then Deputy M.E. Vibert to look into this issue and that Committee lodged a proposition (P.186/2002) in October 2002 with a minority report by Senator Norman. The proposition was not debated before the 2002 elections and the reconstituted Special Committee under the Presidency of then Senator Lakeman that took office after those elections did not support the proposals in P.186/2002 which was therefore withdrawn in 2003.

After the resignation from the States of Senator Lakeman the Special Committee, under the Presidency of Deputy Le Hérissier, brought forward proposals in September 2004 (P.151/2004) for the replacement of the present 3  categories of member with 47  members elected in 6 new large constituencies, all elected on one general election day in the Spring every 4  years. The proposals were heavily defeated when they were debated in November 2004.

In addition to the proposals above there have, since 2001, also been a number of propositions on the subject of reform of the composition lodged by private members including, of course, the recent proposition of Senator B.E. Shenton (P.145/2006) which, together with all associated amendments, was rejected on 1st and 2nd May 2007.

Shortly after taking office the present PPC decided that there was a need, some 6½ years after the publication of the Clothier Report, for the States to take a definite decision on the issue of reform. This Appendix to the Committee's report on its preferred option summarises the outcome of the work that PPC has been undertaking on this subject since it took office. Some material from earlier reports is reproduced in this report so that the full background to the present proposals can be set out in one place for convenience.

The need for change

During the in Committee' debate in March 2007 and during the debate on P.145/2006 in May 2006 some members questioned the need for reform and argued that the present composition of the Assembly had served the Island well for many years. Although PPC agrees that the Island has prospered since the reforms of 1948 it does not accept the argument that reform is unnecessary.

PPC set out its reasons for proposing changes in its initial consultation document on this subject in December 2006 and it is worthwhile to repeat those reasons again.

PPC, in common with many others, is extremely concerned by the current low turnouts in elections to the States. The table below gives a summary of the percentage turnout in recent Senatorial and Deputies elections.

Election Overall Island

average turnout

Senatorial 2002 48.6% Deputies 2002 (contested seats) 39.2% Senatorial by election 2003 25.99% Senatorial by election 2004 23.34% Senatorial 2005 42.55% Deputies 2005 (contested seats) 33.8%

It is perhaps of note that the turnout in the 2004 general election in Guernsey, with a revised electoral structure based on 7 large electoral districts, was as follows –

District Turnout South East 69% Vale 68% Castel 65% St. Sampson 64% West 64% St. Peter Port South 59% St. Peter Port North 58% Guernsey Total 64%

Although the turnout in the 2006 elections to the House of Keys in the Isle of Man, with 49,855 registered voters in the contested seats, was marginally lower than the 2004 Guernsey figures it was still considerably higher than the recent Jersey figures –

Constituency Turnout Castletown 62% Douglas East 51% Douglas North 54% Douglas South 57% Douglas West 57% Garff 64% Glenfaba 74% Malew and Santon 60% Michael 64% Middle 58% Onchan 62% Peel 63% Ramsey 66% Rushen 65% Isle of Man total 61%

It is apparent that there is no one single reason for declining turnouts and it is, of course, a feature of many western democracies that turnout is falling although the experience of the recent French Presidential elections shows  that  voters  will  turn  out  in  large  numbers  when  presented  with  clear  choices  from  candidates  with significantly different policies.

Although PPC accepts that there are no doubt very many reasons why voters in Jersey do not vote in large numbers the Committee's conclusion is nevertheless that the complex and relatively frequent nature of elections in Jersey, with Connétable s' elections happening on an annual basis and separate elections for Senators and Deputies, is one of the most significant factors that cause lower turnouts. In addition it has become clear from the consultation undertaken that many people in Jersey are frustrated by the fact that there is no single opportunity to change the entire membership of the Assembly at one time and, as a result, a feeling that voting does not make any real difference.

In  addition  to  the  frequency  of  elections  concern  has  frequently  been  expressed  about  the  imbalance  in representation in the Island particularly in relation to the Deputies seats where changes in population have not been reflected in the allocation of seats that has remained unchanged for many years. The following tables give an indication of the breakdown between population and representation in the Island (the 2001 census figures are the last available accurate statistics on the population of each parish).

Population 2001 Current Deputies Residents per Census Deputy

Grouville 4,702 1 4,702 St.  Peter 4,293 1 4,293 St.  Clement 8,196 2 4,098 St.  Ouen 3,803 1 3,803 St.  Martin 3,628 1 3,628 St.  Brelade 10,134 3 3,378 St.  Helier 28,310 10 2,831 Trinity 2,718 1 2,718 St.  John 2,618 1 2,618 St.  Saviour 12,491 5 2,498 St.  Lawrence 4,702 2 2,351 St.  Mary 1,591 1 1,591 TOTALS 87,186 29

Average 3,006

If the Parish Connétable is counted as part of the parish's representation the imbalance between the parishes is accentuated –

PPC does not believe that the above imbalance in membership can simply be ignored and, furthermore, is seriously concerned that the present low turnouts place Jersey near the bottom of any international league table' of voter turnout in free parliamentary elections across the world. The well respected International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) estimates that the average turnout across the globe post 1990  in  democratic  societies  is  64%,  considerably  higher,  of  course,  than  the  averages  in  Jersey  (see http://www.idea.int).