Composition of the States Assembly: interim reform for 2014 and referendum on further reform

STATES OF JERSEY

COMPOSITION OF THE STATES ASSEMBLY: INTERIM REFORM FOR 2014 AND REFERENDUM ON FURTHER REFORM

Lodged au Greffe on 25th September 2013 by the Privileges and Procedures Committee

STATES GREFFE

2013   Price code: C  P.116

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

1. to agree that, from October 2014 the Assembly should be comprised of  47 members,  comprising  6 Senators,  12 Connétable s  and 29 Deputies;
2. to agree that the 29 Deputies should be elected in 14 constituencies comprising  a  whole  parish  or  a  district  within  a  parish,  with  the current Schedule 1 to the States of Jersey Law 2005 setting out the Deputies' constituencies being amended as follows –

DEPUTIES' CONSTITUENCIES

3. to agree that in an Assembly of 47 members, the maximum number of Ministers and Assistant Ministers shall be 21;
4. to request the Privileges and Procedures Committee to bring forward for debate legislative changes to enable the revised composition to be in place in time for the 2014 elections with the new structure of 47 members being effective from the date of the swearing-in of the new members elected in those elections;
5. to agree that a referendum under the Referendum (Jersey) Law 2002 should be held on the day of the 2014 elections with a single Yes/No question to ask voters whether they agree that the States Assembly should, with effect from the 2018 elections, be comprised of a single category of members elected on a parish basis in accordance with the recommendation of the Report of the Review Panel on the Machinery of  Government  in Jersey  (the  Clothier'  Report)  published  in December  2000,  and  to request  the  Privileges  and  Procedures Committee to bring forward for approval the necessary Referendum Act to enable the referendum to take place.

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE

REPORT

When the States adopted paragraph (b) of the proposition of Senator B.I. Le Marquand "Referendum on States reform: outcome" (P.74/2013) on 16th July 2013, members charged the new Privileges and Procedures Committee with assessing alternatives for reform of the Assembly after the rejection of the proposals to implement Option B' of the Electoral Commission.

Over the summer recess, the Committee issued a questionnaire to gauge the views of States members on this issue, and the Chairman and members have also held informal discussions  with colleagues  to consider  the  best  way  forward. The  Committee  is extremely conscious of the need to move forward quickly if alternatives for reform are to be debated and implemented in time for the 2014 elections.

Since  the  new  PPC  was  appointed  and  charged  to  look  at  alternatives,  4 private members  have  also  put  forward  options  for  reform  through  propositions  or amendments  to  those  propositions.  The  debate  on  those  propositions  will  give members the opportunity to consider the options put forward but, although individual members of PPC have differing views on the merits of the alternatives proposed, the Committee as a whole does not support any of the options that have been put forward, and does not consider that any have a realistic prospect of receiving the necessary support in the Assembly to be adopted. This has left PPC in the position of having to consider  what  the  best  alternative  option  would  be  that  is  fair,  workable  and, importantly, that has any realistic chance of success in the current Assembly.

PPC has concluded that it would be wrong as a matter of principle to propose major reform of the Assembly without seeking the subsequent approval of the public to that reform in a further referendum. There is, however, simply not time to hold a further referendum if reform is to be implemented for 2014 and, in addition, PPC is sure members would agree that there would be an adverse public reaction if a further referendum on reform was proposed in isolation. As a result, PPC has reluctantly agreed that, following the rejection by the States of the Option B' proposals, there is no realistic prospect of major reform being agreed and implemented for 2014. This has led PPC to consider how the current agreed structure of the Assembly for the 2014 elections can be improved and how major long-term reform for the Assembly for 2018 and beyond can be implemented.

If no further reform is agreed before next year, the States Assembly from the next elections will be comprised of 8 Senators, 12 Connétable s and 29 Deputies elected in the 17 constituencies that have remained unchanged for nearly 40 years.

Senators

Following  the  rejection  by  the  States  of  the  large  constituency  model,  PPC  has considered whether or not the retention of the Island-wide mandate remains important for 2014.

The Committee is conscious that the Final Report of the Electoral Commission (see Section 5.2) showed that 58% of those making submissions to the Commission wished to maintain or even enhance the number of members elected on an Island-wide basis, whereas only 42% of respondents were content for the Island-wide mandate to be abolished.

In  the  absence  of  agreement  on  the  compromise'  of  large  electoral  districts  put forward by the Commission, PPC believes that the Island-wide mandate should be retained for 2014 until more far-reaching reform has been agreed in a referendum and implemented. Many people nevertheless remain concerned about the feasibility of electing 8 Senators on one single election day, and concerned about the legitimacy of the  candidates  elected  in  the  bottom  places  who  may  have  received  a  very  low percentage of votes, particularly if the first past the post' system is maintained.

PPC shares these concerns and is therefore proposing, as has Senator Farnham in his recent amendments, that the number of Senators should be reduced to 6 from 2014. Electors have, for many  years, been used to electing 6 Senators at one time and experience has shown that an election for 6 Senators on one day is workable and leads to an acceptable result. Although some, including the Electoral Commission, have questioned  whether  the  position  of  Senator  will  remain  attractive  to  candidates following the introduction of a single election day, PPC considers that an election for 6 places in 2014 will provide a meaningful contest, particularly as a number of the existing 10 Senators are likely to seek re-election in 2014. As explained below, PPC believes that further reform is necessary after 2014 and the retention of the senatorial position  for  the  next  elections  may  therefore  prove  to  be  nothing  more  than  a transitional arrangement.

This  proposed  reduction  in  the  number  of  Senators  will  also  enable  the  current proposed membership of the Assembly for 2014, namely 49, to be further reduced to 47 members. It is clear from the debate on Option B and from the responses to the PPC questionnaire, that many members considered that the reduction to 42 members as proposed by the Electoral Commission was a step too far; although the clear wish of the public to see some reduction in the number of members will be addressed by the reduction proposed in this proposition.

Parish representation

The responses to the PPC questionnaire showed that a majority of the States members who  replied  favour  the  retention  of  elections  based  on  a  parish  basis.  63.3%  of respondents agreed that Jersey electoral districts should continue to be based on parish boundaries. One member who replied stated "[Large] Districts have been invented by people of no feeling for our history or the parish being real entities with their own identity and communities". In addition, 75% of those who replied to the questionnaire considered that Deputies should be elected in districts of roughly equal size.

PPC agrees that direct parish representation is important and valued in Jersey, and believes it is important that this parish representation is viewed as a combination of the Connétable and the Deputy or Deputies elected for the parish. Those who have supported the retention of the right of the Connétable s to remain in the States by virtue of their office have stressed that Connétable s must be seen as full' members of the Assembly, and PPC considers that it would be wrong to make any distinction between the Connétable and the Deputy or Deputies when calculating the appropriate and fair level  of  representation  for  a  parish  in  the  States.  Under  these  proposals,  parish representation will therefore come in part from the presence of the Connétable s and from parish Deputies.

At present there is significant unfairness in the allocation of parish representation across the Island because of irregular population growth across the 12 parishes since the current allocation of Deputies was last revised nearly 40 years ago. Using the 2011 census figures, the current allocation of population per parish representative and the deviation from the average, is as follows –

There have been many calls in the past for the allocation of Deputies to be revised to obtain a fairer distribution across the parishes. PPC agrees that this is long overdue and  therefore recommends  that  a re-allocation  should  be  undertaken for the next elections.

PPC  initially  considered  whether  the  re-allocation  should  be  done  by  combining parishes to create large districts as proposed by the Electoral Commission, and as now proposed  in  the  propositions  of  Senator P.C.F. Ozouf  (P.93/2013),   Deputy T.M. Pitman  (P.94/2013)  and  the  amendments  to  those  propositions  by  Senator L.J. Farnham . PPC has concluded that large areas would effectively only be useful as a form of compromise to compensate for the loss of the Island-wide mandate and, as some senatorial representation is being retained under these proposals, PPC believes it would be more acceptable to base the re-allocation on a parish basis as the Committee is  not  convinced  there  is  any  genuine  enthusiasm  for  large  areas  among  States members or the public.

PPC  considered  various  options  for  the  re-allocation  of  Deputies'  seats.  The Committee initially considered whether the re-allocation should be made on the basis of having at least one Deputy per parish in addition to the Connétable , and worked out the allocation of seats on this basis for 27, 28 and 29 Deputies. The allocation under these options is shown in Appendices 1 to 3 and, as can be seen, these options all lead to very significant deviations from the average or target' of parish representation across the 12 parishes.

PPC does not think it is right, as a matter of principle, to put forward an allocation with such wide deviations that go well beyond the recommended 15% figure in the Venice  Commission  recommendations,  albeit  that  the  Commission's recommendations are not actually binding on the States of Jersey. In addition, as explained above, PPC sees the combined parish representation of the Connétable and the   Deputy  or  Deputies  as  something  that  should  be  looked  at  together  and  not separated out. As a result, PPC calculated the allocation of parish representation across the 12 parishes for the 12 Connétable s and for 27, 28 and 29 Deputies in the fairest way possible, and the results of these calculations are shown in Appendices 4 to 6.

Having considered the percentage deviations in the 3 options, PPC concluded that allocating 29 Deputies as shown in Appendix 6 gives the fairest possible allocation across  the  12 parishes,  even  if  it  has  to  be  accepted  that  working  within  parish boundaries inevitably means that some deviations go beyond the recommended 15% figure for some of the smaller parishes. Options that try to compensate for these large variations by adding or taking away one parish representative simply create larger deviations in the opposite way, and PPC believes that until more major reforms are agreed there is no choice but to accept some variations. PPC is nevertheless confident that members will agree that the allocation shown in Appendix 6, which is reflected in paragraph (b)  of  the  proposition,  is  a  considerable  improvement  on  the  current allocation of parish representation shown in the table earlier in this report.

PPC is aware that some members may express concern about the fact that 3 parishes, St. Mary , St. John and Trinity , will only be represented by a Connétable and have no Deputy . The Committee considers that the principles of fairness of representation must override any such concerns. If representation is linked to the size of population, it is inevitable that smaller parishes will have fewer representatives and if Connétable s are to play a full and meaningful role as members of the States, there should be no difference for residents if they are represented by a Connétable or a Deputy in the States. PPC believes it would be quite wrong to allow smaller parishes to have more than their fair share of representation.

For 2014, PPC believes it will be easiest to allow the current electoral districts in St. Brelade , St. Saviour and St. Helier to be used for the election of Deputies. This will lead to some imbalance in the level of representation between the districts, but the imbalance is not so great as to be unacceptable in PPC's view. The detail of the breakdown into districts for the 3 parishes is shown in Appendices 7 to 9.

PPC considers that the 2014 proposals it is putting forward in this proposition will be a considerable  improvement  on  the  composition  that  will  be  in  place  for  the  next elections if no further amendments are made. The concern about electing 8 Senators at one time will be addressed by the reduction to 6, and the current unfair allocation of Deputies across the Island will be considerably improved by these proposals.

PPC accepts that some may be disappointed that more fundamental reform is not being proposed, but following the rejection by the States of the legislation to implement Option B,  the  Committee  believes  that  members  must  be  realistic  about  what  is actually achievable in the coming months. Tweaking' Option B, as has been proposed by  Senator   Ozouf  and   Deputy  T.M. Pitman  may  improve  the  representation  of St. Helier , but PPC's calculations have shown that, in doing so, the representation of other urban and semi-urban parishes is simply worsened and now that the pure' Option B has been rejected, PPC does not believe that variations of it are acceptable.

Paragraph (e) – Referendum on the Clothier' proposals

PPC wishes to make it clear that it sees these proposals for reform for 2014 as nothing more  than  an  interim  solution  on  the  road  to  more  far-reaching  reform,  and  the Committee  views  paragraph (e)  of  this  proposition  as  an  integral  part  of  the Committee's overall reform package.

Although the recommendations of the Report on the Review of the Machinery of Government in Jersey (the Clothier' report) were published over 10 years ago, the public has never been given the opportunity to decide whether or not one of the core recommendations, namely that there should be a single class of States member elected on a parish basis, should be implemented. The relevant chapter of the Clothier report, Chapter 3, is included at Appendix 10 for information.

Ever since the publication of the Clothier report, there have been continual calls for the public to be able to consider this recommendation and PPC believes that the issue should be decided once and for all by holding a referendum on the same day as the 2014 single election day for Senators, Connétable s and Deputies. PPC considers that the referendum should take place on the basis of a single Yes/No question to allow voters to make a simple choice on this one issue and to avoid the difficulties that some saw with the more complex choices and the alternative voting system used in the April 2013 referendum.

PPC recognises that there may be some logistical problems in holding the referendum on the general election day, but considers that any such problems are far from being insurmountable even if, for example, the referendum votes could not be counted on election night. The advantage of holding the referendum on the general election day will be that there should be a good turnout and the issue of reform will hopefully become an important issue during the overall election campaign.

Some  members  may  believe  that  the  public  would  reject  the  Clothier recommendations, but PPC's stance on this issue is that no-one can give an informed view on what the public actually thinks until after the referendum. The Committee therefore believes that the sensible way forward is to ask the public for their view to enable the new States constituted in 2014 to have a clear steer on future reform options. If the Clothier proposals are supported in the referendum, it will be incumbent on the new Assembly to implement them; if they are not it will be clear to the Assembly that a single category of member option is not acceptable and other options will need to be considered. PPC believes that after nearly 13 years, it is time for this matter to be finally decided one way or another.

If paragraph (e) is adopted, PPC will be required to bring forward for approval by the States a draft Referendum Act that will cover the precise wording of the proposed referendum question and that question will, for example, need to cover the proposed number of members to be elected.

Financial and manpower implications

Successive PPCs have always made it clear that a reduction in the membership of the States should be made because it is the right thing to do, and not as a way of making a financial  saving.  The  Committee  is  nevertheless  obliged  by  Standing  Orders  to indicate the financial implications of any proposition, and would therefore point out that  if  the  membership  of  the  Assembly  is  reduced  in  2014  from  the  currently proposed level of 49 to 47, there would be a saving of some £92,000 per annum at current levels of remuneration.

The costs of the referendum will be considerably less if it is combined with other elections when polling stations and the other infrastructure will already be in place. There will nevertheless be some additional cost for matters such as the printing of ballot papers and the necessary public information campaign. It is estimated that some £30,000 would be required for this purpose.

27 Deputies  redistributed  across  the  12 parishes,  taking  account  of  the representation provided by the Connétable but allowing at least one Deputy per parish in addition to the Connétable .

28 Deputies  redistributed  across  the  12 parishes,  taking  account  of  the representation provided by the Connétable but allowing at least one Deputy per parish in addition to the Connétable .

29 Deputies  redistributed  across  the  12 parishes,  taking  account  of  the representation provided by the Connétable but allowing at least one Deputy per parish in addition to the Connétable

27 Deputies  redistributed  across  the  12 parishes,  taking  account  of  the representation provided by the Connétable .

28 Deputies  redistributed  across  the  12 parishes,  taking  account  of  the representation provided by the Connétable .

29 Deputies  redistributed  across  the  12 parishes,  taking  account  of  the representation provided by the Connétable .

St. Brelade – breakdown of representation into existing 2 districts.

St. Saviour – breakdown of representation into existing 3 districts.

St. Helier – breakdown of representation into existing 3 districts.