A stroke of genius - P.119

On Wednesday evening the Privileges and Procedures Committee published their proposition for reforming the States of Jersey

The whole proposition can be read here - http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyPropositions/2013/P.116-2013.pdf

In short, here is what they are proposing -

- There is not time to implement a radical reform in time for the 2014 election, so there should instead be a modest "interim reform" as a temporary measure.
- The 29 Deputies seats should be redistributed amongst the Parishes to achieve as great a voter equity as is possible with the current electoral system.
- Reduce the number of Senators to 6.
- Keep the Constables.
- On the day of the 2014 election, there should also be a referendum asking the public to answer yes or no on adopting the Clothier Reports recommendations.

Unfortunately the media coverage has made this very unclear and has, as usual, focused on a few selective soundbites that are automatically going to help foster negative feelings.

The distribution of Deputies in the "interim reform" is as follows -

Parish	Population	Constables	Deputies	Total MSJs	Population per MSJ	Deviation from average
St Helier	33,522	1	13	14	2,394	-0.05
St Saviour	13,580	1	5	6	2,263	-6.37
St Brelade	10,568	1	3	4	2,642	9.31
St Clement	9,221	1	3	4	2,305	-4.63
St Lawrence	5,418	1	1	2	2,709	12.08
St Peter	5,003	1	1	2	2,502	3.52
Grouville	4,866	1	1	2	2,433	0.66
St Ouen	4,097	1	1	2	2,049	-15.23
St Martin	3,763	1	1	2	1,882	-22.13
Trinity	3,156	1	0	1	3,156	30.58
St John	2,911	1	0	1	2,911	20.44
St Mary	1,752	1	0	1	1,752	-27.51
Average -					2,417

Losing an unearned and undeserved privilege

The controversial point there is going to be the fact that the three smallest Parishes will be left without a Deputy and St Lawrence is losing a Deputy, with only St Helier and St Clement given extra Deputies.

This may not be diplomatic of me (but frankly I'm sick of making the point), but I have three words for those in the country Parishes that want to keep both a Constable and a Deputy - Deal with it.

Tough luck. 

You can't have it both ways. 

If St Mary only has 1,752 people living there, it is absolutely absurd that they should have two States Members. A Constable is a full States Member, like all the others. When they walk through the doors to the States Chamber, they are equal to every other member and can do anything they can. They serve no other administrative purpose in the States to Deputies or Senators. So to carry out the function of representing the people in St Mary, they do not need one of each category.

When St Mary has one States Member for every 876 people, but St Helier has one for every 3,047 people, you have an unfairness that has to be addressed.

In fact, miraculously, candidate for Constable of Grouville John Le Maistre made this same point at the hustings earlier this week. He said that the smallest Parishes didn't need Deputies when they are so small and already have a Constable.

It's a logical position, but we will no doubt be subjected to all sorts of cries of "injustice" from those Parishes over the next few weeks who seem oblivious to the inherent and unfair advantage that they currently have and want to keep.

They are not entitled to an advantage, they are only entitled to equality. Their over-representation cannot go on any longer.

If a country Parish wants to hold back the islands democracy so they can keep their undeserved special privileges, then they should increase their population. If St Mary wants to keep a Deputy, they should donate several large fields to the States for them to build social housing on. See how well that goes down.

Here is how PPC's proposed "interim reform" compares to the current system -

Parish	Population	Current MSJs	Pop per MSJ	Deviation	Total MSJs	Pop per MSJ
St Helier	33,522	11	3,047	42.72	14	2,394	-0.05
St Saviour	13,580	6	2,263	6	6	2,263	-6.37
St Brelade	10,568	4	2,642	23.75	4	2,642	9.31
St Clement	9,221	3	3,074	43.98	4	2,305	-4.63
St Lawrence	5,418	3	1,806	-15.41	2	2,709	12.08
St Peter	5,003	2	2,502	17.19	2	2,502	3.52
Grouville	4,866	2	2,443	14.43	2	2,433	0.66
St Ouen	4,097	2	2,049	-4.03	2	2,049	-15.23
St Martin	3,763	2	1,882	-11.85	2	1,882	-22.13
Trinity	3,156	2	1,578	-26.09	1	3,156	30.58
St John	2,911	2	1,456	-31.8	1	2,911	20.44
St Mary	1,752	2	876	-58.97	1	1,752	-27.51
			2,135			2,417

It is abundantly clear here that PPC's interim reform is much fairer than the current system, though it does still leave some cracks to be ironed out

Referendum on Clothier

And ironed out they shall be, with a referendum to ask the public a simple yes or no question on adopting the reforms proposed in the Clothier Report.

Frankly, this was the question we should have been asked 10 years ago.

The States adopted all of the recommendations to change the machinery of government, but didn't adopt the changes to the make up of the States, despite the Clothier Report very clearly saying that their recommendations were intended to be considered as a package and not cherry picked.

This referendum seeks to put us in the position we should have always been, and I for one will very enthusiastically vote "yes".

And what is more, if the answer to the referendum results in a "no" I will be able to accept that result with my conscience clear, because it would not be a vote to make our system worse (like the victory for Option B in the previous referendum was), but simple a "no thanks, we're not keen on this particular vision". Fair enough, back to the drawing board. At least the interim reform will mean the new States will be better placed to achieve a better reform in the long run.

I have mixed feelings about the referendum being on the same day as the 2014 election. It is good because it ensures a higher turn out but it makes it impossible to conduct the referendum campaign separately from the election campaign.

I'm hoping to stand in the next election, and I'd rather campaign on issues that actually matter to people, like fixing unemployment, ending the rapid rise in population and investing in projects to secure Jersey's long term economic and environmental prospects. I don't want to have to trot out the same old arguments again about reform. But so be it. If that is what is going to happen, then we should grasp hold of the opportunity with enthusiasm.

To those that cynically just presume the States will ignore the result again (even though in my opinion they didn't ignore the last one), the answer is very simple - elect candidates who say they will abide by the result. Easy.

Winning the vote

But of course, we can talk as much as we like about these ideas from PPC. But will they win the vote?

I'm assured that the parts of the proposition to implement the interim reform and the part to hold a referendum on Clothier are likely to be voted on separately by the States. So even members who are against Clothier can still vote for the interim reforms if they want. So the two issues aren't combined in a way that makes them both likely to be lost.

I've titled this blog "a stroke of genius" because that's what I think this proposition is.

What matters is getting these interim reforms through the States. They are modest changes and don't radically alter the nature of the system, they just shift it about a bit. What we need now more than anything is a step (no matter how small) in the right direction. These interim reforms do make the system slightly better and should be supported on that basis alone.

The only reason for opposing them is not believing in fairness. Okay, in our States that is actually quite a big handicap. But hopefully the scale of the change being as small as it is may bring together the different factions of the States to vote for it, because it's not a drastic change, just a minor alteration.

All of the other reform options that have been proposed by private members are almost certainly doomed to failure. This one may have a slight glimmer of hope.

In the weeks leading up to the debate I'll be lobbying hard and hopefully holding a public meeting with Reform Jersey to discuss it all.

Until then though, peace!

Sam

P.S. Sorry for not yet writing my "What Really Happened" piece. It's on it's way, but this unexpected proposition has gotten in the way.