Deputy Montfort Tadier says his run-in with Bailiff William Bailhache is the latest example of why the role of legislature and the judiciary need to be divided.
He has spoken out after he was told to leave the Chamber by the Bailiff when he refused to retract comments about Jesus Christ attending the Tory party conference. The Bailiff said his comments were ‘offensive and unparliamentary’.
However, the politician says the Bailiff interrupted him while he was making a legitimate point and should have allowed him to continue.
Deputy Tadier says the Island must now move to appoint a new independent chair for the States and added that the Bailiff’s continued presence in the Chamber was detrimental to politics in Jersey.
The Reform Jersey politician is calling for a States Member to be appointed to the role of President of the States and said his views were shared by numerous other politicians, including ministers.
On Monday he lodged a question to the chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee asking what powers Members had to challenge decisions made by the Bailiff in the States.
The question was rejected by the Deputy Bailiff Tim Le Cocq who deemed it ‘out of order’ as the answer was already in the public domain.
The current ruling is that the decision of the presiding officer ‘shall not be open to appeal’, and any decision made by the presiding officer may only be reviewed following a debate in the States after a relevant proposition has been lodged.
Deputy Tadier said that seemed like a ‘waste of time’ as it could take weeks for a decision to be overturned and added that the powers of the legislature and the judiciary need to be separated.
‘It is very difficult for a Member to appeal decisions made by the Bailiff. Imagine questioning the Queen if she was in parliament.
‘We are trying to promote ourselves as a modern, cosmopolitan Island. We have an international finance centre, we have got people flying around the world trying to promote the Island. Are they going to look at Jersey and think “what is this all about?”.
The Bailiff’s role has been subject to previous propositions in the States and at least two separate reports – The Clothier Review (2000) and the Carswell Review (2010). They recommended that the Bailiff should cease to act as the president of the Assembly and that States Members should elect their own speaker.
Deputy Tadier has now lodged a second written question to the Privileges and Procedures Committee asking if they think the roles of the Bailiff should be split and if so when they will bring a proposition to the Assembly.
A spokesman for the Bailiff’s office said that the question of the presidency of the States is a ‘political matter and one for politicians’ to discuss.
Sharon Cox: The problem has been highlighted again that in having the Bailiff in charge of the Chamber we have the people we voted for gaged by a person who does not have a public vote.
John Mcnichol: It beggars belief that a politician trying to have a serious debate on economic policies that will have devastating implications to real people is thrown out of an alleged modern democratic chamber for a perceived insult to a conceptual religious figure. Should the position of Bailiff now be reviewed?
Chantelle Mundy: The point is, Montfort clearly offended the Bailiff and his beliefs and when asked to retract his comments he should have realised the offence caused and how unnecessary bringing Jesus into his point was. He should have apologised and moved on, like an adult.
Carol Hector: Good for them all walking out, this is so pathetic in this day and age getting upset about a comment about ‘Jesus’. Really!
Josh Tully: Religion and politics don’t mix. Look at America.
Paul Matthews: Pathetic. How can our government continue to take themselves seriously after doing this to Monty? They will be burning witches next.
