It's an obvious move, but some will still vote it down

As I said last week, it’s a good move and one worthy of serious consideration at a time when increasingly the public aren’t being told the whole story.

Now, I am not always a fan of Deputy Baudains and his ideas – remember the ridiculous left turn out of Snow Hill proposition, for example? He’s also got a reputation for over complicating things, delivering rambling, dare I say it even boring, speeches in the Chamber and being a pretty close-minded individual at times.

But, he really does have it right on this one. Add to that his sensible and mature comments this past week that today’s debate should not be dominated by Treasury Minister Philip Ozouf and arguments about what he did and didn’t do in relation to Mr Swinson and his departure and I have a new found respect for the St Clement Deputy.

In addition, when asked what he would say to those who would argue that a potential cost of £30,000 for a committee of inquiry was expensive, he replied that although he didn’t think it would cost anywhere near that much, even if it did it’s just a fraction of the £546,337 wasted on paying off former States chief executive Bill Ogley. Another good point well made, Deputy.

But, despite all the merits of the proposition, despite the very obvious need for something like this and despite it being the right thing to do, there are going to be those who will vote against it anyway.

It is highly likely that among them will be Chief Minister Ian Gorst and his loyal ministers and supporters who are happy to accept the ‘let’s move on and draw a line under all this’.

And it is just as likely that among them will be Senator Ozouf himself. Let’s remind us that this is a man who has been accused of all sorts of serious wrongdoings that would have had a lesser man booted out of power a long time ago including bullying, harassment and plotting to get rid of a senior civil servant by threatening to ruin his reputation.

They are allegations that he has vehemently denied from the start and he has complained time and time again that he hasn’t been given the chance to clear his name.

So, Senator Ozouf, today is your chance – vote for this proposition and urge others to as well. Then, and only then, will you get the chance to really clear your name and get rid of, once and for all, the dark clouds of suspicion that still hang over you.

And then everyone can truly put this whole sorry mess behind them based on plain, simple fact.

So, the Chief Minister wants to the power to reshuffle ministerial portfolios and replace ministers. Sounds like a fair enough idea that would enable him to keep the best people that can do the best job in the right places.

Speaking after UK Prime Minister David Cameron reshuffled his cabinet last week, Senator Gorst said that he would like whoever is in the top job after the 2014 elections to have the power to ‘shuffle’.

He proposes changing the States’ rules which currently allow Members to vote on every ministerial appointment and propose alternatives. Instead, he thinks that the Chamber should be able to veto his nominations and therefore have the power to say yes or no but not to propose alternatives.

But, this isn’t how our States Assembly is currently set up. The Council of Ministers is not a cabinet – it is a bit like one in some ways and completely not like one in others.

And Senator Gorst is not our Prime Minister – he is a bit like one in some ways but completely not like one in others.

And this is all because there is one big piece of the jigsaw missing in this whole scenario – political parties.

In their absence, and that is not to say that they would even work in a place as small as Jersey, to give the Chief Minister this added power would, in every way, just make the current tensions between the ‘executive’ and the backbenchers (who, although we sometimes like to call them it, are not in reality the opposition) even worse.

It would blur the already cloudy lines of power even more and fracture the cracks that are already reappearing within the House whereby those without ministerial responsibilities feel at best side-lined and at worst completely powerless.

In fact, even Senator Gorst’s suggestion that this should be how things are done has probably begun that process already.

At a time when Members and some of the public are becoming increasingly concerned about who is really running the show and as questions about the merits and downfalls of the ministerial system continue, perhaps it isn’t such a good idea after all.