These options will not resolve the reform debate

From Trevor Brown.

THE Electoral Commission’s proposals, supported by the States Assembly, provide us with an opportunity to take part in our first-ever referendum and to contribute to the decisions to be made on electoral reform.

The first option we may vote for offers the removal of the Constables from the Assembly. This is, however, conditional on our endorsement of the decision to reduce the number of Members to 42, which I could support but only with a change to the way in which ministerial government works.

We must also endorse the establishment of six large voting districts, an idea which may have some merit, but I am not entirely comfortable with the possible impact on rural area representation, or with losing the direct parish connection. In addition, we must endorse the decision to remove the Islandwide mandate which, for me, is the only element of our existing system which provides any real sense of involvement or contribution to the democratic process.

The second option we may vote for offers the retention of the Constables in the Assembly. This is also conditional on our endorsement of exactly the same decisions that apply to our first option.

The third option allows us to vote for the status quo, which I would be happy to do, if it involved a commitment to go back to the drawing board, but it does not. This leaves it open to future interpretation that voters are content with the current system, which I most certainly am not.

I would like to be able to give my view on the only real question which the referendum asks us, which is do we want to remove or retain the Constables? I cannot, because I do not support the attached conditions.

If I want to vote on the Constable issue, I must endorse those conditions. I would like to be able to give my view on the conditions applied to the first two options. I cannot because I am not actually asked to do so. I can only reject them by voting for retention of the current system, and thereby losing the chance to vote on the position of Constables.

Senator Sir Philip Bailhache is quoted in your columns as saying: ‘This gives the public a clear choice between reform options and the opportunity as well to resolve once and for all the question of whether the Constables should remain in the States’.

Well, no Senator, it does not. It gives the public a choice on the question of Constables, but conditional upon acceptance of the only other reform option.

In my view, this referendum is not an opportunity to take part in anything like a fair and honest democratic process. It feels rather like an attempt to persuade voters to participate in a process structured to manufacture support for a narrow range of decisions which are already made. It feels false and most unsatisfactory.

This is not the way to offer the people of the Island the choice we deserve. This will not resolve the reform debate.