To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Changes must not be blocked or delayed
Share this:
From Darius Pearce.
AS a wholehearted supporter of Option A in the recent referendum, it now concerns me that certain supporters of Options A and C, may try to block, delay or divert the States of Jersey from implementing the preference of the people of Jersey in time for the elections which are due to be held in 2014.
Gone are the days when all people living in Jersey experienced the same lifestyle and the differences in experience and values were represented in the results of the referendum. But to imply that the values and opinions of the people who supported Option B should not be valid because they differ from the views of some European bureaucrat who may or may not even know where Jersey lies, is regrettable.
The notion put about that Option B is not an equitable resolution and would not comply with the demands of the Venice convention is questionable. Under the current system, people living in different parts of the Island vote directly for a varying number of Members from ten in St Mary to 13 in St Helier No 3.
Under Option B, each individual will elect the same number of Members – one Constable and five Deputies. As a result, I cannot see how the proposed changes can be considered inequitable; they address an historic imbalance. It may be true that certain parishes have slightly more or slightly less representation, but it is not parishes which vote, it is individuals.
I would remind all States Members that they are representatives – servants – of the people and, in view of the clear instructions they have been given, to refuse to follow the wishes of the people would be an undeniable breach of trust.
The good men and women of parishes such as St Mary, St John and Trinity have, for the good of the Island, surrendered their right to a Deputy for it is Deputies in the smaller parishes who are least likely to be re-elected under the new system.
In time, once responsibility for the important matters such as road maintenance, planning and primary education have been returned from the States to the parishes, the Constables may wish to concentrate solely on their parishes. In the meantime, they are required in the States to ensure that those responsibilities are returned to the administration that is most competent to deal with them.
Related
Most read this week...
More from the JEP
Man loses appeal against street assault conviction
Opening hustings event draws crowd in St Mary
“Islanders should be aware of the moving picture here”
Carer accused of taking £7,000 from elderly woman