ONE hundred days – or 2,400 hours, or 144,000 minutes. A lot can happen in 8.64 million seconds…
But so can not very much at all.
This week marks 100 days since Jersey’s General Election, when Islanders said they wanted change but then voted pretty much for the status quo with only a few small surprises here and there.
The biggest surprise, however, came a few weeks later, when Senator John Le Fondré – boosted by a strong third place finish in the Senatorial race – beat incumbent Senator Ian Gorst to take the top job in Jersey politics.
And then change is exactly what we got, with a ministerial team made up of people more used to warming the backbenches than making decisions around the Council of Ministers’ table.
The new Chief Minister, you see, promised inclusivity and has even set up policy development boards to get more politicians involved in formulating government policy. Unless, of course, that means including Senator Kristina Moore who, it turns out, is something of a political nemesis for the new chief, but more about that another day…
All this week the JEP is running a special series in which we look back over the past 100 days and speak to those with a vested interest in what has happened since the votes were counted.
In the grand scheme of things, 100 days isn’t that long – just a fourteenth of the term for the current States Assembly.
But as voters we expect our politicians to hit the ground running and begin making good on their election promises more or less straight away.
In that regard, not much has happened so far and indeed many around the Island are saying they are disappointed, particularly in the Chief Minister who, let’s be honest, hasn’t really put himself out there very much yet.
So are we, the public, being fair to say we are disappointed with the class of 2018 so soon, and particularly when the new timing of the election means they headed straight into summer recess almost immediately?
Well, yes and no.
Yes because, quite frankly, time is short and if they are as passionate to get on with it as most claimed to be when asking for our votes then they should have been raring to go. Take, for example, new Deputy Jess Perchard who was working on a proposition to amend the law that allows high-value residents to be given housing qualifications within days of being elected.
Last week she lodged that proposition with the States, with a few amendments following the news that States chief executive Charlie Parker had been given ‘quallies’ using the same law, and in doing so became the second new Member to lodge a formal proposal, Deputy Gregory Guida having also done so just days earlier.
There has also been a lot of talk from the new House about dealing with ‘legacy’ issues from the previous Assembly. Deputy Rob Ward talked about it in an interview with this newspaper yesterday and various ministers have referred to it too, particularly they say because so many decisions were ‘rushed through’ at the end of the last term.
And that is where we come to the real crux of why it doesn’t seem like much has happened in these first 100 days, and why we should hold back – albeit only slightly – on casting judgment – because change, especially that led by an inexperienced team, takes time.
Add into the mix the huge changes going on in the public sector more widely with the machinery of government, the rearranging of departments, the restructuring of the civil service under Mr Parker and new ways of thinking – and communicating – generally, and the start of this term was always going to be challenging and, crucially, different to previous years.
That said, September is now just days away, and the Assembly is due to sit again for the first time on the 11th. We are right to expect some signs of progress before that month is out, and one would hope that Senator Le Fondré will be leading it.
And so far the States – as in the wider service as a whole – aren’t doing themselves any favours in the eyes of the ‘disappointed’ public.
Because statements such as that provided to this newspaper when we tried to make sense of all the new departmental arrangements are not helpful, especially at a time when there is so much nervousness and suspicion about the new system and who exactly is controlling the puppet strings.
A spokesman for what is now known as the Office of the Chief Executive (formerly the Chief Minister’s Department) said that the public did not need to know how States departments were structured, and that they would only be told as and when specific issues arose.
He said: ‘As and when changes are made that affect customers and other stakeholders, such as bringing customer-facing services together in one place, we will specifically publicise them.’
I’m sure they will, but the message is loud and clear: we will keep you informed – on our terms.
The public are always going to pass judgment, 100 days or 100 weeks down the line.
And a properly informed public on all levels – not just that which the government thinks is appropriate – will always lead to a fairer analysis.
