By Mark Boleat
The States Assembly has voted to reinstate Senators with effect from the 2026 election. The decision, secured with the exact minimum number of votes needed, now has to be implemented through a series of legislative changes. The decision has wider implications for Jersey’s compliance with recognised international standards. While these might be rejected on the grounds that “we don’t need anyone to tell us how to run the Island”, they at least need to be understood and properly considered.
Universal suffrage
The introduction of the new larger constituencies for Deputies in 2022 was prompted by a critical report on the 2018 election by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Election Observation Mission. The report described the electoral system as being “overly complicated and cumbersome” and drew attention to the fact that Jersey’s system did not comply with international standards.
This was taken on board by the Privileges and Procedures Committee of the States Assembly. It noted the Code of Conduct in Electoral Matters published by the European Commission for Democracy through Law – better known as the Venice Commission – which is the Council of Europe’s advisory body on constitutional matters. (For the avoidance of doubt, the commission and the council are not part of or connected to the European Union.) The committee observed that Jersey complied with the code of conduct in all areas except equality in voting rights and equality in voting power. Voters did not have the same number of votes across the Island, and the power of their votes was unequal.
The Venice Commission Code requires that “except in really exceptional circumstances”, the maximum variance from equality of voting power should seldom exceed 10% and never be more than 15%. The report noted that in Jersey the average variation was 28%, that the range was from +59% to -44% and that “in essence, the voters in the urban parishes are vastly under-represented compared to their rural neighbours”.
The 2022 election
The Privileges and Procedures Committee recommended that, to comply with the code, the Assembly should comprise 46 Members, elected from nine constituencies, with Constables remaining as members of the Assembly without a vote but with the ability to participate in debate and non-executive committee work.
The committee pointed out that the two points needed to be considered together, as it was impossible to achieve equality of voting power as long as Constables remained as voting members in the States Assembly.
The Assembly voted to accept the recommendation that “fair representation and equality in voting weight and power across the whole population should be the basis for any reform of the composition and election of the States” and immediately contradicted itself by rejecting the proposal that Constables should not be voting members of the Assembly.
However, at least the creation of nine new constituencies, based on the parishes, for Deputies was a significant move towards equality of voting power. The range of variance from the average of +12% to -10% was much lower than the figures of +52% to -44% with the previous system.
The implications of reinstating Senators
Deputy Millar’s proposal was that to compensate for the introduction of nine Senators, each constituency should lose one Deputy. She stated that “the voting system would maintain its existing level of equity”. But it did not do so. Taking one person from a five-member constituency is a 20% reduction; taking one from a three-member constituency is a 33% reduction.
As a result, two constituencies will now exceed the 15% “never” benchmark under the Venice recommendations and two others are at the 10% benchmark. The range of variation from the norm has increased from +12% to -10% to +27% to -15%, and the average variation from the average has increased from 5.6% to 9%. The big “loser” from the new arrangements is Grouville/St Martin which will now have a population of 4,675 per Deputy against an average of 3,688. At the other end of the range, St Helier Central will have a population of 3,127 per Deputy.
Making a change in the electoral system that deliberately reduces equality of voting power is a very unusual step for a democracy to take.
Some options
Would it have been possible to readjust the boundaries to keep within the Venice recommendation – at least for Deputies? Yes, it would – by moving around 500 voters from St Helier North to St Helier Central and 600 from Grouville/St Martin to St Clement. Presumably having constituencies that cross parish boundaries would be unacceptable. Having a second three-parish constituency of Grouville/St Martin/St Clement would address that point.
If Constables are included in the analysis, then four constituencies exceed the 15% threshold. The two three-parish constituencies are over-represented by more than 20%, while St Helier North and St Helier Central are under-represented by over 30%.
If decision-makers wish to address this specific point, then there is another option – to return to the Privileges and Procedures Committee recommendation that Constables should remain as Members of the Assembly but not have the vote. They could continue to be involved on committees and perhaps also as ministers, while those who wanted to concentrate on their parish could do so.
If there is a determination for Constables to remain as voting members of the Assembly, then there is yet another option – including Constables in the calculation of how many representatives each constituency would have. Reducing the number of Deputies by two in St Mary, St Ouen and St Peter (so it would have just one Deputy) and one in St John, St Lawrence and Trinity, and adding one in each of the St Helier constituencies would bring the whole of the Jersey electoral system within the Venice Commission recommendations.
One suspects, however, that it is unlikely that the Assembly would support any option to ameliorate the effects on the equality of voting power of the decision to reinstate Senators.
Stability in the electoral system
The Privileges and Procedures Committee, while stating that it had no view to express on the merits of reintroducing Senators, did propose an amendment that would have the effect of delaying any new arrangements until the 2030 election. It did so again on the basis of the guidelines set out by the Venice Commission. Two extracts from those guidelines are very relevant to Jersey – stability of the law is crucial to credibility of the electoral process, which is itself vital to consolidating democracy. Rules which change frequently – and especially rules which are complicated – may confuse voters. Above all, voters may conclude, rightly or wrongly, that electoral law is simply a tool in the hands of the powerful, and that their own votes have little weight in deciding the results of elections.
It is not so much changing voting systems which is a bad thing – they can always be changed for the better – as changing them frequently or just before (within one year of) elections. Even when no manipulation is intended, changes will seem to be dictated by immediate party political interests.
The Assembly rejected the committee’s amendment. The committee’s terms of reference include to review the composition, the practices and the procedures of the States Assembly and to bring forward amendments and to review the rules for enfranchisement and for the conduct of elections and to bring forward amendments. The process that led to the decision to reinstate Senators effectively bypassed the committee.
Taking major decisions on the constitution in a piecemeal way without full consideration of the implications is no way to run a democracy. And we have not heard the end of it. There will no doubt be amendments proposed to the legislative changes which the Privileges and Procedures Committee has been instructed to bring forward.
Turnout in Jersey elections is among the lowest, if not the lowest, in the world. This reflects a number of factors. The complexity of the electoral system and its constant changes is probably one of them. The Assembly prioritises discussions of itself rather than why the people of Jersey are disengaged from the political process.
Sir Mark Boleat has held a number of leadership positions in companies, public bodies and charities in Jersey and in the UK. He is senior adviser to the Policy Centre Jersey.
