By Stephen Le Quesne
IT is less than a year now to Jersey’s next election, a general election on Sunday 7 June 2026. I do plan on voting, but this is the closest I have been to not.
If I do vote, it will be mainly due to the importance of it, rather than being optimistic or hopeful with the next four years of government. Being able to vote in a free and fair election is a precious thing.
I am not angry nor too emotional about Jersey’s current government and I also try to not hold any unhelpful or negative opinions about any elected Deputy or Constable as it must be an incredibly challenging position, but my hope that the politicians we elect may mirror my views, desires and policy changes has never been lower. I fear next year that the Island will elect a 2026 continuity government, one that will be working within an unstable and unpredictable global political atmosphere.
When this current election cycle started and we had our first female Chief Minister in the role, I was optimistic yet nervous about the upcoming four years. I was intrigued and interested in what new individuals from varied backgrounds could do in their roles, but also nervous as to what how the States Assembly would act and behave with a female Chief Minister in the lead role.
My worries were unfortunately proven right as Deputy Moore was ousted through a vote of no confidence in January 2024, less than two years after she took the role. The first gender-balanced Council of Ministers was no more. Those new beginnings, a spark for something new and different was firmly extinguished.
This one event wobbled my confidence in our political system and to me, it showed a lack of patience, a lack of respect for the electorate and a resistance to change.
The closure of Jersey Recovery College still stings for me and many others, mainly because I know it helped some of the most vulnerable, the most lonely and disillusioned. For it to close so suddenly without a well communicated, detailed plan and for there to be no clear, well communicated answers as to why is poor optics. There may have been good, genuine, factful reasons as to its closure, but I have no idea what they are (and I want to know). The main frustration here is that the college was created in part due to the government’s own Mental Health Strategy Review. There seems to be a lack of strategic stability. What is the likelihood that a future Council of Ministers decide to bring back the JRC in a slightly altered form? Once they forget or become unaware that it existed.
I apologise for being so critical, and I genuinely want to feel positive about our electoral system, but the Island has the lowest voter turnout in all OECD countries and the reasons for that are clear to see.
There are a lot of disgruntled voters and community leaders, watching as our quality-of-life decreases, especially in terms of social enrichment.
For example, the closure of Fort Regent does not appear to have been handled or received well and there doesn’t seem to have been sufficient planning or consultation, or basic knowledge with the new sports facilities as a multitude of clubs and societies are unhappy for several reasons. There are not enough sports venues to go round. These institutions and venues are important as they give us a form of self-identity, community and joy. A lack of focus and attention to the things we love is bound to cause frustration and if this keeps occurring, then the result is voter apathy.
There is also the ever-widening gap between people who can afford to live here and others who cannot. We are an Island with a large chasm of social and economic inequality. I find this unsettling, unacceptable and quite shocking. The substantial policy changes and directions to help create more equality are largely ignored. Would you agree if I said our laws protect wealth?
However, on the other side, our current politicians do suffer from the fact that democracy does stumble, is stumbling and is becoming increasingly frail and out of time in a world dominated by social media, lies, quick fixes and thousands of opinions.
Democracy in 2025 is under sustained attack. It requires patience, perseverance, negotiating, listening to opposing views and accepting the reality that it will not always go in the policy direction that you want it to (the most frustrating of all). Engagement needs to be sustained and continuous by a majority of voters, for democracy to work as envisioned and be successful.
The aim of democracy is for power to held by the people and exercised directly by them or through elected representatives. The problem is, voters are feeling increasingly and overwhelmingly powerless, so how do you begin to solve this? I feel it would help all 2026 candidates to ponder this very question.
Stephen Le Quesne is a naturalist and outdoor learning instructor.
