Chains have been loosened, but UK remains in control

SO the sands are beginning to shift, if slowly, over the island's relationship with the UK. There is talk of Guernsey reaching maturity, but it sounds more like we have passed our driving test but mum and dad are still not sure we should be allowed out on the road alone.

Last week, the Ministry of Justice gave the government's response to the Justice Select Committee report that contained some keystone issues in how the UK works with the island and other Crown Dependencies.

Much of it centres on administration.

The MoJ is facing extreme budget cuts and this may have been the driver behind some of the changes it is happy to accept.

Allowing Guernsey to talk direct to the relevant department in Whitehall instead of acting as the go-between will save its staff time, as well as help greater understanding throughout the UK government about the island's position.

Having the Guernsey Law Officers attach interpretation of how legislation fits in with international standards is aimed at stopping duplication of efforts - in effect the MoJ won't have to do what Guernsey has already done.

There could be a few secondments on offer as well for our civil servants to go to London and find out more about how the machine works.

These were the non-contentious issues aimed more at oiling the wheels than anything else, and were universally welcomed on both sides of the Channel.

But it was not all roses in the garden, especially if you put on more sceptical glasses.

While the UK is happy to sign off letters of entrustment, pieces of paper that tell other nations we have its permission to sign off on agreements such as sharing tax information - it still is the ultimate master of these.

'Where a Crown Dependency concludes an agreement under entrustment, the UK remains responsible under international law for ensuring the Crown Dependency implements the agreement fully and complies with obligations under it,' the MoJ report says.

'The UK's entrustment of the Crown Dependencies is based on the UK's status as the sovereign body and for as long as that constitutional dependency remains the UK will reserve the right to ratify agreements negotiated by the Crown Dependencies.'

So what happens if Guernsey wants to pull out of an agreement but the UK does not want that to happen?

The biggest area of contention between the MoJ and Justice Select Committee report is on the issue that really would make a big stride to greater independence and a greater sense of identity.

The Select Committee wanted a separate person to put forward the island's case in international negotiations when the dependency's position differed by the UK.

'Clear and unambiguous representation of the Crown Dependencies' interested on the international stage will assist them in building their relationships with third countries and international identities, as envisaged in the Framework document agreed with the UK,' said the select committee.

But the MoJ was unequivocal in knocking this back.

'The Crown Dependencies are not sovereign States and cannot represent themselves; the UK represents the Crown Dependencies internationally. While the Government respects the Crown Dependencies as having an international identity which is different from that of the United Kingdom's it is difficult to envisage how equal billing could be given to the interests of a Crown Dependency if they are incongruent with those of the UK,' the MoJ said.

The report said it would not be appropriate for the dependencies' position to be represented separately.

'It would be unrealistic to expect a UK official to put the interest of a Crown Dependency above that of the UK and in extreme circumstances this may hamper the ability of the UK to operate effectively on the international stage.'

So the islands' view will be 'taken on board' as the UK line develops.

To some, this is simply restating the current position and the select committee had gone too far in suggesting a position hinting a sovereignt

y Guernsey does not have.

But for the vocal minority keen on pushing for greater independence it is an opportunity missed.

There are other areas of the report that make, on a literal reading, for uncomfortable moments.

Concerns have been raised the UK is influencing island legislation at a policy level - possibly motivated by wider political concerns.

The MoJ said checking island laws for adherence to UK policy was generally done if a difference breached the European human rights act or international law.

'Although we do not generally seek to do so, in addition to strict questions of lawfulness, in limited occasions we may consider it appropriate to intervene in policy matters where there may be the position for a direct and adverse impact on UK interests (for example in relations to changes to drug or immigration law in the islands). Equally, if an island law sought to do something fundamentally damaging to UK interests, we would not consider it constitutionally illegitimate to refuse to recommend the law for Royal Assent.'

The scope of these powers remains untested.

In practice this position is aimed at things like Guernsey lifting barriers on immigration, effectively creating a back door entry point to the UK because of the free travel area which means people coming from here do not routinely have passport checks.

How far can it go when it looks at population management, which will obviously take a look at immigration?

And what if the island had a sudden liberal turn and wanted to legalise cannabis?

Internal tax matters are protected under the largely unwritten constitutional arrangements, but how does that stand up in modern times with Europe looming so large and talk of tax harmonisation?

While the MoJ's response gives scope for the island taking on more responsibility, another question is whether it is ready, experienced, staffed and bold enough to do that?

Guernsey has been at odds with both Jersey and the Isle of Man when it comes to the national and international stage.

When the UK scrapped the reciprocal health agreement, the Isle of Man shouted loudest and first and has since got a fresh deal in place.

Jersey is next in line. Guernsey will follow having initially stated there was no room for manoeuvre.

The other islands have also had their case heard over keeping zero-10 in Europe, while Guernsey waits in the background working away on its replacement.

Sometimes a more aggressive stance can pay off, although some doubt it over the tax strategy at least the other islands have learnt more about the decision-making system.

The MoJ report is one of a three important staging points as the Policy Council works on a response to the Advocate Roger Perrot-led call for greater autonomy.

Before it we had the Jersey and Guernsey Law Review sovereignty debate, and to come a Jersey report, expected in December, on the role of the Crown officers.

The chains that bind are allowing a slight shift, any more than that would require real public pressure.