‘We would have less flip-flop government with green papers’
INTRODUCING green papers as a standard feature of local politics is among a short list of items which the States Assembly & Constitution Committee will look into during the final year of its term.
The committee’s priority remains preparing for next June’s general election, but at its most recent meeting Sacc president Carl Meerveld won support for a focused review of the Assembly’s rules of procedure to include how policies are submitted and debated by deputies.
He believes that States committees should submit major policy ideas in two stages, initially as a green paper for consultation, and later as a white paper with firm proposals, having reflected on views expressed during the initial stage.
At present, committees can ask the Assembly to debate ideas without amending them or making firm decisions, but committees rarely do that, and Deputy Meerveld believes the rules of procedure should be amended to help it become standard practice.
‘What we do at the moment, which is appallingly bad governance, is that a committee can work for a year in a silo, come forward with proposals, and see them amended with an amendment drafted over a lunchtime,’ he said.
‘With green papers, we would have less flip-flop government and better governance and it would be better for all concerned.
‘On a first reading of a policy letter, everyone in the room could express their views and pick holes in it if they wished, and then the committee could take it away and reflect and come back with firm proposals.’
Deputy Yvonne Burford, one of the committee’s two newer members, thought a better idea might be to encourage deputies to take greater interest in proposals published by committees before they reach the States Assembly.
She was also concerned about adding another stage to the decision-making process, arguably without any prospect of improving the quality of decisions or outcomes.
Another committee member, Deputy Simon Fairclough, asked whether looking into such changes to the Assembly’s rules of procedure could be justified as a priority for the committee.
Deputy Meerveld said he thought changes of the type he had in mind could make ‘a big difference’ to the quality of decision-making in the States.
He eventually secured the backing of his committee without a formal vote and officials were asked to include possible reforms in a paper for discussion by the committee at a future meeting.
