Concerns election candidates could feel ‘bullied’ by States

The States Assembly & Constitution Committee is facing a backlash over its intention to publish candidates’ record of attendance at pre-election events led mainly by States staff.

Christopher Le Tissier has led public calls for Sacc to reverse its decision and has the support of several other States members.

‘Some prospective candidates have expressed concerns to me and some have felt bullied into trying to be a SACC preferred candidate,’ said Deputy Le Tissier.

‘I posed a series of questions to Sacc and its president, Deputy Carl Meerveld, nearly three weeks ago, but despite reminders no response has been forthcoming. I will, therefore, be submitting a series of formal Rule 11 questions shortly.’

The first opportunity for the questions will be when the States Assembly next meets on 22 January.

Sacc’s announcement that it would publish candidates’ record of attendance at the events followed previous concerns about interference in next June’s general election after deputies agreed to cut election spending limits to a level which will make it practically impossible for candidates to send their own material to voters outside of a booklet of manifestos arranged by the States.

These were the latest moves in the States’ attempt to exert greater control over candidates’ campaigns and communications with voters since the adoption of island-wide voting ahead of the 2020 general election.

‘There should be no government interference in the election. Each candidate should be free to approach the election as they wish,’ said Deputy Le Tissier.

The pre-election events, announced by Sacc last month, feature seven talks to be held in January and February. They are aimed at anyone thinking of standing for election.

Current deputies will lead the first session, but the other six will be led by States staff, despite some covering political subjects such as how the States works, meetings of the Assembly and what a candidate can expect when standing for election.

Deputy Le Tissier said yesterday that existing States members had been invited to the sessions ‘to talk to and answer questions from potential candidates’ but were not told originally that attendance would be recorded and published.

‘I do not think this is a particularly good idea and many of my colleagues agree,’ he said.

‘Non-attendance would likely be construed negatively by the public. However, there are many reasons why a prospective candidate might miss some or all of course dates through no fault of their own, such as illness, work or family commitments, among many others.

‘Sacc is putting undue pressure on prospective candidates to attend all the courses.

‘It is not the government’s role to publicise a candidate’s attendance or non-attendance.’

In an online discussion about the issue before Christmas, Sacc member Deputy Yvonne Burford expressed some sympathy with the concerns raised, and undertook to ‘take it back to the committee and propose leaving it up to the candidate’.