The Scrutiny Management Committee carried out a thorough review of the electoral system in the previous States term. Why does your States Assembly & Constitution Committee need to carry out another one now?
We’ve had another election. We can test people’s experiences of the latest election and compare them with the previous election. Now that people have settled into the idea of island-wide voting, did they find it more favourable, were there things that worked better for them this time around, and were there things that we did differently? As a result of this system, people change their behaviour, so has that shifted, are they happier, are there people who were unhappy with the results of the 2020 election but are happier with the results of the 2025 election, and therefore now think the system is acceptable?
Might your committee propose scrapping island-wide voting in whole or in part?
That’s not off the table if that was something that came out of the review, but equally it’s not just a case of us definitely getting rid of island-wide voting. There is no predetermined outcome. We have to take a step back and ask what is working and what is going to help us move forward.
Do previous voting records not suggest that the majority of Sacc members are sceptical about the current electoral system?
It’s fair to say that, and I include myself in that. I didn’t vote for island-wide voting and I was very sceptical that it would work.
In order to make island-wide voting as accessible as possible, we have to do a lot of mitigating and that’s very expensive, but you can’t overlook that we had a referendum and people voted for this system. That’s why you go to the public and find out if it’s working for them rather than leaping to conclusions.
That’s what makes a good politician – not just leaping to your own conclusions about what works, but marrying the practicalities of what works with how people feel about what works, and listening to people and taking account of everybody’s opinion and balancing those opinions.
The previous States approved a budget of £50,000 to fund election observers from the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Why does the taxpayer need to pay £50,000 to tell us what we already knew?
It’s a good question. This was the first opportunity to have election observers on the ground for an island-wide election. In some ways the report was disappointing because it didn’t show us anything that we didn’t know already, but you can say that in hindsight.
I think there was a case for having the observers. If we didn’t change the system in 2029, I would say the case for having them probably would not be warranted. But if we change the system, then in a mature democracy it’s a cost of assuring ourselves that we are doing things correctly.
Guernsey has run its own elections for decades. Why does Sacc want to set up a new independent body to organise and oversee elections?
Island-wide voting has centralised everything and taken functions away from the parishes, creating an awkward no-man’s land around elections. We really shouldn’t have the government involved in the election process, such as running the booklet of manifestos. In order to fix that, having an electoral body makes sense.
There is a by-election coming up and your husband, from whom you are separated, has said he will stand. Would it be awkward if he was elected?
I’m sure it would be, but we’re both professionals, or I certainly am. If that’s the case, we’ll just get on with it.
You work under Deputy Neil Inder as president of the Development & Planning Authority. You have had an interesting political relationship with him in the past. Are you now working well together on that committee or are you longing for the day when you can find a reason to get out?
I am pleasantly surprised by how well we have got on at the DPA. We’ve just sort of settled in and Deputy Inder’s doing a really good job.
You are also a member of the Education, Sport & Culture Committee. In your 2025 election manifesto, you were critical about the secondary school model agreed by the previous States, you said there was unhelpful uncertainty surrounding sixth form studies, school governance boards were toothless, the primary schools’ review had been kicked into the long grass, and a draft new education law was on a shelf gathering dust. Nine months later, all of that criticism could be applied to the committee on which you sit, could it not?
Absolutely, but I’m now inside the tent working on those things. There is some stability in the secondary sector at the moment.
The long-term home of sixth form studies, and how that fits in with the rest of the estate, is being worked on at the moment. In dealing with each of the things I criticised, I’m bringing that perspective and pushing for things to shift and change.
When you’re in the room and presented with options, you can constantly ask whether there is efficiency, ask to see the workings, and ask questions of officials outside the public gaze.
We have these big public debates about education and, over the past two decades, we’ve made a lot of decisions that have gone backwards and forwards and created uncertainty. The most important thing now is to be absolutely thorough exploring every single option, which has created a much better decision-making process.
When do you think the committee will be in a position to make an announcement about the recommended long-term model for sixth form education in the States sector?
There isn’t a date. We need to make that decision carefully and with a lot of buy-in from other States members and the profession.
We are being really careful and exploring the options really thoroughly. I would imagine it would be months rather than years, but I’m not giving you a time. If you take any option off the table at this case, I think it would be irresponsible.
Les Ozouets is still one of the options we’re looking at. La Mare de Carteret long-term you could almost take off the table, but it has remained as an option to look at because no stone is being left unturned.
In your 2025 election manifesto, you said you wanted to help restore trust and drive genuine reform, and only then should the public be asked to pay any new form of taxation. Do you think the States will soon be in that position?
I think we’re getting there with the work around public sector reform and shifting the process of budgeting.
The piece of work that is missing is restoring trust. I don’t see that happening before we have to make the decision [on the deficit] but we have to make the decision. There is a lot of heavy lifting that Policy & Resources is going to have to do to make the case. I have trust that we will be in a position to make a decision and explain it properly to the electorate.