Police law changed in time it takes to watch a soap

JUST half an hour.

In the time it takes to watch an episode of EastEnders, a small group of politicians in Guernsey changed the law that governs how long the cops can hold you on bail without charge.

The rights and wrongs about the move are not the issue, rather the fact that fundamental changes can be considered without the full context of the whole law and in less time than it takes to finish half a game of football.

It is the States' legislative process at its worst, but just a microcosm of a disease that has infected those that we elect to govern us.

Give a deputy a policy letter on upgrading an airport runway, building a school or introducing bowel cancer screening and they are full engaged.

Give them a major law change and the vast majority turn into the nodding dog from the Churchill advert: yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

Perhaps it is not so bad when they are discussing the policy change that will lead to a new or revised law, but when that law comes back that nod begins again.

Only one projet de loi, the main law, has provoked any kind of scrutiny by this States.

That was the inheritance law and debate was sparked only because of a late intervention by concerned advocates.

There is a whole apathy that has seeped into the legislative process.

Not even those whom the public may rely on to be skilled enough to scrutinise what the States is doing - the advocates - seem publicly to play a significant role in provoking the debate that is so important in a democracy.

And then what of the Legislation Select Committee - the small group of deputies referred to at the start?

It has become nothing more than a proofreading committee that ensures no one has slipped in anything outrageous in the drafting process of a law before it reaches the debating chamber.

Which is a travesty, because the committee could have a role in ensuring the laws that govern Guernsey fit with the society that has developed.

It could identify shortcomings, areas where the laws are running behind popular modern thought - take the age of gay consent, for instance.

At the moment there is a sense of drag in the whole process.

Some of the laissez-faire attitude to the legislative function of the States could be down to the lack of legal professionals among the political class - but then again, there are those with a legal background even if they were not trained advocates.

Mind, good laws are rarely sexy enough to win votes - shiny buildings just may be.

There also appears to be a fundamental misunderstanding, or perhaps a wilful one at times, about a deputy's role in the legal process.

The public has been at times outraged with disproportionate sentences handed down by the courts.

Judicial independence is crucial, but when a deputy argues there is nothing they can do - as they have over issues such as sentencing of paedophiles - they are doing democracy a disservice.

Deputies are the law-makers and the sentencing guidelines the judge must follow are in their hands.

If they do not think that minor drug users should be locked up for more time than someone found guilty of a serious assault, they can change those guidelines.

Part of the problem with getting an engagement with the legislative process is understanding, some of it the lack of transparency or accessibility.

The Privy Council - which has to sign off Guernsey's primary legislation, principally to ensure it fits with international standards and will not embarrass the UK - is an archaic and opaque body. It recently introduced new guidelines so that anyone who wants to object to a local law by way of a petition will have a time limit in which to do so.

It would not be unfair to suggest that relatively few know about this process, but it again is a key democratic right - the ticking clock has been brought in to bring certainty to the decision-making.

The change means staff for the Committee of Council for the Affairs of Jersey and Guernsey, a Privy Council committee that includes Ken Clarke, Nick Clegg and Lord McNally, will not complete their work on a new or revised law only for a last-minute petition to come in and the whole thing needing to be reconsidered.

All good so far.

But sadly, how many people know what laws are currently waiting for Privy Council approval? There is no published list - and attempts to find out may lead you into an embarrassing game of ping pong between different departments.

The same goes for laws that have been through the whole process but are not yet enacted - maybe for resource reasons, as with Jersey's freedom of information law.

Some have argued for Guernsey to take on more law-making powers - even as far as having its own equivalent of the Privy Council as the backstop for local legislation.

It would certainly give it more control of the prioritisation process.

A Policy Council group now advises the Law Officers on which pieces of legislation should be prioritised for drafting.

But history has shown that laws the island makes with a sense of urgency, such as the medicines law to close loopholes that had attracted unwanted attention, may not be given the same level of priority once they reach the UK, even if there is a dialogue asking for certain items to be up the pecking order.

There are suspicions that the UK uses its power to slow or withhold consent as a tool with which to lever the island - the process is not free from political interference.

But Guernsey's legislative independence is a slow, evolutionary process.

The Ministry of Justice, in response to a Justice Select Committee report, has suggested steps of reform, including Guernsey doing more of the work on showing how laws comply with international standards.

Other jurisdictions have different answers to the legislative process.

They include second readings, where a proposed law is gone through line by line - a time-consuming process.

As Guernsey becomes more of a player on the international stage, and with it becomes more internationally aware, it can do more to take control of the legislative process.

But it also needs to do more domestically to capture the mood of modern society.