The time has come for an electronic vote

Not only will they miss the regular votes ‘de vive voix’ – the shouted ‘pour’ or ‘contre’ response to a proposition, but also a regular debate on the topic.

The policy letter to be considered by deputies charts a history of these debates back to 2002 and the issue has rumbled on outside of the Chamber for many more years than that. Former deputy Mary Lowe, one of the key people pushing for electronic voting for many years, dates it to 1999.

A lesson to government that can be learned from its procrastination over the decades is that of cost. Implementation of simultaneous electronic voting back in 2011 would have cost the taxpayer an estimated £20,000.

Now, if approved next month, the move is likely to cost government £73,000 in its first year and a total of £109,000 over a three-year introduction period.

Some will balk at the figures for what is likely to be cost saving of a few minutes per meeting, arguably less than the length of a standard speech.

Others will be supportive of the move for the added transparency it would bring to States proceedings and to the actions of individual deputies. The permanent record of results, which one supposes would be easily accessible, would hold States members accountable.

Government has done much to improve the way that States meetings are made available to the public who may not have the ability to listen in all day. Now recordings are available during and after sessions, proceedings are updated and recorded on the States website, and voters can follow debates through Twitter.

But in instances of debates being decided de vive voix – which happens much more rarely now Deputy Lester Queripel repeatedly asks for recorded votes – still forever leave voters in the dark on who supported what.

Much is made at present of transparency in politics. With money allocated and priority given to this project in the Government Work Plan, it feels like a project whose time has come.