Too much time on their hands
ANYONE who has listened to a States debate will have some sympathy for a new proposal to limit the length of members’ speeches.
Some deputies take a long time to say nothing very much, there is frequent digression and repetition, and debates can meander aimlessly long after the outcome is clear.
However, Deputy Steve Falla’s amendment to impose a 15-minute limit on most speeches will do nothing to inject greater discipline or more focus into States debates, nor will it make our representatives better speakers.
It could be counter-productive, if 15 minutes comes to be seen as an allocation rather than a limit.
It would curtail the best speakers as well as the worst. Some of the finest and most influential speeches ever heard in the States have lasted longer than 15 minutes, sometimes much longer.
The proposal exempts committee presidents’ opening speeches on policy letters, which would allow them the freedom to develop their arguments fully – sometimes just by reading out speeches prepared by officials – while restricting others, for example those with amendments, from doing the same.
It would also allow the Bailiff to set different time limits for different debates, and even vary time limits on different speakers within the same debate, which is certainly not the presiding officer's role. It shouldn't need a long debate to kick out this idea.