Referendum brings chance of electoral certainty

HIGH on the agenda for those who have a passion for politics, a cause for bemusement for those who do not, the issue of island-wide voting will return with a flourish during this political term.

In many ways it is something of a sideshow given that this is a States that is facing up to a multi-million-pound structural deficit at a time when the wider economy is fragile, a States that needs to decide on the future of secondary education and one that finally needs to put the waste strategy to bed.

There is, though, no doubt that debating the electoral system has a magical allure on each Assembly, like the moth heading towards the light, and that this one should be able to put the argument to bed.

Members of the States Assembly and Constitution Committee, who will lead on the issue, have different views on the pros and cons of different systems, which is something that will be reflected in the wider chamber and among the public.

The committee agrees that the forthcoming referendum should be binding, anything else would indeed make a mockery of holding the vote in the first place.

And that is where the certainty ends, because despite the instruction from the last States that it should be a question of whether to have a vote for all members in one go or retain the current system, the tinkering nature of politicians looks likely to come into play.

Proponents of island-wide voting argue that it will increase public engagement and provide for greater accountability – and, indeed, simply having a mid-term referendum could serve as a catalyst for the former, although it will be interesting to see how much people care about how they vote for their States members compared with who they vote for.

Those that are against island-wide voting point to the administrative problems, the sheer weight of material to wade through to be able to cast a vote. Will the electorate be able to make informed choices, or will they just be making choices? If it is the latter there could be a profound democratic impact.

The danger with the referendum is for there to be any uncertainty or ambiguity in the air about the options being offered.

With 38 States members there are probably 38 different systems that they would want to get on the ballot, whatever the last Assembly voted for.

Already the argument for super-districts has been firmly put in the public domain. Expect some to want some form of parish representation to continue in any number of different formats. Some would want the number of States members cut before any decision is made. Golden votes, proportional representation, party politics, an island-wide presidential vote – the list goes on.

Whatever Sacc's report states – and it should be a pretty simple choice between a) status quo and b) full island-wide voting – it will become an agent for a much wider debate, again.

This States needs to be clear about what it favours, the more options that appear the more likely the referendum result becomes closer and the binding nature becomes more questionable.

What if the result came down to decimal points on a low turnout on a vote held on a dark, cold and wet, winter mid-week day?

Of course, it is in the gift of the committee and deputies to ensure this scenario does not happen.

It is also in their gift to ensure an engaging debate to boost turnout.

Once the question is decided on, the expectation must be that funded support campaigns unfold using all the tools a modern political system allows – from the traditional poster campaigns and public meetings to the use of social media and perhaps even a Saturday vote.

The trouble for those with rose-tinted spectacles dreaming of a Brexit-style fever to sweep over Guernsey is that the choice is fairly mundane, the arguments well worn after being aired for decades.

Compare this to a referendum on ending selection, for instance – now, that would be one heck of a passionate debate.

Island-wide voting will probably win because to many people it just feels right, or it at least feels like we should give it a go to see if it works.

Every general election brings with it a new swathe of deputies campaigning for an island-wide mandate, although their enthusiasm tends to wane as they get embedded over the years and the reality of the tasks facing government, and of keeping their seats, takes over.

At some point the States needs to stop meddling in both the system of government and the way of electing it to create some continuity and certainty.

This referendum offers the opportunity to do just that.

It is also a topic that should be one of those metaphorical low-hanging fruit people are so fond of picking, an inherited issue that really should be dealt with now at a time when the political agenda is quiet rather than when things get more frantic and it can get lost among the noise.

It won't be because the deadline is ultimately three or four years away, and Sacc by its nature is a very cautious body.

Allied to that is the lack of resolution of the general referendum law itself, which has never been finalised because Frossard House has tied itself in a decade-long knot about its wording.

Island-wide voting will cast its long shadow over this Assembly just as it has to others in the past.