Guernsey Press

Break the chains that bind to stop the political meddling

GUERNSEY has to decide whether it remains a willing plaything for UK MPs to kick around or it finally takes full control of its own destiny.

Published
House of Commons (24103562)

It has for the last decade been slowly inching down a path of increased self-determination, but never without the confidence or perceived necessity to move at anything more than the pace of a proverbial snail.

In tandem to work on things such as the ability to sign off some international agreements in its own right, closer ties have been established with Jersey but without a clearly articulated or agreed vision as to what the final destination of that work may be.

The island and the other Crown Dependencies have been dwelling in a false sense of confidence that their unique constitutional position protected them from UK interference unless it was on the most dramatic of grounds – corruption in the government, public rioting on the streets of St Peter Port.

But it is a position based on opinions and interpretation – opinions and interpretation that has never been truly tested – that we see vividly now can shift with the political whims of people we have no role in electing.

That is a democratic deficit that cannot be allowed to remain.

Our States may be at times idiotic, but they are our idiots, and we have the power to do something about them.

Watching MPs in parliament moving to act like a colonial power of old and legislate for Guernsey over public registers of beneficial ownership shows that nothing is out of bounds.

Journalists and politicians alike have a tendency to hyperbole, but the description of this as a constitutional crisis is fully justified.

Guernsey was only saved from this interference by the government pulling the financial services bill to buy more time, but time does not solve the problem and certainly has not shifted the position of the MPs wielding their size nine boots to stomp all over us.

Dame Margaret Hodge and Andrew Mitchell have subtly shifted their position and reframed the argument on why they believe the UK has the power to impose its will – it is now about national security for the UK and good governance for the islands.

That is open to challenge, but given the political climate it will be through the courts.

They rely, as others have, on the Kilbrandon report, which set out the constitutional position of the United Kingdom and the British Isles back in 1973.

But constitutional relationships, especially those that have never been written down but established through convention, shift as society changes.

The world of March 2019 is clearly not the world of 1973.

Just look at the powers that Scotland and Wales now have, what Brexit is doing to tear relationships with the European Union and by extension the islands apart, the agreements that the UK has signed with the islands and the documents they have published since 2010 outlining the relationship.

But these reports from the Justice Select Committee and Ministry of Justice we can now see are barely worth the paper they are written on.

They are factsheets, not binding agreements. No one has dared tread into the murky world of the Crown Dependencies not consenting to the parliament’s will, parking that in the hypothetical tray.

That remains a folly – it is like turning away from a fire in the hope it will put itself out but in the meantime everything of value burns.

And there are things of value in the current relationship.

Guernsey needs intentional representation, it needs a voice at many tables it would be excluded from without the UK being there.

In the absence of setting something new up, it needs a mechanism provided by the Privy Council for ensuring the principal laws it passes are in accordance with international standards.

But do these things need to be done in the current way – is the relationship robust enough to stand up to the tests of the political climate both now and in the future?

Even in the unlikely scenario the beneficial ownership issue is kicked into touch, we will find ourselves in this situation again unless we are willing to act to break the chains that bind and set out a new vision.

Be bold. Be brave. Most of all don’t stand still and hope for the best.

Almost exactly five years ago, the UK government said that as long as the existing constitutional relationship remained in place there were limits to what the Crown Dependencies can expect in terms of increased autonomy.

Scratch beneath the surface of the political grandstanding in recent years about our autonomy and independence and you quickly see that it has been much more about words and creating an impression than it has been about concrete progress.

As an island we are still being led rather than leading.

There has always been a strong case for a confederation with Jersey as a way of enhancing both islands’ standings, but those of us with those views have remained in a minority of a minority.

If work had started in earnest on this a decade ago when it was being discussed around conference tables thanks to the Jersey and Guernsey Law Review, we would be well prepared to fundamentally shift in response to the UK’s overreach.

As it is, we could well find ourselves acting in a time of crisis.

The answer that comes back from any court challenge to establish where the UK’s powers start and stop may not be favourable, but it would be the spark to establish a much more assured place in the world and create a much more robust position to defend ourselves from.

In broadbrush terms a confederation is the co-ordination of powers between two separate states – in this case the two Bailiwicks.

It could lead to significant financial savings by avoiding duplication and having proper co-ordination of services.

We already see the roots of this, in regulation for example, but really we have not progressed because there has never been an agreed shared vision or roadmap.

Internationally, more often than not the Channel Islands are having to speak with a shared voice – for example on beneficial ownership, on the EU tax blacklist and on the implications of Brexit.

There are areas where it will be beneficial to have a law that covers both islands rather than the constant rush to go down slightly separate routes with all the costs and time involved in that. A single Channel Islands court of appeal would have to be established – but remember already that judges from both islands sit in the other.

Decisions would need to be made on where the role of the confederation begins and ends and what political structure would need to be in place to allow that to happen, how that would be elected, even whether Guernsey’s consensus model of government could be compatible.

Much of the talk about how to make Guernsey’s government better has in recent years been all about looking inwards, but this has blinded many to the real threat and driver for fundamental change from across the water, both looking north in the UK and south in Europe.

Both islands need to protect their sovereignty.

Once you have established the institutions and structure – and confederation is only one of the options – you then have the foundations for independence from UK political interference.