The most important constitutional debate for years

DEPUTY GAVIN ST PIER and Deputy Scott Ogier have put in an amendment to the requete on island-wide voting, which effectively gives voters in each of the seven electoral districts the opportunity to use up to two of their votes for candidates in other electoral districts.

This proposal is pure tokenism and does nothing to address the issue of giving islanders the right to vote in all members of their government, as proposed by the requete.

These two deputies are letting their electors down because they had said at the election they supported IWV.

Their proposals do not give electors any more votes than they have at present and are in fact an encouragement for electors to not use all their district election votes, which is irresponsible. Electors should be encouraged to use all their votes in a district.

Currently their proposals are an insult to the electors.

What would happen in a by-election? Would all islanders be able to vote in a district by-election?

Would Alderney voters be able to vote island-wide? They used to, so why take away this democratic right?

If these deputies want to make a realistic amendment, they will propose that electors have their six or seven votes in their respective districts, but are given an additional 20 votes to use on an island-wide basis for candidates in other electoral districts. This would enable all islanders to at least vote in over half their States members. They would not have to use all their 26/7 votes but the key point is that they would have the right to do so. The electors could then at least claim some form of ownership of the States.

This would not be as democratic as the public having the right to vote in all 45/47 States members, which is the option most people, including me, want, but at least it would be a step in the right direction.

In the 1997 Guernsey elections, St Peter Port electors, for example, had the right to vote for nine deputies and six island-wide-elected conseillers, having voted for six other conseillers in 1994, so they voted in 21 of the then States members.

This was much better than we have at present, but it still was not voting for a majority, or all, of our States members.

In a nutshell, the problem we have at the moment is that if public confidence in the States is to be restored, it is imperative to give people ownership of their States. That ideally means supporting the requete, but the only other barely acceptable option which could be considered is the one I have mentioned.

The views put forward by Deputy Scott Ogier against IWV frankly do not stand up to scrutiny:

People do not necessarily expect or want a knock on the door from candidates.

That option is always available (as it is with IWV), but more modern technological means of electioneering are becoming the norm now.

The vast majority of electors do not attend hustings meetings, but with IWV there are simply more of them for those voters who wish to attend them.

There will not necessarily be more candidates with IWV (which would be better choice for electors anyway).

It is likely that IWV will encourage fewer candidates, but of a higher quality and broader diversity more accurately reflecting the make-up of Guernsey's population.

The parish link, as described, only refers to the three parishes, St Sampson's, Vale and Castel, who have their own electoral districts, whereas St Peter Port is split into two electoral districts. Scott Ogier is forgetting that most parishes no longer have their own deputies. Indeed creating electoral districts on parish boundaries creates the electoral distortions we have now with some districts having six and some seven deputies.

There is nothing stopping IWV-elected politicians keeping their parish links. When I was a conseiller, I was invited to some of my parish douzaine meetings. However, the parish interests are best enhanced by protecting the powers of the individual parishes and the Guernsey Douzaine Council.

It is also not true that the best-known politicians would have more chance of being elected. This was demonstrated at the first conseiller elections in 1994, when a number of very-well-known politicians lost their seats.

Conversely, it is actually more likely that a well-known district politician will keep their seat in district elections than in IWV elections.

Finally, IWV is not too big or unwieldy to manage in Guernsey.

We have successfully managed large numbers of candidates before and other countries have successfully managed much larger election lists than we would be likely to have in Guernsey.

Those who don't want the people to choose their own government are trying to resist democratic change.

This certainly is the most constitutionally important debate in Guernsey for years and the outcome will affect the credibility of the States with the people of Guernsey. The States really needs to get this decision right.

TONY WEBBER.