I wasn’t the ‘midwife’ of current island-wide electoral system

I am delighted that my recent column on the perils of cabinet government spooked the supporters of such a system to the extent that two of them felt the need to defend the idea via the Press’s letter page. Of course they are completely free to advocate putting all of Guernsey’s political power in just a few hands. People are always entitled to their own opinions, but what they are not entitled to are their own facts.

To portray me as the ‘midwife’ of our current island-wide electoral system is not only 100% wrong but downright mischievous. The reality is the complete opposite. I have often been lambasted over the years for defending the use of districts in local elections, and warning that IWV risked putting too much distance between voters and candidates/deputies.

Yes the States, when I wasn’t even a member, decided to have a referendum on IWV. Yes I was president of Sacc when accordingly we, very efficiently, carried out Guernsey’s first ever referendum. However it was the States Assembly itself, not Sacc, which decided on the options which would appear on the ballot paper. These included several versions of IWV, from hybrid models to rolling elections, not just 38 votes for 38 deputies.

That system, which I always warned would make it impossible for voters to properly appraise all of the candidates, was dubbed Option A. It was officially promoted by Deputies Ferbrache and Meerveld, and they are to be congratulated on convincing the majority of the Guernsey public that was the option to pick.

I can [thankfully] take no credit for our current electoral system. The fact that supporters of cabinet government are reduced to suggesting otherwise rather suggests they would prefer to move the argument off the issue itself. I can well understand why.

Peter Roffey
St Andrew’s