Jersey has published a statement on External Relations this morning. Whilst its near neighbour Guernsey begins to realise just how fragile its economy (like Jersey's) is Jersey does instead decide its time to play fantasy politics.
And this document really does come from the realms of fantasy. For those old enough to recall the era, much of what Jersey claims would have seemed familiar to those used to the claims of the late Idi Amin of Uganda. Let's start with some of the corkers, like this:
Let's ignore 'Jersey: it's part in the submission of England' for a minute and lets turn instead to 1204. Who 'elected', might I ask? And what was the mandate? And could we have the election result? Even more important, can we have any evidence for this claim? (For those not familiar: there is not a shred of evidence that any of this is true. Jersey claims there is a 1204 Treaty of King John, its only problem being no one has a copy and no one has any evidence it ever existed). And as for the Seal - hasn't every market town got one of those too?
But let's move on to the next whopper:
Hang on! Jersey's a country? A quick check of the Oxford on line dictionary suggests a country is:
a nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory
Now I don't dispute Jersey is an identifiable territory. Unlike Sandy Island it does exist. But the claim that it has its own governemnt is a joke.
Jersey has a Bailiff appointed by the Crown (which is, of course, the UK government). And its attorney and solicitor generals are UK appointments - making clear where its judicial system is really located. Its supreme court is the Privy Council. It cannot pass any law without the permission of the UK, which is withheld when it so chooses. That's not a self governing place.
More than that though, Jersey is not democratic, It does not hold general elections. There is no party system, which is a sign of a democracy. There can be no change of government as a result of an election. Terms are not consistent between States members. This is no democracy as anyone would know it.
So is Jersey a self governing democratic country? No way!
Which makes all it says about its foreign policy a complete joke. As anyone from a real country reading these claims will realise.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Jersey has a Bailiff appointed by the Crown (which is, of course, the UK government). And its attorney and solicitor generals are UK appointments — making clear where its judicial system is really located.
Sorry Richard, not the case. The UK rubber-stamps the appointments, but the way it works is that once you become Solicitor-General, you will (unless you make some seriously bad enemies) progress to Attorney-General, Deputy Bailiff and Bailiff. The UK government cannot intervene by imposing its own candidate for these roles, simply because the legal system in the islands is different (based as it is on Norman customary law), and without meeting the qualifying requirements (admission to the Jersey Bar) no British lawyer could be considered for the post.
All I think the UK could do is veto a particular candidate – but I believe there is no precedent for doing so. The only recent case where a crown officer was removed (Vernon Tomes in the early 1990s) was done at the behest of Jersey government officials.
The Privy Council’s influence on Jersey law is not as large as you suggest. The last case where I know that British law was imposed over Jersey’s head was in 1947, and to my knowledge no Jersey legislation has ever been formally refused. (A good source book for this is a book by Luke Le Rendu – Jersey: Independent Dependency? (Ex-Libris, 2004))
The question of whether party government makes for democracy is a very interesting one, particularly following the recent US presidential elections!
Ah but James, formal structures do not show where the power lies
And if legisaltion is going to upset London it is changed to suit long before the conflict could arise
It’s all about power, that’s true. An interesting point, though is that if the power lies in the City, can they in practice (long before conflict arises) ensure that the UK govt allows the legislation they want? Is that what has in fact happenned historically?
formal structures do not show where the power lies
My point exactly 🙂
If you can get hold of the Kilbrandon report of 1973, it is reputedly a better representation of what actually happens, rather than what the law says.
James from Durham: recollection says that the City puts a man in Parliament – the City Remembrancer – to ensure that its historic privileges are not infringed.
so now as well as a retired accountand, an economist, and a tax expert, you are also a constitutional authority as well?
Who said I was retired?
I’m doing a client’s tax return this afternoon….
Richard, you never fail to surprise me, there is no beginning to your talents
Thank you
In case that was meant kindly
They don’t like it up ’em, do they Richard?
Jersey only choose to align itself to the English crown (not the English government ) because it did not want to pay certain taxes to France i believe death duties then they negotiated special privileges from King John but i suppose i could be wrong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_dependencies
I take it that, unlike me, you are an authority on the constitution of Jersey. Perhaps you could explain what this wikipedia article is about:
Jersey general election, 2011
Easy
You will note it was not a general election
Your next point is?
Some real counter argument would be appreciated
The BBC thought it was a general election. Why do you say they’re wrong?
Because not everyone was elected
Not easy to work out
Richard is right, the 2011 general election was not a general election! Six members of the Assembly did not face election. The standard term of office for two of the three types of States Members was 3 years, with the 12 Senators (who are elected by the whole island, rather than constituencies) elected for 6 years, with half of them elected every 3 years.
Though the number of Senators is being reduced to 8 so in 2014 there will be a general election. However, there is currently an Electoral Commission looking at shaking up the whole system so the whole make up of the States may change by then.
Richard, I don’t know how familiar you are with the minutia of Jerseys electoral system, but we do have 12 seats in our assembly that are reserved for the Connétables (basically our version of an elected mayor of a local authority), who by virtue of that role are also ex officio members of the assembly. According to European human rights law, ex officio members is not necessarily deemed to be undemocratic, but when you consider that the population of St Mary is 1,800 and the population of St Helier is 30,000 and both Connétables have the same voting power in the States, you suddenly realise that the whole system is gerrymandered so the country parishes hold a hugely disproportionate voting power to their population. And where do the rich in Jersey live? In the country parishes of course.
By no stretch of the English language can that be described as democratic.
The position of the Connétables is actually going to be put to referendum next year… Because some bright spark seems to think that if you have a vote on something undemocratic that makes it democratic! Wrong, of course.
Thanks for also saying what I’ve always thought about this 1204 myth. The only reason Jersey was granted autonomy by the English King was because that was the condition of the aristocracy for not siding with the French instead. He let them exploit the peasants without interference so long as they’d still join his wars. Hardly anything to get jingoistic about.
Keep up the good work!
Sam
I am pretty familiar with much of the detail in Jersey
Less in Guernsey, I admit
The first real General Election will occur in 2014 when all States Members face an election at the same time. As the BBC article notes 6 Senators were not up for election so technically it was not a “General Election” as is generally understood by the expression. It has taken a decade and more of hesitant reform to even reach this basic building block of democracy.
Jersey’s “managed democracy” incorporates elections but through a system that remains opaque except to insiders. The norm was three categories of States Members elected at different times for different periods. These rolling elections denied the electorate any policy choice or ability to structure the legislature in any meaningful way. That was part of the design – to prevent significant change.
As Richard notes there are no political parties. The opposition are so weak that the ruling group does not need to form a specific organisation to achieve its ends.
At the last election in 2011 the turnout was around 30% of the eligible electorate. In other words there is a legitimacy crisis with 60-70% voter abstention. Things are so bad that one category of States Members – that of Constable – saw 8 of 12 elected without facing a contested election (i.e. no one stood against them and they were elected unopposed). The locals barely recognise they have a problem and most are in denial, blinded as they are by insular prejudices.
Jersey is run like a Bank and banks are not democracies.
Thank you Richard
You have finally been honest enough to state that you aren’t familiar with the Guernsey system, which differs hugely from Jersey’s. Hopefully that will encourage you to stop assuming that we are anything like Jersey. We in Guernsey find that very offensive!
That’s disingenuous
Saying I was less familiar is not the same as saying unfamiliar
Please get facts right
It is incorrect to say jersey does not have a political party system. As you well know, one of your closest contacts in the island, Geoff Southern, who regularly receives information from you, and has, like yourself received financial assistance from the trade union movement, was until recently a member of the Jersey Democratic Alliance, a party who had at one point 3 members in government, before all left for various reasons.
There is nothing prohibiting a party from operating or standing in the island at all. It’s just that the majority of voters have failed to elect sufficient members to give them a majority in the past. That looks very much like democracy to me
I think the failure of the JDA is sure evidence of exactly what I said
I’m afraid you either know the reasons for the failure of the JDA and are being disingenuous, or if you don’t know, you will find it was the inability of the members to get along with each other which caused the failure, rather than any impediment in the island’s electoral system which prohibited party politics.
I suspect I know which, given your past and ongoing association with the departed leader of the party. I expect to be banned shortly for bringing up inconvenient truths.
I do know why it failed
It was a shame it did, but that’s life. In a place like Jersey commitment to party politics was hard
My point was Geoff has not failed, being consistently re-elected
That was the point I was making
Hi Richard,
Great article, thanks and if you need proof that we are not a democracy, look at the constables.Oh and wait for the trolls to arrive and start on you !
[…] in Jersey in the way that the government is seeking to achieve its goal of FATCA compliance. Last week Jersey claimed its foreign policy independence from the UK. If there’s one thing the document I have seen suggests it is that Jersey really has no […]