THE CHALLENGES FACING SMALL LEGISLATURES IN THE COMMONWEALTH
Roles and responsibilities within the States Assembly may also strike the observer as being similar to those seen in large Legislatures. There are Ministers and junior Ministers; scrutiny Chairs and Opposition Party Members; and a Presiding Officer and a deputy. The differences between large and small Legislatures might seem to come down to two factors: the number of elected Members and local culture. A study in Jersey in 2013 concluded that the States Assembly needed at least 42 Members in order to discharge the full range of parliamentary functions – including both Ministerial and scrutiny roles. This conclusion assumes that all of the Members are fit and well and want to take up formal roles in the Legislature: my experience suggests that the actual minimum is a little higher. When a Legislature is smaller, the number of Ministerial and scrutiny roles must be reduced. In many cases, scrutiny is disproportionately affected. Even with 49 Members, the Jersey States Assembly could not replicate aspects of the larger Westminster system. Scrutiny Committees are much smaller than in London and have broader remits. While some Ministers have one or two busy Assistant Ministers, others effectively operate on their own. Visitors notice the speed with which the Assembly passes legislation, which is largely because legislation is not remitted to a Committee for line-by-line scrutiny, another consequence of a small membership. Other differences reflect local quirks. The UK House of Commons starts each day with the Speaker’s procession and the cry ‘Hat’s off, Strangers!’. In Jersey, each sitting starts with a roll call and prayers, in French, and sometimes a dispute about a Member’s reason for absence. French and the local language, Jerriais, can be spoken in the Chamber, usually sparking complaints from Members who speak neither. The Island’s Lieutenant Governor (the official representative of the Crown) has a seat in the Assembly, next to the Presiding Officer, and by convention is permitted to speak twice, at their first meeting and their last. It can be tempting to think that these differences are relatively superficial and hide the fact that the majority of Commonwealth Legislatures operate on similar lines to the ‘Westminster model’. However, to think in these terms would be mistaken. The similarities between Legislatures often obscure more than they illuminate. Careful attention should be paid to the differences between Legislatures as they reflect important differences in political cultures. Going back to Jersey, the most obvious physical difference between the States Chamber and the UK House of Commons (other than their size) is that the Jersey Members sit in a hemicycle, with the different classes of Member (Senators, Constables and Deputies) occupying different spaces in the room. Members cannot necessarily sit with political allies, and Ministers do not all sit together, as there are strict rules about how seating is allocated. The hierarchy of Members is no accident, it is based on the ancient concept of bringing together the three estates (land, church and law) to advise the Bailiff (also the Island’s Chief Justice) on questions of civil government. The hemicycle was a new feature when the Chamber was designed in the 1880s. Before that, Members sat in the Royal Court, in spaces reserved for the different classes of Member of the time. Guernsey’s Legislature still meets in their Royal Court. However, the hemicycle accommodates and encourages the Island’s consensual political culture, which tends to steer clear of outright political conflict in search of compromise. This is a far cry from Westminster, where the design of the Chamber recognises
150 | The Parliamentarian | 2022: Issue Two | 100 years of publishing
and encourages conflict and where the concept of a loyal Opposition, constantly challenging Ministers in the interest of good governance, goes back to the early nineteenth century. Jersey has a weak system of party politics. Only five Members were elected to the current Assembly on a party ticket and, although new parties have since emerged, no party is standing sufficient candidates at the recent election to come close to forming a government. Last year, the Assembly published a fascinating study by the Centre for Small States1 on how its rules and procedures might need to adapt to reflect party politics. The report is available on the Jersey States Assembly website2 (www.gov.je). A striking conclusion of this work was that party systems in small jurisdictions are often weak, transient, or reflect personalities rather than ideology. Applying rules which work for party politics in countries with long traditions of competition between stable parties will not necessarily work in small jurisdictions. Members in large jurisdictions are invariably very busy and often have to look after the interests of enormous constituencies, far, far bigger than Jersey. However, politicians in small jurisdictions also must deal with difficult casework and master complex legislation and policy problems. They often do so without staff support and, certainly in the case of Jersey, without party whips to advise on how to vote or an active civil society, providing arguments for and against the issues coming up for debate. Providing appropriate resourcing and pastoral support for politicians in small jurisdictions is a difficult issue which needs to be urgently addressed. Finally, parliamentary ethics can look very different in small places when compared to large jurisdictions. In Jersey there is enormous emphasis on which pieces of land Members might have an interest in, reflecting the importance of land use in a small island. At the same time, the implications of making comprehensive declarations of interest in a small society where ‘everyone knows everyone’ are different from the situation in bigger places. Balancing privacy, particularly of family members, and appropriate management of conflicts of interest is complex, as I know well from the time it took to complete reform of Jersey’s rules on the registration and declaration of interests earlier this year. The CPA is to be commended for its work in invigorating the CPA Small Branches network, emphasising the importance of benchmarking and creating the CPA Parliamentary Academy, to help smaller Legislatures strengthen and become more effective. This work is essential to defend and promote democratic politics across the globe. Recognising the specific challenges of smaller jurisdictions and the importance of understanding the relationship between political culture and how Parliaments work is crucial. I would also like to put a word in for my former colleagues running small Legislatures, who often do so on a shoestring budget and with small teams. Inevitably, Clerks must focus first on the day-to-day, week-to-week running of their Legislature. How can they find time and mental energy to rewrite Codes of Conduct or Standing Orders or legislation on privilege? Again, the CPA is doing some good work in this area, but I think there is a lot more to do. References: 1 2
Centre for Small States - www.centreforsmallstates.com R.165-2021 How might Standing Orders of the States of Jersey respond
to the formation of political parties? - https://statesassembly.gov.je/ assemblyreports/2021/r.165-2021.pdf