The Next Chief Minister: A Comment

Voting Trends

10 members have signed Senator Gorst’s nomination paper: Constable Deidre Mezbourian, Constable Simon Crowcroft, Senator-elect Steve Pallett, Deputy Richard Renouf, Deputy Richard Rondel, Senator-elect Kristina Moore, Deputy Scott Wickenden, Deputy Susie Pinel, Deputy Graham Truscott, and Constable Philip Le Sueur.

15 members have signed Senator-elect John Le Fondré’s paper: Deputy-elect Lindsay Ash, Constable-elect Richard Buchanan, Senator Sarah Ferguson, Deputy-elect Gregory Guida, Deputy-elect Rowland Huelin, Constable-elect Mike Jackson, Deputy David Johnson, Constable-elect John Le Bailly, Constable John Le Maistre, Deputy Kevin Lewis, Constable-elect Karen Stone, Deputy Judy Martin, Constable Chris Taylor, Constable-elect Richard Vibert, and Deputy-elect John Young.

It is interesting to notice how Ian Gorst’s nomination paper contains mainly existing Ministers or Assistant Ministers, and I know that at least one Assistant Minister, Graham Truscott openly has declared at hustings that he would like to move to a Ministry, perhaps economic development.

It’s a very safe set of choices, and it could be argued that with the demise of many experienced politicians (although I think the house is the richer for the loss of some), Ian Gorst is putting together the main talents remaining, and who know the ropes within Ministerial government.

On the other hand, this could be seen as a sign for “no change”, as the same old faces will be mainly those who see again, with a few elevations among the rank and file.

In “Yes Minister”, a very well known aspect of spending a long time in one post is where the Minister is said to have “gone native”. This is political jargon to describe that a Minister is acting in service of the Civil Service and not in service of the party or public. In the civil service such a minister is called house-trained.

That certainly happens in the UK Parliament, and is acknowledged as such. Clearly there are cases when this is the case in Jersey – for example Chief Officer Mike King appears to have had the support of several Ministers with disastrous results in the case of the Fantasy Film or the States Innovation Fund, and the outcomes from following his advice were regularly defended by his Ministers.

How many of the existing bunch can be said to be house-trained and to what extent is a matter of speculation, and Charlie Parker’s reforms will certainly attempt to shake things up behind the scenes and prevent petty fiefdoms run by some Chief Officers – to be fair, some are extremely good, but some, as has been seen, have been running their own little Empires. One attempt to crack this was Collective responsibility, but trying to fix the top when the machinery below was broken down was never going to work.

John le Fondré’s nominations – rather more than Senator Gorst – are interesting because of the political range they encompass (note Judy Martin there) as well as being a lot of new States members alongside the old. Not one of Ian Gorst’s names come from the new intake, and it is rather a slap in the face to the electorate in terms of real change.

It could be argued that John Le Fondré’s supporters, should he be successful, will be inexperienced as Ministers, but the UK manages that perfectly well with a change of party, and it would be perverse to make the case that Jersey cannot manage, especially as there are some talented individuals on the Le Fondré side.

This is clearly a push for a fresh start rather than more of the same. Continuity versus change: this is the real challenge facing the States when they reconvene to vote for a new Chief Minister.

One final note – the end result could be very close, within five votes, in which Reform – if they vote as a block – could actually determine the outcome. At present their supporters on social media seem rather hung up about John le Fondré supporting debate of an amendment to the Gay Marriage law.

But it would be a cardinal mistake to decide matters on a single issue, and when four years hangs in the balance, one which the electorate might not be that forgiving about.