ELECTIONS AND REFORM: SMALL BRANCH VIEW
of political parties is, in fact, a fundamental weakness which actively and obviously is a barrier to good governance. In most parliamentary systems, the political party structure gives shape and discipline to the governance of the State; this politicisation of the functions of the State brings with it many advantages, including strong leadership, discipline, and a holistic and principled approach to policy-making, continuity and accountability to the electorate for the conduct of government.
The election of ten
independent and non-aligned individuals, as in the case of Alderney, brings none of these advantages and, indeed, might be said to bring about the very opposite characteristics to those offered by the party system. It is difficult for one individual to assert him or herself as a ‘leader’; it often proves difficult for independent members who have been elected on what they see as their ‘personal mandate’ to accept the authority of one of their number who has simply been similarly elected - the
concept of ‘first amongst equals’ is difficult to impose, where there is no rules-based structure in place for the absolute determination of who is to be ‘first’.
Similarly, any potential leader of the group of ten equals does not find it easy to forge a consensus around what might well be ten opposing or disparate views. In practice, therefore, whilst in Alderney we have seen many attempts at the assertion of leadership by one individual or another, these ‘de facto governments’ are almost always short-lived because of a refusal of the majority of the group to voluntarily recognise that particular leader’s authority; his or her authority is inevitably undermined by the ease with which it can be ‘removed’. An ‘agreed programme for government’ - which would naturally result from a conventional political party based election - simply does not materialise in a new assembly of ten independent members. The States can only develop policies in an ad-hoc, unstructured and haphazard way; most importantly,
there is no guiding principle or philosophy which shapes and forms policy-making to produce a consistent, coherent and holistic ‘joined-up’ programme of government. Policy-making becomes, almost by default, entirely personality based, lurching from one ‘issue’ to another, each in its own silo and is subject to the vagaries of populist mood-swings (by which, as it happens, independent and non-aligned representatives seem to have an unfortunate tendency to be greatly influenced).
Perhaps, most obviously, the ten independent representatives are not, in any meaningful way, really accountable to the electorate for poor governance. A political party, if it is granted power, will stand or fall by its record in office and its ability to deliver upon its published manifesto; it is granted a mandate to deliver the policies which the electorate deemed the most attractive of those on offer and is fully accountable to the electorate as a result. Any one independent representative in a government of ten similarly
elected representatives has no such responsibility since he or she is but one of ten who are equally accountable for, but can just as easily abdicate personal responsibility for, whatever the failures of the government of the day. ‘What could I do? I was but one loan voice’ is a very easy response on the doorstep when faced with a disillusioned voter when seeking re-election. The absence of political parties in Government may seem to those who have not experienced it, an attractive proposition. Too many who have experienced it, however, as we in Alderney do, it is anything but. The political party system remains as relevant and essential to effective democratic government today as it was 300 years ago when Edmond Burke became its first notable advocate.
The Channel Islands electorates would do well to adopt, albeit somewhat belatedly, a more Burkean approach to representative government; on Alderney at least, it would be the key to unlocking the hitherto hidden economic potential of the Island.
Election spending There is no limitation on expenses spending by individuals in elections. In practice, candidates confine themselves to modest stationery and postage costs to ensure their election manifestoes are widely distributed, though in truth the two local ‘news sheets’, The Alderney Journal and The Alderney Press (bi-weekly publications) print the candidates manifestoes. Establishment of political parties would clearly change this dynamic.
Opinion Polls
Opinion polls play no part in the run up to the elections. However, there is always speculative
174 | The Parliamentarian | 2015: Issue Three
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104