By Gavin St Pier
WHEN politicians attend Commonwealth Parliamentary Association events, they do so knowing that they will run the gauntlet of public opprobrium, with accompanying accusations of squandering public money on a jolly. I eschewed attending such events for many years, with a high-minded attitude that as a senior decision maker – when Treasury and then Chief Minister in Guernsey – I really did not have either the time or inclination to participate in such frippery.
An upside of not being in a senior government role is no longer having time consumed in endless meetings. So, with more time available, I have now participated in three gatherings of parliamentarians in the last year of so, as a result of which, I must admit I was wrong. It has been both humbling and highly instructive to look at government and its component parts through an entirely different lens. Through that lens, you realise that parliaments outside the Channel Islands are treated and regarded rather differently to those in the Channel Islands. This is partly a reflection, no doubt, of our Assemblies’ relatively recent development in the constitutional arrangements for the islands.
Prior to the Second World War, the Royal Courts held primacy. Politically they may no longer do so but socially, culturally and historically they still do, The concept of the separation of powers, attributed to Montesquieu, is not as clearly defined as elsewhere. That is why discussion over the role of the Bailiffs, the islands’ chief justices, as the presiding officer of our respective Assemblies is more controversial than perhaps it ought to be – and therein lies an article for another day.
Tynwald, the Isle of Man’s parliament, has ancient roots and claims to be the oldest continuous parliament, having been established by the Vikings in the 10th century. Its modern-day incarnation is a tricameral construct, with three houses: the House of Keys, the Legislative Council and the combination of the two, which is Tynwald itself. The directly elected members of the House of Keys are known as MHKs and the indirectly elected members of the Legislative Council carry the moniker MLC. Parliamentarians from Guernsey who do not have any chamber of their own, can only admire and envy the Manx parliament building, which has not one but three chambers for each of the constituent parts of Tynwald.
With the Isle of Man having hosted the annual meeting of the three islands’ parliamentarians in 2023, it was Jersey’s turn a couple of weeks ago to host this year’s gathering of the “Crown Dependency Network”. The open sharing, within a safe space, of the experiences, frustrations and practices by delegations from each of our three jurisdictions is educational and useful.
It was also interesting to experience the evolution of a debate which began in Douglas last year, on the margins of a discussion about the islands’ external representation and the perception of each of us from outside. In that discussion a year ago, the frustration of the use of the highly misleading term “Crown Dependency” was aired, given none of us are, or ever have been, dependent on anyone. Further, the term is not a legal term and has little historical standing, having been a relatively recent linguistic construct, shorthand in Whitehall for their convenience to bundle Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man together. Participants’ discussion last year readily agreed that language and the choice of words really does matter, as it shapes expectations and understanding.
Sir Philip Bailhache, not only as a current Deputy but also as a former Bailiff and External Relations Minister, picked up the cudgels when participating in a similar discussion at this year’s Network meeting. He has previously publicly expressed his preference for the use of the term “Crown Territory”, and made his case again. However, the use of the term “territory” found little favour with the Network, not least because of the risk of incorrect association with the Overseas Territories of the United Kingdom, which include Gibraltar, the Falkland Islands and the Cayman Islands.
The debate then explored the origin and meaning of different terms, including “dominion”. That term is most associated with the Statute of Westminster in 1931, which gave “dominion” status to Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Canada, among others. King Charles, to this day, remains the head of state of a country whose formal legal title is the “Dominion of Canada”. This effective hijacking of the term means that many associate it with quasi-independence, which was the direction of travel being marked out for those jurisdictions at that time by that Act of Parliament. However, as a matter of historical fact, Jersey and Guernsey are and remain the oldest dominions of the British Crown.
Consequently, in an informal and non-binding vote, recognising we can call ourselves what we like, the members of this year’s Network voted to rename the meeting the “Crown Dominion Network”. This will seem like an inconsequential change of little relevance to the daily grind and challenge of our respective communities. That much is true. But it is also an illustration of the value of dialogue among our parliamentarians with shared interest and concern about our status in the world being diminished by the use of the misleading term, “dependency”. It was a move that no one island could make alone, but, by acting together, our parliamentarians have moved the debate along. Now we just need our governments to pick it up and run with it.
-
Gavin St Pier is a Guernsey politician. He previously served as the president of the island’s Policy and Resources Committee.
