The recent election in Jersey didn't catch the imagination of voters it seems. A few small changes and novel occurrences didn't make much of a dint in the voter turnout.
Moving the election to May instead of the usual Autumn period didn't do it, even though the weather was favourable. Personally it meant for the first time in three decades I had no active part in a significant election where I was eligible to vote. April and May are the busiest times for general fruit and vegetable growers. Miss the planting season and it is most of a year's earnings lost. So I wasn't a candidate and couldn't get involved in campaigning.
Unprecedentedly I think half the ministers didn't restand. And at least two ministers decided to refight deputy seats rather than put themselves before an Island wide electorate. The result is that voters were unable to give those minister a drubbing if they felt policies or performance warranted it. In a party system of course they have the chance do do that by proxy by voting against the party candidate. This aspect is particularly irritating to me. The ministers stand as individuals, but act together under collective responsibility. But as soon as an election comes they want to be independents again and deny collective responsibility where it really matters - to the electorate.
The third different thing this election was the presence of a party with a worked out manifesto and standing enough candidates to have an outside chance of being a major driving force in the assembly. In those respects I think what Reform did was a service to the electorate and set a bar for others in future election about the level of detail and comprehensive nature of manifestos the electorate might expect.
Perhaps the most notable feature of this election was the fact that all but two of the candidates restanding for election were returned. Given there were 9 sitting members contesting 8 senatorial seats one casualty at least was guaranteed there. The other was constable of St Mary in a re-run of the last election which was similarly close the other way. The conclusion I draw is the that the electorate was fearful and went for the 'better the devil you know' option. What they feared is the question.
And the outcome of this election? Well actually not much change as I can see. I don't expect much from the new Assembly on ecology, sustainability or resource dependency. That the election in the Assembly for chief minister is between a former accountant and another former accountant probably speaks volumes for what is the principal and overriding concern and interest of the elected members. And as they say if you want to know what someone values look at what they count.
