Jersey’s Privileges and Procedures Committee – the equivalent to our States’ Assembly & Constitution Committee – has succeeded in its bid to impose a 15-minute time limit on speeches – although these new rules will not apply to everyone.
PPC’s proposals do not apply to the member bringing a proposition or someone directly affected by it – for example, a States member who is subject to a vote of no confidence. The proposals were approved by 25 votes to 14.
Guernsey’s States has experienced similar issues with long speeches, which have caused debates to frequently overrun into reserve days or be adjourned completely due to unfinished business.
However, outgoing Deputy and Scrutiny President Chris Green is unsure about how a blanket ban will work and favours an approach based around discretion.
It is a tricky business, even if I sympathise with the Jersey rule being introduced. I’ve seen the Speaker of the Commons impose certain time limits in certain debates. Just wonder whether a power to restrict rather than a blanket limit might be worth trying first?
— Christopher Green (@advocategreen1) October 7, 2020
Pictured: Deputy Chris Green expressed caution over the proposals implemented by the Jersey States.
In debate, PPC Member Deputy Jess Perchard said that States Members should raise any questions they have before debate and then use their speeches to make their point. By doing so, the States Assembly will become an “improved” version of itself.
Deputy Judy Martin said that the proposition doesn’t threaten democracy, but does make sure that States Members “stick to the point.”
She also pointed out that the policy itself has already been backed by the States and that the PPC now only needed States sign-off for its implementation.
The model could be chess tournaments. Everyone is allocated, say, a total of thirty minutes a day and they can use it how they choose during various debates. Keeping tabs on the unexpired time might be be tricky though!
— Shane Langlois (@ShaneLanglois) October 7, 2020
Pictured: Current Deputy Shane Langlois came up with an off-the-wall alternative that it’s hard to imagine court staff being fans of.
The main objection against the proposal was a claim that it was “undemocratic” and that there should be “freedom of speech”.
Despite some reservations, the introduction of speech limits passed and is now set to be implemented.
Question time and election speeches are time limited so why not others?
— Dudley Jehan (@earlofgsy) October 7, 2020