Moves to alter the composition of the States Assembly – including the possibility of restoring Senators and removing the role of Constable from the Chamber – should not be rushed, a political committee has stated.

The Privileges and Procedures Committee, which oversees Assembly business, wants any changes supported by Members at a debate later this month to be brought in for the 2030 general election rather than the one scheduled for June next year.

Chaired by Constable Karen Stone, the PPC has expressed concerns that voters could be further disengaged by change brought in at relatively short notice, with the possibility that “reputational damage” to Jersey might result.

Deputy Elaine Millar has proposed that nine Senators should be elected, replacing one Deputy seat for each of the nine electoral districts.

Two amendments have already been lodged, with Deputy Tom Coles seeking to remove the role of Constable from the Assembly and have 12 Senatorial seats, and his Reform Jersey colleague Deputy Sam Mézec calling for an independent boundary commission to be given a role in overseeing future changes.

In the report accompanying her committee’s amendment, Mrs Stone highlighted guidance from several bodies warning against such moves.

She said the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association had stated that “substantive amendments… should be adopted well in advance of the next election and never less than a year before”.

Similar sentiments had been expressed, she added, by the Venice Commission, an advisory body of the Council of Europe, and by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, which said last-minute legislation risked “undermining the legitimacy and credibility of the law”.

The PPC, which stressed it was not taking a position on whether the proposals regarding Senators or Constables should be adopted, cited two potential risks of changing the system ahead of next year’s election.

“The first is that we would be ignoring the recommendations of CPA election observers and internationally recognised best practice, which would be damaging to us reputationally and would simply not be good governance,” the committee stated.

“Secondly, and most importantly, we would be making major changes in the run-up to the election and risk further disengaging the electorate, [which has] cited lack of trust and lack of understanding of the electoral system as [reasons for not voting].”

Mrs Stone said that while the experience of the Covid pandemic showed that the Assembly could act fast to bring in legislation, this had been an emergency situation and should not serve as a precedent.

In conclusion, the committee stated that: “the stability of the law is crucial to the credibility of the electoral process, which is itself vital to consolidating democracy”.

“It is for this reason that it does not consider such substantive changes should be brought into effect until after the next elections have taken place,” it added.

Deputy Millar’s proposition and the amendments are set to be debated during the States sitting scheduled for Tuesday 18 March.