Select a region
A Committee is preparing to stand its ground over campaign spending limits and not requiring candidates to undergo police checks but is mindful of likely consternation from colleagues.
In January the States tore up the States Assembly & Constitution Committee’s liberalisation of candidacy rules which would have seen more convicts permitted to stand, and instead tightened up the process including excluding those recently convicted, as well as ordering investigations into requiring declarations of convictions and police checks.
Months later it sent SACC back to the drawing board on campaign spending caps, demanding investigations into lower limits.
But a policy letter is due to be published on 1 July ahead of a States debate later this year proposing no changes to the original spending caps, advising against introducing DBS checks for candidates, and it’s unlikely to include recommendations for declarations of criminal convictions to go beyond crimes committed outside of the Bailiwick.
In 2020, individual spending was capped at £6,000, while parties could spend up to £9,000. But SACC proposed increasing the cap by £1,500 and £6,000 for people and parties respectively. However, when it was put to the States, it faced opposition with amendments seeking to keep the caps at 2020 levels or halve them.
In any case the Committee was advised that introducing DBS would be impossible for the 2025 election, on top of not being deemed a suitable requirement for political candidates as it isn’t in other democracies.
A key concern is it’s unclear who would carry out the checks as politicians are classed as self-employed.
Pictured: The practically unchanged proposals will go back before the States later this year.
Deputy Simon Fairclough had warned earlier this month that they should explain how DBS checks work as there’s “a fair bit of misunderstanding” among other deputies.
This week SACC Vice-President Deputy Gavin St Pier said a rewrite was required as the committee needed to “show humility” on the matter and ensure their position is explained “clearer than the first-time round” when States members tore up the plans.
He called for the line “limits need to be realistic” to be emboldened in the paper to stress the point over campaign spending caps.
Meanwhile, Deputy Yvonne Burford feared SACC was “going to get slaughtered for this” despite the additional research carried out.
“The point is previous limit allowed every candidate to send out their own manifesto on top of free materials,” she said on the electoral spending point.
SACC President Deputy Carl Meerveld said the research that will be presented “is almost an argument for higher limits”.
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.