Two deputies have taken the "unusual step" of attempting to annul legislation laid by Policy & Resources, despite the fact that they'll eventually vote against their own motion.
Deputies Gavin St Pier and Lyndon Trott have submitted a motion to annul an amendment to The Preferred Debts Ordinance, 2023, therefore forcing public debate on the legislation.
It comes after P&R used Article 66A of the 1948 Reform Law to approve legislation without the need for debate.
Article 66A gives P&R the power to enact Ordinances without public debate if it believes the usual process needs to be sped up "in the public interest".
Earlier this year, P&R utilised Article 66A to approve The Preferred Debts (Insurance Policyholders) (Bailiwick of Guernsey) (Amendment) Ordinance, 2023.
Deputies St Pier and Trott explain the ordinance as such: "The Ordinance amends the Preferred Debts (Guernsey) Law, 1983 by providing that in the event of an insolvent dissolution or winding up of a licensed insurer, priority will be given to insurance debts owed to the policyholders of the insurer before the ordinary unsecured creditors. In essence, the Ordinance re-ranks debtors in their claims in the event of an insolvency."
Deputy Trott said: “We support this legislation which makes a lot of sense but we simply take the view that given the legislation changes individuals’ property rights, as a matter of principle, it ought to be subject to open, public scrutiny, debate and approval in the States of Deliberation. After all, parliamentary democracy essentially emerged to protect property rights.”
Deputy St Pier agreed: “The only way we can ensure debate is to move a motion to annul the legislation. This is unfortunate as we actually support the legislation so we will vote against the motion.
"This is unsatisfactory and we know it will be confusing to some. Consequently, we have today written to the States’ Assembly & Constitution Committee urging them to lead changes which, for legislation like this, would in the future allow a ‘motion to debate,’ a concept which already exists in relation to Appendix Reports laid before the States.”
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.