Members voted 22 in favour to 24 against with one abstention.
Senator Lyndon Farnham wanted States Assembly rules to be changed so that any vote on constitutional changes would need 32 votes to succeed instead of at least 25.
He told the Assembly the requirement for what he called a supermajority was commonplace in other jurisdictions, and that previous failures to deliver reform were because politicians did not work together.
‘It is clear efforts to reform have failed because under a simple majority, there is a slim chance of getting things through. There is no necessity to work together and that is why there has been a myriad of propositions [on reform].’
With the States due to debate major reforms to the electoral system in the coming weeks, the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee, Deputy Russell Labey, was among those who said this proposition from Senator Farnham was designed to prevent change. ‘What Senator Farnham is doing is diluting the power of Members. It’s actually an insult to Members and actually those that put us here that a simple majority is not enough.’
Currently, for most matters that come before the States, decisions are made on the number of votes cast by those who are in the Chamber when the vote is taken.
But if a proposal changes the make-up of the States it would need an absolute majority of at least 25 votes no matter how many Members were in the Chamber.
St Peter Deputy Rowland Huelin said that if Members were serious about change, it required hard work and collaboration and he felt the proposition would achieve that.
‘A vote against this proposition is the vote of the lazy, the un-confident or those hoping to limp across the line.’
But other Members described it as another wrecking motion designed to block reforms as future proposals would only need 17 Members to vote against a change to block it.
Senator Tracey Vallois said that the Assembly had a poor track record on working together. ‘If people are ingrained with a particular view and are not willing to open their eyes to the modern 21st century that we are living in, then we are never going to change.’
The majority of Members voted to reject Senator Farnham’s proposition, although one member, Deputy Lindsay Ash, said he had voted in favour by mistake.
VOTE
FOR
Senators: Farnham, Ferguson and Le Fondré. Constables: Mezbourian, Le Sueur-Rennard, Jackson, Le Maistre, Taylor, Le Sueur, Vibert, Le Bailly, Buchanan and Shenton-Stone. Deputies: Lewis, Pinel, Luce, Truscott, Ash, Guida, Huelin, Raymond and Le Hegarat. (22)
AGAINST
Senators: Vallois, Moore and Mézec. Constables: Crowcroft and Norman. Deputies: Martin, Southern, C Labey, Tadier, Higgins, Renouf, Doublet, R Labey, Wickenden, Johnson, Young, Morel, Pointon, Ahier, Perchard, Ward, Alves, Pamplin and Gardiner. (24)
ABSTAINED
Senator Pallett (1)
