Select a region
Moves to cast off the term Crown Dependency have gathered pace with a recommendation that formal discussions take place between the Isle of Man, Guernsey and Jersey on a replacement.
It is contained in a standing committee report to be debated in the Isle of Man, the investigations into which heard different suggestions from Channel Island politicians about what the replacement term should be.
The report by the Constitutional and Legal Affairs and Justice Committee also recommends exploring the three islands sharing a permanent representative in Westminster - Jersey already has a London office and Guernsey’s External Relations lead Jonathan Le Tocq told the IoM committee it was something that the island needed to consider in the near future.
The term Crown Dependency appears to have emerged in the 1970s as shorthand for the three jurisdictions.
In evidence to the committee, IoM Speaker Juan Watterson said while the title correctly connects the islands to the Crown, it was time to review the “Dependency” epithet.
“We are after all, not dependent on the UK. We have entered into relationships and partnerships, and we are doubtless the junior partner, but I don't think it is right or helpful to market ourselves to the world as 'dependencies'.
“Whether we consider ourselves part of a network of 'Crown Kingdoms' alongside the Channel Islands and possibly Scotland, or choose some other label, I think the time for change has come.”
Moving to the term Crown Dominions has been suggested by Deputy St Pier, meaning it can still be shortened to CDs .
“I think 'dominion' is a very old term that suggests a relationship with a monarch. We are indeed the Crown's oldest dominions, between the three of us, and certainly Guernsey and Jersey are, stretching back to 1066,” he said in his evidence to the committee.
“So I think there's a good case for ‘dominions’. But again it would, I think, require the three to move together and effectively to make that request of the MOJ and indeed the Government. I can't imagine, to be honest, why anybody would object.”
Deputy Le Tocq told the committee he would firstly just change it around to Dependencies of the Crown, which puts the emphasis on the Crown rather than the UK Government. It is a phrase used since the Second World War.
“I do think that names are important. Titles are important. They give at least a brief description. And while we were never called a dominion as such when places like Canada for example were termed dominions we certainly have far more in common with that than we do with either the Overseas Territories or the Devolved Administrations.”
Jersey’s Sir Philip Bailhache also said that dependency was the wrong term and backed Crown Territories instead.
The committee said the matter should be discussed further, but it was the word “dependency” that people wanted changed.
“All of the options presided to use maintain the word ‘Crown’ and we would wish to maintain this as well. Our connection with the Crown is something to be cherished for many reasons. Most particularly it makes it clear that our relationship is with the Crown as the permanent Head of States and not twitch the UK Government of the day.”
Jersey established a London office in 2013 and has hailed how it has helped relations with the UK.
Guernsey shares an office in Brussels and France with Jersey, but originally decided against the London move.
“It is something that I personally think we ought now to consider doing in London, partly because of all the things we’ve been talking about require us to have a more regular presence there,” Deputy Le Tocq said in oral evidence.
“And so while it wouldn’t change my need to get on a flight and get to London on a regular basis and it wouldn’t change the need to develop relationships with UK Government officials and Ministers – that’s something that you can’t... you have to be there physically to deal with – I think the ability to be able to quickly respond by having staff on the ground which Jersey do is something that we ought to seriously consider.
“...I wouldn’t say we’re looking to do that immediately. It’s something that I think we will need to consider in the near future. So I mean if any Jersey colleagues are listening they’re probably jumping up and down with joy because they’ve been trying to get us to do this for some time. It’s going to cost us, that’s the problem, and I don’t think we will have the budget to do so.”
The committee concluded that while the Isle of Man’s relationships with the UK Government and the UK Parliament are strong, more needed to be done.
“Given the importance of political engagement at Westminster, the existing institutional arrangements and resources are insufficient. A permanent representative in London is needed who should be directly accountable to the Isle of Man Government,” it said.
“We conclude that Jersey and Guernsey already co-operate in Paris and Brussels and may in the future co-operate in London. They may be open to the idea of co- operating with the Isle of Man and there may be efficiencies to be gained through such an approach.”
The committee’s report is due to be debated at the May sitting of Tynwald.
Calls to fix faltering relationship with UK by giving Jersey official trade rep
OPINION: Does 'Crown Dependency' really reflect Jersey's status?
Should we be Crown Dependencies... or Crown Territories?
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.