GUERNSEY has been set back seven years in its relationship with the UK Government, a leading constitutional lawyer has claimed. In response to yesterday’s 10-point framework on the island’s international identity, Advocate St John Robilliard criticised its wording, claiming Guernsey had gone ‘backwards rather than forwards’.
Citing a UK Government anti-bribery report lodged with the OECD in 2000, the Ozannes partner believes Guernsey has now relinquished what was once a far stronger position.
One section of the report said ‘the ratification of international conventions and treaties may be extended to the (Crown Dependencies) subject to the agreement of the insular authorities’.
This wording is in contrast to the document unveiled yesterday, which states: ‘The UK Government will not act internationally on behalf of Guernsey without prior consultation.’
‘I’m very disappointed,’ he said.
‘This wording, as the Guernsey Press correctly pointed out, is different. I hope the States debates this and I hope an explanation is given as to why this earlier statement has been abandoned.’
Advocate Robilliard was also concerned that the document had failed to do what it set out to achieve.
‘What it doesn’t do in any way is spell out how our identity is different to the UK,’ he said.
‘Without that explanation, it’s pretty meaningless.’
He said UK influence could already be seen in policies on tax information exchange and corporate tax rates in Guernsey.
Advocate Robilliard was one of 12 prominent islanders voicing support for more debate over the issue of independence.
Blue Diamond Group chairman Geoff Dorey, also among the group, accused the States of creating a ‘fait accompli’.
‘This document, about such an important subject, has been cooked up in secret,’ he said.
While accepting it was right for the States to hold an educational seminar on the issue behind closed doors, Mr Dorey was concerned there had been no opportunity for public scrutiny.
‘Our executives in the States have been involved in drafting it and I think a decision like this should be brought before the States of Deliberation to be debated in a proper manner.’
Mr Dorey said history suggested the UK Government could not always be trusted to look after the interests of the Channel Islands.
He refererred to an EU working party chaired by Treasury minister Dawn Primarolo.
The group met in secret in 1999 to examine ways of stamping out unfair tax competition.
Of the 60 proposed measures, 22 applied to the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.
‘She committed the Crown Dependencies to a quid pro quo agreement, which was essentially the origin of zero-10 and again never came before the States of Deliberation,’ he said.
In relation to the different wording of ‘consultation’ and ‘consent’, he said, ‘I would approach the debate with an open mind.’
Article posted on 3rd May, 2007 - 12.00am
Loading ...
Most Commented: