IT MAY seem like a perverse thing to say, but I really like those politicians who are willing to totally ignore my views as a voter when they’re sincerely convinced that they’re right and I’m wrong. I know that puts me at odds with large numbers of people who constantly recite the mantra ‘they should listen to the people’, but I suppose I just admire conviction, courage and intellectual integrity.

Certainly I would prefer to be represented by a deputy who carries out his or her own research on issues, thinks deeply about them and reaches firm decisions based on that process than by one who comes from the focus group school of politics. ‘Which way can I jump that won’t upset too many people or attract the ire of any pressure groups?’ is no basis for policy formation.

Of course, this admiration for independent thinkers does – like any other philosophy – collapse when taken to the extreme. When it’s clear that a huge majority of islanders feel strongly one way on an issue, then, unless it’s a matter of personal conscience, any sensible deputy should reflect that overwhelming public sentiment.

However, these sorts of situations occur only once in a blue moon despite claims to the contrary by activists in lobby groups. Claims such as ‘everyone I’ve spoken to agrees with me’ usually translate into ‘my friends largely agree and no one else can be bothered to argue with me because I’m so charged up over this one’.

Even on a personal level, I’m not so enamoured of independent thinkers as to vote for someone who hardly ever votes the way I wish. That would be perverse. A deputy is a representative and if mine never represents my view, then I clearly can’t support him continuing in that role. That would be counter to the whole concept of representative democracy.

On the other hand, any effective deputy must always have a mind of their own and exercise their own judgement. Certainly to withdraw support for a States member just because he/she votes ‘the wrong way’ on a single issue about which one feels particularly strongly is to risk throwing out the baby with the bath water. Worse, it’s liable to lead to those deputies who survive elections being the ‘lowest common denominator’ – the ‘political weather vanes’ without minds of their own.

I suppose that to illustrate what I mean, I probably need to name some names. Looking at this House, one man whose political ethos is clearly quite different from mine is Vale deputy Tony Spruce. I’m from the centre-left school of politics and I perceive him to be firmly to the right of centre. For that reason, I have frequently not agreed with his line of argument or the way he’s voted. What I have liked is his integrity, independence and insistence on being his own man. These characteristics alone would tempt me to vote for him if I was in a position to do so.

Another very different character who believes in backing his own judgement is south-east deputy Mike Hadley. In many ways he is a real maverick and I’m never sure what stance he is going to take on any issue. Sometimes he’s inspired and at other times outrageous. But I’m always sure he isn’t going to dither or ‘run with the hare and the hounds’, trying to please everyone at the same time.

If I was still in the States, I’m not sure I would want him sitting on my committee but, as a voter, I think the House would be poorer without him.

In a strange way, this debate over the merits of conviction politicians versus those who always seek to placate the public is related to the current discussion about States members’ pay. Pay too little and you get a very unrepresentative House with only the retired or well-heeled able to serve. Pay too much and you risk discouraging leadership and the courage to be different as people shelter in the political pack to preserve their ‘States careers’. Neither is healthy.

What’s also vital is for the voting public to take a balanced approach. It’s good to get hot under the collar over important local issues, but however strongly we feel, we should try to judge our politicians in the round. If we utterly condemn them because they happen to disagree with us over a couple of issues, then we will soon be represented by a very grey set of deputies indeed.