IT’S funny how in local politics some subjects suddenly seem to become causes celebres and generate all sorts of passionate debate, only to fade from the public gaze a short time later. Sometimes those issues return on a cyclical basis, other times they just disappear for good.

For example, a year ago there was all sorts of debate about Guernsey’s constitutional relationships with the rest of the world. There were calls for total independence or for dominion status (whatever that means in the modern world). Others wanted a Guernsey Bill of Rights or a written codification of our constitutional links with the UK.

Still others called for a locally-based privy council to approve our local laws and to underline the fact that our historical links are with the British Crown and not the British Government.

If you remember, there were many letters and articles in the Guernsey Press exploring all the options, with passionate advocates for each alternative. The whole thing culminated in a packed public meeting in St James at which people voted overwhelmingly for a change in the current arrangements. What was the net result of all this passion and campaigning? So far, absolutely zilch. It’s not as if supporters of constitutional reform within the States have been rebuffed and defeated by a conservative majority. It is just that no deputy seems to have taken up the cause with any kind of passion or commitment.

I wonder why that is? Is it that, when looked at closely, the difficulties of changing our current relationships with the outside world are far greater than at first imagined? Perhaps it dawned on some that attempting to alter or rewrite our ancient links with the UK carried more dangers than benefits.

After all, if you review a relationship between two parties then both are going to want input. As for total independence – well, the sea of international relations can be a pretty choppy place to paddle your own, very small, canoe.

Or perhaps it was none of the above. Maybe the subject just fell out of political fashion, like campaigning against telephone masts.

In many ways it is a shame that all seems to have gone quiet on the constitutional relationships front. While not being an advocate of gung-ho reform, I think an in-depth, cool-headed consideration of our options for the future was highly desirable.

The world is changing rapidly and although the best response probably remains incremental evolution in our unwritten constitutional relationship with the UK, the other options are certainly worth looking at.

I know some initial work was done on just these issues by a special panel under former Procureur Nik van Leuven, which reported its interim findings to the Policy Council. It was then disbanded and the work was going to be taken forward by the Policy Council’s External Relations Sub-Committee.

Meantime, in Jersey a far more detailed bit of research had been completed considering all the options for the island’s constitutional status. That considered all scenarios, from the most benign to one where the UK government had really sold the islands down the river.

It would be interesting to know if Guernsey ever completed its own examination of this fascinating subject and whether the findings are going to be made public. Perhaps the work is going on apace right now, with the Policy Council’s apparent inaction on constitutional issues masking the furious activity going on below the surface.

Or maybe, when it came right down to it, it was felt that academically fascinating though constitutional questions are, balancing Guernsey’s books was a heck of a lot more important.

If so, that’s probably the right conclusion, but it doesn’t mean the less-pressing subject of Guernsey’s autonomy should be totally ignored. For what it’s worth, here’s my take on the issue.

It is very easy to focus on the downsides of our current status and conclude, like a farmer talking about the weather, that everything is always stacked against us.

That is human nature, but in reality our current constitutional position would be the envy of many, both in relation to the UK and the EU. We should preserve it if we possibly can and not put it at risk by showboating and demanding an ever-more favourable position.

That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t seek betterment, but it should be quietly and slowly, not through some grand gesture.

Only in extremis should we consider the nuclear option of complete independence.Independence issue? It’s no time for ‘showboating’