P.1/2018, the Draft Machinery of Government (Miscellaneous Amendments) Law, set out an ambitious restructuring of how Jersey's public administration would work. It proposed three main changes: the establishment of the Chief Executive Officer as the Principal Accountable Officer for the public administration; changes to ministerial appointments by Orders of the Chief Minister; and the establishment of a single legal entity for Government. The States Assembly accepted the proposition, as amended, on 20th March 2018.

That single decision had profound consequences. It effectively placed statutory authority over Jersey's public finances and departmental operations in the hands of the most senior civil servant ‘the Chief Executive Officer’ and set in motion a chain of legislation that would follow.

What P.1/2018 established as principle, two further laws were meant to complete in practice: the Public Finances (Jersey) Law 2019, adopted by the States on 4th June 2019, which embedded the financial architecture of the new model; and the Employment of States of Jersey Employees Law, which governs how the Civil Service is managed. Together, these three pieces of legislation were intended to form a coherent accountability framework. The problem is that the framework was never completed, and the gap left behind has been widening ever since.

The Public Finances Law was not passed without challenge. The Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel scrutinised the legislation closely, requesting additional time to examine it and flagging that it was a large and quite involved law, describing it in scrutiny hearings as being almost an entirely new law, in development since 2017. Multiple amendments were lodged before the debate, a sign of genuine concern among Members about what the legislation would mean in practice. Those concerns were not unfounded.

What the law did was formally designate the Chief Executive Officer as Principal Accountable Officer, responsible for ensuring the propriety of public spending, the efficiency of government operations, and the appointment of Accountable Officers across departments. Accountability runs upward to the Council of Ministers collectively and to the Public Accounts Committee. What it does not do is give individual Ministers a defined legal role in setting objectives for, or reviewing the performance of, the officials who run their departments day to day.

The result is a structural imbalance at the heart of Jersey's government. Ministers are elected. They carry public responsibility. They answer to Islanders at the ballot box. But when it comes to the most senior civil servants, the officials whose decisions shape whether Government Plan commitments are actually delivered, Ministers have no formal mechanism to set expectations, assess performance, or ensure accountability when things go wrong. That authority sits elsewhere.

This is not a criticism of the Civil Service. Jersey's public servants include many dedicated professionals, and the reforms of 2018 and 2019 were intended to modernise a system that genuinely needed updating. But good intentions do not substitute for a proper legal framework. The Clothier Report, which launched the entire journey toward ministerial government back in 2001, was explicit on this point: elected Ministers must be able to lead, and the Civil Service must be clearly accountable to democratic direction. A quarter of a century later, that principle remains only partially enacted.

So will the Assembly elected in June 2026 finally close the gap?

The question is a serious one. Several incoming Members have spoken during the campaign about accountability, transparency and making government work better for Islanders. But the distance between campaign rhetoric and legislative action is considerable, and the specific technical reform required, targeted amendments to the Employment of States of Jersey Employees Law to give Ministers a formal, defined role in the performance management of senior officers, will require both political will and a willingness to work through unglamorous detail.

What is needed is not another review, not another working group, not another briefing paper. It is a clear amendment that gives Ministers a formal role in setting objectives for principal officers, establishes transparent performance accountability linked to Government Plan delivery, and ensures that when things go wrong, it is clear who bears responsibility.

The 2018 proposition that started this process was lodged on the 8th of January of that year, the very first working days of a new political term. If the new Assembly is serious about accountability, it could do worse than make this a priority from day one.

Jersey's Islanders deserve a government where elected representatives can genuinely lead, where civil servants are empowered and supported, and where accountability is not a principle held in aspiration, but a mechanism enshrined in law.

The architecture of change was drawn up in 2018. It is past time to finish the building.