Jersey States Member Scorecard

AN INDEPENDENT RECORD OF EVERY PROMISE MADE IN THE STATES OF JERSEY

Visit the Guernsey edition →
04 SeptStamp duty on buy-to-let and second homes regraded from Mixed to Kept after the vote that delivered it was found unlinked; Long-Term Care cap ruling stands, with the December 2025 vote added.— Stephen Ahier04 SeptSustainable finance promise regraded from No recorded vote to Kept after a reader challenge found the amendment that delivered it, which she lodged herself, unlinked.— Hilary Jeune04 SeptTwo further verdict-based promises revised after reader challenges: constituency surgeries regraded Partial to Delivered; Equalities Minister regraded Outstanding to In progress.— Hilary Jeune
← Leaderboard·Manifesto rating·June 2026 election manifesto
Rank 30 of 46

Richard Percy Vibert

The manifesto sets out a programme centred on parish life in St Peter: protecting rural character, pursuing sensible planning, addressing traffic and road safety through dialogue, seeking reductions in PFAS levels in drinking water, and completing community projects subject to available finances. The manifesto describes how working with youth services and community organisations helped address antisocial behaviour in the parish. Commitments are framed in directional language throughout, with no figures, dates or named mechanisms attached to any pledge.

Read the manifesto
020406080100
0
Overall · out of 100
“Needs a second draft”

The five dimensions

Select one to jump to the reasoning behind its score.

Weighted into the overall score
38
/ 100

Ambition

Weight 15%
“The art of the possible”

The manifesto centres on parish continuity: protecting rural character, maintaining community life, and addressing longstanding local concerns including PFAS, traffic and youth issues. There is no cross-portfolio reform programme and no named investment envelope. The reach is local and incremental, with the PFAS pledge representing the furthest stretch, and even that is framed as a wish rather than a commitment to a specific outcome.

28
/ 100

Tangibility

Weight 25%
“Mostly directional”

No pledge carries a figure, a date or a named mechanism. The planning and development commitments use words such as 'sensible' and 'carefully considered' without defining what that means in practice. The community projects are noted as conditional on parish finances without naming the projects themselves. The PFAS pledge names a goal but no route to achieving it.

60
/ 100

Realism

Weight 20%
“Needs a tailwind”

The manifesto acknowledges constraints throughout: development pledges recognise the need to balance access with character, the community projects are conditional on parish finances, and the PFAS pledge acknowledges that legislation was delayed. The traffic and road safety section avoids overcommitment by calling for dialogue rather than specific infrastructure. The pledges are modest enough that none require a revenue source that is not named.

55
/ 100

Deliverability

Weight 30%
“Needs an Assembly majority and a willing Council of Ministers”

The Scorecard records Vibert as Minister for Children and Families and as a member of the Comité de Connétable. The manifesto's references to youth services and antisocial behaviour sit in the same subject area as the Children and Families post. The planning, PFAS, traffic and parish finance pledges would depend on Assembly support, a majority of 25 of 49 members, and on engagement with other decision-makers, as no single member controls those outcomes. The community projects pledge is explicitly conditional on parish finances.

72
/ 100

Low waffle

Weight 10%
“General in places”

A significant portion of the text consists of general statements of values and intent: caring deeply about the parish, the importance of practical solutions, the belief that parish government works best when approachable. Several sentences restate the same theme of protecting rural character without adding new commitments. The closing lines in particular are statements of feeling rather than pledges.

← Back to the leaderboardRank 30 of 46 · Scored by the Jersey States Member Scorecard team