A total of eight petitions were prepared for handing in on the annual Tynwald Day this year using a centuries old tradition, revived in the 20th century, which allows ordinary citizens to bring matters to the attention of government.

Petitions for redress of grievance allow constituents in the island to exercise an ancient democratic right, but what happens next and how often are matters taken up by politicians with any changes being made as a result?

The Examiner asked deputy clerk of Tynwald Jonathan King what petitioners can expect, having handed in their petitions.

’They don’t all automatically go to a committee,’ he said.

After being examined by the Standing Orders Committee, a petition may then be adopted by a member of the House of Keys or Legislative Council.

’Then that member has to persuade Tynwald to set up a committee,’ Dr King said.

Tynwald’s own guidance for petitioners tells constituents petitions can ’deliver changes in Tynwald policy, which can in turn result in changes to the political priorities of government departments and to the administrative procedures for which they are responsible. A petition can even ultimately result in a change being made to the law’.

However, the guidance sounds a note of caution, saying: ’Procedures are not quick, cannot provide a benefit in the form of compensation and cannot result in another person being fined or punished.’

The benefit, according to the guidelines, is that a petition can publicise a matter of public interest that has affected a petitioner and raise the question of whether something should be done to address a problem.

A report from the Tynwald Standing Orders Committee, which incorporates all of the petitions is laid before Tynwald, but not debated, and the report is also published on the Tynwald website so the content of all the petitions is publicly accessible.

At this point, any member of Tynwald can adopt any of the petitions, within the next five years after Tynwald Day, and put it forward to be debated in Tynwald.

After being debated, a petition could move to a select committee for further consideration. At this point further input might be invited from petitioners who could be required to submit further information in writing to the committee; they could even be invited to give evidence in person at a public hearing.

Once a matter has been fully considered by the committee, a report is produced for Tynwald and this is generally debated. Petitioners will receive a copy of the report and can attend the debate. Any recommendations contained in the report can be accepted, amended or rejected by Tynwald members.

Recommendations accepted by Tynwald could then be adopted by a government department or if new legislation is required, this would be drafted by the Attorney General’s Chambers before going through the standard legislative process of debate and consideration by the House of Keys and Legislative Council.

Dr King said it was not always easy to link policy or law changes with a specific petition.

’It’s not that nothing happens, it’s more that action is dissipated across different departments and we wouldn’t always know that the petition committee was part of the reason for the action,’ he said.

However, he said a petition presented in 2009 was the catalyst for changes in rules governing legal aid in family cases.

The petition, by Stephen Broad, was supported by a number of other people who gave evidence to a standing committee about the inequitable way they felt the legal aid system could operate. They pointed out that a legally aided party in family proceedings may pursue a course of litigation, publicly funded, when matters could have been dealt with less acrimoniously using mediation.

It also meant the other, possibly self-funded party, incurred significant expense defending their position in what could be an unnecessarily combative process.

Following the petition, the Legal Aid (Amendment)Act, 2012, introduced a statutory charge. This can oblige a legally aided party, to use money awarded in any court proceedings to reimburse the legal aid fund, and puts both parties on a more even footing.