Leopards remain keen to hang on to their spots

GIVEN the response so far to the Wales Audit Office's investigation, islanders would be forgiven for asking, what next?

Sure, its findings have been acknowledged and welcomed to varying degrees.

But instead of putting in place a clear action plan, ministers charged with taking its findings forward have taken a 'wait and see' approach. Has the island really got time to let things unravel further?

Many members' reaction to a report that lays bare deficiencies in the system of government was 'tell us something we don't know'.

They believe changes in motion, such as the States Strategic Plan, will answer all our prayers so taxpayers can be confident they will get value for money.

The trouble is the WAO was clear that the current set-up would not deliver the aspirations in the document on which so much weight was being put.

Auditor-General Jeremy Colman said it was 'very unlikely' because the mechanisms did not exist.

'It's not unusual for bodies to have fine statements of strategy but with no effective mechanism for transporting it into action,' he said.

'The particular difficulty you have here is to do with the fact that to transfer strategy into action you need leadership, accountability, information about performance and money. Our work found serious weaknesses in all those areas.'

We are being asked by most members to accept that the leopard will change its spots, that cultural change will happen, deputies will become more disciplined, grasp a corporate vision and will allow responsibility to be delegated and funds to be reallocated to make things work.

Given that everyone seemed to recognise the problems, why some six years into this new system of consensus government have they not been able to overcome them? Why are the silos still in place?

Change is happening at a pace with which a snail would be embarrassed.

Instead of having a form of government that as far as it can guarantees best practice, we are reliant on members showing discipline in a vacuum with little track record that they can.

The States is making things difficult for itself.

Mr Colman did tell deputies, civil servants and reporters that the current system could deliver, but it came with a health warning.

'You can, if you wanted to continue with consensus government, have it.

'But you would need a very clear sense of delegation from the States to the corporate machine and deputies so everyone would know where a decision should be taken and have arrangements for referring decisions to the States within a framework that's properly understood, all based on good information.'

So what should happen next?

Some have said that the system would overload if the machinery of government debate began again now. That could be a costly delay.

What needs to be on the table are clear options for the way forward to address the deficiencies identified by the WAO.

Perhaps one would show how the current system could be modified to deliver and another how a different one would deal with it.

The pros and cons could be outlined in each, backed by evidence.

If the Policy Council is not willing to get this moving, maybe some of those who call for action from the outside will see this as an opportunity.

A think tank, whatever you want to call it, could come up with concrete propositions to drive things forward.

Or maybe the WAO could be tasked with coming up with possible solutions.

A Green Paper debate on these would be an eye-opener for all concerned. Some are already considering forcing debate on the report.

It is telling that not all ministers are opposed to reform of the current system.

Chief Minister Lyndon Trott, Treasury minister Charles Parkinson, Home minister Geoff Mahy and, to a certain extent, Health and Social Services minister Hunter Adam, all appear advocates for change.

Housing minister Dave Jones, Public Services minister Bernard Flouquet, Education minister Carol Steere, Culture and Leisure minister Mike O'Hara and Social Security minister Mark Dorey are reportedly opposed.

It appears that Environment minister Peter Sirett and Commerce and Employment minister Carla McNulty Bauer are on the fence.

The shift in positions needed to move things forward is not insurmountable.

But the shift from the floor of the House would need to be much greater given the response last week from those approached.

We are told this system has just six to nine months left to prove itself, although the targets it has to meet are anyone's guess.

Given all this, and despite report on report identifying a system that is rotten on the inside, reformers are facing a daunting uphill battle.