Train wreck decision has a high cost
LOOKING back on the fiasco that has been the start, stop and then abandonment of the island's waste strategy, it is tempting to ask, what on earth has the States done?
LOOKING back on the fiasco that has been the start, stop and then abandonment of the island's waste strategy, it is tempting to ask, what on earth has the States done?
While the visceral reaction to that question depends on whether you are pro- or anti-incinerator (for whatever reason), the fact is that no one really knows the answer.
The consequences and cost of cancelling the Suez contract will take months or years to unfold, Guernsey has no idea today how it is going to deal with its refuse and islanders and States members have not a clue what efforts or sacrifices will be required in order not to have an energy from waste plant.
What is certain, however, is that last Friday's debate demonstrated government at its worst. One of the key tests of good governance is taking informed, transparent decisions and managing risk. Doing a volte face after a secret session and voting for who knows what ticks none of those boxes.
Additionally, the position the island now finds itself in – a minority of the Assembly reversing an earlier decision – is directly as a result of the States failing to follow the recommendations on members' interests made by the Wales Audit Office when it looked at the PEH clinical block affair.
By any standards, this was a train wreck of a decision-making process and the only reason the cries of derision have been muted is that Public Services' proposals were so universally unwanted.
The other unsatisfactory element of this is the secret session of the States itself.
What compelling new information emerged that islanders cannot be told but deputies can?
By that stage, the issue was swinging on the consequences of cancelling the contract with Suez. The cost was put in the Billet d'Etat at £3.2m. with a dire warning of other 'significant' but unquantified financial and legal risks.
What can be deduced from members going ahead and cancelling despite that warning is that the secret part of the debate heard that the damages hinted at were actually far less severe than PSD gave islanders and deputies to understand.
So PSD has potentially misled the House, has had years of work thrown back at it but now says that it has seen the light and will work on a green alternative.
It simply doesn't wash – and is yet another reason why the PSD members should resign and seek a fresh mandate to hold office.
