Why States is still lacking direction

CONFUSED. Disjointed. Working in silos. Lacking clear direction, understanding and leadership. Sound familiar? Well, if you are a political watcher you will know that these messages have come out of successive independent reports on different aspects of the States.

The latest, released on Friday, will make uncomfortable reading for those that seemed intent on holding the Policy Council or the chief minister responsible for what happened during the airport firefighters' dispute last year to account.

It explicitly states in the report that it was not there to apportion blame, which, at times, is exactly what the public wants to know. But it paints a pretty dismal picture of the way the States negotiates, the blurred boundaries, miscommunication and at times complete lack of flexibility.

To paint a very brief picture, airport management knew they had a recruitment and retention problem with airport firefighters in 2007.

Nothing got resolved apart from temporary deals and a voluntary agreement to work overtime.

As things came to a head in 2009, no-one from the States' side seemed clear exactly what the problem was – pay or conditions – and the airport firefighters could not work with the Public Sector Remuneration Committee.

Suggestions to bring in fresh negotiators were not followed up.

'The States departments and committees acted as if silo-based. This is both a systematic and a cultural failure,' the report said.

Just to demonstrate how things snowballed into confusion, more than 40 people got directly involved in the negotiations.

So where does the States go from here?

In the background work goes on to try to transform the culture within the current system of government.

But this report, and the others, points to something more radical being needed to get the island the government it needs.

It points to even more centralisation of power, arguing that the Policy Council takes under its wing wage negotiation, responsibility for dealing with crises and resolving any differences of opinion between departments.

Is this the outcome the requete signatories wanted when they pushed so hard for the £250,000 tribunal of inquiry?

Deputy Mary Lowe led the successful requete and maintained it was all about lessons being learned.

So will anyone be listening to the recommendations?

What will now happen to the aborted Scrutiny Committee review into the affair?

Since the machinery of government changes, three independent reports have focussed on who should be conducting wage negotiations for the States – all have pointed away from PSRC but in different directions.

In 2008, Professor Burchill recommended airport management negotiate directly with the firefighters, but the Public Services political board could not reach a conclusion and it presumably has gathered some dust since.

Also in 2008, the Graham Robinson report into the role of the States as an employer recommended a new free-standing body, the Public Employment Board, take control of wage negotiations

Now the tribunal of inquiry says the Policy Council should take over.

Given the States' track record of difficult decisions, all these options could muddy the water somewhat.

The Policy Council has produced a consultation document on creating a States employment board which would combine its employment and HR mandate with collective bargaining.

It has been put on hold but, now the tribunal result is out, there is fresh impetus to move things on.

And perhaps the States will be listening to another message that could get lost if deputies argue over the findings.

Transcripts of the tribunal's hearings, written statements of those giving evidence and core documents were all posted online for public scrutiny as its investigation went on – if at times a little belatedly.

'It is worth commenting that for Guernsey, where there is no Freedom of Information Law, this constituted an unparalleled degree of openness and accountability,' the report states.

'One of the benefits of a public inquiry, which may seem in hindsight to be a blunt instrument and an expensive one, is that the very act of having to account for their actions leads individuals and institutions to contemplate how they make and justify their decisions and how they may do better in future. This in turn leads to better decision-making and hence more effective government.'

Indeed, openness and transparency is the last recommendation made in the report.

'There should be a presumption that reports commissioned from the public purse will be made publicly available unless there are specific grounds for doing otherwise.'

Given the debate on regulation this week, maybe the Policy Council will be the first to oblige by releasing its secret briefing document on the issue to the public?