OPINION: ‘Guernsey deserves better than a zombie government’

A FEW weeks ago the local media were much exercised in marking the halfway point in this political term.

One hack even went so far as to ask all deputies if they intended to stand for re-election in the summer of 2025. Blimey, I thought, I’m not even sure what the odds are on my still being alive by then, let alone standing for election.

Seriously, it does feel like an odd mixture of still having ages to go, yet at the same time being on the downhill slope. That’s largely because this States was given such a very long mandate.

To put it in context, my first three States’ terms each lasted for three years. So with 27 months to go (like now) we were hardly getting our feet under the table.

Why so much longer this time?

Partly because the standard States’ term has been increased from three years to four, and partly because the electoral cycle was thrown out of kilter by the pandemic.

The 2020 general election had to be delayed from June to October but the States was keen to retain June as the month for future elections. So this term had to be either three years and eight months or four years and eight months. I wanted the former but I was in a minority.

Anyway, the last States meeting of this term will be in April 2025 – so what can we expect over the next two years? Normally it is an immutable rule that States Assemblies are far busier in the second half of their existence than the first half. The early months are used to determine what needs to be done and the latter months in getting them done. I’m not sure that will be true this time.

Even before we made such a poor fist of resolving our large, looming, financial deficit, we were being warned that we had to do less, not more.

‘There is too much in the Government Work Plan.’

‘The money isn’t there.’

‘We don’t even have the human resources required to work up these projects, let alone the cash to implement them.’

The direction of travel was very clear – dial down on your ambition as a government.

I have no doubt that, post the tax debate, the volume is going to be turned up on that messaging.

That’s a great shame. I agree that resources are limited, and prioritisation is key, but our society still faces really big challenges, and it deserves better than a zombie government, just marking time for the next two years.

I have never seen our health service under such pressure – bordering on disarray. A significant part of that is linked to the limited social care provision in the island. The affordable housing strategy has never been more crucial, and desperately needs both impetus and investment.

Guernsey has to plot its future course in relation to energy policy. There are other big environmental issues to tackle too. If the States are determined to see our population grow, then the resulting infrastructural pressures must be addressed, with traffic and transport perhaps the most urgent.

We clearly need to invest in our long-term economic future too. It would be tragic if as a result of the tax debacle we shrugged our shoulders and played the role of a ‘dead government walking’ until 2025.

Guernsey deserves better than that.

Talking of the tax debate, where does the outcome leave the States, both in terms of funding and leadership?

Addressing finances first. While it was deeply disappointing not to approve any coherent package to balance our future budgetary needs, I don’t think the debate was a complete disaster. In fact, it revealed what measures were likely to gain broad States’ support.

So P&R can crack on with bringing proposals this year for raising up to £20m. more in corporate taxation. E&I and P&R can look at ways to reform motoring taxes, while raising somewhat more revenue in the process.

ESS can consider the best way of delivering a fairer approach to social security contributions, which seems to have universal support. This will even raise extra revenues, albeit perhaps less than the £34m. needed to stabilise the pension fund.

So, all in all, the debate was long and frustrating but not a total disaster. It did, however, leave most of the heavy lifting to the next Assembly, which I deprecate.

Where did the debate leave States’ leadership? Well it is clear by now that P&R don’t intend to go anywhere and I suspect any attempt to sack them would end in failure. It has been clear throughout this term that they command a loyal coterie of supportive members who can be relied on to vote with them on most issues.

Asking them to back a package which contained a GST may have been an ‘ask too far’, but I suspect they would snap back into the fold in a heartbeat if P&R faced a vote of no confidence. The prospect of a more liberal or progressive top committee wouldn’t bear thinking about in some of their eyes.

So I suspect P&R will soldier on but minus a lot of the authority they commanded, in the eyes of the majority of the Assembly, up to now.

How much that will compromise their ability to offer any real leadership remains to be seen.

Where do I stand personally on P&R’s suitability to see out this term?

I have oddly mixed opinions.

On one hand I have generally been unimpressed with their performance. They have trampled over mandates, taken powers they have no right to, and relied on the dynamics of this States Assembly to behave like a political steamroller – while ironically not achieving that much.

So I give them about 3 out of 10 overall. But there is no way I could support a move to oust them on the basis of their proposed tax reforms. Despite the chaotic outcome, in many ways it was their finest hour.

Firstly, they put forward a package which, amazingly, would have tackled the deficit, kept Guernsey competitive, and (crucially) delivered significant benefits to islanders on more modest incomes. But more than that – knowing what the backlash would be, they showed considerable political courage. So credit where it’s due.

In closing, perhaps it is useful to look back as well as forward. So, at its halfway point, let’s remember how this political term started.

A new P&R, containing two complete political novices, determined to shake things up. Heidi Soulsby was its vice-president and showed all the fervour of an evangelist. This new crowd she had fallen in with were the future, and would be delivering ‘action this day’. The rest of us had better jump on their train or be left at the station.

Two years on and the narrative is very different. Well it would be.

Two years is a very long time in politics. The next two years will be too.

So no, this term is not as good as over.

It will still contain more twists and turns than the Val des Terres.