Deputies reject former P&R member’s ‘scarier alternative’
A suite of proposals aimed at solving the structural deficit without the need for a goods and services tax was rejected by States members by 24 votes to 16.
Members criticised the so-called ‘fairer alternative’ presented by former Policy & Resources member Heidi Soulsby and seconded by former chief minister Gavin St Pier, questioning its fairness, its sums and their motivation.
Father of the House John Gollop summed up the opposition by saying ‘it’s not fairer, and it’s not an alternative’.
P&R member Dave Mahoney characterised the amendment as being ‘all mouth and no trousers’ and questioned the accuracy of the supporting evidence – with £100m. of borrowing not having been included in relevant graphs.
‘This amendment does not put the States in a sustainable financial situation,’ he said.
Referring to a proposal to re-examine capital projects – including those ‘in-flight’ – he challenged the proposers to identify which schemes would be deprioritised.
Home Affairs president Rob Prow claimed the alternative represented ‘a managed decline in a race to the bottom’.
‘It was with dismay that I read this amendment,’ he said.
‘The revenue raised will not touch the sides.’
Listen to our 'Shorthand States' round-up from day one of the tax debate, with Matt Fallaize and Simon De La Rue
A proposal to suspend payments into the pension fund – known as a pension holiday – was ‘raiding the till’, he said, and was ‘an irresponsible scramble for cash’.
Other top-bench deputies were equally scathing, with Economic Development president Neil Inder warning against the effects on Guernsey’s economic competitiveness.
He suggested it should be called the ‘scarier alternative’ and accused the proposers of ‘a cavalier attitude to our economy’ presented by ‘three Partnership of Independents deputies who can’t take no for an answer’.
Health & Social Care president Al Brouard said he was able to back the introduction of a GST, but could not support the paid parking proposals within the amendment.
He warned of the consequences of the ‘in-flight’ project to modernise the Princess Elizabeth Hospital being derailed and claimed Deputies Soulsby and St Pier’s motives were ‘political rather than financial’.
‘It doesn’t get us the money we need, it just gets us to the next election,’ he said.
P&R member Bob Murray responded to claims that the senior committee had not consulted widely enough by contrasting its efforts to communicate with unions, deputies and the public, with the ‘fairer alternative’ group’s decision to publish its amendment at the last allowable moment, according to the rules.
He criticised a lack of consultation with pensioners about the suggestion of suspending payments into their pension pot.
Responding to the debate, P&R treasury lead Mark Helyar pointed out previous commitments to ensure pension fund contributions were increased if the fund fell below 90%, and it had now reached 89%, meaning the idea of a holiday was badly timed.
He said it amounted to ‘casting about for cash down the back of a sofa’.
Fellow P&R member Jonathan Le Tocq said there was ‘no substance’ to the amendment, as it was ‘based on assumptions that are not realistic’.
He characterised it as a ‘fingers crossed and hope for the best’ set of proposals, and asked how money that was planned to be redistributed to lower-income islanders could be counted as a cost in its calculations.
Fellow GST supporter Deputy Peter Roffey also opposed the alternative plan, calling it a ‘smorgasbord of ideas’ that did not raise enough new funds.
He said Deputies Soulsby and St Pier had ‘given it a good go’.
‘But I don’t think it cuts the mustard.’
