Development Agency gets £1.6m. to work up Bridge plans

States members approved outline ideas produced by the Guernsey Development Agency and backed funding of £1.6m. for the agency to carry out more detailed work next year.

The agency, set up by the States last year, wants development at the Bridge to boost the marine economy, improve commercial and recreational spaces, and allow an increase in the number of people living nearby.

It will now prepare a funding plan for debate by the States by the end of 2026.

• Listen to our Shorthand States round-up from Thursday’s States debate

‘The significant potential of Guernsey’s east coast and sea front has long been recognised and several Assemblies have attempted to identify opportunities to deliver regeneration of the east coast, in many cases without material success,’ said Bob Murray, on behalf of Policy & Resources.

‘At a time when public finances are constrained and the community is facing increased charges for the delivery of essential services, it is vital that government looks at ways of supporting and growing the economy and facilitating inward investment to balance this pressure.

‘I believe the work of the GDA will do just that and will be an important economic enabler for Guernsey for many years to come.’

The most contentious aspect of the debate concerned a late amendment proposed by Deputy Murray through which the States agreed in principle that land could be transferred to the agency, even if there was a negative effect on the finances of the ports.

Peter Roffey, the president of the States Trading Supervisory Board, described the amendment as ‘a complete stinker’, but it was approved with only six votes against.

‘There is nothing in the policy letter which would block the release of any piece of land whatsoever, if it was needed for the wider benefit of Guernsey. What would have to happen is some kind of compensation arrangement to make sure the ports as a business were no worse off,’ said Deputy Roffey.

‘The ports are a crucial operation and we have to be get them back to a point where they are able to wash their own face and most importantly invest for the future.

'If you really want your trading assets to run on a commercial basis, this amendment is an appalling example to set.’

Deputy Neil Inder described Deputy Roffey’s stance as ‘entirely protectionist’, claimed that the harbours had ‘not moved on one iota’ since the North Beach scheme of the 1980s and appealed for ‘government to get out of the way’ of the GDA’s plans.

STSB vice-president Charles Parkinson backed the agency’s work but was concerned that it was already being held back by the indecision of the States earlier this term.

‘The problem is we’ve asked the GDA to do too much,’ said Deputy Parkinson.

‘The States abdicated responsibility for deciding where Guernsey’s commercial ports should be located and basically appointed these three very able people to the agency in effect to tell us what the answer is.

‘We have not told the GDA what we want it to do.

‘That’s not a responsibility politicians can duck.

‘The decision about where Guernsey’s ports get located is a political decision, and without that decision nothing very fundamental can be agreed on the shape of St Peter Port in particular, and St Sampson’s is affected too.’