The GBTEA has written an open letter, addressing many of the challenges it feels Guernsey is facing.
The association noted that the Fiscal Policy Panel had only recently noted that there needed to be sufficient certainty in necessary investments so that construction firms can plan their projects and ensure resources are available.
‘Unfortunately, actual performance by the States has fallen well short of that objective, with an extremely poor record of capital investment planning and project execution laid bare in the panel’s report,’ the association said.
‘The States own policy directs that capital expenditure should average no less than 2% of GDP per year averaged over any eight-year period. Actual investment has only been 60% of this target, averaging 1.2% of GDP in the eight-year period to 2023. This level of investment is far below comparable jurisdictions.’
They said that the panel was made up of ‘extremely qualified and experienced economists’, who despite not being associated with the construction industry, were saying all the same things that the association and other industry organisations had been saying for years about the state of Guernsey’s capital investment and pipeline planning.
‘Unfortunately, when we have made these statements in the past they have often been dismissed as self-interest, especially by those who are to blame for these problems,’ the association said.
‘Our hope is that these comments, now supported by an independent panel of experts, will be taken seriously.’
They highlighted that putting off infrastructure maintenance only deferred the costs of the work.
‘Under-investing to the extent which the States of Guernsey has over the last 15 years is irresponsible and stores up a huge backlog of capital investment,’ the association said.
‘It burdens us – or, even more unfairly, future generations who did not cause this mess – with a “triple whammy” of ageing infrastructure which is inefficient and expensive to operate, at the same time as presenting the challenge of finding enough public money to upgrade or replace it, whilst denying the productivity, economic growth, quality of life and other benefits of good infrastructure.’
The association implored politicians, the civil service and the business community to work together to enable progress on housing and infrastructure and to find ways to speed up the process between project inception and project execution.
‘We are seeing progress in this respect, but there is huge scope for improvement at a political level to ensure long-term plans are executed,’ the association said.
‘Action is required on many levels. In terms of infrastructure, we need to entirely re-frame our expectations around how much we invest and how we go about executing projects. A visible, long-term plan must be developed and delivered to avoid further decline and stagnation.
‘In the immediate future the housing focus should be on unlocking small sites which can be delivered relatively quickly. In the medium term we need to identify and work through the blockers to enable progress on larger sites.’
There is ‘visibility of likely major projects over the next 10 years’ - P&R
Policy & Resources has said there is good visibility about upcoming States projects.
A spokesman said the major projects portfolio agreed by the Assembly was developed to give a longer-term outlook for large schemes and enable horizon planning, as the capital infrastructure projects the States is intending to deliver are publicly known, with predicted timescales for delivery.
‘The States has agreed a delivery portfolio of up to five years and projects that are put into the pipeline (longer term planning for future portfolios),’ he said.
‘This gives visibility of likely major projects over the next 10 years. The independent fiscal policy panel recently commented that we would benefit from lengthening this planning horizon still further and this is under consideration.’
In regards to concerns about whether tenders should be weighted towards local businesses, the spokesman said they already did this.
‘The procurement policy is that up to 20% of the total score can be applied to local factors,’ he said.
‘It’s important to clarify however that this isn’t simply about rewarding suppliers, because they are Guernsey-based. It is possible that an off-island supplier can score well if they purchase materials locally or use a high proportion of locally based subcontract resource. Through our tender processes we are seeking to assess the extent of local economic benefit in relation to the job, rather than simply whether a business is a Guernsey entity or not.
‘This also, importantly, seeks to balance the twin desires to support local companies with ensuring value for money for the taxpayer.’
You need to be logged in to comment. If you had an account on our previous site, you can migrate your old account and comment profile to this site by visiting this page and entering the email address for your old account. We'll then send you an email with a link to follow to complete the process.