Policy & Resources wants the Assembly to impose a limit of seven-and-a-half minutes on opening and closing speeches and five minutes on all other speeches.
The senior committee circulated its suggestion to deputies late on Tuesday evening after 30 amendments were submitted against its 2027 budget report.
Garry Collins criticised the approach and accused P&R of attempting to stifle debate having presenting plans that prompted numerous counter proposals.
‘The Assembly finds itself in a very disappointing situation,’ he said yesterday.
‘P&R asked members to submit amendments to its two-option budget, and we did, and now we have 30 amendments, and then that same P&R is bringing motions to reduce debate time, which feels like a weapon now.’
During their recent tax and spending debate, deputies agreed a speech limit of five minutes, as they were facing dozens of amendments and feared not completing business despite setting aside six days.
That speech limit, which was much tighter than the normal rules of debate in the Assembly, was proposed by Forward Guernsey, and seeing its effect has encouraged P&R president Lindsay de Sausmarez to ask for a repeat for the budget debate which her committee said must conclude in the four days set aside next week.
‘The purpose of the motion is to enable timely consideration of the 2027 budget, given the number of secondary propositions that have been lodged and acknowledging the need for the budget to be agreed at the scheduled meeting to allow sufficient time for coding notices to be issued and input into employers’ payroll systems ahead of the first payroll in the new year, which for some will be within the first week of January,’ said Deputy de Sausmarez.
Deputy Collins had counted up more than 100 amendments laid against five major policy letters submitted by P&R in recent months.
‘It doesn’t feel like a joined-up government to me. It feels like we are entering a new era,’ he said.
P&R has proposed two spending options for 2027. Option A would limit committees’ budget adjustments to inflation minus 1%, in line with a States direction issued earlier this year. Option B would sanction £15.7m. of additional expenditure above that level.
P&R drew up its unconventional two-option approach following months of budget discussions during which committees’ requests exceeded the ‘inflation minus 1%’ spending target by £33m.
Deputy Collins was sceptical that P&R’s approach provided the kind of financial leadership needed across the States.
‘I am concerned about cost controls and the real need for zero-based budgeting to review what is spent, how and why, and if we are to manage our finances correctly,’ he said.
‘I was not successful with an amendment proposing setting up an Appropriations Committee, but it is an idea which is very much needed, as I have no idea if some committees are looking at savings or not.’
Forward Guernsey has submitted an amendment containing an Option C, which would limit increases in committees’ cash limits to inflation only, effectively freezing budgets in real terms.
The 2027 budget starts next Tuesday.
You need to be logged in to comment.