Hayley North: The cost of control

When I was 10 years old, I co-founded a school magazine. After much debate, we named it ‘Splat’ and the school agreed we could print it using their equipment. I negotiated free gifts from the leisure centre across the road, little plastic propellers for attaching to Chupa Chup lollipops to make them fly. I twisted my family’s arms into sponsoring us for a small fee with the promise of a very low-tech advertisement for their local hairdressing salons on the back of the first issue. Heck, I even managed to secure an exclusive (and very unexpected for him) interview with swimmer and triathlete Adrian Moorhouse when his race happened to finish outside my house one weekend. It was a masterpiece.

Sadly, not long after the success of the first issue – time moves fast in junior school – the editorial team became restless. They were getting tired of being told what to do and not having any creative freedom. They were unhappy that whatever they suggested was deemed not good enough and frankly they had better things to be doing with their breaks and lunchtimes.

One set of eager newshounds resigned and, undeterred, I replaced the team and we squeezed out a second issue. It went well for a few weeks but then the same thing happened again. I was not able to tolerate anything not being just perfect in the way I thought it should be and understandably with hindsight (I was less self-aware back then) my unpaid team-mates had had enough.

A dramatic coup was staged and an election held to replace me as editor. I was mortified. I had put my heart and soul into creating the magazine and was on the verge of losing everything to the most popular girl in my year (who had also spent the previous year bullying me relentlessly). The worst happened. My nemesis took over the reins and I was left sobbing in the toilets. Less than a week later, the magazine funds were stolen and ‘Splat’ was no more.

I’ve reflected on this experience many times over the years as I have managed teams and worked with others to get things done and it has not been an easy transition for me. I still prefer doing things my own way and having things exactly the way I want them so tend to work mainly on my own as a result, but I know I am missing out. It has been hard work accepting that there are other versions of an acceptable solution. I know that having to do things myself rather than trusting others to do it their way instead slows me down and prevents me from achieving more. I know it also irritates people immensely, yet it is hard to let it go.

Our 38 deputies and two Alderney representatives are routinely dealing with as much legislation as 650 deputies in the UK but with much less support. Without political parties, deputies are free to choose how they approach all issues but this must be overwhelming with so many issues to consider and the pace of change so rapid.

In the UK, for example, it is the party that decides which way members should vote and as such much of the focus is shifted. MPs in the UK can then concern themselves with issues that impact their constituencies the most or topics they feel passionately about. Little time is wasted debating less controversial topics in parliament. It is no wonder progress seems slow over here and we often revisit the same issues many times. I understand how hard it must be to read all that information on a regular basis, never mind understanding and constructively debating it.

It also begs the question, why are we creating so much extra work for ourselves when we already have a blueprint of incoming legislation that was deemed fit for the UK in most cases? I know we need to make changes to fit with our own laws and approaches but in most cases, there is little need to make as many changes as we do and thus debate could be more focused where it is needed. What we have access to from elsewhere might not be perfect but it is good enough.

Horace Camp wrote last week about the fact that we have mistakenly tried to recreate a form of National Health Service on a small scale and that this is causing, and will continue to cause us, major issues in terms of funding over time. We just do not have the people or infrastructure to replicate such a system and in many cases, we are wasting time when we could be using our skills to leverage the best services from all over the world for our islanders instead.

This is just one example of where we would do better to let someone else set the rules or provide the service where it makes more sense, so that we can focus on things that we do best.

Trying to control everything that gets sent our way rather than settling every now and again for someone else’s version, even if it is not perfect in our eyes, is hindering our progress and is a risk. We know that the biggest challenges we tend to face as an island are events that are unexpected and utterly out of our control such as global pandemics and Brexit. This is normal – none of us can predict the future nor ensure that we are crisis-proof. We can, however, focus on what matters most to islanders right now – namely health, housing and long-term demographics – and devote our energy to coming up with bespoke solutions in these areas that bear little resemblance to what the UK is doing.

We should continue to be demanding of our deputies and our fellow islanders in helping us make Guernsey a better place, but let’s consider what we ask everyone to focus on and whether ‘good enough’ is in many cases better for us than ‘perfect’.

I learned the hard way, just as the Bailiwick has, that trying to have everything precisely the way you want it comes at a price.