There has to be a purpose to change

The one thing that seems to be agreed upon is that drastic change is required.

For that, much of the blame is being laid directly at the door of the States members themselves, rather than consensus government or the financial squeeze that has blighted the past decade.

The assumption is that deputies of the right calibre would sort it all out and put the island back on the right course.

That sounds good until the obvious questions are asked: what is the right course and what is meant by the right calibre? What is it that this Assembly of 38 of our finest is failing to do that is so obvious?

There, the consensus is less assured. While there are many bugbears, unanimity on the big issues is far from evident.

Education is certainly a big problem for many. The move to all-ability schools and the end of the Grammar system (if not the 11-plus) will never win over all the doubters.

Are they in a majority? Perhaps. Is there time for an influx of ‘the right’ deputies to reverse the decision? Probably not.

The new rubbish collection system? Undoubtedly unpopular in many quarters, it is hard to say that the States has manifestly ‘got it wrong’. The new charges may be poorly distributed, people in Town flats are struggling and the glass collection is too noisy but none of the alternatives is trouble-free.

Would a revitalised States do an about-turn? Unlikely.

The economy? It is sluggish and in need of a defibrillator but spending is under control, savings are back on the agenda and GDP growth of 2% would be the envy of many jurisdictions.

Is there a host of untapped bright minds out there ready to revive our industries?

And so it goes on through issues major and minor: speed limits, population laws, the north v south planning debate. All divisive.

Would deputies of the ‘right quality’ – who could be persuaded to stand in 2020 – do better?

There is a danger of implementing radical change, any change, for the sake of unrealistic expectations.