'Managed decline' is a big concern
READERS of the latest letter from the Guernsey Aviation Action Group – even deputies, to whom it was largely directed – will probably have responded in one of two ways. To agree fulsomely with the arguments made, or dismiss them as more of the same from a group which the States’ Trading Supervisory Board says has consistently proved that ‘nothing will persuade them to the contrary’.
Whatever the case for an airport runway extension, and the rights and wrongs of the States approach so far, all would be wise to have read on.
GAAG chairman Barry Cash once again didn’t hold back.
‘Guernsey needs to project itself as an innovative, confident, mature and outward-looking jurisdiction, able to hold its own and compete for new business in any sector of our economy. At the moment, Guernsey is totally risk averse, preferring a managed decline.
‘Hiding behind evidence-based spending, adopting a policy of “wait and see”, will leave our economy even further behind our major competitor across the water.’
While there’s no agreed strategy of managed decline, the lack of commitment for future funding and general void of activity leaves Guernsey at risk of that, and indeed, at times of funding frustration, it’s been talked up more than once.
The Chamber of Commerce has previously expressed fears that managed decline may be a direction of travel for the island, one which inevitably leads to reduced public services.
Of all pre-election chat, both locally and in the UK, over wealth creation, this a local theme which needs to be shown to be changing – and the need is much broader than connectivity.