Setting the right priorities
IT APPEARS that one of the few things that irritates people as much as the States proposing to do things, is the States proposing to stop doing things that it had previously agreed to do.
Feedback on the proposal to scrap the ideas of working up ways to enable States house tenants to buy their own homes, and another to insist that newcomers to the island have health insurance for specialist treatment, has been overwhelmingly negative.
It can be argued that the States is putting both issues into the ‘too difficult’ drawer and if there was the desire to pursue these ideas, it could be done. But they are among 37 ideas coming to the States next week for official rescission, while another 200 or so remain outstanding.
Most of those being removed are either no longer relevant, have never been given priority status for the resources available within the public sector, or have been overtaken by events. Some of them, such as the health insurance proposal, came up via amendment, and so while States members made them a priority, were clearly never considered so from the off.
It’s likely that there won’t be much debate from deputies next week over dropping items that aren’t a priority for government.
But it does seem to indicate that the States keeps trying to do too much, and should even be more ruthless about its priorities.