The right kind of scrutiny

The board survived it comfortably, no surprise given there was a blood­letting of the department only a year ago, but there was much more to read into the proceedings.

HSSD clearly feels under siege.

Board members talk of being barraged by questions about its operation, not least from the former minister Hunter Adam and Mike Hadley, and from the bogeymen in the media.

Minister Mark Dorey said he was not worried by scrutiny – it just has to be the 'right kind'.

And therein lies the problem – this is a political board that at times gives the impression that nothing is the right kind.

This is the same person who stood up in the States and said that all the money was being spent on the bowel cancer screening service.

It would have been left at that had the department not faced sustained scrutiny – it was solely that pressure which led to the disclosures that not only was the budget underspent, there has been significant disquiet among the health professionals about screening only a single cohort.

Sometimes scrutiny leads to this kind of result, sometimes it is not as effective, but it is only by keeping the pressure up that the questioner finds out.

HSSD has a £104m. budget and handles life-and-death issues – no wonder it faces more scrutiny than others. It goes with the territory and ultimately should lead to a better service.

After last week's debate, Deputy Dorey told a reporter at this paper that he was no longer going to answer questions personally – everything had to be emailed through the department's civil servants.

It was an extraordinary response – these were questions about political opinions and a man in a post with a £45,000-a-year salary was no longer willing to answer them.

At this rate, come the next general election you can see the candidates lined up on stage behind their spokesman just nodding in agreement.

One of the best parts of Guernsey politics is meant to be the accessibility of deputies to the public – something that is fast eroding.

The recent Vale question time event can act as a great catalyst to revitilise this tradition.

The public needs to believe that ministers have the ability to run a department and be confident enough that they are on top of their brief and so can answer questions.

A few years back there was a keenness for ministers to face more, not less, scrutiny.

Hopefully, this will be revived.

Regular public questioning of ministers in rotation should work for all.

The departments have the chance to get a message out that they want while the public can offer another layer of scrutiny.

In the Jersey States, ministers face questions without notice.

It would be enough to make some here in the Policy Council squirm, but those on top of their job would revel in the challenge, which is how it should be.

Some of this reluctance to stand up and be counted, to be able to go off a carefully-crafted script prepared by civil servants, is about training.

What other job would be so bereft of the opportunity to improve skills?

Confidence in public speaking, you would think, comes pretty high on the list for a politician, but it is a skill some lack.