Reserving judgement about our new smaller Assembly

With respect to Deputy Prow, I was asked by the Press to comment on the specific issue of whether the reduction in the number of deputies has been successful or not. That was in the context of a discussion on social media (along with Deputy Yerby and others) about the same discrete topic. I was not asked to give my own version of the ‘State of the Union’ address.

It would be utterly wrong for anyone to suggest that I believe the sole solution to this States’ problems is more deputies. The problems and the solutions are far more complex than that.

That said, I did agree with some of what Deputy Prow said about the wider issues with the system of government.

I myself am a long-term (constructive) critic of Guernsey’s committee system of government. For example, I have long been of the view that the concept of leadership within the States is, more often than not, somewhat curiously missing from our political traditions. Nevertheless, I was prepared to support the 2015/2016 reforms advocated by the (now defunct) States Reform Committee because (a) there was little or no political support at that time for ministerial government and because (b) the consensus in the last States seemed to be that ‘one more heave’ for the committee system of government would suffice.

I would tentatively agree that the practical experience of the machinery of government changes in the States since May 2016 appears to have been rather patchy to say the least. As Deputy Prow indicates, it is surprising that the presidents of the principal committees do not meet formally as a group with Policy & Resources within the new structure.

It also takes far too long for the States to determine its programme for government at the beginning of a political term.

Progress on prioritisation has been slow.

The rationalisation of government has led to arguably less clear accountability in areas where policy straddles more than one committee. Think waste policy; housing; and transport links.

And I am still reserving judgement myself on the changes made to financial oversight within the States, particularly with the abolition of the Treasury and Resources Departmental board and the ending of the stand-alone Public Accounts Committee. Ultimately however, we should guard against judging a system too soon. Yes, we need to see much better delivery under the new machinery of government in the next year or so. Otherwise, there will be a strong case for a review of our post May 2016 arrangements. But we must not make assumptions about it too quickly and we must ensure that we look at the evidence dispassionately. Better still, somebody independent – albeit with a strong working understanding of Guernsey’s special system of government – may need to evaluate the new system and assess whether the aims of the changes have been met or otherwise.

In conclusion, I do sincerely believe that we must raise the expertise and skill sets of all elected representatives and one obvious way of doing that is via a bigger parliament in the first place. Moreover, we need to assess holistically all the evidence of the recent structural changes to government at the right time. That time is not necessarily now; but that time may be coming reasonably soon. For now, I reserve judgement on where we are. It is not yet too late for this system of government; but the clock really is ticking.

DEPUTY CHRIS GREEN,

People’s Deputy for the Castel,

States of Guernsey,

La Chaumiere,

Le Gele, Castel, GY5 7LU.