We do not all have tunnel vision

With the dust barely settled on a public roadshow by members of the Policy & Resources Committee to highlight the future fiscal challenges facing our community which explores possible ways to raise more necessary revenue, the Assembly then endorses a proposal for the new development agency to consider a St Peter Port tunnel, which would undoubtedly be enormously expensive.

Now, while the two deputies proposing this extraordinary idea are confirmed cycling enthusiasts (deputies de Sausmarez and Soulsby), who one might presume would clearly believe there to be merit in ‘taking through-traffic off the surface level of the road between the South Esplanade and the North Beach roundabout…’ – it does not rationally explain why a majority of other deputies (cyclists and car drivers alike) saw fit to support it. Particularly when the more significant and fundamentally necessary issue regarding the location of (and indeed how many) harbours we might need was rejected as being too restrictive for the brief of the new development agency earlier in the debate.

While many deputies could see the logic of the harbours being so significant that putting forward personal ideas from the Assembly would be inappropriate and would certainly tie the hands of the agency, it appears that the reasons to consider a potential tunnel must be so much more significant that it demanded overriding attention.

Understandably then, the public’s reaction has been somewhat incredulous, and in some instances distressed, that its government does not seem to be consistent and is sending out mixed messages.

As a minority of deputies who did not support what certainly has the hallmarks of what many islanders might consider a ‘vanity project’ we would wish to make our position perfectly clear on this issue - we did not and do not support the consideration of a tunnel (since in order to take through-traffic off the surface level of the road, there can be few other options other than over – which was actually mentioned in passing by Deputy de Sausmarez during the debate – or by rerouting onto already heavily congested roads).

Indeed, in the midst of a housing, energy and cost of living crisis, there are clearly far more important issues confronting government at this time on behalf of the islanders we serve.

We therefore hope the development agency dismisses this idea in as short a time, and incurring as little expense, as possible after its formation.

Deputies Sue Aldwell, David De Lisle, John Dyke, Mark Helyar, David Mahoney, Liam McKenna, Nick Moakes, Bob Murray, Lester Queripel and Simon Vermuelen