‘Needs not wants’ is a policy that deputies are incapable of following
I APPLAUD Lord Digby Jones for highlighting the current Assembly’s failure to make a realistic effort to reduce expenditure. I believe the majority of people would prefer to have less government with lower taxes rather than the high tax, nanny state model of looking after everyone from cradle to grave, which seems to be the model being pursued here and even more so on the mainland under Prime Minister Sunak.
Your headline to Lord Jones’ article ‘Needs not wants’ is a policy that our deputies are incapable of following and whether it is a need or a want, the ultimate cost to the economy is not given the importance required to avoid or improve the Micawberish state of our financial situation.
A well run, commercial organisation in the same position will go through a rigorous cost-cutting process, often make redundancies and cut services (look at the clearing banks for instance) to ensure its future. Hard to do but better for the majority overall.
Government has different responsibilities to commerce but that should not prevent them going through a cost-saving review, even if it does not produce sufficient savings to avoid GST.
Ironically, in the same week as Lord Jones’ column there was an article about the excellent work a talented, young lady was doing in the role of biodiversity officer. This is an excellent example of a want which we cannot afford. When private business is struggling for staff, I have no doubt that businesses could be competing to employ her in a tax-contributing role instead of a tax-funded ‘want’ role.
A quick look at its website will show how the States has caved in to pressure groups. Taxpayers’ money is being given to a myriad of grants, presentations, awareness events, etc.
Despite the well-argued case that Gpeg made about the cost to the economy of introducing some legislation, the States of Deliberation passed it by a surprisingly large majority. This will not stop them being subject to further pressure to introduce yet more measures, rather in the way that trade unions are never satisfied however advantageous their settlements are made. I have been told that one deputy believes that if a whole package of diversity and equality measures is introduced that it will take 200 – 200 – civil servants to implement it.
It also puzzles me that there has been little information about the ratio of nurses and front line medical staff to management and administration staff. Could we be reassured that we are not following the example of the NHS?
I was more than puzzled to the extent that my eyebrows were raised to disappearing, when I read that States resources were being used to investigate road pricing of vehicles as a tax-raising measure. Is this a civil service initiative or a diktat to them from some of our anti-car and motorist politicians? Perhaps the same politicians who beguiled our States to decide to introduce a completely unnecessary MOT test to be a further burden on the islanders they represent.
All the above comes from a quick trawl through my limited memory and certainly does not scratch the surface of what is possible. I nonetheless suspect that despite Digby Jones’ sensible and reasoned advice, little will change.
Geoff Dorey