The only people who should be leading government are members of the electorate
YOUR columnist and former editor Richard Digard made a valid point when he wrote, as he did recently, about who was and wasn’t consulted with by the Scrutiny Committee with regard to the Agilisys contract. As has been said before, if you consult with someone or commission them for advice, you’ve got a fair idea what they are likely to say or recommend based on their track record. And if they have no track record then they will not be considered an expert worth consulting with. So it’s pretty easy then, if you want to reach a conclusion or persuade others to do so, to choose or ignore experts which suit your desired outcome, just as lawyers choose witnesses to help their clients’ cases. How many experts can be independent and impartial? And in any case, what might be a desirable outcome or objective to one person might not be on the wish list of another.
Former deputy Laurie Queripel once said, ‘There are an awful lot of people who know an awful lot about very little and very little about an awful lot’. Quite right. Which is why, if we want a joined up society or government we need to reject, in principle, the philosophy of science or expert-led government.
The only people who should be leading government are members of the electorate, in proportional fashion. It might be Greek to our power mongers, but it’s called democracy.
MATT WATERMAN
Flat 2
3 Burnt Lane
St Peter Port