‘A new system of government is needed for true accountability’

I am sure that many islanders would be interested to know which of our politicians are responsible for the failure of the outsourcing of States IT services to Agilisys and ultimately the waste of £42m. of public money on the Mygov and Revenue IT systems. I have been undertaking research by means of correspondence with the office of the Policy & Resources Committee.

I was principally interested in knowing which individual politicians were responsible for the political oversight of the proposal to outsource States IT Services, the selection of an outsourcing provider, the negotiation of the terms of the outsourcing contract, the establishment of arrangements for monitoring the operation and progress under the contract. P&R informed me: ‘Under our system of government, the starting point is that each committee is in effect an agent of the States of Guernsey, collectively exercising functions conferred on it and therefore, other than in very specific circumstances, an individual member does not hold individual accountability or responsibility for a particular service area or work stream in the way that your request might suggest. Matters are instead generally referred to the full committee for decision making and discussion. This collective responsibility ensures that decisions and oversight remain democratic and transparent, reflecting the principle that authority is vested in the committee as a whole rather than any single member.’

I was referred to policy letter presented to the States on 12 June 2019 and the scrutiny applied by the Scrutiny Management Committee (Review of the Future Digital Services Contract with Agilisys (Guernsey) Limited).

The office of P&R has been very open and transparent in naming the various members of the committee who have taken the lead with regard to corporate services (which includes IT) over the six years to 2025. It was equally clear in saying that these lead representatives undertook their duties as agents of P&R and reported back on all matters of substance and that decisions were taken by the committee as a whole.

So there you have it. Going back to P&R office’s original response we have to conclude that the members of P&R in its various compositions since 2019 and deputies who served from 2016-2019 and 2020-2025 and, to a certain extent, deputies currently serving in the States Assembly, are responsible. There is only one remaining member of P&R as at 12 June 2019 and six deputies who voted in favour of signing the outsourcing contract still serving in the current Assembly. That leaves me distinctly unsatisfied considering how badly things have gone wrong and so much money was wasted.

What value is there in identifying deputies past or present who were involved? It will not make the project a success or replace the money which has been lost.

I put it to you that it is not just deputies but the system of government which has failed. This is not surprising and is not necessarily a criticism of the deputies in office at the time or since. It reflects human nature. Guernsey needs a radical change in its electoral system and machinery of government. The current electoral system results in a completely random group of people being placed in office. They are expected to operate together as a coherent body, finding, selecting and implementing the optimum solutions for each challenge which the island faces. It is inevitable that whenever a decision is taken by the States each member will have a uniquely different attitude to it and, consequently, different levels of commitment to seeing it through. Add to that the fact that the consequences of many decisions will continue from one States’ term to another, regardless of who is in office and we have a very diffuse system of accountability, the IT outsourcing decision being a case in point.

Let us contrast this to a political system in which a party, or parties, are elected into office. Political parties would hammer out policies and proposals internally and these would be published in manifestos. They would be put forward for approval if a party or parties were elected to power. It would be easily recognisable as the responsibility of that particular party or parties. These parties will have lives much extended beyond the political or natural life of individual members of a party. Therefore, accountability would be easier to attribute although individuals will be identifiable as a result of their roles in parties and those considered competent and efficient will hopefully be recognised at election time. A competent party will organise itself in such a way as to be effective in government.

Under the current system election of committees is carried out by deputies who have various agendas and motives. This does not necessarily include choosing the best, most knowledgeable and experienced individuals in the respective fields required. Once elected the various committees should cooperate together to find the best solution to matters where the involvement of more than one committee is required but this often does not happen. The current system results in a totally haphazard approach to the fulfilment of the States’ duties. Neither does it make for continuity from one Assembly to another.

Therefore, I call once again for the introduction of a party system which would provide for the election of a government under a proportional representation system. Each party would be required to produce a manifesto prior to an election and it would then be possible to hold each party to account for failures to adhere to their policies, i.e. by democratic vote of the electorate. Such manifestos would be required to be more specific than the party manifesto which I saw prior to the most recent election which made no substantial commitment to action but represented the most blatant example of fence-sitting, comparable to Keir Starmer on the USA’s actions in Venezuela. To be fair to the party in question most of the individual manifestos were little better. Each party would be responsible for decisions taken and policies adopted during their tenure. It would also mean that the island-wide voting system could finally be used for the only good reason for which it is suited.

I wish the current government well and I hope that it will be exceedingly successful but the odds are stacked against it for the reasons set out above. I call upon all incumbent deputies to act in a true statesman/woman-like manner and to change the current political system in Guernsey for the sake of effective democracy and government in the future. It would provide a lasting legacy to future generations living in Guernsey.

The States Assembly and Constitution Committee last published a document on 11 October 2021 according to gov.gg. I hope that there are some sitting deputies who see the need for change in our system of government and that they will see to it that the SACC is directed to work on the design of a new system of government to produce truly accountable individuals and groups to serve in it.

Richard Corbin