Many of the 30 amendments for the budget debate are from committees seeking more cash to maintain essential services which they claim they will otherwise need to cut.
They might as well all be debated together: if the States says 'yes' to one committee, how will it manage to say 'no' to others? And with members of committees unlikely to rally against each other's bids for cash, the chances are close to zero of anything other than an above-inflation increase in overall spending next year.
The most striking amendment to increase expenditure – to make bus travel free – comes from two deputies acting independently, not on behalf of a committee, and therefore it is less likely to benefit from the kind of inter-committee loyalty which will probably get other amendments across the line.
Yet in some ways it is the most justifiable. Bus travel should be encouraged. There are more cars on our roads than there ideally should be; public transport is beneficial to our environment and health; and removing fares would be particularly beneficial for poorer households.
There is a problem, however. When free bus travel was proposed previously, it was in a package funded by paid parking. It is known that paid parking is under consideration again. Free buses and paid parking remain two sides of the same coin and it would be better to consider them together rather than in isolation.
You need to be logged in to comment.