WITH two hustings meetings held, it is starting to emerge which issues concern islanders and which they want to see progress on over the coming months and years, the most obvious being the state of the island’s economy and zero-10.
Treasury and Resources will be pleased that the mood appears to be one of acceptance – but with interest in how the strategy might be modified.
It is an interesting situation. Something that is barely in place and has yet to have a discernible effect on Guernsey’s prosperity is already seen as ripe for tinkering with.
The assumption has to be that any modifications will lean towards the so-called zero-20 model put forward earlier by a sitting deputy so the implications are potentially profound and the new House will need to address them very carefully.
Another key topic emerging is the island’s population, in particular, whether the required economic growth can be achieved without expanding the number of people living here.
In recent days, the island’s financial services sector has been running an effective campaign explaining the benefits of the industry but despite that, the sense is a majority of voters want the population to remain the same and take any consequences of that decision.
In some respects, the evidence from the first two hustings indicates that the underlying – if unspoken – issue is what sort of island people want.
Looking around, it is easy to say that enough is enough. The level of building means it is only too easy (if untrue) to say Guernsey has no more countryside. The environmental impacts of too many people in too small an area are evident as are the consequences of a community where virtually everyone old enough to do so drives.
So a call for a calmer, less frenetic pace is appealing even though it overlooks the fact that these are symptoms of economic success and that there is no going back.
As for the future, wishing or voting for a particular lifestyle is one thing. The reality is that people will know whether it was what they really wanted only after it has arrived – and by then the changes are irreversible.
One Article Comment
“The assumption has to be that any modifications will lean towards the so-called zero-20 model put forward earlier by a sitting deputy so the implications are potentially profound and the new House will need to address them very carefully”
A misleading statement Mr Editor.
The Policy Council has accepted there needs to be some tweaking of Zero 10. These possible tweakings do not lean towards Zero 20
The original documentation accepted that changes would be made in the second stage. These possible tweakings do not lean towards Zero 20
Deputy Parkinson has made clear that he sees sense in changing zero 10 but sees some scope for tweaking. These possible tweakings do not lean towards Zero 20
Please avoid scaremongering, and read what Deputy Parkinson has written about the topic on an alternative bulletin board.