A RECURRENT theme – and one that will remain so down the decades – is Guernsey’s population and whether it is too high and, more importantly, whether it should be allowed to grow any further.
Candidates in this month’s general election are all being asked questions on this crucial topic and there are few, if any, who advocate significant expansion.
As the retiring Health minister put it in this newspaper last week, the defining question is whether we primarily see ourselves as urban dwellers or inhabitants of a small, charming, semi-rural island. It was a well made point and most would plump, if it was an option, for the semi-rural outlook.
The reality, of course, is quite different. For many, probably the majority, Guernsey is urban and the housing developments of the last few years, particularly ‘apartments’ and high density homes, seem deliberately designed to increase the feel, look and spread of urbanisation.
Yet people have to live somewhere and the process has been going on since at least the late 1600s as St Peter Port became established as a major entrepot in the Atlantic economy. It did that by exploiting the island’s special constitutional position within the (then) British Empire, subject to the Crown but largely outside the control of the UK Customs authorities.
This brought great wealth to the Town, with a quarter of the urban population active in port-related work by 1800, but in the process great changes took place in urban culture and social patterns.
St Peter Port was transformed from a ‘French’ into an ‘English’ town, a third of its population being English by the second decade of the nineteenth century. The parallels of that period and today, when the island continues to exploit its constitutional and tax status and struggles with the consequences of economic success and growth, are obvious.
Without an entrepreneurial spirit and a determination to make the best of whatever opportunities it has, Guernsey would become an economically depressed backwater.
The issue is how to minimise the problems of success and preserve and enhance what rural aspect remains. Otherwise, islanders’ children and grandchildren will resolve the population ‘problem’ by quitting – because there is nothing here for them.
2 Article Comments
There are far too many people here already. People who come here on licences don’t always go back and the population has been steadily creeping up over the last few years. Where will it end ? Perhaps the states should consider where the workforce is going to come from before trying to encourage yet more businesses to the island with strategies like zero-10.
from Dave
It appears that there is a growing movement against a growth in population.
I would go further and suggest that there should be a lower population figure which should be aimed for. One idea is that a population should be able to grow enough to be able to survive without outside aid, and if that idea were to be applied then the population of Guernsey would eventually need to be around 25,000. I can’t see that figure being voted for so I would suggest a figure of around 50,000 to be achieved in a certain time (say 100 years, because like slimming, it is a lot easier to add on than take off.)
There are 2 things to consider – too many children being born, and immigration.