NEW States member Mike Hadley’s questioning of Housing’s policy on licences and that department’s dreadful treatment of a woman wanting to work here for just a short time - which we highlighted yesterday - are the latest illustrations of how unsatisfactory the current system has become.
The deputy’s concerns about the millions apparently wasted re-recruiting because of short term contracts has not been addressed, mainly because Housing does not care about the economic damage its decisions cause.
Its response is that it is doing a job and the States decided that the population should remain at or near current levels.
Yet the question might properly be, what concern of Housing is population? Its mandate is actually controls on housing occupation under the relevant laws, so its function is purely bureaucratic in that respect.
Its effectiveness, too, is limited. No one knows what figure the States had in mind when it decided to cap population growth but it is a safe bet Housing has failed to hit its target because the figure generally rises by a little under 300 a year despite its best efforts.
Neither has the department said how it will balance the resolution against the potential for economic harm, especially in these zero-10 days.
Wealth creating positions remain empty, other States departments and local businesses spend fortunes replacing ‘time expired’ staff they would rather hold on to yet - as we have argued before - there is no shortage of people for whom the island is now expected to introduce minimum wage legislation to protect them from being exploited.
It simply makes no sense and everyone except, it seems, the States can see that.
The other worrying aspect is the reluctance of Housing to answer the wrong sort of questions, those that are not chief officer to chief officer or minister to minister.
It is a telling illustration of what Housing regards as transparency and accountability and why what is essentially a labour and resource issue does not sit comfortably with a department whose main function is as an accommodation provider.
‘Housing’ is all about labour use
NEW States member Mike Hadley’s questioning of Housing’s policy on licences and that department’s dreadful treatment of a woman wanting to work here for just a short time - which we highlighted yesterday - are the latest illustrations of how unsatisfactory the current system has become.
The deputy’s concerns about the millions apparently wasted re-recruiting because of short term contracts has not been addressed, mainly because Housing does not care about the economic damage its decisions cause.
Its response is that it is doing a job and the States decided that the population should remain at or near current levels.
Yet the question might properly be, what concern of Housing is population? Its mandate is actually controls on housing occupation under the relevant laws, so its function is purely bureaucratic in that respect.
Its effectiveness, too, is limited. No one knows what figure the States had in mind when it decided to cap population growth but it is a safe bet Housing has failed to hit its target because the figure generally rises by a little under 300 a year despite its best efforts.
Neither has the department said how it will balance the resolution against the potential for economic harm, especially in these zero-10 days.
Wealth creating positions remain empty, other States departments and local businesses spend fortunes replacing ‘time expired’ staff they would rather hold on to yet - as we have argued before - there is no shortage of people for whom the island is now expected to introduce minimum wage legislation to protect them from being exploited.
It simply makes no sense and everyone except, it seems, the States can see that.
The other worrying aspect is the reluctance of Housing to answer the wrong sort of questions, those that are not chief officer to chief officer or minister to minister.
It is a telling illustration of what Housing regards as transparency and accountability and why what is essentially a labour and resource issue does not sit comfortably with a department whose main function is as an accommodation provider.
Article posted on 3rd September, 2008 - 2.25pm