The Policy Council.
CABINET-STYLE powers have been given to the Policy Council and senior civil servants to ensure the States makes savings, it has been confirmed.
The Assembly voted in favour of supporting the Fundamental Spending Review report and, in doing so, gave the Policy Council executive authority to push ahead with projects that could save the island more than £70m. without further approval from members.
It was an unprecedented move in the evolution of Guernsey’s government.
As a result the Policy Council and its Financial Transformation Executive of five senior civil servants will now be able to implement changes that will:
- Create a culture of cost consciousness;
- Reward staff who perform well, with performance-related pay increases already being looked at;
- End the ‘job-for-life’ culture as public sector workers will no longer be guaranteed job security if they under-perform;
- Introduce clear boundaries between deputies and civil servants, with both parties accepting accountability for their duties;
- Ensure there is a change of mentality to put the best interests of the States as a whole first instead of individual departments.
In an exclusive interview with the Guernsey Press, deputy chief executive of the States Nigel Lewis, who sits on the executive, said the decision highlighted a huge change.
‘This represents a shift and I think time will show it to be a seismic shift in responsibility, accountability and outlook,’ he said.
When asked if the decision represented the start of a revolution into the way the island is governed, Mr Lewis replied: ‘I describe it as an objective for evolution. It gets you to the same place as a revolution but without the blood and bodies.’
Deputy Matt Fallaize had tried to challenge some of the FSR report’s recommendations, believing it gave the Policy Council too much control over implementing the changes suggested by Tribal Consulting. And he wanted the power to make policy decisions to remain firmly with individual departments.
But his amendment was defeated by 23 votes to 19 as the Assembly backed the Policy Council to get the job done.
Deputies agreed that the States as a whole would provide overall policy direction while delegating responsibility for the delivery of the Fundamental Spending Review to the Policy Council.
The Assembly will also make key decisions on big projects that the Policy Council decides are too politically emotive to be made without the input of all States members.
The executive will, with the approval of the Policy Council, run the day-to-day delivery of the Fundamental Spending Review.
It was the timing Page 2
Making savings Pages 4 & 5
Opinion Page 18
Article posted on 9th November, 2009 - 2.30pm
23 Article Comments
And then there was transparency and openness.
And austerity the new religion.
Amen.
Report abuse
Good lord ,it’s the same bunch who naused it all up in the first place, but with a few common sense ideas written down, to which they can refer to before launching themselves on another suicide mission (i like the money saving idea of performing related bonuses )
Report abuse
Its about time the States spending was looked at. As they always go over budget and have not had to account to anyone for the overspending.
Report abuse
I wish there was a law forcing these people to declare whether they were freemasons.
Report abuse
As the rules have changed we should now have an election to choose the Policy council as I know many who would have voted very differently knowing we would have most of the current policy council in place. If fresh thinking is needed then surely we need fresh faces we can trust.If the States is serious about making Guensey better then they need to get our trust and that won’t happen with the current Policy council. Those in it who are truly the right individuals have nothing to fear. Too much has happened, now is the time for change.
Report abuse
The list of failures, misrepresentations and noted misconduct from this group of people is far too extensive for them to assume executive power.
It could not be worse.
How Flouquet getting executive power is a ‘a brave decision’ is beyond me, and most others.
It’s a real head-shaker.
Efficient decision making can happen in a concensus framwork, it just needs the deputies to do more work and less cat fighting.
Trott making decisions on my behalf is an appalling state of affairs. A thousand or so people voted for him. What has he done right, or within the rules?
Get him telling his half truths to the Chinese if need be, but get his two-faced local politics away from any levers of power.
We need a public vote. Efficiency, yes, ruled by misanthropes, no.
Report abuse
Oh yeah, if we’re going to have cabinets then we need party politics to oppose it.
Report abuse
We seem to be thinking on similar lines on this one Arnald.
I have deep scepticism of executive government within the States, not least because executive government is fundamentally undemocratic unless there is party politics. And I think that this community is too small and politics is too personal for party politics to be introduced.
My view of the push for executive government is that if you have concerns about the ability of a driver to drive a Morris Minor, would you put them in a Ferrari instead in the belief that they would drive better?
At the very least, I hope that the powers granted to the Policy Council can be revoked at a moment’s notice upon a further resolution of the States. Anything else would be a scandalously rejection of democracy by our elected representatives.
Report abuse
Paul,
You have raised a very good point. In the interests of democracy there must be a strong case for members of the Policy Council submitting themselves for re-election.
The role and expectations of the Policy Council have now changed quite significantly. When I voted in the ministerial elections immediately after the general election of 2008, I voted on the basis of the Policy Council’s function as it was then, which was largely one of policy co-ordination, whereas they have now been handed very wide-ranging executive powers to develop policy in several areas that were previously the responsibility of departmental political boards.
We now have an unfortunate and peculiar situation where the mandates of Policy Council and States departments do not adequately reflect what is expected of them in respect of the efficiency opportunities identified in the Fundamental Spending Review. For example, in 2008 the States elected five members of the Health & Social Services Department to develop health and social services policies, whereas in respect of the HSSD-related items in the spending review policy changes will be developed and sponsored not by that department’s political board but by the political members of the Policy Council, who were never elected for that purpose.
It is a question of securing a democratic mandate to develop policy and being accountable on that basis. Without that, there exists a democratic deficit.
TL,
I agree that cabinet-style government without political parties is fundamentally undemocratic.
I also agree that party politics is neither necessary nor particularly healthy in small communities like ours, so long as we do not adopt a cabinet-style system. However, as the example of Jersey demonstrates, executive government is much more likely to provoke the establishment of party politics; indeed, arguably it makes them essential.
On your final point, the States of Deliberation is the ultimate political authority in the island. It can establish whatever form of government it considers appropriate at any time. So, yes – the States could amend the powers vested in the Policy Council. But don’t expect a reduction in those powers any time soon – it seems far more likely that the centralisation of powers will be accelerated under this States.
Arnald,
I don’t really wish to become involved in the personality issues here, but for the record I think you will find that Deputy Flouquet, despite his seat on Policy Council, remains one of the most committed supporters of consensus government [and opponents of cabinet government] in the States. That has always been his position, as I understand it.
Report abuse
Matt
So where do we go from here?, if the power for change lies with the Policy Council, who have proven that they will not change except to enhance their own position, Guernsey is left to continue this downward spiral. Are there mechanisms to have a half time team talk, make substitutions and a tactical change so all the team is refreshed and motivated so we, Guernsey United, go on to win the game.
Report abuse
Matt
They cut out some other stuff so it looked like I was targeting Mr Flouquet (which I partly was) and the fact remains that him being in the PC means he will have executive powers, regardless of committedness.
Report abuse
Why are there no more comments on this thread??? This is a fundamental change to the mechanics of our government and yet it has been implemented in a way which is worse than if there was a full reform brought in at a new general election.
At a stroke, the States has become undemocratic.
The public have had no opportunity to elect these members to the Council or to even to elect them to the States at a time when it was contemplated that they could be granted these powers.
I am not questioning the integrity of the members involved but, as a matter of principle, this has turned Guernsey into a state governed by people with no mandate to govern.
I appreciate that the executive powers have parameters, but none of us cast our votes with this system in mind.
The States should be ashamed of themselves.
Report abuse
TL – I have been a supporter of party politics for a while now, although I accept on an island the size of Guernsey is may not be feasible.
Putting that aside for a moment, I strongly believe that if we are to have executive government, it is vital that island wide voting is implemented as soon as possible. I cannot see how Deputies who only required just over 1,000 votes to secure election have been given the mandate to wield that level of power.
Report abuse
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
Report abuse
Paul Le Page,
I fully agree. This is an insult to democracy. The Policy Council has absolutely NO mandate for their new role.
There should be an election with island – wide voting as soon as is practibably possible and in the mean time all Policy Council members should place themselves up for re-election for their place on it.
Report abuse
The following questions must be asked of this
What mandate did they have ?
In whose intrests will they use that authority ?
To who they will be accountable to ?
How can they be democratically removed from this cabinet they have formed ?
Where is the Shadow Cabinet who will oppose them ?
If they are truly democratic they should feel uncomfortable to the position they have appointed themselves to and seek an manadate to all this by the means of an election.
Report abuse
Matt,
You need to lead the way on this. This has to be one of the most important issues that have developed in Guernsey politics for many many years.
It is an absolute disgrace a group of elected officials can decide to suddenly implement more power to themselves. If roles change, the people in these roles have to HAVE TO be democratically elected, whether it be the states members or the public.
Report abuse
I agree with you TL, it’s surprising – alarming, even – that there hasn’t been more comment on this.
Speaking for myself, it’s because I don’t really know what to say. I know that it’s already a done deal, my opinions don’t count, and that they are simply going to do what they like, as always.
Just looking at the lineup in the photo with all those cat that got the cream, smug faces of those who have placed themselves in (almost) absolute power makes my blood boil yet run cold at the same time, especially when I consider the actions and opinions of several of them during their time in office.
Lower pensions, threatening behaviour, racial jokes, the death of the parish primary schools, a blatant unwillingness to implement the much needed changes highlighted in the WAO report – yet suddenly this eagerness to implement change (cunningly accompanied by a huge increase in their power) – and that’s just the good bits.
This totally undemocratic process is wrong in the extreme, but bearing in mind the above, it’s hardly surprising that some don’t ‘feel the ‘need’ to, and with all this talk of becoming independent of the UK, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we next see LT declaring himself the king and reinstating public floggings for any dissenters.
Report abuse
I think the lack of response is due to the fact that most people believe there is no point – it is a done deal? I think they have been watching re-runs of ‘Yes Minister’ …….
Report abuse
The fact is that the States decided to support the recommendations and voted in favor of supporting the Fundamental Spending Review report and, in doing so, gave the Policy Council the permission to take forward the initiatives that could save the island more than £70m without going back to the states on every single detail, now you either believe in democracy or you don’t, many of the issues in the FSR cut across departments and somewhere along the line those threads have to be pulled together by someone if we are to cut government spending at all. The majority of States members recognized that point and voted accordingly it was a States decision.
Janet
There has been no overspends since the Policy Council was formed although I haven’t seen the details on the new clinical block.
TL
“I am not questioning the integrity of the members involved but, as a matter of principle, this has turned Guernsey into a state governed by people with no mandate to govern.”
The mandate is in the hands of the States of deliberation they are the people who voted this through and therefore gave the FSR team the go ahead to take the necessary measures to reduce waste and government spending overall.
Jonny
A group of elected officials have NOT given themselves more power the States of Guernsey have given the PC through the FSR team the authority to press ahead with FSR.
Report abuse
Jonny
You say: “It is an absolute disgrace a group of elected officials can decide to suddenly implement more power to themselves. If roles change, the people in these roles have to be democratically elected, whether it be the states members or the public.”
I must be missing something here – the democratically-elected House voted democratically to give the group the extra power. The group did NOT give themselves the extra power !
Report abuse
Dave Jones is not quite right if he is trying to frame the debate over the FSR in terms of whether every single detail should come back to the States for approval.
Clearly, that would be ludicrous. My amendment proposed no such thing.
What it did propose was that a departmental political board should continue to assume responsibility for making policy in areas that fall within its mandate. Further, in line with our system of government, it proposed that the Policy Council’s role should be one of co-ordinating policies rather than the power to develop policy being sucked up to the centre.
It’s important to note that although the States retains ultimate political authority, and while in any parliamentary democracy parliament is capable of amending or defeating proposals put before it, a great deal of political influence rests in the hands of those who develop and shape policy in the first place.
However, we debated the issue at some length. And Dave is correct in saying that the majority of States members disagreed with my view about how the FSR should proceed. As with all policy decisions, those of who were in the minority on this occasion will just have to respect the outcome, get on with the task in hand and make things work to the best of our ability.
Report abuse
Ladies and gentlemen
For your pleasure, and the right to applaud(Yeah)
I give you the latest circus to appear in Public.
They are the (ha ha Ruling body of the peasants)
Their ideas are bigger than their heads; and that’s saying something.
Report abuse