Left to right, IoD committee member Mark Palfrey, advocates Mark Helyar and Peter Harwood and Stuart Falla at yesterday’s seminar. (Picture by Adrian Miller, 0870871)
THE behaviour of some States members has been ‘disgusting’ since the release of the highly critical Wales Audit Office report, it was claimed yesterday.
The Institute of Directors winter series debate was examining options open to the States since the WAO delivered its ‘nought out of 10’ verdict on governance.
The Public Accounts Committee commissioned that report and one of its non-political members, Advocate Mark Helyar, was a member of the IoD panel discussing the options.
The former civil servant said one of the best words he could use about some of the behaviour seen since the report came out was ‘disgusting’.
As a member of the public, he found it ‘distasteful’ that a member of government would try to hijack the report and turn it into a consensus versus executive government debate, not about what was best for Guernsey.
‘There are a number of people in our government, without naming names, that have no interest in that [what was best for Guernsey] whatsoever,’ he said.
‘I’m sure their feelings are genuinely held, but I’m not sure what they do is in our best interests.’
He later said the public did not care whether the island had consensus or executive government, merely wanting one that worked.
In another sign of how heated the topic has become, IoD committee member Mark Palfrey revealed that he had taken a phone call saying the group was being irresponsible debating the report, released two months ago, because the States had not yet done so and it would draw attention to the findings.
The Public Accounts Committee has been criticised for not getting the WAO to make recommendations on how to address the deficiencies it found, but Advocate Helyar said the committee had taken legal advice from HM Procureur and was also lobbied by States members on the issue.
‘The view was it was not within the PAC remit to recommend changes to policy, particularly when it would walk over established constitutional structures.’
It handed the report to the Policy Council, which initially decided it would be used to measure the pace of change brought about by the fundamental spending review and States Strategic Plan.
But an unhappy PAC was set to place an amendment at the end of last month to get recommendations from an independent panel when ministers backed down.
They wrote back to say, ‘if you wish to have the matter debated, please take it to the States with whatever recommendations you feel are appropriate’, according to Advocate Helyar.
During the seminar, former deputy chief minister Stuart Falla outlined his vision for dramatically changing government to encourage the most talented people to stand for election.
Plan for action Page 2
Re-elect Policy Council Page 4 Opinion Page 18
Article posted on 11th November, 2009 - 2.30pm
17 Article Comments
If Mark Helyar is referring to a deputy who frequently posts of these pages when he says “…he found it ‘distasteful’ that a member of government would try to hijack the report and turn it into a consensus versus executive government debate, not about what was best for Guernsey”.
Knowing Dave Jones I can be sure his views reflect what he thinks is best for Guernsey, and the consensual executive debate is an integral part of the WAO report
Report abuse
Stephen
I suspect that Mark Helyar might perhaps have been referring to a somewhat younger Deputy.
Report abuse
I also take issue with the last quotation attributed to him. Whilst the public may not be vocal one way or the other between executive and consensus government (witness the relative lack of comments on the Bloodless Coup thread), that does not mean that they will not care when they wake up to the implications.
What one considers to be in the best interests of the island changes depending on your assessment of the issues at hand.
It sounds rather like two sides going to war, each saying that God is supporting them…
Report abuse
Helyar should have been specific about who he was criticising.
The same comments apply to Matt Fallaize as Dave Jones.
Both have the interest of Guernsey at heart.
Report abuse
Advocate Helyar is obviously a very able and respected gentleman.
Provided that he was quoted correctly, it seems to me unfortunate that he found it necessary to suggest that something other than the best interests of Guernsey motivate a deputy or deputies who just happen to be of a different political persuasion to his own. Whether he had me in mind, as David seems to think, I have no idea.
But I’m sure he is more capable than many politicians, me included, of making his case powerfully without resorting to the use of such playground language.
It is possible, in my view and I think in the view of most of my colleagues in the States, to disagree profoundly without the need to denigrate the motives of those with whom one happens to disagree on any given subject.
Leaving that to one side, it is plainly misguided to suggest that the future shape of our Machinery of Government – whether led by committees or an all-powerful cabinet, whether based around parties or independent members acting by consensus – is unrelated to the island’s best interests. It may be a dry subject for many, but the theory of government has been important enough to provoke many wars worldwide, and a jurisdiction’s system of government is fundamental to the interests of its people.
TL,
Rest assured that a war beyond the metaphorical is unlikely. This is merely a reasonable political disagreement and a healthy ongoing debate in a pluralist society. I hope nobody reads more into it than that. Do you think they will?
Report abuse
Matt – as I typed it I realised that my analogy made it sound more serious. I am certainly not suggesting that we are heading towards civil war, just that it is always interesting how some people claim that they have the monopoly on being “right” or being moral.
Report abuse
Looking at Mark Helyar’s comments, but not really understanding.
When he says “not about what was best for Guernsey” I read that as “not about what was best for Guernsey plc”, with a lawyer’s sensitivity to language causing omission of the give-away “plc”.
So this is to be the new tack on executive government – it’s best for Guernsey. To be against it is to be unpatriotic.
Maybe my thinking is influenced by George Clooney’s excellent little film last night on Ed Murrow and his mordant attack on McCarthy’s ‘un-American activites’ committee.
Report abuse
Indeed, David Cranch.
I posted recently on Guernsey’s corporatism.
Report abuse
What a joy to read Matt Fallaize’s post which shows a vastly greater depth of understanding of the needs of a small community than some in this Island who seem to believe that they are automatically endowed with intelligence simply because of who or what they (and I am not referring to Mark Helyar).
Communities have complex needs and many stakeholders. Understanding these is a task in itself; dealing with them is an even greater matter.
All power to those who can see the overall picture. The economy is vital and I make no concessions on that but it is only part of the picture, albeit a very big part. I fear that some believe it is the solution to everything. They should widen their minds. What I fear more is that they are unable to do this.
Report abuse
I think what some members of the IOD find disgusting, is the fact that they cannot get control of the islands government, what they really want is a political elite preferably made up of people they have selected which will make up a cabinet of 8 or 10 that they can wine and dine in order to get their way.
Decisions would be made behind closed doors and the rest of the states members would be told about them after the event. What has got in the way of this preferred option is a small matter of democracy and the fact that the States as a whole make the final decisions. That will not change even though the PC has slightly more clout to formulate policy to put before the States than it had before. Any healthy form of democracy contains elected members who often disagree, that is as it should be, unless of course you wanted a government of nodding dogs, which would be little more than an elected dictatorship. If Adv Helyar disagrees with some of the comments made by elected members over the WAO report, that of course is his right but because they take a different view to his own and others, does not make those views “disgusting”.
Report abuse
I agree with Dave Jones’ every word. Well said sir, spot on. Incidentally, I don’t agree with everything you say, Deputy Jones, but I respect you for speaking your mind and letting your electorate know what you stand for.
Report abuse
Maybe the clamour for change would be less emotional if there was visible evidence of the system actually working?
The government, those voted in, those that weren’t voted in but some how continue to hang around it and those employed within it, still appears to be disjointed, wasteful, aimless, lacking responsibility and self obsessed by departmental status as opposed to cohesive government.
I don’t see how you can get any decisions made unless you slim down the amount of decision makers and make them wholly accountable for their action/inaction.
I could take hours listing the amount of States induced cock-ups over the last decade but I can’t think of a single politician or civil servant drummed out of office over any of these calamitous decisions?
I don’t see how suggesting that we should ask for clear goals, defined timescales and accountable politicians/civil servants making decisions based on the real needs of the island, as opposed to populist wish lists, is such a bad thing?
If you were ill would you want the best surgeon and his highly trained team to operate on you or would you trust your fate to a large diverse collective of enthusiastic amateurs, all with different opinions arguing over your rapidly failing body?
Report abuse
I would be marginally happy to have executive government here – provided both Dave Jones and I have a veto.
If an anti-liberal and a liberal agree on a States decision, it could not be far wrong.
Report abuse
Another Dave Jones rant, however if you take out the IOD part what he says sounds exactly like what we have got right now but without the IOD commercial input.
Report abuse
An interesting thought DC
Report abuse
Just ba thought to all who blame the OTHETRS,
BEWARE OF THOSE WHO CARRY GIFTS;!!!
Report abuse
Interesting comments from IOD member, Mark Helyer.
There is a large number of people, who think that the IOD, have only their own self interests at heart.
They are a very small number, who the gsy Press give a lot of time and credence too.
The majority of Guernsey people are fed up of this self interest group.
It appears that they would like to pull the strings of government, without standing for election.
I would prefer to have people like Dave Jones, l may not share all his views, but at least you can trust him. He is not afraid to air unpopular views and stand by them at elections and for him the Island comes first.
Report abuse