In the second of his series of articles on the zero-10 process, Treasury and Resources minister Lyndon Trott recalls the consultation process which led to a historic vote IT WAS clear to me from day one – back in 2002 – that our economic and taxation reform was an enormous issue that couldn’t simply be dealt with by politicians.

Here was an issue that was going to fundamentally impact on the economic and social well-being of the whole island.

The impact would be positive if we got it right – and I believe we have for this stage at least – but absolutely disastrous if we got it wrong.

It was therefore essential that everybody, no matter what their age or background, was involved.

First, because it was so important and second, because no one, least of all me, has a monopoly on good ideas and we wanted all ideas on the table.

The resulting consultation process was unprecedented and consisted of a number of different strands, some more visible to the public than others.

The consultation process included:

u Special media briefings and coverage, including the unique Channel TV half-hour special at the Grammar School with a live audience of sixth-form students.

u A series of face-to-face meetings with business leaders from all areas – finance and non-finance.

u A large number of presentations and briefings for States members.

u Organisations such as the Chamber of Commerce and Institute of Directors conducting their own wide-ranging consultation exercises among their broad-based membership.

But the most important, and the most rewarding, were the public presentations held as part of the second consultation document process between September and December 2005.

Demand was so great that additional presentations were held in Guernsey and in Alderney.

I was personally involved in more than 100 sessions throughout.

What impressed me was the courtesy and good humour that was shown by the audience to the presenters, even among those not won over initially by the proposals.

The public presentations will live long in the memory of all those involved.

I would say that the consultation process was true democracy working at its best, with more than 1,300 people attending the public presentations, more than 1,500 copies of the second consultation document issued and more than 500 responses received from the widest possible range of people and organisations.

In addition to the public and private presentations, there was hardly an hour, it seemed, let alone a day, when I didn’t get a phone call, a letter or was just stopped in the street or in the shops to discuss the reforms.

I am sure it was the same for many of my colleagues.

The important thing was that the people of Guernsey and Alderney were engaged.

They understood how important the process was and seemed genuinely pleased to be able to contribute – and contribute effectively they most certainly did.

Yet I believe many people still don’t understand the reasons for many of our decisions and that is something I really want to change.

I’d say that the process not only produced a better package of proposals, but there was a sense of confidence that government was really listening and listening to everyone. It was genuine consultation and the eventual package of proposals, while sticking to the essential original elements, did materially change to reflect the huge amount of feedback. They were the better for it. For one, the first public consultation document proposed the introduction of a payroll tax. On reflection, this idea was, quite rightly, removed from the package approved by the States as it was widely criticised as being bad for jobs.

We also had independent validation for the way we went about things.

The Scrutiny Committee reviewed the consultation process and published a report just before the June 2006

debate recommending that it be the benchmark for any future States consultations.

The consultation process must and will continue, not only in the run-up to the May 2007 debate, but for the next few years, particularly during the transitional phase up to 2011-13 as we watch carefully how our economy performs.

It is worth emphasising that the single issue which attracted the most comment and was clearest in its message was that the States must control its own expenditure.

This is sometimes forgotten by others, but not by the Treasury and Resources Department. We have held States departments down to budget increases below the cost of living in the last two years and have done it with the support of the House.

At the same time, we are spending more on health, education and law and order than ever before.

As a result, we have saved the taxpayer £25m. each and every year without damaging priority services.

That’s the power and the benefit of real consultation.

Next time: What the States actually resolved in June 2006, in what was described by many as the most important debate since the Second World War