£400m. wishlist means States set to borrow
Saturday 8th November 2008, 9:30AM GMT.
STATES departments have a whopping £400m. shopping list for capital projects.
But with the 2009 Budget anticipating there will be a balance of just £66.7m initially available, the question of whether the government should borrow is again raised.
In March, a comprehensive report will go before the House for members to decide which projects should become a priority.
‘It’s a big shopping list. In the life of this States we’re not expecting to have more than £150m. available from the capital reserve,’ said Treasury minister Charles Parkinson.
All departments have had to submit their spending priorities to Treasury and the list includes redevelopment of Les Beaucamps School, mental health facilities and upgrading the runway.
In total, there are 24 projects in the pipeline.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Les Beaucamps School should be the number one priority. After all they have been waiting as patiently as saints for action. Are we going to wait untill another windon falls onto a child before action commences. As for sewage it has been going into the same place since time began. A few more years won’t hurt many. What would be the implications to our fish and shellfish stocks if we took this out of the equasion? We definately need to get our priorities in onder that is for sure. Things that have a health and safety nature should be at the top of the list others will have to wait. As for the runway do we need to lengthen it? Not in my book. Do we need to maintain it? Most definately. Why can’t the states train up our own people to get the job done at a realistic price? Should we be borrowing? Absolutely not. This is what has brought our global economy to the point in which it now finds itself. If we can’t afford it we need to do without. I would love a bigger house prefably with a pool and a garage large enough to house lots of top of the range vehicles. Can I afford it? Unfortunately not at the moment but it is still nice to dream eh.
Report abuse
Simple solution is wish for less. It’s not that hard is it?
How’s the reduction of cost of government going? No need to answer that, it was rhetorical.
Report abuse
Would be interesting to know how the Members of the house select a project?
What form of risk management is there in place, i.e. do they conduct a full risk assessment of each project at conception as should be done according to international standards?
How do they prioritise what should be done first?
It is quite emotive to say the school should come first, however Guernsey should give priority the projects that provide the greatest benefit in financial returns as it is in dire straights financially.
I would love to know how they select the projects and would welcome some feedback for the Guernsey public on how it is done – do they just vote? Or is there some matrix involved to measure relevance?
I would suspect they just vote, probably after a long lunch in a local bar, at our expense of course. . .
Report abuse
Increasing government borrowing to finance capital projects when times are hard can reduce unemployment and stimulate the economy through the downturn – or so Keynes reckoned.
I have always been sceptical about this idea for three reasons:
Firstly, one needs to trust the government of the day to spend the money wisely – on things that will bring the best long term benefit to the Island.
Secondly, the government also needs to be trusted exercise spending restraint – i.e. setting strict spending budgets and sticking to them.
Thirdly, it needs to be remembered that, one day, when the economy imporoves the borrowed money needs to be paid back and that those repayments will act as a brake on growth during the ‘prosperous times’.
Based on years of observation I am afraid I do not trust the States to spend borrowed money wisely and they have proven time and again that they are unble to control thier budgets.
There is a real threat that, over the coming years, our finance industry will be seriously damaged, (if not shut down altogether) by external regulatory forces. That being the case then there is no guarantee that the ‘prosperous times’ will return at all. Guernsey could find itself lumbered with a massive (and very long term) debt.
On balance I think we should take the pain now and limit States spending to what they can afford (I agree Les Beaucamps should be prioritised). Letting the States borrow c. £300m would be like giving kids the keys to a sweet shop.
Report abuse
Darren
I have the answers for you:
Would be interesting to know how the Members of the house select a project? It is called a wishlist!!!
What form of risk management is there in place, i.e. do they conduct a full risk assessment of each project at conception as should be done according to international standards? Absolutely no safeguards at all quite the opposite actually. One might suspect lots of backscratching goes on?
How do they prioritise what should be done first? Whoever holds the most power tends to have priority then next in line are the chums. Next in line tends to call in favours and then it is who can dish the most dirt. After that there are those all important expenses so nobody shouts out any further.
It is quite emotive to say the school should come first, however Guernsey should give priority the projects that provide the greatest benefit in financial returns as it is in dire straights financially.
With reference to the school in question it should be the number one priority due to the fact that it is falling to pieces. This school has waited as patiently as saints. This is after we have built several new schools. A new court building which is all very nice but not crucial. Oh and a new arts centre. Factor in also all the overspends our states make and the chance of a window falling on some poor childs head then my argument is strong. I am comforted by the fact that my children are too young to be at risk.
I would love to know how they select the projects and would welcome some feedback for the Guernsey public on how it is done – do they just vote? Or is there some matrix involved to measure relevance?
This I believe you can call a hierarchy. It is in fact one man but dressed up as democratic? The term for this is mutton dressed up as lamb.
I would suspect they just vote, probably after a long lunch in a local bar, at our expense of course.
I have been lazy and cut and pasted your text but I feel I have covered your questions sufficiently?
Report abuse
Thanks Paul – very grateful for your reply old bean.
Explains why Guernsey is in severe financial trouble then.
How can they run an economy without giving objective simple programme and project management to major expenditure?
Oh well.
Report abuse
Do the schools need really demolishing and rebuilding?
From what I saw highlighted on TV the old metal windows had flaking paint and probably are draughty. This could be cured by fitting in uPVC double glazed windows and the other problem shown was flaking paint on the walls. This could be cured with a pot of paint and a paintbrush. (Probably the PTA would help out with the operation of the paintbrush if asked, saving even more money)
Even if the roof needs repairs,but this does not seem to have been mentioned, it must still be a lot cheaper to refurbish and modernise the existing buildings than to demolish the existing buildings and replace them with new ones.
Are these buildings structurally unsound or is just that it would be nice to have new buildings.
Do you knock your house down and build a new one when your lounge needs a coat of paint and your kitchen windows need replacing???, maybe some people do!!
Report abuse
Interesting point Neil – clearly education should always be a high priority for investment however we shouldn’t build a new school unless absolutely necessary. Repair and modernise what’s already there until such time as it becomes structurally necessary to rebuild. I wonder if this is a case of “keeping up with the Joneses” – now that St Sampsons have a new school, everyone else wants one?
Interestingly enough, two of the most highly regarded schools on the island, Castel Primary and Elizabeth College still use old buildings and, in the case of Castel – old “temporary” huts that were there when I was a pupil nearly 30 years ago!
Clearly new buildings and state of the art facilities aren’t as vital for good education as high quality teaching staff that make the best use of what they have.
Report abuse
Im sorry Paul and Neil but I am going to disagree. There has been a sustained period of declining investment in the basic infrastructure of our schools. Many such as Les Beaucamps were never built to last as long as they have done so and are no longer suitable for purpose.
I remember sitting in a classroom with ineffient heating in the middle of winter with a coat and scarf on because it was so cold. How does this lend itself to being a good environment to teach?
Report abuse
Ebenezer
Totally agree! I do not wish to take anything away from you statements at all! I have done a drive by recently and little, if anything, has changed. I was there 20 odd years ago. What does this say to the taxpayer? It could have done more for me, probably, but I am relatively happy with my lot. However I would wish to give others more! This school is outdated and uneconomical. This is a school that has let itself become left on the shelf. I truly feel that it is now time that all those with a vested interest. For whatever reason needs to make their voices heard. Schools should be exactly that. If any are better than any others then our government are letting us down as an Island as well as for themselves surely? We all need to enjoy equal rights. The majority of us haven’t been charmed with this. This does not mean we can’t wish for better for our children surely?
Report abuse
Nobody is suggesting we shouldn’t wish better for our children however we need to make sure we make wise investments with what we have (something if I remember correctly you have advocated on other threads). Remember, if Guernsey borrows unwisely to fund major projects, the burden will fall on those children.
Incidentally, by demanding so called “equal rights” does this mean that all the kids who left St Sampsons before last year should claim compensation for not being educated in a new school, what about those who were educated at the old Grammar schools?
What about those who are educated at Elizabeth College (which still has an old building which probably gets quite chilly). In fact, I had a bad maths teacher for a year at Grammar school, should I sue the Education Council because other kids my age had better?
I know that sounds silly but it’s making a point. In the real world, there will always be someone that gets something “better” than us. That’s just life – we need to make the best of what we have, instead of bleating about “rights” and making excuses. Some of the most succesful business people in modern times were educated in poor facilities (e.g. Jack Walker, who left school at 14)
Report abuse
Paul – incidentally I agree with your previous point about sewage and the runway.
Obviously dumping untreated sewage isn’t ideal and at some point should be addressed however in the current circumstances I think there are higher priorities.
As for the runway, when the current Airport user group is saying there’s no need for an extension, that’s the end of the matter as far as I’m concerned. To extend the runway now would show stubborn pride and very little else – repair it yes, extend, no!
Perhaps those responsible for that particular decision should remember the old sayings – it’s quality over quantity and size isn’t everything, it’s what you do with it…
Report abuse
Very good points Paul Le P. Its a balancing act but the balance has been made worse over the last couple of decades by poor investment choices by the States coupled with an over reliance on ‘consultants’ and an ‘institutionalised’ habit to dither over important decisions which end up having to be done anyhow but at a much greater cost to the taxpayer.
Sometimes it is better to do what is needed rather than talk about what is needed.
Report abuse