IT IS easy to be critical of the present crop of States members.

I have been, but it’s impossible not to have some sympathy for those who entered the House for the first time last year. They have come into a States where about 40% of their colleagues are fellow newbies and which faces massive fiscal challenges.

They were always going to have to oversee the tricky ‘phase 2’ of the zero-10 implementation but that has been made so much worse by the appalling turmoil in the world economy.

What do novices do in those circumstances? Of course, they have to use their own judgement – that is what we elected them to do. However, it is only natural for them to look for leadership from those in the top positions within the administration.

The trouble is that if they try to do that on the most important issues of all – the economy, taxation and balancing the books – then they are going to be torn two ways.

If they listen to the T&R minister, backed up by his political board and a raft of civil servants steeped in financial administration, then they will be looking to act to plug a very large, developing budget deficit.

If they listen to the chief minister, they will take a far more sanguine view of events.

One presumes that his view is backed, at least to some extent, by fellow members of the fiscal and economic steering group and its professional advisors.

It’s all very confusing, but of course it’s far worse than that. Come November’s budget debate, the novice deputies will be facing some huge and potentially unpopular decisions on revenue-raising measures. (Yes, they should be cutting expenditure as well, but I’ve already had my say on that.)

They will want to please their constituents, but at the same time will want to be responsible. So what do they do?

I’m afraid that they are in the stark position of choosing which of their political leaders they believe.

If Deputy Parkinson and his team are right, then they would be irresponsible not to act decisively to raise considerable extra revenue.

If Deputy Trott (and his team?) are right, then increasing the tax burden to that degree, at a time when the local economy is under considerable stress, would be equally irresponsible.

Of course, there have always been disagreements between leading figures in the States. That is both human nature and the natural consequence of our non-party system.

Personally, I would hate that to ever change, but this is rather different. That’s because the same unique system of government makes the Policy Council responsible for economic and fiscal policy.

In that task it is assisted by its own fiscal and economic steering group.

Both bodies are chaired by Deputy Trott. At the same time, issues relating to the States revenues and taxation come firmly under the T&R department.

A personal row between senior deputies on most policy areas is one thing. It’s a healthy demonstration of independent thinking. However, a real schism between those leading fiscal policy and those leading taxation policy is quite another thing.

The two areas are inexorably interlinked and need to be mutually supportive. Once they start unravelling, we could find ourselves in real trouble.

Indeed, it is hard to see how this schism can go unresolved for the next three years. If it does, then it will hugely handicap this States during a very difficult period.

Hard issues are always easier to tackle with a clear sense of direction. Pulled two ways over the big fiscal issues, the States could become even more prone to equivocation and indecisiveness than it already is. That would be a disaster.

In theory the disagreement should be resolved, one way or another, by a series of States decisions over the coming months. This is particularly true of November’s budget debate. The way members vote will show whose judgement they trust.

Whichever minister is apparently disbelieved will be left in a very difficult position indeed. Of course, the States could just fudge the issue and limp on with a huge division in the centre of its economic policy.

I certainly wouldn’t bet against that.