WHEN the Policy Council delayed the Government Business Plan and the capital prioritisation debate, one of its principal reasons was a desire to see every States member fully engaged with the complex issues before them.

For it is no hyperbole to say that the forthcoming debates in April and May are among the most important to have come before the States in the post-war era.

Taking the wrong course could lead the island down a blind alley from which it might take decades to emerge.

Members who have a reputation for debating minor issues for days while passing huge expenditure on the nod now have an obligation to get out their reading glasses and become acquainted with at least the basics of macro-economics.

To that end, the splinter group of deputies challenging Treasury’s policy letter must be applauded. By providing the Assembly with an alternative view prior to the main debates the level of information and understanding of the main issues can only rise.

Whether they carry the day remains to be seen in what promises to be a close debate. But islanders must hope that, if they do not, it is because a better argument won the day.

Those who see this as the start of party politics, where two sides enter the chamber with a pre-rehearsed position, can be soothed by the broad political views of the five on everything outside of a shared hatred of borrowing.

Given that diversity of view, it will be a challenge to come up with a policy with which all can agree.

As yet, the fact that they have not done so is both a weakness and strength. A weakness because it allows Treasury’s supporters to tear down ideas in their infancy which might never form part of the five’s final report; a strength because it does not alienate other deputies thinking of joining them.

However, given the importance and complexity of the issue it would be a magnanimous gesture of Treasury if, instead of regarding the five deputies with hostility, it went out of its way to help them with both staff time and information.