GUERNSEY’S policy of five-year essential housing licences raises strong passions.

The problem is, there is very little calm, objective analysis of the pros and cons for our community. All we get is the all-too-familiar tennis match.

On one side of the net are those who think it’s an expensive scandal, impacting badly on individuals, the economy and essential services.

The opposite argument is that it helps population control, the demographic mix and islanders returning to work in Guernsey.

‘It’s a waste of talent and money’ – ‘they knew the rules when they came’ – 15 all.

The reality, of course, is that both arguments are true – up to a point.

It is hugely frustrating to lose good, productive, popular employees, simply because their licences are up.

I know that from my time at HSSD and the same must be true for private sector employers.

In the public sector, Housing will look seriously at 15-year licences for specialist staff, where it can be shown that it will be very difficult indeed to recruit a replacement.

That is welcome, but even in areas where replacement is possible, it is still a difficult, expensive and disruptive process.

Add the cost of the States’ relocation package to those of advertising and interviewing and you’re talking a big chunk of cash, which could be far better spent on the services themselves.

Fail to recruit at the first attempt and those costs just escalate. Just as importantly, the lack of continuity has a negative effect on the service, puts extra strain on other staff and upsets clients.

Undoubtedly the mere existence of the restrictions, both length of licence and TRP, put off many first-class candidates from coming to work in Guernsey.

If we think there is an endless supply of talented, key workers wanting to come here for the way of life and the beaches, then we are fooling ourselves.

So am I in the Hadley camp of saying ‘scrap this nonsense now’?

No, I am not, because there are less emotive but equally compelling arguments the other way.

Guernsey is over-populated and short-term licences help to control numbers.

The argument that it makes no difference whether you have one employee under a 15-year licence or three in succession under five-year licences is flawed.

The difference is that many 15-year licensees will become permanent residents.

Some retire after a lifetime in an essential post, others just wait to qualify before swapping to alternative employment.

Many of these people are excellent additions to our community but nevertheless they, and their families, do increase the population.

More important is the impact on demographics.

Most communities are facing a crisis brought on by longevity, fewer workers, more retired people, problems in funding pensions and increasing demand for the services we tend to need more as we age. Guernsey is no exception.  This is the next big political and social challenge.   Scrapping fixed-term licences would undoubtedly make the situation worse.

Put bluntly, at the moment we have a constant churn of working-age residents, here for a few years, who contribute greatly to the economy and vital services, but who will never become a drain on those services by growing old and frail here.

I’m sorry if that sounds ageist but it’s just the blunt truth.

It’s very harsh on those workers involved, it’s inconvenient for their employers, but Guernsey benefits greatly.

Do we want to add another straw to the demographic load on our backs by scrapping fixed-term essential licences?

My answer is a reluctant ‘no’ but the policy needs sensitive application so that we don’t damage our economy or public services. Nor is there any room for personal agendas at the Housing Department.

I think Deputy Hadley is very OTT in his general criticism of Housing, but his recent comments about the minister’s personal antagonism towards specific posts such as that of ‘pain control nurse’ reflect my past experience. Housing must accept it is not expert in all areas and shouldn’t deliberately frustrate the priorities of other departments.

Happily, it realised this in that instance and agreed a 15-year licence – eventually.

Housing should also scrap TRP restrictions for key staff, many of whom are not on particularly high wages.

Of course we need modest housing for locals, but let’s tackle that head-on.

The answer is not to force key workers into properties larger than they either want or need. If there isn’t enough modest housing to go round, then provide it.