States reforms ‘have still not delivered effective leadership’
Wednesday 20th May 2009, 11:30AM BST.
GUERNSEY’S current consensus style of government is not fit for purpose, according to the man who last reviewed it.
Advocate Peter Harwood (pictured) headed a panel that in 2001 recommended moving to executive government, something that now operates in Jersey and the Isle of Man and gives more powers to ministers at the head of departments.
The States baulked at going that far and instead introduced reforms from 2004 that cut the number of members and committees and changed the electoral districts – moves Advocate Harwood described as positive at yesterday’s Chamber of Commerce lunch.
But he believed it was now time for another rethink.
‘We do need to re-examine the argument for executive government, both in light of the present system and also in light of the experience in the Isle of Man and Jersey?’ he asked.
The inherent conflict between the role of the chief minister and that of the Treasury minister also needed to be addressed, he said.
Advocate Harwood suggested that the States could vote for both a chief minister and a Treasury minister at the same time – in effect, they would stand as a package.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
It’s not the sytem that’s wrong, it’s the quality of the Deputies. On one side you have the proteges of New Labour spin tactics and on the other you have those that will sit there, do nothing and take the cash and the pensions. Somewhere in the middle of all that you have the good decent Deputies that don’t get a look in or get shouted down/out.
Report abuse
So Peter Harwood says “…the States could vote for both a chief minister and a Treasury minister at the same time – in effect, they would stand as a package”
Isn’t this what really happended after the april 2008 election?
Or is there a hidden meaning behind the words suggesting that both Lyndon Trott and Charles Parkinsion were forced into a marriage of convenience.
Bit like Blair and Brown!!!!!
Report abuse